Chapter 2
Theology
46. What is theology?
It is that system or body of doctrine concerning God and divine things revealed by God,
for His own glory and man's salvation.
47. In what sense was the word used by heathen authors?
They used it as synonymous with metaphysics. Aristotle divided philosophy into natural,
mathematical, and theological.
48. How was it used by the fathers of the Christian church?
They applied the term particularly to that part of the Christian doctrine which treated of
the divinity of our Savior. Hence John is called by them Theologus [Theologian].
49. How is theology divided?
Into true and false. True theology is divided into that of vision and that of revelation; the
latter again is divided into natural and supernatural, and into natural and revealed.
50. What is natural theology?
It consists in the knowledge of those truths concerning the being and attributes of God,
the principles of human duty, and the expectation of a future state derived from reason
alone.
51. How does it appear that there is any natural theology?
It is proved from man's having a natural law written in his conscience (Rom. 2:14), from
all nations having some religion, and from its being so congenial to our minds.
52. Is that theology sufficient to lead men to the true knowledge of God?
It may lead us to the knowledge of God as Creator, Preserver, and Governor, and to the
knowledge of those attributes manifested in the works of God, but it cannot make us
acquainted with His character as Redeemer and as a God who forgives iniquity,
transgression, and sin.
53. Has natural theology been held in its purity by any nation destitute of revelation?
No, and it is remarkable that the progress of corruption in the doctrines of religion have
been in exact proportion to the advance of nations in the arts and sciences.
54. Should a perfect knowledge of natural theology give any hope to a sinner?
No, it cannot disclose the plan according to which God can be just and yet justify the
ungodly, and therefore it can afford no rational hope that God will pardon sin.
55. How do men acquire the idea of a God?
The mind of man is so formed that though it has no innate ideas of God, nor any intuitive
perception of His existence, yet it has a faculty well suited to receive this truth so that
when it is proposed, it easily and readily apprehends it.
This differs from Descartes's notion of an innate idea only in making it necessary
that the truth should be proposed to the mind. This knowledge of a deity has probably
been preserved in the world by tradition; without this, men would be atheists.
56. How can the existence of God be demonstrated?
The arguments for the being of God have generally been divided into those from a priori
[from what is before] and those a posteriori [from what comes after]. It has also been
argued from the universal and uninterrupted consent of all nations, from the aptitude of
our minds to receive this truth, and from the operations of natural conscience.
57. What is the nature of the argument a priori [from the prior]?
It consists in arguing from cause to effect. It begins with establishing our own existence
from consciousness, that we are not necessarily existent and therefore must have a cause;
that something must have existed from all eternity or nothing could ever have existed;
that this being must exist by an internal necessity of nature; that what exists necessarily
must exist alike everywhere, must be perfect, act everywhere, and so on.
It is, however, very generally doubted whether this argument has any foundation
or whether it is at all conclusive. Dr. Samuel Clark's1 demonstration is the most
ingenious and learned specimen of this method of arguing. See Dr. Alexander's lecture.
58. What is the nature of the argument a posteriori [from that which is later]?
It is a reasoning from the effect to the cause. It is founded on the principle that every
1 [There were many prominent theological and philosophical writers by the name of Samuel Clark(e) during the 1600s and 1700s, including an Anglican (bap. 1624–1669), puritans (1599–1682) and (1626–1701), and a latitudinarian Anglican (1675–1729).]
effect must have a cause, and whatever excellence is found in the effect must exist in a
much greater degree in the cause.
59. How is the existence of God proved from the structure of the universe?
The works of nature prove the existence of God by their production, harmony,
preservation, and adaptation to their ends. Design, wherever manifested, is an
unanswerable proof of a directing intelligence.
60. How is this truth established from a consideration of the body of man?
By the order and fitness of every part, we are "fearfully and wonderfully made" [Ps.
139:14], and from the admirable difference of the features of men.
61. What is the force of the argument from general consent?
The universality and uninterruptedness of the belief in the existence of God is a
phenomenon that nothing but the truth of the fact can solve, particularly when we
consider that all wicked men must wish it were not so. The idea of a God is not derived
either from sensation or reflection; its existence in the breasts of men can only be
accounted for by supposing it to be received by tradition from the first man, who must
have received it from God Himself.
