tats

wM

)8aii .

ii

jut) HP'"

WmmmM

;

"I give theft Books "
for the founding cf a t Colony"

Presented by the Author

THE'IOTES:
OB,
' AN ARGUMENT ON THE EXISTENCE,
PERFECTIONS, AND
PERSONAL DISTINCTIONS, OF THE DEITY;
INTENDED AS
AN ANTIDOTE TO ATHEISM, PANTHEISM,
UNITARIANISM, AND SABELLIANISM.

BY

WILLIAM COOKE.

Honttm:
PAETRIDGE AND OAEEY, PATEENOSTEE EOW.
MAY BE HAD OF ALL BOOKSELLEBS.

LIVERPOOL:
J. E. WILLIAMS, PBIMTEE, WBITECHAPEL.

PREFACE.

When the Author "published his first volume'of " Christian
Theology, " he intimated his intention of issuing a second A
' volume on the same subject, expecting to comprise therein
the several topics deemed necessary to complete his com
pendium of christian doctrine. In the character of the
present volume, however, the Author has rather diverged
from the course he had prescribed. This was as unexpected
by himself as by his readers. While the second edition of
the first volume was passing through the press, the Author
entered upon the preparation of a Rational Argument for
the Trinity, which he intended to incorporate in that, volume,
but, as the article expanded under his hand, he found its
dimensions too large for insertion in a volume already
extending to five hundred and fifty closely printed pages,
and therefore determined to publish the article in a separate
form. The argument on the Trinity being based upon the
necessary perfections of the Divine Being, it occurred to the
writer that, to render it complete, and to impart to it the
solidity and strength which the high importance of the,
subject required, it would be requisite to take in a wider
area of argumentation, and lay his foundation in the first
principles of Natural Theology.
This plan necessarily involved- a demonstration of the
existence and perfections of God, as the basis of an argu
ment for the personal distinctions which subsist in the
Divine nature.
In an age when the fundamental principles of religion are
violently assailed, and the spirit of scepticism is extensively
prevalent, it is a source of ineffable satisfaction to.the chris,-
tian philosopher to behold every new discovery in science
augmenting and brightening the evidence of Divine truth —

4 *" PKEFACE.
archaiology, ethnology, geology, astronomy, chemistry, and
genera} physics, contributing new facts in confirmation and
illustration of revealed doctrines. Just in proportion as the
archives of nature are explored and deciphered, they witness
for God and his truth, and unequivocally declare that the vol
ume of nature and of revelation have, the same eternal,
intelligent, benevolent, and holy Being foj? their Author.
In establishing the first principles of christian Theism, the
Author has availed himself of such scientific dicoveries as
the nature of the argument required, and the limited sige
of the work could admit ; and, should the proeess of argu
ment he has been induced to pursue be found adapted to
the existing state of society, and he productive of usefulness
among the masses of our population, he will rejoice in the
attainment of an object which has engaged his anxious
solicitude. While this volume was passing through the press, the
Author met with the valuable work of Professor Anstead on
Geology, which brings down the discoveries in this science
to the verge of the present date. The most recent researches
recorded by Anstead serve, but to corroborate the facts, of his
predecessors, so far as they apply to our argument ; but some
valuable investigations, in reference to fossils and remark
able foot prints x>n the new red stone, are given in a note at
the end of this volume.
The present work is intended to be the Author's second
volume on Theology, and he hopes to issue, should Provi
dence permit, a third volume, which will comprehend his
summary of. christian doctrine.
As this work will fall into the hands of many not
accustomed to scientific terms, a brief explanation is added
for their use.
April, 1849.

CONTENTS.

Introduction. — Province of reason stated — Object of the work set forth.
p.p. 8—13.
FABT I. — The existence op the Deity.
Chapteb L — God's existence not discovered by mere human reason,
j?.p. 12-18.
Chapter II. — Mode of conducting the argument — Dr, S, Clarke's a priori
reasoning examined — Fundamental principles stated, p.p. 19 — 30.
Chapteb III.— First proposition : every effect must have a cause, and the
cause must be adequate to the effect, p.p. 31 — 86.
Chapteb IV. — Second proposition : there must be something which is not
an effect, but unoriginated and eternal, p.p. 37 — 38.
Chapteb V. — Third proposition : the eternal something must be distinct
from the universe, because the universe is an effect, p.p. 39—58.
Chapteb VI.— Fourth proposition ; the universe, as an effect, must have a
cause, and fhe unprjginated Being must be its. cause. p,p. 58—117. v
Chapter VII. — Fifth proposition: the originator of the universe must be
a conscious, intelligent being, because the effect is the product of
intelligence and design, p.p. 118 — 140.
Chapter VIII. — The spirituality of the Divine nature established, and the
eternity of matter disproved. p.p. 141 — 155.
Chapter IX. — Pantheism exhibited, and proved to be irrational, idolatrous,
fraught with infidelity and licentiousness, p.p. 156—177.
PAET II. — The" attributes of Deitt.
Chapteb I. — The testimony of scripture respecting the attributes of Jehovah.
p.p. 178—186.
Qhapter IL— The eternity of God. p.p. 187—194,
Chapter III. — The absolute perfection, the all-sufficiency, and immuta
bility, of Gad. p.p. 195— 2Q6.
Chapter IV.— The immensity, or omnipresence, of God. p.p. 207—220.

6 CONTENTS.
Chapteb V. — The omniscience of God. p.p. 221 — 243.
Chapteb VI. — The omnipotence of God. p.p. 244 — 255.
Chapter VII.— The benevolence of God. p.p. 256—297.
Chapter VIII.— The holiness of God. p.p. 298—314.
Chapter IX. — God's disposition for communion, p.p. 315 — 337.
PAET III.— The holt Trinity.
Chapter I. — The scriptural doctrine of the Trinity stated, p.p. 338 — 343.
Chapteb II. — The doctrine of the holy Trinity is sustained by the verdict
of reason, p.p. 343— 393.
First proposition. — That all the attributes of the Divine are nature
essential and eternal, equally so with the Divine essence, p. 347.
Second proposition. — That the active powers involved in the Divine
attributes have been eternally exercised, p. 348.
Third proposition.— That the exercise of the Divine attributes implies
the existence of object as well as agent, p. 355.
Fourth proposition. — That the object and agent involve such an essen
tial and real distinction, as that they cannot be numerically and
identically the same. p. 356.
Fifth proposition. — That the object, as well as the agent, must (at least
with reference to the exercise of the moral attributes) be aconscious,
intelligent, and moral Being, because they are reciprocally agent
and object to each other, p. 359.
Sixth proposition. — Thatno adequate object can be found In created ex
istence, because all created existence is limited, both in its dura
tion and its nature, p. 361. „
Seventh proposition. — That no adequate object can be found in the
archetypes of creation, for, although they existed in the mind of
Deity prior to creation, they are impersonal and finite, p. 368.
Eighth proposition. — That only in the Divine nature itself can an infi
nite and adequate object be found, p. 370.
Ninth proposition. — That, therefore, the Divine nature must exist in
such a peculiar mode as comprehends within itself both agent and
object, p. 371.
Tenth proposition. — That, seeing agent and object are comprehended
in the Divine nature, there must be some plurality, p. 372.
Eleventh proposition. — That the plurality thus existing in the Godhead
must be a plurality of Persons, p. 372.

Twelfth proposition. — That each Person must exist in the Godhead
necessarily and eternally, p. 873.
Thirteenth proposition. — That each Person in the Godhead must pos
sess infinite attributes, because nothing finite can exist essentially
in the Divine nature, p. 374.
Fourteenth proposition. — That the Divine Persons, being infinite, must
be co-equal in dignity and glory, p. 374.
Fifteenth proposition. — That eaoh Divine Person must have eternally
exercised the Divine, attributes, p. 374.
Sixteenth proposition. — That, as each Divine Person has eternally exer
cised the Divine attributes, the Persons must have been recipro
cally and eternally agent and object to one another. 375.
Seventeenth proposition. — Each Person having mutually and eternally
exercised the Divine attributes, it follows that all the operations,
nd extra, most be the works of each Person, and of all conjointly.
p. 377.
Eighteenth proposition. — That all finite beings stand in the same rela
tion to each Person as creature and Creator, and owe to each the
same homage, obedience, love, and devotion, p. 378.
Nineteenth proposition. — That the Persons are three, and three only,
is a doctrine in conformity to reason, as well as Holy Scripture.
p. 378.
Twentieth proposition. — That the arguments which thus sustain aper-
sonal plurality are in harmony with the unity of the Divin e essence,
and rationally support this doctrine, p. 380.
Chapter III. — The collateral testimony of holy scripture in support of
the argument for the Trinity, p.p. 894 — 116.

ERRATA.

au *

77
160176276

33 8
13

EEROE.
Catastrophies ibid.
when their
moluscasbefore
desirable atheist
curiously

CORRECTION. Catastrophes ibid.
where those
mollusca coeval with
durableatheisticoursorily

THEIOTES;
OB,
AN ARGUMENT FOR THE EXISTENCE, PERFECTIONS, AND
PERSONAL DISTINCTIONS OF THE DEITY.

INTRODUCTION.

" Tlie entrance of 'thy words giveth light." — Psalm, cxix., 130.
We propose to show that the great truths which revelation
unfolds, respecting the existence, perfections, and personal
distinctions of the Deity, are in harmony with right reason.
Sense, reason, and revelation, are the media appointed by
our Creator, to convey truth to the mind. While reason
is an advance upon sense, revelation is an advance upon
both. While' sense" mates us cognizant of objects in the
external world, reason extends the sphere of our know
ledge to abstract principles, and recondite truths of philo
sophy ; but revelation vastly expands our. mental horizon,
by bringing into view the sublime doctrines of religion.
What the telescope is to the eye, revelation is to the
mind. It makes visible numerous objects which reason
could not descry, and others but dimly seen before, are
thereby rendered distinct and apparent.
But though revelation instructs reason, it does not con
tradict it ; though unfolding many truths before unknown,
it does not controvert those already known. Bevelationjmust
harmonize with our mental constitution, for God is the
author of both, and has ordained both™ as vehicles of truth.
The laws of light are not more in harmony with the organs
of vision, than revelation is with our mental constitution.
Whenever there appears opposition or discrepancy here, the
collision is between revelation and ignorance, error, or
B

10 INTRODUCTION. w
prejudice ; not between revelation and right reason. Owen
Feltham has justly observed : " I believe there is nothing in
religion contrary to reason, if we knew it rightly;" and it
may be yet further affirmed, that there is not a single propo
sition in rehgion, but to which, "if we knew it rightly," rea
son would utter an affirmative response. It was an axiom
with Bossuet, that " every error is a truth abused ;" but it
is, we think, more correct to say, that every error in religion
springs from an abuse of reason. There is certainly no dis
crepancy between the human judgement and the teachings
of revelation, except when we draw conclusions without data,
or from insufficient data ; or substitute hypothesis for fact ;
or, in some way, allow our depraved nature to pervert the
exercise of our reasoning faculties.
Yet, it is not the prerogative of reason to originate or dis
cover the truths of religion, but to receive them — to assent
and give her intelligent response to the instructions of divine
revelation. Vast and magnificent is the region of revealed
truth, but narrow is the domain which man can claim as
his own discovery. **When, however, the light of inspiration
discloses a truth, the human mind can generally perceive
its beauty, consistency, and harmony with other propositions,
and the high probable evidence by which it is sustained.
Bishop Warburton has observed : " Had not revelation dis
covered the true principles of religion, they had, without
doubt, continued altogether unknown ; yet, on their dis
covery, they appeared so consonant to human reason, that
men were apt to mistake them for the production of it."
This statement is verified by the conduct of many writers
on what is called " the rehgion of nature." Already familiar
with the great truths of revelation, they proceed to demon
strate their accordance with reason, and then, forgetting
their divine origin, ascriV"~^si? discovery to rational induc
tion,. Yet, even this e' ^eous assumption yields homage
to the general truths o* religion ; for.it shows that they are
in harmony with the decisions of the human mind, and that
the intelligent christian can often give a reason for the faith,
as well as the hope, that is in him.

INTEODUCTION. II
Let it not, however, be understood that we claim for every
revealed truth the same emphatic response and confirmation
from reason. While the rational evidence of some, and indeed
of most, religious truths, is so clear and strong, that those
truths at once command our rational assent, there are others,
respecting which, it must be admitted, our knowledge is so
limited, and the data furnished by analogy are so remote,
that reason is either altogether silent, or .its testimony so
faint, we are compelled to repose solely on divine authority.
But silence is not opposition. If human reason cannot, in
every case, furnish a demonstration, it never supplies a valid I
objection. Several doctrines are termed mysteries, but not
one of these presents a collision with the dictates of sound
reason, while some of them are susceptible of a rational
confirmation, For what is meant by the word mystery ? and what is the
kind of doctrines included under that designation ? Does
mystery mean that which contradicts our reason ? certainly
not. The word, as used in scripture, primarily means that
which is hidden. Thus it is often applied to the introduc
tion of the Gentiles to the . privileges of the gospel, because
this gracious dispensation was in a great degree veiled,
or hidden, prior to the apostolic age. Ephesians, iii., 4-9.
And although the word is also applied to the Godhead, the
incarnation of our Lord, the resurrection of the dead, &c, it is
not intended thereby to intimate that these sublime doc
trines are repugnant to the dictates of right reason. Mys
teries they are properly called, because they involve depths
of wisdom, power, and love, which to men and angels must
be for ever unfathomable. Yet as doctrines of divine reve
lation, they are explicitly asserted. As parts of the christian
system, they furnish no discordant element in our theology.
They are in perfect harmony with every other doctrine, and
even necessary to the consistency and beauty of the whole ;
and as tested by the decisions of sound philosophy, they are
not incompatible therewith.
The Godhead is our present theme ; and though from its
profundity and partial obscurity, it presents itself before us

13 INTRODUCTION.
as a sublime and awful mystery, we think it will be found no
difficult task to show that the teachings of revelation on this
subject, make no unreasonable demands upon our faith, and
that even the doctrine of the Trinity itself is not as Dr.
Channing has been pleased to insinuate, " an enormous tax
upon human credulity;" but in perfect harmony with the
principles of true philosophy and right reason.
Whether the proposition, there is a God, be or be not dis
coverable by reason, will hereafter be considered ; but cer
tainly when once propounded to the human mind, it is
found so consonant to reason, that no truth is more readily
admitted. The evidence sustaining it is so clear, bright,
and convincing, that it cannot be resisted without doing
violence to our faculties. This we hope fully to establish
in the First Part of this work.
The declarations of scripture respecting the Divine nature
and attributes, are sustained also by the voice of reason.
Though the human mind, by the exercise of its powers,
has never been able to ascertain the existence of any attri
bute or perfection .' in God, except such as are already
asserted in the sacred scriptures ; yet all those divine per
fections which are set forth in the inspired records are so
congruous to reason, that they command our assent. This
truth we hope to establish in our Second Part.
But, as already intimated, we have a further task to
perform : We believe that the great truth which revelation
has disclosed, respecting a plurality of persons in the God
head, is sustained by the testimony of reason. We are
aware, indeed, that in this view we differ from the judgement
of men whom we highly venerate for their erudition and
piety. The general view of divines, in relation to this inte
resting doctrine, is, that it rests exclusively upon the divine
testimony, and is incapable of receiving any evidence from
reason — that there is, indeed, nothing within the range of
human knowledge which can furnish any data on which to
build a single argument apart from the direct and positive
testimony of the scriptures. We are free to admit, there
is no probability that the human mind, by the unaided

INTRODUCTION. i 13
exercise of its powers," would have discovered this profound
doctrine, at least in the present state of existence ; but that,
when once revealed, it can receive no corroboration from the
verdict of reason, is a point we cannot concede. We have
the conviction, that reason furnishes a strong and decided
testimony in favour of a plurality of persons in the Godhead
— that in fact, the doctrine follows as a rational conse
quence from postulates and axioms admitted equally by the
philosopher and the christian.
Let it not be supposed, however, that our attempt to sus
tain this doctrine by rational evidence, arises from any mis
givings, as to the clearness and fulness of the scripture tes?
timony. We believe the Trinity to be. as clearly revealed as
any doctrine peculiar to the christian system ; and we should
hold ourselves under an indispensable obligation to receive
it with full assurance of its truth, and gratitude for its dis
covery, even if the voice of reason were unable to utter a
syllable of concurrent testimony in its favour. But there
is surely no need to reject the service of reason in this sacred
cause. Mr. Wesley says, "Let reason ';do all that reason
can, employ it as far as it will go."* It is not more
religious to exercise implicit faith, than to seek for either
rational demonstration, or rational probability, respecting
any religious truth. It may safely be affirmed a priori,
that there is folly in unbelief as well as sin — that if it
is wicked to reject any revealed doctrine, it is irrational
as well as wicked. If this irrationality can be shown,
there is some service done to the cause of truth and re
ligion. We hope to show that unitarianism and sabelhan-
ism are. both absurd — that, if he who says there is no God,
is a fool ; he that affirms there is no Trinity, is not wise —
that both are sinning against the laws of mind, as well as
against the laws of God. This task will occupy the Third
Part of the work. * Sermon, lxxv.

PART I.
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD,

CHAPTER I.
god's existence not discovered by mere human reason.

' The "World by Wisdom knew not God."— 1 Cor., i., 21.

The great and primary truth, that " there is a God," has
obtained among men almost universally, and in all ages ; so
that the Holy Scriptures which speak of God in every page,
and which advert lo the prevalent sentiments of mankind
for the period of four thousand years, assume this truth as
almost universally admitted. In the early ages of the world,
indeed, there is no positive evidence that speculative atheism
had any advocate ; and if, at a subsequent period, ' the fool
said in his heart, there is no God,' the sentiment appears
more prominent in his affections than his judgement ; and
withal, had so feeble an influence over the minds 'of men,
that the sacred writers never deemed it necessary to combat
the error either by formal proofs of the existence of God,
or by an appeal to miraculous operations. Polytheism, not
atheism, was the prevailing sin ; and therefore, the aim of
inspired men was not so much to prove the existence of one
God, as the non-existence of others — to maintain his autho
rity, and enforce his laws, to the exclusion of all rival
pretenders. Yet, this general belief in the existence of a Supreme Being
does not warrant the conclusion, that it resulted from ra
tional investigation. There can be no doubt that the great
truth was at first, divinely communicated. The earliest re
cords of man, present him in a state of intercourse with his

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 15
Maker ; and the whole history of the bible, is a record of
communications from God to man. Whether the human
mind, if left to itself, is endued with native strength suffi
cient to originate the conception of a Deity, is another ques
tion ; and not so easy to determine, as at first sight would
appear. Locke has said, that " the visible marks of extra
ordinary wisdom and power, appear so plain in all the works
of the creation, that a rational creature, who will but seri
ously reflect on them, cannot miss the discovery of a Deity."*
Such a discovery, however, is unsupported by fact, and the
sentiment of this great man, may be disputed. Familiar
ized as we are, to the idea of a God, we are scarcely in a
position to estimate the difficulties and hindrances, which
lie between the human mind and the attainment of a con
ception so sublime. Philosophers, we know, even in hea
then nations, have elaborated their professed demonstrations
of its truth, but then, their original idea of a God had been
previously derived from another source : and to demonstrate
the truth of a proposition, when the terms and subject are
already known, is a diminutive task, compared with that of
originating the elementary conception. Some savage tribes
are found entirely destitute of both the notion and the name
of a Supreme Being ;-|- so that the idea, though once possessed
by their progenitors,, has been lost in the process of mental
deterioration. Nor is there a record of one instance, in which
a nation having lost this great truth, has recovered it by
rational inquiry. The doctrine when restored in such coun
tries, has not been revived by the resuscitation of native in
tellect, but imported by missionary instruction, or by some
other mode of contact with civilized' man. If, then, the
history of mankind reveals some melancholy instances, in
which the human mind has entirely lost this truth, but fur
nishes no instance, in which it has regained it, the facts of
the case are, presumptive evidence against the supposition
that reason is adequate to the discovery of even this first
principle in religion. * Locke, c. iv., sec. 9.
+ Kobertson's America, Book iv. Moffatt, c. 17.

16 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
It is true the apostle Paul speaks of the ' Creator's eternal
power and,godhead, being evinced by the things that are made J '
but it is quite clear from the context, he is not inveighing
against atheists, nor against men who had no knowledge Of
God, but against idolaters — ragainst men who did ' not like to
retain God in their knowledge,' 'who held the truth in
unrighteousness, ' — who had corrupted the truth originally
imparted, and sunk into the degradation of worshipping the
work of their own hands. Consequently his design was not
to teach the competency of reason to ehcit the discovery of
God's existence from the visible universe, but to show that
this great truth, being previously communicated to man,
was so abundantly attested .and confirmed " by the things
that are made, " and the divine character so fully illustrated
by his works, that the drivelling -sentiments and polluting
rites of heathenism were left totally without excuse. Rom.,
i., 18-23.
God made himself known to man at first by direct
communication, and nature mirrors the great truth which
revelation has given ; and reason, rightly exercised; utters
her emphatic response to the heavenly oracle; but this
response is, in our view, the Umited prerogative of human
reason on this subjeet. Instinctive as is the tendency of
the human mind to refer every effect to a cause, and ade
quate as man is to urge a successful course along this line
of inquiry up to a certain limit, yet the conception of one
spiritual, unlimited, and all-perfect being, as the First Cause
and Creator of all things, is an idea too refined and sublime
for the discovery of man. Apart from revelation, indeed,
we know not from what sources of human knowledge the
idea of such a Being could be derived ; and, unless the notion
of his existence were derived from some source, it could
never be an object of thought and contemplation, and, conse
quently, neither be affirmed nor denied. This case is perti
nently put in the judicious remarks of Hare : " Suppose a
person whose powers of argument are improved to the utmost
pitch of human capacity, but who has received no idea ;of
God by any revelation, whether from tradition, scripture, pr

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 17
inspiration; how is he to convince himself that God is, and
from whence is he to learn what God is ? That of which he,
as yet, knows nothing, cannot be a subject of his thought,
his reasonings, or his conversation. He can neither affirm
nor deny, till he knows what is to be .affirmed or denied.
From whence, then, is our philosopher to divine, in the first
instance, his idea of the infinite Being, concerning the reality
of whose existence, he is, in the second place, to decide?"
If to a number of men totally destitute of the idea of a
God, but intelligent in other respects, the existence and
natural attributes of Deity were proclaimed, and an appeal
made to the works of creation for proofs of the truth thus
announced, we believe it impossible for them to exercise
their reason rightly upon the subject, without arriving at a
conviction in the affirmative. But without the suggestion
of the subject from some quarter, it would be impossible for
them to attain any idea of a First Cause at all worthy of
God. For, supposing it possible that some philosopher,
pursuing his inquiries into nature, guided by the principle
that every effect must have a cause, should hit upon the
subhme conjecture, that all nature was itself the effect of
some great cause or causes, he is still at an immense dis
tance from the conception of the Deity. The lofty idea, as
yet, is only a conjecture; and where, it may be asked, shall
he get the demonstration ? Then comes the question, Does
nature owe its origin to one or several causes ? How is he
to solve this inquiry? In the universe he sees physical
evil as well as good, and he asks, Have these one and the
same originator ? In nature he recognizes a variety of causes
in visible operation, and hence he asks, Is the invisible
origin one, several, or many ? What shall enable our phi
losopher to solve these inquiries ? Again, suppose our
philosopher to conceive the universe the work of one Being,
he is further pressed by the inquiry, Is this originator of
the visible universe himself unoriginated and uncaused, or
is he originated by another, anterior to himself ? Again,
Does this being act necessarily, or freely and intelligently ?
Is he material or immaterial ? — if, indeed, the idea of imma-
o

18 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
teriality could be conceived by a man in such circumstances-
It is quite evident these are inquiries our philosopher is
incompetent to answer ; and it is equally clear, that without
an answer to these and a multitude of other inquiries,..there
would for ever remain an impassable gulf between the boun
daries of philosophy and the first rudiments of religious
truth — the existence and perfections of God. When the
facts before us are duly considered, and when it is remem
bered that the most enlightened philosophers in the heathen
world, though possessing from tradition the notion of a God,
heid the eternity of matter, and deemed its creation abso- '
lutely impossible ; and, that in the prevalent systems of
Pagan theology, the mere construction of the universe out
of pre-existent elements, was ascribed to inferior deities;
and when, moreover, it is remembered that even the wisest
men in the christian world, with their conceptions refined,
and their powers of thinking invigorated by the quickening
beams of revelation, have never been able to prove the exis
tence of a single attribute of the Divine Being, beyond what
are plainly asserted in the bible ; (though probably there are
many other attributes :) — I say, when we put these facts
together, we are forced to the conclusion, that, as the world,
by wisdom, never has discovered God, so it never would
have discovered him — that the subhme conception of one
God, an eternal, independent, all wise, all powerful, and
absolutely perfect Being, the creator and governor of all
things, could never have been realized by man without a
revelation from heaven.

CHAPTER II.
MODE OF CONDUCTING THE ARGUMENT :  DR. S. CLARKE'S,
REASONING EXAMINED :  FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES STATED,

" For every house is builded by some man, but he that built all things is
God." — Hebrews, iii., 4.

The admission previously made as to the incompetency
of reason to originate the conception of the Deity, does not
detract from the clearness and force of the evidence which
creation affords to the mind of this great truth, when once
propounded by revelation. The Newtonian system of the
universe was an unresolved, and apparently an unresolvable
problem for near six thousand years. The loftiest minds
had sought in vain for a solution of this profound problem,
until Newton appeared; but now that system is unfolded,
its facts are so obvious, its laws so simple, and its demon
stration so complete, that the most ordinary minds may
understand it, and the most incredulous are forced to admit
its truth. Had the philosophy of the universe been revealed
from heaven, thousands of years ago, it would at the same time
have been susceptible of a mathematical demonstration . The
existence of the Deity stands in a case similar to the one
supposed. The great truth, though not discovered by man,
has been revealed from heaven, and nature supplies her
corroborative testimony — furnishes a demonstration so dear,
decisive, and convincing, that no man can resist it without
a direct and violent perversion of his own powers.
In proving the existence of God, two modes of argument
have been employed : one, technically called the a priori ;
and the other, a posteriori. The a priori literally means an
argument taken from that which is before, and designates
those arguments which are constructed by reasoning from
cause to effect, from an antecedent to a consequent, from a
principle to a corollary. As, when astronomers, from the
laws and motions of the solar system, determine the return

20 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
of a comet, or the exact time when there will be an eclipse ;
or, when geologists determine by the principles of comparative
anatomy, the form, size, proportions, and. character, of the crea
ture to which a fossil fragment belonged : in such cases, the
reasoning is a priori. On the other hand, an argument
a posteriori, is reasoning conducted from an effect to a cause,
from a consequent to an antecedent. As, when, from the
mechanism of a watch, or some exquisite work of art, we
infer the skill and genius of its author. But no example
more clearly and forcibly illustrates this latter, -kind of rea*-
soning, than the compendious statement of Paul: "Every
house is builded by some man, but he that built all things
is God." As the house proves a builder, the universe proves
a God. It will at once be seen, that the latter kind of reasoning
is conclusive and satisfactory ; but the former, as an argu
ment for the existence of God, is totally inapplicable.
However appropriate and useful in proving some of the. «M«-
butes of Jehovah, it is altogether out of place when used1, to
prove his eccistenee.. The reason of this is obvious :. the ar
gument a priori, necessarily requires an antecedent to prove
a consequent ; but, as God is the First cause of all things,
he. can have no antecedent, and therefore his existence ad
mits of no proof of this kind ; yet, as this mode of argument
has been employed by men of acute and powerful minds,
it may not be out of place to give it some consideration, ere
we pass to that tangible and common sense line of argument,
which, as it may be understood by all, is calculated to con
vince and satisfy all reasonable men. Dr. Samuel Clarke
is admitted to be the most able advocate and expounder of
the a priori argument, and, as his work on " the being and
attributes of God," is the most generally known, we shall "
analyze his reasoning on this subject.
It is proper, however, to observe, that the appellation a
priori, is by no means applicable to the entire argument even
of Dr. Clarke. Metaphysical it may be called, for the most
part, but the title of a priori, is unquestionably a misnomer
as to the greater portion of his reasoning ; for it is mainly based

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 21
upon posterior facts, as .we shall shortly show; and such
indeed, must be the reasoning of all men, on this subject,
whatever may be the title ascribed to it. The doctor's
argument is grounded upon three general propositions.
The First proposition affirms, " That it is absolutely and
undeniably certain, that something has existed from eternity. "
Granted: but this proposition the Doctor proves by an
a posteriori argument, founded upon the fact of our own
actual existence, and that of the universe around us.
The Second proposition affirms, that " this something which
has existed from eternity, must be an unchangeable and
independent Being ;" and, therefore, distinct from the universe
itself, which, in all its parts, is changeable and dependant.
This proposition, also, he establishes by an a posteriori
argument. In the Third proposition, out author affirms, that " this '
unchangeable and independent Being, which has existed from
eternity without any external cause of its existence, must be
self -existing, that is, necessarily eadsting." In support of this
proposition, he argues in the first instance: — "Whatever
exists, must either have come into being out of nothing,
absolutely without cause, or it must have been produced by
some external cause, or it must be self-existent. Now, to arise
out of nothing, absolutely without any cause, has been
already shown to be a plain contradiction. To have been
produced by some external cause, cannot possibly be true
of everything; but something must have existed eternally
and independently, as has been shown already. It remains,
therefore, that that Being which has existed from eternity,
must of necessity be self-existent." So far, conclusive and
satisfactory, but still it will be seen that the reasoning rests
upon an a posteriori foundation — it is stilan argument from
effect to cause.
From this point, however, the doctor diverges, and enters
upon debatable ground: here he introduces his a priori
• argument, so called, and his reasoning becomes confused
and unsatisfactory. An application is made of the term
"necessity," as the ground of God'sexistence, whichis inadmis-

22 THE" EXISTENCE OP GOD-
sible, and an attempt is made to sustain it by an argument,
based upon metaphysical subtleties respecting space and eter
nity, which we regard as untenable and unsound. But we give
the doctor's own words. " Now, to be self-existent is not
to be produced by itself, for that is an express contradiction."
Very true. But he adds, ''' it is, (which is the only idea we
can frame of self existence ; and without which, the word
seems to have no signification at all ;) it ' is, I say, to exist
by an absolute necessity, originally in the nature of the1
thing itself. And this necessity must be antecedent ; not,
indeed, in time, to the existence of the Being itself, because
that is eternal; but it must be antecedent, in' the natural
order of our ideas, to our supposition of its Being ; that is,
this necessity must not barely be consequent upon our sup
position of the existence of such a Being ; (for, then it would
not be a necessity, absolutely such in itself, nor be the ground
or foundation of the existence of any thing, being on the
contrary, only a consequent of it ;) but, it must antecedently
force itself upon us, whether we will or no, even when we
are endeavouring to suppose that no such Being exists. For
¦example : when we are endeavouring to suppose, that there
is no Being in the universe that exists necessarily, we always
find in our minds, (besides the foregoing demonstration of
something being self-existent, from the impossibility of every
thing's being dependant ;) we always find in our minds, I
say, some ideas as of infinity and eternity; which to remove,
that is, to suppose that there is no being, no substance in
the universe, to which these attributes, or modes of existence,
are necessarily inherent, is a contradiction in the very terms.
For modes and attributes exist only by the existence of the
¦ substance to Which they belong. Now, he that can supposj?
eternity and immensity, (and, consequently, the substance
by whose existence these modes or attributes exist,) removed
out of the -universe, may, if 'he please, as easily remove the
relation of equality between twice two, and four."
Such is Doctor Clarke's general statement of the a priori
argument, expanded and elaborated in the subsequent
pages of his work. The high respect .we cherish for his

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 23
talents, and the object for which they were employed, render
it an irksome task to take exceptions to his arguments ; but
the paramount claims of truth render it desirable that the
fundamental doctrine of rehgion should be based only on
sound principles of reasoning ; and, therefore, we deem it
. incumbent upon us to point out what we conceive to be
untenable in the argument adduced.
In the paragraph we have quoted from Dr. Clarke, the
term "necessity" is employed in a sense which we deem
objectionable, and the general argument we consider falla
cious. The grounds of our objection to both may be
briefly stated. The Doctor speaks of an ' absolute necessity
in the nature of God ' as ' the ground or foundation of his
existence.' To represent an " absolute necessity " as the
"ground or foundation " of God's existence, is, in our view,
to use words without meaning ; or if such words have any
meaning, they are inapplicable and improper. We can
form no conception either of a necessity, or anything else,
as the ground or foundation of an existence that is underived,
unoriginated, independent, and eternal. There can be no
necessity — physical or absolute — which could operate upon
God to modify his existence, much less be its foundation.
In speaking of God as self-existent, we keep within the
bounds of Scripture and reason, but when we seek for any
physical or absolute necessity in the Divine nature, as
the foundation of that existence, we involve ourselves in
absurdity. We admit, indeed, that the existence of God is necessary,
in opposition to contingent existence, but this is widely
different from supposing a necessity as the foundation of his
existence. The self-existence and independence of God are
the foundation or ground of that necessity, and not that
necessity the ground or foundation of his existence. It
is because we admit his unoriginated self-existence, that we
admit his necessary existence. Existence is essential to God
because he is self-existent; self-existence and contingent
existence are contradictory.
It is a further exception to the argument of our author,

24 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
that it is involved in obscurity by a strange confusion of
ideas. Throughout the paragraph quoted, and in others on
that argument, the reader will find that a physical is con
founded with an intellectual or logical " necessity." In the
same sentence, a " necessity, "which is described as existing in
the Divine nature, is spoken of as forcing itself upon our
minds, and taking its place among our established truths,
or self-evident propositions. It is granted the subject is
abstruse, and a difficulty is often felt from the poverty and
ambiguity of language, but the distinction between a physical
and an intellectual necessity — between a principle in the
Divine nature, and a mental perception — is so obvious and
apparent, that it seems strange to confound them in laying
down the basis of an argument; and, in this instance, the
lapsus animi of our author has thrown not a little obscurity
and confusion over his performance.
We have, however, graver objections than those stated.
We regard the entire argument as illogical in construction,
and fallacious in principle. In reviewing the paragraph quoted
above, from our author, we would direct special attention
to the words we have marked as emphatic. The necessary
existence of Deity is argued from infinite space and du
ration.* " We find in our minds" says Dr. Clarke, "some
ideas of infinity and eternity, " or of infinite space and
infinite duration ; and then, assuming that these are attri
butes, he argues, that these " attributes " necessarily involve
the existence of a substance in which they inhere, or to
which they belong ; and from this proceeds to show, that,
as we cannot dismiss from the mind an idea of these attri
butes (eternity and immensity), we cannot dismiss the idea
of the substance itself to which, they belong ; and, therefore,
the idea of God, or of an infinite and eternal Being, forces
* A similar view is expressed by Newton, of which the following is a
translation: — " God is not eternity and infinity, but is eternal and infi
nite. He is not duration or space, but by existing through all duration
and space, he constitutes eternity and infinity." It was probably from
this scholium that our author derived the principal elements of his
a priori argument.

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 25
itself upon the mind as a necessary truth. This is the sub
stance of the a priori argument ; and were it as easily proved
as stated, the controversy with atheists would be in a narrow
compass indeed.
But the argument is both illogically constructed and
fallacious in its foundation. It is built upon a mere
assumption. The great principle on which all depends is
takenfor granted, instead of being proved ; and, unfortunately,
is very capable of being disproved. The Doctor first speaks
of our having "ideas of. infinity and eternity," and. before
the sentence is finished, these " ideas " are magnified into
"attributes! " Who does not see that the argument, is worth
less, unless it were proved that our conceptions of eternity
and immensity (or infinite space) do necessarily imply that
these are attributes ? Till, that is done, the argument is
without foundation. A careful examination of our ideas of
eternity, and infinite space, will make it manifest, that,
abstractedly considered, they are not the ideas of either
attributes or modes, and do not necessarily imply the exis-
'tence of either. For what, is our idea of eternity, but an
idea of duration unlimited, or of time indefinitely extended
—extended backward into the past, and forward into the
future? It is an idea of duration without beginning and
without end, and differs from the idea of a moment, or a
year, only by indefinite enlargement ; and a thing does not
part with its essence by enlargement. We get the notion
of time by observing the succession of ideas in our minds ;*
and we get the idea of defined and measured portions of
time by the regular and stated motions of bodies; and
having once got the idea of time, and of definite portions
thereof, we can conceive of it either in short periods, or in
vlong periods, or as being unlimited; and this last idea of
time is our notion of eternity. Now , it is evident we can
* We take the word, idea, in the large and general sense in which
it is used by Locke. Eeid and Brown refer our notion of duration to
the faculty of memory. It is certainly by the power of memory that
we have any conception of succession, and therefore there is no sub
stantial difference between these authors iii this respect.
D

20 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
conceive of different limited portions of time, from an hour
to a thousand ages, without supposing 'those periods to be
the measure of any object actually existing. We can arbi
trarily conceive of them as pure mental abstractions, just as
we can of arithmetical numbers, or mathematical problems';'
and if we can thus conceive of limited portions of time as
pure mental abstractions, so we can of unlimited duration:
The conception of eternity, therefore, does not necessarily
imply that eternity is an attribute of any substance what
ever ; and if not, the Doctor's argument is fallacious.
The Doctor's assumption respecting " immensity," or unli
mited space, is equally untenable. But what is space?
Some writers have contended that it is God himself, and
Dr. Clarke contends that it is an attribute of God. ¦ Others
have adopted the same theory. We contend, however, that
it is neither a substance nor an attribute, but mere nihility,
or, what is the same thing, mere capacity for being. How
do we get the idea of space ? Is it not from sight and touch ?
We observe, or feel, that bodies are apart from each other,1 ;
and perceiving nothing between them, we call that nothing*
space. Thus, the idea we receive is that of simple negation'.
Whether or not there may be some invisible and intangible
substance between the bodies is quite another consideration,
and has no essential connection with our idea of 'space itself.
Our idea of space being a mere negation, or absence of some
thing, is not an idea of either substance or attribute ; and
if such be our idea of space when we contemplate it in any
defined or limited portions, it is essentially the same when
considered as unlimited and boundless. Our idea of its
nature is not altered by changing its dimensions. Whether
we consider it finite or infinite, it is still a mere negation.
It is no more an attribute of something really existing, than
silence is an attribute of sound, or darkness an attribute
of light, or absence an attribute of something present, or
Aristotle's " privation " a principle of existence.*
» Nor can any exception be taken to our argument, on the ground
that we do not distinguish between " space real," and " space ideal."
For we know of no difference. We contend that our ideas ai?e in strict

THE EXISTENOE OF GOD. 27
, It is true, that as language was formed to speak of some- >
thing, rather than of nothing, we are compelled, even when
speaking of "nothing" — of that which has no being — to
employ positive terms ; and thus a mere negation becomes
nominally invested with attributes of a real existence. Hence, j
we speak of the existence, of space, of space having various di
mensions, as a foot, a yard, a mile, or the extent of the solar sys
tem, &c. ; but, herein, we mean merely just so much distance or
emptiness as may correspond with those dimensions. We
acknowledge an impropriety (philosophically considered) in
this application of positive terms to a mere negation ; but
the language is well understood by the common people,
unsophisticated by metaphysical subtleties, though it has
bewildered philosophers, and led to the adoption of such
crude theories and speculations, as have caused metaphysics
to be despised. Bacon has well observed respecting the use
of words, that " although we think we govern them, yet,
certain it is, that, as a Tartar's bow, they shoot back upon
the understanding, and mightily pervert, the judgement."
Thus, our ideas are often created, and oftener influenced,
by the use of words.
Deluded by the misapplication of positive terms to a mere
nihility, metaphysicians have at length reasoned as if those
terms were the representatives of positive ideas, and finally
have invested pure space, or mere nothing, with the Divine
attributes of eternity, omnipresence, and necessary existence :
indeed, by some it has been seriously argued, that space is
no other than the Deity himself. One would think that
such an extravagant perversion would have broken the reve
rie .of philosophers, and brought them back to the regions
of common sense. Yet, we may easily see how the equivo
cal and ambiguous meaning of terms may have originated
even this erroneous conception ; it is only the common
fallacy of mistaking words for things, and nominal resem
blances for substantive realities. They argue that space!
accordance with the reality in thjs case. Besides, as Dr. Clarke's a
priori argument is based on " certain ideas in our minds," so our
objection is based upon the ide,as we have of space, &c.

28 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
I must be eternal, because we cannot conceive of its having
either beginning or end ; but the same may, and with equal
propriety, be predicated of nihility, for that which has no
existence can have no beginning, and, therefore, can have no
end. They argue that space must be infinite in extension,
because we cannot conceive of its having bounds ; but the
same may be affirmed of nihility, for that which has no exis
tence cannot be bounded. They argue that the existence of
space must be necessary, for we cannot even conceive of its
destruction ; but, by the same licence, it may be affirmed
that nihility has necessary existence, because it cannot be
destroyed ; we cannot make mere nothing less than nothing ;
that which is nihil already, cannot be annihilated.* It is
evident that whatever may be predicated of space may, by
the same licence of language, be predicated of mere nihi
lity, and they are thus proved to be identical. The appli
cation of positive terms to space, or nihility, is a mere licence
of language ; but all the positive terms which men can heap
upon space cannot convert nothing into something ; and all
the imaginary attributes with which they invest it melt
away in the crucible of common sense, and leave it just
what it is — mere nothing. Death is merely the absence or
privation of life, yet the poets have personified Death, and
called him the king of terrors ( and it would be just as philo- '
sophical to conceive of this poetic fiction as a real person,'
as it is to conceive of space as "either substance, attribute,
or mode. It is just nothing.
We see, then, how futile must be any argument, built
upon such mental abstractions, to establish the great and
fundamental truth of religion — the existence of God. We
have shown, that neither the idea of eternity nor space ¦
necessarily implies the existence of an eternal and infinite
subsistence, and, therefore, this argument of Dr. Clarke must'
be pronounced untenable. The same may be" affirmed*!
* We are aware that it may be alleged that the existence of the
material universe precludes the absolute infinity of space, but, however
much this may militate against the notion of our opponents, it makes*
nothing against our view, as to space and mere nihility being identical."

