An account of Mr. Ferguson, his common-place-book in two letters.

Where it is pleasant to observe, how Master Ferguson by altering the expression a little, unawares falls into non-sense; that the tra∣dition of the one true God was corrupted and defaced by the worlds lapsing into Polytheism: as if men first lapsed into Polytheism, and this corrupted the tradition of one God: which is as much as to say, that men worshipped a great many Gods, while they believed there was but one; and by this means in time forgot that there was but one God. And indeed our Author is oftentimes very unhappy at varying phrases, and makes either wretched English, or wretched sense of them.

Master Ferguson's next undertaking is, thirdly to prove, that no written Records besides the Bible can lay claim to the priviledge of be∣ing 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of Divine Inspiration: and here he considers the Ethnick Legislators, Poets, and Philosophers; and especially the Alcoran, page 76, &c. all which is done at large by Sir Charles Worsely, page 164, &c. of which Master Ferguson has only given us a short and imperfect abstract.

The same may be truly affirmed of those positive media (as he calls them) by which the Divine authority of the Scripture may be rationally

demonstrated, which indeed he has cast into a different method; but as far as I observe, has nothing but what is particularly discours'd by Sir Charles from page 179. to the end of the Book.

In one thing indeed Master Ferguson takes the confidence to differ from Sir Charles, whether Miracles be always a certain demonstrati∣on of the truth of any Doctrine? or whether God may▪ not some∣times permit Impostors to work Miracles for the tryal of our Faith? This latter Sir Charles affirms, Mr. Ferguson denies; which is not civilly done to dispute such a nice point with his friend, which he confesses is not very material, when he had borrowed from him all his substantial and material notions. But the best of it is, Sir Charles has no need to stand to his Courtesie in this matter, and it is well for him he has not.

And upon this occasion I cannot but take notice, how Master Ferguson deals with Des Cartes; he charges him with affirming, Deum posse fallere, si velit, that God can deceive, if he please. Now Sir you know very well upon what occasion Des Cartes said this; it was when in order to free his mind from the prejudices of sense and education, and popular opinions, he set himself to doubt, as far as possibly he could, as long as there was the least imaginable pretence for doubting; and therefore doubts whether there be a God, or any thing else: and whether this God be not a deceiver, &c. And Master Ferguson might as well challenge Des Cartes with denying that he himself had any body, or that there were any ex∣ternal objects, such as the Sun, Moon, and Stars; as with affirm∣ing, that God might deceive, if he pleased; for he says the one as much as the other, while he was in this doubting humour, and only upon a design to come to some first Principle, which he could not doubt of; and to lay the foundations of a more certain know∣ledge: and therefore he immediately adds▪ Et certe cum nullam oc∣casionem habeam existimandi aliquem Deum esse deceptorent, neo quidem adhuc satis sciam, utrum sit aliquis Deus, valde tenuis, &, ut ita lo∣quar, metaphysica dubitandi ratio est, quae tantum ex ea opinione depen∣det; ut autem etiam illa tolletur, quamprimum occurret occasio, exami∣nare debeo, an sit Deus, & si sit, an possit esse deceptor, hac enim re ignorata, non videor de ulla alia plane certus esse unquam posse, Medit. Tertia. i. e. Since I have no occasion at all to think, that God is a

deceiver; nor as yet am certain, whether there be a God, or not, this opinion (of Gods power to deceive) is but a very slender and metaphysical reason of doubting: However that we may remove this too, as soon as things are ripe for that inquiry, we must examine whether there be a God? and if there be one, whether he can be a deceiver? for while we are ignorant of this, I cannot see how we can be throughly certain of an thing. And accordingly, when in his method he had proved the being of God, he proves too, that he cannot deceive us, and founds the truth and certainty of our facul∣ties upon it. And in the second objections he is charged with assert∣ing Deum non posse mentiri aut decipere, that God cannot lye or de∣ceive; which they say is contrary to the opinion of many School∣men. And in his Answer to these Objections, to which Master Ferguson refers us, he owns the charge, and defends himself from their exceptions. By this we may see, how well skilled Mr. Fergu∣son is in Des Cartes his Philosophy, or what a brow he has, to charge that upon Des Cartes as his professed opinion; the contrary of which he makes the ground of all certainty.

Such another wise discourse he has, page 123. of Infallibility; the result of which is, that our Faith is infallible, though we are not infallibly assured: but this is beyond my first design, only I could not but take this occasion to show you, what a man of reason this is, when he argues at his own natural rate, and dares forsake his Ma∣sters: and it were very easie to make it appear, that he has not one good argument, but what he has borrowed from some late Modern Authors, who are far enough from being Fanaticks; which is an excellent way of proving, that Fanaticks are great friends to Rea∣son.

But to give you some few instances more of Mr. Ferguson's tran∣scribing from Modern Authors.