De Moor I:13: Natural Theology: Acquired

Pseudo-Dionysius

              Then follows the Natural Knowledge of God, Objective, Acquired, Dianoëtic, which is acquired by the contemplation of Objects a great many, and situated outside of ourselves, through discursive reasoning:  and that through the threefold path of Causality, Negation, and Eminence, commonly ascribed to Dionysius the Areopagite.  That is, as often as I consider a thing as dependent (in which manner primarily all creatures are distinguished from the Creator), soon I am led by the Way of Causality into this recognition, that no perfection is contained in a dependent effect that was not already contained in its first Cause.  Then I discover that every perfection of Creatures has annexed to itself many imperfections, which are altogether inconsistent with the Independence of the Creator:  and so the Way of Negation comes to help, removing all that on account of which such a predicate is not able properly to be attributed to the Independent Being.  But now, while from the removal of imperfection follows the positing of the opposite perfection, our mind tries further by the Way of Eminence to magnify the concept of that perfection until it appears to think something that is able to be attributed to God, without prejudice to His Independence.  In the following example VRIESIUS illustrates this, in his Exercitationibus rationalibus VI, § 6.  I observe that the Creature endures:  thence by the way of Causality I gather that also, therefore, the Creator endures.  But the Creature endures by an endurance dependent, finite, and contingent:  this mode of enduring I judge by the way of Negation not to agree with the Independent Creator.  Finally, the Way of Eminence contemplates that God endures in a manner infinitely more perfect than what is able to be conceived of by me:  whence finally a concept of the divine perfection, which is called Eternality, results.  Sacred Scripture goes before in this threefold Way of knowing, in which the way of Causality occurs, Psalm 94:9; Acts 17:28, 29; the way of Negation, Numbers 23:19; the way of Eminence, Matthew 7:11; Isaiah 55:8, 9; 1 Timothy 6:15.  The same manner of discursive reasoning, to acquire further knowledge of God, see excellently illustrated by the Reverend GISBERT BONNET, in his Disputatione de Notitia eorum, quæ Mens humana nec directe nec positive cognoscere potest, § 51-59.  This Acquired Natural Theology is useful for the helping and perfecting of Innate Theology.

              Now, the same is proven from a great many Passages, among which those are clearest, which are here cited, Psalm 19:1, 2; etc.

              Socinus, in his Prælectionibus Theologicis, chapter II, opera Fausti Socini, tome I, page 538, takes exception against this passage, 1.  Because the Heavens are indeed said to declare the glory of God, but not God Himself and His Existence as Creator.  Response:  The Glory of God involves and supposes His Existence; such that, if the heavens declare the Glory of God, they also would declare His Existence as Creator.  Just as, if I should say of some clock or edifice, that it argues the Wisdom of the artificer; by this very thing I shall as much as possible signify at the same time that from the work itself it is proven that it was made by some artificer, and that it did not come together by some chance of wheels or coincidence of stone.

              Exception 2:  All the earth[1] is to be restricted to Judea alone, in which the light of revelation was shining.  Response:  The language of all the earth with the ends of the world is not able to be taken so restrictively here; in which the entire circuit of the Heavens and of the whole Firmament is treated, through which are extended the vicissitudes of day and night, under which a variety of speech and languages obtain, and in which the glory of the Creator is displayed by the elegance of the work; and in which the Sun not only has its own tabernacle, but also that through which it runs from one end to the other:  indeed, the same words are used by Paul unto the signification of the entire world, which, therefore, in these things was understood by him.

              Neither, 3.  is it to be excepted with others also, that here supernatural Revelation through the Gospel is treated, from the Pauline citation of this passage in Romans 10:18, which sort of mystical explication of the former part of this Psalm, following those things which are read in the works of Tertullian, Augustine, and Jerome, has been embraced by more recent men among the Papists, Lutherans, and Reformed.  For there is no indication in the writing of Paul, from which it might be proven that he cites the words of the Psalmist as a proof, as if David in them prophesied of the future, universal preaching of the Gospel:  but Paul sets forth this Universal preaching of the Gospel, which from the event itself is sufficiently evident as having already begun to happen; indeed, he sets it forth in words suitable for this matter, which David had formerly used of the preaching of Nature, through a certain sort of Accommodation, or translation of the words of David unto another subject, as if he should say, Certainly it is able now to be said truly of the preaching of the Gospel, what David sang concerning the heavens and the firmament; namely, that their sound and words had penetrated unto the ends of the earth, and that they were able to be heard clearly by all.  For verily David commends Theology Natural and Supernatural at the same time in this Psalm, the former in verses 1-6, the latter in verses 7-14; in such a way that he subordinates the natural to the supernatural, and lifts the latter above the former:  for he proposes that the perfections and glory of God are able to be understood naturally indeed from the creatures; but that, nevertheless, the doctrine of supernatural revelation in the Sacred Books is far more excellent.

