This is a list of all the questions and their associated study carrel identifiers. One can learn a lot of the "aboutness" of a text simply by reading the questions.
| identifier | question |
|---|---|
| 19003 | But now, what do we mean by this affirmation of absolute reality independent of the conditions of the process of knowing? 19003 Given a rare and widely diffused mass of nebulous matter,... what are the successive changes that will take place? |
| 19003 | How could matter of itself produce order, even if it were self- existent and eternal? 19003 That Omnipotency can not make a substance to be solid and not solid at the same time, I think with due reverence[ diffidence? |
| 19003 | ''The wicked flees when no one pursueth;''then why does he flee? |
| 19003 | Am I told that I am not competent to judge the purposes of the Almighty? |
| 19003 | Am I told that this is arrogance? |
| 19003 | And as to the argument,"Why does the wicked flee when none pursueth? |
| 19003 | Are we leading a sermon on the datum"God is love"? |
| 19003 | But it may still be retorted,''Is not that which is_ most_ conceivable_ most likely_ to be true? |
| 19003 | But let us in fairness ask, What was the essential substance of that theory? |
| 19003 | But what is the''Iliad''to the hymn of creation and the drama of providence?" |
| 19003 | But what, let us ask, is the proximate cause of this difference? |
| 19003 | But why do I speak of forgetting? |
| 19003 | But why is there such a law? |
| 19003 | But you will say, Is it not impossible to admit of the making anything out of nothing, since we can not possibly conceive it? |
| 19003 | But, as a logician, I must be permitted to observe, that if I ask, Why am I not better than I am? |
| 19003 | But, granting this, and also that conscious matter is the sole alternative, and what follows? |
| 19003 | For example, my right hand writes, whilst my left hand is still: what causes rest in one and motion in the other? |
| 19003 | For to ask, Why is there Existence? |
| 19003 | How are we to classify that which contains all possible classes? |
| 19003 | How then did he meet it? |
| 19003 | How then does it fare with the last of the arguments-- the argument from an ultimate teleology? |
| 19003 | How then, it will be asked, did the vast nexus of natural laws which is now observable ever begin or continue to be? |
| 19003 | If it be asked, What other gauge of probability can we have in this matter other than such a direct appeal to consciousness? |
| 19003 | If there is no God, where can be the harm in our examining the spurious evidence of his existence? |
| 19003 | In what sense, then, is the word"Absolute"used? |
| 19003 | Interpreting the mazy nexus of phenomena only by the facts which science has revealed, and what conclusion are we driven to accept? |
| 19003 | Is it said that there are compensating enjoyments? |
| 19003 | Let us then first ask, What is"Nothing"? |
| 19003 | May it not appeal to hearts which long have ceased to worship? |
| 19003 | Must we not feel that had there not been intelligent agency at work somewhere, other and less terrifically intricate results would have ensued? |
| 19003 | Nay, may it not do more than this? |
| 19003 | No; but a work on the questions, Is there a God? |
| 19003 | Now in what does the evolution of intelligence consist? |
| 19003 | Now what are these features? |
| 19003 | Now what may we affirm of noumena without departing from a scientific or objective mode of philosophising? |
| 19003 | Or, otherwise phrased, is Nothing possible or impossible? |
| 19003 | Or, to state the case in another way, if it is asked, Why is there not Nothing? |
| 19003 | Or, what is the same thing, in refusing to predicate multiplicity of it, do we not virtually predicate of it unity? |
| 19003 | Starting, then, with these data,--matter, force, and the law of gravitation,--what must happen? |
| 19003 | The question is-- Has law a reason, or is it without a reason? |
| 19003 | The question, however, is, Which class of studies ought to be considered the more authoritative in this matter? |
| 19003 | The question, therefore, I conceive to be, What amount of evidence is there in favour of this metaphysical system of teleology? |
| 19003 | To which, then, of these distinct theories is Cosmic Theism most nearly allied? |
| 19003 | What is our warrant for ranking this assertion? |
| 19003 | What is the consequence? |
| 19003 | What is the state of the present argument as between a materialist and a theist? |
| 19003 | What origin are we to give them? |
| 19003 | What plainer manifestation of design can there be than this difference?" |
| 19003 | What shall we say of the despotism of preformed beliefs? |
| 19003 | What then shall we say is the final outcome of this discussion concerning the rational standing of the teleological argument? |
| 19003 | Where are we to look for an explanation of Existence?" |
| 19003 | Where is the proof that nothing can have caused a mind except another mind? |
| 19003 | Who but the"image"of his own thought? |
| 19003 | Who is it that he sees in solitude, in darkness, in the hidden chambers of his heart? |
| 19003 | Why does like produce like?... |
| 19003 | Why is this? |
| 19003 | [ 30]''But what is''the satisfactory positive evidence''that is offered me? |
| 19003 | [_ All rights reserved_]*****_ CANST THOU BY SEARCHING FIND OUT GOD?_***** PREFACE. |
| 19003 | and, if so, Is he a God of love? |
| 19003 | is, upon the supposition which has been conceded, equivalent to asking, Why is the possible possible? |
| 19003 | whence his terror? |
| 19003 | whence his terror?" |
| 32006 | ''Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? |
| 32006 | ''Do I not fill heaven and earth? |
| 32006 | ''He asked His disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I, the Son of Man, am? |
| 32006 | ''Is it not just possible that there is a mode of being as much transcending Intelligence and Will as these transcend mechanical motion? |
| 32006 | ''Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away? |
| 32006 | ''What do I see in all{ 78} Nature?'' |
| 32006 | ''What if some did not believe? |
| 32006 | ''What if some do not believe? |
| 32006 | ''What think ye of Christ? |
| 32006 | ''When I consider Thy heavens, the work of Thy fingers, the moon and the stars which Thou hast ordained, what is man that Thou art mindful of him? |
| 32006 | ''Whither shall I go from Thy Spirit? |
| 32006 | ''[ 12] What shall we say to these accusations? |
| 32006 | ''[ 13] Where these distinctions are lost, where this confusion exists, what logically must be the consequence? |
| 32006 | ''[ 15] But is this to admit that the hope of the world lies in renouncing Christianity? |
| 32006 | ''[ 9] What are the facts? |
| 32006 | ''_ What then have I gained in these nine foundation pillars_? |
| 32006 | --GOLDWIN SMITH:_ Guesses at the Riddle of Existence_(''Is There Another Life?''). |
| 32006 | And the Abyss shouts from her depth laid bare''Heaven, hast thou secrets? |
| 32006 | And where else should God dwell than in the human heart? |
| 32006 | Are we to believe, it is asked, that only the comparatively few to whom the knowledge of Jesus Christ has come can possibly be accepted of the Father? |
| 32006 | Are we to_ worship_ the self- ideality? |
| 32006 | Bousset, W.,_ Jesus; What is Religion? |
