Welcome to ON TRUTH A ministry of Dr. Cky J. Carrigan devoted to Apologetic Evangelism which seeks to equip the saints for the work of evangelism through a rigorous pursuit of TRUTH motivated by LOVE. HOME BACK TO INDEX
THE RISE AND FALL OF ENGLISH DESIM
By Cky J. Carrigan, Ph.D. (Fall 1995)
INTRODUCTION
This paper will demonstrate the following:
1. English Deism began with the ideas of Edward Lord Herbert of Cherbury in 1624, as a consequence of several ancient and immediate influences;
2. It flourished after the turn of the century chiefly because of John Locke's new epistemology, John Toland's revision of Locke, and Matthew Tindal's summary defense;
3. And it declined rapidly in the middle 1700's mainly because of David Hume's extreme skepticism.
This demonstration will begin with a survey of the ideas, characteristics, and historical developments of Deism, followed by a treatment of the major background influences that produced it. Then, the paper will undertake to study the people and ideas of three distinct periods of English Deism: Herbert to Blount (1624-1695), Toland to Tindal (1696-1741), and Annet to Bolingbroke (1742-1770).
Finally, the paper will present several concluding observations about the historical development and chief characteristics of English Deism together with some evaluations about the movement as a whole.
OVERVIEW OF DEISM
Definition
Deism is the term customarily employed to describe the unorthodox religious views associated with several seventeenth and eighteenth century English writers beginning with Lord Herbert of Cherbury and continuing with Charles Blount, John Toland, Anthony Collins, and Matthew Tindal.1 Deism is a movement or system of thought advocating natural religion, emphasizing morality, and denying the interference of the Creator with the laws of the universe.
A. H. Strong defines Deism as, "the view that represents the universe as a self-sustained mechanism from which God withdrew as soon as he had created it."2
Etymology and Early Use of Term
Prior to the seventeenth century, the words "theism" and "deism" were used interchangeably. The English word "theism" was formed on theos, the Greek word for God. "
"Deism" was formed on deus, the Latin word for God. Philosophers and theologians began routinely to discriminate between these two terms in the late seventeenth century.3
Scholars are not in complete agreement concerning the first use of the word "Deism" in England to denote distinctive English Deism as opposed to French philosophical naturalism, but there is general agreement that "Deism" was certainly used in the former manner by the year 1682.4
The first known use of the term "Deist" to describe an advocate of unorthodox religion is found on the continent in the dedicatory epistle by the Swiss Reformed theologian, Viret, dated December 12, 1563.5 Viret, who had been in Lyon, France wrote:
There are many who confess that while they believe like the Turks and the Jews that there is some sort of God and some sort of deity, yet with regard to Jesus Christ and to all that to which the doctrine of the Evangelists and the Apostles testify, they take all that to be fables and dreams. . . . There is much more difficulty with these than there is even with the Turks, or at least as much. For they hold opinions with regard to religion that are just as or more strange than the Turks and all other miscreants. I have heard that there are of this band those who call themselves Deists, and entirely new word, which they want to oppose to Atheist. For in that atheist signifies a person who is without God, they want to make it understood that they are not at all without God, since they certainly believe there is some sort of God, whom they even recognize as creator of heaven and earth, as do the Turks; but as for Jesus Christ, they only know that he is and hold nothing concerning him nor his doctrine.6
Chief Characteristics
Deism is similar to theism, pantheism, and polytheism in that it advocates a belief in a god or gods, as opposed to atheism which posits no god of any kind. Deism is dissimilar as well. It is not a well defined religious belief system but Deism generally can be called a natural religion which accepts a body of religious knowledge acquired solely by the use of reason as opposed to revelation or dogmatic instruction. Another general characteristic of Deism is the reduction of God's function in creation to that of first cause only, with no further involvement. Deists generally reject the Trinity, the incarnation, the divine origin and authority of the Bible, the atonement, miracles, particular elect people such as Israel, and supernatural redemptive acts in history. 7
Scholars generally agree that there are five basic doctrines of Deism: God exists, God ought to be worshipped, the practice of virtue is the chief part of the worship of God, men have always had an abhorrence of crime and are under the obligation to repent of their sins, and there will be rewards and punishments after death.8 Charles Hodge called these five doctrines "the confession of Faith of all Deists."9
Deism was largely a negative movement. John Orr distinguished Deists from Theists by observing the positivism and negativism of Deism juxtaposed against Theism. The Deists positively advocated their concept of God and his relationship to the world and they championed ideas of their rational and natural approach to religion. While it was the positive aspects of Deism that made it unique, the negative work of Deists was more prominent. On the negative side, Deists set themselves against positive religions like Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Generally, it could be said that the Deists were more against established religions than for their own. If they did not destroy the positions of their opponents, they could not hope to maintain their own postitions.10 In this vein, Orr observed:
If the Bible were indeed a special revelation from God, if miracles were actually wrought, and prophecies requiring supernatural inspiration were actually spoken, if Jesus Christ was indeed the incarnate Son of God, virginborn and raised from the dead, if the institutions, ordinances, rites and doctrines of the Christian church were God-given through inspired men, then the main position of the deists that God did not interfere with the world which he had made or interrupt the operation of those natural laws which were given at the creation would be untenable. Since belief in at least the greater number of these things was taught by most branches of the contemporary Christian church, the deist could hardly hope to win men from these churches to his own viewpoint without first destroying their faith in these beliefs. . . . Faith in its [the Bible] trustworthiness must be broken down if its teachings were to be rejected.11
Another chief characteristic of Deism was anti-clericalism. While other non-Deists loathed the clergy as well, the Deists may have had a greater stake in their disdain of clergy. Orr drew the following conclusion on this matter:
The setting of one part of Scripture against another, the attacks upon the canon of Scripture and the attacks upon the character of the clergy were with the deists all part of an effort to get rid of an authority that taught positions inconsistent with deism.12
Brief Account of Rise and Fall of English Deism13
Early Influence (pre-1624)
The ideas of early Deism were probably born in France as evidenced by the 1563 reference to Deists by Viret.14 Viret's encounter was supported by a similar reference to Deists by another Frenchman named Philippe de Mornay in his Verite of 1581.
