This library is built in the open.
If you spot an error, have a suggestion, or just want to say hello — we’d love to hear from you.
Alexander Roberts & James Donaldson (eds.) · 1885

We must provide for these, that they may not fight against themselves, and that they may be willing at length to be freed from inveterate errors. And this they will assuredly do if they see for what purpose they were born; for this is the cause of their perverseness—namely, ignorance of themselves. If anyone, having gained the knowledge of the truth, shall have shaken off this ignorance, he will know to what object his life is to be directed and how it is to be spent. I thus briefly define the sum of this knowledge: that neither is any religion to be undertaken without wisdom, nor any wisdom to be approved of without religion.
Having therefore undertaken the office of explaining the truth, I did not think it necessary to take my commencement from that inquiry which naturally seems the first: whether there is a providence which consults for all things, or whether all things were either made or are governed by chance—a sentiment introduced by Democritus and confirmed by Epicurus. But before them, what did Protagoras effect, who raised doubts respecting the gods, or Diagoras afterwards, who excluded them, or some others who did not hold the existence of gods, except that there was supposed to be no providence? These, however, were most vigorously opposed by other philosophers, and especially by the Stoics, who taught that the universe could neither have been made without divine intelligence, nor continue to exist unless it were governed by the highest intelligence. Even Marcus Tullius Cicero, although he was a defender of the Academic system, discussed at length and on many occasions the providence which governs affairs, confirming the arguments of the Stoics and himself adducing many new ones; this he does both in all the books of his own philosophy, and especially in those which treat of the nature of the gods.
It was no difficult task to refute the falsehoods of a few men who entertained perverse sentiments by the testimony of communities and tribes, who on this one point had no disagreement. For there is no one so uncivilized and of such an uncultivated disposition who, when he raises his eyes to heaven—although he knows not by the providence of what God all this visible universe is governed—does not understand from the very magnitude of the objects, from their motion, arrangement, constancy, usefulness, beauty, and temperament, that there is some providence, and that that which exists with wonderful method must have been prepared by some greater intelligence.
For us, assuredly, it is very easy to follow up this part as copiously as we please. But because the subject has been much agitated among philosophers, and those who take away providence appear to have been sufficiently answered by men of sagacity and eloquence, and because it is necessary to speak throughout this work respecting the skill of divine providence, let us for the present omit this inquiry. It is so closely connected with other questions that it seems impossible for us to discuss any subject without at the same time discussing providence.
Let the commencement of our work therefore be that inquiry which closely follows and is connected with the first: Whether the universe is governed by the power of one God or of many. There is no one who possesses intelligence and uses reflection who does not understand that it is one Being who both created all things and governs them with the same energy by which He created them. For what need is there of many to sustain the government of the universe? Unless we should happen to think that, if there were more than one, each would possess less might and strength. Those who hold that there are many gods do indeed effect this; for those gods must of necessity be weak, since individually, without the aid of others, they would be unable to sustain the government of so vast a mass. But God, who is the Eternal Mind, is undoubtedly of excellence, complete and perfect in every part. And if this is true, He must of necessity be one. Power or excellence, which is complete, retains its own peculiar stability. That is to be regarded as solid from which nothing can be taken away, and that as perfect to which nothing can be added.
Who can doubt that he would be a most powerful king who should have the government of the whole world? It is not without reason, since all things which everywhere exist would belong to him, and all resources from all quarters would be centered in him alone. But if more than one divide the government of the world, undoubtedly each will have less power and strength, since everyone must confine himself...