le SELF-LOVE AND VIRTUE RECONCILED. and loses, and Paul, and even Christ himself on earth, had respect to the heavenly country, the recompence of reward, the prize of thehigh calling, the crown of righteousness, and the joy that was set before them : See the epistles to the Corinthians, to the Philippians, Timothy, and the Hebrews. The language of scripture runs always in this strain ; and it seems to be the sense of the bulk of mankind, as well as of Epicurus the philosopher; if we have hope in this life only, and there be no rewards after death, let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die; that is, we have not sufficient obligations to the practiceof virtue. II. Though there were no positive and additional blessed- ness to be expected as the reward of virtue, to engage the prin- ciple of self-love or self-felicitation on its side ; yet this is eter- nally certain, that God, who is the just judge of thewhole earth, will not deal with the righteous and the wicked entirely alike : If the righteous be not positively rewarded for their virtue, it isat least certain, the wicked shall be punished for their vices ; else virtue and vice would be treated alike, and both would have the same success and event. Now whatsoever advantage virtue has above vice in the remunerative sentence of God, that very advan- tage, whether it be of impunity and ease, or of positive reward, is sufficient to engage the principle of self-love or self felicitation on the side of virtue. Thus, whether virtue is positively re- warded or no, yet the virtuous shall be dealt with in a much kinder way than the vicious by God, the governor and judge of theworld ; and thus the obligation arising from thewill of God, as a- commander of virtue, will always be joined with such a su- perior motive from the recompence of God as a governor, that the strongest and supreme obligation of man will still lie on the side of virtue ; and this arises only from the supposition of the existence of a God, who, as hecommands virtue, will in some way or other recompense the practiceof it. I conclude this point of debate therefore thus :Without the supposition of the beingof aGod, I think there is no possible security to innocence, and there will be no sufficient obligation to social virtue and justice among men : But self-love, self-preser- vation, and self-felicitation will be the supreme law of nature and reason to regulate the actions of every rational and sensible be- ing. And if this supreme law meet with any opposition from the abstracted and speculative notions of the fitness and unfitness of things, and the eternal differences of virtue and vice; yet it will surmount and overturn them all; and each man's own reason will support this supreme dictate of nature, this supreme fitness of things, viz. self-preservation or self-felicitation ; though it bring with it an universal confusion, mischief and violence in social life. Therefore akingdom, or a republic of atheists, can never subsist upon any solid principles of nature or reason.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=