།

he regenerates, that which is called the divine nature; it | real difference. But such a composition in the Divine is only said of it, that it is his image, and his likeness, nature is altogether impossible, upon thsee two accounts. that is conveyed or communicated: it is only somewhat First, If there were such a composition there must be suplike God, or the image of God, that is impressed upon and posed a causation : if the Divine nature were compounded, wrought into the soul. We must take heed of thinking it would be inferred it were caused; and so God were not that it is the same nature, as they have thought and blas- the first Cause of the first being: and, Secondly, (though phemously spoken, who have talked of being godded in one would think that nothing should need to be added after God; as if the very nature of God was, under such a name that, it being plain, nothing can be prior to God.) If there as this, transmitted into the creature. And again, were a composition there would also be a limitation, and (3.) We must understand these perfections or excel- so these perfections of the Divine Being would not be inlencies of the Divine nature, to be his very nature itself, finite, and consequently they must be perfections altogether and not to be any accidental thing superadded thereunto. disagreeable, no way agreeing to the Divine nature. It We must not conceive that such divine perfections as wis- cannot but be that he must be infinitely wise, infinitely dom, and power, and goodness, and the like, are additions good, infinitely powerful, and the like. But he should not to the nature of God; but they are his very nature itself. be so, if these things did really differ in him from one anThere can be no such thing as an accidental supervention other; for whatsoever doth really differ from one another, to the Divine nature; but every thing that is in God must doth limit that other from which it differs. If there be an be conceived to be God. He is essential wisdom, and infiniteness in goodness, or an infiniteness in power, or an goodness, and truth, and is not these things by accident, infiniteness in knowledge, we cannot suppose many infias men may be, so as to have those things separable from nites; there cannot be more infinites than one; and theretheir nature; no, nor can his nature, indeed, be so much fore it is but one and the same thing that is all these. as conceived without them. We are not to look upon Whatsoever you do design to the one, you must detract them as accidents, either as separable or inseparable from from the other. And if you should suppose two infinites, his nature, but as being essentially included in it. And you do thereby suppose neither to be infinite, but both to be this is most evident, upon the account we have showed finite. That therefore you must fixedly retain, as a general you; and the thing speaks itself in demonstrating to you rule, that the several excellencies and perfections of the the existence of the Godhead, that that Being whose ex- Divine nature, are in him in most perfect simplicity, and istence we were to demonstrate, is self-existent, existing so do not differ in him, as one thing differs from another. always by and from itself, without depending, without Only the Divine nature and being itself, as it hath all exbeing beholden to any thing from whence it was. Now cellency and perfection in it, doth when it comes to cast what is so self-existent is existent necessarily; that is, it an aspect upon us and upon our minds, appear as various, Owes its own existence to that peculiar excellency of its though in itself it is most simply one. And again, Own nature, to which it is repugnant and impossible not (5.) You must further note this, that the negative attrito exist. Now, whatsoever doth exist necessarily, so that butes of the Divine Being do always imply somewhat poIs non-existence should be altogether impossible, (which sitive. There are some things ascribed to God in negative the peculiar manner of the Divine existence,) that must terms, which must be understood to have a positive sense eeds be unalterable. What is necessary, must be eter- and meaning under those terms. As when it is said of ally or invariably necessary, and without any mutation: God, he is immortal, which is a negative term, it imnd nothing can be superadded to another but must infer plies the most infinite and undecaying fulness of life. mutation: any addition would make an alteration. And so when it is said of God, that he is invisible, though Therefore, none of these perfections are additions to God; that be a negative term, such a being as cannot be seen, or then they would make a change; but that which is the meaning is, that his being is of that high and glorious ecessarily what it is, never admits of any change, neither excellency as not to be liable and subject to so mean a baddition nor subtraction any ways. thing as the sight of our eye; it is too fine, too bright and glorious, for so mean and low a faculty to reach unto. And,