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 29
respecting the abstract idea of an absolutely perfect being,
adduced by Cartesius and other metaphysical writers, as a
proof that such a Being must exist. Even the idea of such
a Being must, we are satisfied, have been derived originally
from revelation : but whether thus derived, or not, the bare fact
that we have such a conception in our minds, is of itself no more
a proof of the actual existence of such a Being, than that
every abstract problem in Euclid is necessarily a represent
ative or type of something actually existing in the material
universe, or than the arbitrary creations of a poet's ima
gination are necessarily types of things actually existing.
We grant that the conception of an absolutely perfect Being,
as it involves in it no contradiction, implies the possibility of
his existence, but affords not the shadow of a proof of his
actual existence. Those who wish to pursue this subject
further may consult Law's Enquiry ; Watt's Enquiry con
cerning Space ; Jackson, on Space, &c. ; Gretton's Review of
the Argument a priori ; Dr. Chalmers on Natural Theology,
Vol. I. ; and Watson's Institutes.
We now proceed to the argument a posteriori. Here we
feel that we tread on solid ground, on a rock of adamant.
Here we deal with facts which are obvious, and arguments
which can be easily comprehended, and which must carry
conviction to every mind where candour, integrity, and a
love of truth, have their abode. The proposition to be estab
lished is, that — there is a God — a conscious intelligent
Being, who is the creator and upholder of all things. To
enable the reader more clearly to apprehend the general
scope and tenor of the argument, it may be advisable to
state the fundamental principles on which it will be sus
tained. Those principles are the following : —
I. — Every effect must have a cause, and the cause must
be adequate to the effect.
II. — There must be something which is not an effect,
but unoriginated and eternal.
III. — The universe is an effect, and therefore is not the
unoriginated and eternal Being in question.

30 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
IV. — The universe, as an effeet, must have a cause, and
the unoriginated Being must be its cause.
V. — This cause must be a conscious intelligent Being,
because the effect is the product of intelligence and
design.
The corollary of this argument is the proposition we have
stated : There is a God — a conscious intelligent Being — the
Creator and upholder of all things.

CHAPTER III.
FIRST PROPOSITION : — EVERY EFFECT MUST HAVE A CAUSE,
AND THE CAUSE MUST BE ADEQUATE TO THE EFFECT.

This fundamental truth is one of those self-evident axioms
which no reasoning can make more obvious, and so firmly
grounded in our nature, that no sophistry can subvert it.
It is verified by consciousness and observation, and by
every way in which truth can be recognized by the mind.
We know, from consciousness, that we have power to pro
duce numberless effects which could not take place without
our agency; and the power which consciousness attests
as existing in ourselves, our observation and experience
witness as existing in others. In fact, the languages and
the reasoning of all nations evince, that this consciousness
of personal agency is natural to man, and is the foundation
of morals and responsibility. The man who denies his own
agency, denies the evidence of his own consciousness, and
might as well deny his own existence ; every action he per
forms convicts him of insanity or hypocrisy. We see other
causes in operation around us in the material universe. It is
true, the relation between cause and effect in the operations of
inanimate nature, is different in its land from that of human
agency, but not in its uniformity and certainty. For the
connection between the falhng of a stone, as the effect of
gravitation, is not less certain and real than the connection
between a volition of the mind and a corresponding action
of the body. All philosophy is built upon this certainty.
What, indeed, is philosophy, but an inquiry into the laws
of nature ? and what are those laws, but rules or principles
according to which the diversified phenomena, or effects,
are produced by their respective causes ? The dependance

32 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
of effects upon their cause, therefore, lies at the very founda
tion of all philosophy. Without this axiom there could be no
inquiry prosecuted, no law demonstrated, no principle
evolved. Nature would be contemplated as a chaos. The
physical dependanoe of effects upon their causes, is admitted
an axiomatic principle, which irresistibly forces itself upon
every mind. It is an intellectual necessity, which is alike
felt by the savage and the sage.
It may be further affirmed, that our confidence in the
connection between cause and effect is an instinct of our
nature. While we reject the doctrine of innate ideas, we
admit the existence of innate tendencies and impressions,
and our confidence in the constancy and uniformity of
nature arises from an instinctive tendency or impression.
It appears in the earliest developments of our mental consti
tution, before reasoning or experience has had time to
originate the impression. Dr. Chalmers has well observed,
"In a newly formed mind, there is no idea of nature, or of a
single object in nature — yet, no sooner is an object presented,
or is an event observed to happen, than there is elicited the
tendency of the mind to presume on the constancy of na
ture. At least as far back as our observation extends, this
law of the mind is in full operation. Let an infant, for the
first time in his life, strike on the table with a spoon, and,
pleased with the noise, it will repeat that stroke with .every
appearance of a confident anticipation that the noise will be
repeated also. " Natural Theology, Vol. I.
It is certain that, in the mind of the infant, the noise is
connected with the stroke on the table, and the stroke with
its own agency. There is here some undefinable recognition
of the connection between the effect and the cause, obvi
ously accompanied with an unhesitating confidence in the
uniformity and constancy of nature ; and as these impres
sions of the infant mind cannot be the result of reason or
experience (for they are felt anterior to both), they must be
referred to an instinct of our nature. This original impres
sion continues with us through life. This recognition of
the connection between cause and effect never leaves us.

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 33
It is as natural for us to believe that every effect must have
a cause, as it is to confide in the certainty of our own ex
istence ; and all the operations of nature are in harmony
with this principle, and demonstrate that it has not been
implanted in our nature in vain. This harmony between
the instinct of our mental constitution, and the operations
of nature, does, of itself present a powerful argument for a
designing and an intelligent Creator, but it would be out
of place to pursue this argument at present. Our object,
now, is merely to show that the connection between cause
and effect, whether it be considered in relation to our
own actions, or the operations of nature, is a principle so
thoroughly grounded in our mental constitution that it can
not be resisted. It is not possible even to imagine an effect
without a cause ; the mind instantly resists every attempt
to entertain such a conception, because it is contradictory
to an intuitive principle.
The sophism of David Hume, who endeavours to resolve »
the connection between cause and effect into the mere rela- 1
tion of succession, is a quibble, worthy only of himself and 1
his abettors. For this succession is either founded in nature
as a physical necessity, or it is not.* If it is, then the
dependance of effects upon their causes is admitted. If it
is hot, then we demand, How is it that this succession is
invariable and universal ? How is it, that what are called
effects, do not take place without any causes ? If this suc
cession wore merely accidental, it would be just as proper to
say that light is the cause of darkness, or darkness the cause
of light ; for they succeed each other daily : it would be as
proper to1 say that silence is the cause of sound, or sound
the cause of silence, (for these succeed one another,) as it
would be to say fire was the cause of heat ! Again, if this
succession were accidental, the order of it might, and indeed
* When we speak of essential or necessary connection between cause
.and effect, we mean merely that cqnneotion which the Deity himself
has established in the system of nature, and not as excluding from
Him the power of establishing a different class of causes, had he
thought proper.

34 THF EXISTENCE OF GOD.
would, be often interrupted, or inverted. We ask, then,
How is it, that the events called effects, do not promiscu
ously change places with those agencies called causes ? Why
do not effects as often precede their causes as causes precede
their effects ? How is it that the succession universally flows
one way — from cause to effect ? I suppose when the infidel
philosopher wrote his preposterous sentiments he used a
pen ; but if his theory be correct, why may we not as justly
suppose, that the goose quill used the philosopher, as that
the philosopher used the goose quill ?
But we confront this philosopher with himself. We may
silence and condemn him out of his own mouth. It is hard
for those who contend against the truth to preserve their
consistency, and of this our infidel philosopher is an ex
ample. When arguing against the being of God, he denies
I the necessary dependance of effects upon their causes ; but,
in another place, when arguing against Christianity, he de-
i nies the credibility of miracles, because, as he alleges, they
( are contrary to our experience of " the constancy of nature."
$ But if there be no necessary dependance of effects upon
their causes, there can be no necessary constancy in the
operations of nature. If the succession of effects be purely
accidental, it is quite in character for effects, such as miracles,.
to take place without physical causes. His arguments thus
destroy each other, and his inconsistency utters no compli
ment upon his sincerity. His argument against miracles,
however, has this value ; it proves that he had no confidence
in his argument against the Being of God; it proves that
his argument was merely a subtle sophism, fabricated with
a design to obscure and perplex a plain but unwelcome
truth ; and it proves that Hume, like all other men, beheved
in the necessary physical dependance of every effect upon
its cause ; or, in other words, that there can be no effect
without a cause.
Every infidel, in objecting to the miracles of Christianity, \
bases his objections upon a principle which necessarily ad
mits the connection between cause and effect. For what is
a miracle, but an effect apparently without an adequate cause ?

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 85
And why does the infidel deny the truth of a miracle but because
it is an event without an adequate cause? And why does he
object on this ground, but because he confides in the constancy
of nature ? But what is the constancy of nature, except the
essential relation between cause and effect ? And why does
he so tenaciously believe in that constancy, but because he
believes that relation to be real and essential, not fortuitous
and accidental ; or, in other words, because he believes there
can be no effect without a cause. Thus his infidehty pre
sents its own antidote, and does homage to the common
sense of mankind, and the fundamental truths of religion.
Since every effect must have a cause, it necessarily follows,
that the cause must be adequate to the effect. The pre
ceding postulate being admitted, this will not be disputed
While we are conscious ourselves of a power to produce
many effects, we are conscious, also, of inability to produce
many others. We feel that our powers are limited. We can
modify and transform the rude materials of nature, made
ready to our hand ; we can change them into forms of ele
gance and usefulness ; but we cannot create a single particle
of dust. We can make a watch, a steam-engine, and other
ingenious machines, but we cannot make life even in its
lowest forms. With regard, also, to the agencies of inani
mate nature, we see that their powers are limited. The
laws of motion, gravitation, chemical affinity, attraction,
repulsion, &c, produce many important effects in the eco
nomy of nature ; but no possible operation of these laws can
be conceived adequate to the production of a watch, a steam-
engine, a house, or a ship. These effects, and all of a similar
character, are beyond the powers of nature alone. These
effects exhibit intelligence and design, to which inanimate
nature is not adequate. Whether, or not, the operations of
nature evince the existence of intelligence and design,
corresponding to what are displayed in works of men — in
the construction of a house, a ship, or a complicated
machine — is a question which will engage our attention here
after. If, however, such intelligence and design are mani
fested in the universe, it is clear the intelligence and design

oP THE EXISTENCE OF GOB.
do not reside in ourselves, or in nature, but ih. something
above, and superior to, both, If there are effects which it
is demonstrable cannot be produced, either by man, or any
species of animal existence, or by any natural causes, we
shall be compelled to look for some other cause distinct,
from, and independent of, all. But, at present, we have
merely to lay down the' fundamental, axiom, that as every
effect must have a cause, and as each cause must be. ade
quate to the effect it produces, so every effect indicative ,of
intelligence and design, must have an intelligent author.
The intelligence of the agent may. be superior, but it cannot,
be inferior, to the effect it produces. The principle here
laid down must be admitted by all reasonable minds ; ita
use and application in our argument will appear hereafter.
We proceed to consider the next proposition.

CHAPTER IV.
SECOND PROPOSITION : — THERE MUST BE SOMETHING WHICH IS
NOT AN EFFECT, BUT UNORIGINATED AND ETERNAL.

From the necessary connection between cause and effect, it
follows that, in a chain or series of events, all proximate
causes are themselves effects of remoter causes ; and "these
again are effects of other causes still more remote; and so
on throughout the whole series, until' We come to a first
cause which must be unoriginated and eternal. All causes,,
then, are in reality effects, until we reach an original or first
cause, which, from its very nature, cannot be an effect. Hence, ,
our second proposition — There must be something which is
not an effect, but unoriginated and eternal. At present we stop
not to inquire into the nature of this something ; whether
it be material or immaterial ; whether it be nature itself, or
something apart from nature, and independent of it. These
inquiries, though highly important, are quite distinct, and
must be reserved for subsequent and separate consideration.
The proposition must not be encumbered with any extra
neous ideas. We have merely to show that there must be
something which is not an effect, but is unoriginated and
eternal ; and this proposition may be established by a very
simple process of reasoning. We know from consciousness
that we exist, and, from the evidence of our senses, we know
that others exist, and that the universe around us exists.
We are certain, also, that no being can create itself, or be
the cause of its own existence ; for this would imply that it
acted before it existed, which is a contradiction. It is evi
dent, therefore, if ever there had been a period when there
was absolutely no being in existence, it would have been
absolutely impossible that any being could have begun to
exist. Ex nihilo, nihil fit — out of nothing, nothing can arise

38

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.

— is an axiom universally admitted. We repeat, had
there been a period in eternity when there was neither
matter nor spirit ; no being whatever, intelligent or unintel
ligent; not the bare existence of any thing, created or
uncreated ; but all infinite space, being, absolutely, an infi
nite void ; there could not ever have arisen any existence at
all — a boundless vacuity must have remained a boundless
vacuity for ever. Seeing, therefore, it is certain that some
thing does now exist, something must always have existed,
and that which has always existed must itself be. unorigi
nated and eternal. It is the fountain and source of all
subsequent existence, and, therefore, it is no effect, it can
have no cause, no origin, but is necessarily eternal. We
pass on to our next proposition.

CHAPTER V.

THIRD PROPOSITION : — THE ETERNAL SOMETHING MUST BE
DISTINCT FROM THE UNIVERSE, BECAUSE THE UNIVERSE
IS AN EFFECT.

In establishing this proposition, it devolves upon us to prove
that the universe is an " effect." By the universe, we mean
nature as it exists, with its diversified laws, arrangements,
and constitution. That the frame-work and organization of
the universe are collectively an effect, produced by some
thing, there is abundant evidence, and that even its consti
tuent elements themselves are effects produced by something,
will be shown hereafter. If, however, the former only were
demonstrated, to be collectively, an effect, it would in
volve evidence that the latter is an effect also; for it is
incompatible with the idea of an unoriginated Being to
receive subsequent changes and modifications, Prove that
nature, as now constituted, is an effect, and it follows
undeniably, that matter is not the unoriginated and eternal
Being whose existence we are seeking. But of this we shall
speak hereafter.
Now, the proof that the universe is an effect, lies in the
fact that it has had a beginning.
That ourselves, and the numerous individual beings com
prehended in all present existent species of the vegetable and
animal kingdoms, have had a beginning, is too plain for the
atheist to deny; but that each species of beings, as well as each
existing individual in the species, has also had a beginning,
may be demonstrated.
The fiction, that things have existed in an eternal series,
has long since been logically exploded. It has been shown,
that the notion of an eternal series of dependant beings
involves a contradiction and an impossibility ; because each

40 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
individual in the series being derived from, and dependent
upon, its predecessor, the properties of derivation and
dependence must belong to the whole ; and derivation and
dependence necessarily involve an origin, and that origin
must be underived and independent, and therefore eternal.*
Conclusive and satisfactory as this argument may be
deemed, we need not rest upon it. In fact, this argument
has, we may say, become almost obsolete, by the more
tangible and impressive evidence of facts.
The science of Geology furnishes a palpable demonstra^ :
tion that the notion of an eternal series of beings is a mere
figment of the imagination ; for this science reveals succes
sive periods, when not an individual of the present species
of animal or vegetable had existence ; nay, more, when
neither animal nor vegetable of any kind had existence.
It would lead us away into too extended a digression,
compatibly with the unity of our argument, to introduce in
this place the critical evidence which proves the consistency
and harmony between Geological discovery and the teach
ings of Holy Scripture, in reference to the history of the crea
tion. . Suffice it for the present to observe, that we have the
fullest conviction there is a perfect harmony, and that the
harmony is founded on just and obvious principles of inter
pretation. The history of creation, furnished in the first
* This argument has been illustrated by Wollaston : — " Suppose
a chain hung down out of the heavens from an unknown height, and
though every link of it gravitated towards the earth, and what it hung
upon was not visible, yet it did not descend, but kept its situation. And
upon this a question should arise. What supported or kept up this
chain ? Would it be a sufficient answer to say, that the first or lowest
link hung upon the second, or that next above it ; the Second, or rather
the first and second together, upon the third; and so on in infinitum ?
For what holds up the whole ? A chain of ten links would fall down,
unless some thing, able to bear it, hindered : one of twenty, if not stayed
by something of yet greater strength, in proportion to the increase of
weight. And thus it is, in a chain of causes and effects, tending or (as
it were) gravitating, towards some end. The last, or lowest, depends,
or (as one may say) is suspended, upon the cause above it. This, again,';
if it be not the first cause, is suspended, as an effect, upon something
above it." — Religion of Nature delineated.

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 41
chapter of Genesis, does not confine the works of God to
six days. It speaks of at least two distinct periods of divine
operation. The one, when " God created the heavens and
the earth ;" 'and another, quite distinct from this, when, oh
six successive days, he wrought certain wonderful operations,
among which man was created. The stupendous act of
creation — of bringing into actual existence the constituent
elements of nature, was the event setforth in the first period,
for it was " In the beginning God created the heavens and
the earth." But that the six-days' operation was the next
or second work of God, is neither stated nor implied in the
sacred narrative. What period elapsed between the first
act of creation, and the six-days' work, is not stated ; and
what wonderful" operations were accomplished during that
interval are not recorded. Respecting both the intervening
period and the intervening works, the scriptures are silent,
because such information was not necessary to our welfare ;
it being the object of revelation not to teach us the sciences,
nor to set forth, specially, all the operations of the Almighty,
tout to teach us our relation to God, and our duty towards
him. The distinct and independent form, therefore, in
which the first verse stands, with respect to those which
follow, and the entire silence of scripture as to both the
period and the operations which might occur between the
actual creation of the universe " in the beginning," and the
more detailed operations during the six-days, give a latitude
for the supposition of myriads of intervening ages, and
myriads of intervening operations, and thus perfectly har
monize with the discoveries of Geology. The scriptures
plainly declare that God is the author of all things ; and
they teach us also the very recent existence of man, and
the present order of things : Geology confirms both these
-feuths ; and by unfolding to us successive revolutions which
transpired between the first fiat of creation, and the more
recent changes when man was brought into existence,
abundantly refute the atheistic notion of an eternal suc
cession, and add a mass of important evidence to the
fundamental truths of theology.

42 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
It would be incompatible with our limits to enter minutely
into the details of Geological science ; but it may be gene
rally stated, that the numerous strata composing the crust
of our globe, for about ten miles in thickness, have been
classified, by Geologists, into four series. Each series
embraces a variety of rocks, formed, successively and slowly,
by sedimentary deposits, during such immense periods
of time, that, compared with the aggregate of those periods,
the entire epoch of human history is only as an hour com
pared with a thousand years. The most ancient strata,
lying next to the granite, and consisting of gneiss, mica
schist, hornblende, clay state, &c, are designated " The
primary series. " The next in antiquity, comprising various
formations, which commence with the Silurian rocks, and
end with the great coal formation, are termed " The tran
sition series." The next strata in the ascending series,
starting from the great coal formation, include numerous
rocks of sandstone, limestone, &c, and, terminating with the
chalk deposits, are named " The secondary series." And the
next strata, reaching from the chalk formation to the sur
face soil, are denominated " The tertiary series." The crust
of the earth, just described, has been so torn, fractured, and
transposed, by successive convulsions and revolutions, that
portions of the various strata are thrown up to the surface,
and exposed to human observation. Internal agencies, of
amazing power, have agitated the bowels of the earth at dif
ferent periods, and forced through the superincumbent strata
those vast masses of granite, which form the central columns
and peaks of the towering Appenine and Andes, &c. The very
foundations of the earth are raised to its loftiest summits,
and the fractured strata which repose on the mountain side,
or build up the rugged walls of the frowning precipice and
deep ravine, reveal to the geologist the successive forma
tions which He between the lowest unstratified rocks, and
the soil on which our harvests wave. Examining these
piled-up ruins of former ages, he can read the general his
tory of our planet through those awful cycles of time which
have elapsed, from the period when our world glowed as a

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 43
molten mass, up to the time when man trod the flowery
walks of paradise. What, then, say these lithographic
records ? Do they teach that existing species are derived
from an eternal succession of progenitors ? They proclaim
the reverse. They reveal a period when no eooistmg species
had a place in our world, and a period still more remote,
when no anterior speoies of either animal or vegetable tribes
had a being ; and, indeed, when the conditions of the earth
were such, that the existence of any organized being was
physically impossible.
Now, as fossil remains attest the species of beings which
in different ages have occupied either the surface of the
earth, or the waters of the ocean, it follows that, if man had
existed in an eternal succession, we should find remains of
the human species, and of human arts, through all the
series of rocks, from the most recent tertiary, down to the
strata of the oldest transition, and even in the granite rocks
themselves, as deep as human observation has reached ; but
the soil, which man ploughs for his subsistence, is the only
deposit where his remains are to be found.* Dr. Buckland
affirms, " no conclusion is more fully established, than the
* Human skeletons have been discovered, imbedded in solid limestone
rock, on the shore of Guadaloupe ; but, as Dr. Buckland observes, the
rock in which they occur is of recent formation. Sometimes, too, human
bones have been found in oaves, inclosed in stalactite, or mingled with
the fossils of extinct species of quadrupeds, but such cases may be
accounted for in various ways ; — " Many of these caverns have been
inhabited by savage tribes, who, for the convenience of occupation, have
repeatedly disturbed portions of the soil, in which their predecessors
may have been buried. Such disturbances will explain the occasional
admixture of fragments of human skeletons, and the bones of modern
quadrupeds, with those of extinct species." " In the case of caverns,
which form the channels of subterranean rivers, or which are subject to
occasional inundations, another cause of the admixture of human
bones with the remains of animals of more ancient date, may be found
in the movements occasioned by running water." Buckland! s Bridge-
water Treatise, 105-6. All such cases furnish no evidence against the
recent origin of the human species. In fact, if the skeletons in question
were coeval with tlie rocks in which they are found, it would not militate
against our argument, for we have only to descend to lower strata, and
every vestige of man disappears.

44 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
important fact of the total absence of any vestiges of the
human species, throughout the entire series of geological
formations."* Remains of other animals are numerous for
thbusands of fathoms deep in the strata of the earth ; and
some of those remains compose entire rocks, of. prodigious
thickness, which must have occupied myriads of ages in
their formation ; but the remains of man have no place
except on the surface of the tertiary system. Not a human
bone is found, not a monument of human art is found, in
the immense piles of strata, which, for ten miles deep, form
the crust of the earth. Nor can it be pretended that they
once existed, but have been decomposed and obliterated ;
for the remains of animals and vegetables, whose texture
was formed of the softest and most pulpy substance, have been
preserved through millions of ages, but not a fragment of
the human system, not a statue, or medal, or utensil, or
intaglio, or inscription, or pillar, or building, or artificial
work of any kind, to attest man's existence in ages anterior to
the few thousand years which the bible assigns to his history.
As Dr. Harris has eloquently observed, " quitting the living
surface of the green earth, and entering on our downward
path, our first step may take us below the dust of Adam,
and beyond the limits of recorded time. From the moment
we leave the mere surface soil, and touch even the nearest
of the tertiary beds, all traces of human remains disappear,
so that let our grave be as shallow as it may, in even the
least stratified bed, we have to make it in the dust of a
departed world. "\ Thus the existence of man is proved to
be of recent origin. If natural generation carries us back
to a single pair of human beings, as the first of our race,
Geology soon carries us back to a period when even the first
pair had not begun to exist ; and thus the atheistic theory of
an eternal succession of human beings is shown to be a
figment of the imagination, both absurd and impossible. '
While Geology thus sustains the testimony of scripture
as to the recent origin of man, the same truth is confirmed
» Bridgewater Treatise, p. 103. + Pre-adamite Earth, p. 72.

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 45
by all authentic history, by the recent dates, in which the
arts and sciences have advanced from primitive rudeness
and imperfection to their present development. The art
of printing, the mariner's compass, the true system of the
universe, the science of chemistry and geology, the steam-
engine, and a multitude of other discoveries, of the greatest
importance to man's Well-being, are of recent origin ; a fact
totally incompatible with the notion of man's having had a
very protracted existence, muoh more with the notion of an
eternal succession of the species. Even the ancient atheistic
Epicureans were compelled to admit the recent origin of
man. While Geology demonstrates the recent origin of man, it
proves, by the same evidence of facts, that all organic exis
tence has had a beginning. More remote, indeed, was the
origin of many inferior tribes than that of man, but there
is the clearest proof that there were periods in the history
of our planet, when neither any species now existing, nor
others of anterior origin, inhabited the earth. In the ter
tiary series of rocks, there are, indeed, remains of shells
belonging to existing species, and of fishes and land animals
belonging to existing genera, but combined with many
others, which have no living representatives. As we descend
lower, this dissimilarity increases, until, entering the second
ary series, we come to a period when, though fossil remains
attest that the seas abounded with fishes, testacea, Crus
tacea, and zoophytes, yet only one genus of the terrestrial
mammalian class is found to have existed, and gigantic
forms of reptiles, and flying lizards, were almost the only
tenants of the earth. Leaving the secondary series, and
descending to the transition rocks, we arrive at a period
when not a solitary species of terrestrial animals is to be
found. The petrified remains of this era furnish proof that
the seas were inhabited by Vertebrated fishes, molluscs, arti
culated and radiated animals, but no remains attest the
existence of either bird or beast at this period. Descending
still further, and reaching the primary series of rocks, we
come to an era when not a relic of either animal or vegetable

46 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
existence is to be found. The strata, composing the series
of primary stratified rocks, are of immense thickness, and
must have required myriads of ages for their deposition ;
but those enormous piles are " wholly destitute of organic
remains."* Descending lower than these primitive strati
fied rocks, we come to those immense beds of granite, the,
depth of which no man knoweth, in which not only are there
no organic remains, but it is clear, from the state of the
earth at this period, that no organized being, animal or
vegetable, could have existed. The igneous origin of gra
nite is too clear to be disputed. The vitrified and chrystal
characteristics of the primitive foundations of our world,
show, that they must have been, at one period, a molten
mass of such intense heat, that even the waters of the
ocean could have had no repose upon the earth's surface,
but must have been suspended in vapours, " floating in the
atmosphere around the incandescent surface." While such
was the state of our planet, it would be just as possible for
either animal or plant to live on the earth, as for them to
hve in streams of fiery lava, as they issue from the crater of
a volcano. We may conclude this branch of our argument in the
language of one of the most eminent Geologists of the
age. " From the absence of all organic remains in the pri
mary strata, we may derive an important argument, showing
that there was a point of time in the history of our planet,
(which no other researches but those of Geology can possibly
approach) antecedent to the beginning of either animal or
vegetable life. This conclusion is the more important, be
cause it has been the refuge of some speculative philosophers to
refer the origin of existing organizations, either to an eternal
succession of the same species, or to the formation of more
recent from more ancient species, by successive develop
ments, without the interposition of direct and repeated acts
of creation ; and thus to deny the existence of any first term,
in the infinite series of successions, which this hypothesis
* Buokland 55, ibid 58.

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 47
assumes. Against this theory, no decisive evidence has
been accessible, until the modem discoveries of Geology
had estabhshed two conclusions, of the highest value, in
relation to this long disputed question : the first proving,
that existing species have had a beginning, and this at a
period comparatively recent in the physical history of our
globe. The second showing that they were preceded by
several other systems of animal and vegetable life, respecting
each of which it may be no less proved, that there was a
time when their existence had not commenced ; and that to
these more ancient systems also, the doctrine of eternal
succession, both retrospective and prospective, is equally
inapplicable." These remarks apply to the stratified rocks,
the lowest series, lying next to the granite itself. Antici
pating an objection, he further states : — " Those who contend
that life may have existed during the formation of the
primary strata, and the animal remains have been obliterated
by the effects of heat on strata nearest to the granite, do
but remove to one point further back the first term of the
finite series of organic beings; and there still remains,
beyond this point, an antecedent period, in which a state of
total fusion pervaded the entire materials of the fundamental
granite ; and one universal mass of incandescent elements,
wholly incompatible with any condition of life which can
be shown to have ever existed, formed the entire substance
of the globe." *
While Geology thus demonstrates that every species of
animal and vegetable existence must have had a beginning,
Astronomy conducts us to the fact, that the earth itself must
have had a beginning also — affords evidence that there was
a period when our world had no place in the solar system,
or, rather, when the solar system itself had no existence.
Analogy, indeed, would afford a presumptive argument of
this. For, if all organized substances on the earth have had
a beginning, and if every stratified rock has been formed by
depositions of the spoils of pre-existing formations, and if
* Buckland, vol. i. 58-55.

48 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
the consolidated and vitrified granite itself gives evidence of
a previous state of fusion, what foundation is there for the
supposition that even this igneous state was the primitive
condition of our planet? If change can thus be traced
through every period of its Geological history, the presump
tion is, that its anterior history was also one of change ; and
a period may rationally be contemplated when it had neither
its present globular form, nor its present place in the solar
System. Analogy leads us to the same results respecting
every other planet; indeed, respecting the entire solar sys
tem, and, respecting every system and every globe in the
universe ; and these deductions derive confirmation from
various Astronomical phenomena.
The general1 laws of Astronomy are now too well under
stood, even by the humblest classes, to require a formal
statement of the evidence that the earth is one of several
planets belonging to the solar system ; that it derives its
light and heat from the sun ; that it turns upon its axis
once in about twenty-four hours ; and that it revolves in an
orbit around the sun once in the year. Now the non-eter
nity of the earth may be satisfactorily evinced, we think,
from the existence and effects of a resisting medium within
the space through which it revolves.* That the space of
the earth's orbit is a vacuum, is contradicted by the fact,
that light is incessantly streaming forth from the sun
through every part of the solar system, and to a distance
inconceivably beyond the wanderings of the most distant *_
comet. Whether light be regarded as a direct emanation of
particles from the solar atmosphere, or the vibrations of an
ethereal fluid, the existence of material particles, diffused
through the entire expanse of the solar system, is established.
The existence, too, of a gravitating force, whatever it be, if -
material, implies the presence of something pervading every
part of our system. That there is one or more media,
* The perturbations and oscillations in the earth's orbicular motion,
caused by the attraction of the other planets, are rectified by forces
mathematically accounted for by Laplace and La Grange ; but this does
not affect the argument arising from a resisting medium.

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 49
through which the planets move, however etherial and
attenuated, must therefore be admitted ; but the effects of
this medium, as to planetary motiott, could scarcely be con
jectured, until recent observations upon Encke's comet
showed a small retardation, affecting the periodical returns
of that vaporous and attenuated body. Two hundred years
ago, indeed, Dr. E. Halley stated, in his Miscellanea Curiosa,
p. 59., he thought he could demonstrate that the opposition
of the ether to planetary motion would, in time, become
sensible ; but it remained fbr more modern astronomers to
determine the fact by actual observation. The solid and com
pact bodies of the planets present, indeed, no appreciable
difference in their periodical revolutions; but Encke's
comet, being a body of light and , vaporous substance,
and consequently the more easily affected by any resist
ing agency, has had the time of its revolution diminished
by about two days since its discovery in 1786. This diminu
tion, however, in the time of its revolution, is accompanied
by the fact of its being ten days in advance of the place
which it Would have reached, had it not been influenced by
some retarding force. This apparent paradox arises from a
conjunction of the facts, that while the comet's motion is
slower, its orbit is narrower, and it gains more by the short
ening of its orbit, than it loses by the diminution of its
velocity. These effects can be accounted for, only by the
existence and influence of a resisting medium.
Professor Airy observes, "I cannot but express my belief,
that the principal part of the theory, viz., an effect similar
to that which a resisting medium would produce, is perfectly
established by the reasoning in Encke's memoir." A simi
lar conviction is expressed by Professor Nichol, and by many
great authorities.
We adduce, at some length, the important statement
of Dr. Whewell: " The same medium which is thus
shown to produce an effect upon Encke's comet, must
also act upon the planets which move through the same
spaces. The effect upon the planets, however, must be
very much smaller than the effect upon the comet, in con-
G

50 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
sequence of their greater quantity of matter." The same
writer goes on to state the consequence of this resistance to
a planet. " If a planet, revolving about the sun, were to
lose any portion of its velocity by the effect of resistance,
it would be drawn proportionably nearer the sun, the ten
dency towards the centre being no longer sufficiently coun
teracted by that centrifugal force which arises from the body's
velocity. And if the resistance were to continue to act, the
-body would be drawn perpetually nearer and nearer to the
centre, and would describe its revolutions quicker and
quicker, till at last it would reach the central body, and the
system would cease to be a system "
" This result is true, however small be the velocity lost
by resistance; the only difference being, that when the
resistance is small, the time requisite to extinguish the
whole motion will be proportionably longer. In all cases,
the times which come under our consideration in problems
of this kind, are enormous to common apprehension. But,"
observes this writer, " the changes themselves must, sooner
or later, take place, in consequence of the existence of the
resisting medium. Since there is such a retarding force
perpetually acting, however slight it be, it must in the end
destroy all celestial motions. It may be millions of millions
of years before the earth's retardation may perceptibly affect
the apparent motion of the sun; but still the day will
come (if the same Providence which formed the system
should permit it to continue so long) when this cause will
entirely change the length of our year, and the course of our
seasons, and finally stop the earth's motion round the sun
altogether. The smallness of the resistance, however small
we may choose to suppose it, does not allow us to escape this
certainty. There is a resisting medium ; and, therefore,
the movements of the solar system cannot go on for ever.
The moment such a fluid is ascertained to exist, the eternity
of the movements of the planets becomes as impossible as a
perpetual motion on the earth."*
.This argument derives confirmation from similar obser
vations which astronomers have made on Biela's comet;
* Whewell's Bridgewater Treatise, 197, &c.

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 51
and, admitting it to be conclusive, as we conceive we
must, it may be applied to the stellary universe, as well
as to the solar system. The fixed stars are now admitted
to be suns — independent sources of light and heat — like
that which illumines and invigorates our world ; and,
hke him, very probably attended by revolving planets, too ,
remote for the human eye, or any optical instrument, to
descry ; and what happens to our system, as the effect of a
resisting medium, may be predicated with respect to every
solar system in the universe. In truth, the retardation of
these comets has established this fact, that while there is
no physical law discovered in nature, adequate to originate
the celestial motions, or restore them when lost, there is
that in existence which does retard motion, and this retard
ation proclaims the final cessation of all motion, as a
physical and necessary result of the constitution of the
universe. There are many stars which revolve around one another,
and astronomical observation demonstrates, that our entire
solar system is shifting its place in the universe, and moving
towards a point in the constellation Hercules, and probably
revolving around some remote centre. Indeed, the sublime
hypothesis is gaining ground, that the countless myriads of
stars, with the crowds of nebulfe, too remote to be deci
phered into stars, are all revolving around a common centre,
"in an orbit so vast, that no measurable arc, in any calcu
lable period of duration, would ever appear otherwise to us
than a straight line." This hypothesis is sustained by the
analogy of nature, so far as the observations of man have
extended. But apart from the hypothesis which connects
and binds all the systems into one magnificent whole,
subordinate to, and revolving around, one common centre,
it may be confidently affirmed that — wherever there is a
system, there is motion ; and wherever there is the presence
of light and gravitation, there is a resisting medium ; and
wherever there is such a medium, there is a physical cause
for the final cessation of motion, and the ultimate destruc
tion of the system itself. Thus, if the universe be a con-

52 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
gregation of such systems, as there is in each an element
of final destruction, the ultimate dissolution of the whole
must flow from the physical laws now in operation, unless
prevented by the interposition of some agency, distinct
from nature, and superior to it. Thus, from the epheme
ral fly, to the whole frame-work of nature, there is nothing
# eternal ; though the one continues but a day, and the other
for ages incalculable, yet both are finite, and as nothing
compared to the cycles of eternity. The heavens, as well
as the earth, shall perish, and wax old as a garment, and
like a vesture be folded up- and laid aside.
Every advance, which superior instruments or more
accurate observation enable the Astronomer to make, in
the starry regions, supplies new facts, accumulating the
proofs, that gravitation and motion prevail, in the remotest
regions which the telescope can reach ; and that their effect,
Hke that upon our system, is, to narrow the orbicular sweep
of the stars, to congregate them into more dense and com
pact clusterings— thus prognosticating their final approxi
mation and consequent destruction, by the slow but certain
operation of physical laws. Let any one examine the dia
grams of nebulas and starry clusters, as copied from the
spectrum of Herschel's and Ross's telescopes, and he will find
that the prevailing form of nebulous and starry clusters is,
more or less, spherical, and the prevailing characteristic
observable is, that of central condensation. When the
telescope is turned-to the Milky Way, it appears to be breaking
up into separate clusters, as if the stars were being gradu
ally drawn closer together, and forming distinct groups.
" Sir William Herschel counted no less than two hundred
and twenty-five such groups, or subordinate clusters, within
the extent of the Milky Way he examined ; and as all those
were of a kind indicating the action of gravity, he concluded
the existence of a clustering power, drawing the stars into
separate groups — a power which had broken up the unifor
mity of the zone, and to whose irresistible influence it
was still exposed. ' Hence, ' says he, ' we may be certain
that the stars will there be gradually compressed, through

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 53
successive stages of accumulation, till they come up to
what may be called the ripening period of the globular
cluster, and total insulation; from which it is evident,
that the Milky Way must forcibly be broken up, and cease
to be a stratum of scattered stars. We may also draw an
important additional conclusion from the gradual disso
lution of the Milky Way, for the state into which the inces-"
sant action of the clustering power has brought it is a kind
of chronometer that may be used to measure the time of
its past and present existence ; and, although we do not
know the rate of the going of this mysterious chronometer,
it is nevertheless certain, that since a breaking up of the
parts of the Milky Way affords a proof that it cannot last
for ever, it equally bears witness that its past duration
cannot be admitted to be infinite." *
Add to these considerations the fact, that while some stars
are augmenting in their brightness and apparent magnitude,
others are diminishing in both, and others again are totally
disappearing. " It is an extraordinary fact," observes Dr.
Mason Good, " that, within the period of the last century,
not less than thirteen stars, in different constellations, none
of them below the sixth magnitude, seem totally to have
perished ; forty to have changed their magnitude, by becom
ing either much larger or much smaller ; and ten to have
supplied the place of those that are lost. Some of these
changes may perhaps be accounted for, by supposing a pro
per motion in the solar and sidereal systems, by which the
relative positions of several of the heavenly bodies have
varied. But this explanation, though it may apply to several
of the cases, will by no means apply to them all ; in many
instances, it is unquestionable that the stars themselves, the
supposed habitations of other kinds or orders of intelligent
beings, together with the different planets by which it is
probable they were surrounded, and to which they may have
given hght and fructifying seasons, as the sun gives hght
and fruitfulness to the earth, have utterly vanished, and the
spots which they occupied in the heavens have become blanks.
* Professor NichpJ.

54 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
What has befallen other systems will assuredly befall our
own. Of the time and manner* we know nothing, but the
fact is scarcely controvertible ; it is foretold by revelation,
it is inscribed in the heavens, it is felt throughout the earth.
Such is the awful and daily text : — What ought to be the
comment ?"f
The application of the argument from astronomy is this
— that as the solar and stellary systems are perishable,
they must have had a beginning. As they are physically
incapable of continuing for ever — of enduring through an
eternity to come — so it is physically and mathematically
impossible they can have endured through an eternity
past. Eternity swallows up all conceivable duration, and,
as an element of certain destruction does exist in the
mechanism of the universe, it would have worked that fatal
result already, had its duration been long enough continued.
The vast horologe would have run down, and nature been
a chaos. The fact that it still exists as an orderly system,'
performing its mighty revolutions, proves that it has not yet
had time to run down, and therefore, compared with eternity,
its existence is but as yesterday.
Another argument, proving that the constitution of our
globe (and, by parity of reasoning, the constitution of every
other globe,) has had a beginning, is furnished by the law of
equilibrium, which obtains among all chemical forces. As
Dr. Prout observes, " Amidst all that endless diversity of pro
perty, and all the changes constantly going on in the world
around us, we cannot avoid being struck with the general
tendency of the whole to a state of repose, or equilibrium^
Moreover, this tendency to equilibrium is not confined to '
the ponderable elements, but prevails also, in the same
remarkable degree, among the imponderable agencies, heat
and light ; which, as we have seen, cannot be any where
* In the effects of a resisting medium, we undoubtedly see one man
ner in which the catastrophe may be produced by a physical agency.
+ Dr. Mason Good, whose remarks are founded upon Herschel's Obser
vations, compared with Flamsteed's. — Phil. Trans., vol. lxxiii., art. 17.

