★ Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
<pb/><!-- t r a n s c r i p t i o n o f r e d i n k o n s o u r c e p a g e f o l l o w s --> | <pb/><!-- t r a n s c r i p t i o n o f r e d i n k o n s o u r c e p a g e f o l l o w s --> | ||
<hi rend='underline'>When</hi> this Law was published we know | <add><hi rend='underline'>When</hi> this Law was published we know;- "it is coeval with</add><lb/> | ||
account is not so clear as one could wish. | "we should live honestly, hurt nobody and<lb/> | ||
<add> Mankind." By whom we know likewise;- it was by</add><lb/> | |||
"render to everyone his due". <del>I believe our</del> <hi rend='superscript'><del>are these laws</del></hi><lb/> | |||
<add> God himself:" ~ But where to whom,<del>&</del><hi rend='superscript'>&</hi> in what</add><lb/> | |||
<del>Author himself would be the first to tell us, </del><lb/> | |||
<add>terms, we must apply to our Author to learn.-</add><lb/> | |||
<hi rend='superscript'>are all</hi><del>That many of</del> the practices above cited <del>moreby</del><lb/> | |||
<add>As to the first questions;- where this law was published</add><lb/> | |||
<del>no means</del> <sic>reconcileable</sic> to ^<hi rend='superscript'>these</hi> his immutable<lb/> | |||
<add> and to whom; our author's | |||
account is not so clear</add><lb/> | |||
laws of nature? What consequence will<lb/> | |||
<add>as one could wish. - But after well weighing what</add><lb/> | |||
he draw from hence? <del><gap/></del><lb/><del>The consequence hence appears to me</del><lb/> <add>he is pleased to tell us, it | |||
comes out at last that it</add><lb/> | |||
<del>undeniable either</del> that there is no such<lb/> | |||
<add>was not promulgated anywhere, or to any body.</add><lb/> | |||
universal, uniform, and permanent<lb/> | |||
<add>[Speaking of revelation</add><lb/> | |||
<add> For he says <stitch pattern> p.42<stitch pattern> "that the other (i.e. the Law of Nature)</add><lb/> | |||
law of nature, as he supposes? of that, if<lb/> | |||
<add>"is only what by the assistance of human reason</add><lb/> | |||
there is, he has not given us a clear account<lb/> | |||
<add>"we <hi rend='underline'>imagine</hi> to be that Law." <hi rend='superscript'>/that is the Law of God/</hi>So when this law</add><lb/> | |||
of it?<lb/> | |||
<add> which was thus early <hi rend='underline'>dictated</hi>, was never formally</add><lb/> | |||
The fact is, that the same confusion of ideas.<lb/> | |||
<add><hi rend='underline'>declared</hi>: though always <hi rend='underline'>known</hi>, & always <hi rend='underline'>binding</hi></add><lb/> | |||
the same abuse of terms appear in this,<lb/> | |||
<add>it was <del>always</del> <hi rend='superscript'>never</hi> more than <sic>guessed</sic> at. This great</add><lb/> | |||
<add>Law</add><lb/> | |||
<add>18</add><lb/> | |||
<pb/> | <pb/> | ||
---page break---
When this Law was published we know;- "it is coeval with
"we should live honestly, hurt nobody and
Mankind." By whom we know likewise;- it was by
"render to everyone his due". I believe our are these laws
God himself:" ~ But where to whom,&& in what
Author himself would be the first to tell us,
terms, we must apply to our Author to learn.-
are allThat many of the practices above cited moreby
As to the first questions;- where this law was published
no means reconcileable to ^these his immutable
and to whom; our author's
account is not so clear
laws of nature? What consequence will
as one could wish. - But after well weighing what
he draw from hence?
The consequence hence appears to me
he is pleased to tell us, it
comes out at last that it
undeniable either that there is no such
was not promulgated anywhere, or to any body.
universal, uniform, and permanent
[Speaking of revelation
For he says <stitch pattern> p.42<stitch pattern> "that the other (i.e. the Law of Nature)
law of nature, as he supposes? of that, if
"is only what by the assistance of human reason
there is, he has not given us a clear account
"we imagine to be that Law." /that is the Law of God/So when this law
of it?
which was thus early dictated, was never formally
The fact is, that the same confusion of ideas.
declared: though always known, & always binding
the same abuse of terms appear in this,
it was always never more than guessed at. This great
Law
18
---page break---
|
Identifier: | JB/096/005/004"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 96. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
096 |
comment on the commentaries |
||
|
005 |
|||
|
004 |
section ii / of the authors account of the laws of nature |
||
|
collectanea |
4 |
||
|
recto |
c15 / c16 / c17 / c18 |
||
|
168 |
[[watermarks::gr [quartered royal arms motif]]] |
||
|
[[notes_public::"to be copied" [note not in bentham's hand]]] |
31009 |
||