(4.) You must take this general note further, that it is hence consequential, that the excellencies and perfections of the Divine nature are in him, in perfect simplicity. That is, if none of them do differ from the Divine nature, then it is impossible they should differ from one another; they cannot really differ one from another in themselves. It is true, indeed, that by our imperfect way of conceiving things, through the narrowness and incomprehensiveness of our minds, which cannot take in all things at once, we are fain to admit distinct notions which are wont to be cal ed inadequate notions concerning the Deity. We can con ceive of such and such excellencies but by parts, but by little and little. It is but a small portion we can take up of him in the whole, and but very little after all. And therefore, all we are fain (looking upon the glorious and ever-blessed Deity) to conceive, is an unknown wisdom in him, and an unknown goodness, and an unknown holiness, and the like. Not as if these things did more really differ in him than one and the same face (as one aptly expresseth it) doth really differ in itself because a great many glasses are placed against it, that do themselves differ from one another, and are variously figured and cut, do seem to represent divers faces. There is, I say, no more of real difference in these perfections from one another, as they are in God, than there would be in that case of so many real things that are reflected by so many glasses, where the difference of the reflected image doth proceed from the glasses, and not from the original, which is one and the same to them all. And that we may preserve the notion entire of the Divine simplicity, it is easy to be demonstrated to them that shall consider-that if there be not a most perfect simplicity in the Divine nature, so as that the several excellencies belonging thereto be really in him, one and the same thing, then these excellencies could not meet there but by composition; they would make a composition in the Divine nature if they were there with

(6.) You must note this, that any particular excellency that men attribute or ascribe to God, it must always be understood to be ascribed to him in the highest pitch of perfection, and not with that diminution wherewith we behold the shadow of such things to be accompanied in the creature. And therefore, we must take heed of debasing the excellencies of the Divine nature, by confining, concerning them, to that which only gives some faint representation of them among us. We speak of several things that are real excellencies among the creatures; as quickness of sense, to be able presently to feel whatsoever is noxious and hurtful: this sense of pain is in the creature a perfection; but we are not to conceive any such thing in God; but we are to conceive that which is transcendent in him, that comprehends in itself the power of giving such and such perfections to the creature; so as that those things are eminently, constantly, only in him which, speaking of this and that particular perfection, is in a distinct, formal notion in the creature. We must not say, that this or that we behold in the creature is in him, but some transcendent excellency that doth virtually and eminently comprehend it; as when the Psalmist tells us, "He that planted the eye, doth he not see? and he that formed the ear, doth not he hear? and he that teacheth man knowledge, doth not he know ?" we are not to think that there is such seeing, or such hearing with God, or any kind of sensation as is with us; but there is that transcendent excellency in him, that doth eminently contain all these in a far more glorious manner than we can conceive. These things it is fit we should note generally, concerning the Divine attributes, or perfections, as a ground for somewhat more distinctly, though very briefly, concerning these attributes or perfections of God, particularly considered.

But before we pass from this discourse, of what is of

hend, who do apprehend that any such thing as Deity | seed did virtually contain the whole tree once in itself; so could only be of itself, from itself. A Being of that sort all the creation was contained in God, before it, by his apand kind, as unto which not to be, was always repugnant; pointment and command, stood forth into actual being. and so that it owes whatsoever it is, or whatsoever it hath And, in itself, to that peculiar excellency of its own nature, which [3.] It is hereupon an immutable fulness. This Divine was always necessary to it, to be what it is; can receive fulness admits of no alteration, either by augmentation or nothing aliunde, from without, and can lose nothing, or diminution. It can neither be made more nor less than it suffer no detraction of what it is, or hath already belonging is; either would make a change, and no change can have to it. This is "I am," the stable and permanent Being place in that Being which is necessary. The Divine Being, that is by itself what it is. That, then, is the character and all that plenitude and fulness that belongs to it, being under which we are to conceive of this divine fulness, of self-original, it must be necessary: it could spring from no this perfect all-sufficiency; that it is self-originate: he other, therefore it must be of itself what it is; and no other being the perpetual, everlasting Spring and Fountain of it imaginable reason can be assigned why such a Being doth to himself. With thee is the fountain of life," Psal. exist, but only that peculiar excellency of its own nature, xxxvi. 9. There, being is in its first Fountain, and life is to which it was repugnant not to exist. Hereupon therein its first Fountain. To that, all things else that be and fore, this is the only necessary Being, and that which is live, and that have any thing of motive and active power, necessarily what it is, can never be other than what it they participate all from hence; "In him we live and move is, can never vary, and therefore that "Father of lights (as and have our being," as the apostle expresseth it, Acts xvii. the blessed God is mentioned under that names James i 28. For which he there quotes a pagan poet; and like-17.) is without variableness or shadow of turning." With wise for that in the adjoining words, we are all his off-out so much as the umbrage of a change, there is not the spring." shadow of variation with him. But before the creation was, he was the same, and through all the successions of time when that creation is in being, he is still the same; and if the creation should drop back again into nothing, he were the same. Unto that which is necessarily what it was first, nothing can supervene, because it hath its whole being necessarily, so that there can be no addition to it; and then there can be no detraction from it, no diminution, because it hath what it hath necessarily; it is essential to be what it is. And therefore,

