The Court of the Gentiles Part 3, Book 1 · Chapter 1

The Court of the Gentiles Part 3 · Book 1 · Chapter 1

p. 1CHAP. I. The Vanitie of Pagan Philoſophie, from its Cauſes.

The Cauſes of vain Philoſophie; (1.) Ignorance, Act. 17.27. foreign. 2 Pet. 1.9. foreign. (2.) Human Inventions, Col. 2.8. foreign, &c. foreign. ver. 20, foreign, ver. 22, foreign. (3.) Curioſitie, Col. 2.18. foreign. Act. 17.21, foreign. 1 Cor. 15.32, foreign. The ſundry workings of this Curioſitie. (4.) Spiritual Pride. Col. 2.18, foreign. 1 Cor. 8.1, foreign, &c. The Effects of Philoſophie Pride. 1 Tim. 3.6, foreign. Pſal. 10.4, foreign. (5.) Carnal Preſumption. Col. 2.18, foreign. Hab. 2.4, Affected ignorance, the effect of carnal Confidence. Socrates's ſenſe of his p. 2ignorance. (6.) foreign, or contentious Logic. 1 Tim. 6.3, 4. foreign. The verbal contentioſe amongſt the Philoſophers. The effects of theſe foreign, Envie, Strife, Atheiſme, &c. 1 Tim. 6.5, foreign. ver. 20, foreign. (7.) Opiniatretie and Dogmatiſing. Col. 2.20, foreign, its origine and vanitie. (8.) Carnal Policie, Pſal. 119.113, 118, 163. (9.) Judicial hardneſſe, Rom. 1.18, 21, 22, 28, foreign. (10.) Idolatric inclination. (11.) Fabuloſe imitation.

§. 1. HAving in the former Part contemplated Philoſophie in its origine and progreſſe,Vain Philoſophie from ignorance. we are now to take view of it in its degenerate, corrupt and deform'd Idea or viſage: For though it were in its origine a weak imperfect reflexion of that glorioſe Divine Revelation, which ſhone from the Sun of Righteouſneſſe on the Jewiſh Church; yet falling on proud, carnal, indiſpoſed hearts, it did but harden them the more: So that, Holding the truth in unrighteouſneſſe, they became vain in their imaginations, and their fooliſh heart was darkened: for profeſſing themſelves to be wiſe, they became fooliſh, as Rom. 1.18, 21, 22. Now to penetrate fully the Corruptions and Vanitie of Pagan Philoſophie, we ſhal conſider it, (1.) In its Cauſes. (2.) In its Mater and Parts. (3.) In its Forme and Proprieties. (4.) In its Effects.

We ſhal begin with the Vanitie of Philoſophie, as conſidered in its Cauſes. And the firſt prolific ſeminal cauſe of al the Vanitie and corruption of Philoſophie, was the innate congenite darkneſſe, or the native ignorance of the natural underſtanding. 1 Cor. 2.14, The natural man, i. e. Nature in its higheſt Philoſophic elevation. By foreign, the Animal or natural man, we are to underſtand, not only the brutiſh, ſenſual man; but man under the higheſt raiſures of natural or moral endowments, ſo far as he is void of the Spirit of God, and oppoſite to the ſpiritual man, ver. 15. Thus Chryſoſtome interprets this foreign, to be foreign, who lives after the fleſh, not having p. 3his mind illuminated by the Spirit, but clothed only with a natural human intelligence, which the creator hath more or leſſe inveſted the ſouls of al with. This Dr. Reynolds, in his Conc. ad Clerum, has largely proved. Theſe firſt Sophiſts or Philoſophers, finding themſelves in the dark as to the origine and firſt principes of the Univerſe; but much more, as to the ſublime Myſteries of Divinitie; they conſidered how they might reduce their foreign, thoſe dark Notices and Remains of natural light, unto a more perfect contemplation of things in their true and genuine Ideas. And in order hereto, that they might the better foment and emprove theſe few commun Principes, contemplative and active, they under-took many tedious Travels and Labors; they went far and near, to the Egyptians, Phenicians, and Chaldeans, but principally to the Hebrews, who were ſcattered amongſt al theſe Nations; from whom they received immediately, or by the mediation of thoſe neighboring Nations, ſome fragments and broken traditions of the firſt origine of things; their Connexions, Cauſalities, Effects, &c. Alſo of the firſt Eternal Being, his Perfections, Operations, and Modes of worſhip, &c. which forrein heavenly Plants of Divine Revelation, they endeavored to tranſplant into the Garden of their natural Underſtandings and Philoſophie; hoping thereby to cultivate and elevate their own natural Principes. But theſe Divine Myſteries being too big for their natural Acumen, they ſoon degenerated into vain imaginations. We find al this ſet forth to the life by Paul, in his Diſcourſe to the Athenian Philoſophers, Act. 17.27.Act. 17.27. foreign.Acts 17:27 foreign, If happily they might, by groping after him, find him, i. e. like blind men, &c. foreign, primarily and properly ſignifies, to touch, as they who play on a Muſic Inſtrument. But thence, in a more laxe notion, it notes, to grope with the hand, as blind men grope for the Wal: and thence metaphorically, as applied to the mind, it importeth the dark inquiries of blind nature after God and things Supernatural. This is excellently illuſtrated, 2 Pet. 1.9, But he that wanteth theſe things, is blind, and cannot ſee afar off. foreign,2 Pet. 1.9. foreign.2 Pet 1:9 i. e. not able to open his eyes: Or as Beza, Not able to ſee far. So Ariſtotle defines foreign, i. e. (according to Budaeus) Myopes are ſuch, who from their birth ſee things next them, but things remote they cannot ſee. Or as Beza, foreign, p. 4becauſe they alwaies blink with their eyes. Thus learned Bochart, in his elaborate Book De Animalibus Sacris, part. 1. lib. 1. cap. 4. pag. 31. Where having layd down three interpretations of the word foreign, he addes a fourth, which he cloſeth with: I prefer, ſaies he, the fourth interpretation of them who render foreign to ſhut the eyes, to twinkle, to blink with the eyes. So Heſychius, foreign. So Iſa. 6.10. Matt. 13.15. Act. 28.27, foreign, they twinkled with their eyes. Thus alſo the ſimple foreign is often taken: ſo that foreign, implies no other than foreign, to ſhut the eyes, as Iſa. 33.15. Therefore this foreign, is he who is blind, becauſe he voluntarily ſhuts his eyes that he may not ſee, or who ſeems to ſee, what he unwillingly beholds. Such are by Job 24.13, called foreign Rebels againſt the light, John 3.20. This fully agrees to theſe Gentile Philoſophers,Rom. 1.18.Rom 1:18 who are ſaid, Rom. 1.18, To hold the truth in unrighteouſneſſe: i. e. They had ſome foreign, commun notions of a Deitie, which they cultivated by ſtudioſe Contemplation of the inviſible perfections of God in his viſible workes, as ver. 19; and farther, by ſome broken Tradition; borrowed from the Church of God. Yet al this while, the truth being captivated by their dark minds, they could not ſee afar off: they had only a purblind light, or as Plato cals it, foreign, a night-day knowledge of Divine things, which rendered them only skilful in coining vain imaginations, &c. They may be ſaid to hold the truth in unrighteouſneſſe, on a twofold account. (1.) As by their unrighteouſneſſe they captivated the Truth: Their unrighteous luſts were too ſtrong for Truth. Or (2.) As they did captivate Truth unrighteouſly, againſt al equitie and juſtice. Had they given Truth fair play, it would have dealt roundly with them, and made them ſenſible of their Crimes; but their unrighteous luſts, did againſt al rules of equitie, unrighteouſly captivate Truth, that ſo it might not diſturbe them in their wicked practices.

