wherein all the reason and philosophy of atheism is confuted, and

wherein all the reason and philosophy of atheism is confuted, and wherein all the reason and philosophy of atheism is confuted, and

cch.kcl.ac.uk
from cch.kcl.ac.uk More from this publisher
12.07.2015 Views

214 Tlutarch. a Dithelfiy or j4j[ertor Book I,evil) yet fo as that they are not both />f equal force^ but the better of themmore prevalent: notwithjlanditig which, it is alfo abfo.utely impojjible for theivorfer power or principle to be ever utterly deflroyed, much of it being alwaysintermingled in the foul, and much in the body of the univerfe, there perpetuallytugging againfi the better principle.Indeed learned men of later times have, for the mofl: part, lookM uponPlutarch here, but either as a bare relat;;r of the opinion of other philofophers,or elfe as a follower only, and not a leader in it. Notwithftandingwhich, it is evident, that Plutarch was himfclf heartily engaged in thisopinion, he dilcovering no fmall fondnefs for it, in fundry of his otherwritings : as for example in his Platonick queflions, where he thus declaresP.1003. Par. I^jj^fglf concerning it, ri to ttoXAkxi? i.'(^' aij.^v hiyoixfio-j oiXn^i; eViv, -h (ixEK yx?J^-1 a'jKf Y''^%*'» *& '''' '^l^opyov (rafjio,, tryvurrifj^oii «AX>7Aoi? ati, >

Chap. IV. of an evil Principle, 215/tnce matter which is devoid of quality, and receives all its differences front theaStive principle that moves and forms it, could not poffibly be the caufe thereof.Wherefore evil muji of neceffity either come from nothing, or elfe it mufl comefrom the aSlive and moving principle, which is God. Now from all thefe premifesjoined together Plutarch concludes, that the phsenomenon of evilcould no otherwife poffibly be folved, than by fuppofing a fubftantial principlefor ir, and a certain irrational and maleficent foul or dsmon, unmade,and co-exifting with God and matter from eternity, to have been the caufcthereof. And accordingly he rcfolves, that as whatfoever is good in thefoul and body of the univerfe, and likewife in the fouls of men and dsemons,is to be afcribed to God as its only original ; fo whatfoever is evil, irregularand diforderly in them, ought to be imputed to this other fubftantial principle,a ^'jyji «v*'? xai v.xy.oTroiic, an irrational and 'maleficent foul or daemon,which infinuating itfelf every where throughout the world, is all along intermingledwith the better principle' : xal fj.f, ttx-j eiWi 'i^yov roZ S-;o~ ti?'j^^x^iiiSo that neither the foul of the univerfe, nor that of men and daemons, waswholly the workmanfhip of God., but the lower^ brulifh and diforderly part ofthem the effctl of the evil principle.But befides all this, it is evident, that Plutarch was alfo ftrongly poflefledwith a conceit, that nothing fubftantial could be created (no not by divinepower) out of nothing pre-exifting ; and therefore that all the fubftance ofwhatfoever is in the world did exift from eternity unmade : fo that Godwas only the orderer or the methodizer and harmonizer thereof. Whereforeas he concluded, that the corporeal world was not created by God outof nothing, as to the fubftance of it, but only the pre-exifting matter, whichbefore moved diforderly, was brought into this regular order and harmonyby him ; in like manner he refolved, that the foul of the world (for fuchathing is always fuppofed by him) was not made by God out of nothingneither, nor out of any thing inanimate and foul-lefs pre-exifting, but out ofa pre-exifting diforderly foul was brought into an orderly and regular frame-,duoQfAim yxo ri

214 Tlutarch. a Di<strong>the</strong>lfiy or j4j[ertor Book I,evil) yet fo as that <strong>the</strong>y are not both />f equal force^ but <strong>the</strong> better <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>mmore prevalent: notwithjl<strong>and</strong>itig which, it <strong>is</strong> alfo abfo.utely impojjible for <strong>the</strong>ivorfer power or principle to be ever utterly deflroyed, much <strong>of</strong> it being alwaysintermingled in <strong>the</strong> foul, <strong>and</strong> much in <strong>the</strong> body <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> univerfe, <strong>the</strong>re perpetu<strong>all</strong>ytugging againfi <strong>the</strong> better principle.Indeed learned men <strong>of</strong> later times have, for <strong>the</strong> m<strong>of</strong>l: part, lookM uponPlutarch here, but ei<strong>the</strong>r as a bare relat;;r <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> opinion <strong>of</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r phil<strong>of</strong>ophers,or elfe as a follower only, <strong>and</strong> not a leader in it. Notwithft<strong>and</strong>ingwhich, it <strong>is</strong> evident, that Plutarch was himfclf heartily engaged in th<strong>is</strong>opinion, he dilcovering no fm<strong>all</strong> fondnefs for it, in fundry <strong>of</strong> h<strong>is</strong> o<strong>the</strong>rwritings : as for example in h<strong>is</strong> Platonick queflions, where he thus declaresP.1003. Par. I^jj^fglf concerning it, ri to ttoXAkxi? i.'(^' aij.^v hiyoixfio-j oiXn^i; eViv, -h (ixEK yx?J^-1 a'jKf Y''^%*'» *& '''' '^l^opyov (rafjio,, tryvurrifj^oii «AX>7Aoi? ati, >

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!