102 



METAPHYSICS. 



Wetaphy- volving some fundamental metaphysical principles, we 

 shall treat it a little more in detail. 



^"~V"~ As the belief in the being of a God is the most im- 

 jx>rtant principle which can enter the human mind, so 

 there is none which can be established by such a varie- 

 ty of proofs. In attempting to discover new arguments, 

 or to display superior ingenuity, there can be no doubt 

 that too much stress has often been laid on circumstan- 

 ces which are doubtful or inconclusive. The marks of 

 design, of wisdom, power, and goodness, displayed in 

 the works of nature, are generally supposed to afford 

 both the most obvious and the most satisfactory evi- 

 dence of the existence of an infinite and eternal cause. 

 The Sacred Scriptures often illustrate this subject in 

 very beautiful and sublime language, not so much to 

 produce the belief of a God, as to excite feelings of re. 

 verence and adoration at the contemplation of his works. 

 Thus it is said, in the Psalms, that the heavens declare 

 Vie glory of God, and Ike Jirmamenl sherscth forth his 

 handyrvork ; and the Apostle tells us, that the invisible 

 things of God are clearly seen, being understood by the 

 things which are made. 



At the same time, it must be confessed, that we are 

 extremely apt to err in our speculations respecting final 

 causes, and that the utmost caution is necessary in se- 

 lecting instances, lest we fix on such as may be subject 

 to challenge, and thus weaken an argument which, if 

 judiciously managed, must be irresistible. We know 

 no author who has handled this argument more success- 

 fully than Paley, in his Natural Theology, in which, 

 from an examination of the various parts of the human 

 frame, he has traced the clearest proofs of benevolence 

 and wise design, and has shewn, at the same time, that 

 any inconveniences or evils that may arise to the sys- 

 tem are incidental, and form no part of the original 

 plan. 



We have no doubt, that the same reasoning is appli- 

 cable in all the different departments of nature ; though 

 we are, in many instances, too ignorant to discover the 

 wise adaptation of their several parts, and their mutual 

 subserviency to promote the good of the general plan. 

 We even see many things which puzzle and perplex us, 

 and which we cannot reconcile with our limited views of 

 expediency and wisdom. We may 1 , for instance, admire 

 the wisdom displayed in the structure of a snake, or a 

 scorpion, or a poisonous plant, or venomous insect : but 

 then we are led to inquire, " why all this apparatus, in 

 the case of things which are positively hurtful ?" We 

 suspect that it is quite impossible to give any thing like 

 a rational system of theology from the light of nature. 

 But if we admit that man is a fallen and sinful creature, 

 and obnoxious to punishment, we can perceive a reason 

 why he should be subjected to such scourges. They 

 remind him of his delinquency ; and they teach him 

 caution, prudence, and preparation for death. Virgil, 

 indeed, without the aids of which we speak, discovered 

 a final cause for the existence of noxious animals, not 

 very remote from that which we have suggested. 



Ille malum virus scrpentibus addidit atris, &c. 

 Ut varias usus meditando extunderet artes : 

 Nee torpore gravi passus sua regna veterno. 



istical The atheistical arguments, if arguments they can be 

 objections, called, are all extremely frivolous and absurd, equally 

 destitute of foundation, either in metaphysics or in facts. 

 Some of them are built on the apparent irregularity and 

 want of benevolence, discernible in the arrangements of 

 nature ; yet it is from the beautiful order and wise de- 

 sign manifest in all the parts of nature, which we have 



5 



been enabled to examine, that the theist derives some 

 of the most convincing evidences of a Supreme Creator 

 and Governor of the universe. When we see, however, 

 the two contending parties taking their stand on the 

 same ground, and endeavouring to draw from the same 

 source arguments to support their opposite systems ; 

 we may see the necessity of caution in selecting our 

 instances, lest we fix on some point which may be un- 

 tenable, or on some fact which may be imperfectly as- 

 certained, or on some intention of the Author of nature 

 of which we are not competent to judge. 



But it is surely fair to conclude, that wisdom and be- 

 nevolence prevail throughout the whole, since we have 

 always discovered them in those parts which we have 

 most thoroughly investigated, and that our ignorance of 

 the uses and application of any of the objects of nature 

 or arrangements of Providence, forms no ground what- 

 ever for arguing against them. Were this rule obser- 

 ved, atheism would be deprived of all its arguments 

 drawn from the apparent imperfection and irregularity 

 of the works of nature. 



To obviate the arguments for the being of a God 

 which Theists have drawn from the structure and pre- 

 servation of animals, Atheists have alleged, that blind 

 chance, or fate, or whatever else they may choose to 

 call it, produced at first an infinite number of animals 

 of all possible natures, forms, and structures ; but that 

 those only survived which happened to have the qua- 

 lities and properties adapted for preservation. The 

 animals without mouths, for instance, would soon pe- 

 rish ; those deprived of the organs of generation could 

 not propagate, and wherever the structure necessary to 

 the vital functions was impecfect, life would soon be ex- 

 tinguished ; the animals only which happened to be per- 

 fect could live and propagate. Atheism must be redu- 

 ced to miserable shifts, indeed, when it has been obli- 

 ged to have recourse to such arguments. Perhaps they 

 ought not to be answered in any other way, than by 

 shewing that they are not only unfounded in fact, but 

 directly opposed to every known fact in the constitu- 

 tion of nature. For where have we ever seen any in- 

 stances of such promiscuous and casual productions ? 

 Are there any who now believe in the production of 

 animals by the solar heat acting on the slime of the 

 Nile, independent of the usual process of generation ? 

 If there are any such, they may be influenced by the 

 atheistical hypothesis which we have stated ; but no 

 man in his senses would attempt to argue with them, as 

 they hold principles totally inconsistent with the known 

 facts and analogy of nature. 



But it may be demonstrated, on the soundest princi- 

 ples of metaphysics, that the hypothesis is absurd and 

 impossible. For when did this chance, or fate, or what- 

 ever it was, begin to operate ? If it had a beginning, it 

 must have had a cause : this is a metaphysical axiom ; 

 and the man who denies it, is no more a subject of ar- 

 gument than he would be who should deny that two 

 and two make four. If then, this chance, fate, c. had 

 a beginning, it cannot be the cause of any thing, since 

 it is itself caused by something else. 



But we are prepared to hear the Atheist affirm, that 

 this principle of his is eternal, and had no beginning. 

 On this supposition, then, it must eternally operate ; 

 and what has been must always be, for to suppose any 

 interruption in the continuity of eternity is absurd. But, 

 according to the atheistical supposition, this eternal 

 principle acted only once in a confused and random 

 manner, and has ever since acted regularly and uni- 

 formly. Here, then, is an evident change, in an eter- 



Metnphy. 



sics. 



