From his defense of his 1828 book “An Inquiry Into the Popular Notion of an Unoriginated, Infinite and Eternal Prescience: With a Preface Containing a Dialogue Between the Author and One of His Readers”:
My good Sir, say rather they are Christian contradictions; and as Christian contradictions they must be believed and received. I am well aware that the philosophy of religious truth may indeed be incomprehensible ; but the possibility of every Christian doctrine must be intuitively evident : or otherwise the fact can never be a subject of rational conviction. If the mystery, or rather the absurdity, of a doctrine may be argued as a valid objection to the cordial belief of it, then I am quite sure that no person can have any rational conviction of the doctrine of eternal prescience. Your argument, my good Sir, is solely and obviously against yourself. If we are not to have any thing to do with mysteries, or rather with contradictory things, then I am very sure we have no business with the doctrine of an eternal prescience.