Consequently no testimony can be admitted which is contrary to reason, reason is founded on the evidence of our senses.
Every proof may be referred to one of these three divisions; we are naturally led to consider[1] what arguments we receive from each of them to[2] convince us of the existence of a Deity.
1st. The evidence of the senses.—If the Deity should appear to us, if he should convince our senses of his existence; this revelation would necessarily command belief;—Those to whom the Deity has thus appeared, have the strongest possible conviction of his existence.[3]
Reason claims the 2nd. place, it is urged that man knows that whatever is, must either have had a beginning or existed from all eternity, he also knows that whatever is not eternal must have had a cause.—Where this is applied to the existence of the universe,[4] it is necessary to prove that it was created, until that is clearly demonstrated, we may reasonably suppose that it has endured from all eternity.[5]—In a case where two propositions are diametrically opposite, the mind believes that which is less incomprehensible, it is easier to suppose that the Universe has existed from all eternity, than to
- ↑ In Queen Mab we read it is to be considered.
- ↑ In Queen Mab the words which should are substituted for to.
- ↑ In Queen Mab is added the trenchant sentence, But the God of Theologians is incapable of local visibility; and the next paragraph opens simply 2nd. Reason.
- ↑ In Queen Mab we read When this reasoning is applied to the universe.
- ↑ There is the following interpolation at this point in Queen Mab: "We must prove design before we can infer a designer. The only idea which we can form of causation is derivable from the constant conjunction of objects, and the consequent inference of one from the other."