Rise (1624-1695)
The first major Deistic work, De Veritate, was penned in 1624 by the Englishman, Herbert of Cherbury and published in France. In 1670, Benedict Spinoza though not a Deist wrote Tractatus, a work that would heavily influence the presuppositions of Deism. English Deism developed very slowly until Blount and his Religio Laici in 1693, ushered in the active period of English Deism. John Locke while not a Deist brought moderate empiricism and theological rationalism to the English milieu with his Essay in 1689, and Reasonableness of Christianity in 1695.
Peak (1696-1741)15
Locke's influence upon English Deists in the late seventeenth century was important. Deists, their ideas and their works flourished after Locke due to an increased tolerance of free thinking and a relaxation of the press laws. The major deistic works of this period were Toland's, Christianity Not Mysterious (1696) which invoked Locke's rationalism in religious matters; Collins' Discourse on Free Thinking (1713) which adopted many of Locke's arguments and Ground and Reason (1724) which attacked the validity of fulfilled biblical prophecy; Thomas Woolston's Six Discourses (1729) which ridiculed miracles, especially the resurrection of Jesus; and finally, Tindal's Christianity as Old as the Creation (1730) which appealed to a natural religion and marked the high point of English Deism.
Decline (1742-1770)
English Deism began to lose its appeal when extreme skepticism arose in Henry Dodwell's Christianity Not Founded on Argument (1742). This work abandoned theological rationalism altogether in favor of mysticism or skepticism. David Hume's "Essay of Miracles" (1748) and Natural History of Religion (1757) rejected revealed religion but also helped dissolve Deism. Hume undermined the self-sufficiency of reason and therefore the possibility of a natural religion. The last principle Deist was the Lord Bolingbroke, but his Works in five volumes (1754) failed to reignite the dying flame of English Deism.
MAJOR BACKGROUND INFLUENCES (pre-1624)16
William Lane Craig identified several major factors which contributed to the rise of English Deism. They were the geographical expansion of Europe, scientific revolutions, incipient biblical criticism, and the religio-social effects of the Reformation.17
Geographic Expansion
The geographic expansion of Europe in the three centuries prior to 1750, helped set the stage for the rise and spread of Deism. The travel literature about the New World of Columbus, the voyages of Magellan, and the colonization of Virginia to the west, together with the interest in India, Persia, and Muslim culture to the east served to challenge belief in traditional Christian orthodoxy. Increasing familiarity with foreign lands and their religions promoted Deism in two ways. First, it advanced relativistic understandings of worldwide religious beliefs. Second, it tended to make Christianity's exclusive claims about itself seem unjustly narrow and cruel.18
Scientific Revolutions
Seventeenth century advancements in three scientific areas promoted the rise of Deism. New findings in astronomy, geology, and physics radically changed the typical view of the world. In astronomy, Copernicus revived the heliocentric hypothesis in his De Revolutionibus in 1543, Kepler offered the three laws of planetary motion in 1609, and Galileo published his works on sunspots in 1613. This revolution in astronomy served to discredit the Church and the Scriptures which rejected, or appeared to reject, these scientific findings. More importantly, the shift in the relationship between God and man promoted Deism.19 Craig observed, "The utter insignificance of man in an oblivious universe governed by purely physical forces promoted belief in a Deity who master-minded the great creation but who took no personal interest in the petty affairs of men."20
New theories about fossils and the geological evidence suggested an old earth while Bishop Ussher and the Church's interpretation of Genesis suggested a young earth (4004 B.C.). Craig posited,
The increasing evidence for the antiquity of the earth and against the literal interpretation of Genesis promoted Deism not only in casting doubt on the reliability of the Bible, but also in disclosing the relative newness of the Judeo-Christian religion. If the earth and mankind existed long before the origin of these revealed religions, then, if Christianity be true, millions of people in the past must have been passed over by God in silence. . .21
The third kind of scientific revolution that gave rise to Deism was Newtonian physics. Isaac Newton's Principia in 1687, offered three laws of motion that constituted the Newtonian world machine. Deism was encouraged by this scientific finding because it suggested a world machine governed by inexorable laws set forth by the Creator which permitted no miracles, or violations of the laws of nature.22
Incipient Biblical Criticism23
Attacks on the reliability of the Scriptures gave rise to Deism as well. Hugo Grotius initiated the method of handling the Bible as ordinary historical documents rather than inspired writings in his works of the 1640's. Other works critical of inspired Scripture like Thomas Hobbes' Leviathan (1651) and Spinoza's Tractactus (1670), together with the aggressive debate between Simon and Le Clerc about issues of biblical inspiration served to create doubts about the reliability of Scripture and thus fueled the fire of early Deism.24
The Reformation