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 55
long retained in a state of excess, on account of their natural
disposition to acquire a certain state of equilibrium."
Every one will see, that it is owing, in a subordinate
sense, to the activity of chemical forces, that the earth is
rendered a fit habitation for animal and vegetable existence.
It is by the action of these antagonistic forces, that com
bustion, evaporation, refrigeration, and all the innumerable
forms of analysis and combination, have been and are still
effected. It is, indeed, by their agency, that the various
strata of the globe have been built up, that atmospheric air
and water have been constituted, and the world rendered
fit to sustain animal and vegetable life.
It requires but slight attention to see, that, however
fixed and uniform may be the laws of chemistry, the intensity
of their operation has been greatly diversified during the
several Geological, epochs. The evidence, that the materials
of our world were once in a state of fusion by heat, is, we
think, too clear to be resisted ; and such a state implies an
amazing excess in the activity of some chemical forces,
compared with what they are in the present day. At a
subsequent period, when the exterior surface of the earth
had so far cooled down as to admit the chrystalization of
the primitive granite, the excess of those chemical agencies
must have abated, while the action of others must have
increased ; but, still the state of the world, not admitting
at that period of the existence of animal and vegetable life,
renders it evident, that the temperature of the globe, and the
action of chemical forces, must have been, even then, widely
different from the comparative repose of the present day.
Again, in that subsequent era, called the Carboniferous
period, during which, dense forests of Fern Trees flourished
for successive ages, and their deposition formed the massive
beds from which we now extract our fuel ; and, when succes
sive generations of corals formed the prodigious piles of
mountain limestone, the atmosphere must have been impreg
nated with carbonic acid to an excess incompatible with the
existence of land animals — a probability, further sustained
by the fact, that no remains of terrene animals are found

56 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
in the rocks belonging to that period. During such an era,
the action of chemical forces must have been greatly modi
fied—differing, perhaps, as much from the intensity of the
former period, as from their tranquillity in the present day.
In the Geological epochs folowing the Carboniferous pe
riod, we Witness further modifications, evidenced by the diver
sified Fauna and Flora of the earth-^-the diversified species
exhibiting meteoric change, and meteoric change involving
the subsidence of some chemical forces, and the ascendency
of others; and the combined action of all progressively
advancing towards the present state of things. It is, indeed,
by no means improbable, that a considerable change has
taken place in the action of chemical forces even during the
brief period of human history. The shortness of hfe in the
human race, since the deluge, intimates a meteoric change
as at least one of the causes ; and it is certain that climate,
in different localities of the world, has altered during a
period still more recent. Ere We dismiss these evidences of a
diversified intensity in the action of chemical forces, during
the protracted periods of Geological history, we ought to
mention another, namely — that furnished by those great
catastrophies, in which the lowest strata have been forced,
by violent internal agencies, to the highest summits of the
earth. These are the effects of an intensity of action, such
as is not known to exist in the present day.
Comparing, then, the known tendency of all the elements
to produce an equilibrium — a state in which antagonist
properties neutralize each other, and produce a state of rest,
we ask, Does not the history of our planet plainly indicate
the effects of the operation of this law ? Has not the earth
passed from a period of intense and violent action, in which
the power of some elements preponderated in the production
of violent catastrophies, to a period Of comparative repose?
Has not intense heat given place to a temperature1 compati
ble with life? Have not vast accumulations of carbonic
acid in the atmosphere been absorbed and solidified in the
Carboniferous strata, and the air rendered fit to sustain
animal and vegetable existence of the highest order? Now,

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 87
What should prevent this tendency to equilibrium from
proceeding to ulterior results ? The tendency still exists in
the elements — Why should not that tendency continue to
operate until the last antagonism between the elements
shall cease — until analysis and combination shall have com
pleted their cycle, and perfect repose, quiescence, and death,
shall succeed the activity and animation of the present order
of things? We see nothing, but the interposition of a Divine
agency, to prevent this result. Philosophy teaches it a pri
ori, and the history of our planet confirms the decision.
Let us listen to the judgement of one whose physiological
research entitles him to the highest respect. Professor Whewell
observes, " We can no longer maintain the infinite past
duration of the earth ; for chemical forces, as well as mecha
nical, tend to equilibrium : and that condition once attained,
their efficacy ceases. Chemical affinities tend to form new
compounds ; and though, when many and various elements
are mingled together, the play of synthesis and analysis
may go on for a long time, it must at last end. If, for
instance, a large portion of the earth's mass were originally
pure potassium, we can imagine violent igneous action to go
on so long as any part remained unoxidized ; but when the
oxidation of the whole has once taken place, this action
must be at an end ; for there is no (physical) agency which
can reproduce the deoxidixed metal. Thus, a perpetual
motion is incapable in chemistry, as it is in mechanics ;
and a theory of constant change, continued through infinite
time, is untenable, when asserted upon chemical, no less
than upon mechanical, principles."
If, then, the laws Of chemistry, and the history of their
operation, infallibly lead to a Cessation of action, they as
certainly lead us back to an origin. A cycle which has an
end must have had a beginning. The fact, that it has not yet
completed its series, shows that it has not yet had time
for that completion, and, therefore, cannot be eternal. This
argument, pursued to its ultimatum, would prove, that the
laws of chemistry, as well as their operation, have had a
beginning, and, by rational consequence, that the particles
H

58 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
of matter itself are not eternal. * At present, however, it
would be out of place to pursue the argument further than
is necessary to sustain our second proposition, which is—
that the universe is an effect. While astronomy gives
evidence of a beginning, with respect to mechanical motion,
chemistry supplies evidence of a beginning, to the action of
chemical elements ; and both combine to prove that the for
mation of worlds — of all worlds when their laws operate—
have had a beginning, and are the effects of a cause on which,
we shall hereafter discourse at large.
Recapitulation. We have seen, then, that the human
species, and all organized existence, have had a beginning.
We have seen that, in ages past, numerous species and
genera, had a being, in earth and sea, which are now extinct,
We have seen, that in the lower stratified rocks, though
hundreds of fathoms deep, there are no organic remains^
not a vestige of animal or plant ; and, therefore, during
the inconceivable ages in which these rocks were being
deposited, there was no form of life on our planet. We
have seen, that during this era, and especially during the
formation of the granite rocks, (the primitive foundations , of
the earth,) such was the incandescent condition of our
planet, that the life of either plant or animal was phy
sically impossible. We have further seen that the earth
itself as a globe, as a planet in the solar system, and
the solar system itself, must have had a beginning ; and
finally, we have seen that all the starry systems too, the
whole fabric of nature, where motion, gravitation, and ligh|,
exist, must also have had a beginning — that there was,*
time when there was not a sun, or planet, or satellite, .in
existence; as parts of any orderly system. Thus, proving
that all things have had a beginning, we prove that the
universe collectively, is an effect. As an effect, therefore,
- we must look to something distinct from it, and superior^.
it, as its cause. This brings us to our fourth proposition,.,

CHAPTER VI.
FOURTH PROPOSITION :  THE UNIVERSE, AS AN " EFFECT," MUST
HAVE A CAUSE, AND THE UNORIGINATED BEING MUST BE
ITS CAUSE.

The estabhshment of our former proposition wrests an
important argument from the power of infidehty, and, in
effect, saps the foundations of every sophism which seeks
to exclude a Creator. Still it may be necessary to pursue
the argument to ulterior principles. It may be replied by
the infidel sophist: — "Admitting that the entire system of
nature, and all the forms of organized existence, have had
a beginning, and are therefore effects of a pre-existent cause,
yet, as the argument does not necessarily prove that the
elementary particles or atoms of matter had a beginning,
we are not necessitated to look for any cause beyond matter
itself, for we contend that those elementary particles them
selves, in the aggregate, are The eternal and unoriginated
substance ; and that matter, being eternal, is adequate to all
the formations, which either have existed in former ages, or
do exist at the present time. "
Now, this is narrowing the controversy, and it plainly shows,
that the dispute is not as to whether there be an eternal
something, but whether that something be matter or mind;
whether it be a conscious, intelligent agent, or whether it be
unconscious, dead matter, acting either according to fixed
laws, or blind chance, or absolute necessity. Now, by explod
ing this sophism, we logically arrive at the great truth —
that the formation of the universe was originated by a self-
existent and independent Being, distinct from matter and
infinitely superior to it. Let us, then, carefully probe this
infidel sophism to its very core. We have not to proceed
far before its hollowness will appear : for,
I. It is grounded upon a mere assumption. It assumes
that matter is eternal, and thus takes for granted a funda-

60 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
mental principle, which, from its importance in the argu
ment, should have been established with the greatest care,
and with the clearest demonstration. As the infidel pro
fesses to be a man of reason — a philosopher — ever on his
guard against imposition and error — at the greatest possible
remove from all credulity — holding it to be even a virtue
to doubt, until the clearest demonstration be afforded, have
we not a right to demand from him a proof of the eternity
of matter ? Have we not a right to insist upon his furnish
ing a demonstration of this first principle, and of resolutely j;
maintaining, that, unless he do this, his argument about
the sufficiency of nature alone — about the prolific powers of
nature being, adequate to the production of all phenomena —
is good for nothing, is utterly without foundation? Undoubt
edly we have. But how will he attempt to prove the eternity
of matter ? He has no data on which to build a single
argument in proof of this. Is the eternity of matter a ne
cessary truth, which irresistibly forces itself upon the mind ?
Is it an axiom so clear and self-evident as to require no
proof? Certainly not. The necessity for an eternal some
thing is felt by every mind. We cannot but admit it ; but
that that something is matter requires proof. We can con
ceive it possihle^or matter not to have existed, and this
possibility excludes the eternity of matter from the category
of necessary truths. A writer, now before me, who was so
far confirmed in infidelity, that he gloried in the name of
Antitheos,* and wrote a work expressly to disprove the being
of God, says, " We can conceive matter not to exist." Im
portant admission ; for, if we can conceive matter not to exist,
its non-existence is admitted to be possible, and therefore
cannot be contended for as necessarily eternal. It follows,
then, that matter is not necessarily the unoriginated- and
eternal Being. Besides, matter is constantly changing. We
have already traced its varied forms, through immeasurable
periods, in the earth's strata, and, beyond that, have traced
it back from its present orderly arrangement in planetary
* A denier of God's existence. See Gillespie, on the Necessary
Existence of the Deity, 253.

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 61
systems, to a state of chaos. We ask, Is this perpetual change
the attribute of an eternal and unoriginated being ; or, is
it the property of a finite, passive substance, acted upon by
a power superior to itself? Let reason judge.
II. If the eternity of matter were granted to the atheist,
he could not proceed in the argument unless we grant him
also the eternity of motion. But we have already proved
that both mechanical and chemical motion must have had a
beginning ; and a mass of dull, inactive matter, incapable
of originating a single motion, internally or externally, must
remain the same inorganic mass for ever, unless some
superior agency act upon it.
III. We may proceed even further, and affirm, that if
matter, and motion, and all the varied laws of matter, were
admitted to be eternal, even then, the spontaneous produc
tion of the universe, the orderly arrangement of the planetary
system, and the organization of animal and vegetable life,
would be for ever a physical impossibility. If the present
order of things were destroyed, there is nothing in nature
alone, adequate to reproduce it ; or matter, in a state of
chaos, but impressed with the same laws as at present,
could never produce the universe, and the organized exist
ence which inhabits it. **?
Here, then, we meet the theories which infidelity has
fabricated to dispense with the idea of a Creator, and to
resolve all the phenomena of the universe into the operation
of what are called natural laws, &c.
The hypothesis of Gradual Developement, refuted. One
infidel theory is, that of a spontaneous and gradual de
velopement — a theory which propounds the doctrine, that
all systems and all forms of organization and life, have been
gradually developed by nature itself, beginning with the
lowest, and thence proceeding to the highest classes of exist
ence. It assumes that man was derived from a species of
inferior animal, next in order to himself, and that species
from another inferior to it, and so on, pursuing the grada
tion downward to, the lowest animalculum, which, in its
turn was derived, some say, from the action of electricity,

62 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
and some say, from a vegetable, and the vegetable, it is said,
sprang spontaneously from matter in a peculiar state of
fecundity; and, by a similar process of derivation, the earth;
the solar and stellary systems, are said to have derived their
modified existence, and orderly adjustment, from masses of
diffused nebulas, floating in immense fields, through bound
less space.* In contemplating this theory, we are forcibly
reminded of Paley's remark— that infidelity never did furnish
a probable argument in its support, but only challenges us
to prove the impossibility of its hypothesis. Indeed, when
a man would rather have an ape for his grandfather, than
acknowledge God for his Maker, and prefers to trace his
remoter ancestry among the moluscas of the ocean, and the
infusoria of a putrid stream, to ascribing his creation to an
intelligent Mind, we ought not to feel surprised at any
absurdity he may propose. The present hypothesis imposes
a tax too enormous upon human credulity to gain many
disciples ; and, had not some features in it been sanctioned
by several popular writers of the present day, it might have
been passed by without any further notice. We shall briefly
show that it is absurd and impossible — that it is contradicted
by facts and common sense.
First Refutation.* The transmutation theory is overthrown
by the natural, essential, and impassable distinction of
genera and species, in all organized existences. If the
infidel theory were true, there would be no such thing^as
distinct species of animals — no essential difference betwixt
one order and another. The higher would only be an
advance upon the lower; possessing faculties more developed
indeed, but such as each inherently possesses in an embryo
state ; and which its progeny may, in successive generations,
* This theory, variously modified, is advocated by Buffon, Lamarcky
Monboddo, Mirabaud, and many modern authors, of loose principles,
and infidel tendencies. The anonymous author of " The Vestiges of
Creation," contends for the same theory, but professes to believe in a
Creator. His theory, however, of transmutation of species, is in flat
contradiction to the Holy Scriptures. It is but the ancient error of the
Epicureans, revived and dressed up in modern costume.

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 63
enjoy in the same degree of development. But this is
contradicted by all observation, by all history, and all expe
riment. In surveying the diversified tribes of animated
beings, we do observe distinct species, marked by essential
differences, and separated by impassable barriers. The
same essential difference obtains in all countries, and his
tory attests that it has obtained in all ages. "Egypt, which,
as the learned commission of the French naturalists well
observed, has preserved for us a museum of natural history,
not only in its paintings, but in the mummies of its animals,
presents us every species, after three thousand years, per
fectly unchanged. "*
This distinction of species and genera, is guarded by an
instinctive aversion among animals, to propagate with any
but their kind ; and if, by any peculiar circumstance, or by
artificial constraint from man, two animals of different, but
proximate species, produce a hybrid, the race cannot be per
petuated. Nature rigidly protects the distinction she has
formed of separate species, by rendering hybrids barren,
and thus dooming the mongrel race to sudden oblivion.f
Besides, if the hybrid race could be established and
made permanent by propagation, it would deteriorate, and
not improve, the animal tribe. The mule is inferior to the
horse, and exhibits a marked tendency to degenerate in
organization. The procreation of a hybrid always involves,
that either dam or sire are of a higher nature than itself;
and the perpetuation of such races, if possible, would have
the effect of collapsing, not developing, existing properties
and faculties ; of deteriorating, not improving, the species.
The transmutation of species by generation, if possible, and
continued for an indefinite period, would gradually run the
species down to an inconceivable state of deterioration and
degeneracy.} But we need not enlarge ; such a deterioration
* Dr. Wiseman, on the connection between science and revealed
religion. Lecture iii., page 131.
+ Lyell's Geology, vol. ii., 395.
} " I may also remark, that if it could have been shown, that a single
permanent species had ever been produced by hybridity (of which there

64 THF EXISTENCE OF GOD.
is impossible, because the transmutation of the species is
impossible. Nature invariably maintains that graceful and
dignified distinction of species established in her own free
domain, and omnipotently resists all the efforts of human
contrivance to break through the invisible guards she has
erected around her own works. Lyell, after the most ela
borate examination of Lamarck's theory, by the test of
nature, thus concludes : " From the above considerations
it appears, that species have a real existence in nature, and
each was endowed, at the time of its creation, with the attri
butes and organization by which it is now distinguished."*
Varieties there are, in the same species, of both animal and
vegetables, the effects of diversity of climate, nourishment,
habits, treatment, &c. ; but these varieties are prescribed
within certain limits, and never break through the essential
difference between one species and another. The fact, then,
is no satisfactory proof), it might certainly have lent some countenance
to the notions of the ancients respecting the gradual deterioration of
created things, but none whatever to Lamarck's theory of their pro
gressive perfectibility, for observations have hitherto shown, that there
is u tendency in mule animals, and plants to degenerate in orga
nization. — Lyell's Geology, vol. ii., 396.
* Lyell, vol. ii., 403. The same author, speaking in reference to vegeta
ble species, remarks: "It seems now admitted by hoiticulturalists, that
none of our garden varieties of fruit are entitled to be considered strictly
permanent, but that they wear out after a time ; and we are thus compelled
to resort again to seeds ; in which case, there is so decided a tendency in
the seedlings to revert to the original type, that our utmost skill is some
times baffled in attempting to recover the desired variety." Again, after
speaking of varieties in the same species of plants being effected by
climate, and other external agencies, he remarks : " The nature of these
results, however, depends upon the species, and they are of a specific
character ; they exhibit the same phenomena again and again, and indi
cate certain fixed and invariable relations between the physiological
peculiarities of the plant, and the influence of certain external agents ;
they afford no ground for questioning the stability of the species, but
rather the contrary ; they present us with a class of phenomena, which,
when they are more thoroughly understood, may afford some of the
best tests for identifying species, and proving that the attributes, origi
nally conferred, endure so long as any issue of the. original stock remains
upon earth." — Ibid, vol. ii., 363-365.

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 6.5
that each species is distinct, permanent, and impassable,
proves that each must have had a distinct origin ; and, if
each had a distmct and separate origin, the development
theory, by transmutation of species, is found to be false, and
must be rejected.
Second Refutation. If the development theory were true,
each generation ought to be more perfect than the prece
ding one, but all existing facts, and all history of the past,
combine to prove that no such physical development either
is taking place now, or has taken place in ages past. In
stature, in constitutional vigour, in physical strength, in
symmetrical proportion, in beauty of countenance and form,
and in the term of his existence, man presents no superi
ority over his remotest ancestors. Whatever truth there
may be in his supposed deterioration in some respects, and
his certain deterioration in others (the term of life for
example), there is clearly no physical advancement. The
savage stands on a par with the sage in these properties,
and nations of the remotest antiquity with the men of this
generation. Third Refutation. If the development theory were true,
we should see, at least, some animals and plants in a tran
sition state; and the natural history of past' ages would
furnish us with a narrative of others in the same transition
state. The development of nature would operate uniformly, if
at all, as well in the present era as in past times ; and proofs
of this development would undoubtedly present themselves
to our view. We should somewhere see plants passing into
animals, fishes into reptiles, reptiles into birds, birds into
quadrupeds, and quadrupeds into nations of human beings',
and human beings into something above human! We
should now and then surely find some animals acquiring
new organizations, new faculties, new organs of sense ; now
and then, the rudiments of an eye, or an ear, in an oyster —
animals, with only one or two senses, acquiring a third, or
fourth, or fifth sense. Sometimes a nascent wing should be
found sprouting on the shoulders of a frog, or a newt, and,

66 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
in successive generations, these new powers and organs would
be advancing towards perfection in these species.
Lamarck says that the structure and organs of animals
have resulted from their propensities — that as any animal
has been driven by its wants to new or pecuhar habits,, for
which it was not originally adapted, it has thereby acquired
the variation of organization necessary for its new state ;
although he admits that many generations must persevere in
their exercise before the new powers are acquired. Thus,
for instance, a bird is driven by its wants to take to the
water, and either swim or wade ; its successors do the same;
in the course of many generations the outstretching of its
claws produces a web between them, and it becomes a regu
lar water-fowl ; or it extends its limbs to walk in deeper
places, and gradually its legs are prolonged to the length of
the crane's or the flamingo's, If some birds which swim
have long necks, as the swan and goose, it is from their
custom of plunging their heads in the water to fish. These
two agencies combined— new wants and the tendency of na
ture to meet them — conspired to make man out of the baboon.,
We will not humble, ourselves, nor disgust the reader, by
any further quotations from this writer on this subject. But
we may ask, with Dr. Wiseman, " If the swan and the goose
have long necks from plunging their necks under water for
their food, how is it that the same habit has not produced a
like effect in the duck or teal ? The bee has been striving,
without intermission, in the art of making its sweet eon?
fection since it sipped the flowers of paradise; the ant has,
been constructing its labyrinths, and the beaver its dwelling-
place, from the morning of their creation until now,
without acquiring a new perception, or a new organ for these
purposes." If new organization and additional faculties proceed from
an endeavour to meet fresh exigencies, how is it that man,
with all his intense acquisitiveness, has never been able to
elicit, from bounteous and prolific nature, a new organ, or
an additional sense ? As he stands at the head of animal

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 67
existence, how is it that the force of development has not
elioited a sixth sense ? As he is incessantly aiming at
something beyOnd his physical abihty, and puts all nature
under contribution to aid him in his attempts, how is it
that this intense and active appetency does not work out
Some new physical energy ? He strains his sight to search
through nature in quest of new wonders ; he constructs
optical instruments to aid him in examining the minute,
and in exploring the vast and' the distant ; yet, though
still dissatisfied, and longing for further powers of disco
very, -nature dilates not his pupil, enlarges not the sphere or
the depth of his vision. He looks upon the eagle as he
soars, and 'envies the velocity of his flight, but still remains
himself fixed to the earth's surface. 'He desires to move
across continents with speed, and invents engines of loco
motive power to Convey him, but this propensity elicits no
new faculty of action. However bountiful Art may be in
Obeying his call, to aid his senses, and facilitate his action,
parsimonious Nature never comes to his help. Prolific as
she is to swans, and geese, and apes, in developing new
powers for new wants, she is most ' niggardly to man.
Though she has raised an oyster to a man, she sternly
refuses to add one new faculty or power to the lord of the
inferior tribes ! A system involving such absurdities and
contradictions is propounded to us as philosophy ! And
this We are to believe in order to rid ourselves of the idea
of a Creator ! If such be philosophy, where shall folly be
found? True philosophy, however, irrespective of all religious
considerations, teaches an opposite doctrine — teaches that
the propensities of an animal are not the determining cause
of its organization, but its organization is the cause — the
proximate cause of its propensities. The propensity never
anticipates the faculty, but the faculty anticipates the pro
pensity, and is formed prospectively. The faculty is not
the consequence of a new condition, but a preparation for
it. "Thus, the larva of the winged insect can only walk,
but, if we take it and dissect it, just before its metamor
phosis is completed, we find an apparatus in progress for

68 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
flight through the air. The embryonic animal has a life
adapted to its condition ; but this life is subordinate to the
formation of its organs for a hfe after birth ; and for which,
during the whole period of gestation, it is unconsciously
preparing."* The theory of Lamarck is contradicted by the general
organization of animal and vegetable existence. Look at
the mechanical structure by which the joints are fitted for
action. As Paley observes, " The ligaments, or strictures,
by which the tendons are tied down at the angles of the
joints, could, by no possibility, be formed by the motion or
exercise of the tendons themselves, by any appetency exci
ting these parts into action, or by any tendency arising
therefrom. The tendency is all the other way ; the conatus
in constant opposition to them. Length of time does not
help the cause at all? but the reverse. " Look at the valves
in the blood-vessels. " They could never be formed in the
manner which our theorist supposes. The blood, in its
right and natural course, has no tendency to form them ;
when obstructed or refluent, it has the contrary. These
parts could not grow from their use, though they had
eternity to grow in. "
Look at the senses of animals. "How will our author get
at vision, or make an eye ? How should the blind animal
affect sight; of which, blind animals, we know, have neither
conception nor desire ?" How should an oyster form a con
ception of sight ? and the conception wouldTje equally remote
from an animal of higher organization destitute of that
faculty, and as remote from either as from a stone. And
the same applies to any other sense. If Lamarck himself,
to support his own theory, requires first, an appetency or
desire for a faculty, as necessary to its organization, and if
that desire requires an antecedent conception of the, thing
desired ; then, if there be no conception to begin with, there
can be organization as the result : for, as Paley observes, it
* Dr. Harris's "Pre-Adamite Earth," page 378 — a work of profound
interest.

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 69
is in vain to inquire how that might proceed whioh could
never begin.
Look at the organization of plants, in which there is
adaptation as complete and successful as in animals. How
will the theory of organization as resulting from desire,
apply to vegetation ? As well might our author ascribe
reason and immortality to mosses and lichens, as argue their
organization from the fallacious . principle assigned. But,
finally, the foolish theory is contradicted as plainly by fact
as by philosophy. If such an appetency or desire existed,
it would show itself. It would operate uniformly in all
ages, and with the greatest force in the highest orders of
existence, and the effects of its energy would be seen in all
ages; But where are those effects ? The eye of the Trilo-
bite— one of the earliest animals in existence, the species
of which became extinct in the Carboniferous period — exhi
bits an optical apparatus as perfectly adapted to the laws
of light, as any kindred crustacean of the present day. What
creature has acquired a new member, a new faculty, or a
new sense? What species has emerged into a higher one,
nay, what single animal, from a mollusk to a man, has pro
ceeded a single step in the ascending scale of existence, or,
during the whole history of our world, exhibited the first
germ of a capability thus to ascend. We have seen how
single individuals of a species may degenerate, but, that
they ever have ascended, or can ascend, one grade above their
kind, is contradicted by all facts, and disproved by all phi
losophy. On this ground, therefore, the transmutation
theory must be rejected.
Fourth Refutation.— li the development theory were true,
then the perfection of figure, and the perfection of intellect,
would be uniformly combined. Now, as man is admitted
to be the type of perfection, both as to organization and
¦ intellect, it would follow, on Lamarck's theory, that the
animals which have most intellect would conform the nearest
to man in external symmetry. But this is contradicted by
fact. An elephant, or a dog, has more sagacity than an ape,
and yet how remote the figure of these quadrupeds from

70 THE EXISTENCE OF -GOD.
the symmetry of man ! Many species of birds, and some
serpents, are remarkable for their sagacity, yet how far
removed from the symmetry of the human species.* Thus,
the development prinoiple, if continually operating in the
various orders of animals, would, in time, lead to the pro
duction of not merely one rational species, conforming to
the type of human nature, but to the production of rational
animals of multifarious species, having the most diversified
forms, shapes, sizes, and modes of existence. If this be
an absurdity, it necessarily springs from the development
theory, and while it charges the scheme with absurdity on
the one hand, it involves it in the most palpable inconsist
ences and contradictions on the other ; for, while assuming
to lead the inferior animals up to man, it makes them
to diverge from him into types of the greatest conceivable
dissimilarity. Such contradictions prove the falsehood of
the theory which involves them.
Fifth Refutation. — If the theory of a gradual develop
ment were true, it would follow, that the highest order of
vegetables should produce the lowest forms of animal exist
ence^ We know, indeed, that the author of the "Ves-
* The attempt to trace a graduated scale of intelligence, through the
different -species of oinimals, accompanying the modifications of the
form of the skull, is a mere visionary speculation. It has been
necessary to exaggerate the sagacity of th,e ape tribe at the expense
of the dog, and strange contradictions have arisen in the conclusions
deduced from the structure of the elephant : some anatomists being
disposed to deny ihe quadruped the intelligence which he really
possesses, because they found that the volume of his brain was small,
in comparison to that of the other mammalia; while others were
inclined to magnify extravagantly the superiority of his intelleot,
because the vertical height of his skull is so great, compared to its
horizontal length." — Lyetl,vol. ii., 398.
t Mirabaud, and others, ascribe the origin of animal life to putrefae- '"'..
tion ; the author of " The Vestige's " thinks it may be generated by a
chemical process ; arid anbthtir thinks < that entozoa may spring from
flakes of lymph. Any theory Which imagination can devise seems pre
ferable, with such reasoners, to a creating energy. Most advocates of
spontaneous generation, however, seem to think the existepce-of vegeta
ble life a necessary condition for theproduotion of the lowest kind of
animal existence.

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 71
tiges of Creation, " and others, refer vegetable and animal
life to a distinct and separate origin; but if the lowest form
of sentient life is higher than the highest order of vegeta
ble life, the scale of gradual development, to be consistent
with itself, requires that the lowest animals should spring
from vegetables, and as one being springs from another by
generation, it follows, that the vegetable should produce the
animal, or, in other words, that the latter should spring from
the former, as its fruit — its natural spontaneous production.
But an animal thus produced was never found, because
none such ever existed. Nay, as Steffens has justly re
marked, the links between the lowest orders of animal
and vegetable life, as the polypus, the sponge, &c, possess
the lowest qualities of each. If we regard the vegetable
characteristics, they resemble the fungi, the lowest in the
scale of vegetable organization, and if we look at their
animal characteristics they conform to the molusca, or soft
bodied animals — the lowest species of the two kingdoms of
nature. Thus, the links in the chain of the development
theory have no adhesion, because no foundation in nature.
Sixth Refutation. — If the development theory were true,
we should find its truth attested by geological discoveries,
but those discoveries utterly disprove it. The almost fathom
less strata which have been deposited during cycles of my
riads of ages, and which reveal the first forms of organi
zation, will certainly bear unequivocal testimony to the
manner in which both animal and vegetable life have pro
gressed. Now, on the supposition of the theory which
derives a superior from an inferior being, we should find the
first fossil deposits in the earth's strata to consist wholly of
vegetables ; first, those of the lowest class alone, and then,
as we ascend to more recent formations, gradually changing
into the higher, until we arrived at the climax of vegetable
hfe. Above these strata, or in connection with them, should
first appear tfee vestiges of incipient animal existence, and
thence, as the strata advanced, the forms should gradually
change, by the most easy and imperceptible transition, to
higher orders of sentient feeing, from the zoophyte to the

72 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
mollusk, from the mollusk to the jointed animal, thence to the
vertebrate, or back-boned animal; each of the series, com
mencing with the lowest species, of the lowest genus, of the
lowest order, of the lowest class ; and so proceeding until, %
imperceptible gradations, and through cycles of myriads of
ages, it had crept through all the inferior classes up to the
quadruped race, and thence ascended to the human species.
Such must inevitably be the uniformity and regularity of
the development system, if it be true ; admitting of no hiatus,
no interruption, no sudden formations, and of no inconstancy,
but what may be accounted for by the catastrophes which in
different periods,"* have suddenly occurred. No catastrophe,
however, can invert the order now stated, if the development
theory be true. An earthquake, or volcanic eruption, may
dislocate the strata, and such changes may convert the dry
land into an ocean, and vice versa, but no such events could
make the vestiges embedded and indurated in one strataj to
amalgamate with those of another. However transposed the
masses of strata may be, their embedded contents will always
attest the age and order of their deposition. The theory in
question, to be consistent with itself, implies, that vast periods
must have elapsed between the formation of the lowest type of
vegetable life, and. the first appearance of animal existence ;
and, again, between the earliest formation of sentient life, and
the animals exhibiting higher and more elaborate organi
zation. Consequently, these diversified forms of being can
never be found embedded together in the early series bf
fossiliferous strata, but separated, as they are assumed to be,
by wide intervals in the date of their origin, their vestiges
must be separated from each other by wide intervals in' the
series of geological strata.
Such is a correct representation of a graduated scale
of existence, successively developed. Now what are the
facts ? Dr. Mantell, a geologist of no mean authority,
and whose statement is based upon a wide and scrutinizing
survey of the science, affirms that the facts of geology war
rant no such inference as this theory adduces ; * and Mr.
* Mantell's Wonders of Geology, vol. ii., 667.

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 73
Lyell; another geologist of the greatest eminence, asserts that
geological researches afford no countenance whatever to the
fancied evolution of one species out of another.* Agissez,
another eminent geologist of our own times, says, " I cannot
admit the idea of the transformation of species from one
formation to another. In advancing these general notions,
I do not wish to offer them as inductions drawn from the
study of one particular class of animals, (of fishes', for in
stance,) and applied to other classes, but as results of direct
observation of very considerable collections of fossils of
different formations, and belonging to different classes of
animals, in the investigation of which I have been specially
engaged for many years."
These authorities, and many others which might be
adduced, are sustained by geological facts, which most
unequivocally contradict and overturn the theory of trans
mutation: for,
1. Instead of vegetables being found first, " the earliest
forms of life known to geology (at present) are not, as might
have been expected, plants, but animals." The oldest monu
ments yet discovered of living things are shell-fish and coral-
loids. Now this fact is fatal to the development theory, for, if
animals existed before plants, how can the former be derived
from the latter, or from decomposed vegetable matter. Indeed,
if we admit that the existence of animals involves a physical
necessity for the prior, or at least contemporaneous, existence
of plants, yet, the fact of their remains having been oblite
rated, while animal vestiges of that period have survived,
shows they were of a very inferior nature, and Cannot be
claimed' by our theorists themselves as the progenitors of the
animal species, on the principle of a gradual transmutation.
2. Again: instead of a gradual and uniform transition
foom. the- lowest appearance of animal hfe, passing onwards
by imperceptible degrees, we have beings of distinct orders
and advanced' organization suddenly introduced. The fossil
animals, which appear in the oldest strata, are not radiata
alone, but these, with other classes,- whieh have a highly
* Lyell's Principles, vol. ii., 396-7.
K

74 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
developed organization. The second and third division of
the animal kingdom are mingled with the first : — Families
of Badiata, Mollusks, and Articulata, embedded in the same
strata. Predaceous cephalopods,* mollusks of the highest
organic structure, and trilobites, with reticular eyes,f lived
together in the same seas, and at the same times, with the
lowest zoophytes. Thus, the first facts in geology contra
dict the theory of one species being evolved from another.
Ascending higher in the strata, we come to the upper Silu
rian rocks. Here, instead of an imperceptible transition,
we meet with fishes. Some of the preceding species are
continued, but exhibit no signs of a process of transfbrma-'
tion to a higher class of animals ; and the fishes accompa
nying them do not come into view half formed or imper:
fectly organized ; nor are they of the lowest class in the'5*
family of fishes, but of the highest : one represents a genus '•'
of the shark family ; and Dr. Buckland remarks, •" there
is no period in geological history in which many of its forms j
'did not prevail. " Now the shark is a fish belonging to the :
highest class ; and, indeed, all the fishes, found in the Silurian"
system, are of a high organic structure. Thus, we have the
* The cephalopods are the most highly organized of all mollusksijc;
In some families they have an internal skeleton, together with a heart,
and a head, having some resemblance in form, and armature, to that of
the parrot tribes. They were carnivorous and predatory.
+ The eye of the Trilobite, at this early period, exhibits the same
elaborate and complicated structure as the eyes of the Crustacea and
insects of the present day. Dr. Buckland remarks, " We find in the
trilobites, of these early rocks, the same modifications of the organ of
sight, as in the living Crustacea. The same kind of instrument was also
employed in the intermediate periods of our geological history, when, the: !
secondary strata were deposited at the bottom of a sea, inhabited by, ,1
limuli, in the regions of Europe, which now form the elevated plains of .
central Germany." And Dr. Mantell observes, " The eye" [of the trilo
bite] "is made up of a vast number of elongated cones, each having a
chrystaline lens, pupil, and cornea, and terminating on the extremity
of the optic nerve. Each organ of sight is, therefore, a compound,!*
instrument, made up of a series of optical tubes, or telescopes,, the
number of which, in some insects, is marvellous." — Dr. MantelVJT*
Wonders of Geology, vol. ii., p. 591. ; — "u

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 76
highest class of fishes appearing in the early formations.
The shark immediately succeeding the earliest forms of life
— the mollusk, the trilobite, and the zoophyte. Will the
atheist affirm that the former derived his being from the
latter? If he does, he contradicts his theory of gradual
development ; and if he does not, he must admit them to
have been produced by creation.
8. Our limits will not permit us to examine the contents
of every strata in the ascending series, but we may affirm,
that similar contradictions to the fanciful theory of Lamarck
and his disciples occur in every series. Ascending from
the transition series to the secondary series of rocks, we
find, in the earlier formations of the new red sandstone,
numerous impressions of the claws of various species of
birds, with similar impressions of the tortoise; of various
small animals, and of a larger creature of singular propor
tions, called the Chirotherium. These foot-prints are dis
tinct and well defined, as if made at the present hour,
indicating the distance of the footsteps from each other,
and the size of the animals which made them. The ex
istence of birds, at this early period, is very remarkable.
Yet, those birds must have had a perfect organization ;
and though some of them were small, others were of a size
far exceeding the largest feathered tribes of the present
day. Both the existence and organization of birds, at this
early period, contemporaneous with the existence of am
phibious reptiles, are contradictory to the theory of a gra
dual development. Ascending to the masses of magnesian
limestone rocks, we find the remains of reptiles, but, here
again, those in the lowest strata (or the first in the order
of time) are completely formed. Nor are these reptiles of
the iowest order, but approaching the' highest, and have
their several organs of sense as perfectly formed as any of
the present day. Some of them are of gigantic stature, and
predatory habits, as saurian monsters, iguanadons, ptero-
dactyles, &c. Ascending higher, we come to the oolitic
system, where we have not only fossils of birds, reptiles, &c,
but the first representative of the mammalian tribes — that

76 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
of an oppossum animal. Though this animal appears at a
period so much earher than other mammalia, it is of higher .
organic structure than some of a far subsequent period, and,
indeed, than some mammals of the present day. On
entering the tertiary system of rocks, millions of organic
remains appear, including representatives of every order,
from corals up to quadrupeds, numerous species of which
are now extinct. But here, again, we perceive nothing hke
a gradual and insensible transmutation of one species into
another. Indeed, the theory which insults our nature, by
deriving the human species from the monkey tribe, is here
most flatly contradicted by geological facts. For that theory
supposes the monkey tribe to be the most perfect develop
ment of the brute species, and consequently of the latest
formation next to man. But geological discovery proves,
that the monkey race existed in the earliest period of the
tertiary series. The remains of monkeys, of three and four
feet high, are found in the eocene period ; not only myriads
of ages before man, but myriads of ages before the appear
ance of other tribes, of an inferior type to the monkey race
itself. Another fact, contradictory to the gradual transmu
tation theory, is witnessed in the contemporaneous existence
of carnivorous and graminivorous animals. In this era, as
in others, no imperfect animal, or half-formed senses, are
found.- Numerous species had died out, and numerous others
were introduced, yet, so distinct in their nature, attributes,
habits, and modes of existence ; so different in anatomical
structure; and presenting so many exceptions, interruptions,
and inversions, of any graduated scale of succession, as to
preclude the possibility of one species being derived from
the other. In the tertiary series, multitudes of fishes, rep
tiles, birds, and quadrupeds, lived in the same eras, and
each appears complete in all its organs, perfect in its senses,
fixed in its habits, and impassable in its class, order, genera,
and species.*
» There is, apparently, a want of candour and ingenuousness in the
anonymous Author of " The Vestiges of Creation," as to the manner
in which he disposes of geological facts, when they contradicthis theory

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 77
Summary. Such, then, are the facts presented in the'
immense chronology of our globe, from the first dawn of
organized existence, up to the period which immediately
preceded that new order of things described by the sacred
historian. From which facts it is manifest, that, while, on
the whole, a general progress is evident in the several periods,
that progress is interrupted by many exceptions and inver
sions. We have seen, that, in the earliest vestiges of life,
beings of high order, of elaborate organization, and fully
developed as to their size, were contemporaneous with the
lowest order, and the simplest forms ; and, that geology alone
does not even determine whether plants or animals existed
first. We have seen, that genera, of the highest class of the
four great divisions of the animal kingdom, not only existed
among the early formations, but appeared suddenly, without
the- existence of any intermediate or connecting links of
genera, leaving wide and impassable gaps' between their
nature and anatomical structure, and that of their contem
poraries. We have seen, that the most perfect of the senses,
the eye for example, and the most complicated organs, always
appear complete, even in the deposits of the earliest strata.
of a gradual transmutation of species. In pretending to describe the
series of geological remains, as they occur in the several strata of the
different periods, we have observed that he omits from their proper
place, important facts, when they militate against his reasoning. For
example, in pages 95,. 96, when giving an account of the new red sand
stone, he omits the fact, that the foot-prints of various species of birds,
are visible in this strata. Thatfact proves the existence of birds before
terrene reptiles, and is fatal to his theory. True, he subsequently refers
to these footprints, but it is to insinuate a doubt respecting the evidence
afforded. Again, in pages 128-9, when describing the Eocene period, he
omits the monkey tribes from the list of organic remains, because their
early appearance is fatal to his theory. These he mentions afterwards.
But the exclusion of these remains, as well as the foot-prints of birds,
from their proper place, seems artfully done, as if to elude the force of
the evidence which the facts present against his theory of u, gradual
transmutation. The introduction of these remains, after the mention
ing of others of more recent date, is calculated to confuse and mislead
a common reader, especially as his subsequent reasoning in page 149,
entirely evades and keeps out of sight the facts in question. This is
disingenuous.

78 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
The derivation of one species from another was, therefore,
physically impossible. While, then, a former argument from
geology showed that all species of animal and vegetable
existence had a beginning ; and while the law of generation
carries us down to the first individuals, as the primogenitors
of each species, the present argument from geology shows,
that those primogenitors must have been brought into exist
ence at once, complete and entire in their nature and attri
butes — perfect in their symmetry, members, and organiza
tion — fitted for their appropriate element, and distinctive
habits — and endowed with power to propagate their kind.
Thus, the records of geology, during those vast epochs
which preceded the six days creation, unite with all the facts
furnished by natural history, during " the period of recorded
time," in utterly disproving the theory which derives one
species from another. All the facts which have been
examined irresistibly lead to the conclusion, that each
species had its original progenitors brought into being
immediately and perfectly. Now, this immediate origin of
the species can be ascribed to only one of two causes : —
either to matter itself, spontaneously and suddenly forming
perfect beings of the highest as well as the lowest class — as
an oak, a cedar, a whale, an eagle, an elephant, a lion, a
man ; or else we must ascribe their origin to a Divine
Creator. The incapacity of mere matter to do this is suffi
ciently manifest. No history furnishes any record of such
a spontaneous production. If such ever had taken place,
it would take place now. But it would be absurd to dwell
upon this absurdity. Its impossibility is admitted even by
our opponents ; hence their forced resort to the theory, of
a slow and gradual transmutation. That slow and gradual
transmutation, however, being disproved, we are irresistibly
driven to the only alternative, namely : that the immediate
origin of the first beings of each species was produced by
the creating energy of a Being distinct from nature and
superior to it.
Evidence, refuting the transmutation theory, might be
vastly extended from other sources, opened to us by anatomy

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 79
and physiology. It might be shown, that the differences
in anatomical structure and organization of the species are
differences in kind, as well as degree, and exclude the possi
bility of spontaneous transmutation. Cuvier, that great
and practical genius in comparative anatomy, maintains,
that the universal application of the graduating principle,
is philosophically untenable ; and he disclaims its rigorous
application to the objects even of one and the same kingdom
of nature. The general progression of vegetable and animal
existence, which is witnessed in the earth's strata, might
be shown to accord well with the physiological condition of
our planet during the several geological epochs, but the
essential differences in the organization of the species
forbid their evolution of one from another. The diversity
of organization, exhibited in the animal tribes, might be
shown to be essentially connected with an equal diversity
in economy, in instincts, dispositions, propensities, and
habits, — a diversity which indeed amounts to direct contra
riety and opposition of nature, which it would be just as
absurd to suppose, sprung from an evolution of species, as
it would be to contend that the tortoise was formed for aerial
flights, and the eagle to lead the hfe of a lobster. Indeed,
anatomy and physiology open out innumerable sources of
evidence, contradictory to the theory under consideration,
and multiply its absurdities ad infinitum. Our limits
forbid us to enlarge.* The arguments already adduced
* The transmutation theory seeks to support itself by the fanciful
analogy of foetal development, alleging " that each animal of a higher
kind, in its embryo state, passes through the successive stages of the
lower kinds ; the character of these stages being taken from the brain
and the heart, and man being the highest point of the series. To
which we furnish a reply from Dr. Whewell, based upon the authority
of a distinguished physiologist, who maintains, that " the brain of the
human embryo does not resemble at any period, however early, the
brain of any mollusk, or of any articulate, which are two of the lower
stages. It never passes through a stage, comparable or analogous to
a permanent condition of the same organ in an Invertebrate Animal.
And, in like manner, the spinal chord in the human vertebrae at no
period agrees with the corresponding part of the lower kinds of animals.
The moment it becomes visible in the human embryo, it is entirely

80 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD,
present irresistible evidence, that the transmutation system .
is not merely unsupported by fact, but contradicted by
countless myriads of facts, which present themselves in
every department of nature and philosophy.
THE ORIGIN OG? ANIMAICULA CONSIDERED.
As the spontaneous generation ot superior orders of exist
ence is proved to be impossible, it will not be out of place
to notice the doctrine in reference to the lowest animalcula
and plants. At the same time, it must be observed, . that
this subject is quite distinct from the preceding argument :
so distinct, indeed, that, even if it could Be proved that
certain species of animalcula and plants were produced
spontaneously, yet, unless it could be shown, that the higher
species were derived from the lower species by gradual evo
lution — unless it could be shown, that these spontaneous
animalcula and flora were the progenitors of all the rest,
there would remain the- same necessity for a creating energy,
distinct from, and superior to, nature. That derivation has
already been shown to be impossible, by a series of palpable
facts, and therefore the argument stands complete of itself,
and is totally unaffected by the question now under conside
ration. But, Is. there such a thing as the spontaneous
production of the most minute and simple forms of animal
and vegetable life ? Facts, as far. as our imperfect organs,
aided by the most powerful instruments, can trace them
into the secret operations of nature, reply, There is not;
and, when those operations become too subtil for our senses
to pursue them further, analogy comes in to confirm that
decision. Cieero says-, " Opinionum commenta delet dies,
naturae judiera eonfirmat "-—Time obliterates human opMottis,
dorsal in position ; while in mollusks and articulates, a great part, or
nearly the whole; is ventral The same is true of the heart, or centre
of the vascular system, which has always a different- relative position to
the great nervous centre in the Human Embryo, from' what it has
in any Articulate Animal, and in most Mollusks."* Thus, the theory
falls, because contradicted by the irresistible evidence1 of facts.
* Indications of a Creator, p. 38-9,

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 81
but brings to light the true principles of nature. This seems
verified with respect to the present question. Aristotle, and
speculators of more modern date, held the doctrine of
spontaneous production, but, as true philosophy has advanced
— as nature has become subject to the test of experiment,
and her operations scrutinized by the use of optical instru
ments — that opinion has been gradually given up, and may
now be said to be abandoned as untenable.
Lyell justly remarks, " We must be on our guard, not to
tread in the footsteps of the naturalists of the middle ages,
who believed the doctrine of spontaneous generation to be
applicable to all those parts of the animal and vegetable
kingdoms which they least understood, in direct contradiction
to the analogy of all the parts best known to them ; and who,
when at length they found that insects and cryptogamous
plants were also propagated from eggs or seeds, still persisted
in retaining their old prejudices respecting the infusory
animalcula, and other minute beings, the generation of
which had not then been demonstrated by the microscope,
to be governed by the same laws."*
By the advocates of spontaneous production it has been
urged, that, from flour and water, from decayed animal and
vegetable matter, from stagnant water, &c, numerous ani-
maleula might be produced, where no pre-existing germs
could be traced ; and, that even in the interior parts and
fluids of animals, species of animalcula were formed where
it could not be supposed possible, as they alleged, for ova to
be introduced; and, therefore, such animalcula must be
spontaneously produced by a prolific energy inherent in
nature. To this specious theory we reply : —
First. — Life is not essential to matter, for there is no- life
in the unorganized particles of matter, as our senses them
selves declare ; and it might, therefore, be argued, a, priori,
that matter cannot give that which it does not possess.
Nor is life essentially connected with organised matter, as
our senses also declare ; for we often see an animal perfect
in its organization when the vital principle is absent. It
* Lyell's Principles, ii., 348.
L

83 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
is, therefore, to say the least, unphilosofhical to speak of
matter having an inherent power to produce life, for it
cannot have a power to produce properties which it does not
essentially possess.
Secondly. — The phenomena adduced in opposition to this
principle are only apparent, and are to be accounted ior, by
the inadequacy of our senses to follow the operations of
nature into all her minute and secret laboratories: As far
as our senses are capable of tracing the economy and habits
of animals, from the largest to the smallest, all are produced
by procreation from the living predecessors of the same
species ; and recent discoveries by Ehrenberg have proved
that the very simplest forms of microscopic animalcula are
propagated in the same way. Let us take a few examples :
We select the Infusoria — animalcula, called by that name
from the circumstance of their swarming in all infusions of
vegetable or animal substances which have been kept for a
sufficient time. They are, in general, far too small to be
seen by the naked eye. We select these because they pre
sent animal existence in its minutest forms, and, at one
time, the mystery of their existence was the stronghold of
the theorists of spontaneous production.. But, as Roget
observes, their fanciful dreams have been dispelled by the
important discoveries of Ehrenberg, who, by introducing
colouring matter into the liquids where the animalcula
reside, and by his unwearied application of the best micro
scopes, has been able both to detect their organization, and
explore the secrets of their physical economy. He has
ascertained that the Botifera (wheel animalcula) have a
structure and- functions indicative of elaborate organization.
He has observed these diminutive beings discharge their
ova (eggs) in the form of extremely minute globules, and
watched these ova expand into animalcula corresponding
with the parent, and, having grown to seven times their
original diameter, they were distinctly seen to excite cur
rents, and to swallow food. The, same diligent observer
detected the young of the Rotifer Vulgaris perfectly formed,
moving in the interior of the parent animalculum, and

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 88
brought forth in a living state ; thus constituting these vivipa
rous animals, as the former were oviparous. Other species
again imitate the hydra, in being what is called gemmiparous,
that is, producing gemmules (like the budding of a plant)
which shoot forth from the side of the parent, and are soon
provided with cilia (small projecting filaments which they put
in motion,) enabling them, when separated, to provide for
their own subsistence ; although they are of a very diminu
tive size when thus cast off.* The Volvox (a spherical
animalculum,) propagates its kind in a singular way. " The
germs of this animal are developed in great numbers in its
interior, having a globular shape, and visible by the aid of the
microscope through the transparent covering ; and, while yet
retained within the body of the parent, other still minuter
globules are developed within these, constituting a third
generation of these animals. After a certain period, the
young, which have been thus formed, escape by the bursting
of the parent Volvox, which, in consequence, perishes.
Similar phenomena are presented by many of the Infusoria, "f
The Monad is the smallest animalculum which the microscope,
of the highest magnifying power, has rendered visible. It
was formerly thought to be nothing more than a homoge
neous globule of living matter, without organization, but
endowed with the single attribute of voluntary motion : and
even this property was denied to it by some authors. It
was described as " the ultimatum of animality, " spon
taneously produced by the prolific energy of nature. And
Buffon and Lamarck conjectured, that here they saw " an
illustration of the natural development of a particle to a
mammal, at that point of the process when the organism
stands between the vegetable and animal worlds." But
Ehrenberg has demonstrated, that this species, the smallest
in size, and the simplest in form, of all the Infusoria, has
a mouth, a digestive and a reproductive system. J Thus,
recent discovery puts to flight the reveries of our Theorists,
and places the microscopic tribes of animalcula under the
* Eoget on animal and vegetable physiology, vol. ii., p. 592.
+ Ibid, vol. ii., p. 591. J Ibid, vol. ii., p. 584.

