« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »
10. How is Christianity a republication of natural religion?
14. Show how miracles may prove natural religion.
15. Show, still further, that revelation is an authoritative republication of natural religion?
16. What doctrines are taught in the Gospel, with a clearness, compared with which, the light of nature is darkness?
17. How does Christianity, now that miracles have ceased, serve the ends and purposes for which it was established?
18. Why was a visible church instituted ?
19. How does a visible church tend to promote natural religion? 20. In what does the visibility of the church consist?
21. Of what advantage are such institutions?
22. On what principles alone can objections be urged against all
23. Can it be truly said that Christianity has ever produced any ill
24. Why cannot the corruptions and abuses of it be insisted on as arguments against it, upon principles of theism?
25. What, are we taught by experience, is God's general rule of government?
26. What things, thus far, have been mentioned, as showing the importance of Christianity?
27. How is this still further shown, in a practical sense?
32 In stating this matter more fully, what is the first thing to be considered?
33. In what does the essence of natural, and of revealed religion consist, considering religion as an inward principle?
34. From what arises our obligation to pay these regards?
35. What are these religious regards?
36. How do we learn in what external manner this inward worship is to be expressed?
37. Is the worship itself a matter of pure revealed command ? 38. What do those persons forget, who think the Christian religion of little importance, provided natural religion be kept to? 39. What is said of the obstinate, or even careless, disregard to Christ, in His relations to us as Redeemer and God? 40. Why is it infatuation to neglect to avail one's self of the means of obtaining divine assistance?
41. The conclusion from all this?
42. Supposing Christianity to be credible, what is our highest duty! 43. The first deduction from the foregoing observations?
44. What is the distinction between moral, and positive precepts? 45. From what do moral, and from what, positive duties, arise ?
46. Is any duty to be regarded as either positive or moral, from the manner in which it is made known? and illustrate.
47. Under what twofold consideration do positive institutions come? 48. The second deduction from the foregoing observations? 49. Show that positive institutions in general, have the nature of moral commands; and illustrate.
50. What caution should be observed in comparing positive with moral duties; and why?
51. Why should we obey a moral, in preference to a positive, standing precept, if we obey but one?
52. In what case is the observance of positive institutions of no value, at all?
53. What may be regarded as a plain intimation of God, which should be preferred, when moral and positive laws interfere? 54. Are we often called upon to decide such a question?
55. In what have mankind, in all ages, been prone to place their religion?
56. How is it shown that all notions of this kind are subversive of true religion?
57. On what do the Scriptures lay most stress?
58. On what occasions did our Lord intimate His preference?
59. What is remarked of the text, "I will have mercy, and not sacrifice"?
60. What is remarkable with regard to these words? and why? 61. What is mentioned as one of the peculiar weaknesses of human
62. Of what should we remind ourselves?
63. What obligation does the account now given of Christianity, impose on us?
64. If, in examining revelation, we find any passages, the seeming meaning of which is contrary to natural religion, what may we conclude ?
65. But what, if such interpretation contains a doctrine, which the light of nature cannot discover; or a precept, which the law of nature does not enjoin?
OF THE SUPPOSED PRESUMPTION AGAINST A REVELATION, CONSIDERED AS MIRACULOUS.
1. What things, thus far, have been considered?
2. The next thing in order, to be discussed?
3. What common opinion with respect to Christianity, is here noticed? 4. Is there any presumption, from the analogy of nature, against the Christian system?
5. If there be, from what alone, could it arise?
6. Show that there is none, on account of its not being discoverable by reason or experience.
7. Nor, on account of the things contained in it, being unlike the known course of nature.
8. Mention several invisible miracles.
9. What is it that is here particularly observed ?
10. Why is there no presumption against miracles, at the beginning of the world?
11. Show this in another way.
12. In another way, still.
13. What do we learn from history and tradition respecting the origin of religion?
14. What is remarked of this fact?
15. What objection is still urged on this point?
16. When alone, can we raise an argument from analogy, against revelation, considered as miraculous ?
17. What would be a parallel case?
18. Would such a case afford any proof, on the subject ?
19. Show that it would be infinitely precarious.
20. The only material question, on this point?
21. Mention a second reason why a proof from such a case would be infinitely precarious.
22. What gives a real credibility to the supposition, that miraculous interpositions might be a part of the original plan of things? 23. The last consideration, in reply to the objection that there is some peculiar presumption, from analogy, against miracles? 24. What must be considered, before any one can determine whether there be such a presumption?