The beliefs and events of the Protestant Reformation also served to advance Deism. Craig identified seven religio-social effects of the Reformation which contributed to the rise and spread of Deism. The Reformation diminished the importance of ecclesiastical additions and the miraculous content of religion, while it increased the role of reason in religion. The Reformation also prompted anti-clericalism, the proliferation of sects, religious wars, and policies of intolerance. The consequences of the Reformation became fertile soil for ideas that tended to promote Deism.25
Other Influences26
There were other influences which gave rise to English Deism. Among them were the invention of the printing press in Gutenberg (1450); theological controversies including Gnosticism, Origen's allegorical method, anti-Trinitarianism, unorthodox Christologies, and Pelagianism-Arminianism. Other influences included the philosophies of Socrates, Plato, Democritus, Leucippus, Epicurus, Cicero, Plutarch, Celsus, Porphyry, and Philostratus; and Protestant Scholasticism.27
THE RISE: HERBERT TO BLOUNT (1624-1695)28
English Deism rather than a totally new idea had its roots in immediate and ancient ideas. Many deistic characteristics especially its negative aspects29 evolved from prior periods. While certainly not the first Deist, most agree that Herbert of Cherbury was the first prominent writer who integrated many of the deistic ideas into his writings. This fact earned him the title "Father of English Deism."30
The early period of English Deism began with Herbert's De Veritate (1624) and concluded with the publication of Blount's Works (1695). Other primary contributors to the ideas of this period were Thomas Hobbes, Thomas Browne, John Tillotson, and John Locke. Scholars disagree about the extent to which Hobbes, Browne, Tillotson, and Locke were actually Deists. While not thoroughgoing self-proclaimed Deists, they each tended toward a rational theology which influenced those who would be Deists.
Beginnings: Herbert
Edward Lord Herbert of Cherbury (1583-1648) was a soldier, diplomat to France, knight, and philosopher. He wrote De Veritate31 in England and anxiously published it in France in 1624. About this work, Herbert said,
My book. . . having begun by me in England, and formed there in all its principle parts, was about this time finished. . . I communicated it to Hugo Grotius. . . and Monsieur Tielenus. . . and after they had perused it. . . exhorted me earnestly to print and publish it; howbeit, as the frame of my whole book was so different from any thing which had been written heretofore, I found I must either renounce the authority of all that had written formerly concerning the method of finding out truth, and consequently insist upon my own way, or hazard myself to a general censure, concerning the whole argument of my book. . . I did consider whether it was not better for me a while to suppress it.32
Herbert, having second thoughts about publishing his book, prayed to God, asked Him for a sign constituting permission to print it, and recorded that he received such a sign at that very moment.33
De Veritate was basically an epistemology. It distinguished between truth that can be known through experience by reason and innate truths which are common to all men. This work set forth five innate truths that became the hallmarks of Deism.34 De Veritate was so influential that John Locke devoted part of his Essay to a refutation of Herbert's innate truths.35
According to Orr, "The whole tenor of Herbert's writings is to the effect that underneath the rubbish of all particular religions are the innate principles of natural religions which are quite sufficient and that therefore special revelations have neither been needed nor given."36 John Leland said, "His lordship [Herbert] seems to have been one of the first that formed Deism into a System, and asserted the sufficiency, universality, and absolute perfection of natural religion, with a view to discard all extraordinary revelation, as useless and needless."37
Non-Deist Contributors: Hobbes, Browne, Tillotson and Locke
Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) was a prolific writer, and political and religious philosopher. He was an admirer of Galileo and served as an amanuenses of Francis Bacon.38 While not clearly a Deist, more likely a materialist-atheist,39 Hobbes sensationalist epistemology certainly influenced the rise of English Deism. In Leviathan (1651) he remarked, ". . . there is no conception in a man's mind, which hath not at first, totally, or by parts, been begotten upon the organs of sense."40 His epistemology was foundational for his biblical criticism. In this vein, Orr remarked, "Hobbes' most important contribution to deistic thought was in his Bible criticism and his teachings concerning the canon of Scripture, inspiration and miracles."41
Sir Thomas Browne's (1605-1682) chief influence on Deism was his open questions about the mysterious elements of religion. In his main work, Religio Medici (1642) he remarked,
As for those wingy Mysteries in Divinity, and airy subtleties in Religion, which have unhing'd the brains of better heads, they never stretched the Pia Mater [membrane surrounding the brain] of mine. . . . I bless myself and am thankful that I lived not in the days of Miracles, that I never saw CHRIST nor His Disciples. I would not have been one of. . . CHRIST'S patients on whom He wrought His wonders. . . nor should I enjoy that greater blessing pronounced to all that believed and saw not.42
Browne's open inquiries about the mysteries of religion, especially Christianity, provided a friendly context in which Deism would gain momentum.