84 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
same general law of procreation as animals of the greatest
magnitude and the most elaborate structure. The Infusoria,
to whom a drop of water is an ocean, are derived by propa
gation as well as the elephant, and the leviathan of the
mighty deep.
As to the difficulty arising from the places in, and the
circumstances under which, these animalcula are found, it
is to be explained by the extreme minuteness of their germs
or .ova, the tenacity with which they retain the principle of
vitality, and their facility of entering into, and combining
with, all animal and vegetable substances, where they are
held, until circumstances favour their development.
" As to the tenacity of life, it is known of some vegetable
seeds, that they will germinate after they have been kept for
many centuries, and that such minute organisms as flour-
ells, and wheel-animalcula, may not only be reduced to
perfect dryness, so that all the functions of life may be sus
pended for years, yet, without the destruction of the vital
principle, but that, in despite of drying in vacuo, along with
chloride of calcium and sulphuric acid, for twenty eight days,
subjected to a heat of 940° F., some of them have been
observed to recover. And as to the subtle manner in which
germs, thus tenacious of life, obtain access to the interior of
living bodies, the probability is, that they can enter where-
ever air can penetrate. The fact, that minute infusory
animalcula can be raised with the watery vapour, and
floated for a season in the atmosphere, deserves, as Hum
boldt remarks in his Cosmos, to be well considered in
connection with this subject; especially since Ehrenberg
has discovered, in the kind of dust-rain, frequently encoun
tered in the neighbourhood of the Cape de Verd Islands, at
a distance of 380 miles from the coast Africa, the remains
of eighteen species of siliceous-shelled polygastric animal
cula. And if Entozoai — creatures living in the interior
parts of other animals — have been found in embryos and in
the eggs of birds, so, also, says Tiedemann, have pins and
small pieces of flint."*
* Dr. Harris's Pre-Adamite Earth, p. 384.

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 85
That bodies so inconceivably numerous, and so extremely
minute, as the ova of infusoria, and of other microscopic
animalcula, should enter into, and combine with, all other
animal and vegetable substances, is what might be expected ;
indeed, such a result is unavoidable : and, that animal and
vegetable matter, fraught as it is with these ova, should, in
certain conditions, favour the development of these ova, is
only in accordance with the well-known laws of generation
in the highest orders of animals. If the warmth of the
fowl's body, or heat artificially obtained, developes the prin
ciple of life in the eggs of a bird, Why should not a chemical
change in animal or vegetable substances develope the prin
ciple of life in microscopic ova, deposited therein ? and, Why
should not many, such as the entozoa species, be developed
by other means within the animal system ? These results
are in harmony with the known laws and operations of
nature, and, from known facts in the history and economy
of microscopic animals, might be predicated a priori, were
.there no demonstration of the phenomena.
That experiments should sometimes ehcit the appearance
of animal or vegetable life, might be expected. It is a result
in conformity with known laws. But the experiment does
not create the hfe ; it merely developes the life which lay
hidden in the dormant ova, until circumstances called it
forth. The experiment is equivalent to incubation, which
quickens and evolves the seed into animal or vegetable
existence. This is further confirmed by the fact, that expe
riment never results in bringing into view the simple seed
or egg, but the perfectly developed animal or plant — a fact
which implies the prior existence of the germs or ova from
which they have been derived ; and this, derivation is further
confirmed by another fact — that the animalcula, which are
evolved by the experiment, are found to have their body
full of eggs or young — thus propagating their species like
larger animals, and, hke them, being propagated by others
of the same race. We need not pursue this subject further.
As the eloquent writer before quoted observes, " The reve
lations of the microscope were hardly more fatal to the

86 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
Brahminical doctrine, that animal life should never be de
stroyed for food, than they have been to the hypothesis of
spontaneous generation." So far, then, as the existence and
habits of the smallest animalcula, can be traced by the
microscope, they are like those which can be traced by the
unaided eye-— produced by natural generation.
Now, had our inquiries on the production of animalcula
led to a different result— had facts even favoured their spon
taneous generation, that result would not have sustained
the development theory. It would have left intact every
preceding argument by which that theory is overthrown.
It would still have been demonstrated, that an impassable
barrier was placed between one species and another — the
hypothesis of transmutation would still have been contra
dicted by myriads of the plainest facts, in every department
of the economy of nature, and the necessity for some origi
nating and creating power, superior to nature, would have
been established by irresistible evidence. But when we
have evidence which is flatly against the spontaneous theory,.
when facts and analogy lead to the conclusion, that a ere- '¦
ating power is as essential to the production of a monad,
as to the production of an animal of the most elaborate and
complicated structure, we have an additional fact to place'1
on the roll of evidence for a creating power. We are thus
enabled to comprehend in our category all animated existence,
the least as well as the greatest, the simplest as well as the
most complex of all organized beings, and say they all attest
their origin to be Divine.
In the last chapter it was proved that all things had a
beginning ; it has now been proved that neither animal nor.
vegetable life began of itself, nor has been produced by any
inherent energy in nature. Thus, we have here, again, an
effect which nature is not adequate to produce, and, as'
every effect must have a cause, the corrollary necessarily*
follows, that all organic existence has been produced by
something distinct from nature, and superior to it.

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 87

THE NEBULAR HYPOTHESIS EXAMINED AND REFUTED.
We now proceed another step in the enquiry, in which
we propose to show, that the inanimate and unorganized
masses, composing the vast universe, could not receive their
present arrangement and disposition from the operation
of any natural law. But here let it be observed, this argu
ment is not essential to the force and conclusiveness of the
preceding one. The former proofs of a Creator, are . each
independent of one another, and equally independent of this ;
and are equally conclusive and satisfactory, though we should
not be able to carry our evidence a step higher. The crea
tion of a man, a quadruped, a reptile, a mollusk, an animal
culum, or a plant, each proves a creator beyond dispute,
even if we could not demonstrate the creation of the inani
mate globular masses, which compose the solar and the
stellary systems. But this too can be demonstrated.
It has already been proved, under our first fundamental
propositions, that the solar system, and, indeed, the entire
universe must have had a beginning (see pages 39-58) ; it has
now to be shown that that origin could not spring from
matter and its known properties, but must, like all orga
nized existence, be derived from something distant from
nature and superior to it. Now, had we no direct . proof
that the universe was created, or brought into its present
conformation and revolutions by a Divine hand, analogy
would present a strong presumptive argument of this fact.
Since the existence of all organized forms of animal and
vegetable life naturally and necessarily leads to a Creator,
it becomes highly probable that the arrangement and dispo
sition of the material universe have had the same origin. If it
be impossible for matter spontaneously to originate organized
existence, it is exceedingly improbable that it can originate
its own modifications, and dispositions, and motions,; so as
to produce the most perfect mechanism, the most consum
mate order and harmony, in the arrangement of its several
parts. The former being irresistibly proved, there is not
one mind among ten thousand who could resist this conclu-

88 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
sion to which analogy so cfearly conducts us. But, here
we are met by the Nebular hypothesis, which proposes to
account for the origin of our planet, and, indeed, of the
solar system, and ah. the other systems, by supposing that
theatoms, of which the whole material universe is composed,
existed primarily in an extremely diffused and attenuated
state through immensity.
There are numerous patches of apparently dull cloudy
matter, irregularly interspersed through the vault of the
heavens. A few of these are faintly Visibleto the naked eye,
but by far the greater portion are revealed only by the tele
scope. iSome of these were always resolvable into clusters of
stars, while the others long resisted all attempts, even with
.telescopes of the highest magnifying power, to reduce them
into determinate bodies. Even when Herschel's great reflector
was turned to the heavens, many of these nebulae still
remained unresolvable ; changed indeed in figure, but stillpra-
senting the aspect of masses of cloudy vapour. It was, indeed,
thought that some of these unresolvable masses were nearer to
the earth than others which had yielded to telescopic power?
and hence arose, during the close of the last century, various
conjectures respecting their nature, and the purposes they
served in the universe. Some thought they served to stopp'ly
the systems of stars in their vicinity, with materials', to
replenish the waste brought on by the emission of light;
but the most magnificent theory, and one which ultimate!!
absorbed other conjectures, was the hypothesis, that these
nebulous masses consisted of luminous matter in its primi
tive condition, ere it had condensed itself into a compact
body of spherical form. Assuming this as the first prin
ciple ih the hypothesis, and assuming, as the second, that
the law of gravitation was inherent and constantly operating?
the different degrees of luminosity, presented by the various
nebulas, were supposed to be characteristic of the different
degrees of condensation to which the respective masses had
advanced, in their progress from a state of primitive diffu
sion to solid globeB. Hence system-makers arose in quantum
mfficit. Mechanical laws were conjectured, diagrams were

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 89
drawn, and books were written, to show us how our planet
had arisen, how systems grew, how constellations of burning
suns, attended by revolving worlds and humble satellites,
were formed, and how other young systems were growing.
At this period, worlds were made, and hurled into immensity,
with as much facility as the school-boy casts his tennis-ball.
Infidels expounded the theory to show us what Nature could
do without a God, and good men took it up to show us how
it harmonized with the nature of God and his word. These
systems are still fresh, and their drawings and diagrams
look beautiful on paper ; but they have no other foundation
than the paper on which they are displayed.
This specious generalization is the ultimatum of the
development theory. It may be viewed in a two-fold aspect,
according to the mode in which it is advocated by its ad
mirers. By some, as we have intimated, it is advocated
simply as the mode in which the Creator has produced the
universe ; and by others, as the mode in which the universe
has been spontaneously produced by the operation of natural
law, without the agency of a Creator. Viewed simply as an
hypothesis, it is unsupported by the phenomena on which
it was founded ; but viewed as an atheistic scheme, it is
fraught with palpable contradictions and absurdities.
I. The Nebular hypothesis is proved, by Astronomical dis
covery, to be without foundation. — It stands precisely in the
same position with respect to the telescope, as the sponta
neous production of animalcula once did to the microscope.
Both systems could boast a species! of plausibility, while the
unassisted eye, or limited and imperfect instruments, were
the only means of investigation ; but both alike vanish, as
idle dreams before the light of day, when science employs
more perfect instruments, and more patient attention. As
a conjecture, it rested mainly on the supposition, that vast
masses, composing nebular phenomena, were unresolvable
from their nature, and not from their distance. This was
the foundation on which its plausible pretensions were sup
ported, and which gained for it a temporary credit among
men. It availed not, how much augmented was the power
M

90 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
which the great Herschel applied. When he turned to the
heavens his telescope of forty feet, with its four feet mirror,
penetrating into space near 200 times beyond the distance
of unaided vision, still these nebular masses were unresolv
able. Every other celestial object seemed to yield to its
power. Stars which had appeared single, and scarcely visible
from their minuteness, were found to be double, triple, qua
druple, &c. Myriads, which the human eye had never seen
to twinkle from the creation, were beheld powdering the blue
canopy of the sky. The faint light of the Milky Way was
found to proceed, as Democritus anciently suggested, from
millions of brilliant orbs, congregating in the form of an
immense belt, suspended in space. Cloudy appearances,
whose grey and dusky aspect was invisible, except in the.
clearest atmosphere, were ascertained to be clusters of stars
of diversified forms and splendour. Multitudes of other
nebulous masses were brought into view, some hght and
well defined, but many diffused, sparse, and dull of aspect, :
These latter, and some faintly visible to the naked eye,
would yield to no power which the great astronomer could
bring to bear upon them. They sternly resisted all his
attempts to resolve them into starry clusters ; under the
amazing power of his four feet reflector, they still appeared
cloudy, vaporous substances ; and hence they were supposed
to be masses of matter, diverse from other celestial objects,
and from their nature, not their distance, incapable of being
resolved by telescopic power. They were supposed, in fact,
to be the crude materials, the primordial elements, of nascent.
worlds. Furnished with these materials, imagination sup
plied gravitation and mechanical laws, and, by their aid,
attempted to account for the origin of the universe.
Thus, the nebular theory was based upon a conjecture,
and subsequent discoveries have proved the conjecture was
founded in error. Time, the great revealer of events, and
expounder of physical law, has demonstrated that the cause,
why Nebute were unresolvable, was not their nature, but
their distance. Lord Rosse's magnificent telescope has left
its noble predecessors far in the rear. With its polished

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 91
and perfect disc of six feet, it penetrates into space more
than twice the distance of that constructed by Herschel. It
carries our observation into the fields of immensity, at least
five hundred times farther than the unassisted vision could
reach ; or, in the other words, it " will descry a single star
six thousand times more remote than an average orb of the
first magnitude." The instrument of these tremendous
powers, when turned to the heavens, at once revealed the
fallacy on which the nebular hypothesis had reposed. Num
bers of the masses of nebulous vapour, supposed to be crude
materials in their primordial state, were immediately resolved
into splendid constellations, — brilliant clusters of stars. The
diffused and irregular forms which bid defiance to Herschel's
telescope, have yielded to the more powerful instrument of
Lord Rosse, and placed themselves among the other immense
systems of stars, too aggregated and numerous to be calcu
lated. The nebulae of Andromeda, and Orion, are among
the most celebrated of these modern discoveries — objects so
distant that their light reaches not our sphere " until sixty
thousand years after it has left the regions where they lie."
The nebula in Orion, which once seemed a shapeless mass
of unresolvable matter, is found to be a glorious object — a
celestial continent, " dotted all over with wisps, not unlike the
flakes of a mackeral sky — each of which must, in itself, be
almost a universe — even a Sandheap of stars."*
It is admitted, there are still numbers of Nebula? which
refuse to yield to the resolving power of even Lord Rosse's
telescope, but this does not build again the fallen hypo
thesis. It is a fact which we should rationally expect ; a
fact, indeed, which must necessarily be successively repeated,
after still more wonderful optical achievements, unless man
could invent an instrument, which could pierce beyond the
utmost verge of creation. Not till then, will it be possible
to resolve all the nebula? which would successively appear
as the penetrating power of the telescope might augment.
No such period, however, can be looked for on our planet,
with our limited powers. But the fact which we have to
* Professor Nichol, L.L.D.

93 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
regard in our argument, is this : — The nebular hypothesis
rested on the supposition, that the cause why nebulous
material was not resolvable by the telescope, existed in the
nature of that material, not in its distance ; but telescopic
observation has now demonstrated that the cause lay, not in
the nature of the material, but in its distance, and that its
nature is totally different from that which our system-makers
had reckoned upon as the foundation of their hypothesis.
The foundation of the theory being thus destroyed, the
hypothesis built upon it, falls to the ground.
II. But although scientific discovery dissipates all evi
dence of the existence of such nebulous matter as was sup
posed by our theorists, yet, if we admit that such was the
primordial state of matter, it can be demonstrated, that
there was still an absolute necessity for a Divine Being as
its originator and disposer. Matter, when brought into
existence, (or if it had eternally existed) must have been in
some state prior to its present orderly arrangement ;, and the
diffused nebulous state may be admitted, without conceding
a particle of evidence for a Creating and Disposing energy.
It can be shown, that to consider matter to have been ori
ginally in a nebulous state, furnishes as palpable contra
dictions to atheism, and as conclusive evidence of God's
existence, as any other view of the subject.
1. Let us, then, suppose all the matter of which the uni
verse is composed to have been originally in a diffused nebu
lous state ; we shall soon see that this state cannot be defended
on atheistic principles, but, that it necessarily involves a
Creator; for, either the matter of the universe was eternal, or
it was not. If not eternal, it must have been created ; and
if created, its creation involves the existence of a Creator.
But, if it was eternal, either the property of gravitation was
eternal and co-existent with it, or it was not. If not, then
gravitation was superadded ; and its superaddition involves
the existence of a Creator. If gravitation was eternal as
well as matter, then, as Newton observes, matter could not
exist in a gaseous or vapourous state, such as our theorists,
suppose, but in a compact and solid mass or masses by the

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 93
eternal action of the gravitating force.* If it be said the
action of the gravitating force was suspended or counteracted ;
we demand, by what agency ? There are but two agencies
which can be supposed — either a voluntary or a physical
agency. If a voluntary force suspended it, then have we
the existence of a voluntary agent or mind, which is the
truth contended for. If that agency was physical, we ask,
what was it ? Is intense heat alleged as the physical agent
to counteract the force of gravitation, and keep the primor
dial particles of matter in a diffused and dissipated state ?
We reply, we know not how such intense heat could exist
among particles, so widely separated and diffused. But,
further, this supposed heat was either eternal or it was not.
If not, then it was superadded, and its superaddition involves
a Creator. Indeed, a state of intense heat is not a per
manent state, and could not be eternal. The property of
radiation is the constant associate of heat, and the effect of
radiation is refrigeration — a reduction of the intensity of
heat — and whatever might be the intensity of heat at any
given period, radiation would, in time, reduce it to an
equilibrium. Thus the supposed state of intense heat, if it
ever existed, must have both a beginning and an end, and
cannot be eternal. This destroys the atheistic hypothesis.
For, in the absence of this heat, gravitation would have con
densed the vapourous fluid into solid bodies ; and, on the other
hand, the presence of this heat, at any time, implies a change,
superinduced by an extraneous power, distinct from nature
and superior to it. Let the atheist, then, adopt which side of
the dilemma he chooses. On either side he is involved in
inextricable contradictions. If he hold to the nebular
hypothesis, he contradicts his atheism ; and if he retain his
* " For if there be innate gravity, it is impossible now for the matter
of the earth, and all the planets, and star's, to fly up from them, and
become evenly spread throughout all the heavens, without a supers-
natural power ; and certainly that which never can be hereafter without
a supernatural power, could never be heretofore without the same
power. " — Sir Isaac Newton's letters to Dr. Bentley ; see his life by Br.
Brewster.

94 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
atheism, he contradicts his nebular hypothesis. He cannot
maintain his theory without admitting a Creator.
9. If any Nebulous matter exist at the present day, its
existence involves the necessity of a Creator. In consider
ing the matter of the universe to be originally nebulous, the
supposition of any portion of it being found in a nebulous
state at the present day, gives another phase to the argu
ment, and presents an additional evidence of a creating
power. For if all the matter of the universe had existed
from eternity, it must all have had the same condition. The
laws of nature acting eternally must have acted uniformly, and
produced uniform results. Consequently, all the matter sub
ject to the operation of these laws, must be in the same
state — either all being in the state of diffused nebula?, or all'
condensed into solid and compact bodies. The fact that
many solid and compact bodies do exist, is a proof of the
action of gravitation and cohesion. Now if all the matter
of the universe had been eternally subject to these laws,'
all would have been compacted and solid, hke our own
globe, and not any have remained at this day in a diffused
nebulous state. If, then, we suppose any matter at this day
floating in a nebulous state, diffused and uncondensed, that
portion must either have been without the property of gravita
tion, or it must have been created, and that within a compara^
tively recent date.* To suppose the former, is to admit
that gravitation is not essential to matter, but superadded,
and its superaddition involves the necessity of a Creator:*
To suppose the latter, namely, that nebula has been created,
is to admit a Creator ; and if he created that portion which
the hypothesis supposes still to exist in a diffused state, he
must have created all the matter of the universe. Thus,
to contend for the existence of nebulous matter, is to deny
its eternity, to contradict the atheistic theory, and furnish
proof of a Creator.
3. The Nebular hypothesis cannot account for the produc-
* The nebulosity of comets is no exception to the argument, for their
location, their motions, and their constitution, combine to disprove their
eternity.

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 95
tion and cosmical arrangements of the planets, as parts of a
regular system, without admitting a Creator. There is no
natural agency adequate to the spontaneous production of
the planets. Supposing the primordial matter of the universe
had been eVenly diffused through space, and the law of gravi
tation in action, the particles would have moved towards the
centre, and congregated into one spherical mass. If the scat
tered elements had been unevenly diffused, they would have
formed several, or, perhaps, an immense number of such
masses. But how were these to form subordinate bodies, such
as planets and moons revolving around their primaries ? Our
theorists tell us, by the larger masses throwing off portions
from their surface, by the action of a centrifugal force. But we
reply, there could be no centrifugal force without a rotatory
motion, and whence this rotatory motion ? The effect of
gravity upon the elementary particles of. matter, is to draw
them in straight lines towards a given centre, and we cannot
conceive that such an action could originate a rotatory
motion. Its tendency would be, by equal pressure on all
sides, to produce perfect rest to the aggregated mass. . The
Author of the " Vestiges," and others, in defending their
theory, refer us to eddies and whirlpools, formed by the
action of running water, as an example of the manner in
which a rotatory action might be produced in a nebulous
mass of matter ; but we can see no analogy between the two
cases. In a stream of water, the particles are moving in one
direction, and would never produce an eddy, but from some
interruption or irregularity produced by various causes —
such as a curve in the channel, or the uneven depth of the
stream, or some other impediment, which, giving a turn to,
some particles of water, and these again meeting with, resist
ance from other particles, their yielding nature occasions a
circular action, and an eddy is produced. Widely different,
however, is the supposed state of nebulous matter, which is
assumed to have been " formed of one mass ; " " the consti
tution of the whole uniform, consisting of similar elements,"
and " the same physical laws presiding over the whole."* Now
* Vestiges of Creation, 27.

96 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
the particles of matter, under these conditions, evenly dif
fused through space, and acted upon by gravitation, would
gradually and slowly move in straight lines towards the
centre of the mass, with the most perfect order and regu
larity, no impediment arresting their course, or disturbing
their action, no opposing currents would be formed, but
an equal pressure would be exerted on every radius from
circumference to centre.* Under such conditions, we cannot
see how any rotatory action could be generated without the
interference of another power, independent of matter. But
without dogmatically asserting the impossibility of such a
result, there are other facts connected with the solar sys
tem, which cannot be accounted for by a rotatory motion,
supposing it to have been thus generated. For instaneey
the axes of the planetary bodies and their satellites, are hot
uniform, but are variously inclined from the plane of the
ecliptic. What rotatory motion in the central mass can
account for this ? The satellites also have their axes in
clined from the equator of their primaries. What rotatory
action can account for this ? It is vain and fanciful to
ascribe these phenomena to " undulations in the nebular
mass." Where does the theorist derive his undulations,
but from his own imagination ? Again :. the satellites of
Uranus, instead of moving from west to east, as the theory
would require, have their orbits nearly at right angles to the
ecliptic, and move in a direction from east to west. This is
not merely an exception to the mechanical result of the
theory, it is a contradiction to that result. But the author
of the " Vestiges," is fertile in invention, and can easily find
a cause in his own imagination, even where there is none in
nature. In fact, his theory consists of a bundle of hypo
theses. It is one hypothesis built upon many. To account
* We need not here suppose the regularity and uniformity of the
motion of the atoms to have been disturbed by chemical affinities ; for if
the law of chemical affinity operated then, it would operate uniformly
through the entire mass of nebulous matter, andwe cannot see how this
law, any more than that of gravitation, nor both combined, could pro
duce a rotation of the entire mass. But both the law of gravitation,
and chemical affinity, wili hereafter be specially considered.

THE EXISTENCE OP GOD. 97
for the opposite motions of the satellites of Uranus, he has
recourse to the supposition of " a curve in the uttermost
portion of the nebular mass ; " but this is a mere suppo
sition, contrary to all probability, and, unfortunately for the
hypothesis, the discovery of Neptune proves that Uranus
is not at the uttermost portion, but very far in the
interior of the system. It is in vain to fabricate an
hypothesis, to account for the fact in question ; it is a con
tradiction to the mechanical result of the centrifugal force
to which the theory ascribes it. The production, there
fore, of the planets, and their orderly arrangements and
motions, must be ascribed to a Power distinct from nature,
and mere physical or mechanical law, and infinitely superior
to both.
4. The Nebular hypothesis cannot account for one body
in the system, being luminous, and all the rest opaque. Here,
is another ultimate fact which no philosophy can account
for by natural law. The nebular theory contemplates the
primitive elements as a mass without any such separation or
partial distribution of light and opaque matter. The appro
priating, then, of light to one body, and the withholding of it
from others, is an effect, but for which, there is no cause to be
assigned in natural laws.* Here, then, is another ultimate
fact which requires, the agency of a Power distinct from
nature, and superior to it.
5 . The Nebular hypothesis cannot show why the luminous
* We are aware it is conjecture by some, that the planet Neptune
is self-luminous. This, however, is at present only a conjecture, but
should subsequent discovery prove it to be correct, it will rather
strengthen our argument for an arbitary and not a mechanical power,
determining the location of light. For what natural law could cause
light to be located only in the centre, and the extreme limits of the solar
system, omitting all the bodies which lie between the centre and the
ciroumference. We see the utility of its location in the centre, as the
source of light and heat to the nearer planets; and we may see its
utility too, in an orb situated at the extreme boundary of the system,
on account of its remoteness from the central orb, but no physical law
can account for an arrangement so admirable. Therefore, if this con
jecture prove correct, it supplies another ultimate fact, which refers us
to a Creator. N

98 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
body should be in the centre of the system. That this is a
most advantageous arrangement all admit, but, what natural
law can account for it ? We have admitted the existence of
gravitation, but gravitation cannot account for the central
collocation of light; for, of all bodies, light seems to be the
least affected by gravitation ; and if it be affected by it
as much as other matter, opaque bodies have the property
of attraction, in proportion to their bulk, equally with
the luminous ones. Gravitation belongs, indeed, to all
matter, and if hght were collocated by its influence, all
bodies would be luminous without exception. Motion can
not account for it ; for, if the rotation of a globe have any
effect upon particles of light, it must be to throw them
off from its surface. The action of light itself cannot
account for the phenomenon, for, whether Hght be by elms':,
sion or undulation, its action is always in straight lines ;
and, in passing from a spherical surface, it diverges mathe-.
matically into a wider area, and, without a directing agency,
could never converge to a centre. So far as we can observe
the action of light, whether emitted or reflected from a
sphere, it is constantly passing from, not approaching to, a
centre — being constantly diffused, not concentrated. The
collocation of light, therefore, in the centre of our system, is
contrary to the known laws of light, and, consequently, the
placing of the luminous body in the centre, is another ulti
mate fact which no law of nature can account for, and
necessarily requires an Agency distinct from nature, and,
superior to it.
6. The nebular hypothesis cannot account for the distances,
bulk, and density of the planets. The theory assumes, that
the more remote from the central orb, the larger the planet
in dimensions, and the less in density. The author of the
" Vestiges" says, there is a " progressive bulk and diminu
tion in density, from the nearest to the sun to the most
distant," and that " the distances are curiously relative."
Such, we admit, should be the result of the theory, were it
correct, but the actual state of the solar system is widely
different from our author's representation. Thus Venus and

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 99
the earth are nearly of equal dimensions and density, though
greatly different in distance ; while Mars, though more
remote from the sun, is only about half the size of the
earth or Venus, and of about the same density. These facts
flatly contradict our author's theory of " progression in bulk,
and diminution in density." The same contradiction is seen
in the remoter planets. Jupiter is by far the largest planet,
though situated in the middle of the system. He is several
times the size of Uranus, though four times nearer to the
sun. Again, the newly discovered planet, Neptune, is said
to be 3,900,000,000 miles distant from the sun, or, in round
numbers, six times more distant than Jupiter, and yet
not more than half the size.* There is, indeed, a most perfect
adjustment between the centrifugal and contripetal forces,
clearly proving regularity and design, but, there is such a
departure from the pretended relation between distance,
bulk, and density, as mocks the generalizations of our
theorists, and defies every attempt to resolve the collocation
of the planets, and the arrangement of the system, into the
operation of mere natural law, and compels us to refer the
whole to the presiding intelligence and agency of One, dis
tinct from nature, and infinitely superior to it As Sir Isaac
Newton has well observed, " To make such a system, with
all its motions, required a cause which understood and
compared together the quantities of matter in the several
bodies of the sun and planets, and the gravitating powers
resulting from thence ; the several distances of the primary
planets from the sun, and of the secondary ones from Saturn,
Jupiter, and the Earth, and the velocities with which those
planets could revolve about those quantities of matter in the
central bodies ; and to compare and adjust all these things
together, in so great a variety of bodies, argues the cause
* The existence of this planet was inferred by Adams, of Cambridge,
from the perturbations of Uranus, and subsequently discovered by Le-
verrier. Supposing the dimensions &c, of Neptune to be as yet not
accurately and nicely ascertained, yet any allowance for error which can
be reasonably made, will still leave results which show a wide depar
ture from the uniformity required by the operation of mere natural law.

100 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
to be not bhnd and fortuitous, but very well skilled in
mechanics and geometry "*
7. To the reasons already adduced many others might be
added; but we shall content ourselves with one, which
applies to every view which can possibly be taken respecting
the origin of the universe. It is this important truth: — There
is no hypothesis can be conceived of the origin of the uni
verse, independent of a Creator, if it does not provide for
the perpetuity and everlasting continuance of the universe.
For, if it be incapable of continuing for ever, it was equally
incapable of originating itself. We have before proved that
both mechanical and chemical motions must necessarily come
to an end, however remote from the present period that end
may be. Therefore, the spontaneous origin of the universe
was impossible, and, by an intellectual necessity, we arrive
at the conclusion, that all the worlds, and all the forms of
organized existence inhabiting them, must have proceeded
from a Divine Creator— a Being essentially distinct from
nature, and infinitely superior to it.
We have thus- traced the development hypothesis, through
all its parts and pretensions, and proved that it is unsup
ported by facts, and repugnant to philosophy. The evolu
tion of one species from another, is contradicted by the
entire length of natural history, though the scroll be un
folded through the dateless eras of geological formations, up
to the first period of organic existence. The doctrine of
spontaneous generation, is disproved by facts, so far as the
eye or the microscope are capable of extending their observa
tions. The nebular hypothesis — the ultimatum of the theory,
we have seen, has no foundation in fact; but if true, affords
equal refutation of the atheistic theory, as it clearly demon
strates the agency of an intelligent Creator.
The development hypothesis is by far the most specious '
generalization, which has been conceived in order to dis
pense with the agency of a Creator, and that being disposed
of, we have no other system of absolute atheism, which can
claim any lengthened consideration. The hypotheses of
* Sir Isaac Newton's Letter to Dr. Bentley, in 1 692.

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 101
Chance and Necessity, however have their advocates, and
must be briefly noticed.
THE THEORY OF CHANCE REFUTED.
We are told that all the phenomena of Nature are produc
tions resulting from Chance. But we reply, in the first
instance, by demanding, What is Chance? It is not
a substance, it is not an attribute ; and if neither, it can
not be the origin of nature, for it has no substantive
existence. If it be replied, Chance is the mode of Nature's
operating — that nature is ever active and prolific, and must
ever be producing something ; but that her operations are such
as we see them to be is merely fortuitous. Now, of the truth
of this hypothesis we demand a proof. If Chance mean any
thing, it means the absence of design ; and the absence of
design can only be proved by the prevalence of universal
disorder and confusion ; and by the absence of adaption of
means to ends, nay, by the total absence of all existence
of either means or ends. Will the atheist undertake
to show, that there is nothing in nature but a chaos
of disorder, confusion, anomalies, and contradictions ? Will
he, in seriousness, be responsible to show to his disciples,
that in all nature there is no such adaptation of means to
ends, or, rather, that there are neither means nor ends — that
all nature's operations are random, isolated, and unconnected
efforts ? He is bound to do this, or give up his theory as
untenable. He will never undertake this formidable task.
Let us, then, look into nature for ourselves, and see if there
be no proof of order, harmony, constancy, law, adaptation,
and consequent design; and if either our senses, or our
reason, can be relied on, we shall find demonstrations of
these at every step in our inquiry. When the simple Arab
was interrogated, "How do you know there is a God?" He
replied, " In the same way that I know that the camel has
been in the desert, when I see his footsteps." The rude
impressions of a camel's foot he could not ascribe to Chance.
We shall soon find traces of the Divine presence and agency

102 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
impressed upon every object in the universe, from a world
to an atom.
1. Proofs of order. Natural history is the history of the
nature and economy of animals. Does the philosopher find
nothing but disorder and confusion here ? On the contrary,
Is not the science based upon the regularity, the uniformity,
the harmony, and constancy, of nature ? The philosopher
divides the aninal kingdom into classes, orders, genera,
species. Is there nothing but disorder here ? He observes
that each species, from time immemorial, propagates its own
kind, and that the individuals in the species are distin
guished into sexes, male and female, and that this distinction,"
in proportionate numbers, is continued from age to age. Is
there no regularity or harmony here ? He sees each indi
vidual of the same species possessing the same organs and
members, the same number of eyes, ears, feet, &c, and these
situated in the same parts of the body, and performing the
same functions respectively. Is there no order or arrangement
here ? He sees each individual of the same species living
in the same element, actuated by the same instincts, and
pursuing the same habits. Is there no order or system
here ? and if order and system be the distinction between
Chance and design, What does the universal prevalence of
order demonstrate, but the absolute falsehood and folly of
the atheistic hypothesis.
2. Constancy. — Fixed Laws. There are numerous fixed
laws in the universe, and every such law affords proof of
order and constancy. For, What is a natural law, but a mode
or rule, according to which Nature operates with uniformity
and constancy ? Thus gravitation pervades all matter, all
individual atoms, and all worlds, and operates according to
a fixed principle — its force being invariably determined by
the quantity of matter a body contains, and the square of
its distance from another body. Does this fact reveal nothing
but disorder ? Could Newton have successfully applied this
principle in resolving the great problem of the mechanism
of the universe, if nature's operations had been random
and fortuitous ? Light moves with a determined amount of

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 103
velocity, and always in straight lines, whether emitted or
reflected — whether it diverge or converge ; and when reflected
it always rebounds, according to a definite angle of inci
dence. Does this fact exhibit nothing but confusion ? The
laws of motion are constant and invariable, and hence the
regularity of planetary revolutions ; so regular, indeed, are
these motions, that they conform to the most rigid prin
ciples of mathematics. Their regularity furnishes data
from which the mathematician can ascertain the relative
position of the planets for ages back, and predict with abso
lute certainty, the moment of an eclipse for ages to come.
Indeed, it was by this mathematical regularity that the
celebrated Adams and Leverrier inferred, that the pertur
bations of Uranus indicated the existence of another planet
beyond that orb ; and, shortly after, the vigils of astronomers
found the stranger in that vicinity, where mathematics had
determined his location. Thus, Neptune was added to the
spheres of the solar system. Could the discovery have been
made if nature had operated by chance ?
It has been said, God works by geometry, and it is certain
the motions of the heavenly bodies are our standard of per
fect order, perfect time, perfect regularity. The most perfect
chronometer, constructed by man, is a specimen of disorder,
compared with the precision, the perfect exactness, of the
grand horologe of nature. We ask, Is this regularity an
evidence of Chance? The laws of chemical affinity,
attraction, repulsion, and combination, are definite, fixed,
and uniform. The materials of nature can be resolved into
about fifty-five constituent elements ; and these, in forming
compound substances, enter into combination with each other,
not at random, or indifferently, but on the mysterious princi
ple of elective affinity, and in fixed and definite proportions.
This rule is invariable, and all the ingenuity or power of man
can neither alter the rule, nor force a departure from it.
There is the same constancy and uniformity in the laws of
sound, atmospheric pressure and elasticity, in heat, com
bustion, refrigeration, evaporation, rarefaction, solution, and
decomposition, Indeed, all the sciences are based on this

104 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
undeviating regularity in the laws and operations of nature,
Optics, on the constancy of the nature and the laws of
Hght ; astronomy, on the constancy of the laws of gravitation
and mechanical forces ; chemistry, on the constancy of the
nature and properties &f matter ; anatomy, on the constancy
of organic structure in the species respectively ; so uniform,
indeed, that the celebrated Cuvier, from a fossil fragment
could accurately determine the entire form, size, proportions,
and habits of the animal to which it once belonged. He
could thus build up the structure of species which had been
extinct for myriads of ages, and determine their habits,
whether graminivorous or carnivorous, whether aquatic or
land animals. And this he could do because of the order,
uniformity, and constancy of Nature's laws and operations,
in all ages past as well as at present.*
It is a proof of the same order and constancy, that the
same physical causes uniformly produce the same effects,
and that not only within the period of human history, but
through all those remote cycles of past duration, which reach
down to the dateless period when the ancient granite rocks
were formed, constituting the primitive foundations of the
earth. Even the most sudden and violent changes which,
at times, appear to invade and break in upon the quiet and
uniform operations of nature, and convulse the globe, are
subject to the same laws of order, regularity, and system.
The eruption of a volcano is as much the effect of natural
law as the budding of a primrose ; the heaving and rending
of an earthquake, as the rising of the morning star ; the
fierce and destructive hurricane, as the gentle zephyr of a
summer's eve. Indeed, all those apparently fickle and
fitful meteoric changes, which consist of varieties in atmos
pheric temperature, in the humidity and dryness of the
weather, in the ascent of vapour, the descent of mists and
showers, hail and snow, in the dulness and brightness of
the sky, and even in the fantastic drapery of the clouds, are
regulated by fixed and unalterable laws. There is not a
particle of dust that floats at random ; there is not a change
* See Cuvier's " Theory of the Earth," pp. 83, 93.