| 32006 | But we can not help also asking,''Whence have you drawn those lofty ideas? |
| 32006 | But what does this prove with regard to Christianity? |
| 32006 | But what is meant by Personality? |
| 32006 | But what is the All, or the Good, or the True, or the Beautiful? |
| 32006 | But what is the superstructure which Dr. Stanton Coit proceeds to build upon this foundation? |
| 32006 | But what is to prevent the withdrawal of the traditional sanction from producing its natural effect upon the morality of the mass of mankind? |
| 32006 | Can there be any doubt, we are triumphantly asked, that of these two, the religious is inferior to the irreligious? |
| 32006 | Could anything be more pathetic or, at the same time, more self- refuting? |
| 32006 | Does it in the least degree indicate that the masses of the European nations have weighed Christianity in the balance and found it wanting? |
| 32006 | Drawbridge, C. L.,_ Is Religion Undermined_? |
| 32006 | For who hath{ 90} known the mind of the Lord? |
| 32006 | Gladden, Washington,_ How Much is Left of the Old Doctrines_? |
| 32006 | HUNT, B.D.,_ Good without God: Is it Possible_? |
| 32006 | Harnack, Adolf,_ What is Christianity? |
| 32006 | Have we not reason to confess that, if the commandment be not new, universal obedience to it would be new indeed? |
| 32006 | How can I look up to myself as the higher that reproaches me? |
| 32006 | How can any one meaning be affixed to the word so that one person can be said to use it properly and another to abuse it? |
| 32006 | How can anything be greater than the Infinite, more enduring than the Eternal, better than the All- Pure and All- Perfect? |
| 32006 | How can he in any way combine these people into a single object of thought? |
| 32006 | How far are these semblances, these battles in the clouds, to carry their mimicry of reality? |
| 32006 | IV In the face of such tremendous indictments, what is the duty incumbent on us who profess and call ourselves Christians? |
| 32006 | If God be such, and our relations to God be such, as Theists describe, would not that Son of Man be the confirmation of their thoughts? |
| 32006 | Is God not Infinite? |
| 32006 | Is it not the fact that the whole realm of Nature is explored by him, is compelled to minister to his wants or to unfold its treasures of knowledge? |
| 32006 | Leaving the name of our Lord out of the discussion, why should a prayer to Serenity have more moral influence than a prayer to the Sea? |
| 32006 | Monod, Wilfrid,_ Aux Croyants et aux Athà © es; Peut- on rester Chrà © tien_? |
| 32006 | Now it is Lord Tennyson: The sun, the moon, the stars, the seas, the hills and the plains, Are not these, O Soul, the vision of Him Who reigns? |
| 32006 | One in a certain place testified, saying,''What is man, that Thou art mindful of him, or the son of man that Thou visitest him? |
| 32006 | Sen, Keshub Chunder, India asks,_ Who is Christ_? |
| 32006 | So we persist in asking, not"Is it true? |
| 32006 | The comment is eminently just, but does it not apply with equal force to Miss Cobbe herself? |
| 32006 | Then Simon Peter answered Him, Lord, to whom shall we go? |
| 32006 | They believe in God: why should it, on their own showing, be so hard to believe in Christ? |
| 32006 | They have a pantheistic tinge: what is there to dread in Pantheism? |
| 32006 | Warschauer, J.,_ The New Evangel; Jesus: Seven Questions; Anti- Nunquam; Jesus or Christ?_ Watkinson, W. L.,_ Influence of Scepticism on Character_. |
| 32006 | Was Earth too small to be of God created? |
| 32006 | What can any one definitely assert or deny about it? |
| 32006 | What has human law to do with our hearts? |
| 32006 | What is the explanation of the horrors which have been perpetrated in the Name of God? |
| 32006 | What legislation can deal with''envy, hatred, malice, and all uncharitableness,''unless they manifest themselves in outward acts? |
| 32006 | When the sceptical physician, in Tennyson''s poem, murmured:''The good Lord Jesus has had his day,''{ 213} the believing nurse made the comment:''Had? |
| 32006 | Whether of them twain did the will of his father? |
| 32006 | Why is Christianity after all these centuries only beginning to be manifested? |
| 32006 | Why should a prayer to the Stars be less efficacious than a prayer to Milton, whose soul was like a star and dwelt apart? |
| 32006 | Why then too small to be redeemed? |
| 32006 | Would He Himself not be the radiant illustration, the eagerly longed for proof of the truth for which they contend? |
| 32006 | Would not His testimony be of infinite value on their side? |
| 32006 | Yet where rather should the weak rest than on the strong, the creature of the day than on the Eternal, the imperfect than on the Centre of Perfection? |
| 32006 | [ 15] Can it be doubted that the claim of Humanity to worship is less credible if we exclude the Perfect Man, Christ Jesus, from our view? |
| 32006 | _ Do we Believe_? |
| 32006 | _ Is Christianity True_? |
| 32006 | and so through all the drama of moral conflict and enthusiasm between myself in a mask and myself in_ propria persona_? |
| 32006 | and the son of man that Thou visitest him? |
| 32006 | and they, too, seem to be infinite in their cravings: who but He can satisfy them? |
| 32006 | ask forgiveness from myself for sins which myself has committed? |
| 32006 | but,"What say the learned men, the influential men, the eloquent men?" |
| 32006 | can only, with heartfelt conviction, give the answer,''Lord, to whom shall we go? |
| 32006 | has it come? |
| 32006 | issue commands to myself which I dare not disobey? |
| 32006 | or whither shall I flee from Thy presence?'' |
| 32006 | or who hath been His counsellor? |
| 32006 | or who hath first given to Him, and it shall be recompensed unto Him again? |
| 32006 | or,"Has the Lord said it?" |
| 32006 | shall their unbelief make the faith of God of none effect? |
| 32006 | shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?'' |
| 32006 | surrender to myself with a martyr''s sacrifice? |
| 32006 | that in confining ourselves to the seen and the temporal, we shall best elevate mankind? |
| 32006 | to trust in sorrow a creature of thought which is but a phenomenon of sorrow? |
| 32006 | to_ pray_ to an empty image in the air? |
| 32006 | true to our souls?" |
| 32006 | { 230} APPENDIX X''Without prejudice, what would be the effect upon modern civilisation if the Divine Ideal should vanish from modern thought? |
| 32006 | { 262} Picard, L''Abbà ©,_ Christianity or Agnosticism? |
| 32006 | { 64} III THE RELIGION OF THE UNIVERSE''Whither shall I go from Thy spirit? |
| 37864 | Again, how can the Relative be conceived as coming into being? 37864 Again, how can the Relative be conceived as coming into being?" |
| 37864 | From a human point of view,and_ we_, at least, can take no other, what follows? |
| 37864 | Infinitewhat? |
| 37864 | Is the First Cause finite or infinite?... 37864 Resist"what? |
| 37864 | There still remains the final question-- What must we say concerning that which transcends knowledge? 37864 A question instantly arises, and it seems to be one which he is bound to entertain, viz: How comes this idea to be? 37864 Again it is asked:In what respect does a body after impact differ from itself before impact?" |
| 37864 | Again we press the question, How came these assumptions to suggest themselves? |
