date

1817 Nov 7. Not Paul I. Argument
1817 Nov 7.

Not Paul

I. Argument

Ch. Quasi Miracles &c

§ Least improbability Paul

§. 3. Rule of least improbability or least improbability explained and justified

In the endeavour to account for a notorious or undisputed fact In every other part of the field of thought and action, reason common sense without any objection on the part of the most zealous religionists, prescribes the employing in the endeavour to account for a notorious or undisputed fact that mode of accounting that presents itself as most probable.

Why this course of which the reasonableness―the exclusive[?] reasonableness is in respect of every other part of the field of thought and action is universally admitted should not be admitted in this part―in this part in which the importance and mischievousness of error is at its maximum seems not altogether easy to pronounce.

If any opposite or different rule were admitted, in what respect would true religion in what respect would that / a portent[?] / which is admitted / embraced / as true by Protestants be a given[?] by it? How in behalf of purely Catholic miracles could it be refused admittance by Protestants? how in behalf of the miracles of the Mahometan or / and / Hindoo religions could it be refused by either Protestant or Catholic Christians? How Sentence breaks off.

Among Protestants if the opposite rule were admitted―all those verbal miracles with which the language of Methodists and even of Missionaries of other persuasion as well as that are so abundant could they be saved from being counted[?] into―from being admitted into the character of real miracles?

Thus would not only incorrect editions of the true, be proved correct, but false religions of all sorts be proved true.
Similar Items
  • Title: [1817 Oct. 23 Not Paul 9]
    Description: 1817 Oct. 23

    Not Paul

    9

    Ch. Miracles Quasi, Visions

    1

    §. 2 Visions

    §. 2. Of Visions in general and hence of Trances

    As a condition / In the character / necessary to the support of a religion in so far as that support consists in miracles a condition mentioned as above in the character of a necessary one is―that the occurrences mentioned / stated / exhibited // as miraculous should be such as in their nature are notorious.

    In the character of a general one the truth of this position will hardly be disputed: for supposing the occurrence to be such an one as supposing it to have had place has not fallen within the cognizance of more than one person, at that rate if it be received as a rule that by the report of an occurrence of this nature is one of any number of occurrences not reported as having fallen under the cognizance of more than one person the truth of a religion is to be / may be / regarded as proved, it is thereby put into the power if not of every man whatsoever at any rate of every man whose veracity and discernment are in other particulars without reproach, to prove to be true or in other words to mount[?] and establish as true every system of religion that he pleases: and in this way may false religions in any number be made true.
  • Title: [1817 Nov. 7 Not Paul Ch Quasi]
    Description: 1817 Nov. 7

    Not Paul

    Ch Quasi Miracles &c

    § Least improbability Paul &c

    Applied to the facts of religion―of revealed religion this rule or at any rate one branch of it may be thus expressed. Whatever effect may with probability be referred to and accounted for by natural causes for the accounting of it, forbear to have recourse to supernatural ones to any cause of a supernatural cast―to any cause by the existence of which in that character if admitted, the effect in the event or state of things would be referred to the class of miraculous ones.

    In a heathen poet may be found a rule which though applied to a very different / light / subject, may help to place and fix in the mind the important and serious rule here in question

    Nec Deus intersit, nisi dignus vindice nodus

    Inciderit.― i.e. ‘nor should a god be introduced unless a knot arises which requires a deliverer’; Horace, Ars poetica, 192-2.
  • Title: [1817 Oct. 22 Not Paul 1]
    Description: 1817 Oct. 22

    Not Paul

    1

    Ch. Miracles Quasi & Visions

    1

    §. 1 Miracles and Quasi Miracles

    Ch.

    Of quasi-Miracles and Visions

    §. 1

    To no true man can any injury be done by the exposure of an impostor: especially of

    an impostor whose pretence it is that he is himself that sincere true man. On no real

    miracle can any discredit be cast by the exposure of a falsely pretended or falsely

    supposed one. By Protestantism was exposed and discredited the whole tribe of

    Catholic miracles: of miracles of later date than those ascribed to or reported in

    the authors called the Fathers of the Church, or for shortness the Fathers. By

    Conyers Middleton have been / were / exposed and discredited the whole tribe of

    Miracles reported in these same Fathers.

    Conyers Middleton (1683-1750), A Free Inquiry into the

    Miraculous Powers, Which are supposed to have subsisted in the Christian

    Church, London, 1749.

    By the present work, if the author has not deceived himself / view presented by it

    be a correct one / in all eyes in which those considerations by which the author has

    been convinced which have been convincing to the author shall have proved convincing,

    in the same predicament will have been placed all miracles other than those reported

    in the Gospel history: and in particular / that is to say /, all those occurrences

    which have been commonly regarded as having been reported as miraculous by the author

    of the history of the Acts of the Apostles―say for shortness by the author of the Acts.