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 105
but it is an effect ; there is not an effect but it has a definite
cause ; and there is not a cause but which operates according
to fixed laws. Atoms and worlds, the events of a- moment,
and the stupendous results of ages -h, the minutest details
of Nature's facts, as well as the most magnificent systems of
congregated worlds, are all under laws which operate uni
formly, constantly, and universally. Two thousand four
hundred years ago, the celebrated Pythagoras applied the
science of numbers and of music to general physics. He
considered the order of the universe so complete, that it
it exemplified the most perfect regularity of numbers, and
the most perfect harmony of sounds. Modern science has
, demonstrated, that, if " the music of the spheres " is to be
ascribed to the poetry of the Sage's imagination, the harmony
of numbers — of adjustment by weight, measure, and quantity,
in every part of the universe, is a doctrine of sound philosophy.
Order and harmony pervade all nature ; and if these are
opposed to confusion, and confusion be the offspring of
Chance, there is no such thing as Chance in the universe.
3. Evidences of Design. Equally conclusive is the evi
dence of design arising from adaptation. Chance has no
end to accomplish, no purpose, either immediate or final, to
obtain, and therefore employs no means. The atheist,. in
speaking of nature, can never use the word adaptation.
If he does, he involves himself in contradiction ; and if he
does not, nature herself contradicts him by myriads of facts.
Nature tells him his feet were made to walk, and he uses
them for that purpose ; yet he denies their adaptation !
Nature tells him that his teeth were made to masticate food,
and he uses them for that purpose ; yet he denies their
adaptation ! Nature informs him that his eyes were formed
for sight, and he uses them for that purpose ;. yet denies
their adaptation ! The science of optics tells him that if
either the laws of light, or the structure of the eye, had been
different from what they' are, he would have been blind;
and yet he denies the adaptation of one to the other ! Astro
nomy tells him that if the centripetal and centrifugal forces
had not been balanced with mathematical exactness, the

106 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
earth could not have been an inhabited World ; and yet he
denies the adaptation of the one to the other ! Further
proofs of adaptation will be given hereafter. Let these
suffice for the present argument. Only remarking, just now,
that so prevalent is the manifestation of design in the
economy of nature, that scientific men, in pursuing their
investigations, have found the postulate — " Every thing 'has
a purpose to accomplish," — is an important guide to the
discovery of truth — -a principle which every new discovery
honours, in its turn, by an additional verification. Nature
is one great system of means and ends. She never works
but for a definite result ; she produces no result but by
means ; she never employs her means without success ; and
this unvarying success flows from the perfect adaptation ef
those means. In the face of all this, the atheist may still
deny the existence of adaptation ; but let him not pretend
to be governed by reason ; never more let him speak of the
Christian's credulity ; never more let him demand evidence
of the truth of religion ; and never more let him speak of
the parts "of a watch as being adapted to indicate time, nor
the construction of a telescope as adapted to the eye, northe
locomotive engine as adapted to facilitate human intercourse.
As his mode of thinking is contradictory to nature, and
axiomatic truth, let his vocabulary exhibit the same perver
sion of language as his mind does of reason, and then,
however unfit for the society of rational men, he will be
understood by those of his own class.
4. Order, law, and adaptation, are not to be resolved into
the possibilities of Chance. There is but another aspecMhat
we know of in which Chance has been presented. It is
this : — that order itself is one of the possibilities of Chance ;
and, as there is a boundless range of possibilities in which
nature may happen to operate, the present constitution of
things inay be one result of those blind, but multifarious
operations ; and, that as nature has had eternity in which to
ply the energies of her vast laboratory, the present state of
the universe has been produced as one out of an infinite
number of preceding states. This final •subterfuge of the

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 107
patrons of Chance is soon exploded. We have only to
apply the principles and facts already before us. If nature
operates fortuitously, without design, without ends or means,
though her operations may produce the appearance of order
in a few isolated cases, she can never produce a system of
universal order, much less can she perpetuate that order
with undeviating and mathematical certainty through the
whole history of her operations. As the result of the fortu
itous operations nf antagonist forces, chaotic disorder and
confusion must always be predominant, if not universal ;
and the appearance of any orderly construction, or any regu-
lai; sequence of events and facts, for even a limited portion
of time or space, would not bear the proportion of one to a
million. Accordingly, if nature had operated by Chance,
the universe must always have abounded with an immense
preponderance of malformations, misshapen prodigies;
and geology, which records her past deeds, must . ex
hibit, at every step, the absence of law and order — the
thick strata must indeed be built up with monumental
proofs that adaptation and design never ruled. But, while
the prevalence of order in the present state of the universe
overturns this notion with overwhelming force, so the strata
of former geological periods carry the contradiction down
through all past ages.
Geology has unrolled to us the volume of nature, and we
can read the history of her operations, from the most com
plicated mixtures and combinations, down to the simplest
element, and from the present date, down to the period
when the earliest formations were produced ; and both past
and present events unite in showing that Chance has no
place except in the brain of the atheist, whom both nature
and reason disown. If the complicated structure of the
human body gives evidence of order and adaptation now, so
does the structure of animals and plants in all ages past :
and if we descend to the period when neither animals nor
plants existed — ere organization had been commenced — we
find, even in the constitution of the granitic rock, the opera
tion of law and order, of chemical affinities and combinations,

108 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
carried on in definite proportions. Dr. Buckland remarks :
"The mineralogist has ascertained that granite is a com
pound substance, made up of three distinct and dissimilar
mineral bodies, quartz, felspar, and mica, each presenting
certain regular combinations, of external form and internal
structure, with physicatproperties peculiar to itself. And
chemical analysis has shown, that all these several bodies
had a prior existence, in some more simple state, before they
entered on their present union in the mineral constituents
of what are supposed to be the most ancient rocks accessible
to human observation?- The chrystallographer has also fur
ther shown, that the Several ingredients of granite, and of
all other kinds of chrystalline rocks, are composed of mole
cules, which are invisibly minute, and that each of these
molecules is made up of still smaller and more simple mole
cules, every one of them combined in fixed and definite
proportions, and affording, at all the successive stages!' of
their analysis, presumptive proof that they possess geometri
cal figures. These combinations and figures are so far from
indicating the fortuitous result of accident, that they are
disposed according to laws the most severely rigid, and in
proportions mathematically exact.
" The atheistic theory, assuming the gratuitous -postulate
of the eternity of matter and motion, would represent the
question thus : All matter, it would contend, must,. of neces
sity, have assumed some form or other ; and, therefore,' may i
fortuitously have settled into any of those under which it
now actually appears. Now, on this hypothesis, we ought
to find all kinds of substances presented, occasionally, under
an infinite number of external forms, arid combined in end
less varieties of indefinite proportions ; but observation has
shown, that chrystalline mineral bodies occur under a fixed
and limited number of external forms, called secondary; and
that these are constructed on a series of more simple primary
forms, which are demonstrable by cleavage and mechanical
division, without chemical analysis."*
When the chrystallographer can proceed no further in
* Dr. Buckland's Bridgewater Treatise, vol. i., chap. 33.

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 109
the division of these minute atoms by mechanical cleavage
or separation, the chemist takes them up, and subjects them
to chemical analysis. Here, still, he finds the prevalence of
law, order, constancy, and design. When his laboratory has
reduced the particles of matter to their . ultimate elements,
and analysis can proceed no further, he finds new evidences
of system and law. For, in the elementary atoms, there is
no fortuitous or promiscuous combination; but the particles,
being endued with elective affinities, enter into union with
each other only in fixed and definite proportions.* Dr.
Prout, after elaborately proving and illustrating this fact,
now so well known and so generally admitted, remarks,
" We assert, without fear of contradiction, that the molecular
constitution of matter is decidedly artificial ; or, to use the
words of a celebrated writer, 'that the molecules of matter
have all the characteristics of a manufactured article.'
Chance, therefore, has no more place in the elementary
particles of matter, than it has in the construction of the
most elaborate and complicated organization.
" When we have in this manner traced back all kinds of
mineral bodies to the first and most simple condition of
their compound elements," says Dr. Buckland, "we find
these elements to have been at all times regulated by fixed
and Universal laws, which still maintain the mechanism of
the material world. In the operation of these laws, we re
cognize such direct and constant subserviency of means to
ends, so much harmony, and order, *and methodical arrange
ment, in the physical qualities, and proportional quantities,
and chemical functions, of the inorganic elements, and we
further see such evidence of intelligence and foresight, in
the adaptation of these primordial elements, to an infinity
of complex uses, under many future systems of animal and
vegetable organizations, that we can find no reasonable
. account of the existence of all ' this beautiful and exact
machinery, if we accept not that which refers to the ante
cedent Will and Power of a Supreme Creator. "
* The merit of this important discovery is ascribed to Dr. Dalton,
one of the most distinguished chemists of modern times.

110 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
5. Before we dismiss the absurdity involved in the hypo?
thesis, that things have been produced by Chance, it is
proper to remark, that this absurdity is rendered the more
strikingly apparent by another fact, which geology-, and
natural history attest, in respect to organized existence-*-
namely, that the original primogenitors of each species of
animals were produced immediately and suddenly. That, as
no species has been evolved from another, the originals,
from which the whole progeny have descended, must have
been brought into being at once, by a distinct act of creation^
Thus, if Chance be the author of nature, it at once produced
an eagle, a lion, a man, &c. The absurdity of which is too
gross, and the impossiblity too obvious, to require further
animadversion. The sum of our evidence in refutation of the sophism , of
chance, then, is this : Chance is another name for confusion
and disorder ; but the universe is full of order and harmony.
Chance is expressive only of fitfulness and inconstancy;
but the universe exhibits every where fixed laws, producing
the most perfect regularity and uniformity. Chance has
no purpose, no end to accomplish, and employs no means
— every thing is isolated and operates at random ; but the
universe is replete with design and adaptation — nothing
is isolated, every thing, great and small, every thing in the
infinite multitude of objeets which exist, is a part of one
great system of means and ends. This order, system, law,
constancy, and universal adaptation, pervade not only tlie
present and past history, which chronicles the period of
Mosaic times, but equally so those vast geological cycles
which belong to the remotest ages of our planet; and this
harmony, system, and rule, apply not only to those masses
called worlds, but to all beings therein, and to all atoms
composing them, and to all those ethereal elements which
escape both the eye and the microscope, and can be examined
only by chemical analysis. Thus, Chance has no place in
creation, no existence in time.
Cicero, appealing to the common sense of mankind, asks,
"Can any thing done by chance have all the marks of

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. Ill
design ? Four dice may, by chance, turn up their aces ; but
do you think that four hundred dice, thrown by chance, will
turn up four hundred aces ? Colours thrown upon canvas,
without design, may have some similitude to a human face ;
but do you think they might make as beautiful a picture as
of the Coan Venus ? A hog, turning up the ground with his
nose, may make something of the form of the letter A ; but
do you think that a hog might describe, on the ground, the
Andromecha of Ennius ? Carneades imagined that, in the
stone quarries at Chios, he found, in a stone that was split,
a representation of the head of a little Pan or sylvan deity.
I believe he might find a figure not unlike ; but surely not
such a one as you would say had been formed by an excel
lent sculptor, hke Scopas. For so, verily, the case is, that
chance never perfectly imitates design." * Thus, of old, a
heathen could show the absurdity of supposing chance to be
capable of producing a single object indicative of design, but
modern discoveries in science have demonstrated the idea of
chance, as the cause of the universe, to be a conception not
only of an absurdity, but of an absolute impossibility.
If a man should say, that all the theorems of Euclid had
been constructed by accident, and not by a man ; or that all
the letters, composing the volumes of poetry, history, science,
and literature, in the Alexandrian library, or in all the libra
ries in the world, might have fallen into their orderly location
by accident, he would not conceive an impossibility more
gross and palpable, than the man who proposes chance as
* Quidquam potest casu esse factum, quod omnes habet in se numeros
veritatis,? Quattuor tali jacti, casu Venereum efficiunt. Num etiam
centum Venereos, si cccc talos jeceris, casu futures putas? Adspersa
temere pigmenta in tabula, oris lineamenta effingere possunt; num
etiam Veneris Coae pulchritudinem effingi posse adspersione fortuita
putas 1 Sus rostro si humi A litteram impresserit, num propterea
suspicari poteris, Andromaoham Ennii ab ea posse describi 1 Eingebat
Carneades, in Chiorum lapicidinis saxo diffisso caput exstitisse Panisci.
Credo, aliquam non dissimilem flguram, sed certe non talem, ut earn
factam a Scopa diceres. Sic enim profecto se res habet, ut nunquam
perfeote veritatem casus imitetur. — Cicero "Be Divinatione," lib. i.,
cap. 13.

112 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
the author of universal order and harmony through all ages.
The planetary motions, themselves, are so clearly indicative
of a Creator, that La Place said respecting them, " It is in
finity to unity, that this is not the effect of chance." And
if the phenomena of the solar system alone, viewed astronomi
cally, justified such an assertion from the great philosopher,
the " infinity" becomes, in a manner, multiplied by endless
infinities, when extended through all organized existence
down to the molecular constitution of matter.
When Aristippus was shipwrecked on the island of Rhodes,
seeing, accidentally, a geometrical diagram drawn upon the
sand, " Courage, my friends," said he; " here are the traces
of men." The sight of one geometrical diagram was enough
to evince the existence of an intelligent being as its author.
" God geometrizes," says Plato; yet, that philosopher saw but
a page of the divine problems, compared with the number
which modern science has laid before us, in the volume of
the Creator's operations — a number which cannot be num
bered. From the petal of a flower, to congregated worlds ;'
and from congregated worlds, down to the minutest atom of
ancient granite, which the chrystallographer and chemist
have examined, geometrical figures and mathematical propor
tions obtain, indicating the mind ^and the hand of infinite
intelligence. No mind, capable of appreciating an argument,
can resist the clearness and the force of evidence which nature
every where furnishes against the possibility of chance. An
interesting illustration of the effects of this evidence upon
the mind of a Sceptic, is graphically related by himself : — -
" Some years ago, I had the misfortune to meet with the
fallacies of Hume, on the subject of causation. His specious
sophistries shook the faith of my reason, as to the being of
a God, but could not overcome the repugnance of my heart
to a negation so monstrous ; and, consequently, left that infi
nite restless craving for some point of fixed repose, which
atheism not only cannot give, but absolutely and madly
disaffirms. " One beautiful evening in May, I was reading by the
light of a setting sun in my favourite Plato. I was seated

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 113
on the grass, interwoven with golden blooms, immediately
on the chrystal Colorado of Texas. Dim, in the distant
west, arose, with smoky outlines, massy and irregular, the
blue cones of an off-shoot of the Rocky Mountains.
" I was perusing one of the Academician's most starry
dreams. It laid fast hold of my fancy without exciting my
faith. I wept to think it could not be true. At length I
came to that startling sentence : ' God geometrizes. ' ' Vain
reverie ! ' I exclaimed, as I cast the volume at my feet. It
fell close by a beautiful httle flower, that looked fresh and
bright, as if it had just fallen from the bosom of a rainbow.
I broke it from its silvery stem, and began to examine its
structure. Its stamens were five in number ; its great calyx
had five parts; its delicate coral base five, parting with rays,
expanding like the rays of the Texas star. This combina
tion of five in the same blossom appeared to me very
singular. I had never thought on such a subject before.
The last sentence I had just read in the page of the pupil
of Socrates was ringing in my ears — " God geometrizes. "
There was the text, written long centuries ago ; and here
this Httle flower, in the remote wilderness of the west, fur
nished the commentary. There suddenly passed, as it were,
before my eyes a faint flash of hght — I felt my heart leap
in my bosom. The enigma of the universe was open. Swift
as thought I calculated the chances against the production
of those three equations of five in only one flower, by any
principle devoid of reason to perceive number. I found
that there was one hundred and twenty-five chances against
such a supposition. I extended the calculation to two
flowers by squaring the sum last mentioned. The chances
amounted to the large sum of fifteen thousand six hundred
and twenty five. I cast my eyes around the forest : the
old woods were literally alive with those golden blooms,
where countless bees were humming, and butterflies sipping
honey-dews. " I will not attempt to describe my feelings. My soul
became a tumult of radiant thoughts. I took up my beloved
Plato from the grass, where I had tossed him in a fit of
p

114 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
despair. Again and again I pressed him to my bosom,
with a clasp tender as a mother's around the neck of her
sleeping child. I kissed alternately the book and the blos
som, bedewing them both with tears of joy. In my wild
enthusiasm I called to the little birds on the green boughs,
thrilling their cheery farewells to departing day — ' Sing on,
sunny birds ; sing on sweet minstrels ! Lo ! ye and I have
a God. ' "
The individual, who thus describes the process of his
conviction of the great truth in question, was not an igno
rant or credulous person. It is evident he was a man of
educationist scholar, a mathematician, a skilful reasoner ;
one who could detect a sophism, and carefully weigh an
argument. But the geometrical argument presented- by the
petals of a flower is one which runs through the universe,
multiplied by every organized substance, and even the
atomic particles which constitute the chrystalline rocks,
and all chemical combinations, until the numbers run into
infinities. Every animal and vegetable — every star in the
firmament, and daisy in the wilderness — every constellation
above, and every particle of sand below, and every floating
atom in the universe, declares chance an impossibility as
well as an absurdity, and proclaims a creating and presiding
Power. THE HYPOTHESIS OF NECESSITY REFUTED.
The theory of necessity is not, indeed, worthy of serious refuta
tion, except to expose the flimsy pretexts and shallow sophisms
which infidelity employs, to uphold its baseless fabric, and to
present another example of the manner in which those en
lightened sons of reason and philosophy can dispense with
demonstration when arguing against religion, and be content
with the most extravagant hypothesis^ It is no small evi
dence of the folly of Atheism, that its arguments are suicidal :
it seeks to reach the same conclusion by opposite arguments
— arguments which mutually destroy each other. Thus,
while, at one time, it ascribes the phenomena of the universe

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 115
to Chance, at another time, it ascribes the same results to
Necessity. No two arguments can be more antagonistic to
each other than Chance and Necessity : for, while chance
assumes a state of chaotic disorder, the pretext of necessity
is assumed on the universal prevalence of order, constancy,
and uniformity. This subterfuge may, however, be disposed
of in various ways.
1 . If this necessity exist, it must be in the original par
ticles of matter, but the existence of matter itself was not
absolutely necessary. The Atheist himself admits that it is
possible to conceive matter not to have existed at all ; and
what may thus be conceived of, is a contingency, not a neces
sity ; and what is itself, in its very nature, a contingency,
can never be made the foundation of an argument for neces
sity. The argument, therefore, is unsound from its founda
tion. But, if matter were admitted to be of necessary exist
ence, still the argument for Necessity, as the cause of the
orderly arrangement and constitution of the universe, is
false : for,
2. If the present state of the universe be by an absolute
necessity, then must this state have been eternal. But we
have before demonstrated that it had a, beginning, and, on
this ground, both necessity of existence, and necessity of
operation, fall to1 the ground.
3. If the existence of the universe, as it is, be by an absolute
necessity, then must it be unchangeable .- But facts already
adduced, abundantly show that it has changed, that it is
now changing every moment, and that it will continue to
change hereafter, and ultimately be destroyed. If it be
Said, that the changes of the universe are themselves neces
sary from the laws which are in operation, and which laws
are equally necessary, We reply, this is a plain contradiction ;
for, if the laws themselves are necessary, and therefore
eternal, they must eternally have produced the same effects
they do now, and must continue to produce the same effects
through all eternity to come. Neoessity and change are incom
patible. Uniformity and immutability are essentially in
cluded in the idea of an eternal, physioal necessity. The

116 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
existence, therefore, of change in every paftsof nature, and
in all ages of its history, contradicts the notion of, immuta
bility, and thus overturns the notion of necessity.
4. Finally, the notion of necessity is refuted by the fact
previously established in the argument from Geology —
namely, that the original progenitors of each species were
brought into existence suddenly, at once. Not, as Lucretius
and others describe, from bulbs, generated slowly by the
prolific earth, but, as before proved, by an agency, which
at once gave to each species existence, symmetry, and organi
zation, as perfect as that which they have at this hour. A
fact as fatal to necessity as it is to chance. He who can
conceive of either Necessity or Chance, producing instanta
neously a perfect oak, a perfect eagle, a perfect Hon, or a
perfect man, has mental properties which disqualify him
for rational society.
Look at these diverse theories in whatever aspect we may,
the absurdities, contradictions, and impossibilities they
involve, meet us at every step. In our argument, we have
given them the advantage of every possible supposition, and
yet, we find, they cannot be sustained. As Dr. Bentley
observes — " Though universal matter should have endured
from everlasting, divided into infinite particles, in the Epi
curean way, and though motion should have been coeval
and co-eternal with it ; yet, those particles or atoms, could
never of themselves, by omnifarious kinds of motion, whether
fortuitous or mechanical, have fallen or have been disposed
into this or a like visible system ;" but this has been estab
lished by facts and evidence, which the eye or mind of Bentley
never knew. We are thus irresistibly conducted to the con
clusion embodied in the proposition which stands at the
head of this chapter — namely, That the universe, as an effect,
must have a cause, and the unoriginated Being must be its
cause. In our First proposition it was proved : That every
effect must have a cause, and the cause must be adequate
to the effect. In our Second proposition it was proved, That
there must be something which is not an effect, but unori
ginated and eternal. In our Third proposition it was proved,

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 117
That the universe is an effect, and cannot be the unoriginated
Being in question. And now, in our Fourth proposition,
we have proved, That the universe could not originate itself
from any elementary particles of matter, supposing them
and their existing laws to have been eternal ; nor from
Chance ; nor from Necessity : and hence we are carried to
the conclusion, that it was created by a Being distinct from
nature, and infinitely superior to it, and this Being, as the
cause of all things, must himself be uncaused and eternal.

CHAPTER VII.
FIFTH PROPOSITION : — THE ORIGINATOR OF THE UNIVERSE MUST
BE A CONSCIOUS, INTELLIGENT BEING, BECAUSE THE EFFECT
IS THE PRODUCT OF INTELLIGENCE AND DESIGN.

'• Shall the work say of Mm that made it, He made me not ? or, shall
the thing framed say of him that framed it, He had no understanding f"
— Isaiah, xxix., 16.

Our preceding arguments have carried us to the logical
necessity of admitting the existence of some Being, distinct
from matter, as the author of the universe. Our present
proposition is, that this Author is a conscious and intelligent
Being. This postulate rationally springs from the applica
tion of our first proposition — namely, That while every effect
must have a cause, that cause must be adequate to the effect.
An effect may be inferior to the cause — it may be infinitely in
ferior in its properties — but a cause can never be inferior to
the effect. Hence, it follows, that the existence of life in the
creature, demonstrates the existence of Life in the Creator?
the existence of consciousness in the creature, demonstrates
the existence of consciousness in the Creator ; the existence
of intelligence in the creature, and the various manifesta
tions of design in the works of creation, demonstrate the
existence of intelligence in the Creator ; and life, conscious
ness, and intelligence, are the attributes of a real personal
existence. Thus, evidences of the Creator's personal exist
ence multiply with every view we take of his works, for
there is no perfection in the creature, but what is derived
from the Creator ; and whatever perfection he may impart
to others, he possesses himself. The evidence of personal
existence from the manifestations of an intelligent and
designing mind are too numerous and interesting to be
cursorily passed by.

THE EXISTENCE OF GODi 119
In reference to the evidences of design, Paley, with his
usual clearness and judgement, observes, " contrivance, if
estabhshed, appears to me to prove everything we wish to
prove. Amongst other things, it proves the personality of
the Deity, as distinguished from what is sometimes called
' nature, ' sometimes called a ' principle ; ' which terms, in
the mouths of those who use them philosophically, seem to
be intended to admit and express an efficacy, but to ex
clude and to deny a personal agent. Now, that which can
contrive, which can design, must be a person. These capa
cities constitute personahty, for they imply consciousness
and thought. They require that which can perceive an end
or purpose, as well as the power of providing means and
directing them to their end. They require a centre in which
perceptions unite, and from which volitions flow ; which is
mind. The acts of a mind prove the existence of a mind ;
and in whatever a mind resides, is a person." .
Proofs of intelligence. In this argument, we regard
nature as we regard any work of art. Both are effects, and
both are effects produced by a designing, intelligent mind.
"Every house is builded by some man, but he that built all
things is God." In the present advanced state of science,
the latter proposition has the clearness and the force of an
axiomatic truth, as well as the former. In the construction
of a house there is evidence of the existence of an intelligent
architect, and in the construction of the universe there is
evidence, too, of the existence of an intelligent mind ;* the
difference being only in this, that the evidence in the latter
case is indefinitely multiplied, and the character of the mind
is infinitely superior.
It is felt to be as much an intellectual necessity to ascribe
the manifestations of design to a designing mind, as it is to
ascribe any effect to some cause. Even the atheist uniformly
does this when speaking of the works of art ; and if he re
fuse to refer the works of nature to a designing mind, he
contradicts himself, and involves himself in the most pal
pable inconsistencies. Yet, this inconsistency is defended
» Cicero De Divinatione, lib. ii., 15 — 19.

120 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
by the subtle and sophistical David Hume. This apostle of
infidelity argues, that our mental habit of referring any work
of art to an artist, is the result of observation and experience,
but the same cannot be pleaded respecting the works of na
ture — that we have seen a man in the act of constructing a
¦ house, but we have never seen a Deity engaged in the construe^
tion of a world, and, therefore, though it be logical to ascribe a
building to a man, we have no right to ascribe the universe
to a God. We give his own words : " If we see a house, we
conclude, with the greatest certainty, that it had an architect
or builder, because this is precisely that species of effect
which we have experienced to proceed from' that species of
cause. But, surely you will not affirm that the universe
bears such a resemblance to a house, that we can, with the
same certainty, infer a similar cause, or that the analogy is
here entire and perfect. The dissimilitude is so striking, that
the utmost you can here pretend to is a guess, a conjecture,
a presumption, concerning a similar cause ; and how that
pretension will be received in the world, I leave you to con1
sider." Again he asks, " Can you pretend to show any such
similarity between the fabric of a house and the generation
of a universe ? Have you ever seen nature in any such
situation as resembles the first arrangement of the elements ?
Have worlds ever been formed under your own eye ? And
have "you had leisure to observe the whole progress of the
phenomena, from the first appearance of order to its final
consummation ? If you have, then cite your experience,
and deliver your theory ?"*
This sophism is very transparent, and susceptible of a
two-fold refutation.
1 . It has already been demonstrated that the universe can
not spring from matter and its laws, but must have an
author — a Creator. This question is settled, and, therefore,
Hume's objection is obsolete. We refer to the marks of
intelligence, not to prove the existence of a Creator — that 'has
been' already effected by another process of argument ; but
we refer to the marks of intelligence to prove the character
* Hume's Dialogues concerning Natural Religion.

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 121
of the Creator. It being established that the works of na
ture have an Author, so far as those works exhibit intelli
gence, they exhibit the intelligence of their Author, just as
the works of an architect, an engineer, a mathematician, or
a writer, exhibit the intelligence of their respective authors.
Creation is God's work, and exhibits his mental properties.
2. The sophism of Hume may be refuted, also, from its own
absurdity. The sum of his objection has been already stated ;
it is this :-^that we cannot reasonably conclude the universe
to have an intelligent author, because we did not see him in
the act of creating it ! To sustain this, he assumes, that
we are not to refer any work of art to man, unless either we
have seen it produced by man, or else the work has a most
intimate resemblance to such as we have seen produced by
man. Now, our experience contradicts this absurdity every
day. In the vast variety of objects of art and manufacture,
which are presented to our notice, there is as great a dispa
rity in shape, character, kind, material, and use, as can well
be conceived ; and of these how few people have seen ah such
fabricated by man ? And yet, who, among all the millions
of our race, would hesitate to pronounce them all the work
of man ? A modern volume printed in English characters,
and a vellum scroll written in Hebrew, are very dissimilar;
yet, who, that understands them, would deny that each was
the work of man. Surely, no one except Mr. Hume and his
disciples, who, it seems, would rather practise this absurdity,
than allow nature to have a Divine author. In the construc
tion of a ship and a chronometer, of a steam-engine and a
theodolite, there is a sufficient disparity, and, though compa
ratively few persons have seen any of them constructed, there
is not a sensible man, (indeed, there is not an atheist) on the
surface of the earth, who could be found to maintain that
either one or the other was not the work of man. There
must be a reason for this fact. If every work of art is thus
ascribed to man, there must be some common grounder reason
for it. The reason is simply the one which is embodied in
our first proposition, "That every effect must have a cause,
and every cause must be adequate to the effect." So, then,
Q

122 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
if the effect exhibit contrivance, it must have a contriver;
and if it exhibit design, it must have a designing mind for
its author.
3. The mental habit, nay, the intellectual necessity, of
inferring an intelligent author from the manifestation of de
sign in any work of art or manufacture, is so uniform in its
operation, that the measure or degree of a man's intelligence
is estimated by his productions. It is thus we judge of the
degree of the genius and mental cultivation of an individual
or a nation. Thus, if a traveller find the ruins of an African
kraal, consisting of rude and comfortless huts, he determines
that its inhabitants were in a low state of civilization ; but if
he discover the ruins of an ancient city, as Pompeii, or
Herculaneum, with numerous fragments of beautiful pillars,
temples, palaces, and monuments of elaborate sculpture and
architecture, he infers that its inhabitants were a polished
and highly cultivated people. On the same principle, we
assign a higher order of intelligence to the original inventor
of a science, than to him who merely comprehends it when
explained to him. There is intelligence necessary to under
stand the various parts, relations, and uses of a complicated
machine, but there was more intelligence required for its
origination. There is no ordinary intelligence required
thoroughly to understand all the problems of Euclid, but a
far higher faculty is displayed in originating those problems,
and the theorems by which they are demonstrated. There
is intelligence, and, indeed, a high order of intelligence, requi
site to understand the discoveries which some men have
made in astronomy ; but a still higher order is conceded to
those gifted minds whose sagacity has pierced into the hidden-
principles and truths, and led their contemporaries and
successors into untrodden paths of scientific discovery. Tet,;
there is no truth in philosophy discovered by man but what
previously existed in nature. All man's knowledge is bor
rowed ; there is no originality here. The first discoverer of
any truth gets it but second-hand. If he is sagacious, and
makes some magnificent discoveries, the fact implies that
there is another mind vastly wiser than his own, whose skill

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 123
had previously originated the truths he has discovered, and
which has been employing those truths for ages, and work
ing out great practical results from their application. Na
ture is always man's instructor, and, however far his mind
may proceed in receiving her lessons, ultimate facts are con
stantly reminding him that he is only on the margin of the
vast ocean of truth, which lies still unexplored before him,
and all that truth implies the existence of a mind in which
the whole was originally preconceived.
4. All the sciences are only so many collections of great
truths existing in nature, and existing there because previ
ously conceived in the mind of the great Author of nature.
All human arts are only imperfect imitations of nature's
operations, and those operations are all the skilful workings
of a Divine mind. When an inquisitive savage comes to see
and inquire into some complicated work of art, he is like
a philosopher who comes to inquire into the laws and me
chanism of the universe. Both may perceive many contri
vances, adaptations, relations, dependencies, connections,
uses, &c, and be enchanted with their discoveries ; but,
neither the one nor the other can claim the character of
inventor; both are studying the plans and ideas which
originated in a mind, distinct from, and superior to, their own.
5 . Astronomy is the science which unfolds the laws and
revolutions of the heavenly bodies, so far as they are known
toman. We speak of Isaac Newton • as a man possessing
prodigious intellect, because of the profound discoveries
recorded in his Principia ; but, if all the elaborate calcula
tions, and all the discoveries which astronomy involves
in its present advanced state, had been made by Newton
alone, how much more exalted the view we should have
entertained respecting his intelligence ! yet, in all this, he
would have only touched the surface of the subject, and
every truth he had discovered belonged to an immense
system of truths, which had been conceived and perfected
myriads of ages before the astronomer was born ; and not
only conceived, but in practical and harmonious operation..
Can we then attribute intelligence to the scientific discoverer

124 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
of the solar system, and deny it to the sole Inventor and
Fabricator of the wondrous universe ?
6. The science of chemistry reveals to us some of the
laws and properties of matter, with the principles of its
affinities, attractions repulsions, combinations, &c.,' and
every fresh discovery therein entitles its author to our admi
ration, and often to our gratitude. Now, if all the disco
veries which have been made in chemistry had been the
result of one man's investigations, how should we have stood
amazed at his skill and penetration ! yet, he would have
discovered only a few principles out of an almost infinite
number, which had previously existed in the mind of the
great Author of nature, and principles which, ages ago, he
had brought into practical operation in the vast and ever-
active laboratory of nature.
7. The science of anatomy unfolds the structure and
organization of animal bodies, exhibiting the multifarious
functions and adaptations of the animal system. Here,
and especially in the human frame, is a most elaborate and
complicated piece of mechanism, presenting an economy t)f
means, adaptations, and uses, so curiously and yet so per
fectly developed, that volumes would not exhaust the mani
festations of contrivance and design. The admirable struc
ture of the person, the symmetry and utility of its members,
the gracefulness and dignity of its motions, the elastic and
transparent cuticle which covers the whole, the beauty of
the complexion, and the minute adaptation of all our vessels
and organs to the various purposes of life, health, and
activity, present a wonderful display of intelligence in the
mind of the Creator. If, as the celebrated Howe supposes,"*
for the sake of illustration, the external covering and
muscular fibre of the human body were made of some very
transparent substance, flexible, but clear as crystal, render
ing visible all the internal mechanism of the system, so
that we could clearly perceive the situation, order, offices,
and operations, of all the vessels and organs : — if we could
see the circulation of the blood flowing from the heart as
* Vide Howe's Living Temple.

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 125
from a fountain, through the arteries and veins, spreading
themselves like net work over every part of the body : — if
we could see each little valve open and shut, to let in and
out the purple stream, as it flows from one vessel to another,
and the apparatus for converting the food into chyme, and
the chyme into blood, and the blood itself to be replenished
with oxygen to renew its vital power, and administer nou
rishment to the whole system : — if we could discern the
curious artifice of the brain, its elaborate organic structure,
its mysterious connection with the organs of sensation, its
modes of generating, filtering, and refining, those spirituous
fluids which are diffused through the nervous system ; —
could we behold the complicated ramifications of the nerves,
starting in pairs from the spinal marrow, and extending
their delicate texture over the whole frame "t-feould, we,
through the same transparent medium, perceive the admira
ble adjustment of the bony structure, with its four or five
hundred parts, based on fulcra, and so nicely articulating
by joints and hinges, that flexibility and strength, ease and
variety of motion are combined ; and see the whole in action ;
— could we thus have a clear and perfect view of the entire
organism of the human frame., with all its diversified parts
in operation, we should be filled with amazement, and each
exclaim, how fearfully and wonderfully am I made !
It was the study of the human system which converted
the famous Galen from the Epicurean system, in which he
had been educated, and which induced him to write a book
on this subject, with a view to convince others that man
must be the work of an intelligent Author. Geological dis
covery shows the recent origin of man, and natural history
proves that his existence was derived from no inferior species,
but immediately created. Anatomy as clearly proves that
his Creator was an intelligent Being. If contrivance and
design are evidences of a contriving and designing mind, we
have it here in the utmost perfection ; and the conclusion, that
man is the work of an intelligent Being, becomes irresistible,
when the mind is not totally besotted by ignorance, or cor
rupted by an inveterate hatred to the truth. To the sculptor

126 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
who chisels the rough block of marble into the human shape;
we award talent and skill, though the most finished marble of
Phidias is only a cold and an external resemblance to man,
and without either motion1, mechanism, or hfe.. To the
painter who makes the canvas blush with the human form
divine, we award talent and skill, though his work is but
the shadow of man's skin. On what principle, then, can we
deny intelligence to that Being who has built up the human
fabric, with all its internal mechanism, as well as its external-
beauty ; and to these admirable contrivances, added the mys
terious attributes of life, sensation, thought, and voluntary;
action ? If a man but imitate a work of art, we call him in-~
genious ; if he imitate a work of nature, we call him more.
ingenious; but as the works of nature exhibit marks of contrki-.
vance ijj&cLskill. indefinitely surpassing the most wonderful^.
- productions of art,«so the skill of their Author must be income
paraHy greater. When-some laborious student of nature
makes . a fresh discovery in -the use or . adaptation of any
vessel or organ in the human frame, we invariably regard it.
as an evidence of his sagacity. When Harvey discovered
the circulation of the blood, mankind did homage to his.
intellect, and his fame is handed down to posterity. . But,
if it required, superior intellect to discover the existing phe-;
nomenon, what intellect was required to originate.it?. . To,
accede intelligence to the discoverer, and not to the originator,
is to belie our own judgement. It is a piece of folly and
perversion, not equalled by the man who should extol the
sagacity of a savage for finding out the mainrspring of a
chronometer, but denies the intelligence of the man who .
first invented that time-telling machine. , „ :
8. The science of optics reveals the laws and properties of,,
light, and the adaptation of the eye to this element. At
every step we take in this science, .proofs of .design, crowds
upon us. In this, we have to consider the properties of light,.
— the inconceivable minuteness of its particles — that while t,-,
its impulses do not injure the delicate mechanism, of the •
organ of sight, they may make every part of the surface .of
an object visible through so small an instrument — the action.;

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 127
Of light in straight lines, and its power of reflection, refrac
tion, divergence, and convergence, all of which are determined
strictly on mathematical principles. Then there is the
wonderful structure of the httle organ, made to be the instru
ment of vision. Perception arises from the image of an
object being painted on the retina, or expanded nerve, at
the back part of the eye ; and the organizationis formed to pro
duce this effect by pencils of light. The humours of the eye,
therefore, are a combination of lenses, of different refracting
powers, and the focal distance is mathematically adjusted to
the convergency of the rays, on the spot where the image
is to be formed. Is there not intelligence in the means and
adaptations here employed ? Is there not an object contem
plated, a set of means adjusted to that object, and the object
¦accomplished? Is there any thing of human contrivance
more artificial ? The laws of mechanics and mathematics
are made to operate conjointly in the organization of the eye,
so that we have the most exquisite adaptation of the instru
ment to the element of vision ; and had either the properties
of light, or the structure of the eye, been different, the sense
of vision could not have been enjoyed : even a slight depres
sion or convexity of the cornea of the eye, beyond what the
focal distance of the retina requires, results in imperfect
vision. The telescope is formed on the same principles as
the human eye : as Paley observes " The end is the same,
and the means are the same ; the purpose in both is alike ;
the contrivance for accomplishing that purpose is in both
alike. The lenses of the telescope, and the humours of the
eye, bear a complete resemblance to one another, in their
figure, their position, and in their power over the rays of
light, namely , in bringing each pencil to a point at the right
distance from the lens, that is, at the exact place where the
membrane is spread out to receive it." If the construction
of the telescope evince contrivance and design — the evidences
of intelhgence — we cannot withhold that attribute from the
Author of hght, and the Maker of the eye.
Nor should it be forgotten that the perfection Of the
telescope was accomplished by copying the art displayed in

128 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
the mechanism of the eye. This is a fact of modern his
tory. The refracting telescope, in the days of Newton, had
the imperfection of presenting objects tinged with different
colours, as if viewed through a prism — an effect arising from
a diversity in the refractive properties of different coloured
rayS — and Newton despaired of the possibility of this imper
fection being corrected in the refracting telescope. This
exigency had been met from the beginning, in the construc
tion of the eye, by the use of different humours of diversi-
sified refracting properties ; and, in about two years after
Newton's death, an individual of the name of Hall, while
studying the mechanism of the human eye, was led to sup
pose that telescopes might be improved by a combination
of lenses of different refractive powers, corresponding to the
different humours composing the lenses of the eye. This
he actually accomplished ; and, subsequently, the discovery
was brought to perfection by Dolland, and other ingenious
artizans. Every one will admit the intelligence which eli
cited the discovery that perfected the telescope, but it was
borrowed from an original, which a prior intelligence had
conceived and constructed.
If any one wish for a more familiar illustration, let him
take that of a glass window. He will not dispute that it was
made to see through, how then can he deny that the eye was
made to see with ? If he allow design and intelhgence to
the maker of the window, how can he deny them to the
Maker of the eye ?
Proofs of contrivance, and of the consequent 'intelhgence,
¦displayed in the diminutive organ of vision, are almost
numberless. The exquisite mechanism for the dilatation and
contraction of the pupil ; the socket, embedded in fat, and
lubricated with moisture, to give ease to the globe which is
placed therein; the muscles, so admirably adapted for
adjusting the position of the eye towards its object, and
securing ease and rapidity of motion ; the eye-lid, furnished
with its lash to protect the dehcate organ ; the position of
the eyes in an elevated part of the body, most convenient
for sight, and giving beauty, vivacity, and expression to the

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 129
countenance ; the symmetry, which renders both eyes alike
in the length of their foci, and the angle of vision, and
gives simultaneous action to both, so that objects are not
seen double, or in different situations, at the same moment ;
all these, and a multitude of other arrangements, contri
vances, and adaptations, combine to excite our wonder. In
the eyes of fishes, there is an adjustment to correspond with
the denser medium, through which the light passes ; and in
the eyes of birds there are arrangements adapted to their
mode of life.
When, for a moment, we reflect upon the fact, that with
out that bright little organ called the eye, man, and all other
animals, would have lived in absolute pitchy darkness, can
we doubt that the eye was formed with a purpose to secure
the object of vision? When we reflect, too, that without a
strictly mathematical adaptation of the eye, in all its parts,
to the properties of light, vision could not have been realized,
Can we doubt that an adaptation, so perfectly realizing that
purpose, is the result of contrivance ? and when we thus
see a complicated contrivance realizing a purpose, Can we
doubt the contriver to be an intelligent Being ?
9. The same argument applies to all the other senses.
Without the organism of the ear, every animal must have been
deaf. No sound of harmony, no dulcet tones of nature or
friendship, could have been heard. Without the organs of
hearing and seeing, universal silence would have been the
associate of universal darkness. When we find an organ
formed to convey sound, Can we doubt that it was formed
for a purpose ? and when we see an elaborate organization
accomplishing that purpose, Can we doubt a contriving mind ?
When we remember, that without any of the senses, man
could have had no communication with the external world,
and see a system of diversified apparatus, formed to give
him that communication — enabling him to see, hear, taste,
smell, and feel, and thus become conversant with the existence
and properties of the universe — we cannot doubt that this
admirable adaptation sprang from a purpose, and that the

130 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
contrivance, which so perfectly adapted the organization to
the purpose, was, emphatically, an intelligent mind !
1 0. AH the sciences are only so many systems or classifica
tions of knowledge, which propose to expound the principles
and laws of nature ; and all arts are so many imitations of the
operations of nature. It has taken the human family near
six thousand years to bring science and art to its present
state of perfection. We have here the collective result of
the human intellect. We have here the aggregate develop^
ment of mind, after operating in millions of individuals,
and through so many generations. If all this had been
the result of one mind, how we should have reverenced his
intellectual powers ! His penetration — his sagacity — his
powers of analysis, of combination, of abstraction, and of
invention — his profound knowledge of mathematics, and
mechanics, and all the sciences — would have commanded
universal applause and wonder. If any one said he had no
intellect at all, it would be a certain proof that the calumni
ator was mad. Everywhere, his word would be an oracle,
his name be mentioned with adoration, and statues be
erected to his genius in every part of the world. Yet, this
prodigious mind, after all, would have been merely studying
the designs and operations of another mind, infinitely sur
passing his own. He is not an original, but a copyist.
His knowledge is merely the knowledge of what another
has done; his arts and inventions are merely imperfect
imitations of the operations of another. If he hit upon an
invention, which is not entirely copied from nature, by a
httle further inquiry he will find that, however complicated
his machine, it is vastly surpassed by contrivances around
him in nature. Skilful as he may be in chemistry, he is
not able either to make one particle of matter, or to add one
new property to matter already made. Practised as he may
be in mechanics, there are myriads of operations which he
vainly tries to imitate. He sees the theory of perpetual
motion exemplified in the solar system, and in a thousand
organized structures, but he cannot produce it. If he under
stands many things in the universe, there are countless

