DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.34827#0179
1819-1)7.
A?<3772<%<3y.
l6'
there is no reason to think our being ends with what we call our
death, it is natural to suppose that we shall go on improving as
we do in this world, and that, as here, our fate will depend a good
deal on our own conduct; that, as we see pain and punishment
here, we may expect to see it hereafter; that as the events of this
world appear to form part of a scheme of which we only see or
understand a portion, it is probable that those of the next world
also will do the same, or rather that both form a single scheme
with which we are now but partially and imperfectly acquainted.
In such a state of things it was natural that some revelation
should be made, and it was to be expected that it should be
obscure and liable to objections ; ^that, as God has not in the
natural world made happiness universal and unconditional, it
should be not cause of doubt if He does not do so in revelation.
In like manner, as He has not endued us with clear and certain
knowledge of what is for our advantage in this world, we should
not expect an entirely clear intimation by revelation ; and as
God does not in the operations of nature adopt what seems to
us the correct way of accomplishing His ends, we should be pre-
pared to find His ways, as displayed by revelation, equally
incomprehensible and inconsistent with our notions of perfec-
tion. On the whole, this reasoning removes most of the pre-
sumptions that might be formed against Christianity from
considering its doctrines without the evidence of their truth,
and this is all which Butler professes. The rest must be
accomplished by an examination of the proofs by which the
truth of the Christian revelation is established.
' HehrtUM'T/ 19.—I have read Paley and a good deal of the
learned and candid Gardner, looked into Paley's " Horse
Paulinas," enough to comprehend the drift of the argument.
I also read Middleton's " Free Enquiry " and some of his other
works, and often examined the Evangelists, Acts, and Epistles.
Nothing delighted me so much as the Sermon on the Mount.
I am now reading Erskine's " Evidences," which seems a feeble
piece of sentimental declamation, a perfect contrast to the
manly simplicity of Paley and Butler.'
A?<3772<%<3y.
l6'
there is no reason to think our being ends with what we call our
death, it is natural to suppose that we shall go on improving as
we do in this world, and that, as here, our fate will depend a good
deal on our own conduct; that, as we see pain and punishment
here, we may expect to see it hereafter; that as the events of this
world appear to form part of a scheme of which we only see or
understand a portion, it is probable that those of the next world
also will do the same, or rather that both form a single scheme
with which we are now but partially and imperfectly acquainted.
In such a state of things it was natural that some revelation
should be made, and it was to be expected that it should be
obscure and liable to objections ; ^that, as God has not in the
natural world made happiness universal and unconditional, it
should be not cause of doubt if He does not do so in revelation.
In like manner, as He has not endued us with clear and certain
knowledge of what is for our advantage in this world, we should
not expect an entirely clear intimation by revelation ; and as
God does not in the operations of nature adopt what seems to
us the correct way of accomplishing His ends, we should be pre-
pared to find His ways, as displayed by revelation, equally
incomprehensible and inconsistent with our notions of perfec-
tion. On the whole, this reasoning removes most of the pre-
sumptions that might be formed against Christianity from
considering its doctrines without the evidence of their truth,
and this is all which Butler professes. The rest must be
accomplished by an examination of the proofs by which the
truth of the Christian revelation is established.
' HehrtUM'T/ 19.—I have read Paley and a good deal of the
learned and candid Gardner, looked into Paley's " Horse
Paulinas," enough to comprehend the drift of the argument.
I also read Middleton's " Free Enquiry " and some of his other
works, and often examined the Evangelists, Acts, and Epistles.
Nothing delighted me so much as the Sermon on the Mount.
I am now reading Erskine's " Evidences," which seems a feeble
piece of sentimental declamation, a perfect contrast to the
manly simplicity of Paley and Butler.'