66

expressions about the Divine Being, "from everlasting to everlasting thou art God," Psalm xc. 2. Set yourselves to contemplate God; you must needs yield yourselves to be lost and swallowed up in your minds upon the contemplations of that which is "from everlasting to everlasting." And so that most emphatical expression, of his inhabiting eternity; "Thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth etemity, I dwell in the high and holy place," Isaiah lvii. 15. Eut before that, he was his own place, and indeed all the creation is rather vested in him, than he in any thing. Before time was, or any creature was, he had nothing to inhabit but his own eternity, that is, his own eternal self; for eternity and the eternal One are the same thing.

[2] We are to conceive concerning this Divine fulness, that it is immense as well as self-originate. He is infinite, unbounded: and that it must needs be for the same reason, because it is self-originate: for causation speaks limitation, whatsoever causeth another, limits it; and that which is uncaused must be unlimited, omnis limitatis est causata; that which doth impart and communicate to another doth measure and bound its own communication; and from whence any thing hath that which it doth derive from another, thence it hath the bounds and limits of that [4] This plenitude of God must be everlasting, this which is derived. The limits of the derivation proceed all-sufficiency, this perfection, must be eternal. For if from the original. Therefore it is plain whatever is un- there can be no variation in any, the least degree, much caused must be unlimited, and so this fulness of God being less is it conceivable there should be a cessation of the self-originate without any superior cause, must needs be whole Being. A variation in any, the least degree, is alimmense and infinite without bounds and limits. There is together mpossible to that which is necessarily what it is; nothing to bound and limit, but he existing necessarily, and thereupon the eternal permanency of it in the same when all things else do exist contingently, and by depend-state mus needs be consequent. Hence those amazing ance upon his will and pleasure, it could not be but that he must engross all being, all life, and all perfection in himself, because there was nothing else existing besides or before that which did exist necessarily, that is himself, by which what was in him could not be any way limited. Therefore, so we are to conceive of the Divine fulnessthat it is immense. It is then a perfection here spoken of God, which is not particular of this or that special kind, but which is most properly absolute and universal, to wit, of all kinds taken together, with all the several degrees that can come within the compass of each several kind. So metaphysicians are wont to distinguish of perfection, into that which is simple or absolute, and that which is sui generis of its own particular kind, that which hath all that belongs to that kind in it, may be said to be perfect in its own kind. That which hath the essence and properties of gold may be said to be perfect gold, and especially if it be pure from dross, and doth exclude every thing that is alien from it, if it be pure. That is the notion of pure: purum est quod est plenum sui, that is pure that is full of itself, and hath no admixture of any thing alien from it. So may a thing be said to be perfect in its own particular kind, when it is full of itself, and when it is free from admixture of any thing else. But the Divine nature (as is evident) is infinite and immense; is not perfect of this or that particular kind, but of all kinds whatsoever; that is, of all that is excellent and valuable; yea, every thing of all being, being included and comprehended in it. Not formally, for that would make God and the creature all one, but eminently and transcendently, that is, being in the Divine power to determine whether any thing besides should be extant, or not extant. And so he is the Root of being to every thing that is, and the Spring of life to every thing that lives, and the Fountain of all excellency to every thing that can partake of it. And therefore, his perfections or fulness is not of this or that particular kind; if it were so, it were a limited fulness, a bounded fulness; but it is a fulness that comprehends all kinds together eminently and transcendently in itself. As the root of the tree doth comprehend all the branches, that is, virtually, it comprehends that virtue in it, and transmits that which extends to all the branches, and as the very