              Acts 14:17:  In which are treated the Gentiles, which God formerly allowed to walk in their ways, but to which notwithstanding He gave His testimony.  But of what sort? by natural benefits:  He filled their hearts with εὐφροσύνῃ/gladness, but resulting from the largess of food:  but that food was granted to them by the help of rain and other things procuring καρποφόρα/fruitful seasons.  But rain and fertile season from heaven are from God, comparing Jeremiah 5:24; 14:22.

              Acts 17:25-27:  ψηλαφήσειαν καὶ εὕροιεν, that is, by groping about they might find.  The incorporeal God is most certainly felt by the mind in corporeal creatures, yet less distinctly, and not so clearly as by Revelation:  just as indeed by handling we apprehend an object, yet not so clearly do we know it by touch as by sight:  compare § 20, Objection 5, of this Chapter.

              Romans 1:20:  This passage is not to be evaded with the Socinians, with the result that those things, which were ἀόρατα ἀπὸ κτίσεως κόσμου, invisible from the creation of the world, now are said to be exposed to sight, ποιήμασι, by the things that are made, that is, through the marvelous works of God Himself and of inspired men, but especially of Christ and His Apostles; namely, God’s ἀΐδιον δύναμιν καὶ θειότητα, eternal power and Godhead, that is, the promises of the Gospel, which are never lost, and that which God wills that we continually do, comparing Romans 1:16; Colossians 2:9:  see Socinus’ Prælectiones Theologicas, chapter II, Opera Fausti Socini, tome I, page 538; Catechesin Racoviensem “de Via Salutis”, chapter I, questions 8-10, page 22-24.  For thus the Nations would be judged to be less ἀναπολόγητοι/inexcusable, which is contrary to the aim/scope and reasoning of Paul.  But the divinity and eternal power of the Creator, having regard unto τὸ γνωστὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ, that which may be known of God,[2] God invisible to corporeal eyes, are observed by the mind and thoughts, thence from the creation of the world, in the things created and through them; whence all Nations not worthily worshipping God are judged inexcusable:  consult ARNOLDI’S Refutationem Catecheseos Racovianæ, on the place cited, § 45-54, pages 71-75; likewise BECMANN’S[3] Exercitationes theologicas, II, page 27, who on pages 25 and 26 in a similar manner frees the text of Psalm 19:1 from the exceptions of Socinus.

              The wisest of the Gentiles support these and the many other testimonies of Scripture; see below in Chapter VIII, § 4, 6, even the greatest Experimental Physicists, as proven by their very words, given by the Eminent NIEUWENTYT in his Gronden van Zekerheid, part III, chapter III, pages 227-230, who himself prepared his entire Cosmotheoriam, a work worthy of cedar, unto this end.

              Those among the Socinians, CRELLIUS[4] on Romans 1:20, and SCHLICHTING on the same passage and elsewhere, do not disapprove.

              Consult in favor of Acquired natural Theology CALVIN’S Institutionem Christianæ Religionis, book I, chapter V; and HOORNBEECK’S Socinianismum confutatum, tome I, book I, chapter VII, part II, pages 150-174.

              Now, while in this demonstration of the divine Existence and perfections from the contemplation of the Creatures the Sacred Scripture so often goes before us, it had certainly not been fitting for the persuasiveness of the argument sought from the Idea of God, as if uniquely demonstrative, to enervate completely this mode of argument:  see the Most Illustrious LEYDEKKER’S Facem Veritatis, locus III, controversy V.

[1] Verse 4.

[2] Verse 19.

[3] Christian Becmann (1580-1648) was a German Reformed theologian; he served as Professor of Theology at Zerbst (1627-1648).

[4] Johannes Crellius (1590-1633) was a one of the Polish Brethren and an influential Socinian theologian.  His son and grandson were also proponents of Socinian views.