But it does not prove that it cannot destroy its
existence. Therefore, for the validity of this argument, it must
either be proved that the "Creator" has not the power to destroy it,
or that he has not the will; but as neither of these can be
established, our immortality is left dependent on the pleasure of the
Creator. But it is said that it is evident that the Creator designed
the soul for immortality, or he would never have created it so
essentially different from the body, for had they both been designed
for the same end they would both have been created alike, as there
would have been no object in forming them otherwise. This only proves
that the soul and body had not the same destinations. Now of what
these destinations are we know nothing, and after much useless
reasoning we return where we began, our argument depending upon the
good pleasure of the Creator.
And here it is said that a being of such infinite wisdom and
benevolence as that of which the Creator is possessed would not have
formed man with such vast capacities and boundless desires, and would
have given him no opportunity for exercising them.
In order to establish the validity of this argument it is necessary to
prove by the light of Nature that the Creator is benevolent, which,
being impracticable, is of itself sufficient to render the argument
invalid.
But the argument proceeds upon the supposition that to destroy the
soul would be unwise.
Pages:
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38