94 
Scientific opposition. To “ buttress up the falling 
The Me. edifice ” of a literal Resurrection of the same body, 
vers V ies CO as r ?o great efforts were made, and many theories resorted 
uoni®e Surrec ' to. Some asserted that the sameness of the future 
man (p. 33) was entirely dependent on the immor- 
tality of his soul. Others, denying that the soul was naturally 
immortal, regarded the immortality as a gift conferred here- 
after by the Creator. (This at a later age among ourselves, 
was Priestley’s idea.) Few, however, could persuade themselves 
that the future life depended on a miracle to be thus wroug 1 
in every case to qualify each of us for immortal existence. 
Then returned, of course, a still growing indistinctness of con- 
ception, which induced in some an abandonment of all real 
faith in that human future, which nevertheless mankind are 
known to aspire to. . c , 
But disturbance in the belief as to the Resurrection of the 
Body (p. 35) was accompanied by the re-opening ot 
opening 6 ' of many other fundamental questions of the here- 
fundamentai after as to the person and attributes of the Divine 
which en. Beino- Himself; and the existence of other immor- 
tals there ; such as the good and bad “ angels 
already referred to. The divergences of thought seemed, how- 
ever, to be ultimately determined by the growing, though seem- 
ingly dangerous, recognition of ,c invariable law as peiva in a 
the whole Universe (p. 36). . . 
10 To reconcile the invariableness of Law with some real 
Theism, and still more with the Moral government 
tavv hf r Nature of the world, was the next effort of thoughtful per- 
a difficulty i sons _ q^e! latter difficulty was not worked out. 
t ion ^attempt- The Scriptures were explained in allegorical senses, 
cd - s0 as to meet some of the Theistic difficulties. 
Still, the admission of a Deity who was to be nothing 
but the administrator of rigid law, proved to be irrecon- 
cilable with all Religion. And, further, it was plain that 
it would not be worth while to admit or deny an Unseen 
world,” into which, omitting all “ Religion,” we might just 
mechanically pass on hereafter. All the Christian ideas ot 
prayer duty, and future rewards would thus become impos- 
sible. (Even the Moral idea of Right would seem excluded.) 
Amidst the manifold difficulties as to the very ele- 
and Vede oth°er! ments of the Christian belief in a Future Life, which 
thought to t | mg i ia( j S p VUn g up, some persons from time to time 
the* Christian arose, pretending to have “received new and supple - 
Revelation. mentary revelations” on the subject. 
Passing over all others, our authors choose Swedenborg, as one 