| 37864 | And are Mr. Spencer''s words, in which he teaches exactly the opposite doctrine, true? |
| 37864 | And how is this? |
| 37864 | And is this the_ supreme good_? |
| 37864 | And one is forced to exclaim,"How can he speak of such things when they have nothing to do with the matter in hand? |
| 37864 | And since that day, has Religion advanced? |
| 37864 | And the question may be asked, it is believed with great force, If this last were not so, how could the mind take any cognizance of the actuality? |
| 37864 | And what was the result? |
| 37864 | And yet is it not also a subjective law; and so was it not originally discovered by introspection and reflection? |
| 37864 | Are its supposed objects negations? |
| 37864 | Are they hypostatized as positive? |
| 37864 | Are they the result of experience? |
| 37864 | Are they the result of individual experience? |
| 37864 | Are we to rest wholly in the consciousness of phenomena? |
| 37864 | As before, we ask, infinite-- what? |
| 37864 | But do we see that the axiom is under any condition of Time? |
| 37864 | But how can man be"conscious of the Absolute?" |
| 37864 | But how? |
| 37864 | But is the result true? |
| 37864 | But this"general truth"has_ no_ bearings upon"ultimate religious ideas"; how then can you consider them? |
| 37864 | But where shall such a base be sought for? |
| 37864 | But, if this is true, how came these words in the language at all? |
| 37864 | Can any one, except a Limitist, be induced to believe that it was originally_ constructed_; that a will put it together, and might take it apart? |
| 37864 | Can it be found within the Universe? |
| 37864 | Can man be a free moral agent, and be free from the duties inherent therein? |
| 37864 | Can the Limitists find in language, or can they construct, a positive term which will represent the negation of a sixth sense? |
| 37864 | Can there be a thing so great as to be without limits? |
| 37864 | Can we find nothing beyond a want, which shall from its own behest demand that this, and not its opposite, shall be? |
| 37864 | Can we have any"sensible experience"of God? |
| 37864 | Can you see--"have sensible experience of"--a soul? |
| 37864 | Could another Universe arise, upon which would be imposed no conditions of Space and Time? |
| 37864 | Delightful philosophy, is it not, reader? |
| 37864 | Did you ever see a person-- a soul? |
| 37864 | Do you not join with me in pitying him? |
| 37864 | Does Mr Spencer mean to comprehend the Universe in"thing"and"attribute"? |
| 37864 | Does such a picture instantly shock, yea, horrify, all our finer sensibilities? |
| 37864 | Does the soul cry out in agony, her rejection of such a conclusion? |
| 37864 | Erect some makeshift subterfuge of mental impotence? |
| 37864 | For do n''t you see? |
| 37864 | From his misuse of these terms Mr. Spencer is led to speak in an irrelevant manner upon the question,"Is the First Cause finite or infinite?" |
| 37864 | From this wearisome, Io- like wandering, the soul returns to itself, crying its wailing cry,"Is this true? |
| 37864 | Grant that the round worlds and all their furniture are_ good_--but why good? |
| 37864 | Grant that this end, the happiness of sentient beings, is_ good_--but why good? |
| 37864 | Has greatness anything to do with infinity? |
| 37864 | Have we a lower sensitive and animal nature? |
| 37864 | Here we most freely and willingly agree with Mr. Spencer that"the question is, What does consciousness directly testify?" |
| 37864 | His question,"how came it so?" |
| 37864 | How came these assumptions to suggest themselves? |
| 37864 | How can it be, when with all its might the mind revolts from it, as nature does from a vacuum? |
| 37864 | How can this be explained? |
| 37864 | How comes it to belong, then, to the rudest aboriginal equally with the most civilized and cultivated? |
| 37864 | How could he reject the cry of his spiritual nature, and accept the barren contradictions of his lower mind?" |
| 37864 | How does it arise? |
| 37864 | How far? |
| 37864 | How is this? |
| 37864 | How long? |
| 37864 | How may"a simple idea"be known? |
| 37864 | How much? |
| 37864 | How shall it be done? |
| 37864 | How shall the finite I am accord_ itself_ to the pure purpose of the infinite I AM? |
| 37864 | How shall we account for the last generalization, and show this conclusion to be false? |
| 37864 | How then can the Sense observe it? |
| 37864 | How, then, can the power, having been sent forth from God, be organized? |
| 37864 | How, then, could they learn by experience one of the profoundest speculative ideas? |
| 37864 | If asked"Absolute"what? |
| 37864 | If from something, how came that something to be? |
| 37864 | If man can know nothing because of mental imbecility, why suppose that he has a mental faculty at all? |
| 37864 | If one shall now ask,"How could he send forth the power?" |
| 37864 | If the two contradictory extremes are themselves incogitable, yet include a cogitable mean, why insist upon the necessity of accepting either extreme? |
| 37864 | If we can know only these, why speak of those?" |
| 37864 | In reply to the question,"What is the constitution of these units?" |
| 37864 | Is his utterance a"principle,"or is it a judgment? |
| 37864 | Is it that"continuous adjustment"? |
| 37864 | Is it"created by the slow action of natural causes?" |
| 37864 | Is man such a being? |
| 37864 | Is the moral law matter? |
| 37864 | Is the result of inquiry to exclude utterly from our minds everything but the relative; or must we also believe in something beyond the relative? |
| 37864 | Is this Science"the agent which has effected the purification of Religion?" |
| 37864 | Is this all?" |
| 37864 | Is this philosophy? |
| 37864 | Is this series of modifications"of consciousness infinite or finite"? |
| 37864 | Is this vacuum an entity? |
| 37864 | Now how shall one see these conditions? |
| 37864 | Now, how is it respecting the question raised by Mr. Spencer? |
| 37864 | Now, how is it with the Reason? |
| 37864 | Now, how is it with the moving body and the collision? |
| 37864 | Now, who has the right to say, either in mathematics or metaphysics, in any philosophy, that_ x_=_ab_? |
| 37864 | Observe now that a somewhat is unquestionably communicated; and the question is:--What is it? |
| 37864 | On what ground can the unanimity of the other nine tenths be accounted for? |
| 37864 | On what immutable Ararat can the soul find her ark, and a sure resting- place? |
| 37864 | Or are we to believe that these assumptions are mere happenings, without law, and for which no reason can be assigned? |
| 37864 | Or does the reader prefer to call them religious? |
| 37864 | Or, to save him, will one say that the defining terms are unknown? |
| 37864 | Remove now from our presence all material object in Space, and all during event in Time; in a word, remove the Universe, and what will be left? |
| 37864 | Such for instance are the questions, How is God self- existent, how could he be eternal, how exercise his power, and the like? |
| 37864 | Take another step and we can answer the question"What is this that thinks?" |
| 37864 | That the mind is impotent? |
| 37864 | The only question to be raised is, are they true? |
| 37864 | The question instantly arises, What is Common Sense? |
| 37864 | The question,"What are Space and Time?" |
| 37864 | The questions Where? |
