Info

But although both ends of the logical bridge are confessedly wanting, the process may serve and does serve a more useful purpose than that of mere demonstration, namely, that of awakening, explicating, and confirming a conviction which, though the most fundamental of all, may yet have been partially slumbering for lack of thought.

Morell, Philos. Fragments, 177, 179 ? ?We can, in fact, no more prove the existence of a God by a logical argument, than we can prove the existence of an external world; but none the less may we obtain as strong a practical conviction of time one, as the other.? ?We arrive at a scientific belief in the existence of God just as we do at any other possible human truth. We assume it, as a hypothesis absolutely necessary to account for the phenomena of the universe; and then evidences from every quarter begin to converge upon it, until, in process of time, the common sense of mankind, cultivated and enlightened by ever accumulating knowledge, pronounces upon the validity of the hypothesis with a voice scarcely less decided and universal than it does in the case of our highest scientific convictions.?

Fisher, Supernat. Origin of Christianity, 572 ? ?What then is the purport and force of the several arguments for the existence of God? We reply that these proofs are the different modes in which faith expresses itself and seeks confirmation. In them faith, or the object of faith, is more exactly conceived and defined, and in them is found a corroboration, not arbitrary but substantial and valuable, of that faith which springs from the soul itself. Such proofs, therefore, are neither on the one hand sufficient to create and sustain faith, nor are they on the other hand to be set aside as of no value.? A.J. Barrett: ?The arguments are not so much a bridge in themselves, as they are guys, to hold firm the great suspension bridge of intuition, by which we pass the gulf from man to God. Or, while they are not a ladder by which we may reach heaven, they are the Ossa on Pehion, from whose combined height we may descry heaven.?

Anselm: ?Negligentia mihi videtur, si postquam confirmati sumus in fide non studemus quod credimus intelligere.? Bradley, Appearance and Reality: ?Metaphysics is the finding of bad reasons for what we believe upon instinct; but to find these reasons is no less an instinct.? Illingworth, Div. and Hum. Personality, lect. III ? ?Belief in a personal God is an instinctive judgment, progressively justified by reason.? Knight, Essays in Philosophy, 241 ? The arguments are ?historical memorials of the efforts of the human race to vindicate to itself the existence of a reality of which it is conscious, but which it cannot perfectly define.? H. Fielding, The Hearts of Men, 313 ? ?Creeds are the grammar of religion. They are

<- Previous Table of Contents Next ->

Was this article helpful?

0 0

Post a comment