John Tillotson (1630-1694), Archbishop of Canterbury, while not a Deist, had a considerable influence upon Deism. His high standing in the church of England coupled with his advocacy of rational supernaturalism tended to promote some aspects of Deism. Tillotson reduced religion to three principles of natural religion similar to Herbert's five innate truths. Additionally, he suggested that revelation clarified the truths discerned by natural reason43 saying, "Natural religion is the foundation of all revealed religion and revelation is designed simply to establish its duties."44
John Locke (1632-1704) was a very influential English philosopher whose beliefs weighed heavily upon the rise of English Deism. So important was the influence of Locke upon the entire deistic movement that Orr divided the periods of Deism into Pre-Lockean and Post-Lockean Deism. Orr further suggested, "Locke, though not himself a Deist,45 undoubtedly exercised a greater influence upon the deistic movement subsequent to his time than any other writer with the possible exception of Herbert of Cherbury."46
Locke's two works that cut across Deism most were, Essays in Human Understanding (1689) and The Reasonableness of Christianity (1695). Locke led Deists to build an epistemology upon empirical foundations rather than upon Herbert's innate ideas.47 Locke proffered several other ideas that appealed to and grounded Deism though Deists usually developed these ideas more extremely than Locke. He advocated toleration, anti-clericalism, the reasonable evaluation of the mysterious elements of religion, the reinterpretation of the nature of miracles, an ethical rather than ritualistic approach to religion, and a weaker dependance upon traditional revelation and greater dependance upon natural religion. Together with the above influences, Locke's Arian-unitarian Christology and his acceptance of the possibility of a material soul laid the egg that John Toland and others would hatch.48
Herbert Revisited: Charles Blount
Charles Blount (1654-1693) may be credited with reviving the ideas of Herbert and "gathering up the deistic notions that were in the air and. . . making them known."49 His two main works were, Religio Laici (1683) and Works (1695). Religio set forth to identify what was good in non-Christian faiths and bad in Christian faiths. The positive elements of Blount's writings were not as prominent as the negative ones. His negative contributions centered around the criticism of biblical veracity.50 Blount's two other contributions to the evolving deistic movement were his opposition to Christianity by paralleling features of it with pagan legends, and his widespread communication of Copernican astronomy.51
THE PEAK: TOLAND TO TINDAL (1696-1741)
English Deism though relatively short lived flourished after Locke's influence. Deism also flourished in this period because of a slightly more free press52 and tolerant atmosphere. Four Deists were the principle contributors to this peak period of English Deism. They were Toland, Collins, Woolston, and Tindal.53
John Toland
John Toland (1670-1722) was an Irish Roman Catholic who became a liberal protestant, a latitudarian, a Deist, then finally a pantheist.54 His chief work, Christianity Not Mysterious was instrumental in ushering in the peak period of English Deism. Not Mysterious was basically an argument against mystery and supernaturalism in Christianity based on a modification of Locke's theory of knowledge. Toland rejected Locke's distinction between revelation that was above reason, and therefore true, and revelation that was contrary to reason and therefore false.55
In 1698, Toland published Amyntor which severely questioned the canon of Scripture and therefore undermined the authority of revelation in favor of a natural-rational religion.56
Toland contributed to Deism in two chief ways. He helped build Deism upon Locke's epistemology and he was critical of the canon of Scripture. Thus, Toland made Deism clearly and openly an anti-mystery and anti-supernatural cult.57
Anthony Collins
Anthony Collins (1676-1729), a close friend of Locke, did not contribute any new big ideas to Deism but his two main works served effectively to increase the intensity of the deistic debate with orthodoxy and incite replies. His Discourse of Free-Thinking (1713) was an argument for religious toleration and freethinking as the title implies. The first part of Free-Thinking constituted a summary of Locke's Letters on Toleration and the second part represents a list of free thinkers and their virtues.58 Sown through this work were many arguments against the reliability of the Bible59 and supernaturalistic Christianity60.
Collins' second work, The Ground and Reason of the Christian Religion (1724), is similar to the first. It set forth to decrease the credibility of Scripture by appealing to, among other things, an argument against fulfilled prophecy as the grounds for believing in orthodox Christianity's claims.61 This argument against Scripture on the basis of prophecy may have been Collins' primary contribution of content to Deism.
There was little positive definition of Deism in Collins' works. Primarily, he was dedicated to arguing against the Bible, its prophecies, Christianity in general, and the clergy. These arguments were so provocative they generated fifty-five written replies.62 This heightened debate may have been Collins' other major contribution to Deism.