| 37864 | True that the human mind is an incorrigible falsifier? |
| 37864 | Upon reading this passage, the question spontaneously arises, What does the writer mean? |
| 37864 | Was it"created"from nothing or from something? |
| 37864 | Was its law constructed? |
| 37864 | We find in language the positive terms, ear and hearing; but can such positive terms be found, which will correspond to the phrase, no sixth sense? |
| 37864 | We might, it is believed, ask with pertinence, What better, then, is man than the brute? |
| 37864 | We shall best enter upon this labor by answering the question, What is thinking? |
| 37864 | Well might President Hopkins say,"The only question is, what is it that consciousness gives? |
| 37864 | What follows then? |
| 37864 | What has been communicated? |
| 37864 | What has happened? |
| 37864 | What have God and infinity and absoluteness to do with''mammals, birds, reptiles, or fishes''? |
| 37864 | What is it, then, that we have such experience of? |
| 37864 | What is moral obligation? |
| 37864 | What mind? |
| 37864 | What must be done, then? |
| 37864 | What relation, then, do these so widely diverse natures bear to each other? |
| 37864 | What then follows? |
| 37864 | What then is the truth? |
| 37864 | What weight have human opinion with reference to its validity? |
| 37864 | What, then, can the Sense give us? |
| 37864 | What, then, is a spiritual person? |
| 37864 | What, then, is the logical conclusion? |
| 37864 | What, then, is the opposite pole of thought? |
| 37864 | What, then, is this life for? |
| 37864 | What, then, is vague-- is undefined? |
| 37864 | When, then, one of these parts shall be broken, what results? |
| 37864 | Whence comes the authority of the law? |
| 37864 | Whence does it arise, or how is it imposed? |
| 37864 | Where did this_ tertium quid_ come from, when he had already comprehended everything in the two extremes? |
| 37864 | Where is the Everlasting Rock? |
| 37864 | Where, for instance, did the notion of self come from? |
| 37864 | Which does he mean? |
| 37864 | Who, then, has purified Religion? |
| 37864 | Why do n''t the Limitists entertain and explain this? |
| 37864 | Why not enounce, as the fundamental principle of one''s theory, the assertion, All men are idiots? |
| 37864 | Why? |
| 37864 | Will Mr. Spencer deny the fact of the idea of personality? |
| 37864 | Will any one say that it might have been made to make forty- seven; or that at some future time such may be the case? |
| 37864 | Will any one say that_ perhaps_, we do n''t know but it might have been so made, as to appear to us that the conclusion was Some Z is not X? |
| 37864 | Will he assert that man has no such notion? |
| 37864 | Will its conditions cease in its ceasing? |
| 37864 | Will you allow person, or other definite term to be supplied? |
| 37864 | With what then will such a being naturally occupy himself? |
| 37864 | Would any evidence, any argument, strengthen his conviction of the validity of the axioms? |
| 37864 | You must modify( correct?) |
| 37864 | _ How came this fundamental law to be?_ and to this the Sense and Understanding return no shadow of answer. |
| 37864 | _ That the mind can not conceive of anything._ What is his conclusion? |
| 37864 | _ b._ If it were true, the question obtrudes itself,--How came it there? |
| 37864 | and who will enforce it, and how will it be enforced? |
| 37864 | e._ by living with the help of the Holy Spirit, in accordance with the law of the spiritual person--"do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live?" |
| 37864 | e._, would it not remain if he be destroyed? |
| 37864 | takes, then, this form: How came immeasurable nothing to be nothing? |
| 45850 | Canst thou by searching find out God? 45850 What can be more absurd,"asks Montesquieu,"than to imagine that a blind fatalistic force has produced intelligent beings?" |
| 45850 | What prospect,are his own words,"would there have been of such a concurrence of circumstances, if a state of chance had been the only antecedent? |
| 45850 | ''Has the word Duty no meaning? |
| 45850 | ''Is the heroic inspiration we name Virtue but some passion; some bubble of the blood, bubbling in the direction others profit by?'' |
| 45850 | ''The wicked flees, when no one pursueth;''then why does he flee? |
| 45850 | ''Worship whom?'' |
| 45850 | An objector may still ask, Could not God have attained all good ends without employing any painful means? |
| 45850 | And how could the cause communicate to it this reality unless it possessed it in itself? |
| 45850 | And if so, why may not this integrating, as I should propose to call it, have been going on for ever? |
| 45850 | And what connection in reason can there be between the sin of men or the sin of angels and the suffering endured or inflicted by primeval saurians? |
| 45850 | And what is his theory? |
| 45850 | And who can, after due deliberation, accept it? |
| 45850 | And why should producer and produced be like? |
| 45850 | Are these thoughts and feelings true? |
| 45850 | Are we, then, rationally warranted to assign to God those attributes which are called absolute or incommunicable? |
| 45850 | As soon, then, as we thoughtfully ask ourselves, What is matter? |
| 45850 | Besides, how could matter of itself produce order, even if it were self- existent and eternal? |
| 45850 | But can any one fail to see that such an argument in such a case would be ridiculous? |
| 45850 | But do not laws suppose a legislator? |
| 45850 | But if the employment of contrivance is in itself a sign of limited power, how much more so is the careful and skilful choice of contrivances? |
| 45850 | But in that case, how can any man pretend to get a knowledge of God out of it? |
| 45850 | But is conscience ever independent of the consciousness of moral law? |
| 45850 | But is there nothing more, nothing higher than this, implied in fatherhood among men? |
| 45850 | But this does not preclude the raising of the question, Is it reasonable to believe the former of the world merely its former? |
| 45850 | But what are the facts? |
| 45850 | But what could be more calculated to inspire both horror and pity? |
| 45850 | But what is nature? |
| 45850 | But what is the Iliad to the hymn of creation, and the drama of providence? |
| 45850 | But what is truth? |
| 45850 | But what of the law, or so- called law, of natural selection? |
| 45850 | But what thoughts, what feelings, can we have about the Unknowable? |
| 45850 | But where are the milliards of mishaps which are said to have occurred? |
| 45850 | But why is there such a law? |
| 45850 | But why should I assume either that there is a triangle or that there is a God? |
| 45850 | Can anything be thence inferred as to whether God is, and what He is? |
| 45850 | Can blind physical forces, if not subservient to intelligence, be conceived of as working towards so essentially ideal a goal as beauty? |
| 45850 | Can death itself, when seen in the light of it, be denied to be an evidence of benevolence? |
| 45850 | Can this be done? |
| 45850 | Can we accomplish, then, what the Greeks and Romans so signally failed to achieve? |
| 45850 | Can we build a system worthy to be called a religion on any other foundation than that which has been laid in the Gospel? |
| 45850 | Can we go any farther than this? |
