A treatise of the necessity of humane learning for a Gospel-preacher shewing the use of I. Languages, II. Rhetoric, III. Logic, IV. Natural philosophy, V. Moral philosophy, VI. History, VII. Chronology, VIII. Arithmetic, IX. Geometry, X. Astronomy, XI. Geography, and the benefits of learning in all ages : also this question is determined, whether grace be essential to a minister of the Gospel? / by Edward Reyner ...

CHAP. III. Of the Ʋsefulness of Logic.

THe use of Logic to a Minister of the Gospel is fivefold.

I. For the rational under∣standing, or clear and distinct notion of things, in their several habi∣tudes, respects and order, and for the right defining and describing of things; and to discourse understandingly, properly, clear∣ly, distinctly and methodically, not ob∣scurely, extravagantly or confusedly.

II. For understanding the sense and scope of the Scriptures, the Dependence, Contexture, Method, and Argumentation of them: to discern evidently the Argu∣ments and Conclusions in the Disputations of Christ, and of the Prophets and Apo∣stles.

III. For the right Dividing of the word of Truth, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 2 Tim. 2 15. (which cannot be without the help of Logic, and Rhetoric, which are properly subservient to that end, &c. saith Mr. Burges in his Treatise of Assurance, pag. 620) and for proper Analysing of the Books of Scrip∣ture into Heads and Chapters (according to the subject thereof;) and of Chapters in∣to

parts; of Texts into simple Terms first, then into Axiomes, or Propositions.

For want of Logic some tear the word in pieces (as it were with their teeth and nails) rather then divide it aright.

IV. * 1.1 For the plain, perspicuous, and me∣thodical handling of Points of Divinity, or Doctrines, and of every Particular in them, in its right maner, due order, and proper place: which is a great help to the Understanding and Memory of the Hear∣rers, and of the Speaker also.

V. For Disputations, and the handling of Controversies. Logic is of great use,

1. To understand rightly both the state of the question, and the force of the Arguments.

2 To proceed Syllogistically.

3. To detect Paralogisms, Captions, Argumentations, Fallacies, and Sophi∣stries of the Adversaries of the Truth of God; as the Jews, false Prophets, and false Apostles: of the Broachers or Maintainers of Errors and Heresies: of Seducers and Deceivers. It is the work of a Minister 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to argue against, * 1.2 and refute Gainsayers, and to defend Truth against all Opposers and Underminers, Phil. 1.17. Danaeus, in his Logical piece de Elenchis Haereticorum, reduceth their

Sophisms and Fallacies to their several Heads, and shews the maner of detecting, and answering them.

4. To infer, or draw conclusions rational∣ly, clearly and strenuously, according to the Rules of good and firm Conse∣quence.

5. To confute the corrupters of the sense of the Scriptures.

Davenant saith, that Philosophy, * 1.3 which teacheth the Rules and Art of right Disputing, (that is, Logic) apprime neces∣saria est, & ab omnibus adhi••enda in diju∣dicandis & tractandis omnibus Controver∣siis quae spectant ad Religionem, is princi∣pally necessary in handling, and adjudging all Controversies, which pertain to Reli∣gion.

Pareus speaks of the Lutherans as no great friends to Logic: * 1.4 and therefore at Ratisbone, when they would by no means be brought to dispute Syllogistically, though they had the best Cause, yet were sadly foiled by the Jesuits.

Augustine, in one of his Epistles, in∣genuously professeth, ad dissolvenda Haere∣ticorum sophismata, artem hanc (scil. Dia∣lecticam) magnum sibi adjumentum attu∣lisse.

I may give three Reasons of this useful∣ness

of Logic for a Minister.

1. Reas. Logic is of Universal use and Influence for all Arts and Sciences, and for all Artists, why not for Divinity? (which is the principal) and consequently for Di∣vines.

Augustine, De ordine, lib. 2. cap. 13. saith—Dialectica est Disciplinae disciplina∣rum. Haec docet docere, haec docet discere: quae scit scire, & alios scientes facere, &c. Logic is the Discipline of Disciplines, —This teacheth to teach, and to learn, &c.

2 Reas. Reason is the Eye of the Soul, and Logic the Art or Way of using Reason aright: Or it is a Faculty of Reasoning by Art, acquired by industry. They that would debar men of the use of Logic, (as one saith) would have them blind, * 1.5 or blinded, * 1.6 that they may carry them as the Faulkner doth the Hauk, hoodwink'd whi∣ther themselves please.

3. Reas. The holy Scriptures are full of Logic, of Logical Arguments both Artificial and Inartificial: of Axiomes, Simple and Compounded; and of Syllo∣gisms of all sorts.

Christ himself made use of Logic in drawing consequences, or in arguing from an Antecedent to the Consequent, or

from Premises to a Conclusion, in the same maner that we do: as to infer and prove from the story of the Creation, and of God's Institution of Marriage, the un∣lawfulness of groundless Divorce, Matth. 19.4, 6.—from Hosea 6.6. to vindicate the lawfulness of his Disciples plucking and eating the ears of corn on the Sabbath-day, Matth. 12.7.

Thus Christ proves the Doctrine of the Resurrection by way of Syllogism, or Lo∣gical Inference, from the saying of God to Moses, Exod. 3.6. with Matth. 22.31, 32, Luc. 20.37.38.

