Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

pears to be rather an extraordinary process to reject Christianity, on the disputed ground that human reason alone is sufficient, while the various arguments, on which is built the evidence of its claim to be received as a divine revelation, still remain unanswered. An abstract notion, itself all the while a disputed notion, Mr. Volney maintaining and Socrates denying its propriety; an abstract notion, so circumstanced, can never be rationally admitted against direct unconfuted evidence to a fact. He therefore, who can be content to found his system upon so insecure a basis, may, I think, be more justly charged with an easy faith or a fond credulity, than he, who cautiously deems such a basis inadequate to support the proposed superstructure.

II. In the present stage of the argument then, the believer admits Christianity to be a revelation from God on the following several grounds.

A revelation from heaven is, in the abstract, a circumstance clearly possible.

From a consideration of the wisdom of the Creator and the ignorance of the created, the fact of a divine revelation is highly probable.

The evidence in favour of Christianity being a divine revelation is so strong, that it cannot be reasonably controverted; more especially as the arguments, upon which the evidence rests, have never yet been confuted.

Mere difficulties, even if unanswerable, cannot set aside direct and positive evidence; still less therefore can they set it aside, when they have been fully and repeatedly solved.

Numerous pretended revelations, like copious

issues of base coin, are no proof of the non-existence of that which is genuine: but the false may be readily distinguished from the true by a careful and honest examination of their respective evidences.

Finally, as our unassisted reason is an insufficient teacher, a matter long since acknowledged by the wisest of the Greeks, a revelation from God is no less necessary in the abstract, than the claim of Christianity to be received as such a revelation is well-founded in the concrete.

III. On the other hand, still in the present stage of the argument, the unbeliever denies Christianity to be a revelation from God on the following several grounds.

Although a revelation may perhaps in itself be possible, yet the fact of one is very highly improbable: because it is to the last degree unlikely, that an all-wise Creator should deem it necessary to give any instructions to a rational but inevitably ignorant being, whom he had created.

The evidence, in favour of Christianity being a divine revelation, is insufficient; though no infidel has hitherto been able to confute the arguments, on which it rests.

Insulated objections to a fact, notwithstanding they may have been repeatedly answered, are quite sufficient with a reasonable inquirer to set aside the very strongest unanswered evidence.

As many pretended revelations are confessedly impostures, therefore all alleged revelations must clearly be impostures likewise.

D*

Lastly, as our unassisted reason is held by some philosophers to be a sufficient teacher, while others declare it to be wholly insufficient. A revelation from God is quite unnecessary: nor ought any claim of this character to be admitted, though it may rest on the very strongest unconfuted arguments.

IV. Such are the principles, and such the systems, of the Christian and the infidel.

Whether it argues a high degree of credulity to receive, as a divine revelation, Christianity thus evidenced; or, in order to the rejection of it, contentedly to bow beneath such an extraordinary mass of contradictory difficulties, as the theory of the infidel is constrained to support: let the prudent inquirer judge and determine for himself.

SECTION II.

THE DIFFICULTIES

3

ATTENDANT UPON DEISTI

CAL INFIDELITY IN THE ABSTRACT REJEC TION OF ALL REVELATION FROM GOD.

MR. Volney and other writers of the same school, in plain defiance of the more modest confession of Socrates, contend, that the light of nature alone is an amply sufficient teacher: so that, by its sole aid, an authentic and immutable code, which shall readily command the assent of all mankind, may very easily be formed. Shew us, say the people freed (as Mr. Volney expresses it) from their fetters and prejudices, the line, that separates the world of chimeras from that of realities; and teach us, after so many religions of error and delusion, the religion of evidence and truth. To this humble request the French philosopher kindly assents; and, for the instruction of the disabused multitude, draws up, what he styles, The Law of Nature, or principles of morality deduced from the physical constitution of Mankind and the Universe.

Now, unfortunately, some of the very first principles, on which this with other similar schemes of natural religion is founded, cannot themselves be certainly known without the aid of a revelation from heaven. Hence it is clear, that such a system, instead of being a religion of evidence and truth (the character much too hastily claimed for it by Mr. Volney), is in fact nothing better than a religion of vague conjecture and unauthorized speculation.

I. The deist, as his very title implies, lays it down as the basis of that natural religion which he advocates, that there is one God the Creator and Moderator of all things.

This dogma may appear so obvious, that few, it might be suspected, would controvert it, even placing revelation altogether out of the question, save the atheist: and, laboriously to answer his folly, might equally, both by the deist and by the Christian, be well deemed labour thrown away. Yet the very first objection, which I would make to the deistical scheme, is the defect of legitimate proof under which its leading dogma most certainly labours.

There is one only God, says the deist, the Creator and Moderator of all things; by whom the universe was brought originally into being, and through whom it subsists.

In reply, I request to be informed, upon his principles, how he knows, that there is only one God, respecting whom such matters may be truly predicated.

His answer, no doubt, will be, that the existence of a God is decidedly proved by the very frame of the universe. Evident design must needs imply a designer. But evident design is

« AnteriorContinuar »