Thomas Woolston63
Thomas Woolston (1669-1731) was a prolific writer and "the most vitriolic of the Deists."64 His main work, Discourses on Miracles, in six volumes, was an attack on a large number of individual miracles in Scripture rather than a philosophical treatise against miracles in general. He applied the allegorical method refined by Collins to a treatment against miracles, especially the resurrection of Jesus. His characteristic argument attempted to demonstrate that the church fathers believed the miracles to be allegorical. Like Collins, Woolston proffered no essentially new ideas or positive definitions of Deism, but his works generated sixty written replies.65
Matthew Tindal
If Toland initiated the peak period of English Deism, then Matthew Tindal (1655-1733) represented "the culmination of the constructive phase of English Deism."66 His main work, Christianity as Old as the Creation (1730) was called by Lucius Noack, "The Deist Bible," because it so completely captured the views held in common by most Deists.67 In this work Tindal wrote,
. . . no Religion can come from a Being of infinite Wisdom and Perfection, but what is absolutely perfect. Can, therefore, a Religion absolutely perfect, admit of any Alteration; or be capable of Addition, or Diminution; and not be as immutable as the Author of it? Can Revelation, I say, add any Thing to a Religion thus absolutely perfect, universal, and immutable?68
Livingston made the following observation concerning the premises of Old as the Creation,
Tindal's book begins with two a priori principles on which his whole case is built. First, God is eternally the same, infinitely wise and good. What originates with a perfect, all-wise God must itself be perfect. Thus an absolutely perfect religion cannot be altered or increased or decreased. Secondly, human nature is always the same and unalterable in itself. Hence, God's perfect religion must dispense its truth equally to all men at all times. Historical revelation can add nothing to a religion that is absolutely perfect, universal, and unchanging.69
Tindal integrated several elements of previous deistic writings in one work. He became the representative Deist. He advocated Herbert's positive natural religion, Locke's reason, and the several attacks on the canon. He used Blount's parallels between Christianity and pagan stories, and he aped Shaftesbury's stress on ethics over ritualism. He affirmed Collins' allegorical interpretation of prophecy and Woolston's similar arguments against miracles. He espoused toleration and anti-clericalism. And he viewed himself with most Deists as a reformer rather than an enemy of Christianity.70
The chief hallmark of Deism may have been its attack on Scripture as a reliable source for knowledge. In this regard, Tindal may have been Deism's greatest champion. Because of the obvious consequences of Tindal's views on orthodoxy, Old as the Creation may have been the most important document of the movement. It was so dangerous to orthodoxy that it generated one hundred and fifty responses71
THE DECLINE: ANNET TO BOLINGBROKE (1742-1770)
There were several factors which contributed to the rapid decline of English Deism after Tindal's Old as the Creation. After a slow growth from Herbert to Toland and the flourishing of Deism from Toland to Tindal, there was a state of general exhaustion of ideas needed to fuel such a thought movement. There were no new ideas or approaches coming from deistic writers, only restatements of the same ideas. Division among the Deists and the mighty defense of learned orthodox opponents stalled the movement as well. Dodwell's and Hume's radical skepticism undermined Deism with free thinkers, and the public at large saw Deism as responsible for the rise of immorality. The spiritual awakening of the Wesley's together with a general preoccupation with political and military matters related to the Colonies and France also helped begin the rapid decline and almost complete extinction of Deism in England.72
There were four prominent Deist's writing in this period: Peter Annet, Thomas Chubb, Conyers Middleton, and Henry Bolingbroke. More significant than these Deists to the fate of the movement were the works of two non-Deists. Henry Dodwell Jr. and David Hume put forth ideas that severely undermined Deism with free thinkers. Their positions served to take reason out of rational religion which left essentially no religion at all.
The Deists: Annet to Bolingbroke
Peter Annet (1693-1769) was very hostile to the clergy and to Scripture. He was a thoroughgoing Deist in every way. He distinguished himself by being extremely critical of the character and reputation of King David and the Apostle Paul.73
Thomas Chubb (1679-1747), one of the more radical Deists, distinguished himself in the propagation of Deism to the lower classes through his widely circulated writings, and in his assertion that Jesus was a Deist.74
Conyers Middleton (1683-1750), a clergyman, took the deistic epistemology and applied it chiefly to an investigation into the post-biblical miracles in his Free Inquiry in the Miraculous Powers, Which Are Supposed to Have Subsisted in the Christian Church (1749). Strangely, he did not however apply this epistemology to the miracles of Christ and the Apostles when he wrote,
The History of the Gospel, I hope may be true, though the History of the Church be fabulous. And if the ecclesiastic Historians have recorded many silly fictions, under the name of miracles, as they undoubtedly have, the blame must be charged to the writers, not to their religion.75
Henry Bolingbroke (1672-1751) did not wish to have his generally unfriendly Works in five volumes published until after his death. He was of high rank in society and a very able writer, but his writings appeared too late to influence the course of the deistic movement in a major way. Bolingbroke was a rationalistic believer in God76 who expressed his Deism in a very negative way.
The Non-Deists: Dodwell, Jr. and Hume
Dodwell, Jr.