62. Can any argument be drawn from miracles in favor of this truth?
Nothing very conclusive, as it is more difficult to establish the truth of a miracle than of
the divine existence.
63. How does the existence of conscience prove the being of a God?
There is a law in the human mind that in some measure is the rule of good and evil; this
law must have a lawgiver, the transgression of this law excites the dread of punishment,
and this operation of conscience is universal, regarding even the most secret acts of
wickedness. Moreover, men cannot free themselves from the authority of conscience,
however much they may desire it.
64. On what argument did Descartes depend for the proof of this truth?
He held that the idea of God was impressed on the mind of man by the Deity Himself.
And that as we have an idea of an infinite being, that of which this idea is the type must
also exist.
65. In what way do atheists attempt to evade the arguments in proof of a god?
Modern atheists endeavored to maintain the eternity of the world and its inhabitants;
ancient atheists, admitting the world was formed in time, deny that it is the work of an
intelligent agent, but the result of a fortuitous concourse of atoms.
66. How can it be demonstrated that the world is not from eternity?
1. From the continual changes constantly occurring before our eyes
2. From the natural history of the world
3. From the late origin of the arts and sciences
4. From there being neither history nor monument indicating the world to be older than
five or six thousand years
5. From the decay of the centrifugal force
67. How can the absurdity of an infinite succession of dependent beings be proved?
It is proved by the argument of the chain of an infinite number of links that it would be
absurd to say supported itself when we cannot discover the least tendency to self-support,
though we ascend it as high as our thoughts can reach.
Or, we may argue thus: when a man is brought into being, the whole cause
necessary to produce this effect must at that time be in existence. But when a man is from
his immediate parents only, it may be that all of his progenitors are in existence; therefore
all the cause necessary for the production of a human being resides in his parents, quod
est absurdum [which is absurd].
68. Have there been any speculative atheists?
Yes, some few among both the ancient and modern philosophers have professed
themselves to be atheists. Atheism has even had its martyrs. Lucilio Vanini,2 a native of
Naples and teacher of atheism in France, was condemned and executed at Toulouse, AD
1619.
69. How do you know that God is a being of infinite perfection?
It is a dictate of nature, a first principle that must be taken for granted and that indeed is
included in the very definition of the term God.
2 [Lucilio Vanini (1585–1619) was an Italian philosopher, physician, free-thinker, and one of the first significant representatives of libertinism.]
70. How can this be reconciled with the prevalence of idolatry and polytheism?
It is very difficult to remove all the difficulties arising from these sources to this opinion.
The difficulty may be lessened by remarking that
1. The heathen, in worshiping images (at least in the first instance), considered them
merely as the habitations of their deity.
2. Those gods to whom they ascribed principles and actions inconsistent with
perfection were merely intermediate deities.
3. From the corruption of human nature, superstition has obtained such power as to
make men believe and act in opposition to even the first principles of reason.
4. They received implicitly the religious opinions of their forefathers without
inquiring or thinking for themselves.
71. Is the unity of God a dictate of natural theology?
If we admit that it is taught by the light of nature that God is infinitely perfect, it must
follow that nature teaches His unity, as infinite perfection excludes the idea of superiority
or equality in any other being. Besides, we have clear evidence of the existence of one
God, but see no proof of more than one.
72. How is the spirituality of God demonstrated?
It is demonstrated that He is entirely different from matter, as matter is inert essentially,
but God must be active essentially. Spirit is the noblest of substances with which we are
acquainted; we therefore ascribed it to God from the principle recognized above.
73. How is the omnipotence of God proved?
It is proved by creation; there is no indication of want [lack] of power to be discovered in
the universe.
74. How does it appear that He is wise?
It is manifested by the variety and beauty of His works, by the fitness of creatures for
their end, and in the subordination of one creature to another. Wisdom is the right use of
knowledge.
75. Can His omnipresence be demonstrated by reason?
Were God not capable of perceiving and acting in all places at all times, He must be
limited and possessed only of finite knowledge.
76. Does the goodness of God appear evidenced from His works?
It is manifested in the provision He has made for the happiness of His creatures, in the
pleasures of animal life, and in the intellectual powers of man. The air, earth, and sea are
full of animated happy beings.
77. Does natural theology teach that God should be observed and worshiped?
Yes, our obligation to obedience rests on the omnipotence and infinite excellence of God
and His relation to us as Creator and Preserver.