• ...God is the God of the living,
• God is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
• Ergo, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, must live:
• and to that end, rise again.

Christ calls this by the Name of Scrip∣ture, which was but a Logical Inference drawn from it, Matth. 22.29, 31, &c. with Exod. 3.6.

Thus Christ proves the Jews not to be of God, Joh. 8.47.

• ...He that is of God heareth God's words,
• ...Ye hear not God's words,
• Ergo, ye are not of God.
• This was a Categorical Syllogism.

Christ used Hypothetical Syllogisms also: as John 5.46, 47.

• If ye had believed Moses, ye would have believed me:
• ...But ye believe not his writings.
• Ergo, how shall ye believe my words?

Thus Christ disputed against the Phari∣seces—Assertion of the Messiah's being the Son of David, * 1.7 Matth. 22.43, 45.

If Christ be David's Son, then David should not call him Lord. But David calls him Lord—How is he then his Son?

Christ used a Dilemma to nonplus those that asked by what Authority he acted, Matth. 21.23, 25. The Baptism of John whence was it? from Heaven, or of Men? and they had Dilemmatical Reasonings with themselves what to answer to this Dilem∣matical question, ver. 25, 26, 27. If we say, It was from Heaven, he will say, Why did ye not then believe him? If we say, Of men, we fear the people, Thus perceiving they were in danger to be catcht with Christ's Dilemma, if they answered to ei∣ther part of it, they returned Ignoramus for their answer—we cannot tell. Thus Christ did clavum clavo pellere, drive out one wedge with another.

See more of Christ's Dilemmas in Luc. 6.9. Joh. 18.23.

Christ begun to be a Questionist, and a Disputant, when he was young, twelve years old, sitting in the midst of the Do∣ctors or learned men in the Temple, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, * 1.8 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, both hearing them, * 1.9 and posing them. Ecce Jesum Quaestionistam! All that heard him were astonished at his Understanding, and Answers. Did not Christ herein put honor upon Learning, and upon learned men, and upon Disputa∣tions?

The Prophets and Apostles do every where bring Arguments, or use Logical Reasonings, to press unto Vertues and Duties, to disswade from Vices; to con∣vince, reprove, encourage, comfort, &c. drawn from Causes, Effects, Consequents, Examples, &c. from Promises or Threat∣nings, Rewards or Punishments, &c.

Both Christ and his Apostles draw Ar∣guments by good Logic from the Old Testament, to prove Articles of Faith in the New. Hence these Phrases occur so often,—it is written—it is written,—and what saith the Scripture? —or such and and such a Prophet?

How frequently and strenuously doth Paul prove Theological Points (and con∣firm matters of Faith) by Logical Argu∣ments? As,

Justification by Faith, not by Works, Rom. 3.20, 28. and 4.1, 2, 3, &c.

The Necessity of Sanctification, Rom. 6.2, &c.

The Filthiness of Fornication, 1 Cor. 6.13. to the end.

The Resurrection of the Body, 1 Cor. 15.13.

Paul was very Argumentative and Syl∣logistical in his Epistles: He played the Logician notably in the Epistle to the Ro∣mans; as Chap. 3. v. 28. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 — Therefore we conclude (scil. from the pre∣misses laid down before) that a man is justified by Faith, &c. Paul's Syllogisms shew his Logic.

His Sorites, Rom. 5.3, 4. and 8.29, 30.

His Induction, Rom. 8.35, &c.

Enthymems are very frequent with him.

His Hypothetical Syllogisms are many; as Gal. 3.18. If the Inheritance be of the Law, it is no more of Promise—But God gave it to Abraham by promise— Ergo. The Conclusion is left out, as it is oft in Disputation.

As Christ, so his Apostles were Dispu∣tants. Paul disputed against the Grecians at Jerusalem, Acts 9.28, 29. with the Jews, Epicureans and Stoics at Athens, Acts 17.17, 18. The Stoics were most

famous for Logical Skill, they were ac∣counted in those Times Dialectici maximi. Paul was able to dispute Logically and Philosophically with those Philosophers: —argumenta vibrare, idque Athenis.

He disputed daily in the School of one Ty∣rannus, Acts 19.9.

Did not Stephen make use of Logic when he disputed against the Libertines and Sophisters of divers Nations, Acts 6.9, 10?

Logica est Radius divinae mentis, * 1.10 est Re∣gina mentis humanae, lima ingenii, norma judicii, officina veritatis, & panacea me∣moriae: atque ita necessaria est Theologis, Medicis, Jurisperitis, & ipsis Philosophis; sive velint docere, sive refutare, sive ex∣plicare, sive probare; unde non abs re vo∣catur Instrumentum Instrumentorum, & manus Philosophiae.

Notes

• * 1.1

  See Dr. Cha∣pel's Method of Preaching.
• * 1.2

  Titus 1.9.
• * 1.3

  In Col. 2.8.
• * 1.4

  In Col. 2.8.
• * 1.5

  Mr. Gataker.
• * 1.6

  ☞
• * 1.7

  See Piscat. in locum.
• * 1.8

  Luke 2.46.
• * 1.9

  Dr. Arrowsmith Orat. 2. Anti∣weigel. pag. 12.
• * 1.10

  Alsted. Ency∣clop. lib. 4. Di∣dact. cap. 10.