[236] Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der blossen Vernunft, Stück iii, Abth. i, § 5; Abth. ii (ed. 1793, pp. 145–46, 188–89). [↑]
[237] Work cited, Stück ii, Abschn. ii, Allg. Anm. p. 108 sq. [↑]
[238] E.g. Stück iv, Th. i, preamble (p. 221, ed. cited). [↑]
[239] Id. Stück iii, Abth. ii, Allg. Anm.: “This belief,” he avows frankly enough, “involves no mystery” (p. 199). In a note to the second edition he suggests that there must be a basis in reason for the idea of a Trinity, found as it is among so many ancient and primitive peoples. The speculation is in itself evasive, for he does not give the slightest reason for thinking the Goths capable of such metaphysic. [↑]
[240] Stück iii, Abth. i, § 5; pp. 137, 139. [↑]
[241] Stück iii, Abth. ii, p. 178. [↑]
[242] Kant explicitly concurs in Warburton’s thesis that the Jewish lawgiver purposely omitted all mention of a future state from the Pentateuch; since such belief must be supposed to have been current in Jewry. But he goes further, and pronounces that simple Judaism contains “absolutely no religious belief.” To this complexion can philosophic compromise come. [↑]
[243] Stuckenberg, Life of Immanuel Kant, p. 329. [↑]
[244] Borowski, Darstellung des Lebens und Charakters Immanuel Kant’s, 1804, cited by Stuckenberg, p. 357. [↑]