78. Do all men agree in this truth?
Mankind in general does, as appears from every nation having some form of religious
worship, though there are doubtless individuals who question the propriety of praising
God or the efficacy of addressing Him in prayer.
79. Does it inform us how we should worship Him?
It is a dictate of natural religion to pray, but the method of approaching God by a
mediator is a subject entirely of revelation.
80. Can we learn the justice, holiness, and truth of God from a survey of His works?
These attributes, properly speaking, cannot be said to be capable of demonstration from
the works of God. We are led to ascribe justice to God from the dictates of conscience
and the sentiments of justice in our own breasts. The same may be said of the other two:
they are included in the idea of an ens summe perfectum [all-perfect Being].
81. Does it teach that the wicked will be punished?
Yes, reason teaches that it shall be well with the righteous and ill with the wicked. That
the doctrine of future punishment is a part of natural religion appears from its being
prevalent in all nations and ages; its truth is strongly confirmed by the natural dread
excited by conscience in the breasts of the wicked and by the analogy of the present state,
since God has ordered that our happiness or misery, even here, shall depend in a great
measure on our own conduct.
82. How does it appear that God exercises a moral government over the world?
1. The first argument in proof of God's moral government is that since in fact God does
govern the world by the distribution of rewards and punishments according to some
settled rule, it is more natural that this rule should be the moral merit or demerit of
men.
2. That peace and external advantages are the natural consequences of prudence in regard
to ourselves and our affairs, and inconvenience and suffering the result of negligence
and rashness.
3. From the natural course of things, vicious actions are to a great degree actually
punished as mischievous to society, and there is a necessity for its being so.
4. In the natural course of things, virtue as such is actually rewarded and vice as such
punished. Virtue, as such, is rewarded by the satisfaction attending it by the hope of
future happiness and by the approbation of all good men, and so on.
5. The tendencies of virtue and vice are necessarily to produce respectively good and bad
effects, both in individuals and in societies. Thus power under the direction of virtue is
more efficacious than if directed by vice.
83. By what arguments is the immortality of the soul proved?
1. By its immateriality
2. It is not probable that God should make all His creatures temporary
3. The capacity of the soul to increase in knowledge is unlimited
4. The desire of immortality being deeply implanted in our souls
5. The unequal distribution of good and evil in this world
6. [The idea has been] Prevalent in every age and nation
84. What degree of conviction do these arguments produce?
They only render the truth of the doctrine probable; it is the gospel that brings life and
immortality from this state of dimness and obscurity into light.
85. Is the knowledge of the truths of natural religion sufficient to salvation?
No:
1. Since Christ is only known by the gospel
2. Because the state of the Gentiles is called the times of ignorance (Acts 17:30)
3. Were salvation by a common religion, [there would be] no necessity of revelation,
but the world by wisdom knew not God
86. In what respects is natural theology defective?
It cannot teach us the true character of God, the method of reconciliation to Him by an
atonement, the nature and extent of our duties to the Supreme Being, [or] our destiny in a
future state, and it is defective in certainty, authority, and motives.
87. Is the necessity of revelation evinced [proved] by a view of the truths of natural theology?
Yes; reason teaches man only sufficient [enough] to render him sensible of the necessity
of being taught of God.
88. How is the necessity of revelation evinced by the view of the history of the world?
By observing that
1. In exact proportion as men increased in human wisdom have they become
ignorant of God.
2. The most erroneous and shocking ideas were prevalent respecting His nature and
worship.
3. The state of morals arising from these errors was exceedingly corrupt.
89. Was not revelation necessary to give a greater certainty to the truths of natural religion?
Yes, as the greatest men have only been doubtful of some of the most important branches
of true religion, such as the immortality of the soul, and so on, and as the sophistry of
man's deceitful heart would teach him to question the plainest principles of natural
theology.
90. Was it not necessary to give authority and sanction to these truths?
It was.
91. Was not revelation necessary to inform us whether God was reconcilable to sinners, and on
what terms?
The delay of punishment might excite in the sinner some hope that God would show
mercy, but reason could never discover that a just God could pass by transgression. And
we see all men erring in regard to the terms on which they expect forgiveness, trusting to
works of righteousness, not to grace through faith.