A44699:176
The vanity of this mortal life, or, Of man, considered only in his present…
The vanity of this mortal life, or, Of man, considered only in his present mortal state by J. Howe ...
London: printed by A. Maxwell for Sa. Gellibrand, 1673
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Their remoteness from sense hath little of excuse in it, and unworthy a reasonable Creature. Methinks they should be ashamed to allege it, who consider themselves furnished with an intellectual power that doth, in many other instances, control the judgment of sense, and impeach it of falsehood. Would we not blush to ⟨p. 123⟩profess it for a Principle, That there is nothing real that exceeds the sphere of our sense?
Their remoteness from sense hath little of excuse in it, and unworthy a reasonable Creature. Methinks they should be ashamed to alledg it, who consider themselves furnished with an intellectual power that doth, in many other instances, controle the judgment of sense, and impeach it of falshood. Would we not blush to ⟨p. 123⟩profess it for a Principle, That there is nothing real that exceeds the sphere of our sense?
We would reckon it a part of modesty, not to ascribe too much to our own Understandings, or presume too far upon our intellectual Ability, against the Judgment of sage and knowing persons. How is it then, that we think it not immodest to oppose the apprehensions of our dull and incapacious sense, to the common faith and reason of all good and wise men, that are or have been in the world, as well as our own? If we have not seen what the state of things is in the other world, are we not told? And have we not enough to assure us, that 'tis He hath told us, whose nature cannot suffer him to impose upon us, or represent things otherwise than they are? Who else can be the Author of so common a persuasion? I• any man had been the first Inventor of the opinion, That there is another state of things to succeed ⟨p. 124⟩to this; would he not have assumed it to himself, that he was so? Would he not have owned it, and gloried in it? Or would not some or other of his proselyted disciples have preserved his name and memory, and transmitted them to posterity? Could so vast a sect be without an Head or Master, known and celebrated among men?