Chap. XI.—Of God, and that the One God, and by Whose Providence the World is Governed and Exists.

Since it is agreed upon concerning providence, it follows that we show whether it is to be believed that it belongs to many, or rather to one only. We have sufficiently taught, as I think, in our Institutions, that there cannot be many gods; because, if the divine energy and power be distributed among several, it must necessarily be diminished. But that which is lessened is plainly mortal; but if He is not mortal, He can neither be lessened nor divided. Therefore there is but one God, in whom complete energy and power can neither be lessened nor increased. But if there are many, while they separately have something of power and authority, the sum itself decreases; nor will they separately be able to have the whole, which they have in common with others: so much will be wanting to each as the others shall possess. There cannot therefore be many rulers in this world, nor many masters in one house, nor many pilots in one ship, nor many leaders in one herd or flock, nor many queens in one swarm. But there could not have been many suns in heaven, as there are not several souls in one body; so entirely does the whole of nature agree in unity. But if the world  

it is evident from the testimony of the poet, that there is one God who inhabits the world, since the whole body cannot be inhabited and governed except by one mind. Therefore all divine power must be in one person, by whose will and command all things are ruled; and therefore He is so great, that He cannot be described in words by man, or estimated by the senses. From what source, therefore, did the opinion or persuasion73    Persuasiove; most editions read “persuasione,” but the meaning is not so good.   respecting many gods come to men? Without doubt, all those who are worshipped as gods were men, and were also the earliest and greatest kings; but who is ignorant that they were invested with divine honours after death, either on account of the virtue by which they had profited the race of men, or that they obtained immortal memory on account of the benefits and inventions by which they had adorned human life? And not only men, but women also. And this, both the most ancient writers of Greece, whom they call theologi;74    θεολόγαι.   and also Roman writers following and imitating the Greeks, teach; of whom especially Euhemerus and our Ennius, who point out the birthdays, marriages, offspring, governments, exploits, deaths, and tombs75    Sepulcra; others read “simulacra.”   of all of them. And Tullius, following them, in his third book, On the Nature of the Gods, destroyed the public religions; but neither he himself nor any other person was able to introduce the true one, of which he was ignorant. And thus he himself testified that that which was false was evident; that the truth, however, lay concealed. “Would to heaven,” he says, “that I could as easily discover true things as refute those that are false!”76    De Nat. Deor., i. 32. [See p. 29, note 2, supra.]   And this he proclaimed not with dissimulation as an Academic, but truly and in accordance with the feeling of his mind, because the truth cannot be uprooted from human perceptions: that which the foresight of man was able to attain to, he attained to, that he might expose false things. For whatever is fictitious and false, because it is supported by no reason, is easily destroyed. There is therefore one God, the source and origin of all things, as Plato both felt and taught in the Timœus, whose majesty he declares to be so great, that it can neither be comprehended by the mind nor be expressed by the tongue.  

Hermes bears the same testimony, whom Cicero asserts77    Ibid., iii. 22.   to be reckoned by the Egyptians among the number of the gods. I speak of him who, on account of his excellence and knowledge of many arts, was called Trismegistus; and he was far more ancient not only than Plato, but than Pythagoras, and those seven wise men.78    [P. 268, note 1, supra.]   In Xenophon,79    Memor., iv. 3.  Socrates, as he discourses, says that “the form of God ought not to be inquired about: “and Plato, in his Book of Laws,80    Lib. vii.   says: “What God is, ought not to be the subject of inquiry, because it can neither be found out nor related.” Pythagoras also admits that there is but one God, saying that there is an incorporeal mind, which, being diffused and stretched through all nature, gives vital perception to all living creatures; but Antisthenes, in his Physics, said that there was but one natural God, although the nations and cities have gods of their own people. Aristotle, with his followers the Peripatetics, and Zeno with his followers the Stoics, say nearly the same things. Truly it would be a long task to follow up the opinions of all separately, who, although they used different names, nevertheless agreed in one power which governed the world. But, however, though philosophers and poets, and those, in short, who worship the gods, often acknowledge the Supreme God, yet no one ever inquired into, no one discussed, the subject of His worship and honours; with that persuasion, in truth, with which, always believing Him to be bounteous and incorruptible, they think81    Arbitrantur; some editions have “arbitrabantur,” which appears preferable.   that He is neither angry with any one, nor stands in need of any worship. Thus there can be no religion where there is no fear.82    [“The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom” (Prov. ix. 10). See p. 262, cap. 6, note 6, supra.]    

CAPUT XI. De Deo, eoque uno, cujusque providentia mundus regatur et constat.

