JB/096/014/002: Difference between revisions

Transcribe Bentham: A Collaborative Initiative

From Transcribe Bentham: Transcription Desk

Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.

JB/096/014/002: Difference between revisions

Kmason (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
BenthamBot (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
 
(11 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
'''[{{fullurl:JB/096/014/002|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]'''
'''[{{fullurl:JB/096/014/002|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]'''
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
<hi rend='underline'>To be copied</hi>before told us "that the law of nature was "coeval with mankind, was dictated by "god himself, was binding over all the the "Globe, in all countries, and at all times." <del>It should follow then, that the law of reve<lb/>lation was only a <sic>repubblication</sic> of the</del><add>enforce this law that <del>law</del> precepts of the <gap/> of the revealed Law are parts only of the original Law of nature. From hence then a plain man would include that the Law of Revelation is no more than a republication of the Law of nature; &amp; therefore that the laws</add> of revelation were to be found in the code of Nature.&#x2014; But fair as this conclusion seems <del>of nature for now contradicts that asserti<lb/>on, and says that they were to be found only </del> the Author will not allow <add>it.</add> The Laws of Revelation, though parts only of the Law of Nature are not to be found in the Code of Nature, but <hi rend='underline'>only</hi>
<p><note><hi rend='underline'>To be copied</hi></note>
''This Page Has Not Been Transcribed Yet''
before told us "that the law of nature was<lb/>
"coeval with mankind, was dictated by<lb/>
<note>Vol. 1. p. 41.</note> "God himself, was binding over all the<lb/>
"Globe, in all countries, and at all times."<lb/> 
<del>It should follow then, that the law of revelation</del> <add>He here tells us, that the end of revelation is to</add><lb/>  
<del>was only a republication of the</del><add>enforce this law: that the <del>law</del> precepts of the <del>Law</del> of <add>the</add> revealed Law are<lb/>
parts only of the original Law of nature. From hence then a plain</add><lb/>
<del>law of nature, and that therefore, the laws</del> <add>man would conclude, that the Law of Revelation is no more than a<lb/>
republication of the Law of Nature; &amp; therefore that the laws</add><lb/>
of revelation were to be found in the code of<lb/>
<del>of nature<add><unclear>:</unclear></add> he now contradicts that assertion,</del> <add>Nature.&#x2014; But fair as this conclusion seems</add><lb/>
                   
<del>and says, that they are to be found only</del>
<add> <del>our</del> <add>the</add> the Author will not allow <add>it:</add> the Laws of Revelation, though<lb/> parts only of the Law of Nature are <hi rend='underline'>not</hi> to be found</add><lb/>
<del>in the holy Scriptures. Nay, he as plainly</del>
<add>in the Code of Nature; but <hi rend='underline'>only</hi> in the <hi rend='underline'>holy Scriptures:</hi><lb/> <del>Nay</del> <add>and</add> so fond is he of the law of Revelation in this <del>section</del>, page</add><lb/>
<del>tells us, that the law of nature</del> never was published <add>that the favorite of the last page, the great law of nature<lb/> is almost given up:&#x2014; <del>he allows that it</del></add><lb/>
                   
at all, and therefore was no law at all <add>according</add><lb/> <note><gap/></note></p>
<head>37</head>
 






<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Completed}}

Latest revision as of 10:11, 4 February 2020

Click Here To Edit

To be copied before told us "that the law of nature was
"coeval with mankind, was dictated by
Vol. 1. p. 41. "God himself, was binding over all the
"Globe, in all countries, and at all times."
It should follow then, that the law of revelation He here tells us, that the end of revelation is to
was only a republication of theenforce this law: that the law precepts of the Law of <add>the revealed Law are
parts only of the original Law of nature. From hence then a plain</add>
law of nature, and that therefore, the laws man would conclude, that the Law of Revelation is no more than a
republication of the Law of Nature; & therefore that the laws

of revelation were to be found in the code of
of nature: he now contradicts that assertion, Nature.— But fair as this conclusion seems
and says, that they are to be found only our <add>the the Author will not allow it: the Laws of Revelation, though
parts only of the Law of Nature are not to be found</add>
in the holy Scriptures. Nay, he as plainly in the Code of Nature; but only in the holy Scriptures:
Nay <add>and
so fond is he of the law of Revelation in this section, page</add>
tells us, that the law of nature never was published that the favorite of the last page, the great law of nature
is almost given up:— he allows that it

at all, and therefore was no law at all according

37




Identifier: | JB/096/014/002"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 96.

Date_1

Marginal Summary Numbering

Box

096

Main Headings

comment on the commentaries

Folio number

014

Info in main headings field

Image

002

Titles

section iii / the author's account of the laws of revelation / note

Category

collectanea

Number of Pages

4

Recto/Verso

recto

Page Numbering

c36 / c37 / c38 / c39

Penner

168

Watermarks

[[watermarks::gr [quartered royal arms motif]]]

Marginals

Paper Producer

Corrections

Paper Produced in Year

Notes public

[[notes_public::"to be copied" [note not in bentham's hand]]]

ID Number

31018

Box Contents

UCL Home » Transcribe Bentham » Transcription Desk
  • Create account
  • Log in