Thus you have some account of the nature of the allsufficient, perfect fulness of God, both from the contents and properties or perfections thereof; what it contains, to wit, all being, all life, all motive power, all wisdom, all knowledge, and whatsoever excellency besides you can con ceive, or all that is conceivable, and indeed, all that is unconceivable by any created mind. And then, under what characters, as it is a self-originate fulness, an immense fulness, an uralterable fulness, incapable of any augmenta tion or diminution, and as it is an everlasting fulness.

2. The next thing is to show you what purposes this perfect, all-sufficient fulness of God may answer. And indeed, it answers all that is any way desirable should be answered, or that it were to be wished should be answered. For,

(1.) It answers the corresponding purpose of its own felicity, to be an everlasting felicity to himself, where there is the only correspondency, that it is any way possible it should otherwise be; should any way be found between the fruitive faculty and the object. Here is an immense and boundless object for an immense fruitive faculty: nothing could satisfy God but God: there is a capacity not otherwise to be filled up. It was to be answered by nothing but himself, and therefore we must not suppose that there are any additions any way to that felicity from any thing without himself. He only enjoys himself and takes plea sure in his own designs. When he hath designs upon such

with the greatest facility and ease, consume adversaries with a fire not blown, and make them "perish like their own dung;" and blow upon them with the breath of his nostrils, and make every thing of opposition vanish when he will. And thereupon, as being perfectly Master of his own designs, and having every thing in his own power, with the times and seasons and ways of doing them, he lets enemies run on, foreseeing still at a distance their day that is coming. He knows their day is coming, and in the mean time sits in heaven and laughs at them, "the Most High hath them in derision;" them who say, "Come, let us break their bands asunder, and let us cast away their cords from us :" as it is in the 2nd Psalm.

(5.) It answers the purpose of sustaining and preserving his own, the people that he hath collected and chosen out of this world to be peculiar to himself, the whole community of them, and every particular soul belonging to that community, so as to lose none of them. He bears them up and carries them through all the temptations and conflicts and trials and exercises that they meet with here, in a sojourning state and in a warfaring state, so as that they are kept by his mighty power through faith unto salvation. And then,

poor creatures as we, he only pleaseth himself in himself, | defeating of the designs of his enemies; so that he can in his bountifulness, the benignity and the kindness of his own design. When he did (he must be supposed to have done) even in the days and ages of eternity always retain with himself a design, "I will raise up such and such creatures;" such in particular as any of us; "I will in their proper time and season raise them up out of nothing, on purpose to take them into a communion and participation with me in my own felicity, my own blessedness." What is it he was pleased with? was it that he loved us or delighted in us? He was self-pleased with the kindness and benignity of his own design: not that any thing in us could draw his eye, his love, or his delight, but his kindness and goodness therein was its own reason. He showeth mercy because he will show mercy. It was not that one was better than another, but from that goodness of his that is invariable, and can never be better than himself, the complacency that it was always apt to take in its own designments. From hence it is, that he hath any such thing as delectation in a creature, only as he hath freely placed a design and made it terminate upon such a one, and so is pleased in that kindness and goodness which he hath in himself, and not in any delectableness that was previously in the object. For as to that, there was no more in one than another, and if it were for that reason as such, then it must have followed that all would have a like participation in the felicity of the Divine Being. But this is the eminent great purpose that the Divine all-sufficient fulness serves for even for his own eternal and invariable felicity. Whence he hath so frequently the title and name of "the ever-blessed God;" his own blessedness being his very essence, or essential to himself; so that he was never to be known under another name, or conceived of under another notion, than as the blessed One, the Fountain of all blessedness; "The glorious Gospel of the blessed God," saith the apostle, 1 Tim. i. 11. And "the blessed and only Potentate," 1 Tim. vi. 15. And "the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who is blessed for evermore," 2 Cor. xi. 31. And so of Christ as he is God, he is said to be "over all, God blessed for ever," Rom. ix. 5. "Blessed for ever," that is, only in himself as the only correspondent and adequate object of his own fruition. And,

