SECTION V.

_Warburtons Paradox on the Immortality of the Soul._

Warburton, the editor and commentator of Shakespeare, and Bishop of

Gloucester, using English liberty, and abusing the custom of

vituperating against adversaries, has composed four volumes to prove

that the immortality of the soul was never announced in the Pentateuch;

and to conclude from this very proof, that the mission of Moses, which

he calls "legation," was divine. The following is an abstract of his

book, which he himself gives at the commencement of the first volume:

"1. That to inculcate the doctrine of a future state of rewards and

punishments is necessary to the well-being of civil society.

"2. That all mankind [wherein he is mistaken], especially the most wise

and learned nations of antiquity, have concurred in believing and

teaching, that this doctrine was of such use to civil society.

"3. That the doctrine of a future state of rewards and punishments is

not to be found in, nor did it make part of, the Mosaic dispensation.

"That therefore the law of Moses is of divine origin;

"Which one or both of the two following syllogisms will evince:

"I. Whatever religion and society have no future state for their support

must be supported by an extraordinary Providence.

"The Jewish religion and society had no future state for their support;

"Therefore the Jewish religion and society were supported by an

extraordinary Providence.

"And again,

"II. The ancient lawgivers universally believed that such a religion

could be supported only by an extraordinary Providence.

"Moses, an ancient lawgiver, versed in all the wisdom of Egypt,

purposely instituted such a religion; Therefore Moses believed his

religion was supported by an extraordinary Providence."

What is most extraordinary, is this assertion of Warburton, which he has

put in large characters at the head of his work. He has often been

reproached with his extreme temerity and dishonesty in daring to say

that all ancient lawgivers believed that a religion which is not founded

on rewards and punishments after death cannot be upheld but by an

extraordinary Providence: not one of them ever said so. He does not even

undertake to adduce a single instance of this in his enormous book,

stuffed with an immense number of quotations, all foreign to the

subject. He has buried himself under a heap of Greek and Latin authors,

ancient and modern, that no one may reach him through this horrible

accumulation of coverings. When at length the critic has rummaged to the

bottom, the author is raised to life from among all those dead, to load

his adversaries with abuse.

It is true, that near the close of the fourth volume, after ranging

through a hundred labyrinths, and fighting all he met with on the way,

he does at last come back to his great question from which he has so

long wandered. He takes up the Book of Job, which the learned consider

as the work of an Arab; and he seeks to prove, that Job did not believe

in the immortality of the soul. He then explains, in his own way, all

the texts of Scripture that have been brought to combat his opinion.

All that should be said of him is, that if he was in the right, it was

not for a bishop to be so in the right. He should have felt that two

dangerous consequences might be drawn: but all goes by chance in this

world. This man, who became an informer and a persecutor, was not made a

bishop through the patronage of a minister of state, until immediately

after he wrote his book.

At Salamanca, at Coimbra, or at Rome, he would have been obliged to

retract and to ask pardon. In England he became a peer of the realm,

with an income of a hundred thousand livres. Here was something to

soften his manners.

A Philosophical Dictionary, Volume 09 · 第 5 / 11 章