Henry Dodwell, Jr. (d. 1784) asserted in his short booklet, Christianity Not Founded on Argument (1742) that religion was something absolutely out of the proper jurisdiction of reason. This important work, unfriendly to Deism and orthodox Christianity alike, served to point out the tendency of Deism to lead to skepticism. It is arguable whether Dodwell was indeed an absolute mystic or a rationalist poking fun at irrational Christianity. However, it is rather likely that his argument moved more Deists into the ranks of skepticism than it moved orthodox Christians into the ranks of skepticism or mysticism. In this regard, Dodwell's arguments were the beginning of a watershed that Hume would reenforce.77
Dodwell proffered three arguments. He argued first, "it is evident from the nature of reason and the nature of religion that God never intended reasoning to be the method by which men should be led to a true faith."78 He argued second, "the Bible itself does not teach that the appeal to reason is the way to faith or right religion."79 And he argued third, "the Scriptures themselves say faith comes only by the Holy Spirit."80
Thus, with these arguments Dodwell together with Joseph Butler and William Law "served as significant links between the Deism of Tindal and its downfall at the hands of Hume."81
Hume
The beliefs of David Hume (1711-1776) can not be easily defined because he was not a particularly consistent writer.82 He was further from orthodox Christianity then the regular Deists83 though he was equally as anti-clerical, anti-miracle, anti-Bible, and anti-Christianity as any Deist. His main works that influenced Deism were "Essays of Miracles" (1748), and "Of the Idea of Necessary Connexion" both compiled in An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, and Natural History of Religion (1757). Hume was like the Deists in some regards but unlike them in others. He was in agreement with the negative expressions of Deism which undermined orthodoxy. More importantly, he was in sharp disagreement with the chief positive assertions of Deism.84
He rejected Herbert's innate ideas which were the grounds for natural religion, and he rejected the whole idea of causation which ultimately undermined the grounds for the Creator, First Cause, kind of Deism. On the latter subject Hume wrote,
Here, then, many philosophers think themselves obliged by reason to have recourse, on all occasions, to the same principle, which the vulgar never appeal to but in cases that appear miraculous and supernatural. They acknowledge mind and intelligence to be, not only the ultimate and original cause of all things, but the immediate and sole cause of every event which appears in nature. They pretend that those objects which are commonly denominated causes, are in reality nothing but occasions; and that the true and direct principle of every effect is not any power or force in nature, but a volition of the Supreme Being, who wills that such particular objects should for ever be conjoined with each other. Instead of saying that one billiard ball moves another by a force which it has derived from the author of nature, it is the Deity himself, they say, who, by a particular volition, moves the second ball. . .85
In sum, Hume's rejection of causality or necessary connection, so severely wounded Deism that it would not recover in England.
CONCLUSION
Historical Development
English Deism began with the ideas of Edward Lord Herbert of Cherbury in 1624. These ideas were recaptured and recommunicated by Charles Blount in 1683 and 1695. Herbert's natural religion and innate truths, though redefined, served as the grounds for English Deism until its decline in the middle of the eighteenth century. John Locke provided a new epistemology for Deism in 1689 and 1695, based on empirical foundations while keeping an open mind to matters above reason.
John Toland modified Herbert and Locke, arguing absolutely against the supernatural and ushered in the peak period of English Deism. Then, Matthew Tindal brought Deism's ideas to their highest point with his restatement of Toland and others in 1730. Tindal was the most severe and comprehensive opponent of Scripture.
Deism ran out of steam in the 1740's and beyond because it could not stand against the orthodox's rebuttal or the skeptic's inquiry. Joseph Butler and other orthodox Christians argued effectively against Deism in 1736. More importantly however, Henry Dodwell's argument against faith on the basis of reason in 1742, together with David Hume's argument against causality c. 1750, struck the death blow to English Deism. The ideas of Deism, born in the minds of moderately skeptic people could not be held in the face of extreme skepticism.
Definition and Chief Characteristics
Deism was a natural religion which accepted a body of religious knowledge acquired solely by the use of reason as opposed to revelation or dogmatic instruction. Deism was the religion of an Absentee-Creator God. It affirmed the existence of a God who ought to be worshipped by virtuous living. It also proffered an innate awareness of evil and need for repentance together with an innate awareness of next-life consequences for this-life conduct.
Though most Deists called themselves Christians, Deism was generally against every distinctively Christian religious belief. Deism was especially against the fundamental doctrines of substitutionary atonement, virgin conception, incarnation, and bodily resurrection. It was against any authority that would seek to shape its beliefs or behavior including the reliability of Scripture and the clergy who communicated it. Deism was not against everything however. It was for religious toleration of dissenters, free-thinkers, and non-Christians, though Deism was not usually tolerant of orthodox Christians.
Observations
Considering the roots and beliefs of English Deism, one might conclude that it was the likely and logical consequence of a theology or philosophy which rejects or undermines revelation. It began with a priori premises that it could not hold forever. Deism was both ushered in and ushered out by varying degrees of skepticism. It was a relatively brief and relatively confined movement that attempted to make sense of a world that makes no sense apart from an unwavering confidence in biblical revelation and the affirmation that Jesus is Lord. English Deism rose, flourished, and fell because of The Skeptic's query, "Hath God said?"
________________
1Colin Brown, Christianity and Western Thought, Vol. 1 (Downers Grove; InterVarsity Press, 1990), 197-214; and Walter Elwell, ed. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984), s.v. "Deism," by M. H. MacDonald, 304.
2A. A. Strong, Systematic Theology (Old Tappan: New Jersey: Judson Press), 414.