§. 2. A Second Cauſe of the Vanitie of Pagan Philoſophie,2. Human Inventions. was the human Figments and Inventions of their own, which they mixed with thoſe broken Traditions, they received originally from the Jewiſh Church; whence the whole of their Philoſophie, according to Divine eſtimation, is judged to be at beſt but human Invention and Tradition. This is fully laid down, p. 5Col. 2.8, Through philoſophie and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, &c.Col. 2.8.Col 2:8 The Apoſtle ſeems to ſtrike primarily at the Pythagorean Philoſophie, as it appears by the following, verſ. 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, which were Pythagorean Doctrines. Thence Grotius, and Hammond out of him, underſtand this Diſcourſe of the Gnoſtic Theologie, compoſed for the moſt part of Pythagorean Principes. Now here the Apoſtle exhorces them Firſt, That no man make a prey of them through Philoſophie. What the proper import of foreign is, we ſhal hereafter ſhew. He ſaies, foreign. Grotius obſerves, that here is the figure foreign, one and the ſame thing ſignified by two expreſſions: For foreign, by Philoſophie and vain deceit, availeth as much, as if he had ſaid, foreign, by the vain deceit of Philoſophie. Thence the Apoſtle proves, that it was vain Philoſophie, from its Cauſes, (which is the higheſt kind of demonſtration) foreign, according to the tradition of men. Very right: (addes Grotius) for that which theſe Greek Philoſophers taught, proceded, foreign, for the moſt part, from their human ingenie, or own invention. But what true account can we have of God, and of his Decrees, unleſſe we are taught of God? Hence therefore thoſe perpetual and inexplicable diſſentions amongſt the Philoſophers: Hence alſo their induſtrious labor and ſtudie, in things that were neither in themſelves certain, nor yet rendred men better. foreign, according to the inſtitution, which came not from Heaven; but from this world: and thence is partly falſe, partly imperfect. foreign properly ſignifies the Elements, which the Philoſophers ſuppoſe to be the firſt principes of Natural bodies. Thence in Philoſophie the word was uſed to ſignifie the firſt principes, or rudiments of any Science, which have an analogie with the natural elements. So that by rudiments, or elements of this world, is evidently meant thoſe principe, of Philoſophie, which had their main origine from the world; that is, the invention of man, though grounded on ſome Jewiſh traditions. So it follows, foreign, and not according to Chriſt: i. e. ſaies Grotius, Not ſuch rudiments or inſtitutions, which were brought by Chriſt from Heaven. 'Tis true, much of their Philoſophie, its firſt Rudiments and Elements, deſcended originally from Heaven by Chriſt. For, as it hath been proved, the chief principes of al Philoſophie were but p. 6corrupt traductions, or broken traditions derived originally from Gods ſacred Oracles: Ay, but in as much as the manner of traduction, or conveighance was but human, not according to Gods Ordinance; yea very broken and imperfect; and moreover, theſe purblind Philoſophers mixed their own figments and inventions with their Jewiſh Traditions, which they underſtood not, neither emproved to any other uſe or end, than a little to elevate their own commun principes; hence the Apoſtle ſtiles the whole of their Principes and Philoſophie but Traditions of men, worldly rudiments, which were partly falſe, partly imperfect; but wholly vain and uſeleſſe as to Divine Inſtitution and Inſtruction of men, in the ſaving knowledge of God in Chriſt. Not that the Apoſtle condemnes al Philoſophie as vain, becauſe it was of human Invention or Tradition; but his deſign here, is to preſerve theſe Colloſſians from the contagious infuſions of the Gnoſtics, and other Heretics, who mixed Pythagoric Traditions and Rudiments, with Divine Revelations and Inſtitutions; and ſo rendred both vain and uſeleſſe. This our Apoſtle over and again inculcates,Col. 2.20.Col 2:20 verſ. 20.21, 22, Wherefore if ye be dead with Chriſt to the rudiments of the world, &c. i. e. ſaith Grotius, Chriſt has delivered you from this human Inſtitution. He that is dead, is freed from the incommodities of life. Therefore to dye here, is taken in the better part, as Rom. 6.2.Gal. 4.3, 9.Gal 4:3Gal 4:9 foreign, Rudiments, are every inſtitution, as Gal. 4.3, 9. Where you'l ſee the reaſon, why they are called foreign, Rudiments of the world; namely, becauſe they were commun to the Jews with the Gentiles. For there was nothing in theſe Rites peculiar to the Jews, yea they rather came by Gods permiſſion from the Gentiles to the Jews, than from the Jews to the Gentiles. And indeed it is evident, That theſe Rudiments or Inſtitutes here mentioned, ver. 21, 22, were not Jewiſh but Pythagorean, (as Grotius obſerves) which the Gnoſtics tranſplanted out of the Pythagorean Philoſophie, into their Theologie. This further appears by what follows, ver. 20, foreign; Why, as though living in the world, are ye ſubject unto ordinances? foreign, ſaies Grotius, ſignifies here, Why do you ſuffer your ſelves to be thus taught, as though your life were to be compoſed according to the exemple, not of Chriſt, but of the World? Or, as Schmidius, Why do you bind your ſelves, ad foreign, to the Dogmes, Rites, and Inſtitutes of p. 7men? foreign, as it is wel known, is a Philoſophic terme, and ſignifies to impoſe a Dogme, or Doctrine, as foreign, to impoſe a Law. The Pythagoreans had their foreign, Dogmes, impoſed on al their Sect; ſo that foreign, he ſaid it, was a Law to them. Now, ſaies the Apoſtle, Why do you ſuffer theſe Pythagorean Dogmes to be impoſed on your Conſciences, inſtead of Chriſts Laws? Why do you ſubject your Conſciences to theſe worldly Rudiments, or Pythagorean Ordinances, which are vain and uſeleſſe, in point of ſalvation; as to maters of Faith and worſhip, &c? Then our Apoſtle procedes to lay down ſome of theſe Pythagorean Dogmes or Ordinances, ver. 21,Col. 2.21.Col 2:21 foreign. That theſe are no Moſaic Ordinances, is affirmed by Tertullian. It ſeems to me (ſaith Grotius) that he uſeth words commun, which comprehend both the Jews and the Philoſophers, principally the Pythagoriſt, &c. Then it follows,Col. 2.22.Col 2:22 ver. 22, foreign, according to the commandements and Doctrines of men. This, ſaies Grotius, ought to be referred to the remoter, namely to that foreign, ordinances, ver. 20, which were the inventions of men, not of God. foreign, are ſuch things as are commanded by mens Laws: foreign, are the Injunctions or Dogmes of the Philoſophers. So that we ſee the ſum of our Apoſtles Diſcourſe, and ſcope in theſe forecited places, is, to ſhew the vanitie and deceit of this Pythagorean Philoſophie, which theſe Gnoſtics (pretenders to wiſdome) had foiſted into their myſtic Divinitie. And this he doth fully demonſtrate from its main cauſe; namely, that al theſe Pythagoric Principes (which theſe fooliſh Gnoſtics ſo much doted on) were but mens Traditions and worldly Rudiments, as ver. 8, or Dogmes, Mandates and Doctrines of men; as ver. 20, 22: i. e. Though they might have ſome origine Idea in, and Tradition from Gods ſacred Oracles; yet, in as much as this Tradition was only human, broken and corrupt, and no way apprehended, much leſſe rightly improved, but rather abuſed to vanitie, pride and idolatrie, by theſe fooliſh Sophiſts; hence the whole of their Philoſophie, according to Divine eſtimation, was judged at beſt but of human. Invention and Tradition; and therefore vain and deceitful, when made the meaſure of Divine things, or rule of faith and worſhip, as here it was. And this indeed the wiſer of the Philoſophers, Pythagoras and Plato, ſeemed ſenſible of; as alſo of their need of an p. 8higher and more Divine light, than what they had attained unto by Traditions received, and the improvements of their own natural principes thereon. What elſe mean thoſe Pythagoric Symbols, Look not in a glaſſe by Candle-light? Diſcourſe not of Pythagorean things without light, &c. And Plato gives us many great acknowlegements of his natural ignorance, and of the need he had of a Divine light, to direct him into the knowlege of Divine Myſteries, &c.