(2.) His most perfect divine fulness, appears to have been sufficient for the creation of this world: and (which is but doing the same thing continually) preserving it ever since it was created, even until now; not only bringing it into being a rude mass of being; but settling and conserving of order in it, and that variety and distinction of creatures, which we behold, and which indeed we must suppose to be the only effect of the all-sufficient perfection of a God. The very being of such a world speaks his power; but the order that is in it, and the variety of creatures wherewith it is replenished, and the continual preservation of those distinct kinds and species through so many successive ages; so that what this or that plant is, or at least was, so many thousand years ago, it continues to be the same, a thing of the same kind, in the same rank or class of being still as it was. All this is by the allsufficient, perfect fulness of a Deity that could answer such a purpose as this, to make such a mass of created beings exist and arise out of nothing; and that so much of order and distinction of kinds should obtain and be preserved even in this natural world, through so many successive ages unto this day. It was this that the perfect all-sufficiency of God did, and doth continually serve for. And,

(3.) For the government of the intelligent world; so that wheresoever he hath intelligent creatures, he can, by bare touches upon the mind, steer them and act them this way and that at his own pleasure; make great numbers of people at once to agree in one and the same design, all of them; as God did touch their minds in making Saul king. And that is one instance that shows what is done throughout all the world, and all other ages, where all minds lie under the agency and influence of one supreme, universal Mind. And otherwise, how were it possible that all should conspire and agree to serve the same purpose and to do the same thing. And again,

(4.) This perfect, all-sufficient fulness serves for the

* Preached June 12th, 1691.

(6.) And lastly, this perfect and all-sufficient fulness serves for their final satisfaction and blessedness, when they shall be brought into that region, into his "presence, where there is fulness of joy, and to his right hand, where there are pleasures for evermore," Psalm xvi. 11. And that which is felicity enough for himself, will surely be enough for them too.

LECTURE XIX.*

BUT now, in the next place, I shall speak further to you of some of the most eminent and noted of those attributes and perfections of God which are comprehended in this general one, and concerning the order of speaking to them, I shall not be much solicitous. Some distinguish them into negative and positive. But that distinction I reckon less material; because that those they call negative ones are so only verbally, there being somewhat most really positive, that is comprehended under such negative terms, as infinite, and immortal, and immense, and the like. They are usually distinguished into communicable and incommunicable, as hath been occasionally told you already; the former whereof, being those attributes of God of which there is some image and resemblance under the same name among the creatures.

The INCOMMUNICABLE ATTRIBUTES are those whereof there is no direct resemblance among the creatures, nor the very name thereof justly or properly to be given to any among them, or to any thing that is to be found among them. And for this distinction of the Divine attributes, they speak very properly and congruous to the nature of the thing, who tell us, that in the description of God, the former sort of these attributes (the communicable ones) do serve to express his nature more generally, or serve to supply the room of a generous in a definition. And that the incommunicable attributes serve to supply the place of a difference in a definition restraining (as it is in the business of a difference to do) that general nature, that is presupposed.

And others again distinguish these several ways, that is, some do call every thing a divine attribute, which may be any way affirmed concerning God. When some others of them do only mean by a divine attribute, that which is affirmed concerning him, (as the logicians are wont to speak,)" Loquitur quid," not "in quo;" as when it is said, "God is a Spirit," that they do not reckon a divine attribute which is only to answer the question, What he is? But those things only are to be called attributes, or divine perfections, that do speak more distinguishably concerning his nature, to show what a one he is, or what a peculiar sort or kind of being he is. And so for one class of divine