3John Orr, English Deism: Its Roots and Its Fruits (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1934), 13.
4Webster's Ninth, 335 (1682).
See also Walsh's article for an important treatment on the use, meaning, and development of the term "Deism" in English writings. Walsh concludes that before 1670, "Deism" was a foreign loan word from France and its use as early as 1621 in England referred to the French movement of free thinking and not English, Herbert of Cherbury, kind of Deism. Clement Walsh, "A Note on the Meaning of "Deism,"" Anglican Theological Review 38 (1956): 160-165.
5William Lane Craig, The Historical Argument for the Resurrection of Jesus During the Deist Controversy (Lewiston, England: Edwin Mellen Press, 1985), 72.
6Viret, L'instruction chretienne; quoted in Craig, 73.
7Elwell, 304.
8These doctrines are based on Herbert's five truths in De Vertitate.
This list is from James Livingston, Modern Christian Thought from the Enlightenment to Vatican II (New York: Macmillan, 1971), 14.
See Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986), 42. "1. The existence of God. 2. The dependence of man on God, and his obligation to reverence him. 3 Piety consists in the harmony of the human faculties. 4. The essential difference between good and evil. 5. A future state of rewards and punishment."
See also Orr, 62. "I That there is one Supreme God. II That he ought to be worshipped. III That Virtue and Piety are the chief parts of Divine Worship. IV That we ought to be sorry for our sins and repent of them. V That Divine goodness doth dispense rewards and punishments both in this life and after it."
This list may be directly referenced in the English translation by Herbert of Cherbury entitled, The Ancient Religion.
9Hodge, 42.
10Orr, 15-16.
11Ibid., 16.
12Ibid., 17.
13This brief account is a compilation of the summary treatments by Craig, 252-268; Orr, 18-19; and C. Brown, 203-214.
14See p. 3, this paper.
15For an exhaustive chronological list of the works of English Deists from 1696 to 1761, see Norman L. Torrey, Voltaire and the English Deists (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1930; reprint, Archon Books, 1967), 207-210.
16Craig, 82-175; See also Orr, 20-58.
17Craig, 82-175.
18Ibid., 82-92.
19Ibid., 92-95.
20Ibid., 95.
21Ibid., 99.
22Ibid., 99-101.
23This treatment of the influence of biblical criticism on English Deism does not fit the given chronology of this chapter (pre-1624), rather it fits into the chronology of next chapter, but it is included here for the sake of continuity.
24Craig, 101-123.
25For an in depth defense of these assertions see Craig, 124-175.
26Orr, 20-58.
27Livingston observed two particular aspects of seventeenth century Protestant Scholasticism which he believes helped produce the religion of reason in the eighteenth century: the highly rationalistic spirit and practice, and the general divisiveness of the period. Livingston, 13.
28Unless otherwise noted, the general historical assertions in this chapter represent a summary of Orr, 59-113.
29See pp. 4-5, this paper.
30 Thomas Halyburton pronounced this title upon Herbert in his Natural Religion Insufficient (London: 1714), n.p.; quoted in William Lane Craig, The Historical Argument for the Resurrection of Jesus During the Deist Controversy (Lewiston, England: Edwin Mellen Press, 1985), 72.
31This primary work for the study of Deism is not available in its English, French, or Latin edition in the library holdings of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary. Therefore assertions herein are based on secondary works.
32Herbert, Edward Herbert, Autobiography, ed. Sidney Lee (London: George Routledge and Sons, 1886), 132-133.
33Ibid., 133-134.
34See p. 4 this paper and footnote 11 for a list of these five innate truths.
35John Locke, Essays in Human Understanding, ed. P. H. Nidditch (Oxford: Oxford Press, 1975), vol. 1:iii, 15-19.
36Orr, 71.
37John Leland, A View of the Principle Deistical Writers, Vol. 1 (London: for B. Dod, 1756-1757; reprint, New York: Garland Publishing, 1977), 3.
38Kenneth Scott Latourette, A History of Christianity, Vol. 2 (New York: Harper & Row, 1975), 692
39For an evaluation of Hobbes' atheism, see David Berman, A History of Atheism in Britain: From Hobbes to Russell (London: Croom Helm, 1988), 57-67.
40Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan (original publisher and date unknown; reprint, Oxford: Basil Blackwell, n. d.), 7.
41Orr, 79.
42Thomas Browne, Religio Medici (1642; reprint, New York: P. F. Collier & Son, 1909), 272.
43Livingston, 15.
44John Tillotson, Works (London: 1857), vol. 2, 333; quoted in Livingston, 15.
45Orr defended this assertion by listing the similarities and dissimilarities between Locke and Deism on p. 108.
Richard Westfall took a slightly different view of Locke's standing as a Deist saying, "Although he [Locke] still used the name "Christianity," the differences separating his religion from Deism were essentially semantic. Natural religion had displaced Christianity almost completely in his thought." See Richard Westfall, Science and Religion in Seventeenth Century England (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1958), 138.
For a detailed treatment of the charge of Deism leveled against Locke, see John Yolton, John Locke and the Way of Ideas (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1968), 169-208.
46Orr, 115.
47Ibid., 108, 115.