| 45850 | Can we, with all our knowledge of nature and man, devise a religion which shall be at once merely rational and thoroughly effective? |
| 45850 | Can we? |
| 45850 | Canst thou find out the Almighty unto perfection? |
| 45850 | Could mere matter know the abstrusest properties of space and time and number, so as to obey them in the wondrous way it does? |
| 45850 | Deeper than hell; what canst thou know? |
| 45850 | Did the atoms take counsel together and devise a common plan and work it out? |
| 45850 | Did they make themselves? |
| 45850 | Did, then, the philosophers discover the way? |
| 45850 | Do they find any person admitting that mind would be an insufficient First Cause? |
| 45850 | Do they themselves see any way of showing its insufficiency? |
| 45850 | Does the world explain itself, or does it lead the mind above and beyond itself? |
| 45850 | External nature, however, is seen to be throughout orderly and harmonious; how can we suppose the moral world to be disorderly and chaotic? |
| 45850 | For what is it that conscience declares most clearly about moral good and evil, right and wrong? |
| 45850 | For what is meant by design? |
| 45850 | Has this been done? |
| 45850 | Have we any reason, however, to suppose that sin is willed by God in the sense either of being caused or approved by Him? |
| 45850 | How can all this be under the government of Infinite Goodness? |
| 45850 | If at any past period there was a certain degree of diffusion, why may there not have been a greater degree at an earlier period? |
| 45850 | If man had nothing to struggle with, would he be as enterprising, as ingenious, as variously skilled and educated as he is? |
| 45850 | If the hare had no fear, would it be as swift as it is? |
| 45850 | If the lion had no hunger, would it be as strong as it is? |
| 45850 | If we could, would our worship do either our minds or hearts more good than the worship of Jupiter and Juno did the Greeks of old? |
| 45850 | If we worship the creations of our minds, why not also those of our hands? |
| 45850 | In what directions are vegetable and animal life developing? |
| 45850 | In what sense has He fatherly love? |
| 45850 | In what sense is He a Father? |
| 45850 | Is belief in God a reasonable belief, or is it not? |
| 45850 | Is it conceivable that any other than a righteous God would have bestowed on us such a gift, such a faculty? |
| 45850 | Is it not because revealed religion contains more than natural religion-- what reason can not read in the physical universe or human soul? |
| 45850 | Is it scientific, or in any wise reasonable, to believe that the process will not advance to its legitimate goal? |
| 45850 | Is that not to go back to fetichism? |
| 45850 | Is that proof in this case likely to be easier or more conclusive than the proof of the Divine existence? |
| 45850 | Is the First Cause finite or infinite? |
| 45850 | Is the testimony which conscience gives to the existence and character of God confirmed when we look out into the moral world? |
| 45850 | Is theism true, or is some antagonistic, some anti- theistic theory true? |
| 45850 | Is there any heathen religion or heathen philosophy in which there are not truths of natural religion? |
| 45850 | Is there any point, any fact or principle, which we are in reason bound to start from? |
| 45850 | Is there any truth which can be affirmed to belong universally to this consciousness? |
| 45850 | Is there not in this fact a vindication of God''s wisdom and holiness worth more than volumes of abstract speculation? |
| 45850 | It is high as heaven; what canst thou do? |
| 45850 | It is, perhaps, especially important in conducting the moral argument to ask ourselves distinctly, Whence ought we to begin? |
| 45850 | Might there not be others, yet unknown, that would solve the difficulty? |
| 45850 | Might we not as well worship empty space, the eternal no, or the absolute nothing? |
| 45850 | Might we not just as wisely and profitably adore a stock or stone? |
| 45850 | Must it rest in the recognition of order, for example, and reject the thought of an intelligence in which that order has its source? |
| 45850 | Must not its former be also its creator? |
| 45850 | Must not, in that case, his ideals be mere dreams-- his longings mere delusions? |
| 45850 | Must the First Cause be thought of as eternal or not-- as infinite or finite, as perfect or imperfect? |
| 45850 | No man need go to them with the question,"What shall I do to inherit eternal life?" |
| 45850 | On what grounds, then, does he withhold his assent from them? |
| 45850 | Or did he not think on the subject at all, and so reasoned very much at random? |
| 45850 | Or did he suppose, perhaps, that both ability and inability were signs of weakness, and that, consequently, for once opposites were identical? |
| 45850 | Or, is this not to represent every science as leading us into a darkness far greater than any from which it has delivered us? |
| 45850 | Perhaps the first question which arises is, Are we to take the material universe to be infinite? |
| 45850 | Pope''s''Shall gravitation cease when you go by?'' |
| 45850 | Shall we try, then, to get out of and beyond theism on that other side to which some moderns beckon us? |
| 45850 | The question is, Is this state of things intelligible on any other supposition than that of a designing mind? |
| 45850 | The question is-- Has law a reason, or is it without a reason? |
| 45850 | The question, Did the earth and the solar system originate with intelligence? |
| 45850 | The question, Is the Platonic proof of the Divine existence substantially true? |
| 45850 | The sole question for us is, Of what being? |
| 45850 | There are two good popular accounts of the controversy:''What is Darwinism?'' |
| 45850 | There at once rises the question, Is it really necessary to believe both matter and mind to be eternal? |
| 45850 | There may be no such thing as a triangle, why should there be such a Being as God?" |
| 45850 | This question, then, is alone left,--Could anything else than intelligence thus weigh, measure, and number? |
| 45850 | Was he correct in this judgment? |
| 45850 | We may ask, What is the goal towards which creation moves? |
| 45850 | Well, is this law not a means to an end worthy of Divine Wisdom? |
| 45850 | Were there no truths of natural religion in the works of Plato, Cicero, and Seneca? |
| 45850 | What becomes of our doctrine of progress? |
| 45850 | What can creation and providence teach us about God? |
| 45850 | What could the most perfect art have done to protect the walls of the stomach, but invent a precaution similar to that which exists in reality? |
| 45850 | What do we mean when we hold that final causes in this sense truly are in the Divine Mind, and with reference equally to intrinsic and extrinsic ends? |
| 45850 | What great good has ever been lost? |
| 45850 | What has happened? |
| 45850 | What is implied in this admission? |
| 45850 | What is the chief end of man? |
| 45850 | What is the ideal of truth which science has before it, and which it hopes to realise? |
| 45850 | What more would we have? |
| 45850 | What now must we say of this region? |
| 45850 | What origin are we to give them? |
| 45850 | What proof do they give us? |
| 45850 | What right can any one have to represent it as a source of knowledge of God? |
| 45850 | What then would become of the marks of design and unity in nature, and of the theist''s argument for the being of a God?... |