§. 3. Another Cauſe of the corruption and vanitie of Philoſophie, Curioſitie and affectation of Novitie. Col. 2.18.Col 2:18was Curioſitie, and affectation of Novitie. This is more than hinted in that of the Apoſtle, Col. 2.18, foreign, i. e. (ſaies Grotius) Penetrating into thoſe things, which he hath not ſeen or known; claiming a privilege of diſcourſing concerning things unknown or hidden. foreign, in the Gloſſarie, ſignifies to dive or pry into. It is placed for the Hebrew foreign Pſal. 19.51. They preferred Angels to what Offices they pleaſed, coyning Names for them, diſtributing them into Claſſes, &c. Schmidius renders foreign, Invading, or proudly intruding on things he hath not ſeen. foreign, properly ſignifies, to place the foot on ſomewhat; and thence ſometimes, proudly to undertake a mater beyond a mans capacitie. Our Apoſtle here ſtrikes immediately at the Pythagoriſing Gnoſtics, their proud and curioſe ſpeculations, concerning the Pythagorean Aeones or Angels; whoſe Natures, Proprieties, Orders and Offices, they ſo buſily, but vainly pryed into: As after them, the Popiſh Monkes and Scholemen, who exactly follow the Gnoſtics and Pythagoreans herein; and ſo are without dout ſtruck at here, by this Apoſtolic charge. This curioſe inquiſitive humor was an original ſin amongſt the Greek Philoſophers, ſpecially the Pythagoreans; who having had ſome dark notices of Divine Jewiſh Myſteries, were greatly inquiſitive into them, even beyond ſobrietie and modeſtie; in ſo much, that being, as it were, drunken with their own curioſe conceits and ſpeculations, they grew extreme vain in al their Imaginations and Philoſophie. This ſin of curioſitie, and affectation of novitie, was that which Luke charged upon the Athenians, as the ſource of their vain Philoſophemes, Act. 17.18, 21. ver. 18, we are told, that he was encountred by certain Philoſophers, Epicureans and Stoics, who ver. 20, ſeem very inquiſitive to know what Pauls new Doctrine meant; and ver. 21, Luke gives us the root of al p. 9their Vain Philoſophiſings, namely, their Curioſitie,Act 17.21.Acts 17:21 who ſpent their time in nothing elſe but ſome new thing. foreign, i. e. they were wholly buſied, or, they counted their time in nothing elſe wel ſpent but in Novities. This humor of Curioſitie was that which the Corinthian Sophiſts or Wiſe-men were drunken with; for which Paul frequently rebukes them, ſpecially, 1 Cor. 15.32,1 Cor. 15.32.1 Cor 15:32 Awake to righteouſneſſe, &c. foreign (ſaies Beza) to awake, properly belongs to perſons Drunken, who at length after ſleep grow ſober. He ſpeaks here of the ſobrietie of the mind, to which he exhortes them to returne, who had been, as it were, drunken with their many and curioſe ſpeculations. This itch of Curioſitie is that which has ever proved noxious (yea, pernicioſe where it prevails) not only to Pagan Philoſophie, but alſo to Schole-Divinitie; and 'tis like to prove as deſtructive to Sacred Philologie or Scripture-Criticiſme, (according to the Prophetic fears of Pious Ʋſher) if Critics awake not to righteouſneſſe. This peccant humor of Curioſitie, as Aquinas has wel obſerved in 2a 2ae, Quaes. 167. is not directly oppoſed to a thorow diſquiſition and knowlege of Truth, but to the irregular Appetite thereof, or Studies therein; which Irregularitie may be occaſioned ſeveral waies. As (1.) when our Curioſitie leads us to the ſtudie of Truth only upon ſome lower motive or baſe ends; namely, to feed our Pride, or gratifie Luſt. (2.) When our very Appetite or deſires and ſtudies after knowlege are inordinate and exceſſive. (3.) When the mater of our Studies and Inquiries is irregular, i. e. things ſecret, and above our capacities: or elſe things forbidden and ſinful. (4.) When the manner of our diſquiſitions and contemplations is irregular; which happens ſundry waies. [1.] When we are prepoſterous in our ſtudies, and make that ſubſervient which ſhould be ultimate, and that ultimate which ſhould ſubſerve. [2.] When we violently perſue ſhadows or things leſſe uſeful, and neglect ſubſtantials or maters of moment, &c. [3.] When al is done in our own ſtrength and confidence. Al theſe pieces of Curioſitie the Pythagoreans, with the reſt of the Philoſophers, were greatly guilty of, which rendred their Philoſophie exceding vain and degenerate: and the Schole-men have herein followed, if not out-gone them.Spiritual Pride, the Cauſe of Vain Philoſophie.