48Locke's contributions stated here are a compilation of Orr, 83-109, 114-116.
49Orr, 110.
50Charles Blount, Miscellaneous Works: Great is Diana of the Ephesians (London: 1695; reprint, New York: Garland, 1979), 8. ". . . in relation to Divine Miracles, there is often times great Errors committed in the manner of reading Scripture; . . . As that of Adam, whom Moses made only to be the first Father of the Jews, whilst others Hyperbolically make him to be the fist Father of all Men."
51Orr, 113.
52Craig, 75, 254. The Licensing Act of 1662 which required all works to be approved by a censor was allowed to lapse in 1679, reinstated in 1693, and lapsed again for good in 1695. But the Blasphemy Law of 1696 served to make Deists very cautious.
53The limited scope of this paper demands restraint, therefore only these four representative Deists will be evaluated. The following is a list of four other Deists of this period together with the titles and publication dates of their chief works: Anthony Cooper,Characteristics of Men, Manners, Opinions, Times, etc. (1711); Bernard de Mandeville, The Fable of the Bees (1714); William Wollastson, Religion of Nature Delineated (1722); and Thomas Morgan, The Moral Philosopher, 3 vols. (1737).
54Orr, 116.
In an early defense of his own Christianity Toland exclaimed, "I must take notice of those Gentlemen who love to call Names in religion; for what are all Party-Distinctions, but, according to them, so many sorts of Hereticks, or Schismaticks, or worse? But I assure them, that I am neither of Paul, nor of Cephas, nor of Apollos, but of the Lord Jesus Christ, who alone is the Author and Finisher of my Faith. . . . The only religious Title therefore that I shall ever own, for my part, is that most glorious one of being a Christian." John Toland, Christianity Not Mysterious (London: 1696; reprint; New York: Garland, 1984), xviii-xx.
55Toland, Not Mysterious, 6. ". . . we hold that Reason is the only Foundation of all Certitude; and that nothing reveal'd, whether as to its Manner of Existence, is more exempted from is Disquisitions, than the ordinary Phenomena of Nature. Wherefore, we likewise maintain, according to the Title of this Discourse, that there is nothing in the Gospel contrary to Reason, nor above it; and that no Christian Doctrine can be properly call'd a Mystery."
See also, "It is improper therefore to say a thing is above our Reason. . ." Toland, Not Mysterious, 8.
56Amyntor was not in the holdings of SEBTS library. This observation is based on Orr, 118.
57Orr, 121.
58Anthony Collins, A Discourse in Free-Thinking (London: for J. Morphew, 1713; reprint, New York: Garland, 1978), 123f. ". . . they who have been most distinguished in all Ages for their Understanding and Virtue, have been Free-Thinkers." The listing begins with Socrates and includes Plato, Aristotle, Origen, Cicero, Bacon, and Hobbes.
59See the argument about the lost books of Scripture, p. 54.
60See the argument about pagan parallel narratives to undermine Jesus' virgin conception, pp. 52-53.
61For example, see p. 37. ". . . the miracles wrought by Jesus are, according to the gospel-scheme, no absolute proofs of his being the MESSIAS, or of the truth of christianity."
62Orr, 133-134. The chief reply was Thomas Sherlock, The Use and Intent of Prophecy.
63The works of Woolston were not in the holdings of the SEBTS library, therefore this evaluation of Woolston is based on Craig 255-260, and Orr 138-140.
64Craig, 255.
65Among the chief replies was Thomas Sherlock, Tryal of the Witnesses.
66Livingston, 22.
67Lucius Noack, Dei Freidenker in der Religion, b. 1, s. 272; as quoted in Orr, 140.
68Matthew Tindal, Christianity as Old as the Creation (London: 1730; reprint, New York: Garland, 1978), 3-4.
69Livingston, 22.
70Orr, 140-141.
71The chief orthodox response was Joseph Butler, Analogy of Religion (1736). For an analysis of Butler's argument against Deism, which Livingston suggested was an important cause of the decline of English Deism, see Livingston, 47-52.
72Orr, 171-176.
73Ibid., 150-152. Annet's works were not in the holdings of the SEBTS library for primary evaluation.
74Ibid., 152-155. Chubb's Works were not in the holdings of the SEBTS library for a primary evaluation.
75Conyers Middleton, A Free Inquiry into the Miraculous Powers (London: for R. Mamby and H. S. Cox, 1749; reprint, New York: Garland, 1976), 162.
76Henry Bolingbroke, Philosophical Works, vol. 1 (London: 1754-1777; reprint, New York: Garland, 1976), 9. Bolingbroke posited the existence of God on the basis of the existence of "something" and "intelligence" concluding, "Thus the existence of God is demonstrated."
77Orr, 160-165.
78Ibid., 161. Orr presents Dodwell's arguments more concisely than Dodwell.
79Ibid., 162.
80Ibid., 163.
81Livingston, 52.
82Orr, 165.
83For an essay which demonstrates Hume's disavowal of the title, atheist, see Berman, 101-105.
84Orr, 165-171.
85David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, in English Philosophers, The Harvard Classic Series, Vol. 37 (New York; Collier & Son, 1910), 362.