THE EXISTENCE OF A GOD. In stating this evidence, I shall endeavour, neither to weaken it by unnecessary enlargement, nor obscure it by words of affected erudition. My great object is to make what follows both concise and plain, both intelligible and interesting to every one who will give it serious attention.

SOMETHING now exists: we ourselves exist: the whole world exists: something then must always have existed. If there ever had been a time when there was nothing, it is evident that nothing could ever have been. It is a contradiction in terms, to suppose that nothing could ever produce any thing. The existence, then, of present objects, nay, the existence of ourselves, is a proof of an eternal existBut what is it which hath eternally existed? It must be a Being who is the original cause of all things, and who is himself without any cause; for had he any cause, he could not be eternal: the cause which produced him must have existed before him. The idea then of an eternal uncaused Being, forces itself upon the reflecting mind: his existence is neces

ence.

If its

let it

sary; *—that is, it is absolutely impossible for such a Being not to exist. Hence it follows, contrary to the assertion of some atheists, that the visible world cannot be this being. Can any one assert that it is impossible for the world not to exist. non-existence be literally impossible, be shewn where the impossibility lies. trifling and not reasoning: it is taking the matter for granted, and not proving it, to say that the world must exist, and must have eternally existed, merely because it does exist; and yet, I apprehend, this is all that can be said by those who venture to assert that its non-existence is impossible.

It is

BUT suppose, for argument's sake, that it were impossible for the world not to ex

* To the phrase necessary existence, I do not here affix the same meaning that Dr. Clarke does in his Demonstration of the Being and Attributes of God. By necessary existence, he means, that whose non-existence is a contradiction in itself. My reason for not adopting this sense of the phrase, may be seen in the Appendix to this discourse. By the necessity of God's existence, I mean only a demonstrable existence, or in other words, that necessity which is expressed when we say,there must be a cause of every effect;' and which is therefore nothing more than an unavoidable inference from the exist ence of effects.

ist, yet still we could not say that it was literally impossible for it to exist in a different manner. It certainly might have been, in some respects, different from what it is: different, for instance, in magnitude, in figure, in the number, size, and species of the creatures who inhabit it; and in various other circumstances. This I say is at least possible. But though I say that the manner of the world's existence, might, in the nature of things, have been in some respects different, yet I do not say that it could have been better, or even so well upon the whole. I only say that it is surely possi ble for the world to have existed in a somewhat different manner, without considering, at present, whether such difference would have been for the better or for the worse. Only grant what I imagine must be granted, that it is physically possible for it to have been different in any one part,-in any one animal,-in any one vegetable,or in any one atom which it contains, and you grant the possibility of all that it is necessary for me to suppose. But if it is only physically pos sible for the world to have been, in any respect, even different from what it is, there must have been some cause to have deter

-

2

mined it to be actually what it is. For where two or more things are equally possible, and when only one of these things comes into existence, there must have been a cause who has exercised choice and given a preference. If we do not admit this, then we must admit an effect without a cause: we must admit what we can hardly conceive to be admitted by any rational being. Nothing, I think, can be more evident than this. We are obliged, therefore, by the constitution of our nature, to infer the existence of a Being separate from the world: and who is the original cause of the world: who is himself uncaused, eternal, necessary, self-existent :-a Being whom we are taught to denominate God:

-a Being from whom we have derived our own existence, and upon whom we depend continually, both for existence, and for every thing which we enjoy.

THIS Conclusion, that there is an original Cause of all things, and who himself has no cause, expresses a truth, which I acknowledge is far above our comprehension; yet it is such, as by the plainest and most cogent train of reasoning, we have been

compelled to draw. Reason is forced to admit the fact, that God exists;-though of the manner of the fact, or, in other words, how God exists,-reason must confess herself totally ignorant. And surely we need not be surprised at our ignorance on this subject, when we consider the finiteness of our understandings. We cannot comprehend the manner even of our own existence; how then can we expect to comprehend the manner of God's existence. -Canst thou by searching find out God? • Canst thou find out the Almighty unto perfection ?'*

To elude the force of this reasoning, some atheists have been so absurd and silly as to take refuge in a few unmeaning words. They have ascribed all that we behold to Nature,-Fate,-Chance-But what are Nature,-Fate,-Chance ?Are they real existences? Are they efficient causes? Can they produce any thing?He who uses these words, and annexes any proper ideas to them, can understand, in

Job, xi, 7.