Education for Life. George Turnbull
Читать онлайн книгу.
analogous in kind, and proportioned in quantity or moment, to the power or knowledge claimed: just as in natural philosophy, or the common reasonings in life every day about the properties and qualities of things, or agents.
SECTION II
It remains therefore to be considered, what doctrines of our SAVIOUR can be taken in this light; or compared in this manner with his works.
And there are three doctrines of Christianity that are evidently of this kind.
“The doctrine of future rewards and punishments.”
“The doctrine of the resurrection of the dead.”
“The doctrine of the forgiveness of sins.”
But before we advance farther it is proper to take notice, that it is evident from what was said before, of the proper proof of any claim to a certain degree of power or knowledge, that <14> it must be the same, whether these three doctrines are reduced to a claim of knowledge or a claim of power. The works will have the same relation to these doctrines, whether they are considered in the one way or the other. For a pretension to knowledge of
[print edition page 112]
a certain kind must be proved by samples of that kind; and a pretension to power of a certain kind must be proved by samples of that kind. The same samples therefore will prove the one, that prove the other, if the power and knowledge are of the same kind.
Either these three doctrines must be considered as a claim to knowledge in this way;
“I know certainly that the dead shall be raised.”
“I know certainly that there is a future immortal State of rewards and punishments.”
“I know certainly that sins will be forgiven upon a certain condition.”
Or these doctrines must be considered as a claim to power in this way:
“I have power to raise the dead.”
“I have power to forgive sins.”
“I have power to make happy or miserable in the life to come.”
And which ever way they are taken, the question about the works must come to the same <15> thing. For in the one case it will be, whether they are samples of the knowledge pretended to; and in the other, whether they are samples of the power pretended to. But the power and knowledge being evidently of the same kind; their objects the same; the works that are of kind with the one, must be of kind with the other.
In which way then are these doctrines to be considered? As a claim to power certainly. For thus our SAVIOUR himself is represented in his history as always declaring these doctrines. “I will raise the dead; that all men may know I have power to forgive sins,” &c.
But these three doctrines must be examined severally, and compared with their samples.
SECTION III
Let us first consider the “Doctrine of the resurrection of the dead.”
If our SAVIOUR had said: “I certainly know that the dead shall be
[print edition page 113]
raised”: What would have been the proper proof of his having that knowledge? He behoved certainly to have given instances of the possibility of a resurrection from the dead; and of his having that knowledge, by actually raising from the dead. But observe how the doctrine runs; it is not an assertion of knowledge but of power: He does not say; “I know certainly the dead shall be raised.” But he asserts his power to <16> raise the dead: and always teaches that doctrine in these terms; “I will raise the dead; I will give eternal life.”
And what is the proper evidence when the claim runs in this strain? The same as in the other case. It was necessary to give samples, or experiments, of this power he claimed. And accordingly he raised from the dead;a and gave power to his Apostles to raise from the dead.b And to put his pretensions beyond all doubt, he himself submitted to death, that he might give an incontestible proof of his being actually possessed of that power, by rising himself from the dead the third day,c according to his own prediction.d
To ask then whether JESUS CHRIST gave a sufficient or proper proof of his having power to raise the dead; is to ask, whether raising the dead is a sample of power to raise the dead.
All the Objections of certain Sceptics against the doctrine of a resurrection from the dead, have been examined and sufficiently answered by Dr Samuel Clarke,e Mr Locke,f and others; to whom I refer you. To say the
[print edition page 114]
truth, the difficulties moved against a resurrection from the dead, do not touch that doctrine as it is de-<17>livered by our SAVIOUR and his Apostles; but the chimerical additions to it of some Divines; who imagine the same particles of matter, which were united with the soul when it acted the bad or the good part, must likewise be sharers in the rewards or the punishments; forgetting their own principle, the immateriality of our thinking part, and that matter is utterly insensible; nay incapable of being made, even by the Deity himself, to think, feel, or perceive.5
SECTION IV
But our SAVIOUR not only asserted his power to raise from the dead:* but to give us immortal, incorruptible† bodies and to make perfectly happy, or compleatly miserable in the life to come.
And who are to be happy, and who are to be miserable, according to his doctrine? The virtuous and regular are to be rewarded; the vitious and immoral are to be punished. Every one is to be judged by his works, by his conduct, and approved or condemned accordingly.
Instinct, Reason, and the universal consent of all nations and ages of the world, conjoin to render this doctrine probable, which our SAVIOUR has set beyond all doubt, by the samples he gave of his power to bestow blessings, or inflict miseries of every sort. Consider but his works in this light; and were they not all so many experiments or instances of this power? he made the <18> ignorant and simple wise in a moment: changed the tempers and dispositions of men almost instantaneously: cured the most malign, inveterate, diseases by a word of his mouth: delivered in the same instantaneous, wonderful, manner, from infirmities of every kind: and bestowed upon whom he pleased, the most marvellous and surprizing gifts
[print edition page 115]
and talents.* His transfiguration was a plain specimen and example of the glory and lustre he could give to our bodies after the resurrection. And all his works, in one word, were one continued series of proper and analogous experiments, to prove his power to curse or bless; banish diseases and infirmities; bestow blessings of every kind, moral or corporeal: make happy; compleatly happy, or compleatly wretched.
SECTION V
Our SAVIOUR also taught the forgiveness of sins.† And how did he prove his pretension to this power? By these very experiments and samples that he gave of his power to deliver from miseries, and render happy. For what is it to forgive sins? is it not to deliver from those miseries sin justly merits; or to which it renders the sinner obnoxious?
And accordingly he asserted his power to forgive sins: but that all men might know he had <19> indeed that power; he ordered the lame, whose sins he pronounced remitted and forgiven, to arise take up the couch and walk. The dumb spoke; the deaf heard; the lame walked strait and firmly: he cured all diseases; and bestowed health, strength, and all sorts of blessings: at his command also the dead arose; to prove that he could forgive sins, or deliver the penitent from all the pains and miseries his sinful life had righteously deserved.‡
Let us take notice however, how cautious he was of giving any encouragement to the wicked, by his doctrine of the forgiveness of sins.§ It was only to those who seriously repented and reformed, that he gave the agreeable hopes of finding pardon. It was not to such as continued in their sins, in spight of frequent Remorses and professions of repentance: but to such
[print edition page 116]
as