| 45850 | What will be the fate of the earth? |
| 45850 | What worth can it have? |
| 45850 | What, then, even at the present day, do the ablest of those who reject Christianity propose to offer us instead? |
| 45850 | What, then, is its most comprehensive and best established theorem? |
| 45850 | What, then, is its most general and certain result? |
| 45850 | What, then, is the result of such an examination? |
| 45850 | When we assume the principle of causality in the argument for the existence of God, what precisely is it that we assume? |
| 45850 | Whence do we get this knowledge? |
| 45850 | Whence has it this power, this foresight, this intelligence, which are so conspicuous in the course of our destinies? |
| 45850 | Whence his terror? |
| 45850 | Where are the monstrous worlds which preceded those which constitute the cosmos? |
| 45850 | Wherefore has He permitted sin to endure so long and spread so widely? |
| 45850 | Wherein is it that both fail? |
| 45850 | Whither is history tending? |
| 45850 | Who can rationally assure us that this was to be desired? |
| 45850 | Who is it that he sees in solitude, in darkness, in the hidden chambers of his heart? |
| 45850 | Who made them thus? |
| 45850 | Who will believe that matter acts with wisdom-- with intelligence? |
| 45850 | Who would have recourse to means if to attain his end his mere word was sufficient? |
| 45850 | Whose is this perfect, authoritative, supreme will, to which all consciences, even the most erring, point back? |
| 45850 | Whose, if not God''s? |
| 45850 | Why did He not prevent them sinning? |
| 45850 | Why does like produce like? |
| 45850 | Why is such idolatry any better than that of the old wood and stone? |
| 45850 | Why is this? |
| 45850 | Why should God not act by general laws there as well as elsewhere? |
| 45850 | Why should an accident not occur there as well as elsewhere? |
| 45850 | Why should not all nature have been sterile? |
| 45850 | Why should offspring not always be as unlike their parents as tadpoles are unlike frogs? |
| 45850 | Why should there have been any provision for the propagation of life in a universe ruled by a mere blind force? |
| 45850 | Why should they ever become like to them? |
| 45850 | Why should this be? |
| 45850 | Why? |
| 45850 | Why? |
| 45850 | Would He have so constructed the creatures of our species as to have planted in every breast a reclaiming witness against Himself? |
| 45850 | Would an intelligent but unrighteous God have made us to hate and despise what is characteristic of his own nature? |
| 45850 | Would he have made us better than himself? |
| 45850 | Would the world thereby, however, be made better as a whole, and throughout all its future history? |
| 45850 | Would there have been in that case any moral conflicts in the human heart akin to those which a Sophocles or a Shakespeare has delineated? |
| 45850 | Would they be the magnificent and beautiful creatures so many of them are? |
| 45850 | and if He could do this, why did He not? |
| 45850 | and if not, does it bear out the theological conclusion here sought to be rested upon it? |
| 45850 | and that to still another of the same kind, and so on_ ad infinitum_? |
| 45850 | and where has it a real existence? |
| 45850 | and who can this legislator be, if not God? |
| 45850 | and, What is known of His nature? |
| 45850 | he would have exclaimed;''worship what? |
| 45850 | is distinct from the question, Was the intelligence in which they originated perfect? |
| 45850 | is precisely equivalent to the question, Is the Platonic philosophy substantially true? |
| 45850 | is what we call Duty no Divine messenger and guide, but a false earthly phantasm made up of desire and fear?'' |
| 45850 | of beauty, which art has before it? |
| 45850 | of goodness, which virtue has before it? |
| 45850 | or, did any blind force make them? |
| 45850 | that millions of men are ignorant whether there be one god or thousands? |
| 45850 | worship how?'' |
| 17147 | ''; v. 20:''Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? |
| 17147 | ''Now what contradiction would there be if Spinoza had died in Leyden? |
| 17147 | ''What, then, will become'', he adds,''of man''s free will? |
| 17147 | (_ c_) Why should the dog ever be displeased_ spontaneously_? |
| 17147 | 7:''For who maketh thee to differ from another? |
| 17147 | ANT.--How does he know it, since I will do the opposite of what he shall have said, and I suppose that he will say what he thinks? |
| 17147 | ANT.--What? |
| 17147 | And can one be less a slave than to act by one''s own choice in accordance with the most perfect reason? |
| 17147 | And choice in virtue of what? |
| 17147 | And could not the Christian alliance be cemented by theological agreement? |
| 17147 | And is it not most often necessary that a little evil render the good more discernible, that is to say, greater? |
| 17147 | And is not an irrefutable argument a_ demonstration_? |
| 17147 | And should we not be well pleased to exchange it for sinlessness, if that depended upon us? |
| 17147 | And to cut the matter short, how comes it that he has prescribed laws for himself? |
| 17147 | And what means shall one have thereafter of demonstrating the falsity, and even the absurdity, of any opinion? |
| 17147 | And what shall be said of his justice? |
| 17147 | Are salts, metals, plants, animals and a thousand other animate or inanimate bodies aware how that which they do is done, and need they be aware? |
| 17147 | Are they any less enslaved by sensual pleasure, by ambition, by avarice? |
| 17147 | Be it so, but does it follow that there is as much reality and force in each of the two? |
| 17147 | But I ask you, what else is the permission of him who is entitled to forbid, or rather who has the thing in his own hands, but an act of will?'' |
| 17147 | But are they? |
| 17147 | But can they any better conceive how the power of God is capable of stirring a straw?'' |
| 17147 | But could God himself( it will be said) then change nothing in the world? |
| 17147 | But does physical good lie solely in pleasure? |
| 17147 | But how is it possible for it to be said that there is no good or evil in the ideas before the operation of God''s will? |
| 17147 | But if I am free to give these six degrees of goodness to the object, am I not permitted to give it more goodness? |
| 17147 | But if so, why does Leibniz keep saying that the harmony is_ pre- established_, by special and infinitely elaborate divine decrees? |
| 17147 | But if that is so, why shall we not give to the object all the goodness conceivable? |
| 17147 | But in so applying the scheme of choice to God''s act, have we not invalidated its application to our own? |
| 17147 | But in this case, would it be proper for God to grant it to all, that is, always to act miraculously in respect of all rational creatures? |
| 17147 | But is it not better, notwithstanding, that health should be usual and sickness the exception? |
| 17147 | But of what is the environment of each made up? |
| 17147 | But should he? |
| 17147 | But someone will say to me: why speak you to us of''permitting''? |
| 17147 | But someone will say, why did not God refrain from producing things, rather than make imperfect things? |
| 17147 | But then again, how can we take it seriously? |