§. 4. Another great Mother-root of the Vanitie of Philoſophie, was Spiritual Pride, which attended and influenced al the Diſquiſitions p. 10and Contemplations of thoſe Pagan Philoſophers. This is ſufficiently expreſſed by our Apoſtle,Col. 2.18.Col 2:18 in his forecited caution to the Coloſſians, Chap. 2. ver. 18. foreign, vainly puffed up by his fleſhly mind. foreign (ſaies Grotius) here is ſpoken of human Knowlege, not reveled by God. So foreign is taken, Matt. 16.17. This knowlege ſwels them like to the wind. The word foreign we have 1 Cor. 4.6, 18, 19, &c. They much pleaſed themſelves in vain matters, as Ezech. 13.3. It is moſt evident, that our Apoſtle perſues his great undertaking begun ver. 8, to prove this Gnoſtic Theologie, compoſed for the moſt part of Pythagorean Philoſophie, to be vain and deceitful. He had ſhewed, in the former part of the Verſe, the Vanitie of theſe their Pythagorean ſpeculations from the Curioſitie that attended them: he here procedes to a more pregnant Cauſe, which had an univerſal influence both on the Curioſitie and Vanitie of their Philoſophie; and that was their Pride. Vainly puffed up, i. e. ſwollen with Pride, as an emty Bubble or Bladder ful of nothing but Wind; which al procedes originally from their fleſhly mind, i. e. as Grotius wel obſerves, their human knowlege or Philoſophie; which ſpringing from their proud carnal minds tended to no other than the puffing up and exaltation of carnal ſelf or fleſhly intereſt: For we know nothing aſcends higher than its ſpring-head and origine: When the proud fleſhly mind is the ſource, proud fleſhly ſelf wil be the center or end of al our contemplations.1. Cor. 8.1.1 Cor 8:1 We have the like anatomie of Vain Philoſophie, 1 Cor. 8.1, 2. Ver. 1, Knowledge puffeth up, but Charitie edifieth. foreign. He doth, as ſome conceive, here alſo ſtrike at thoſe Pythagoriſing Gnoſtics, who were carnal Goſpellers, but yet pretended to an high ſpiritual foreign, or Knowlege; whence they were called foreign, Gnoſtics: which is the ſame with foreign, Sophiſts or Wiſe men; whoſe pretended Wiſdome or Theologie was nothing elſe but a degenerate compoſition of Judaiſme and Pythagorean Philoſophie; which puffed them up with a proud, vain, windy conceit of, I know not what, Myſtic knowlege. Thence ſaith the Apoſtle, Knowledge puffeth up, 1 Cor. 8.2.1 Cor 8:2&c. So it follows, Verſ. 2, If any man thinketh he knoweth any thing, &c. foreign, i. e. ſaies Grotius, if any man pleaſeth (or prides) himſelf in this, That he is ingenioſe, that he is learned, that he knows Dialectic Diſputations, or is skilled in Philoſophie. foreign here notes one p. 11that fondly conceits, preſumes, or arrogantly perſuades himſelf, that he knows ſomething: It importes a proud ſelf flaterie and groundleſſe preſumtion of what he hath not indeed. So it follows, foreign, He does in no wiſe know any thing as he ought to know it. i. e. He is ignorant of the principal thing. That Knowlege is not ſaving which tends not to love. To know as one ought, is to uſe his Knowlege for the ſalvation of himſelf and others. The ſum of al is this, That conceited, windy, emty, ſpeculative Knowlege or Philoſophie does but puffe up the mind, and ſil it with Pride, Vanitie and Oſtentation; which is but conceited Ignorance. And this was an Epidemic Diſeaſe and Ʋniverſal Contagion, which tainted al Pagan Philoſophie and Philoſophers, though ſome had more skil than others to concele their Pride and Vanities under modeſt Titles and Habits, as Pythagoras, Socrates, and Diogenes the Cynic, &c. Yea this original ſin of Pride and Vanitie ſo much reigned amongſt theſe firſt Philoſophers, as that they themſelves could eaſily diſcerne it in each other, although they could not or would not ſee it in themſelves. Thus Plato and Diogenes accuſe each other, as Diogenes Laertius, in the Life of Diogenes the Cynic, informs us: Diogenes, ſaies he, trampled upon Plato's Bed (where he Philoſophiſed) ſaying, foreign, I tread upon Plato's vain ſtudie. To whom Plato replies, foreign, O Diogenes, how much Pride doſt thou diſcover, in ſeeming not to be proud (but to tread on others Pride)? So Antiſthenes, ſeeing the Veſſel wherein Plato's Vomit lay, ſaid, foreign, I ſee Plato's Choler, but I don't ſee his Pride; meaning that Plato's Pride was too deeply rooted to be vomited up. This Spiritual Pride was an univerſal contagion which infected al the Philoſophers: Whence, ſaies Minutius Faelix, We contemne the proud looks of the Philoſophers, whom we know to be Corrupters, and Adulterers, and Tyrants, and yet alwaies eloquent againſt their own vices. We Chriſtians) who boaſt not of our wiſdome by habit, but keep it in our mind, do not ſpeak, but live great things. Now the Pride of theſe Pagan Philoſophers rendred their Philoſophie and Imaginations vain in theſe particulars.Pride brings al Divine myſteries to the meaſure of carnal Reaſon

1. In that they endeavoured to meaſure things Reveled and Divine (concerning which they had received ſome broken notices by Jewiſh Traditions) by their corrupt, proud, and vain p. 12underſtandings. Thence, ſaies Minutius Faelix, It is a piece of the greateſt ſacrilege to ſeek that on the ground which thou oughteſt to find above. And indeed there is nothing in the World, that hath been a greater enemy to Gods Word, or Divine Revelation, than proud and vain Philoſophie: which, albeit it received the firſt rudiments and elements of al its contemplations about God and Divine Myſteries from the ſacred Oracles, yet hath it ever rejected, yea oppoſed the ſame, endeavoring, by its vain and curioſe ſearches into ſacred Myſteries, to comprehend and reduce the ſame to the meaſure of its proud conceivings. This, ſaies Calvin, is the greateſt arrogance, not to allow God his ſecret Reaſons, which our Reaſons can't fadome.

2. The Pride of their vain Philoſophie,Pride makes men intemperate in deſires of knowlege. appears in their intemperate deſires of Knowlege, which indeed is of al the worſt intemperance. So Seneca: To deſire to know more than we ought, is an high degree of intemperance.

3. The Pride and Vanitie of Pagan Philoſophie appeared in their buſie Diſputes and Contemplations about trifles and unprofitable maters.Pride is much buſied about trifles. This Plato himſelf was ſenſible of, when he ſaid, (in his Meno,) foreign, We account ſuch mad, whom ſome count moſt wiſe. And Calvin pronounceth univerſally of ſuch vain Philoſophers, Sedulo in hoc omnes incumbunt, ne abſ que ratione inſipere viderentur, They al labor with al their might in this, that they might not ſeem to play the fool without Reaſon. We find this proud vain Philoſopher notably Characteriſed by Paul, 1 Tim. 6.4, foreign. He is puffed up (as hydropical bodies, or Toads ſwollen with poiſon) with his aerial, proud, vain ſpeculations, without true ſolid knowlege which humbles, &c. of which hereafter.

4. That which rendred the proud Philoſophers ſo vain in their Diſquiſitions and Inquiries,Pride expoſed Philoſophers to the Divine Curſe. was the peculiar curſe of God upon them for their Pride. This was obſerved by ſome of the ſobereſt amongſt themſelves. For Chilo (as Diogenes Laertius) being asked, what Jupiter did? Anſwered, foreign, He caſts down the high things, and lifts up the low. This is more fully expreſſed by the Spirit of God, 1 Tim. 3.6.1 Tim. 3.6,1 Tim 3:6 Where foreign, the novice in Chriſts Schole is dehorted from Pride, foreign, leſt being lifted up, or waxing mad, p. 13[So Phyſitians cal foreign, one that labors under a Frenzy.] he fals into the condemnation of the Devil i. e. paſſively, the Devils curſed condition, &c. Thus through the Fever of their Pride they loſt the underſtanding of their frail condition. God is ſaid to reſiſt the proud: And thus he did thoſe proud Philoſophers, by leaving them to be entangled and enſnared in their own proud Imaginations, and Philoſophic Contemplations.

5. Hence this Pride of their hearts cauſed their Philoſophie to determine in Atheiſme, Blaſphemie, Idolatrie and Senſualitie. Pride turned Philoſophie into a ſeminary of 'Blaſphemie, Atheiſme, Idolatrie, Senſualitie.For God leaving them in judgement to their own proud Imaginations, they fel firſt into doutful Diſputations, thence into Sceptic Concluſions, and at laſt arrived unto Atheiſme, Blaſphemie and Senſualitie: for their Scepticiſme ended in Epicuriſme, as we ſhal after ſhew. And al proceded from the Pride of their hearts, according to that prophetic ſaying of the Pſalmiſt, Pſ. 10.4, The wicked through the pride of his countenance. Pſal. 10.4.Ps 10:4foreign the Particle foreign here is cauſal, denoting the cauſe of al their Atheiſme to be Pride. The Countenance is here put as that which is the Index of the heart. The Thargum reads it, foreign, his ſpirit. God is not in al his thoughts, or al his thoughts are, that there is no God. This is the effect of al his proud vain Philoſophie, to believe there is no God. It is certain, that Atheiſme was the effect of proud Philoſophie, as hereafter.