Quoniam constitit de providentia, sequitur ut doceamus, utrumne multorum esse credenda sit, an 0110B potius unius. Satis (ut opinor) ostendimus in nostris Institutionibus, deos multos esse non posse; quod divina vis ac potestas si distribuatur in plures, diminui eam necesse sit: quod autem minuitur, utique et mortale est; si vero mortalis non est, nec minui, nec dividi potest. Deus igitur unus est, in quo vis et potestas consummata, nec minui potest, nec augeri. Si autem sunt multi, dum habent singuli potestatis aliquid ac numinis, summa ipsa decrescit: nec poterunt singuli habere totum, quod est commune cum pluribus: unicuique tantum deerit, quantum caeteri possidebunt. Non possunt igitur in hoc mundo multi esse rectores: nec in una domo multi domini, nec in navi una multi gubernatores, nec in armento aut 0110C grege duces multi, nec in uno examine multi reges. 0111A Sed nec in coelo quidem multi soles esse potuerunt, sicut nec animae plures in uno corpore: adeo in unitate natura universa consentit. Quod si mundum Spiritus intus alit totamque infusa per artus Mens agitat molem, et magno se corpore miscet,apparet testimonio poetae, unum esse mundi habitatorem Deum; siquidem corpus omne nisi ab una mente incoli regique non potest. Omnem igitur divinam potestatem necesse est in uno esse, cujus nutu et imperio regantur omnia; et ideo tantus est, ut ab homine non possit, aut verbis enarrari, aut sensibus aestimari.

Unde igitur ad homines opinio multorum deorum persuasione pervenit? Nimirum ii omnes, qui coluntur ut dii, homines fuerunt, et iidem primi, ac maximi 0111B reges: sed eos, aut ob virtutem, qua profuerant hominum generi, divinis honoribus affectos esse post mortem; aut ob beneficia et inventa, quibus humanam vitam excoluerant, immortalem memoriam consecutos, quis ignorat? nec tantum mares, sed et foeminas. Quod cum vetustissimi Graeciae scriptores, quos illi θεολόγους nuncupant, tum etiam Romani, Graecos secuti et imitati, docent; quorum praecipue Euhemerus, ac noster Ennius, qui eorum omnium 0112A natales, conjugia, progenies, imperia, res gestas, obitus, sepulcra demonstrant. Et secutus eos Tullius tertio de Natura deorum libro dissolvit publicas religiones: sed tamen veram, quam ignorabat, nec ipse, nec alius quisquam potuit inducere. Adeo et ipse testatus est, falsum quidem apparere, veritatem tamen latere. Utinam (inquit) tam facile vera invenire possem, quam falsa convincere! Quod quidem non dissimulanter, ut Academicus, sed vere atque ex animi sententia proclamavit: quia veritas humanis sensibus erui nunquam potest, quod assequi valuit humana providentia, id assecutus est, ut falsa detegeret. Quidquid enim fictum et commentitium, quia nulla ratione subnixum est, facile dissolvitur. Unus est igitur princeps, et origo rerum Deus, sicut Plato 0112B in Timaeo et sensit et docuit; cujus majestatem tantam esse declarat, ut nec mente comprehendi, nec lingua exprimi possit.

Idem testatur Hermes, quem Cicero ait in numero deorum apud Aegyptios haberi, eum scilicet, qui ob virtutem multarumque artium scientiam Trismegistus nominatus, et erat non modo Platone, verum etiam Pythagora septemque illis sapientibus longe antiquior. Apud Xenophontem Socrates disputans 0113A ait, «formam Dei non oportere conquiri;» et Plato in Legum libris: «Quid omnino sit Deus, non esse quaerendum: quia nec inveniri possit, nec enarrari.;» Pythagoras quoque unum Deum confitetur dicens, incorporalem esse mentem, quae per omnem rerum naturam diffusa et intenta, vitalem sensum cunctis animantibus tribuat. Antisthenes autem in Physico unum esse naturalem Deum dixit, quamvis gentes et urbes suos habeant populares. Eadem fere et Aristoteles cum suis peripateticis, et Zeno cum suis stoicis. Longum est enim singulorum sententias exequi, qui licet diversis nominibus sint abusi, ad unam tamen potestatem, quae mundum regeret, concurrerunt. Sed tamen summum Deum, cum et philosophi, et poetae, et ipsi denique qui deos colunt, saepe fateantur; de cultu tamen et honoribus ejus 0113B nemo unquam requisivit nemo disseruit; ea scilicet persuasione, qua semper beneficum incorruptumque credentes, nec irasci eum cuiquam, nec ullo cultu indigere arbitrantur. Adeo religio esse non potest, ubi metus nullus est.