| 17147 | But this objection is exactly as if I were to ask why a father of a family does not give himself gold when he has need thereof? |
| 17147 | But what sort of a theology? |
| 17147 | But what then will Sextus say? |
| 17147 | But whence came Leibniz''s more strictly metaphysical objections? |
| 17147 | But whence comes this new election? |
| 17147 | But who does not see that that only proves a hypothetical impossibility? |
| 17147 | But( M. Bayle will say) God having power to avert innumerable evils by one small miracle, why did he not employ it? |
| 17147 | Can I not come to be a good king? |
| 17147 | Can he commit so many crimes? |
| 17147 | Can he have so many evil tendencies? |
| 17147 | Can one believe it? |
| 17147 | Can one conclude from this that the State has no anxiety about this irregularity, or even that it desires it? |
| 17147 | Can one form any falser notions of a universal providence? |
| 17147 | Can one, then, leave it or give it to another? |
| 17147 | Can supreme goodness produce an unhappy creature? |
| 17147 | Can they also both exist? |
| 17147 | Can we adapt our scheme of choice to the description of God''s creative decrees? |
| 17147 | Certe Deus ipse numquid quia peccare non potest, ideo liberum arbitrium habere negandus est?'' |
| 17147 | Choice between what? |
| 17147 | Could I have resisted his will? |
| 17147 | Could Sextus reply: It is you who are the cause, O Apollo; you compel me to do it, by foreseeing it? |
| 17147 | Could he not have established others of a kind not subject to any defects? |
| 17147 | Could not the Christian princes sink their differences and unite against the infidel? |
| 17147 | Do men relish health enough, or thank God enough for it, without having ever been sick? |
| 17147 | Do not the Thomists say, that there are as many species as individuals in angelic nature?'' |
| 17147 | Do we not see that all these advantages or disadvantages spring from the idea of the thing, and that the contrary would imply contradiction? |
| 17147 | Do we say then that these things are not because the common herd does not know of them? |
| 17147 | Do you consider such a faculty, sir, to be the richest present God can have made to man, and the sole instrument of our happiness? |
| 17147 | Does it also come from mere indifference? |
| 17147 | Does our authority over our ideas more often fall short than our authority over our volitions? |
| 17147 | Does the internal and active virtue communicated to the forms of bodies according to M. Leibniz know the train of actions which it is to produce? |
| 17147 | Does the will of God form the ideas which are in his understanding? |
| 17147 | For can I know and can I present infinities to you and compare them together? |
| 17147 | For if the soul is perfectly indifferent in its choice how is it possible to foresee this choice? |
| 17147 | For what foundation can God have for seeing what the people of Keilah would do? |
| 17147 | For what other legitimate reason for rejecting an opinion can one find, if an invincible opposing argument is not such an one? |
| 17147 | For what possibility is there of giving these six degrees of goodness to the object? |
| 17147 | For who hath resisted his will? |
| 17147 | For why should the law of justice, which states that reasonable promises must be kept, be more inviolable for him than any other laws? |
| 17147 | Have they less bodily suffering? |
| 17147 | Have they less tendency toward true or apparent goods, less fear of true or imaginary evils? |
| 17147 | He adds fittingly in the same passage:''Qui potest provideri, quicquam futurum esse, quod neque causam habet ullam, neque notam cur futurum sit?'' |
| 17147 | How could he be a true Protestant who treated the differences with the Catholics as non- essentials? |
| 17147 | How could he have touched pitch and taken no defilement? |
| 17147 | How do we know that? |
| 17147 | How does it do that? |
| 17147 | How many of these rudimentary''minds''will there be in my body? |
| 17147 | How many times do men permit evils which they could prevent if they turned all their efforts in that direction? |
| 17147 | How then can it be the vehicle and instrument of my conscious soul? |
| 17147 | How then explain the actual conformity of their mutual representation, without recourse to divine fore- ordaining?'' |
| 17147 | How then shall we overcome the obstinacy of a Stratonist?'' |
| 17147 | How, then, shall we understand that he wills to save all men and that he can not do so? |
| 17147 | I am then not free? |
| 17147 | If it were others, would there not be the same appearance of evil? |
| 17147 | If not, where does it come from? |
| 17147 | If the real universe is what you say it is, why do our minds represent it to us as they do?'' |
| 17147 | If there is a consciousness attached to human bodies, then why not to systems of clockwork? |
| 17147 | If they say so, how can they own that Adam sinned? |
| 17147 | Ignorance, error and malice follow one another naturally in animals made as we are: should this species, then, have been missing in the universe? |
| 17147 | Is a bee no more essentially one than a swarm is? |
| 17147 | Is it also something arbitrary, and would he have acted wisely and justly if he had resolved to condemn the innocent? |
| 17147 | Is it not God that doeth the evil and that willeth it? |
| 17147 | Is it not rather an obstacle to our felicity? |
| 17147 | Is it possible, said M. Bayle, that there is no better plan than that one which God carried out? |
| 17147 | Is it to be desired that God should not be bound to be perfect and happy? |
| 17147 | Is it without remainder transubstantiated from sheep into dog? |
| 17147 | Is it? |
| 17147 | Is not Leibniz the victim of a familiar fallacy, that of incompletely stated alternatives? |
| 17147 | Is not that recognizing that goodness is the object and the reason of his choice? |
| 17147 | Is not that true? |
| 17147 | Is not this much more incomprehensible than the navigation I spoke of in the foregoing paragraph? |
| 17147 | Is our condition, which renders us liable to fail, worth envying? |
| 17147 | Is the life of a living animal indistinguishable from the rhythm of a going watch, except in degree of complication and subtlety of contrivance? |
| 17147 | Is the wholeness of a living thing the mere resultant of the orderly operations of its parts? |
| 17147 | It is not in my power to follow virtue? |
| 17147 | It is with regard to them that M. Bayle discusses this question: whether there is more physical evil than physical good in the world? |
| 17147 | LAUR.--What would you have me do? |
| 17147 | LAUR.--You innocent? |
| 17147 | May they not be sufficiently acute to disturb the sage''s tranquillity? |
| 17147 | Must God spoil his system, must there be less beauty, perfection and reason in the universe, because there are people who misuse reason? |
| 17147 | Must a drop of oil or of fat understand geometry in order to become round on the surface of water? |
| 17147 | Next the question is asked: Will God create such and such a thing, and wherefore? |
| 17147 | On the example of the dog:(_ a_) How should it of itself change its sentiment, since everything left to itself continues in the state in which it is? |
| 17147 | On the problem, how can the simple act otherwise than uniformly? |
| 17147 | Or is it to be identified with the activity and fortunes of a single atomic constituent of my body, a single cog in the animal clockwork? |