It's a good obſervation of Senault, that ſober Janſeniſt: There is no one but knows, that Pride hath alwaies accompanied the Sect of the Stoics, who to elevate man, have abaſed God; and who oft have made their Wiſe-man more bleſſed than their Jupiter. What greater Pride can there be than this, for a man to ſay, unleſſe he be leſt to his own corrupt wil, he wil do nothing? Which was the caſe of the Stoics, and moſt Philoſophers, who walked in the ſparkes of their own fire, pleaſed themſelves in their own abilities, both Contemplative and Active, but had not the leaſt regard to Gods glorie. It was wel obſerved by Auſtin, That they who wil aſcend to God, muſt deſcend in ſelf-abaſement and humilitie. The further from Pride, the nearer to God: He that aſcends in himſelf, deſcends and fals from God. Pride and Vain-glorie are the prime elements of vain Philoſophie; whereas ſacred and ſound Philoſophie is ſounded in Humilitie. Ships that are heavieſt loden, fail loweſt: So a Mind laden with ſound Philoſophie is moſt humble.

p. 14§. 5. The Vanitie of Philoſophie ſprang much from the carnal preſumptions or confidences of theſe Philoſophers in their own wiſdome or conceited ignorance.Carnal confidence another cauſe of vain Philoſophie. This was another Maſter-Vice, which originally ſprang from the forementioned Pride of their hearts, and had a potent influence on the Vanitie of their Philoſophie. This alſo is implied in Paul's Anatomie of the Pythagoriſing Gnoſtics, Col. 2.18. Vainly puffed up. Hab. 2.4.Col 2:18Hab 2:4their proud vain Philoſophie, Col. 2.18, Vainly puffed up by their fleſhly mind, i. e. by carnal preſumtion and confidence on their own fleſhly human wiſdome. So Hab. 2.4, we read of an heart lifted up, i. e. with its own ſwelling proud confidences, or ſelf-dependences on its own wiſdome and ſtrength;Affected ignorance the effect of carnal preſumtion. which indeed turnes the beſt human Knowlege into the worſt ignorance: Whence, ſaies Seneca, (de Tranquil.) I think many might have attained to wiſdome, if they had not thought they had already attained to it. Therefore we are unwilling to learne, becauſe we conceit our ſelves already learned. If thou deſireſt to learne, or know any thing with profit, learne firſt to know thine own ignorance. There is nothing that proud nature more affects, than to be reputed wiſe; and thence it is moſt prone to ſlater it ſelf into a fond preſumtion of its own knowlege; and ſo to aquieſce therein. It's rare, that ſuch as are wiſe in their own conceit, have ſo much humilitie as to ſuffer themſelves to be taught by others. Whence it is accounted by wiſe-men better to have little of knowlege with humilitie, and a teachable heart, than treaſures of Sciences with vain ſelf-complacence and confidence. For affected Ignorance is uſually the fruit of ſuch preſumtuous confidence: When ever a man leanes on his own underſtanding, he uſually fals into ſome conceited Follie, or vain Imaginations. This Ariſtotle, Rhet. l. 2. c. 14. makes the cauſe why young men, or Novices, ſo often fal into fooliſh, indeliberate actions: foreign, Young men thinke they know althings, and thence are ſtrong in confidences. And as this is uſually the crime of Novices in Philoſophie, ſo was it generally of al the Pagan Philoſophers; and ſo the root of much Vanitie in their Philoſophie. Man indeed naturally affects a kind of Divinitie: he would fain (with his firſt Parent Adam) be a God to himſelf, and thence he makes an Idol of his own wiſdome, which is an high piece of Idolatrie, and therefore provokes the great God, to leave ſuch to al manner of fooliſh conceits, and vanitie of Imagination. That p. 15this was a main cauſe of thoſe vain Pagan Philoſophiſings, is excellently laid open by Owen, Theolog. l. 1. c. 7. The Philoſophers, ſaies he, being inſtructed by the advantage of ſome Revelation in the workes of Creation and Providence, with ſome notices of the Power and Divinitie of God, endeavored with al their might to promote their foreign, their own commun principes; and this gave origine to Philoſophie, &c. Theſe their endeavors being grounded only on the preſumtion of their own wiſdome and parts, proved altogether vain. This Socrates, one of the wiſeſt of them, ſeems ſenſible of, as Plato in his Al ibiades brings him in thus Philoſophiſing:Socrates's ſenſe of his dependances on God for light. foreign, Thou knoweſt that errors in practice come from this ignorance, that men thinke they know what they know not, &c. Then he addes, When men are conſcious of their own ignorance, they are willing to be taught by others. Agen, But believe me and the famoſe Delphic Oracle, foreign, Know thy ſelf. This Plato, in his Charmides, ingenuouſly confeſſeth; Many have erred from their ſcope, foreign, by truſting to their own opinion without judgement. Agen, It is a great piece of temperance for a man to know himſelf. It would be a great advantage, if none would act beyond their knowlege and ſtrength. We ſeem to know althings, but indeed we are ignorant of every thing. It is an abſurd thing to Philoſophiſe of things we know not: When any attemtes a thing above his ſtrength, he greatly erres. Thus Plato, out of what he had learnt from his Maſter Socrates. So agen in his Legib. 5. Plato diſcourſing of foreign, ſelf-love; From this, ſaie he, procedes this great error, that al men eſtime their ignorance to be wiſdome, foreign, whence knowing nothing, we thinke we know althings. Thence (addes he) not permitting our ſelves to be taught what we are ignorant of, we fal into great errors. We have indeed a great ſaying of Plato, in his Epinom. pag. 980. ſhewing, That we can get no true knowlege of God, but by dependence on, and prayer to him. His words are, foreign, Truſting in the Gods, pray unto them, that thou maieſt have right notions of the Gods. Thus it ſhal be, if God as a Guide ſhal ſhew us the way; only help thou with thy Prayers. Had Plato really practiſed what he here teacheth of Faith, p. 16Dependence, and Prayer to the true God, it's probable his Philoſophie had not been ſo vain as it is. Laſtly, Plato, Legib. 4, tels us, That he who is humble and modeſt wil adhere to Divine Juſtice: foreign, &c. But he that is lifted up in his own proud confidences, foreign, as though he wanted no Guide or Governer, he is deſerted by God; and being deſerted diſturbes others; and although he may for a while ſeem ſome bodie, yet at laſt he is ſufficiently puniſhed by Divine Juſtice, &c. Which indeed was Plato's own caſe, as wel as the reſt of the Philoſophers, whoſe preſumtuous confidences in their own wiſdome and reaſon proved the bane of their Philoſophie; as it proved alſo with the Jews, Rom. 2.17, 18, 19, 20.