25. The conclusion from all this?
OF OUR INCAPACITY OF JUDGING WHAT WERE TO BE EXPECTED IN A REVELATION; AND THE CREDIBILITY, FROM ANALOGY, THAT IT MUST CONTAIN THINGS APPEARING LIABLE TO OBJECTIONS.
1. Against what, have objections been alleged, besides the evidences of Christianity? specify particulars.
2. What puerile objection has been urged by some? 3. What is it the design of this chapter, to show?
4. What would prove a supposed revelation to be false?
5. What is remarked of objections against Christianity, as distinguished from objections against its evidence?
6. What do we learn from Scripture respecting the government of God?
7. What is observed of the natural and revealed dispensation of things?
8. What does experience teach us of the course of nature?
9. What may we infer from this respecting the revealed dispensation?
11. To what are these observations particularly applicable? 12. Show this in detail, in twelve particulars.
13. What may be said with respect to some of these circumstances? 14. How would you reply to the objection?
15. What is the only question concerning the truth of Christianity; and why is this the only one?
16. What is the only question concerning the authority of Scripture ?
17. If this be so, what things, sometimes objected to the Scriptures, fail to overthrow their authority?
18. What alone, could overturn Revelation?
19. Is the same mode of arguing applicable to the Bible, in all respects, as to other books?
21. The reason of the difference?
22. What question is asked here of internal probabilities?
23. Show that it is alleged here to no practical purpose.
24. What does the analogy of nature teach us respecting the preconceived expectations which men are likely to have of the Scriptures? and why ?
25. What is remarked of the instruction which God affords to brute creatures, by instincts; and to man, by instincts and reason? 26. Illustrate.
27. What inference may we deduce from these things?
28. What is remarked of objections against the Scriptures, and Christianity in general?
29. What objection is made against the miraculous gifts of some of the early Christians?
30. How is it answered?
31. What sort of persons, might we have supposed, would be endowed with miraculous powers?
32. How does it appear that we are not judges in what degree and manner God should interpose?
33. Show in what other respects there is a resemblance between the light of Nature and Revelation.
34. In what way are all improvements made?
35. Show that it is not incredible that there are many truths in the Bible, not yet understood.
36. In what respect, may it be objected, that this analogy fails? 37. What may be said in reply to this?
38. What further objection is urged?
39. How answered? and illustrate.
40. What is the just consequence from all these things?
41. What of revelation, comes under the cognizance of reason?
42. What is meant by, reason judging of the morality of Scripture? 43. What is said of those particular precepts in Scripture, given to particular persons, requiring actions, which would be immoral and vicious, were it not for such precepts ?
44. Why is it right to take life, when commanded by God? 45. Why has Bp. B. noticed such precepts ?
46. What question alone, respecting Christianity, needs to be discussed?
47. Why is this the only question?
48. What presumptive proof is mentioned, of Christianity, not proceeding from enthusiasm and political views?
OF CHRISTIANITY, CONSIDERED AS A SCHEME, OR CONSTITUTION, IMPERFECTLY COMPREHENDED.
1. What has been shown in the preceding chapter?
2. On what ground may it be alleged that this is a very partial answer to such objections?
3. How is it proposed to be shown that the things objected to, are wise, and just, and good?
4. What affords a sufficient answer to objections against the wis dom, justice, and goodness of the constitution of nature?
5. Why is this a sufficient answer?
6. How is the moral government of God, exercised?
7. What relation does Christianity bear to this general plan of providence?
8. What else is said of Christianity?
9. What are some of the parts of this economy ?
10. How is it known that this scheme is but imperfectly comprehended by us?
11. Show that our ignorance is an answer to objections against the perfection of Christianity?
12. What may we learn from the fact, that, in the Christian dispensation, as much as in the natural scheme of things, means are made use of to accomplish ends?
13. How does Bp. B. undertake to prove that the Christian dispensation may have been, all along, carried on by general laws, no less than the course of nature ?
14 State, at large, the reasons why we conclude that the whole common course of nature is carried on according to general fore-ordained laws.
15. If it is only from analogy that we conclude this, then, what else
may analogy teach us?
16. Specify, in some particulars.