| 17147 | Or rather, would not these others be those known as We? |
| 17147 | Out of the consideration of an infinity of ideas, how can God arrive at a choice? |
| 17147 | Prudentius in his_ Hamartigenia_ presented the same difficulty:_ Si non vult Deus esse malum, cur non vetat? |
| 17147 | SEXTUS-- Why must I renounce the hope of a crown? |
| 17147 | Shall God not give the rain, because there are low- lying places which will be thereby incommoded? |
| 17147 | Shall not supreme power, united to an infinite goodness, shower blessings upon its work, and shall it not banish all that might offend or grieve?'' |
| 17147 | Shall the sun not shine as much as it should for the world in general, because there are places which will be too much dried up in consequence? |
| 17147 | Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, why hast thou made me thus?'' |
| 17147 | Should we not find it more imperfect and more unhappy than if it had not this freedom of indifference? |
| 17147 | Someone will say: so much the worse for them; if they know not how to enjoy the advantages of nature and fortune, is that the fault of either? |
| 17147 | That we are conscious of it, I say, in such a way that we should for ever remain ignorant of the cause of our being if other knowledge did not aid us? |
| 17147 | The first question will be: Will God create something or not, and wherefore? |
| 17147 | The question is asked first of all, whence does evil come? |
| 17147 | The wise mind wills only the good: is it then a servitude when the will acts in accordance with wisdom? |
| 17147 | The young man will complain: I have brought you a royal gift, O Apollo, and you proclaim for me a lot so unhappy? |
| 17147 | Then is my soul homeless? |
| 17147 | Thus why should not one say, equally, that the Mysteries are against our feeble reason, and that they are above our feeble reason?'' |
| 17147 | To give to a hundred messengers as much money as is needed for a journey of two hundred leagues? |
| 17147 | To imprison actually ninety- eight of these messengers on the moment of their return? |
| 17147 | Very well; but does this consideration really drive us into theology? |
| 17147 | Well, what constitutes the officer an officer? |
| 17147 | What conclusions have been reached? |
| 17147 | What happens to the mutton? |
| 17147 | What is to choose? |
| 17147 | What material does the finite mind supply for an analogical picture of the infinite mind making choices or decrees? |
| 17147 | What necessity is there for one always to be aware how that which is done is done? |
| 17147 | What then constitutes its superiority or dominance, and makes it a mind_ par excellence_? |
| 17147 | What was Leibniz thinking of when the new principle flashed upon him? |
| 17147 | What was he_ not_ thinking of? |
| 17147 | What will become of the consideration of our globe and its inhabitants? |
| 17147 | What would an intelligent creature do if there were no unintelligent things? |
| 17147 | What would it think of, if there were neither movement, nor matter, nor sense? |
| 17147 | What, then, is the relation of the assimilated materials to the dog- form which assimilates them? |
| 17147 | What, then, shall we say of bodily sufferings? |
| 17147 | What, then, was to be done? |
| 17147 | What? |
| 17147 | Whence comes this distinction, someone will say, and wherefore does his goodness appear to be restricted? |
| 17147 | Where had he learned that standard of metaphysical adequacy which showed up the inadequacy of the new metaphysicians? |
| 17147 | Where is, then, his justice[ 60]( people will say), or at the least, where is his goodness? |
| 17147 | Wherefore, when I looked that it should bring forth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes?'' |
| 17147 | Who knows what the ultimate constituents really are? |
| 17147 | Who shall then say, wherefore hast thou done so?'' |
| 17147 | Why does he not act without general laws, in accordance with all his power and all his goodness? |
| 17147 | Why has God established laws that give rise to so many difficulties? |
| 17147 | Why have you condemned me, O great God, to be wicked and unhappy? |
| 17147 | Why not allow that there is two- way traffic-- by one relation the mind represents the members, by another the members represent the mind? |
| 17147 | Why not reverse the relation, and make the members represent the mind as the mind represents the members? |
| 17147 | Why not? |
| 17147 | Why shall we not even go as far as twenty- four carats of goodness? |
| 17147 | Why should he not, then, just as well be the evil principle of the Manichaeans as the single good principle of the orthodox? |
| 17147 | Why should not a form of conscious life so interact with what would otherwise be dead matter as to''indwell''it? |
| 17147 | Why should not one go as far as he? |
| 17147 | Why should not we take this seriously? |
| 17147 | Why then does he punish me? |
| 17147 | Why then should one boast of a good action, or why should one be censured for an evil one, if the thanks or blame redounds to fortune or hazard? |
| 17147 | Why, then, do men not give themselves this indifference( he says), if they are masters in their own house? |
| 17147 | Will he not break forth into complaints against the Gods? |
| 17147 | Will he not say? |
| 17147 | Will it never disturb the correspondence of those changes with the changes of the soul? |
| 17147 | Will it not be something incomparably less than a physical point, since our earth is as a point in comparison with the distance of some fixed stars? |
| 17147 | Will there not have been necessity and fatality for Adam to sin? |
| 17147 | Will you be doubtful whether the will of the latter is less complete than the will of the former? |
| 17147 | With what regrets would one not be torn, in that case, if the determination made had an ill result? |
| 17147 | Would Nature then have been less perfect, less wise, less powerful?'' |
| 17147 | Would it be possible that vice alone had offered him this means? |
| 17147 | Yet could he have been unaware that there is no possibility of an insuperable objection against truth? |
| 17147 | _ Dextrum Scylla latus, laevum implacata Charybdis__ Obsidet._ Everything comes back in the end to this: Did Adam sin freely? |
| 17147 | _ Si Deus est, unde malum? |
| 17147 | and what hast thou that thou didst not receive?'' |
| 17147 | and what sufficient reason will one be able to find for the knowledge of a[440] thing, if there is no reason for its existence? |
| 17147 | less apprehensive? |
| 17147 | less envious? |
| 17147 | that in a plane six equal circles may touch a seventh? |
| 17147 | that of all equal bodies, the sphere has the least surface? |
| 17147 | that some are more fitted than others for forming battalions, composing polygons and other regular figures? |
| 17147 | that the number six has the advantage of being the least of all the numbers that are called perfect? |
| 17147 | that[ 429] certain lines are incommensurable, and consequently ill- adapted for harmony? |
| 17147 | the God will say, do you mean then that I am a liar? |
| 17147 | v. 4:''What could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done in it? |
| 17147 | why ants are not peacocks? |
| 17147 | why has it not four? |
| 17147 | why should not two have sufficed for it? |