§. 6. The Vanitie of Philoſophie received a great foundation and improvement from their vain foreign,The Vanitie of Philoſophie from its vain contentions. or Litigations about words and trifles. For we muſt know, that the foreign, That vain contentioſe, mode of diſputing, ſo much adored by the Greke Philoſophers, had its foundation in the Italic or Pythagoric Schole: For the Eleatic Sect, where it firſt flouriſhed, was but a branch of the Italic: And Parmenides, with Zeno the Eleatic, who were the great promoters of this foreign, Dialectic vain Diſputation, did herein, as in other maters, Pythagoriſe. And the Gnoſtic Chriſtians ſucked in this itching humor of vain Diſputation, together with their other Pythagorean Dogmes; which Paul does moſt profeſſedly ſet himſelf to beat down, as that which he, by a Prophetic inſpiration, foreſaw would prove a mighty Engine to promote Antichriſt's throne; as indeed it did, when the Schole-Divinitie, which is wholly compoſed of vain Diſputations, came in faſhion. Therefore Paul laies in many precautions againſt this vain foreign, or Litigioſe Dialectic Sophiſtrie, hatcht in the Pythagorean and Eleaatic Scholes, and foiſted into the Chriſtian Theologie by the Gnoſtics, and after them by the Scholaſtic Divines. And the ſeat of our Apoſtles Dehortations againſt this itch of vain Diſputation lies manely in his Epiſtles to Timothie, who, as ſuppoſed, was very much infeſted by thoſe Pythagoriſing Gnoſtics. So,1 Tim. 6.3.1 Tim 6:3 1 Tim. 6.3, foreign, If any one bring in any other Doctrine: Which was the deſigne of the Pythagoriſing Gnoſtics, who abounded at Epheſus, where Timothie had his reſidence, and endeavored to compoſe a new Myſtic Theologie, out of Judaiſme and Pythagorean Philoſophie, tempered with p. 17ſome Chriſtian Dogmes. Thence it follows, and conſent not to wholeſome words; foreign, ſaies Grotius, anſwereth to foreign, which is a Temple-Phraſe, belonging to ſuch as approche to the Altar, as Lev. 9.7: as if our Apoſtle had ſaid, Theſe Goſpel-Dogmes are ſacred things, and ought to be handled with as much reverence as the Jewiſh Sacreds were. They are indeed foreign, wholeſome words, without any corrupt or poiſonous mixtures; not like the Gnoſtic Infuſions, compoſed of the venimous ingredients of Rabbinical Fables and Pythagorean Philoſophie. And to the Doctrine according unto godlineſſe; foreign, and, is here as oft elſewhere exegetic: For the words of Chriſt truely are a Doctrine tending unto godlineſſe, whereas thoſe Pythagorean Gnoſtic contentions tended only to profaneneſſe and licentiouſneſſe. foreign, i. e. which is both agreable and conducible unto godlineſſe, as Tit. 1.1. Then it follows ver. 4. He is proud knowing nothing. i. e. He is as an emty veſſel filled with nothing but airy ſpeculations,1 Tim. 6.4.1 Tim 6:4 which conduce nothing to true godlineſſe, (as before §. 4, 5;) But doting about queſtions; foreign, i. e. Phyſic, Dialectic, or Metaphyſic Quaeſtions and Diſputes touching their Aeones, or ſuch-like unintelligible Myſteries, which no way conduce to edification. And ſtrife of words, foreign i. e. ſaies Grotius, There were many diſputations amongſt the Philoſophers merely about words: namely Ariſtotle and Plato cal ſuch things as conduce to the wel-being of the Bodie and Life, Goods: The Stoic wil not have them called ſo, but foreign, Conducibles. The Platoniſt and Ariſtotelian, ſay, A wiſe man hath mercy: Illud ſemper egerunt ſectae uſ que ab initio originis ſuae, ut quocun que modo a cateris diſtarent: unde quod uni placuit alteri diſplicuit: Omnia pugnabant adverſis frontibus. Horn. Hiſt. Phil. l. 7. c. 13.The Stoic wil not allow that he hath mercy, but that he ſpareth. The greateſt part of the Stoic Diſputations, ſaies Cicero, is ſpent about words. What more vitioſe than to intend a controverſie merely about Words? We may adde to theſe the foreign, in the Pythagoric and Eleatic Scholes, the foreign, the probationatory, or problematic diſputes in the old Academie begun by Socrates and Plato: Alſo Ariſtotle's Dialectic Diſputations, with al the ſharpe contentions in the New Academies, and by the Sceptics, &c. which were al but ſo many foreign, or needleſſe ſtrifes about words. See more of this in Plutarch, foreign, concerning the various placites, or opinions of Philoſophers.