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 131
numbers he cannot understand. In every branch of science
he is perpetually coming to ultimate facts, which bound
his knowledge, and mock his inquiries. If he ask what is
hfe, he cannot tell ; what is matter, he cannot answer ; or
what is spirit, he is perplexed. A blade of grass has mys
teries he cannot explore, and an atom of dust is too profound
a subject for him fully to explain. But why ? Because
the intellect which formed these objects, and gave them laws,
so far surpasses his own. To deny intelligence, therefore,
to the Creator, is to surpass the madness of one who should
affirm that there is no intellect in all the sciences man ever
knew, or the arts he ever practised.
INSTINCT, A PROOF OF DIVINE INTELLIGENCE.
There are three classes of actions essentially distinct from
each other, and referrable to separate causes — Mechanical,
Rational, and Instinctive. Mechanical actions are those
of the automaton, the clock, or the steam engine — arising
not from any spontaneous or self-determining impulse, but
from mere mechanism. Rational actions are those pro
ceeding from the combined exercise of the understanding,
judgement, and will, in which the mind employs definite
means to obtain a given result. Instinctive actions are
distinguished from the former, by their proceeding from a
propensity, which prompts to a course of action, " prior to
experience, and independent of instruction. " Such, in the
new bom infant, and indeed in the young of all mammalian
animals, is the act of hunting out for the mother's milky
food, and of sucking with a perfection which can never be
acquired in subsequent life ; such is the whole process of
nestling, or nidification among birds ; the periodical change
of salt for fresh water among the sturgeon, salmon, and other
fishes. Such, among insects, is the formation of the exqui
site decoy-lines of the spider, and the nice masonry of the
bee, and of the white ant; and such is the remarkable con
struction of habitations by the beavers.
Now, in the results of instinct, we have a multitude of

132 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
effects, exhibiting a presiding intelhgence as resident some
where — either in the animals themselves, or in some other
being distinct from the animals. Some of the evidences
of intelligence may be specified.
1. All the operations of instinct, are directed to specific
results. We never witness these instinctive operations for
any continued period, but we observe them tending towards
¦ an end, and we never persevere in our observations to the
consummation of the animal's work, but we see the end
successfully accomplished. No architect proceeds more sys
tematically, and none ever succeeds more completely in his
work, than the bee in the construction of its cell, the bird in
the building of its nest, and the beaver its habitation. Thus
there is somewhere, a mind contemplating a given result —
an intelligence which understands the relation betweeii
cause and effect. e
2. In the operations of instinct, we have the manifestation
of an intelligence comprehending a complete and perfect
knowledge of all things requisite to produce the effects
contemplated, and combined with this intelligence, we have
skill for the execution of the object intended.
(a) There is clearly a knowledge of the physical proper
ties of bodies. In the spider's web, we see proof of a know
ledge of the properties of that net-work, to entangle prey.
In the selection of strong materials for the outside of a
bird's nest, and of wool, feathers, and moss for fining the
inside, there is evinced a knowledge of the properties of the
one to strengthen, and of the other to give warmth. In the
process of incubation, there is a knowledge of the chemical
properties of heat to evolve the principle of life in the egg.
One insect deposits its eggs in the cabbage, and another in the
willow, and these never change places. The willow-caterpillar
is never found in the cabbage, nor the cabbage-caterpillar in
the willow; as the food for the one is not adapted to the other.
The parent insect always selects the appropriate vegetable, and
this selection involves a knowledge of the distinction between
the properties of each, and of its adaptation for food to her
progeny. The young of all mammalia hunt for their mother's

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 183
teat as soon as they are born, which implies a knowledge,
somewhere, of the properties of milk, and its adaptation to
nourish the infant constitution. In the laying up of stores
of food by the bee, and the ant, in summer, there is a know
ledge of approaching winter ; and, in making provision
against its barrenness and cold, there is an anticipation of
meteorological changes, and a knowledge of their effects
upon nature. Examples of this kind might be indefinitely
multiplied, affording proofs of an unerring knowledge of the
laws and properties of matter.
(b) There is evidently a knowledge of the dispositions
and habits of other animals of a different nature and species.
Thus the net of the spider implies a knowledge of the vola
tile and careless habits of the fly ; and the location of the
bird's nest in the most secret place, and its suspension on
the most distant and inaccessible branches of a tree, are
provisions against the predacious habits of other animals.
(c) In the economy of some animals, if not in all, there
is involved a knowledge not only of natural laws, and their
operation, but of mechanics and the higher branches of
mathematics. For the sake of illustration, we select the
industrious bee. " Bees it is well known construct their
combs with small cells on both sides, fit both for holding
their store of honey, and for rearing their young. There
are only three possible figures of the cells, which can make
them all equal and similar, without any useless interstices.
These are the equilateral triangle, the square, and the regu
lar hexagon.
" It is well known to mathematicians that there is not a
fourth way possible, in which a plane may be cut into httle
spaces that shall be equal, similar and regular, without
leaving any interstices. Of the three, the hexagon is the
most proper, both for convenience and strength. Bees, as
if they knew this, make their cells regular hexagons.
"As the combs have cells on both sides, the cells may either
be exactly opposite, having partition against partition, or
the bottom of the cell may rest upon the partition between
the cells on the other side, which will serve as a buttress to

131 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
strengthen it. The last way is the best for strength ; accord
ingly, the bottom of each cell rests against the point, where
three partitions meet on the other side, which gives it all
the strength possible.
" The bottom of the cell may either be one plane perpen
dicular to the side partitions, or it may be composed of seve
ral planes, meeting in a solid angle in the middle point. It
is only in one of these two ways that all the cells can be
similar, without losing room. And, for the same intention,
the planes of which the bottom is composed, if there be
more than one, must be three in number, and neither more
nor fewer.
" It has been demonstrated, that by making the bottoms
of the cells to consist of three planes meeting in a point,
there is a saving of material and labour, not very incon
siderable. The bees as if acquainted with these principles
of solid geometry, follow them most accurately : the bottom
of each cell being composed of three planes, which make
obtuse angles with the side partitions, and with one another,
and meet in a point in the middle of the bottom ; the three
angles of this bottom being supported by three partitions
en the other side of the comb, and the point of it by the
common intersection of these three partitions.
" One instance more, of the mathematical skill displayed
in the structure of the honey comb, deserves to be mentioned.
It is a curious mathematical problem, at what precise angle
the.three planes which compose the bottom of a cell ought'
to meet, in order to make the greatest possible saving of
material and labour. This is one of those problems belong
ing to the higher parts of mathematics, which are called
'problems of maxima and minima. , , The celebrated Maclaurin
resolved it by a fluxionary calculation, which is to be, found
in the Transactions of the Royal Society of London, and
determined precisely the angle required. Upon, the most
exact mensuration which the subject, could admit, he after- -
wards found, thatit is the -very angle inwhich tlie three planes
in the bottom of the cell of the honey-comb do actually meet."*
* Eeid; on the Mind, vol. iii., chap. 3.

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 135
3. Conjoined with this intelligence of the materials of
nature, of its laws, and of abstruse mathematical principles,
we have the most consummate skill. Could any artizan
construct a bird's nest with more neatness and perfection
than the hnnet? or build up a honey-comb with more order
and regularity than the bee ? or spin with more dexterity
than the spider does his thread, or the silk-worm its shining
cocoon? Whatever advantages man may have from the
variety and perfection of his tools, — from the line, the rule,
the square, the plummet, and the wheel, — he cannot excel
the simple artificers of nature in their mechanical operations.
The effects of intelligence are before us, and we require
the cause ; or, in other words, we ask for the source of this
intelligence and skill. By the estabhshment of our first
proposition, we have proved, that " every effect must have
a cause, and that the cause must be adequate to the effect; "
and, from the application of this principle, we must now find a
cause adequate to the effects produced before us. There are
but two sources which can enter into our considerations, and
these are to be found either in the animals themselves, or
in their Creator. To suppose that this intelligence is pos
sessed by the animals is absurd, for this is to ascribe to them
an intelligent nature far superior to man. It is to make
birds, spiders, bees, and other insects, into profound philo
sophers, into mathematicians and mechanics of the highest
and most perfect order— a notion which refutes itself by its
superlative absurdity, and which is contradicted by the most
"ofeyious proofs.
If the mathematics of the Bee were understood by that
diminutive creature, they must have been acquired ; but this
is contradicted by the fact, that they are practised as per
fectly by the young as by the old, and are practised without
learning, without imitation, and without experience, and are
permanent in the species. If the intelligence displayed in
instinctive operations resided in the animals themselves,
the species would be able to give and receive instruction
one from another ; but this never takes place, even where
their hahits are similar in some respects. The bee borrows

136 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
nothing from the ant, nor the ant from the bee. Their
whole economy is fixed and stereotyped in each species,-
from the first generatiom to the last. The bees of our day
gather honey, and fabricate their cells, precisely in the same
way as they did when Virgil celebrated their economy in
his flowing numbers. If the required intelhgence resided
in the animals themselves, it would extend to a vast variety
of other objects in nature ; for, as the sciences run one into
another, it is impossible for any creature to be perfect in
one, without having some considerable acquaintance with
others. But the inferior animals, however they excel in
such things as are instinctive, have not even that superficial
knowledge of many other things with which children and savar
ges are famihar, nor have they any capacity for acquirng it.
" Sir Joseph Bankes had a tame beaver, which was allowed
to range at liberty in a ditch about his grounds, and was at
all seasons liberally supplied with food. One day, about
the end of autum, it was discovered in the ditch very busily
engaged in attempting to construct a dam after the manner
of its companions in a state of nature. This was evidently
the blind impulse of its instinctive feelings ; for, a moment's
exercise of the lowest degree of reflection must have shown
it that such labour, under the circumstances in which it
was placed, was altogether superfluous. A common quail
was kept in a cage, and became quite tame and reconciled
to its food. At the period of its natural migration it became
exceedingly restless and sleepless ; it beat its head against
the cage in many vain efforts to escape, and, on examination?**
its skin was found several degrees above its usual tempera
ture. A bee, which can fly homewards, one or two miles,
in a straight line to its hive, with extreme accuracy, if it
happen to enter an open window in a room, will exhaust
all its efforts in attempting to get out at the opposite window
which is closed down, but never pauses to think of retracing
its flight a httle way backwards, so as to fly out at the open
ing at which it had entered. We often observe a dog,- when
going to sleep on the floor, turn himself several times round
before he lies down, and this is just one of the lingering

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 187
instincts which he has retained ; while in his wild state he
is accustomed thus to prepare his bed amid the tall grass or
rushes. An acute observer of animal habits has remarked
that a jackdaw, which, for want of its usual place of abode,
had, for its nest, made a choice of a rabbit hole, was often
sorely perplexed in what way to get the long sticks, of which
its nest was to be formed, drawn within the narrow entrance.
Again and again did it attempt to pull in the piece of stick,
while it held it in the middle in its bill, and it was only
after a series of vain efforts, that, by mere chance, it at last
accomplished its object by happening to seize it near one
end instead of the centre. In this case it appeared to the
observer that the building instincts of this bird were com
plete and perfect within a certain range, but without the
limits of this circle, it had no deliberate foresight to guide
its actions." *
It is evident, therefore, that the intelligence exhibited in
instinct, is the intelhgence of another, and not of the
animals themselves. This conclusion is the more obvious
from the economy of plants, in which there is a similar
display of a presiding intelligence. As examples — A straw
berry offset, planted in a patch of sand, will send forth its
runners in the direction in which the soil lies nearest. A
tree, which requires much moisture when planted in a dry
soil, has been observed to send forth much the larger portion
of its roots towards the nearest water. When a tree
happens to grow from a seed on a wall, it has been noticed
on arriving at a certain size, to stop in its growth for a
while, and send down a root to the ground, and this being
fixed in the soil, the tree resumed its growth in an upward
direction. The grass called phleum pratense, or common
catstail, when growing in pastures that are uniformly moist,
has a, fibrous root, for it is locally supplied with a sufficiency
of water, but in dry situations its root acquires a bulbous
form, and thus instinctively accommodates the plant with a
natural reservoir, f It will not be pretended that these
• British Quarterly.
t Vide Mason Good's Book of Nature, Vol. ii., p. 124-5.

138 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
habits of accommodation in the plant, result from intelligence
or reasoning in the plant, neither can the instinctive economy
of animals be referred to any reasoning process in them.
There is, in the economy of both, a demonstration of intelli
gence, but it exists in another Being, distinct from, and
infinitely superior to both.
A wide disparity there is, indeed, between the nature of
animals and plants. The latter have hfe, but so far as we
can judge, are devoid of sensation, as well as reason ; while
the former have an inferior description of mind, superadded
to life. They have sensation, perception, vohtion, and
memory, as well as muscular contraction ; and these quali
ties are the evidences of mind. It is owing to these qualities,
that they have the power of imitation to a limited extent,
and of performing some feats which have been ascribed to
them. It is, however, to be remembered, that while feats are
awkwardly and imperfectly performed, instinct is perfect and
infallible ; and, that while the former are learned by imita
tion, the latter are neither learned nor acquired, but are
performed in the first stages of life, just as well as in the
last ; in the first generations of the race, as well as in those
of the present day. These facts denote an essential distinction
between what is instinctive, and what is not.
Summary. — From the whole train of the foregoing reason
ing it is obvious, that all instinctive habits involve the
existence somewhere, of a most accurate knowledge of the
laws and properties of matter ; in some cases a knowledge
of the dispositions and habits of other animals of a different
species ; a knowledge, too, anticipative of future events ; a
knowledge of mathematics in some of its highest branches ;
a knowledge, too, which is infallible, and never miscalculates
or mistakes ; and as it is evident, this knowledge cannot
dwell in the minds of reptiles and insects, or plants, we
have no alternative, but to ascribe it to the Creator of all
things. As Dr. Reid elegantly and forcibly observes, " If a
honey comb were a work of art, every man of common sense
would conclude, without hesitation, that he who invented
the construction, must have understood the principles on

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 139
¦*'
which it was constructed. We need not say the bee knows
none of these things. They work most geometrically, with
out any knowledge of geometry ; something like a child,
who, by turning the handle of an organ, makes good music.
The art is not in the child, but in him who made the organ.
In like manner when a bee makes its comb so geometrically,
the geometry is not in the bee, but in that Great Geome
trician who made the bee, and made all things in number,
weight, and measure. "
There is no more certain nor satisfactory evidence of a
truth, than when we reach the same conclusion, by taking
either side of an alternative ; just as when a certain mathe
matical result is arrived at by different theorems. Thus it
happens to the truth under consideration. For should any
one be so foohsh as to take the contrary side of the argu
ment, and contend as Darwin, Smellie, and others have
done, that the instinctive operations of animals result from
intelligence and reason in the mind of the animals them
selves, he is inevitably carried the same conclusion — namely,
that the Creator of these animals must be an intelligent
Being. For, if as we contend, the intelhgence which guides
animal instinct, does not dwell in the animal itself, it must
dwell in the mind of the Creator; and, if as the objector
contends, it does dwell in the mind of the animal, it must
have dwelt first in the Creator, for he planted it there, and
he could not give to another that which he did not himself
possess. The cause may be superior to the effect, but it
cannot be- inferior. Whatever intelligence, therefore, is
exhibited by the creature, whether by instinct or reason,
must previously have existed in the Creator.
The same conclusion flows from the consideration of
human intelhgence and reason. Those who are so bounti
ful to reptiles and insects, as to contend for their intelligence,
will perhaps not deny the same powers to man : We are,
therefore saved from the process of proof in this instance.
But if man have intelligence, the Being who gave man his
existence, must be admitted to have intelligence also. " Shall
the work say of him that made it, He made me not ? Or

140 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. '¦%
shall the thing framed, say of him that framed it, He had
no understanding?" The answer is anticipated by the
inquiry. The Maker of an intelligent being, must himself
be an intelligent Being.
Intelhgence implies consciousness, perception, thought ;
and the exercise of that intelligence for an object, implies
will, purpose, and the choice of means ; and these are the
attributes and acts of mind. They can no more exist without
a subject, than the essential properties of matter can exist
apart from matter. We cannot conceive them apart from a
subject in which they inhere. Thus, every proof we have
furnished of intelligence and purpose, is a proof of the exist
ence of mind. The existence of mind being established, the
proper personal existence of the Creator is established, for a
mind is a personal existence. Man is a conscious personal;1
being, and so is that Great Being who gave him existence.
The personal existence of the Creator is a truth which
accumulates evidence, not only from the Creator's works, ;
but also from every view we take of his character and attri
butes. Thus, as we proceed to discourse upon his benevo
lence, his justice, his holiness, and his other perfections, we
speak of attributes which can belong only to a person, and
every evidence of the existence of these attributes augments
the proofs of his proper personal existence. We have thus ¦
arrived, step by step, to the corollary of our five fundamental
propositions : — There is a God — a conscious intelligent
Being — who is the creator and upholder of all things.

CHAPTER VIII.
the spirituality of the divine nature

" God is a Spirit." — John iv., 24.

The process of argumentation pursued in proving the
existence of God, affords evidence as conclusive respecting-
the spirituality of his nature, as it does of the certainty of
his existence. Indeed, in proving the truth of this propo
sition, we have little more to do than to apply the principles
and facts, previously laid down and established.
I. Thus, from the application of our first proposition,
That " every effect must have a cause," combined with our
second proposition, That " there must be some Being who is
not an effect, but unoriginated and eternal,'' we arrive at the
truth that God is not an effect, because he is the originator
of all things.
II. By the application of our third proposition, namely,
That "the universe is an effect," we have the certainty that
God and the universe are not identical, because, while the
universe is an effect, the Creator is unoriginated. God and
the universe, therefore, are as distinct from each other, as
it is possible for any cause and effect to be distinct from
one another. Nature is not God, for it is an effect ; God is
not nature, for he is its Cause. Distinguished from Nature -
as to his identity, he is equally distinguished by his Nature.
The universe is material ; God is not material, for the same
reason that he is not Nature. He is not identical with
matter, because he is not identical with Nature or the
universe. Therefore, as it is not pretended that there are
more than two substances in existence — matter and spirit,
it necessarily follows, that God is a Spirit. Now, had we
no other proofs, these are abundantly sufficient to prove the
immateriality of the Divine Nature. But proofs multiply

142 THE existence of god.
with every aspect in which the subject is contemplated, and
though they need not be pursued at length, they may be
noticed in order to show the extreme weakness and folly of
the contrary hypothesis. Hence : —
III. God is not material, because he is infinite, while
matter is limited, and their co-existence is a physical impos
sibility. That matter is finite, is evident from the fact, that
it exists in various degrees of density and solidity, from the
compact diamond to the most diffused gases ; and that God
is infinite, is a truth, necessarily resulting from his eternity,
and absolute perfection, which will be proved at large here-,
after. Now, if God were material, there would then be materi
ality existing to an infinite extent ; and as it is an axiomatic
truth that two material substances cannot both occupy the
same place at the same moment of time, it would follow, that-
the existence of an infinite material substance would exclude
and prevent the existence of any finite material substance,
and thus have prevented the existence of the material uni
verse. If God were an infinite material substance, he would
fill immensity with his own substance ; and, therefore, not
a world, nor an atom of any other material substance,,)
would have space for existence. The actual existence, there
fore, of the material world, presents a double proof of tho
spirituality of the Divine Nature. First, in that it was ere- ¦
ated by an intelligent Being totally distinct from it, and who
existed eternally prior to its existence; and, secondly, in
that its existence as a finite and limited creature, involves
the certainty that no infinite Being of the same nature can
co-exist with it. The existence, therefore, of; God, is that of
an immaterial or spiritual substance.
IV. God is not material, because the properties of his
nature are essentially diverse from the properties of matter.
1. God is a conscious and intelligent Being. This was
established under our fifth proposition, but matter is desti
tute of these properties. If we consider it in its diffused
elementary state, it is unorganized and chaotic, and desti
tute, not only of consciousness and intelligence, but also of
life. But, whether we consider matter in atoms or in aggre-

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 148
gate masses, united by chemical attraction and affinity, it is
equally destitute of consciousness, of intelligence, and even
of hfe ; and, if destitute of life, it must be devoid of all the
attributes of life. In such unorganized masses as are cogniz
able by our senses, it is inert, passive, and without hfe or
sensation ; and, when analyzed by a chemical process, and
separated into ultimate and invisible particles, it must be
the same. Neither combination nor analysis can produce
the least change in this respect. A diamond is as devoid
of hfe, sensation, and thought, as a piece of charcoal, and
both are as devoid of these properties as carbon in its gas-
seous form.*
2. The absurdity of investing matter with the properties
of consciousness, intelligence, and vohtion, will further ap
pear from the fact that matter is not one thing but many.
As it presents itself to the senses, it consists of an- inde
finite number of particles, and when subject to chemical
analysis, these particles are further reduced to atoms, incon
ceivably small, and are multiplied to an extent so as to elude
the p6wer of numbers to express, as they do of sight to recog-
nizei Yet, every atom, however small, has a separate indi
vidiial existence, and if the properties of mind belong to
matter, they must belong to each atom: Each atom in this
Case, must have distinct consciousness, intelhgence, vohtion,
" Divide matter into as minute parts as you will (which we are apt to
imagine a sort of spiritualizing of making a thinking thing of it,) vary
the figure and motion of it as much as you please ; a globe, cube, cone,
prism, cylinder, &c., whose diameters are but 1 0'0,000th part of a gry,
will operate no other wise upon other bodies of proportionable bulk
than those of an inch or foot in diameter ; and you may as rationally
expect to produce sense, thought, and knowledge, by putting together,
in a certain figure and motion, gross particles of matter, as by those
that are the very minutest, that do any where exist. They knock, impel,
and resist one another just as the greater do, and that is all they can do.
So, that, if we will suppose nothing first or eternal, matter can never
begin to be; if we suppose bare matter without motion eternal, motion
can never begin to be ; if we suppose only matter and motion' first or
eternal, thought can never be'gih to be. For, it is impossible to conceive
that matter, either with or without motion, could have, originally, in and
from itself, sense, perception, and knowledge ; as is evident, from hence,

144 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
and every other attribute of mind, as certainly as it has a
separate individual existence. Thus the materialist to evade
the truth of one Creative, Spiritual Intelligence, plunges into
the extreme absurdity of supposing an infinite number of
intelligent atoms. To escape this absurdity, we have no
alternative, but to admit that intelligence is not a property
of matter, and, therefore, the intelligent Creator is not a
material, but a spiritual existence.
3 If the materialist, pressed by the facts and arguments
adduced, should admit that consciousness and intelligence,
do not reside in either atoms or unorganised masses, but
as a dernier resort contend, that these are properties of
organized matter associated with life, we reply, " This ob
jection is irrelevant, if urged against the spirituality of the
Divine nature ; for how can any material organization be
associated with the nature of Deity, seeing he existed prior
to all organization, and prior to all life, but his own ? If
consciousness and intelligence, do not reside in each of the
particles of matter in its original state, then it is impossible
to contend for the materiality of God. Again : the objection
is absurd, as well as irrelevant, for it supposes an effect to
exist before its cause. The primordial state of matter, was
that of elementary particles as destitute of organization, as
of vitality and consciousness. This was proved under our
that sense, perception, and knowledge, must be a property eternally sepa
rable from matter and every particle of it." — Locke, on the Understanding,
book iv, chap. 10, sec. 10.
Saurin justly asks, " What relation can ye find between wisdom,
power, mercy, and all other attributes which enter into your notion of
Divinity and the nature of bodies ? Pulverize matter, give it all the
different forms of which it is susceptible, elevate it to its highest degree
of attainment — make it vast and immense, moderate or small ; luminous
or obscure, opaque or transparent; there will never result anything but
figures (different forms and combinations) ; and never will ye be able by
all these combinations, or divisions, to produce one single sentiment,
one single thought, like that of the meanest, and most contracted of all
mankind. If matter, then, cannot be the subject of one single operation
of the soul of a mechanic, how should it he the subject of these attri
butes, which make the essence of God himself?" — Saurin's Sermons,
vol. I., 55.

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 145
fourth proposition. The subsequent organization of matter
was an effect produced, not by any inherent power in matter
itself, but by the operation of a Being, distinct from, and
infinitely superior to it. This has been established by an
appeal to a multitude of the most obvious facts in philoso
phy. Thus we have positive proof of the operations of an
intelligent Being, prior to the organization of a single thing.
Moreover, the Being who exercised this intelligence, has been
proved to be unoriginated and self-existent ; and, therefore,
we have proof of the existence of an intelligent Being for
an eternity of duration, prior to the existence of either
animal, plant, or world. Thus, it is evident, that intelh
gence existed for infinite ages, prior to, and independent
of any material organization, and, therefore, instead of in
telligence resulting from organization, organization resulted
from intelligence. It is an effect of which a distinct, an
eternal, and independent intelligence is the cause. If, then,
the intelligence of God is neither a property of matter in its
primordial state, nor the effect of any organization, it fol
lows, that it is totally distinct from matter, and, therefore,
the Creator of the universe cannot be a material, but a
spiritual existence.
4 The naturalist may allege, that the intelligence of man,
and of the inferior tribes, springs from their organization. If
the allegation were true, it would be of no service against
the argument for the spirituality of the Divine nature, for
the reasons already stated. But we deny the assertion, and
in vain do we ask for proof. Certainly, in man we see a
material organization connected with mental attributes; and
in lower animals, too, we see some of the inferior attributes
of mind: but these mental properties are not the results
or products of mere organization. The facts before us nei
ther identify mind with matter as essentially one and the
same substance, nor prove that mental attributes spring
from material organization. In the Deity, we see life and
intelligence, unconnected with organization ; and in plants,
we see life and organization, unconnected with intelhgence,
or any mental attribute. These facts prove that there is
T

146 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
no necessary eonnectionlietween intelligence and organiza
tion ; and, consequently, the intelligence of man is not to be
resolved into a mere product of organization, but to the
existence of a distinct and immaterial principle, which, at
present, acts through the medium of a material organization.
If it be said that this doctrine invests the inferior animals
with a similar principle, We reply, that we shrink not from
the logical results of our argument. It is true, the most
sagacious of the brute creation exhibit no faculty for com
bining and analyzing their ideas, of forming abstract and
general conceptions ; they have no conscience, or moral facul
ties ; and instinct, as we have seen, is essentially different
from reason ; still, we are far from considering the inferior
tribes of creation to be mere machines. We do see some
manifestation of the inferior attributes of mind, and wherever
there are the attributes of mind, there is mind of some sort;
and wherever there is mind, there is a principle distinct
from matter. In this admission, we see nothing repugnant
to either philosophy or rehgion. As Watson observes, " It
strengthens, and does not weaken, the argument ; and it is
perfectly in accordance with scripture, which speaks of ' the
soul of a beast,' as well as ' the soul of a man.' "* We never
suppose that man has the highest order of mind : Why should
we suppose he has the lowest ? Why not allow gradation
below as well as above the human species ? It does not,
however, follow, that the souls of inferior animals are immor
tal. The truth is, that God alone hath independent immor
tality, because he alone is self-existent ; and neither human
nor brute souls are, of necessity, immortal. The immortality
of the human soul is a gift from God, which he has withheld
from brutes, as he has withheld, also, moral consciousness,
and the higher -faculties of reason and speech. " The spirit
of man goeth upward, but the spirit of a beast goeth down
ward to the earth." As Matthew Henry observes, " The
soul of a beast is, at death, like a candle blown out — there
is an end of it ; whereas, the soul of a man is hke a candle
taken out of a dark lantern, which leaves the lantern
» Institutes, vol. i. Vide Watt's Works, vol. viii., 446 — 9.

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 147
useless indeed, but does itself shine brighter." Though
the certainty of our soul's immortality lies not in its immate
riality, it is abundantly sustained by irrefragable evidence of
another kind ; but as this enters not into our present argu
ment, we must postpone its consideration.
From the preceding observations, it will be seen that any
objection taken from the connection of mind with a material
organization among created beings, has no force, either
against the philosophy of our argument, or against the
spirituality of the Eternal and Uncreated Mind. Indeed,
no metaphysical question can invalidate the great fact pre
viously demonstrated, that the Infinite, Intelligent, and
Almighty Being, existed and acted prior to all organization,
and prior to all life but his own, and therefore, cannot be
material. V. The Non-eternity of Matter. — Another distinct and
independent proof of the spirituality of God, arises from the
non-eternity of matter. All our previous, argumentation has
been based on facts and principles, irrespective of the non-
etemity of matter. The • establishment, therefore, of the
present proposition must irresistibly establish the evidence
the spirituality of the Divine nature.
1. The eternity of matter is a gratuitous assumption, un
supported by the slightest evidence. It is not a self-evident
proposition ; nor is it sustained by a single fact, nor indeed
by any argument that will bear a moment's examination. It
is admitted by Antitheos, a modern materialist before referred
to, that we can conceive matter not to have existed ; there
fore its non-existence is admitted to have been possible^-
and though the admission of so self-evident a proposition
does not involve much condescension, it certainly excludes
the eternity of matter from the category of necessary truths,
even on the testimony of infidelity itself. Indeed, as the
actual existence of matter is certain, and its non-existence
is admitted to have been possible, What ground has matter
for its existence at all but the creating energy of another ?
The ground on which the ea»=eternity of matter was ar
gued by Epicurus, and echoed from one heathen philosopher

148 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
to another, was the alleged impossibility of something
arising from nothing,* an argument (as we have previously
demonstrated), irresistibly conclusive for the eternal exist
ence of something, but certainly not for the eternal existence
of matter. That eternal something we have proved to be a
Being distinct from matter, and possessing properties and
attributes essentially different from matter. Thus the eter
nal existence of one Being having been^stablished, and that
Being having been proved to be the Author of all organized
existence, and all systems of being, the eternal existence of
another being is not required, either by logic or philosophy.
When the eternal existence of one Being is thus es
tablished — that axiom, " Ex nihilo, nihil fit, " — (From
nothing, nothing can arise) — has no relevance in a
question respecting the eternity of matter. Nor is the
creation of matter properly or justly stated by describing it
as " bringing something out of nothing," but rather by des
cribing it as causing that to exist which did not exist before ;
recognizing both a positive agent, and a positive act. What
then, we demand, is there impossible in a self-existent,
eternal, independent, and Almighty Being causing a thing
to exist. ? Limited as are the capabilities of a human being,
we can originate events. By a mere exercise of volition, we
can cause a variety of events to be which at present have no
existence. Why then cannot a self-existent Being cause the
existence of another being? Why cannot an Almighty
Being do any thing which does not in itself involve an abso
lute contradiction ? In causing a substance to exist, which
did not exist before, there is no more contradiction involved
than in causing an event to exist which did not exist before !
It is evident, then, that the doctrine of the eternity of matter
is without foundation. It is a mere figment of the imagination.
2. The eternity of matter is not only unsupported by
reason, but it is contradicted by reason. This will appear
from the following considerations : —
(a) It has already been demonstrated that sound philo
sophy requires but one unoriginated, eternal, and self-existent
* Lqertius, i, c. Lucretius De Eer Nat i, 157. Persius Sat. iii, 83, &c.

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 149
Being to account for the origin of the universe. It has been
shown that that Being is not matter, but One totally dis
tinct from matter, and infinitely superior to it. It being
thus manifest, that matter is not The Unoriginated Being,
whose existence is necessary, to contend for its eternity, is to
contend without reason and against reason. It is to contend
for a notion which can serve no purpose even for atheism
itself; for, if matter- were eternal, it would require another
eternal being, infinitely superior to it, to give it form, adap
tation, system, and such orderly arrangement as it now
possesses. This was proved under our fourth proposition.
The notion, therefore, of the eternity of matter is incompa
tible with philosophy and sound reason.
(b) The notion, that matter is eternal, involves the further
absurdity of limiting the power and perfections of the Creator.
God's existence being established, it follows, that he is an
independant and all-powerful Being — a Being of infinite
perfections ; but, to maintain the eternity of matter, is vir
tually to deny him the attribute of omnipotence. It is to
limit the infinite, and to invest the finite with at least one
attribute of infinity, which is absurd.
(c) It involves the absurdity of supposing two eternal and
independant beings of opposite nature and attributes. No
two natures can be more different than these two. The one
spiritual, the other material ; the one conscious, the other
absolutely unconscious ; the one intelligent, the other devoid
of all intelligence ; the one essentially living, the other desti
tute of hfe ; the one essentially active, the other entirely
passive ; the one omnipotent in energy, the other absolutely
helpless ; the one immutable, the other perpetually changing ;
the one doing all things freely, and by his own vohtion, the
other doing nothing of itself, nor capable of doing anything ;
the one infinite in all his attributes, the other limited and
confined. We cannot conceive of properties more dissimilar
and contrary. Yet, all the properties ascribed to God are in
harmony with himself, because they are in harmony with
his eternity. They perfectly accord with his unoriginated
and independent existence. But, all the properties of

150 THE EXISTENCE OF GOT)'.
matter are repugnant to Deity because they are inconsistent
with independance and eternity. Passibility, change, inac
tivity, unconsciousness, and the total absence of vitality, are
qualities as incompatible with self-existence, independence;
and eternity, as they are with the nature of Deity. It is
irrational to conceive, that a Being, so dissimilar to Deity
in every other respect, should be identical with him in self-
existence and eternity. In fact, limitation in every other
attribute is incompatible with infinity in one. For these
reasons, we must reject the notion as an absurdity.
(d) The absurdity of the eternity of matter further appears
from the fact, that both the laws and operations of matter
had a beginning. By a preceding argument in the fourth
proposition, it has been proved, that the mechanical motions
of the earth, planets, and sidereal systems, are destined to ter
minate. However vast, and overwhelming to contemplate, the
periods through whieh those spheres may continue to revolve
in their respective orbs, they are certain to come to an end.
In a continuation of the same general argument, it was
proved that the motion arising from chemical forces, was
also destined to arrive at a termination. However long the
several elements may continue their play of synthesis and
analysis, the period must come when the tendency to equi
librium will bring about an ultimate cessation of all che
mical action. These arguments having been stated at some
length, it would be superfluous to repeat them, but, to
refresh the memory of the reader, we refer him to pages 48-58.
A termination to any cycle of causes and effects, necessa
rily involves a commencement of their operations ;• for the
fact that the cycle is still running on, implies that it has
not yet had time to complete its course, which it must have
accomplished infinite ages ago, had it been eternal.
A beginning to any object, excludes from that object the
property of self- existence. It necessarily implies the inter
position of a Superior Power of antecedent existence. Thus,
the motions of matter, whether mechanical or chemical,
having had a beginning, must have had a BegJwaer. As
they have no power to continue their activity beyond a

TnE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 151
limited period, they have no power to resume it when it
ceases, and, certainly, had no power to commence it, forthat
would imply that they acted before they existed, which is
an absurdity and a contradiction in the very terms.
It avails not to affirm that the present cycle of operations
in the material universe, may be only one of a series, which
have antecedently run their course. This but places the
beginning, both of events and of the Divine agency, at an
earher period. It neither obviates the necessity of a begin
ning, nor supersedes the necessity of the Divine agency to
effect that beginning. It only multiphes the operations of
the Divine agency, the necessity of that agency being pre
cisely the same in each instance ; for, while the tendency
to equilibrium infallibly determines an end to motion, there
is no resuscitating self-acting energy in nature, to secure
a resumption thereof. No multitude of cycles, however pro
tracted, can make up eternity. They are but as a moment,
contrasted with infinity. Where there is an end to either a
series, or successive cycles of series, there must have been a
beginning ; and if the interposition of a Divine agency was
required for the last, it was for the first. That it was abso
lutely required for the last has been shown, and that it was
equally required for the first has been demonstrated. To
refresh the reader's memory, We refer to our arguments, at
length, on this subject. See chapter the fourth.
An important consequence flows from the facts before us ;
for, if all mechanical and chemical motion had a beginning,
it follows, that the laws and properties of matter, producing
those motions, had a beginning also. Thus the properties
of elective affinity, attraction, combustion, &c, must have
had a commencement. They could not have existed eternally
without acting, unless a Divine power had restrained them,
which the atheist will not assume, for that is to admit the
existence of Deity. The beginning of mechanical and che
mical motion, necessarily implies a beginning of those pro
perties of matter, which determine and regulate the motions.
Thus, we are necessitated to contemplate a period when
there was no such thing as chemical affinity, attraction, repul-

152 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.'
sion, combustion, &e, and we may add gravitation, for what
is gravitation but a more general characteristic of attraction
— the outer circle, so to speak of, chemical affinity ? These
properties having had a beginning, must have derived their
existence from the first cause — the Creator of all things.
They could not originate themselves — the idea is an absurd
contradiction, for then they must have acted before they
existed. Matter could not originate them spontaneously,
for how could it give what it did not possess. In whatever
aspect we contemplate the subject, we are compelled to have
recourse to a Creator.
We ask, then, What is the rational conclusion respecting.
the primary and essential qualities of matter ? and respect
ing the substratum of matter itself, if there be any distinct
from the qualities themselves ? If we can thus trace not
only motion, but the origin of the chemical properties of
matter, to a Divine hand, to what source shall we ascribe the
creation of the other qualities, extension, solidity, &e, but to
the same Divine hand. If matter could not give to itself the
chemical and mechanical properties it now possesses, by what'
principle of reasoning can it be thought capable of giving
the other ? In fact, it must first be shown, that it could
exist without either one or the other. With regard to the
primary and essential properties of matter, it is agreed, on
all hands, that matter could not exist without them, and it
is impossible to prove that it could exist without its chemical
properties. If it be allowed, that it is impossible for matter
to exist without its chemical properties, then the question is
decided : its non-eternity necessarily follows ; for we have
seen that these qualities were created; if this be not allowed,
we have still a moral certainty-^-we have as high a proof
as the nature of the subject will admit — that matter is
not eternal, but brought into existence by a Divine hand ;
for He who gave its properties must also have given its
existence. Summary of the argument. — In taking a review of the argu? ,
ment, we find the following points established: 1. — That
the actual creation of matter involves no contradiction.

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 153
2. — That the eternity of matter is a mere gratuitous assump
tion, unsupported by any evidence whatever. 3. — That this as
sumption does not aid the atheistic hypothesis, as the exist
ence of an eternal and unoriginated Being is demonstrated.
4. — That the eternity of matter involves the absurdity of sup
posing two eternal Beings, of opposite properties. 5. — That
as all the known properties of matter are those of a finite
and dependent being, they are incompatible with the suppo
sition of its eternity. 6. — That the chemical properties of
matter are proved to have been created, and, by a parity of
reasoning, all the other properties of matter, and its sub
stratum too (if it have any), must also have been created.
In fact, while it has no characteristic indicative of eternity.
it has all the evidence it can have of being a creature of God.
Having adduced the testimony of reason on this subject,
we may briefly remark (what is interesting to the believer
in revelation), that this is the doctrine emphatically asserted
in the sacred records. It is declared, " In the beginning
God created the heavens and the earth." That the word
Nia in this passage, signifies to create, or to cause that to
exist which before had no existence, there can be no doubt
to any candid mind ; and the necessity of elaborate criticism
to establish this meaning is superseded by the explicit state
ment of Paul, who affirms, " That the worlds were framed
by the word of God ; " and framed in such a sense, that the
things which are seen were not made of things which do
appear." " The things which do appear " are those material
objects which are cognizable by our senses. Thus the testi
mony of the apostle determines the sense of xia in Gen. i., 1,
and shows that the creation of the universe is to be under
stood in an absolute sense. It is not a mere modification
of matter from pre-existent elements, but a bringing into
actual existence the elements themselves, of which the great
fabric of the universe is composed. Thus the teachings of
holy scripture, and the testimony of reason and fact, are in
•perfect harmony on this most interesting and important
subject.

154 THE EXISTENCE OF GO,D.
The argument; ,w,hich proves the non-eternity of matter
furnishes another proof of ,the existence, of God, .and peaces
the spirituality of his nature beyond dispute. Even ,the
atheist wfll hardly surpass all his Qijber absurdities iby con
tending that God created himself, and, unless he can dp this,
or overturn the arguments adduced, he must admit God to
be an Immaterial Spirit. This and every o,ther argument by
which we have proved ^hat God and matter are not identical,
proves him to be an Eternal and Infinite Spirit.
Conclusion.— We have now completed cur argument on
the existence of God, and the sphdtuality of his nature ; not,
indeed, that the subject is exhausted, for many volumes
might be written replete .with evidence. We conceive that
any one of the arguments adduced, is, of itself, sufficient
to satisfy any candid inquire?: ,afte,r feaith. Thus the facts
of natural history and geology, excluding, as they do, the
possibility of either an eternal series, or the transmutation
of species, necessitate a creating agency ; and, if we could
proceed with no further evidence, the proofs thus adduced
are complete in themsejyes. Astronomy and chemistry—
proving that motion and the orderly arrangement of matter
into its present forms, are physically impossible to have
resulted from any spontaneous energy in nature— present
another proof of a Creator ; and this evidence, irrespective of
all other, is sufficient to carry the conviction of God)s existence
to any mind accessible to the power pf trutii. Again, tfee
. manifestations of intelligence and design in all jthe operations
of nature, involve a demonstration both of the existence and
personality of the Deity. This was, indeed, the only evi
dence furnished in by-gone days ; and yet it was deemed
abundantly sufficient to satisfy the mind of any candid
lover of truth. To th,eae may be added the proof, that
matter is not eternal but a created substance. The whole
combining to furnish, in our estimation, an impregnable
demonstration both of God's existence and spirituality.
Modern science hag revealed facts which set infidel sophistry
at defiance. To deny God, men must now not only resist
their reason, but refuse to behold the most obvious facts.

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 155
If Atheism was folly in the days of David, it is madness
now. The torch which science holds to religious truth, is
so brilliant and powerful, that the monstrosity of atheism
must seek an escape from the universe of mind. Men may
hate and resist the truth, but they must believe, or refuse
assent to a palpable demonstration. They must believe it,
or wilfully, wickedly, and dehberately close their eyes against
the clearest and the brightest light, with a perversity and
obstinacy only equalled by the man who should bandage his
eyes at noon-day and protest that the sun does not shine.
The existence of the Deity is the grand central truth around
which all others revolve, so resplendent with hght, that its
beams are diffused through the universe, and, from what
ever part the open eye of candour turns, the divine rays fall
upon it and depict tne Mage of the Creator.

CHAPTER IX.

PANTHEISM.

" Great men are not always wise." — Job xxxii., 9. " For the heart of
this people is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their
eyes liave they closed ; lest tliey should see with their eyes, and hear with
their ears, and understand with their hearts, and I should heal them." —
Acts xxviii., 27.

In close alliance with Atheism stand the variable systems
(if systems they may be called) of Pantheism, which, in all
ages, have existed in some regions, and, strange to say, find
abettors in countries where it might have been supposed the
light of science and revelation had for ever excluded them.
The general features and history of this protean monster,
as it existed in former ages, are succinctly described by
Dr. Good, in the First of his admirable Lectures, at the
Surrey Institution. " According to this absurd hypothesis,
the universe is an emanation or extension of the essence of
the Creator. Now, under this belief, however modified,
the Creator himself is rendered material; or, in other words,
matter itself, or the visible substance of the world, is ren
dered the Creator. There can be no difficulty in tracing
this doctrine to its source. It runs through the whole tex
ture of that species of materialism which constitutes the two
grand religions of the East — Brahmism and Budhism ; and
was undoubtedly conveyed by Pythagoras, and, perhaps,
antecedently, by Orpheus, (if such an individual ever existed,)
into different parts of Greece, in consequence of their com
munications with the gymnosophists. From Pythagoras it
descended to Plato and Xenophanes, and, under different
modifications, became a tenet of the Academic and Eleatic
schools.

