352 
whatever. I should say that we have very much more proof of the existence 
of those matters connected with religion, with which the paper deals, than of 
anything else in the paper. We have the clearest possible testimony — if 
testimony is worth anything, and is not a kind of myth — as some say 
matter is — that a spiritual world exists. We have independent testimony 
with regard to God’s Word, and we have a revelation given to us. Nothing 
can get over one great fact which exists outside the Scriptures, — I mean 
the existence of the chosen people of God.* There we have an external 
proof. If you say you will believe nothing but what you have absolute 
proof of, then all truth vanishes into thin air : the question is, whether we 
have a sufficient proof of many things. The existence of God, tested by 
mere reason, is a matter of the balance of argument, after all. If I say 
I will not trust my intuitive conviction — which, thank God, I do trust— I 
enter into an argument of some kind. But we must have something to start 
from. Well, I am here, and have existence. Something must have caused 
that existence. But I must proceed in an argument upon the basis of that 
existence. If you do not grant me that, I am gone altogether ; but if you 
do grant that, there must have been some previous existence ; and I am 
persuaded by a balance of probabilities. There was one point in the paper 
which struck me very much ; viz. that matters of religion commend them- 
selves to our reason, but not to our comprehension. Now reason tells us 
that there must have been, in infinity past, some existence which caused all 
other existences ; and thus I am driven to confess the existence of a God. I 
always feel that the great difficulty in these discussions is, that we cannot 
agree upon a definite basis on which to found our logic. If we cannot 
start with the belief of certain things upon our own intuition, we cannot 
come to a conclusion. 
The Chairman. — If there is one thing which is satisfactorily established 
in the paper, it is that it lays down a completely solid platform. It proves the 
existence of a spiritual world, — not mathematically, for that is impossible, 
but so satisfactorily that large numbers of minds can receive it ; and on that 
basis it is said that there are analogies from which we might prove 
Christianity, and on that basis we have sufficiently solid ground to go upon. 
Mr. Buckley. — It was far from my intention to attack the paper. I 
consider that, as regards religion, I spoke in its favour ; for I think it shows, 
that whereas science sometimes calls things facts which have not been 
proved, the existence of a spiritual world is proved with much more 
completeness. I was only alluding to the generally loose manner in which 
subjects of immense importance and great weight are discussed, without first 
of all laying down clear and distinct grounds on which reasoning and dis- 
cussion should be based. My observations were intended to be perfectly 
general. 
The Chairman. — With reference to what Mr. Weldon said, I may remark 
* Hume has made a remark to the same effect. [Ed.] 