p. 18Whence follows Envy, The effects of theſe verbal Diſputes, Strifes, Railings, &c.Strife, Railings, evil Surmiſings: Theſe, ſaies Grotius, were frequent amongſt Philoſophers. foreign, Envy, was the natural product of their foreign, or ſtrife about words. What Envyings and Emulations were there betwixt the Italic and Ionic Sect, the Pythagoreans and Eleatics, the Platonics and the Peripatetics, with the other Sects. Hence follows, foreign, Strife, or Contention: Such was their foreign, Contentioſe Logic, in the Eleatic and Megaric Scholes, which was frequently attended with railings; foreign, Blaſphemings of each others reputation: al which ended in Evil ſurmiſings. foreign, i. e. ſaies Grotius, evil opinions or vain Philoſophie: For foreign is here put for foreign, to think. Such were the opinions of Diagoras, who held there was no God: Of Epicurus, who aſſerted that God regarded not human affairs; which alſo ſeemeth to be the opinion of Ariſtotle, foreign. Such alſo were the opinions of the New Academics and Sceptics, who held nothing to be knowable or perceptible; nothing to be in it ſelf ſhameful, &c. Such were the fruits of this vain foreign, which we find excellently ſet forth by Plato in his Repub. 7. from pag. 532, to 539; where diſcourſing profeſſedly of Dialectic Diſputes or Logic, and having opened the nature of it, that it is foreign & foreign, wherein we procede from ſome lower Hypotheſis, to the firſt Principes, &c. he procedes to ſhew the Qualities of a good Logician, and evil fruits of contentioſe Litigations. And his general direction is, That men ſtudie not Logic before they are Thirtie years aged: for, ſaies he, young men engaging in Dialectic Diſputes, abuſe this Art to contradictions each of other; and ſo ſometimes overcomming, and ſometimes being overcome, at laſt they come to believe nothing: whereas elder Perſons, ſeeking not childlike glorie but truth, are more moderate and grave; but young men foreign, &c. being alwaies uſed to contradictions, affect, like little Dogs, mutually to overcome each other. 1 Tim. 6.5.1 Tim 6:5Thus Plato. It follows 1 Tim. 6.5, Perverſe Diſputings, foreign. Some Copies read it, foreign, which to Grotius ſeems the trueſt. foreign is properly a Philoſophic terme, and ſignifies their more ſolemne Diſputations: Whence Gellius cals the very place where they diſputed foreign. Paul addes foreign, which uſually in compoſition ſignifies perverſe or not right, as in foreign ſo Jam. 1.22, foreign, deceiving themſelves with p. 19a Paralogiſme or falſe dangerous reaſoning and diſpute. Hence foreign properly ſignifies a perverſe and inane Diſputation or Exercitation, a curioſe, jejune concertation. It's rendred here by the Syriac, foreign, and the conflict of the Sons of Man: Or, and the mutual attrition; for thoſe Sophiſts mutually brought down each other, and by their Scab infected each other. Chryſoſtome, and Theophylact out of him, render it confrications: For thoſe vain Sophiſts mutually rubbed each other, like ſcabbed Sheep, and by their Philoſophic confrications or rubbings mutually infected each other. Thence it follows, foreign, i. e. having their minds altogether averſe from pietie, which is the greateſt corruption. Such were theſe Pythagoriſing Gnoſtics, who albeit they pretended to a ſublime myſtical foreign or knowlege, yet were they profeſſed enemies to Pietie, being indeed guilty of unheard-of uncleanneſſes and wickedneſſes. So it follows, foreign, i. e. deſtitute of al true ſaving practic knowlege, notwithſtanding al their Pythagoric Dogmes and Inſtitutes. foreign, i. e. making uſe of the Chriſtian Religion only as a blind, or politic medium to promove their gain and cover over their ſenſual deſignes: Their godlineſſe lies in gain, here lies their Religion or meaſure of good and evil: whereas, ſaith he, ver. 6,Verſ. 6. Godlineſſe with contentement is great gain to a ſincere Chriſtian. This is added to the former by an alluſive Antanaclaſis, as Glaſſius; or by an Epanorthoſis, as Schmidius. The Pſeudo-Chriſtians eſtimed Gain Godlineſſe, i. e. They by their perverſe Philoſophic Diſputations wreſted the Scripture and Religion, ſo as to make al ſubſerve their private Gain: Theſe Nazianzone ſtiles foreign, ſuch as Hucſtered and made Morehandiſe of Chriſt. But the Apoſtle aſſures us, That godlineſſe is the beſt gain, i. e. it brings the beſt profit to mens ſouls. Thus we ſee how Paul does here anatomiſe this Philoſophic foreign or contentioſe Logic, as the pregnant cauſe of their Philoſophic Emulations, Contentions, Railings, Evil opinions, and al manner of vain Philoſophiſings. And indeed nothing more natural than that ſuch perverſe Diſputings ſhould determine in Scepticiſme and Atheiſme, as Janſenius hath wel obſerved of the Scholemens Diſputes. Therefore our Apoſtle, in the end of this Epiſtle, does further inculcate this his Exhortation againſt theſe vain Diſputes, 1 Tim. 6.20, O Timothy, 1 Tim. 6.20.1 Tim 6:20keep that which p. 20is committed to thy trust, foreign being a decompoſite of foreign, & foreign, ſignifies a Depoſitum committed to the truſt of another. This Depoſitum, which Timothy was ſo charily to keep, was the great Doctrine of the Goſpel; which he cals a Depoſitum, becauſe it is committed by Chriſt to his Miniſters in charge. So 2 Tim. 1.14, we find the word foreign uſed in the ſame ſenſe, 1 Tim. 1.18. 2 Tim. 2.2. So in the Book called Muſar the precepts of the Law are called a Depoſitum, as ſome obſerve. Thence it follows, avoiding profane and vain bablings, foreign, according to the Gloſſarie, is the ſame with foreign vain ſpeech. foreign here is either a clamor about vain maters, or of vain words; ſuch as agree not with the forme of ſound Doctrine. Chryſoſtome underſtands it of novel words and formes of ſpeech introduced. Theophylact here renders it foreign, vain diſcourſe or Diſputation; which is therefore vain, becauſe it's mater, forme, concomitants and effects were al vain and fruitleſſe: It was converſant only about vain maters, Genealogies of the Aeones, &c. and it tended only to vain ends, vain glorie, &c. Further, he ſaies theſe bablings were foreign, not only vain but profane, i. e. they being foiſted into ſacred Theologie, not by Gods appointment, but from their own inventions, merely to ſymboliſe with Pagar. Philoſophers, &c. they were thence profane. It follows, foreign, and oppoſitions. The Greeks interpret foreign by foreign, Contradictions. Much of the glorie of theſe vain Diſputers lay in their facultie of contradicting each other. The Peripatetic ſtudies how he might contradict the Academic; the Stoic oppoſeth both the Peripatetic and the Platoniſt; the New-Academic and Sceptic al other Sects. Thus were they involved in perpetual contradictions; and the fruit of al theſe Litigations was no other than a falſe Science or vain Philoſophie. So it follows, foreign, of Science falſly ſo called: i. e. Of ſpinoſe, frivolous queſtions, ſuch as aſſume the name of Science, but deſerve not the ſame. You ſee here (ſaies Grotius) how ancient the name of Gnoſtics was; which theſe Philoſophers mingling with the Chriſtian Churches aſſumed to themſelves, deſpiſing al others as rude and ignorant, but boaſting of their knowlege falſely ſo termed. Clement Alex. ſaies, this Epiſtle was upon this account rejected by the Gnoſtics; becauſe they ſaw p. 21themſelves herein deſcribed to the life. foreign, As Pride and vain Opinion hath hurt Philoſophie, ſo falſe, or falſely ſo called Knowlege, hath ſpoiled their Knowlege. Thence he produceth this Text. True Knowlege is that which profiteth to eternal life. Whence ver. 21 he addes, which ſome profeſſing, have erred concerning the faith: 2 Tim. 6.21.foreign. i. e. Theſe Pythagoriſing Gnoſtics, being ſwollen with proud conceits, and preſumtuoſe confidences of their own pretended Knowlege and contentioſe Philoſophie, have deſerted the true Orthodoxe Chriſtian Faith. Paul gives us much the ſame account in 2 Tim. 2.14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 23. touching theſe Gnoſtic foreign or vain Diſputes, of which in the following Chapter. At preſent we may take notice that our Apoſtle, though he ſtrike immediately at the Gnoſtics who abounded then at Epheſus, yet in them he does propheticly ſtrike through the Schole-Divines, who have, by their vain Ariſtotelic foreign, rendred not onelyonly Philoſophic but Divinitie alſo vain and uſeleſſe.

§. 7. Another cauſe of the Vanitie of al Philoſophie, Opiniatrctie and a Dogmatiſing hum or, its origine and and vanitie.was the Opiniatretie and Dogmatiſing humor of the Philoſophers. This indeed hath an intimate and cauſal connexion with the forementioned vain Diſputation. For Self-love produceth in us al a fond conceit of, and regard unto our own Phaenomena and Principes: The contradiction of others is as fuel to feed this ſelf-flatering opinion of our own conceived notions. This Self-love or flaterie being engaged to maintain what it hath undertaken, ſets the wits on work to contrive, ſtudie and diſpute for the defence of its eſpouſed perſuaſion: And the effect of al is a fixed Opiniatretie or abounding in our own ſenſe, and ſtiffe adherence to our own judgements; ſo that in this caſe mens ſtiffeneſſe in adhereing to their own opinions or perſuaſions, is not from the force and ſtrength of the reaſons on which they are grounded, but rather from the force of their own violent Self-love. For when the ſtrength of adherence to any opinion ariſeth from grounded reaſons, it wil be either ſtronger or weaker, according to the force of thoſe Reaſons on which our Opinions are grounded: ſo that if we cannot ſhew ſome proper motive or particular reaſon, as ſtrong as the Opinion we eſpouſe, it is apparent that the ſaid Opinion is founded on aſſectionate p. 22Opiniatretie rather than on grounded Reaſon. This was the general fate of thoſe Greek Philoſophers, ſpecially of the Pythagoreans, with whom foreign he ſaid it, had the force of a firſt Principe or the moſt binding Reaſon. They generally affected foreign, to be ſlaves to their own Hypotheſis, rather than foreign, to ſacrifice to truth. Ariſtotle gives us a good character of a Philoſopher, that he ſhould be a ſlave to truth, foreign, to the abandoning his own perſuaſions: which is quite contrary to this philoſophic humor of Dogmatiſing Opiniatretie, which makes men to abandon Truth for the preſervation of their own Phaenomena. This ſeems ſtruck at by the Apoſtle in that Col. 2.20,Col. 2.20.Col 2:20 Why are ye ſubject to ordinances? foreign, i. e. Why do you ſuffer your ſelves to be impoſed on by thoſe Pythagorean Gnoſtics, who would fain bring you under the yoke and bondage of their Pythagorean Dogmes, ver. 21, 22. foreign among the Graecians ſignified primarilie a placit, or confirmed, eſtabliſht opinion of any Sect; and thence an Inſtitute, Edict, Decree. Whence foreign primarilie importes to give a ſentence, to impoſe an opinion, or tenaciouſly to adhere to an opinion. Thence it is oppoſed to foreign, to ſuſpend aſſent, or to heſitate: which kind of Suſpenſion and Heſitation the Academics and Sceptics affected. It was a great queſtion amongſt the Philoſophers, whether thoſe of the Old Academie, namely Plato and his followers, might be ſaid foreign and it is generally concluded in the affirmative. Yea ſome would bring in thoſe of the New Academie, who ſeemed moſt averſe from this humor, under this mode of Dogmatiſing or Opiniatretie: For, ſay they, their ſtiffe and tenacious adhereing to this Perſuaſion and Dogme, That there is nothing knowable, is a great degree of Dogmatiſing. Though the Sceptics endeavored to avoid this imputation of Dogmatiſing, by affirming, That they gave not a dogmatic aſſent to thoſe Sceptic propoſitions, viz. Nothing is knowable, I aſſert nothing, &c. Yet certain it is they were too opiniatre, tenacious, and ſtiffe in renouncing thoſe foreign, commun notions of a Deitie ſo deeply engraven on human nature, (for their Sceptiſme determined in Atheiſme) which is an helliſh piece of Opiniatretie or Dogmatiſing.