PANTHEISM. 157
A few examples may be given of this doctrine from the
writings of the ancients, both in the eastern and western
worlds. A passage, in M. Anquetil du Perron's transla
tion, from the Abridgement of the Veids, developes the
entire doctrine as well as the principle. " The whole uni
verse is the Creator, proceeds from the Creator, exists in
him, and returns to him. The ignorant assert, that the
universe, in the beginning, did not exist in its author, and,
that it was created out of nothing. 0 ye, whose hearts are
pure ! how could something arise out of nothing ? The
first Being alone, and without likeness, was the All in the
beginning ; he could multiply himself into different forms ;
he created fire from his essence, which is hght, &c." So,
in another passage of the Yagar Veid, " Thou art Brahma !
thou art Vishnu ! thou art Kodra ! &c. ! thou art Air ! thou
art Andri ! thou art the Moon ! thou art Substance ! thou
art Djam! thou art the Earth! thou art the- World! O
Lord of the world ! to thee humble adoration ! O Soul of
the world ! thou who superintendest the actions of the world !
who destroyest the world ! who createst the pleasures of the
world ! 0 Life of the world ! the visible and invisible worlds
are the sport of thy power! thou art the Sovereign, 0
universal soul ! to thee humble adoration ! "
Plutarch, in his " Defect of Oracles," says, that the ancient
philosophers resolved all things into God, and pronounced
this of them universally,
Ze-iig apxn, Ztig fxeacra, Aios S *£b iravra reKovrai.
That is, God is both the beginning and the middle, and that
all things are out of God. Dr. Good observes, to the follow
ing effect, " As this doctrine became embraced by many of
the Greek and Boman philosophers, it is not to be wondered
at, that it captivated still more of their poets ; and, hence
we find it, with perhaps the exception of Empedocles and
Lucretius, more or less pervading all of them, from Orpheus
to Virgil. It is in reference to this, that Aratus opens his
Phenomena with the passage (perhaps referred to by St. Paul

158 PANTHEISM.
in the course of his address to the Athenians on Mars' Hill),
of which Twill beg your acceptance of the following version :—
From God we spring, whom man can never trace,
Though seen, heard, tasted, felt, in every place ;
The loneliest path, by mortal seldom trod,
The crowded city, ali;isfaHof God;
Oceans ahdlakes, for God is all in all,
And we are all his offspring.*
" So iEschylus in a passage Still stronger in point; and
imbued' with the full spirit of Brahmism : —
Jupiter is the air,
Jupiter is the earth;
Jupiter is the heaven;
All is Jupiter;*
" But, perhaps, the passage most express, is one contained
in a very ancient Greek poem, entitled' De Mundo, and
ascribed to -Orpheus, in the original, ¦ highly beautiful, and
of -which, for want of a better, I present youwith the follow
ing translation : —
Jove first exists, whose thunders roll above ;
Jove last, JoVe midmost, all pibceeds'frd'm Jove"
Fetaiale isiJ<ove, immortal J6Ve is male ;
Jove the broad earth — the heaven's irradiate pale;
Jove is the boundless spirit, Jove the fire '
That warms the world with feeling and desire.
The sea is Jove, the sun, the lunar ball ;
JoVe ltirig4supreme; the sovereign'stiurce'bf all.
* 'E%'Aid£ '&fal!>iitfr9a; rhv offSewor aviate kw/itv
"Afipiitdv* jMri-rtW Si Aibg'irairai /ikv' ayvial,
USeo-aiS' aV&p&ifiJv Ayoptii* pkiiTfi'Si'Si&'Kaaait-, .
'SLetOkuflkvic;, ifavtujflSk'AtAisMKp^/iltBciiiravTef
Tov y&p; KaA-yivoifrtoyLev: —lib. i., 1.'
t Tilvg ianv aiQrip,
TitvQ re y1}'
Zeis Si oiipavog,
Zkifc r& wavra.

PANTHE.ISM. 159
All power is his; to him all glory give,
For his vast form embraces all thatlivQ.»
From the Greeks this doctrine was adopted by the Latins.
Thus Lucan says, "Whatsoever thou seest is Jupiter. "f
Seneca asks, " What is God ? " and answers, " He is all
that you see, and all that you do not see." " And he alone is
all things, containing his own work, not only without, but
also within. " In another passage he has the following
pantheistic sentiments : — " We are all members of one great
body. The whole world is God, and we are not only his
members, but also bis fellows or companions."!
From ancient times this doctrine has descended to our
own age. It was elaborately set forth and advocated in the
seventeenth century by Spinoza, and runs through the
writings of the English sophists of the last century. It appears
prominent in Pope's Essay on Man, though, probably, as
Dr. Johnson intimates, its writer spoke more rhetorically
than philosophically. The following lines, if understood
literally, express the very quintessence of Pantheism.
" All are but parts of one stupendous whole,
Whose body nature is, and God the soul. "
The writings of Neckar are full of this doctrine : and
Isnard, on the Immortality of the Soul, labours to give it
support and plausibility. Some ,of the sayings of Malebranche
appear to favour this theory, for he says, that " We see all
things in God," and that he is pur " intelligible world."
* Zcilg irpuiTog yivtro, Zeiig Insrarog 'ap%iicspavv!>g
Zeilg RE0a\>), zevg /isaaa' Aibg 6" 't(e iravra Tsrvxrai'
Ztjbg apanv yiverp} zpbg ajifSporpg eirXsro vvp.tyn'
zeig irufi/MJiv yaing ra koj, oioayoS ' asTt-potvrog' i^c, &C.
—Ex. Apul-
i Jupjter /est quodenncjue vides. — Lib. ix,, v. 580.
j Quid est Deus ? Quod vides totum, et non vides, totum.
— Nat. Quaest, Lib. i.
See solus est omnia; opus suum et extra et intra tenet.
— De Benefic, Lib. iv., c. viii-
Membra sumus corporis magni. — Epist. xcv.
Totum hoc Deus est, socii ejus et membra sumus, — Epist xcii.

160 PANTHEISM.
In Germany, a variable pantheism prevails to a consi
derable extent, which, though greatly differing in some of
its elements from the materialism of its heathen predecessors,
yet presents characteristics equally absurd, and equally re
pugnant, to all just conceptions of the Deity. Professor
Kant* has the reputation, if not of originating, yet of elabo
rating and diffusing principles, under the designation of
" Transcendental philosophy," which his successors have
ripened into various mystic theories, the most repellant to
reason, and the most inimical to religion. Schelling regards
' the objects of sense as the phenomena of the ideal world,
and the ideal world as nothing more than the mode of the
existence of the Deity.' With him, ' the infinite eternal
mind is the absolute element from which all is evolved,
while thought is essentially identified with being.' Fitche
' identifies object and subject, or being and thought are one
— the finite and infinite are one. Ego (I) is an absolute
principle, and the whole universe but as its dream ; there
is no reality beyond consciousness.' According to Hegel,
' creation is an eternal momentum : it is the Deity, by a
negation of himself passing into a world, and becoming a
second self : the creation is a world which is never made,
but always being created. '
Such is a cursory view of the varied systems of Pantheism
which, in different ages and climes, have held ascendancy
* More remotely, however, the principles which originated the German
development of Scepticism may be ascribed to Des Cartes. Affecting
to establish all things, even intuitive principles, by logical deduction, he
placed his own existence among the things to be proved before it should
be admitted in the category of established truths. Ego cogito, — I think,
was his first proposition ; and ergo sum — J exist, was his first conclu
sion. A dangerous concession to scepticism, and as foolish as dangerous ;
for, the evidence of his existence lay in his consciousness, as well as the
evidence of his thinking. Scepticism respecting first principles, thus
receiving a philosophic dress, and the sanction of a great metaphysician,
soon obtained disciples, who carried the vicious principle to an extent
never anticipated by their master. Locke, on the contrary, took for
granted his own existence, and that of the material world, and here was
a solid foundation on which to erect a rational and desirable system of
mental philosophy.

PANTHEISM. 161
over vast multitudes of minds — systems so heterogeneous,
that it is difficult to give them a general classification, and
so contradictory, that they are equally opposed to each other
as they are to truth and common sense. If such views had
been originated and put forth by men of ordinary minds
and status, they would have been deemed by the literati as
scarcely worth denouncing — as too preposterous to merit a
passing observation. The ravings of Johanna Southcott, and
of the prophet of the Mormonites, do not furnish a greater
outrage upon the first principles of reason than these philo
sophic reveries. Yet, they are earnestly and elaborately
defended and propagated by men of strong intellect and
great acquirements, whose potent influence in moulding
public opinion can scarcely be estimated. Trifling, there
fore, and absurd as the sentiments are, their extensive preva
lence, and their elaborate defence by learned men, are to be
treated as great and serious facts, and their fallacies and
wickedness to be gravely set forth. This is our duty arising
out of the argument which has engaged our attention, and
we proceed to show that the Pantheistic theory, under every
modification, is fraught with absurdity, infidehty, idolatry,
and licentiousness. I. PANTHEISM IS FBAUGHT WITH ABSURDITY.
1. It contradicts one of the most obvious principles on
which all reasoning proceeds, and on which all knowledge
is built — namely, the principle, that essential difference
constitutes individuahly, or distinct identical existence. In
all classes, orders, genera, species, and individuals, there is
an essential difference, by which one thing or person is dis
tinguished from another, and has its individual identity. It
matters not whether the beings be organized or unorganized,
animate or inanimate, material or immaterial, atoms or
worlds, persons or things, there is in each a distinct individu
ality. As a tree is not a man, and a man is not an ox, and
an ocean is not a continent, so an idea is not the object it
represents. Now, the theory that identifies the creature

162 PANTHEISM.
with the Creator, the finite with the Infinite, the Deity with
the universe, contradicts this obvious principle. It has the
absurdity of making the workman and his work, thepotter
and his clay, the same identical being. It matters not how
the theory be disguised, nor how metaphysically, learnedly,
and elaborately, it may be presented — whatever be its
costume, this, is the theory itself, apart from aU disguise.
2. While this theory is contradicted by the common sense
of mankind, and. the first principles of knowledge, it is
equally contradicted by its authors themselves : they are
every moment contradicting their own theory, both in their
speculations and their practices. Are they mathematicians,
they distinguish a square from a triangle, and they distin
guish both from a circle;, they. cannot state a single the
orem, nor even commence the process, without contradicting
their own theory. Are they logicians, they distinguish one
proposition from another, and the premises from the conclu
sion. If they made these identical, they could never con
struct a single syllogism, if tliey should hve to the end of
time. In fact, every effort they make to build up their own
theory assumes the very principle which destroys it ; in the
very act to support it, they undermine its foundation. In
every sentence they pen, they assume an essential difference
in their own ideas, one from another ; in every word, every
syllable, and every letter, by which they seek to express their
ideas, they assume this essential difference ; and, in their
controversies amongst themselves, or against their common
opponents, they assume an essential difference in their sys
tems, one from another ; and this difference constitutes an
individuality for each; and this individuality destroys the
identity which lies at the foundation of their theory. There
may be a resemblance between two beings of the same spe
cies, but there is still an essential difference which gives to
each a distinct individuality. Two atoms of matter may be
so near alike, that we can see no difference in shape, size,
colour, or weight, but still they are not identical-^— there is
such an essential difference between them, that each has its
own identity and individuality.

PANTHEISM. 163
If, then, there be distinct individuality in objects thus
intimately resembling each other, how palpably absurd to
contend against this distinction, with respect to objects be
tween which there is the greatest disparity and contrariety !
The universe is finite, God is infinite ; the creature is of
yesterday, God is eternal ; the creature is helpless and de
pendent, God is independent and almighty ; the creature
is changeable, God is unchangeable ; the creature dies, the
Creator is essentially and eternally living ; and yet these
sage philosophers are writing books to persuade mankind
that they are one and the same Being !
3. While this theory is contradicted by the first principles ,
of reason, it is equally contradicted by our consciousness
and our senses. We have a consciousness of personal iden
tity, by which we know that Ego is not Tu, nor Ille — that
I can neither be Thou, nor He — a consciousness, by which
each feels that he is not another person, or another thing ; by
which the existence of each person is distinct from nature and
from all other persons and things ; and by which I know that
my thoughts, affections, and actions, are myown, and not those
of another person. All human laws recognize this distinct
personal existence, and consequent individual responsibility;
and all human relations and habits exemplify its truth. Our
speculators, themselves, feel this consciousness of distinct
personal identity, and recognize it in others. They cannot
theorize themselves out of this ;consciousness. Their own
feelings witness to their own minds the falsehood and absur
dity of their theory, and their . actions exhibit the same
testimony to the observation of others. They cannot escape
from themselves wherever they may flee, and they cannot
confound their identity with that of another creature, much
less with the Creator. We never heard of any one acting on
such an absurd hypothesis, except the hypochondriac or the
maniac, and for the amusement of such alone is the philo
sophical reverie adapted.
4. It is not difficult to trace the origin of this delusion.
It springs from a partial discarding of the faculties which
God has given to man for ascertaining truth. The faculties

164 PANTHEISM.
God has given to man for this noble purpose are, conscious
ness, sense, and reason. Not any one of these is sufficient
of itself. Consciousness, without sense and reason, would
barely distinguish man from a vegetable. , Consciousness
and sense, without reason, would, at most, only place us on
a level with the brute creation. It is the combination of the
three faculties, or the three classes of faculties, which con
stitutes us men — rational as well as sentient beings — quali
fied for ascertaining truth. Each of these faculties, being
given for this exalted purpose, is adequate within its own
sphere to fulfil its purpose — is a faithful witness of what
comes within its cognizance, and ought, therefore, to receive
proportionate confidence from its possessor.
Now, the two great divisions of the Pantheistic error — the
material, and the ideal — have sprung from a discarding or
disparaging of some of these faculties. Whether it is that
truth is too obvious, when its evidence is poured upon the
mind through the ordinary media, and is therefore despised,
because it is popular; or, whether it is that some men, from
an overweening opinion of their superior powers, imagine
they can dispense with one half of their faculties, and demon
strate truth by the other, we need not determine ; but cer
tain it is, that the doctrines of these sceptical speculatists,
both in ancient and modern times, involve a discarding, or
at least, a disparaging of the evidence furnished by one class
of their faculties.* The materialist, or the Pantheist who
* Paley's observation on the causes of scepticism well accord with our
views. He says, " Were it necessary to inquire into the motives of
men's opinions — I mean their motives, separate from their arguments —
I should almost suspect, that because the proof of a Deity, drawn from
the constitution of nature, is not only popular but vulgar, (which may
arise from the cogency of the proof, and be, indeed, its highest recom
mendation) and because it is a species almost of puerility to take up
with it ; for these reasons, minds, which are habitually in search of
invention and originality, feel a restless inclination to strike off into
other solutions, and other expositions. The truth is, that many minds
are not so indisposed to anything which can be offered to them, as they
are to the flatness of being content with common reasons; and what is
most to be lamented, minds, conscious of superiority, are the most liable
to this repugnancy." Hence, those who follow the^beaten track of

PANTHEISM. 165
denies all spiritual existence, and resolves Deity and nature
into one identical material substance, pretends to rely on
the evidence of sense, which assures him of the reality of
the material world, but rejects the evidence which conscious
ness and his mental faculties give of the reality of a spiri
tual existence. On the other hand, the Idealist or trans
cendental Pantheist, who denies the existence of the material
world, and contends that there is no real being but mind,
denies, in fact, the evidence of his senses. He can see the
evidence of spirit in the exercise of consciousness and rea
son, but the testimony of his senses, which proclaims the
reality of an external world, he rejects as delusive.
Nothing is more obvious than that men, in attempting to
reason under the government of such principles, must greatly
err. Error may be incidental to other minds, but is essen
tial to theirs ; and we need not wonder at any absurdity,
however monstrous, which they may advocate. If a man
deny the evidence of consciousness, he cannot believe in his
own existence. If he confide in consciousness, but deny
the evidences of his senses, he may believe in his own exis
tence, but he cannot believe in the existence of the material
world. Nor can he reason, for reason derives her materials
from consciousness and sense ; and, apart from revelation
or inspiration, he can have them from no other source.
" Sense is God's organ, his means of manifestation ; and
God cannot lie." " When reason degrades sense — charges
her with deception — discards her informations— reason be
comes transformed from truth into nonsense. " When,
therefore, these men deride those who enquire for truth by
using all their faculties — consciousness, sense, and reason
— and charge them with being " empirical " — when they
scornfully describe them as "timidly lingering on the
threshold of science," it may be justly replied, that we seek
for truth in the only way in which it can be found, and that
nature, inbelieving the testimony of their senses and consciousness, are
disdainfully spoken of as empirics in science — as those who timidly
linger on the threshold of truth, instead of fathoming its depths, and
soaring to its heights.

166 PANTHEISM.
the renunciation of any one faculty is voluntarily to impose
deception on all the rest. When men disbelieve their
senses, they may dream and rave, but cannot reason ; and
their very dreams are composed of images drawn from the
sources they discard. They may flatter themselves with the
idea of soaring'to the heights, and penetrating into the deep
abysses, of truth, but their career is that of floundering from
absurdity to absurdity at every step; and having abandoned
the sources and first principles of truth, their denial of God's
personal existence, or their confounding- of his identity with
the universe, is only one out of a multitude of errors, which
necessarily spring from their folly. Though the truth of
God's personal existence lies at their right hand, they can
not find it ; though it shine with effulgent splendour, they
cannot see it. The anatomist might as well attempt, to find
a spirit by dissection, and a limner might as well attempt to
sketch a beautiful landscape from nature, in the dark recesses
of a coal mine, as for either the materialist, or the transcen
dental pantheist, attempt to find the truth, while discarding
the faculties which God has given for its perception and
discovery. It is worthy of observation, that a similar scepticism
with regard to first principles has its advocates in India, in
a modern sect of sophists, of which Dr. Judson records in his
journal the following notable example :— " May 20th, 1821.
Encountered another new character, one Moung Long, from
the neighbourhood of Shway-doung, a disciple of the great
Tong-dwan teacher, the acknowledged head of all the semi-
atheists in the country. Like the rest of the sect, he is, in
reality, a complete sceptic, scarcely believing his own exist
ence. They say he is always quarrelling with his wife on
some metaphysical point. For instance, if she says, ' The
rice is ready, ' he will reply, -• Bice ! what is rice ? Is it
matter or spirit? Is it an idea, or is it a non-entity?'
Perhaps she will say, ' It is matter ! ' and he will reply,
' Well, wife, and what is matter ? are, you sure there is any
such thing in existence, or are you merely subject to a
delusion of the senses ? ' " Bishop Berkley was a firm believer

PANTHEISM. 167
in the existence of Deity, but it was the same mental disease
which led him to doubt the existence of the material uni
verse, and which disease, in a more developed state, induced
Hume to reason against his own existence, and resolve all
things into mere ideas and impressions. Thus, men of the
most opposite theological sentiments find themselves carried
to similar absurdities, when they proceed to reason by denying
the evidence of their faoulties.
It is remarkable how error furnishes its own antidote.
Notwithstanding the obvious absurdity involved in the oppo
site speculations of the material and the spiritual Pantheist,
there is just so much truth in each that they separately serve
to confute each other, and combine to establish both the
validity of our faculties, as the media of our knowledge, and
the great doctrine of Jehovah's existence. Though the ma
terialist disbelieves in all spiritual existence, he confides
implicitly in his senses ; and his confidence in them does
homage to the truth, that their testimony is faithful, and not
deceptive, and that the existence of the material world is
real, not ideal. The Idealist, though denying the evidence
of his senses, confides in the testimony which consciousness
and reason bear to the existence of the spiritual world ; and
his confidence does homage to the verdict of reason. The
affirmative side of one theory confutes the negative side of
the other. One maintains the existence of Body, and the
other the existence of Spirit, and thus they correct each
other's errors, and supply a testimony that the existence of
both body and. spirit is sustained by the. clearest evidence ;
for it is certain that men of such sceptical sentiments would
believe in nothing except the evidence extorted conviction.
It thus appears too obvious to be denied, that each class of
speculators missed the truth they were respectively seeking,
by disparaging the faculties which were adapted to receive
it — the one by denying his senses, lost the material world ;
the other, by denying the evidence of his rational nature,
lost the. spiritual world. Thus, each maintained the oppo
site pole of the same truth. "Each was right just so far as
he used his faculties aright, and error began just where the

168 PANTHEISM
testimony of either sense or reason was discarded. Now,
had both honoured the faculties God had given them, by an
appropriate confidence and a due exercise of them, it is quite
clear that both would have maintained the truths they now
separately deny. Men might as well try to explore meta
physics with a lantern, as attempt to find the whole truth
by their senses alone ; and they might as well attempt to
build a temple with oxygen gas, as to find the whole truth
by reason, to the exclusion of their senses. Employ both,
and, while they obtain a cure for their insanity, they will
find that the material and spiritual world have each a real
existence, and that God is the author of both.
There is another remarkable effect arising from the con
templation of these opposite theories — namely, the testimony
they conjointly bear to the fundamental truth of religion —
the existence of God. Contradictory as the systems are to
each other, they each proclaim a Deity. Though each the
orist starts from an opposite point, and pursues an opposite
track, both reach the same conclusion — There is a God.
Though the materialist believe in nothing but matter, he
believes that matter to be God; though the transcendentalist
believes in nothing but spirit, he believes that spirit to be
God. Though each believes in but one Being, that Being
is God. Though sceptical on all other points, on this they
profess no doubt; with them, the evidence of his exist
ence is so clear and decisive, that it extorts their unequi
vocal assent. It is thus that error itself yields homage
tothe truth. The existenee-of the DenyTsJegible~tnrougn- '
out^flTe~universe, and the truth, though obscured and dis
torted, is too brilliant to be wholly lost, even amid the dark
and eccentric wanderings and the most extravagant specu
lations which have marked the history of the human mind.
II. PANTHEISM IS FKATJGHT WITH IDOLATEY.
The systems of Pantheism are not only fraught with absur
dity and contradiction, they are idolatrous. By lowering the
Deity to the creature, they rob him of his distinguishing

PANTHEISM. 169
glories ; and, by exalting the creature to the Creator, they
transfer his glory to another. Is adoration offered to matter ?
it is offered not to God, for he is not material. Is adoration
offered to a created spirit ? it is offered not to God, for he is
not created. Nor will Jehovah allow himself to be asso
ciated in worship with the creature under any pretence
Personal in his existence, independent in his attributes, in
finite in all his perfections, and conscious of his prerogatives,
he will not give his glory to another. There is an infinite
disparity between him and his creatures ; and whether
homage be offered to a molten statue, or to the universe ;
whether to Nature, as an abstract impersonality, or to Nature,
as a supposed conscious existence, it is idolatry ; and its
votaries, however refined and intellectual, are as much idol
aters as the Indian, who prostrates himself before the hideous
Juggernaut, or the degraded South Sea Islander, who bows
before the shapeless forms of his Maras. More repugnant,
indeed, in some respects, than the simple superstition of the
savage, for the refined Pantheist may worship himself, under
under the sanction of a theory which regards his nature as
an emanation from the essence of God, or identical with his
Being.
III. THE PANTHEISTIC THEORY, is FRAUGHT WITH INFIDELITY.
We are aware that this is a charge which some would
indignantly repel, but no respect for talents, or deference
to professions <jf candour, are to deter us from uttering the
unvarnished truth. If to deny the teachings of the inspired
volume be infidehty, we have it here in its most unequivocal
manifestation. The scriptures teach that God is a Spirit ;
this system, in one of its forms, maintains that he is mate
rial. The sacred volume affirms that all creatures are
distinct from their Creator, as separate as individual exist
ence can render them ; this system proclaims that God is
all things, and all things are God, as parts of one great
whole. This is resistance to inspired teaching ; it is infi
delity. It is, in many cases, the ultimatum of that down-

170 PANTHEISM.
ward course of error which began in the rejection of spiritual
religion, proceeded in resolving miracles into natural events,
and the history of Christ into a mythos, and which has
descended, through various forms of Neology, to its present
dark abyss of error, folly, and infidelity. The successors of
the Beformers — ministers of religion — those who occupy
the professor's chair, have turned their backs upon the pure
and salubrious sun-light which shone upon them ; and God
is judicially permitting them to wander in darkness that
may be felt, and presenting to the gaze of surrounding
nations, a people the most eminent for learning, and the
most consummate in folly — once foremost in emancipating
the minds of men from papal bondage, but now the most
elaborate in forging chains of mental slavery — in the six
teenth century exhuming the scriptures from masses of papal
superstition, and in the nineteenth century burying them
beneath the errors of atheism and pagan philosophy. They
have repudiated divine truth, and God, in judgement, has
permitted them to lose natural truth. They have repu
diated revelation, and have forfeited their reason. They
have become wise above what is written in the sacred word,
and are incapable of reading the volume of nature. They
have pronounced the Bible a fable, and their writings are
a compound of fable. As it hath happened to the Jews
who rejected Christ, so hath it happened to these rejectors
of the doctrines of the reformation. With both, philosophy
shares the same disgrace and outrage as religion, — with
the absence of faith, we see in both the absence of common
sense ; and in both we behold these qualities succeeded by
the most ignoble trifling, the wildest mysticism, and the
most absurd and contradictory speculations ; and, finally,
as if to complete the burlesque upon sober sense, by a
specimen of the superlatively ridiculous, these preposterous
speculations are dignified with the title of " Rationalism "
and " Transcendental philosophy." Professing themselves. to
be wise, they became fools ; and, like their heathen prede
cessors, have changed the image of the incorruptible G6d,
into an image made hke to corruptible man, and to birdS,

PANTHEISM. 171
and four-footed beasts, and creeping things ; and, in this
Pantheistic transformation, they have changed the truth
into a lie, and God has given them over to a reprobate
mind. Perhaps there never was an instance in which the
prophetic judgement was more literally verified, " Hearing,
ye shall hear, and shall not understand ; and seeing, ye
shall see, and shall not perceive. For the heart of this people
is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their
eyes have they closed ; (literally closed their senses against
the appeals of nature) lest they should see with their eyes,
and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart,
and I should heal them."
IV. PANTHEISM IS LICENTIOUS.
We mean not to charge its literary advocates with prac
tical licentiousness, but we contend that such is the natural
tendency of the system. It strikes at the foundation of
morals, and moral responsibility. Thus, in Pope's Panthe
istic Essay on Man, we find the doctrine associated with this
licentious principle :
" In spite of pride, in erring reason's spite,
One truth is clear, Whatever is, is right."*
Bevolting as is the principle expressed in this distich, it is
the genuine morality of Pantheistic philosophy ; for, if all
nature be God, then human actions, are as much the actions
of God, as the operations of gravitation, chemical forces, or
any other natural law. On such a principle, there can be
nothing wrong. As there is only one being in existence,
there can be no standard of right but what exists in his
mind, and, therefore, all actions must be equally good, when
they are the products of that mind. Injustice, lying, treach
ery, oppression, intemperance, lust, and murder, are only
names which conventional usage has given to certain actions ;
but the actions themselves are as good as probity, chastity,
» There is reason to believe that Lord Bolingbroke supplied the
principles, and Pope the poetry, of the " Essay on Man," and that thus,
Pope unwittingly gave currency to sentiments he did not hold.

173 PANTHEISM.
benevolence, and any of those designated virtues. Some of
the literati, who advocate the pantheistic theories, may live-
virtuously, but they live above their own principles ; they
may indignantly repudiate the doctrine, but it logically
results from their speculations. Although the cloistered
professor may indulge in his reveries for the sake of mere
intellectual gratification, and subject his conduct to the
government of an opposite class of principles, the masses.
will act otherwise. They will reduce the licentious theory
to practice, so far as it may comport with self interest) and
depraved appetite. They will give it exemplification in
their character and habits. They are doing so at the pre
sent day ; and hence the disregard for all authority, human
and divine — the open contempt of. sacred things — the rude
and unblushing blasphemy — the licentious indulgence of
the passions — the perverse and extravagant notions of human
rights — the concentration of all concern upon things present
and momentary — the light estimate of human life — the
suicide of Individuals and nations — and the horrid murders
which characterize the history of continental nations, where
pantheistic and atheistic principles almost equally obtain
at the present day !
By vast numbers throughout Germany and various parts of
the continent, these principles are not only avowed with
unblushing hardihood, but propagated with the most inde
fatigable diligence and perseverance. M. Wichern, a man
of unblemished integrity and unwearied benevolence, at a
public meeting in Wittenberg, on the 23rdr of September,
1848, held for the purpose of forming an evangelical con
federation, gave a lengthened statement of the most appal
ling facts. Speaking of the general prevalence and effects of
atheism and pantheism among the artizans, he observes —
"What scenes are enacted within the Herberge (the trades'
hall,) may not be rehearsed before so large an assembly as
this : suffice it to say, that the most fearful orgies of the
ancient heathens have been surpassed in them. Yet Ham
burg is, in this respect, not worse than her neighbours.
Her example may, therefore, be taken as a fair specimen- of

PANTHEISM. 173
all. " How, then, does it stand with her ? One single fact
speaks louder than a thousand arguments, and I will, there
fore, tell you that, recently, in Hamburg, one of the songs
which resounded with applause in the convivial meeting of
a certain trade, ran thus : —
" Curse on the Godhead, the blind and the deaf,
To which heretofore we have pledged our faith ;
On whom we have hoped,<and have waited in vain,
He hath tricked us, and mocked us, and laughed at our pain."
" But neither to Hamburg, nor to all the large cities of the
German fatherland, is the danger arising from its infidel
travelling journeymen limited. Look at the shoals which
overspread Europe ! See Paris, Switzerland, Lyons, Mar
seilles, and London, teeming with them. When, some ten
years ago, the danger of communism, as possibly threatening
us from that quarter, was suggested, it was laughed at as a chi
mera, Now, the thunderbolt has fallen, and no one can shut
his eyes to the magazine in which it has been forged.
" It would be difficult for those who are unacquainted with
this class of the population of Germany to form a conception
of the sophistic attainments of our travelling artizans ! The
dogmas of the most radical philosophy, and the sinthetics
of Hegel's theology, are familiar in their mouths as house
hold words. Neither does practice lag behind theory ; and
they are fully prepared to bide the brunt of what may come
upon them. As " they fear not God, neither do they regard
man." " Switzerland has been the German journeyman's prepara
tory school. There the most unblushing and ultra-atheism
was preached as the, surest .and readiest road to communism.
" I am sorry to be obliged to name as the most prominent
of these atheistic labourers, my own countrymen, William
Marr, a native of Hamburg, and who has recently received
the largest number of votes, as the future representative of
her population. He makes no secret of his sentiments, and,
after having served his apprenticeship to atheism in Swit
zerland, in which, by his own account, he was instrumental
in leading hundreds of his own countrymen to apostatize

174 PANTHEISM.
from God, he was, in 1845, in common with other members
of her communistic clubs, forced to leave that country, where,
as he says in his book, entitled Dasjunge Deutschland, ' Many
hundred Germans, avowed enemies to God, returned to their
native land.'
" Druey got Marr to leave Switzerland (for he was too daring
even for Druey), by urging on him that the leadership of a
German propaganda was his natural sphere. In prosecution
of this suggestion, Marr betook himself successively to Hys-
tein, Hecker, and Robert Blum, and, at length, in pursuance
of his mission, arrived in Hamburg (which is still his head
quarters), everywhere introducing, with fiendish diligence,
atheistic and communistic ideas into the artizan clubs and
associations, and thereby inducing the dissolution of every
earlier and holier tie.
" The aim and undeviating object of these men's lives, is
the promotion and spread of infidelity ; and rank republi
canism, with all its senseless tirade of perfect equality;
fraternity, and community of goods.
" But William Marr does not confine his efforts to Ham
burg, or its vicinity, but, with a zeal worthy a better cause,
travels through the north of Germany, as an avowed mis
sionary of atheism ! In this capacity he was lately in Lubeck
(after having perambulated Holstein), and is believed to be
at this momemt going from village to village, in Lauenburg,
with the demoniac purpose of recruiting the rank of God's
avowed opposers.
" I maintain," says this shameless demagogue, " that
THE BELIEF IN A PERSONAL LIVING «0D IS THE CHIEF FOUNDA
TION AND ORIGIN OF OUR PRESENT WORM-EATEN SOCIAL STATE ;
and further, that so long as mankind shall hang, by a single
hair, to the idea of heaven, there is no happiness to be looked
for on earth." " Christianity, and the existing order of things
which is built upon it, are the true fretting cancers of
human society." " Man himself is the religion of futurity.
GOD STANDS IN NEED OF MAN, BUT MAN HAS NO NEED OF GOD."
Such are the senseless blasphemies published by the man
who has been chosen, by a large majority, as a member of

PANTHEISM. 175
Hamburg's future legislative assembly ! Similar to these are
the sentiments of Itzstuin, Hecker, Simon of Treves, Voght,
and the larger portion of the Frankfort extreme left. Such
are the sentiments entertained by the bulk of the Voigtland
parishioners (in Berlin), of whom their pastor, the Bev. M.
Kunze, sorrowfully testified at the Wittenberg meeting, that
ninety-nine out of every hundred had not merely fallen off
from Christ, but gone over to the enemy ! Such characters
formed the aggregate of the celebrators of Robert Blum's*
requiem in the Church Of St. Thomas, in Leipsic, when such
desecrations were ventured on, that the pious superintendent,
Dr. Grossman, has laid down his pastoral office, in sorrow
and disgust, feeling it impossible ever again to lead Divine
service in the so grossly polluted building. The pulpit was,
it seems, used as a tribune ; from which resounded, not the
praise of Jesus Christ, but of his avowed contemner Blum,
whose bust was placed On the altar, and many of his worship
pers sat smoking cigars while the dirge was being played !"f
These revolting sentiments, alike destructive of social
order, and personal virtue, are not confined to Germany,
France, Switzerland, and other parts of the continent, but,
as might be expected, have become widely diffused in our
own country. Itinerating lecturers are propagating them
in our public institutions. Sometimes a discourse on
science is made the occasion of insinuating doubts, and
administering scepticism in homoeopathic doses to our youth
ful population, and sometimes the poison is offered in large
and intoxicating draughts. Not long since, a popular lec
turer, in Manchester, openly advocated scepticism as a mental
excellency, and, in discoursing on human destiny, is reported
to have averred, that wherever "We see man, whether on
the ale bench, in the brothel, on the treadmill, or the gal
lows, we see him on the high road to dignity, to excellence,
and happiness ! "
* A foreign conspirator, who lately was tried by court martial, and
shot, in Vienna.
+ Abridged from the " Christian Times " for December 8th, 1848.

176 PANTHEISM.
Whether we contemplate the system theoretically, or prac
tically, it is the most outrageous monstrosity which the
human mind has ever yet fabricated, or can fabricate. It is
the ultimatum of absurdity and immorality. It was generated
by conceit, fostered by pride, and matured by the most con
summate depravity. Viewed by the eye of philosophy it is
arrant nonsense, by the eye of morality it is disgustingly
obscene, and by the eye of religion it is horrid blasphemy:
It is repugnant to our reason, and revolting to our moral
sense. It is a foul disgrace to the intellect and character
of man, which it is both humiliating and loathsome to con
template ; and the disgrace is deepened when we think of
the men, the country, and the age, with which the system has
sprung. A maniac could not equal its folly, nor a demon
exceed its wickedness. The prince of darkness himself,
delighting in devastation and misery as he may, could not
desire a more complete abasement of human intellect, a
more entire wreck of the human character and happiness,
a more perfect subversion of the authority and designs of
Almighty God. Its universal prevalence would consum
mate the wishes t>f that apostate and malignant spirit, in
dissolving all the bonds of society, uprooting the foundations
of social order and happiness, and filling the earth with
lust, violence, and blood. We wonder not at the spread of
socialism, communism, libertinism, anarchy, and hatred to
rehgion ; we wonder not that vices are open, crimes unblush
ing, and the vilest of men are held in reputation. There is
a cause ! learning and talent have prostituted their powers
in advocating an atheist lie, and have sent it abroad through
society ; and the he, thus sanctioned, and ministering to the
vilest passions of human nature, has produced the effects
we deplore.
It is time, therefore, to sound an alarm — to exhibit the
character and tendency of this great leading error of the age ;
and it is our duty to call upon ministers of rehgion, sabbath
school teachers, and christian philanthropists of every name,
to employ all lawful means to destroy the baneful system,
and purge society from its malignant influence. To do this,

pantheism.

we must widely circalate the truth — we must bring the truth
into more frequent contact with the multitude of men around
us. and sedulously work its great principles into the minds
of oar youthful population. To zealous labour, we must
unite earnest and believing prayer. We must cry aloud to
Him whose being is denied, whose majesty is insulted, and
whose prerogatives are trampled in the dust, by impious and
presumptuous men. We must not trust in learning or talent,
however splendid, but in the living God. We have seen
enough to make us refrain from deifying the intellect of man.
We must cease from man, whose breath is in his nostrils ;
that breath often becomes pestiferous and blasphemous. We
must lift up our importunate and restless cry to God against
the common foe to himself and human happiness. We must
beseech him to arise and plead his own cause. While strenu
ous exertions engage our right arm,- our united cry must daily
ascend to heaven, " Help us, O Lord our God : for \re rest
on thee, and in thy name we go against this multitude. O
Lord, thou art our God : let not man prevail against thee."

PART II.
THE ATTRIBUTES OF GOD.

CHAPTER I.
Having shown that the testimony of scripture, as to the
existence of God, is abundantly sustained by the conclusions
of reason, we proceed to descant upon the attributes of this
glorious Being. By " attributes," we mean the properties or
qualities which God attributes to himself. The same volume
which declares the existence of God, unfolds the attributes
of his nature and character. It would be gratuitous to sup
pose, that revelation itself has made known to man all the
perfections of Deity ; sufficient, however, for all practical
purposes, is the knowledge which is unfolded respecting the
perfections of our Creator.
God is declared eternal. " Before the mountains were
brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the
world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God."
" Thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity,
whose name is Holy." — Psalm xc, 2. Isaiah, lvii., 15.
God is absolutely perfect, all-sufficient, and independent —
attributes clearly indicated by the sacred name, "Jehovah,"
and theexpressive title, by which he revealed himselfto Moses,
" I am that I am." I am self-existent and independent, deri
ving nothing from another, but communicating all things. " I
am Alpha and Omega ! I am the first and I am the last !
and, beside me, thereis no God." He is the "blessed God;"
" God over all, blessed for evermore." — Bev. i., 8. Isaiah,
xliv., 6. Bomans, ix., 5.
God is immutable. " For I am the Lord, I change not."
He is " the Father of Lights, with whom is no variableness,
neither shadow of turning." — Malachi iii., 6. James i, 17.

THE ATTRIBUTES OF GOD. 179
God is omnipresent. " Whither shall I go from thy spirit,
or, whither shall I flee from thy presence? If I as
cend up into heaven, thou art there : if I make my bed in
hell, behold, thou art there. If I take the wings of the
morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea; even
there shall thy hand lead me, and thy right hand shall hold
me." "But will God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold!
the heaven, and the heavens of heavens, cannot contain
thee!" He "filleth all in all." — Psalm cxxxix., 7 — 10.
1 Kings, viii., 39. Eph., i., 23.
God is omniscient. " He that planteth the ear, Shall he
not hear? He that formed the eye, Shall he not see? "" "I,
the Lord, search the heart.' " There is no darkness, nor
shadow of death, where the workers of iniquity may hide
themselves.'' " For, he looketh to the ends of the earth,
and seeth under the whole heaven." "If I say, Surely the
darkness shall cover me, even the night shall be a hght about
me. Yea, the darkness hideth not from thee ; but the hght
shineth as the day : the darkness and the light are both
alike to thee." " O, the depth of the riches, both of the
wisdom and knowledge of God." " His understanding is
mftnite."' — Psalm xciv., 9. Jer., xvii., 10. Job, xxxiv., 22.;
xxviii., 24. Psalm, cxxxix., 11,12: cxlvii., 5. Bomans, xi.. 33.
God is omnipotent. " I am the Almighty God : walk
before me and be thou perfect." " I know that thou canst
do every thing, and that no thought can be vrithholden from
thee.'' "And Jesus looking upon them, saith, With men
it is impossible, but not with God : for with God all things
are possible." " Alleluia : For the Lord God omnipotent
reigneth." Gen., xvii., 1. Mark, x., 27. Eev., xix., 6.
God is benevolent. ¦¦ And the Lord passed by before him,
and proclaimed, The Lord, the Lord God, merciful and gra
cious, long suffering, and abundant in goodness and truth."
" O give thanks unto the Lord for he is good, for his mercy
endureth for ever." " The Lord is good to all, and his ten
der mercies are over all his works.' "God is love." Exodus,
xxxiv., 6. 1 Chron., xvi.. 34. Psalm, cxlv., 8. 1 John,
iv., 16.