§. 8. Another poiſonous root which infected and tainted al Pagan Philoſophie,Carnal policie of Philoſophers. was the carnal policie of their Philoſophers; p. 23which appeared many waies. (1.) In their conceling the Authors and origine of thoſe Scriptural Traditions they borrowed from the Jews. (2.) In their clothing theſe Jewiſh Traditions with a Grecian fabuloſe Garbe, thereby to make them ſeem their own. (3.) In conceling their own Ignorance of thoſe Jewiſh Dogmes, on which they ſo boldly Philoſophiſed under myſtical, unintelligible Termes and Fables, like Apollo's Oracles, &c. (4.) In converting al their traditional and invented Philoſophie, to a ſubſervience to their carnal Intereſt or ſuperſtitioſe Idolatrical deſignes, &c. Theſe and ſuch-like were the branches of their Carnal Policie, which rendred their Philoſophie ſo vain and uſeleſſe. We find this Philoſophic craft wel deſcribed in the Platonic definitions: foreign, Craft is an affection whereby he that hath it is enabled to deſigne and promove his private end. Pſal. 112.113.Ps 112:113But we have it more fully unbowelled by the Spirit of God, ſpecially Pſal. 119.113, I hate vain thoughts. foreign French: les Diſcours, i. e. the vain and fraudulent Diſcourſes of carnal ſapience, contrary to the ſimplicitie of Faith and that obedience due to God. So agen, ver. 118, for their tromperie is falſehood, foreign,Ver. 118. i. e. their cauteloſe Artifices, on which they truſt, ſhal in the end deceive themſelves, they being not able by al their cunning to avoid thy judgement: or, they are to thee abominable, in as much as in al their train and politic wiles there is nothing but fraud. So agen, verſ. 128, Therefore I approve as right foreign al thy commandements of al things, but I hate every falſe way, i. e. al Carnal Policie and ſhifts. The like ver. 163, I hate and abhorre lying, i. e. politic craft, &c. And the Apoſtle ſeems to ſtrike directly at this Carnal Policie of the Greek Philoſophers, 1 Cor. 2.6, Not the wiſdome of this world, nor of the Princes of this world, that come to nought. 1 Cor. 2.6.1 Cor 2:6Grotius and Deodate underſtand this laſt clauſe of falſe reaſon of ſtate, or politic prudence of the worlds Grandees, which directly oppoſeth the Kingdome of Chriſt, Matt. 11.25. 1 Cor. 2.2. And we need not dout, but that the Apoſtle here takes in the worldly wiſdome and politic prudence not only of Stateſmen, but alſo of the Philoſophers who paſſed for Princes and Rulers of this World, ſpecially the Pythagoreans, who were great Stateſmen and Politicians as wel as Philoſophers. This Carnal Policie was the great engine of the Gnoſtics, thoſe ſenſual profeſſors, who, p. 24to ſymboliſe and keep fair both with Jews and Gentiles, compoſed a politic and fleſh-pleaſing Theologie of worldly Rudiments and Elements, partly Pythagorean and partly Jewiſh, as before on Col. 2.18, 19, 20, 21, wherein Antichriſt and his Adherents (as in other Inſtitutes) have exactly followed them, as hereafter.

§. 9. The great judicial Cauſe, which rendred al Pagan Philoſophie vain and curſed,Judiciarie blindneſſe and hardneſſe. was Judiciarie Hardneſſe of heart and Blindneſſe of mind; or Gods delivering thoſe Pagan Philoſophers up to ſpiritual Occecation, Blindneſſe and Hardneſſe of heart. This was the effect of al the former cauſes, and a great cauſe of al their vain Philoſophie, as we find it fully laid down by the Apoſtle,Rom. 1.18, 21, 22, 28.Rom 1:18Rom 1:21Rom 1:22Rom 1:28 Rom. 1.18, 21, &c. Verſ. 18, he ſaies, The wrath of God was reveled from heaven, againſt ſuch as hold the truth in unrighteouſneſſe. We muſt know, the Apoſtle in theſe Verſes diſcourſeth of the Gentile foreign or Philoſophers, as ver. 22. And I conceive principally of the Pythagoreans, who were of the Italic Sect, and therefore flouriſhed at Rome. Now of theſe Paul ſaies, That the wrath of God was reveled againſt them, becauſe they held the truth in unrighteouſneſſe, i. e. what-ever knowlege of Divine truth they had acquired either from Jewiſh Tradition, or from the Improvements of their own commun Principes, by which they were capacitated to contemplate the inviſible perfections of God in the viſible creatures, it was al captivated by, and made ſubſervient to their luſts; whence God gave them up to their own vain Imaginations and fooliſh hearts, as verſ. 21, Becauſe when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, i. e. Their knowlege was not active. Neither were thankeful, i. e. They aſcribed not the glorie and praiſe of their Philoſophic contemplations unto God, they owned not him as the Sun of righteouſneſſe, whence al theſe rayes of human knowlege ſprang: but they attributed al their Philoſophic attainments to their own parts, Sagacitie and Diſquiſitions; and ſo improved al for the greatening and advancing of themſelves, their Idolwiſdome, &c. Whence it follows: foreign, They waxed vain in their Diſcourſes, Reaſonings or Philoſophiſings: For foreign is a Philoſophie terme, the manner of Diſputing amongſt the Ancients both Jews and Grecians being by Dialogues. The meaning is, al their Philoſophic reaſonings and diſputes proved by Gods ſecret judicial dereliction and p. 25permiſſion of them vain, yea curſed. And thence it follows, foreign. i. e. (ſaies Grotius) Such as the ſin was, ſuch was the puniſhment. They ſhook off the light of Reaſon and God took away the remainders, as Eph. 4.18. So verſ. 22, Profeſſing themſelves wiſe. foreign i. e. glorying in their wiſdome. foreign, they were made fools: God in his righteous judgement befooling them. Which is more fully explained, verſ. 28, as they did not like, &c. Here is an elegant Paranomaſia or alluſion in the words, foreign & foreign they reprobate or reject God in their knowledge, and God gives them up to a reprobate or droſſy mind. So we read of foreign, reprobate money, i. e. droſſy, &c. Juſtly does God leave ſuch to a reprobate mind who reprobate him.

10. We might mention alſo,Idolatrical inclination. as another fruitful womb of vain Philoſophie amongſt the Pagans, the univerſal Inclination of al, more or leſſe, unto Idolatrie and Superſtition, as Rom. 1.23, 24, 25, 26, which is, Act. 17.18, applied to their Philoſophers, foreign but of this more in the effects of vain Philoſophie, B. 2. Chap. 1.

11. Laſtly,Fabulous Imitation. Mythologic or fabuloſe imitation of Divine Truths and Myſteries might alſo be mentioned, as that which had a great influential cauſalitie on the vanitie of the Pythagorean, as of al other Philoſophic: Of which we have already largely treated in the cauſes of Mythologic Philoſophie, Part. 2. B. 2. C. 2. §. 3, &c.