180 THE ATTRIBUTES OF GOD.
God is holy, just, and true. " Be ye holy, for I the Lord
your God am holy." And the seraphim " cried one to
another, saying, holy, holy, holy is Jehovah of hosts : the
whole earth is full of his glory:" " Great and marvellous
are thy works, Lord, God, Almighty ; just and true are thy
ways, thou king of saints. Who would not fear thee O
Lord, and glorify thy name ? for thou only art holy." Lev.
xix., 2. Isa. vi., 3. Eev. xv., 3, 4.
Such is the scriptural representation of the Divine attri
butes in which we have the most purifying and enobling
views of our glorious Creator. These discoveries of his
natural and moral perfections are frequently combined
with the most eloquent and lofty exhibitions of his majes%
and glory. He clothes himself with hght as with a garment.
He stretcheth out the heavens hke a curtain. He layeth
the beams of bis chamber in the waters. He maketh the
clouds his chariot ; and he walketh upon the wings of the
wind. He maketh the heavens his throne, and the earth
his footstool, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers
before him. He measureth the oceans in the hollow of his
hand, and meteth out heaven with the span, and compre-
hendeth the dust of the earth in a measure. He weigheth
the mountains in scales, and the hills in a balance. Behold !
all nations are as a drop of a bucket, and are counted as the
small dust of the balance, and he taketh up the isles as a
very little thing. He bringeth the universe into being
with a word. He said, let there be light, and there was
light. He telleth the number of the stars, and calleth
them all by their names. He looketh on the earth, and it
trembleth ; He toucheth the bills and they smoke. The
thunders are his voice, the hghtnings his arrows. At his
rebuke, the sea retires as affrighted, the sun standeth still,
the heavens gather blackness, and finally he will roll them
together as a parchment scroll, and cause the stars to fall from
their orbs, as a fig-tree easteth forth her untimely fruit, when
shaken by a mighty wind. His throne is unapproachable for
its brightness ; a rainbow spans the terrible chrystal firma
ment: and round about the throne are living ones, cherubim,

THE ATTRIBUTES OF GOD. 181
seraphim, human spirits, angels, thrones, dominions, princi
palities, and powers, who, countless in their number, refulgent
with brightness, and blissful in their estate, pour forth before
him their ceaseless anthems of joy, and eternal hallelujahs
of praise.
The richest imagination of uninspired man — the subhmest
creations of the poet's fancy, could never equal this descrip
tion of the Divine majesty. Nothing but the Spirit of God
could furnish to the human mind such an exhibition of the
majesty and glory of the blessed God. The most admired
odes of heathen antiquity, or of modern genius, are not to •
be compared with these inspired representations of the Al
mighty Jehovah; and yet it must be confessed, that inspira
tion itself, conveyed through the imperfect medium of earthly
symbols, and apprehended by the narrow and feeble grasp
of human intellect, falls short, yea, infinitely short, of fully
setting forth the Godhead to our view.
But, though our conceptions of the Deity are so vastly
inadequate in measure, yet, they may, in some respects, be
correct and true, if we allow them to be formed by a sober
regard to the representations furnished in Holy Scripture.
Though much of the language of inspiration is figurative,
yet, it must be remembered that we are not at hberty to
resolve all the scriptural exhibitions of God into mere
figures of speech. It has, indeed, been maintained, that
the attributes of Deity are of a nature altogether different
from the mental and moral faculties of the human mind,
and, that the analogy between the powers of the human
mind, and the perfections of God, is very remote, and has
in it no more of real resemblance " than a map of China
has to China itself. " Archbishop King remarks, " We
ought to remember that the descriptions which we frame to
ourselves of God, or of the Divine attributes, are not taken
from any direct or immediate perceptions that we have of
him or them ; but from some observations we have made of
his works, and from the consideration of those qualifications,
that we conceive would 'enable us to perform the hke. It
doth not truly follow from hence, that God must have either

182 THE ATTBIBUTES OF GOD.
these or other faculties equivalent to them, and adequate to
these mighty effects which proceed from them . And, because
we do not know what his faculties are in themselves, we
give them the names of those powers that we find would be
necessary to us in order to produce such effects, and call
them wisdom, understanding, and forelmowledge ; yet, at
the same time, we eannot but be sensible that they are of a
nature altogether different from ours, and that we have no
direct and proper notion or conception of them."
We demur to this representation as being inaccurate, and
calculated both to obscure our conceptions of the Divine
Being, and almost obliterate the impressions of scriptural
truth. We grant, indeed, that the language of scripture is
often figuratively employed in setting forth the Divine Being,
and is to be interpreted soberly. We grant, that when the
Divine Majesty is represented by the pomp and georgeous
costume of eastern royalty, when the members of the human
body and some inferior passions of the human soul are
ascribed to Deity, the language is anthropomorphic and
highly figurative ; but we cannot, on this account, allow
all the exhibitions of the Divine character and attributes to
be resolved into such distant analogies as exist between a
map and the country depicted. We cannot admit the notion
that the attributes of Deity " are of a nature altogether
different from those of the human mind, and that we have
no proper conception of them." Dark and enigmatical,
indeed, must be the scriptures, and erroneous, as well as
inadequate, must be the views we gather from them, if such
were the case. We feel compelled to reject the representa
tion of Dr. King as being unphilosophical as well as unscrip-
tural. We contend, that, with regard to faculties and
properties, there is a true and real resemblance. That, in
reference to both mental and moral attributes, there is an
actual representation as to their nature, however vast the
disparity in measure and degree.
What, in fact, is the difference in duration, as it applies
to God and man, but that in man it is finite, while in God
it is infinite ? The nature of duration in both, is the same.

THE ATTRIBUTES OF GOD. 183
What is tlie difference in knowledge or wisdom, as it applies
to Deity and to man ? We conceive it is the same in both
as to its nature, though infinitely different as to its perfec
tion and degree. What is volition but the self-determina
ting act of a free mind whether in the creature or the
Creator ? What is the difference in love, in truth, in faith
fulness, in justice, in hohness, as they exist in the mind of
God and man ? Is not love an affection of complacency
and delight in an object ? Is not truth the conformity of
our perceptions to things ? Is not faithfulness the confor
mity of our purposes, dispositions, and actions, to truth ?
Is not justice the regulation of all our dispositions and eon-
duct by the principles of truth and faithfulness towards
others ? Is not holiness freedom from and aversion to
moral evil, and love to all that is good ? Are not these
principles essentially the same in all ages, in all minds, and
in all worlds? Do they part with their essence or become
changed in their nature by existing in minds of different
order and capacity? We conceive they do not. Whether
they exist in the mind of man, angel, or God, "they are
essentially and eternally the same in their nature. Here
is the only difference : in the creature they are limited, in
the Creator infinite ; in man they are mixed with infirmity
and often with qualities of an opposite kind, but in Jehovah
their lustre is untarnished by any alloy — they exist in abso
lute perfection, in unchanging harmony and beauty — they are
united to ia mind of infinite capacity and iinchanging recti
tude. Gold is gold whether in the rude heterogeneous mass
of -owe, or in the pure and refined ingot; whether in the
diminutive quantity of a grain, or a ponderous massive
globe. tSo with regard to those faculties and properties of
mind, indicative of excellence, there is a real resemblance
between the creature 'and the Creator.
Similar views are expressed by the most eminent Theolo
gians. Watson observes, " When it is said" God is a Spirit, '
we have no reason to conclude, that a distant analogy, such
a one as -springs out of mere relation, which, in a poetic
imagination, might be sufficient to supporta-figu-reof speech,

184 THE ATTRIBUTES OF GOD,
is alone intended. The very argument connected with these
words in the discourse of our Lord with the woman of
Samaria forbids this. It is a declaration of the nature of
God, and of the worship suited to his nature ; and the word
employed is that by which both Jews and Samaritans had
been taught by the sacred inspired records, which they each
possessed; to designate and conceive of the intellectual
nature of man. The nature of God and the nature of man
are not the same, but they are similar, because they bear
many attributes in common, though, on the part of the
Divine nature, in a degree of perfection infinitely exceeding."*
Howe says, " The Godhead is of a nature nearly resembling
our own souls, and the higher excellencies of the best of his
creatures, although eminently containing in himself also all
the real perfections, virtues, and powers of all the rest."-)-
Bobert Hall remarks, " The body has a tendency to separate
us from God by the dissimilarity of its nature; the soul, on
the contrary, unites us again to him by means of those
principles and faculties which, though infinitely inferior, are
of a character congenial with his own. The body is the
production of God, the soul is his image. "J
We have, however, higher authority than that of human
reason ; for, not only does revelation represent the Deity
under the designation of Spirit — the same word as that
applied to the human soul — but, in setting forth the creation
of man, it expressly declares him to have been created in
the image and likeness of God. " And God said, let us make
man in our image, after our likeness." " So God created
man in his own image, in the image of God created he him."
In .this repetition of the affirmation, expressed in the same
terms,' there is an emphasis intended — calling our attention
to the meaning of the phraseology and the importance of the
fact set forth. Here, then, we have a resemblance definitely
affirmed, and that resemblance expressed by the terms " like
ness " and " image." We know not what words the Holy
* Institutes, chap. iv. + Howe's Living Temple, part ii., chap. 8.
} Sermon on the Spirituality of the Divine Nature.

THE ATTRIBUTES OF GOD. 183
Spirit could have employed more definitely expressive of a
real and proper resemblance. It will not be pretended that
the resemblance applies to man's corporeal nature, for, God
is a Spirit, and there must be a total dissimilarity in his
essence and properties. In the human spirit, then, and the
Divine Spirit, the Creator, we are authorized to look for the
resemblance intended. The soul of man in its spiritual
essence, in its natural attributes, and in its moral qualities
too, prior to its depravity by sin, and after its renovation by
grace, has a real resemblance to God. Originally it was
created in his image and likeness, and, when purified and
sanctified by the Holy Spirit, it is said to be renewed " after
the image of him who created it. " On this passage Matthew
Henry observes, " that the two words, image and likeness,
express the same thing, and make each other the more
expressive. Image and likeness denote the likest image,
the nearest resemblance of any of the visible creatures.
Man was not made in the likeness of any creature that went
before him, but in the likeness of his Creator. " Then this
sensible Divine goes on to state the particular points of
resemblance between the soul of man and God, which were
— 1. Its nature and constitution. 2. Its authority and
dominion. 3. Its purity and rectitude. Dr Adam Clarke
also remarks on the same important passage. " The image
and likeness must, necessarily, be intellectual ; his mind,
his soul, must have been formed after the nature and per
fections of God." As Theodorus Mopsuestenus quaintly
saith, " When God created man, his last and best work, This
was as if a certain king, having built a great city, and
adorned it with many and various works, after he had per
fected all, should command a very great and beauteous image
of himself f o be set up in the midst of the city, to show who
was the builder of it."*
We grant there are qualities and properties in man, in
dicative of the weakness and dependence of its nature ;
these cannot be ascribed to God. Again, there are some
attributes in the Deity which cannot be ascribed to man.
* Ap. Petav. T. iii., Lib. 3.
Z

186 THE ATTRIBUTES OF GOD.
But, all the mental and moral properties of a human soul,
expressive of the excellence and perfection of its nature, are
characteristic of similar attributes in the Deity, in whom, from
the self-existence and infinitude of his nature, they reside
in boundless plentitude and unchanging glory. The consi
deration of this important truth will aid us as we proceed
further in our contemplations of the Divine character.
Having so far adduced the instructions of the sacred records
with regard to the Divine attributes, we shall in the sub
sequent chapters, show that the conclusions of sound reason
accord with the declarations of inspired truth, on these most
interesting subjects.

CHAPTER II.

THE ETERNITY OF GOD.

" From everlasting to everlasting, thou art God." — Psalm xc, 2.

The existence of an Eternal something was proved under
the first and second propositions, and is admitted by all men.
That this eternal something is not nature itself, but a con
scious and intelligent Being, was demonstrated in the third,
fourth, and fifth propositions. The eternity of God, therefore,
follows as a necessary truth. The process of reasoning which
proves that he now exists, proves that he has always existed,
and, being self-existent, he must continue to exist for ever.
He lives, but has had no commencement, and will have no
end. There was nothing to originate him, there can be
nothing to destroy him. He is before, above, and indepen
dent, of all that he has made. Possessing essential life in
himself, he has given hfe to innumerable beings of various
natures, some of whom quickly perish, and others by his
appointment, will continue in life for ever ; and their im
mortal nature is the most impressive image we have of
Jehovah's eternity. Though our origin is of yesterday, it
will be perpetuated long as that of our infinite Creator.
This speaks the transoendant dignity of our nature, and
closely allies the finite with the infinite mind ; yet,
though our nature resembles his, in our powers and faculties,
there is an infinite disparity. A moment's thought reveals
our feebleness. We cannot grasp even in conception, that
duration he possesses and enjoys. We cannot comprehend
eternity ; we have no definite or adequate idea of it. All our
positive ideas fall infinitely short thereof. After wearying
ourselves with numbers, multiplying millions by millions, and
bringing all the aid which imagination can supply, to swell the

188 THE ETERNITY OF GOD.
aggregate, we feel compelled, at length, to fall back upon a
mere negation, as the best conception we can form of this
sublime and overwhelming subject, and can only say, His
existence is without beginning, and without end. Mysteri
ous and incomprehensible as eternity is, it is not the less
so when contemplated purely, as a mental abstraction, than
when applied to the existence of Deity ; and however mys
terious to contemplate something as really eternal, it is
an impossibility to avoid admitting it as a truth. To deny
it, is to escape from a mystery by plunging into an absur
dity. The difficulty and mysteriousness in relation to
eternity is not theological, but metaphysical, and a similar
difficulty is felt in relation to all mathematical infinities.
While the great truth of God's eternal existence,' defies our
comprehension, it equally defies our contradiction, and
irresistibly commands our assent.
The first attribute, then, which the mind ascribes to Jeho
vah, fills it with humility and awe. While it settles our
convictions, because its bright evidence induces our assent
as an intellectual necessity, it transcends our powers as infi
nity surpasses unity ; and its overpowering grandeur lays
us prostrate before the Most High. We feel, indeed, the
ground beneath us is a rock of adamant, which nothing can
remove, but the awful and interminable line of duration,
stretching into the past and the future, bewilders our imagi
nation, and makes us shrink into insignificance. Through
all the ages past, Jehovah lived ; through those vast periods
of time, during the slow formation of the prodigious strata
which build up the earth's foundations, he lived : ere the
primitive atoms of matter had coalesced into globular masses,
he lived : all the cycles through which they have run are
as nothing pompared with his eternal duration. Nay, if we
recede still farther into the awful abyss of his duration,
until we pass beyond the first moment of creation, when
the universe was unborn — when there was neither a revolv
ing world, nor a solitary atom — when the sacred throne
was not surrounded by cherub, seraph, or the first-born of
spirits — when universal nature was a universal blank — when

THE ETERNITY OF GOD. 189
the holy place itself was occupied only by the radiant sche-
chinah, and Jehovah dwelt in loneliness, without a purpose
unfolded by any objective manifestation; — even then, we
are only on the frontiers of his eternity, and the ages through
which imagination has pierced, or may yet pierce, compared
with his existence, are only as a unit to the infinite.
During those infinite ages, Jehovah was what he is now —
• his perfections, like his essence, are all eternal; and, during
those infinite ages yet to come, he will remain the same,
without addition or diminution, in the essential attributes
of ^ls nature..
The schoolmen, and after them many modern writers, have
greatly mystified and perplexed this subhme doctrine, by a
conceit which, to us, seems equally unsupported by scripture
and reason. The eternity of God is described as duratio
tota simul — duration without succession, or one eternal now.
We are told that "the infinite perfection excludeth from
God successive thoughts, as well as successive duration,
which seem inconsistent both with eternity, and with infinite
perfection." Charnock says, "There is no succession in
God ; " " God hath his whole being in one and the same
point, or moment of eternity. " "As nothing is past or future
with him in regard of knowledge, but all things are present,
so nothing is past or future of his essence. " " Of a creature
it may be said, he was, or he is, or he shall be ; of God, it
cannot be said, but only he is."* Dwight says, " His du
ration is a mere and Eternal now. In our own existence,
the clearest resemblance to the duration of God, is found in
the contemplation of a single present moment of our being,
without taking at all into our view the succession even of
that which immediately follows." " He fills eternity at once,
and does not come from the past, go by the present, and
enter the future, "f
However great the names by which such a notion is
maintained, we can no more assent to it than we can to two
• contradictory propositions. To us, it appears a jargon of
* Charnock on the Eternity of God.
+ Dwight's Sermons, v.

190 THE ETERNITY OF GOD.
unintelligible words, darkening the understanding, and
mystifying one of the simplest yet most important truths of
the christian religion.
1. It is certainly repugnant to the representation which
the sacred scriptures give of God's eternity. The inspired
writers freely speak of Jehovah's existence in ages past, at
the present moment, and in ages to come, without any inti
mation that their language is not to be understood in its
customary sense. Jehovah, speaking of himself, says, " I
am the First and I am the Last ; and beside me there is no
God." " I am Alpha and Omega, saith the Lord God, who
is, whe, was, and who is to come." — Isaiah 44, 6. — Bevela-
tion, 1, 8. In accordance with this representation, they
speak of some of his purposes which have been fulfilled, of
others now fulfilling, and of others to be fulfilled in ages to
come ', and the existence ot purposes which are not yet accom
plished refers to the Divine contemplation a succession both
of time and events, like that which engages our own minds.
In opposition, however, to this view, we are referred to a
few passages which are supposed to favour the scholastic
representation of. the Nunc semper stans — the Eternal now.
It is alleged, that God is said to " inhabit eternity." But
this passage is conformable to the popular view of the subject,
and says nothing which confounds past with present and fu
ture duration. Indeed, if his existence be absolutely without
beginning or end, he must inhabit eternity. Again: we are
referred to the declaration of Peter, " That one day is with
the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as1 one
day." But this passage merely asserts the obvious truth,
that as all finite duration bears no proportion to the infi
nite, so apparent length of time, indicates neither forgetful-
nessnor indifference with God, as to the ultimate fulfilment
of his purposes, nor the want of means to accomplish his
will. Moreover, the mentioning of " years " and " days " in
this passage, confirms the popular view of this subject —
it admits their reality even in reference to the Divine
existence, though it asserts their insignificance contrasted
with his eternity. This is more expressly obvious in

THE ETERNITY OF GOD. 191
the corresponding passage in the Old Testament : — " For
a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it
is passed, and as a watch in the night." The declaration
that he is "the same yesterday, and to-day, and for ever," is
an affirmation of the unchangeable nature of Christ and his
office ; and if applied to his eternity, the terms employed,
clearly admit, beoause they express, the past, the present,
and the future. If it be alleged, that the representation of
this subject in the sacred volume is given in popular phrase
ology, in condescension to our capacities, we reply : —
2. The scholastic representation is as repugnant to philo
sophy as it is to the phraseology of the sacred records. It
contradicts our consciousness, and our experience. We have
before noticed that we get the idea of time from the succes-
tion of our ideas and the motions of bodies. If time be
contemplated apart from the actual existence of any being,
it is merely a mental abstraction, and if applied to the exist
ence of any being, it denotes its actual duration or continu
ance in being. This continuance certainly consists of such
a flow or succession, that the past is distinct from the present,
and both are distinct from the future ; and this distinction
is as real and essential as that between any two things, how
ever diverse in their properties. Therefore, to demand from
us to conceive of past and future ages as co-existent with
the present moment, is to require an impossibility; Those
who require it from us cannot do it themselves, and if this
cannot be done with regard either to time in the abstract,
or the duration of any created object, neither can it be done
in reference to God. We may as well try to conceive every
particle of matter to occupy the same point, as attempt to
conceive the past, present, and future being of Deity, to be
co-existent with the present instant. In fact, this notion is as
repugnant to God's eternity, as it is contradictory to our
consciousness and experience.
8; The advocates of the scholastic notion were indeed
influenced by motives the very opposite to the logical result
of their argument — they having conceived and defended the
dogma, as necessary to the absolute perfection of the Creator.

192 THE ETERNITY OF GOD.
Thus, Cudworth and others contend, that an existence
through successive duration is the characteristic of an im
perfect nature— a nature "expecting something of itself,
which is not yet in being, but to come; " whereas, the infi
nitely perfect Creator, " hath a permanent duration, never
losing anything of itself once present, as sliding away from
it, nor yet running forwards to meet something of itself
before, which is not yet in being. "* This succession is
also declared to be incompatible with God's perfection in
knowledge ; and, therefore, it is contended, " that infinite
perfection excludeth from the idea of God successive thoughts
as well as successive duration ; " — successive thoughts, it is
contended, " are plainly an imperfection, and argue a
progress in knowledge."!
The fallacy of the objection, here stated, lies in the
erroneous supposition, that successive duration necessarily
implies a change in nature, which it certainly does not
Whether a being change or not, depends not upon his
duration, but upon the nature of the being, whether perfect
and independent, or dependent and. imperfect. Duration
is simply continuance of being, and, though this duration
implies succession or flow of time, it takes nothing from
the nature of the being. What diminution of the glorious
attributes of the Deity can we suppose to be effected by
the mere continuance of his existence ? What had he a
a year since, or a thousand years, which he has not at this
moment? Does continuance in being deprive him of
happiness ? Does it detract from his knowledge, or power,
or self-sufficiency ? Impossible : for the source of these
perfections is in himself, and mere time can no more diminish
these than it can diminish his essence. Nor does the flow
of time, or continuance in Being, involve, as the schoolmen
suppose, an expectation of receiving something, or adding
to the amount of his knowledge and happiness. As an
absolutely perfect Being, his knowledge and enjoyment are
infinite, "not progressive. From eternity he knew all things,
* Oudworth's Intellectual System, 645.
+ Vide Brocklesby's Theism, 80S.

THE ETERNITY OF GOD. 193
whether actual or possible, and his enjoyment flowed from
his own exalted and absolutely perfect nature ; consequently
he has nothing to expect to constitute the fulness of his
felicity. If it be said that a succession of time or duration
implies a portion of duration lost, and an expectation of future
existence, We reply, there can be nothing lost to a Being
whose existence is eternal. His existence and perfections
are unimpaired, and the consciousness of present existence,
conjoined with the knowledge that his existence can never
terminate, is no imperfection, but an infinite excellency, and,
indeed, the foundation of every other excellency.
The consciousness which human beings have of successive
duration, does not detract from their nature or happiness,
nor can we conceive they would have realized a more exalted
state, or a greater degree of enjoyment, if their mental con
stitution had been so formed as to render them unconscious
of this succession. On the contrary, our knowledge and
expectation of immortality contribute greatly to our happi
ness, and evince our superiority of nature; and what thus
marks the excellence of our nature cannot be an imperfection
in the Deity. We do, indeed, change : we lose both know
ledge and happiness, and again we receive accessions to both ;
but all our changes arise not from a consciousness of succes
sion in our duration, but from the imperfection of our nature.
We lose what we have because of our feebleness, and we
receive accessions because we have not sufficiency in our
selves. Defect, limitation, and dependence, characterize our
nature, and, hence we change : fulness, infinitude, and
all-sufficiency, characterize the Deity, and hence, during the
flow of ages, he remains the same.
4. The scholastic notion which denies to the Deity any
consciousness of the succession of thoughts and events, so
far from being necessary to a correct view of the Divine per
fections, is positively derogatory to them ; for it involves
ignorance and delusion ; it makes God conceive of things
contrary to what they actually are. There is, in reality, a
succession of events and of duration ; this cannot be denied.
Therefore, to deny that God's thoughts coincide with facts,
a

194

THE ETERNITY OF GOD.

is to suppose him ignorant, and to deny that they coincide
with truth, is to suppose him deceived. We must, therefore,
reject this notion, as unworthy of God, and unworthy of the
great names by which it has been put forth. It removes
not the absurdity, to maintain that, to the mind of a Being
of infinite knowledge, all things must be present at one and
the same instant. We grant, that " known unto God are all
his works from the beginning," but he knows them as they
actually are, and not as they really are not. He does not
know that to exist now which does not yet exist, nor that which
is past or future to be present. His knowledge is according
to truth. Things may be contemplated as actual or pos
sible ; as intended or accomplished. Prior to creation, the
ideas or archetypes of the universe were in the Creator's mind,
and then creation must have been contemplated by him as a
future event; but when the things were created, his mind be
held the various objects in actual existence, and was conscious
of the difference between the ideal audi the actual — the purpose
and the accomplishment; and here we have a succession of
thought. So with regard to each generation of human
beings, the rise and fall of empires, the fulfilment of his own
predictions, the accomplishment of his purposes, and all
other events, there must be a distinction between the ideal and
the actual, and, consequently, between the present, the past,
and the future. This distinction involves such a succession
of thought, as excludes all ignoranoe and deception, and
corresponds with truth and reality. We, therefore, dismiss
the scholastic figment, and wonder that a notion so contra
dictory and absurd should have found so many abettors
among the wise and the good. We adhere to the scriptural
representation of God's existence as being strictly conform
able to common sense, and sound philosophy. " Before
the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed
the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting,
thou art God."

CHAPTEB III.

ABSOLUTE PERFECTION.

Who is over all, God, blessed for ever." — Romans ix. 5.

A conscious intelligent Being, whose existence is eternal,
must possess absolute perfection. " To such a Being infi
nity may be justly ascribed ; and infinity, not extrinsically
considered, with respect to time and place, but intrinsically,
as importing bottomless profundity of essence, and the full
confluence of all kinds and degrees of perfection." Limi
tation implies defect, and when the attributes of any being
are limited, there is a cause for the limitation. Thus,
every creature is limited, because the Creator has given to
each a finite capacity, and a finite measure of any good
which it may possess. The capacity may be filled, but it
is limited. No such cause of limitation, however, is appli
cable to the Divine nature, for he is uncaused. He receives
neither his existence nor his capacity from another, but, as
already proved, is self-existent and eternal. It is, therefore,
irrational to ascribe limitation to him, for it is to suppose an
effect without a cause — an effect where it is impossible there
could be any effect. Existing from all eternity, there
was no extraneous cause to limit or fix bounds to any of his
glorious perfections ; nor could there be any intrinsic cause
to produce that result, for every nature delights in its own
perfection. Eternity of existence is itself an infinite perfec
tion, and implies, in an intelligent nature, the actual and
eternal possession of every other perfection. In such a
Being, it is impossible to conceive the existence of defect,
and this impossibility involves an intellectual necessity of
supposing, on the contrary, the actual existence of every
element of perfection, and that in boundless measure and
degree.

ABSOLUTE PERFECTION.

INDEPENDENCE.

Absolute perfection involves Independence. All God's attri
butes and perfections being eternal, as well as his essence, -
they depend on nothing exterior to himself. There never
was a period when they were not in him in the same infinite
measure and degree as they are at this moment ; and there
never will be a period when they will be either augmented
or diminished. Had no creature as yet existed, he would
possess the same glorious perfections ; and if no creature
ever were to exist throughout eternity, he would be the same.
Creation adds nothing to him ; it can only present objective
manifestations of what is in him, and always was in him
from eternity ; and if there had been no objective manifesta
tion at all, God would still have been essentially and
absolutely perfect. The great truth, thus established, is cal
culated to inspire intelligent beings with admiration of the
Divine character, and excite unceasing thirst to know more
of God. Infinity and perfection being impressed upon every
attribute , they invest him with unfading and eternal glory , and
establish, in sanctified minds, an assurance that there are in
God, treasures of knowledge and enjoyment never to be ex
hausted, and beauties in the Divine character, to be unfolded
to their astonishment and delight, world without end.
ALL-SUFFICIENCY.
Absolute, perfection involves All-Sufficiency. A created
mind has capacities without intrinsic and independent re
sources to replenish and satisfy them. The knowledge and
enjoyment of all creatures are derived, and derived from
sources extrinsic to themselves. " Whoever retires into his
own mind for happiness, will soon find himself miserable ;
he will feel imprisoned until he is permitted to go forth and
unite himself in affection and confidence to something out
of himself. Hence, those who are most insulated and cut off
from all contact with others, are styled, by way of distinction,
misers, and are truly the most miserable of men. There
cannot be a greater picture of abject wretchedness, than a

ABSOLUTE PERFECTION. 197
man, entirely confined to himself, possessing none of those
sensibilities which attach mind to mind, and heart to heart,
— a stranger to that reciprocation of feeling and affection
between kindred minds, which is the very balm of life."*
This is a necessary result of our imperfect and dependent
nature, and it characterizes the highest created intelligence
in the universe, as well as ourselves ; all finite natures are
dependent upon sources extrinsical to themselves, for the
knowledge and enjoyment requisite to fill their capacities.
On the contrary, God is All-sufficient, in and of himself.
Both his capacities and resources are infinite, and his re
sources are all in himself. The boundless ocean of his own
nature affords scope for all his infinite faculties, and reple
nishes his mind with infinite enjoyment. Thus it was
before the fiat of creation went forth ; thus it was from all
eternity ; and thus it would have been if the stupendous
operations of creative energy had been postponed myriads
of ages ; and, indeed, thus it would have been, had he con
tinued to exist in absolute solitude for all eternity to come.
But though he is dependent upon no creature, all creatures
are necessarily dependent upon him, and all intellectual
and moral natures must derive their supreme happiness
from him. Whatever rivulets of enjoyment may flow from
the creature, our capacities can never be filled, except from
the ocean of bliss, which essentially dwells in the Creator.
Such being the law under which all finite natures are placed,
how exhilarating the assurance, that God is All-sufficient,
— that the fountain is perennial and inexhaustible. That
which has filled the capacities of the Deity through all eter
nity past, can never be expended by the claims and desires
of the creature through all eternity to come. The capacities
and wants of the finite, are as nothing to the treasures of
the infinite — " The fulness of him that filleth all in all. "
IMMUTABILITY.
I. An absolutely perfect being, must be Immutable.
Change is the law of all created existence. Nothing is
* Eobert Hall on the Spirituality of the Divine Nature.

198 ABSOLUTE PERFECTION.
absolutely stable and unvarying but the Deity. The mate
rial universe is running through a course of gradual but
certain change. One generation cometh and another goeth.
The ocean shifts its place, the mountains are crumbling
into ruin, chemical activities are seeking repose, the earth
is narrowing her orb, and is destined to destruction. Simi
lar changes are transpiring in other orbs, and analogy points
to universal dissolution, as the destiny of the countless
myriads of systems, which faintly shed their light upon our
planet. The universe of mind, too, is changing, and des
tined to change. Some intelligent beings, once holy and
happy, have fallen and lost their blest estate. Others are
in a process of merciful recovery ; and others passing from
a life transient and trying, to one of immortality and glory.
The most blessed in heaven are changing by accessions of
knowledge and enjoyment, and a greater exaltation awaits
them at the resurrection, to be succeeded by growing honours
and accumulating blessedness for ever. The law of progres
sion seems to belong to all minds, and all the various orders
of angelic beings seem destined to advance with us, both in
their faculties and attainments throughout eternity. The
scale of being on our planet, too, has advanced through
successive ages, and after another catastrophe, may be the
abode of beings of a higher nature than any which have yet
trod its surface.
II. But amid all this change and progression in the
universe of matter and of mind, there is One who remains
unchangeable — the everlasting God. Eternity, self-existence,
independence, and all-sufficiency, involve an unchangeable
nature. He cannot change by augmentation or improve
ment, for infinite and absolute perfection, admits not of
increase or progression. He cannot change by diminution
or decay, for his whole nature and attributes being self-
existent, are not contingent, but necessary. He cannot
change by deterioration, for on the one hand, as a perfect
being he cannot but delight in the continuance of his own
perfection ; and on the other hand, being independent, he
is superior to all incidents, and to the operation of all second

ABSOLUTE PERFECTION. 199
causes. All change implies limitation and imperfection,
both of which we have seen are excluded from the nature of
God. All his attributes being equally eternal and necessary
with his essence, they can no more change than his essence.
He is, therefore, immutable. Beason accords with his own
divine declaration, "lam Jehovah, I change not. "
III. Yet the immutability of God, does not exclude the
exercise of dispositions and affections, nor involve a stoical
indifference to the welfare of his creatures generally, or the
character which may be assumed by intelligent and moral
agents. Such an apathetic Deity, however conformable to
the notions of heathen philosophers, is totally repugnant
to the dictates of sound reason and the teachings of inspira
tion. All intelligent beings have dispositions and affections,
and though some of these, such as fear, sorrow, sadness,
and the hke, are evidences of an inferior and dependent
nature, and cannot exist in God, yet others, such as love,
complacency, delight &c, are evidences of a superior nature,
and do dwell in the mind of Deity. It is quite evident that
to abstract these latter qualities from mankind, would be to
deteriorate human nature. It is, indeed, within the scope of
these affections, that all the moral excellencies of our nature
are evolved, and without them, however intellectual a man
might be, he could exhibit no moral excellencies; in fact, in
a state of total apathy, we cannot see how he could be a
moral agent. It is, therefore, irrational to suppose the Deity
destitute of affections. The qualities which constitute either
intellectual or moral excellencies in man, must exist in the
Creator, and exist too, in infinite plenitude and perfection.
Possessing these affections, Jehovah does not look with in
difference upon the conduct of men; for apathetic indifference
as to moral actions, would argue an imperfection in his
sectoral character as the governor of the universe, just as the
absence of all affections, would involve a defect in his nature.
From Tiis exalted throne he beholds the conduct of all men,
and while he approves the righteous, and regards them with
affection, he condemns the conduct of the wicked, and regards
it with abhorrence.

200 ABSOLUTE PERFECTION.
IV. — Neither does immutability involve absolute uniform
ity of action or relation. God creates and he destroys ; he
kills and he makes alive ; he raises up and he casts down ;
he exalts to glory and he consigns to endless ruin ; yet, in
all this, there is no change in God. He foresaw the end
from the beginning, so that he is never disappointed or
taken by surprise by any result — has never to alter his plan
to meet any unexpected contingency or emergency. All
that the creature does, he foreknew ; and all that he does
himself, he had pre-determined. His purposes are stable,
for they were laid by unerring wisdom, and his nature
and character are unchangeable, though his operations
are diversified. A righteous man may fall from the Di
vine favour, but it is because the man himself has changed
in his character by sin ; and a wicked man may rise into the
Divine love, but it is because he becomes changed by repen
tance. God may deal with nations as he does with individuals.
The Jews may be cut off from the olive, and the Gentiles be
grafted in ; the hght of truth may expire in eastern churches ;
and western nations, which sat in darkness, may emerge
into the day-spring of gospel privilege ; but, in all these
events, the change is in man, not in God. The one has
rejected privileges, and they are withdrawn ; the other has
improved them, and they are increased. The fact, that when
men change in their character, they change also in their
relation to God, is a further proof of God's immutabihty. It
is because his law, his love of holiness, and the principles
of his moral government, are unchangeable, that the repent
ant are accepted, and the impenitent rejected — that the
righteous are approved, and the wicked are cast out. As the
sun shines at midnight with equal brightness, though we
are involved in darkness, and as his beams are diffused
with the same genial and vivifying power in winter, though
we shiver with cold, and our hemisphere is covered with
barrenness and desolation , so God is the same in his na
ture, perfections, and laws, though our conduct may change
our condition from happiness to misery, from favour to con
demnation. " With him is no variableness, neither the sha-

ABSOLUTE PERFECTION. 201
dow of a turning." The only uniformity necessary in the
operations of God, is this — that the works of his hand should
always accord with the perfections of his nature — that the
principles of his government should harmonize with the
attributes of his character — and that his relation to his crea
tures should be in accordance with those principles. " Were
it at all possible, that the product of any act of his power
should be out of harmony with any attribute of his character,
it would cease to be possible for his creatures, to read nature's
lesson with any clearness, or to arrive at truth with any cer
tainty. The fault, in that case, would not be in the reader,
but in the book. The oracle being ambiguous, no blame
could be attatched to those who understood it in different
ways. These things are sufficiently plain  In all his
procedure, we must, without doubt, conceive of him as acting
in the strictest agreement with the immutable principles of
his character. By these principles, therefore, essentially
and eternally inherent in his nature, he was guided in the
formation of the universe — in fixing the constitutions, allot
ting the circumstances, and adjusting the mutual relations,
of all his creatures ;"* and by these principles he is guided
still. The sum of this is, that as God cannot contradict
himself, his works must agree with his nature. This agree
ment flows from his absolute perfection, and is everywhere
seen in His works. His wisdom, power, goodness, truth,
justice, and hohness, harmoniously beam forth in creation,
in providence, and in his moral administration, especially
as contemplated in the light of revelation, and with due
reference to the future state of moral agents. Thus, his
works are a running comment upon his unehangingcharac-
ter from age to age. The acts of power are directed by wis
dom, and both wisdom and power accomplish the purposes
of goodness ; and the purposes of goodness harmonize with
the dictates of truth and justice. However multiplied and
diversified the operations of Deity, no attribute of his nature
is ever infringed upon by his works ; they are subject to no col-
* Wardlaw's Christian Ethics, p. 216.
b

202 ABSOLUTE PERFECTION.
lision, no compromise, no change, and, however varying the
character and condition of the creature, God is eternally the
same. V. Again, the immutability of God does not involve
fatalism, or imply the existence and control of any absolute
necessity in his operations. The scriptures everywhere
describe the Deity as acting with perfect freedom of choice
and will — a voluntary, self-determining power, directed by
intelhgence and goodness. He doeth all things " according
to the good pleasure of his will." This doctrine is abun
dantly sustained by reason. The notion of necessity, or
fatalism, is contradicted both by the Nature and the Works
of God.
1. His nature contradicts the doctrine of necessity.
(a) He is eternal and self-existent, and cannot be under
any physical necessity, because, as he existed before all
things, there could be nothing, originally, to induce that
necessity ; and since creation, there could be no such
physical necessity, because, nothing exists but what he
himself has freely brought into being ; and every creature
is subject to him while he is subordinate to nothing, but
superior to all.
(6) His intelligence refutes the notion of necessity. Ab
solute necessity is blind, and acts without knowledge or
choice, but we have before proved that his intelligence con
templated a purpose in multitudes of instances, and elected
means for their accomplishment. Every proof of such intel
ligence and choice, expresses the freedom of the Deity, and
totally disproves the notion of necessity.
(c) His absolute perfection refutes this doctrine. A being
which acts from necessity, acts subordinately to a superior
power, but Deity is absolutely perfect, and can have neither
superior nor equal ; on the contrary, all things are infinitely
inferior to him, and absolutely dependent upon him. A
being acting from necessity is of the lowest species of existence,
for all things rise in dignity in proportion to their freedom.
Thus, inanimate matter has no choice, but is necessarily and
absolutely subject to the gevernment or control of the laws

ABSOLUTE PERFECTION. 203
impressed upon it. The lowest animal which has voluntary
motion, is higher than the most elaborate modification of
matter, and than the highest form of vegetable existence ;
but man, whose actions are voluntary and free, who is con
scious of an elective and self-determining principle, is the
highest creature upon earth. If, then, the Creator be of a
higher nature than the creature, he must be perfectly free.
Indeed, he could not have given freedom to man, had he
not been absolutely free himself — he could not have made
man a moral agent had he not himself been an intelligent
and a voluntary Being.
2. All the works of God evince his freedom, and contra
dict the notion of necessity.
(a) An absolute Necessity must have a~cted eternally, but
we have proved that there was a time when the universe
had no existence.
(6) Necessity must act with absolute uniformity, but in
the works of God there is a boundless variety, and a succession
of changes therein from age to age.
(c) Necessity must act up to the utmost limit of the powers
which it constrains and employs ; and as the attributes of
God are infinite, they must, if thus influenced and deter
mined by necessity, produce infinite results, whereas nothing •
is more evident, than that every creature is finite itself, and
that all creation put together is finite and limited.
id) Necessity must not only have acted uniformly from all
eternity past, but continue to act through all eternity to
come, producing nothing but the same results for ever ; but
we have proved both that creation has had a beginning, and
that it must have an end. The idea, therefore, of God being
influenced by necessity, is a mere figment of the imagination,
alike contradicted by his word, his nature, and his works.
The only necessity conceivable is that of fitness : — that,
as a God of truth, he cannot he ; as a God of benevolence,
he cannot be unkind ; as a God of absolute rectitude, he
cannot be unjust ; and, as a Being, wise, holy, and good, he
cannot but do what is best. This, however, is not a phy
sical, but a moral, necessity — a necessity of fitness, and is

204 ABSOLUTE PERFECTION.
as agreeable with his perfect freedom as it is with his
unchangeable nature.
Summary.^-'We have thus shown that the immutability
of God is perfectly consistent with the exercise of dispositions
and affections, with a boundless variety of operations in the
works of creation and providence, and with absolute freedom
of choice andj self-determination. From which it follows,
that a correct view of Jehovah's immutability is this : —
There is no change in his essence by decay ; no change in
his attributes by augmentation or diminution ; no change
in his views or purposes by ignorance, inadvertence, or mis
take ; no change in his dispositions and affections by fickle
ness or caprice ; no change in his character by deterioration
or improvement. What he is, he always was, and always
will be— a Being, infinitely and absolutely perfect. Not an
attribute, disposition, or affection, but what he ever had;
and throughout eternity no new property or affection can
arise. He is "the same yesterday, and to-day, and for ever."
With what glory does immutability invest the Creator,
and in, what sublime and awe-inspiring, contrast does, he
stand, with respect to the most durable existence, and the
most exalted nature among his creatures ! Compared with
his eternity, the universe is young, and, compared with his.
immutability, it is unstable and evanescent. From his ex
alted throne, he beholds the longest series of < events which
the heavens have chronicled, conie on and depart, and their
duration is " but as, a watch in the night. " The most pro
tracted dynasties rise and fall, and their existence is but as
an hour. Suns are lighted up, systems-are formed, and he
sees them wane and expire — he beholds their vast cycles.
run out, as we see the changing phases of the moon. He
has seen the ethereal spirits, nearest his eternal throme-^
pure and refulgent with the reflection of his own image — rise
from the dawn of infantine intelligence and excellence, and,
through countless myriads of ages, advance in intellectual'
vigour and moral elevation, to their present dignified estate
He envies not, but rejoices in their attainments; satisfied
and pleased that they answer the, end of their being. Yet,

ABSOLUTE PERFECTIOX. "JOj
he changes not He shifts not his throne higher because
of their exaltation. He expands not his powers because of
their progression. He brightens not his perfections because
of their augmenting glory. The excellencies of his intellec
tual and moral nature will for ever leave the most exalted
seraph at an infinite distance from himself.
Such being the nature of Jehovah, his immutability can
have no proper emblem or representation in nature ; for, how
can that which is essentially and eternally unchangeable,
be fitly represented by that which is in a state of constant
flux and mutation. It is only because rocks and hfffc
seem not to change dozing the brief moment of our mortal
history, that such are employed as feint images and shadows
of God's unchanging nature. Strictly speaking, they are no
more fit to represent the immutability of Jehovah, than the
transient meteor, or the ignis fttnus is fit to represent the
stability of the solar system. To whom, then, -will ye liken
God? or what likeness will ye compare unto him? Have ye
not known? have ye not heard? hath it not been told you from
the beginning ? have ye not understood from, the founda
tions of the earth? It is he that sitteth upon the circle of
the earth — and the inhabitants thereof are grasshoppers —
that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth
them out as a tent to dwell in ; that bringeth the princes
to nothing; he maketh the judges of the earth as vanity.
Yea, they shall not be planted; yea, they shall not be sown;
yea thpir stock shall not take root in the earth : and he
shall also blow upon them, and they shall wither, and the
whirlwind shall take them away as stubble. To whom, then,
will ye liken me, or shall I be equal ? saith the Holy One.
Blessed God, thou art beyond all compare I " Of old hast
thou laid the foundation of the earth ; and the heavens are
the work of thy hands. They shall perish, but Aon shalt
endure : yea, all of them shall wax old lifcp a garment : as a
vesture shalt than, change them, and they shall be changed :
but thou art the same, and thy years shall hare no end."
The immutability of Jehovah gives stability to his pur
poses, and certainty to his promises. His word cannot foil,

206 ABSOLUTE PERFECTION.
because his nature cannot change. His covenant rests on
this sure foundation. Therefore, " The counsel of the Lord
shall stand, and he will do all his pleasure." He is- not
man, that he should lie ; nor the son of man, that he should
repent. Though all flesh is grass, and the goodliness thereof
as the flower of the field, the work of the Lord endureth for
ever. Those who rest on him shall never be moved. Those
who trust in him shall never be disappointed. Those who
confide in his protection shall never be endangered. Those
who seek their consolation and happiness in his favour shall
never be repulsed. They tread upon a rock of adamant —
they drink from an exhaustless fountain — and they are
secure, though nature sink in ruin. Though living in a
world of vicissitude and change — inhabiting a body of clay,
destined soon to perish — surrounded by friends who fluc
tuate and die — and subject to events which oscillate and toss
mankind, hke a frail bark on a troubled ocean — they shall
find strength and security in God. Our frail and changing
nature, when united to him, inherits a lot which partakes
of his changeless character ; and not only amid the muta
tions of this life, but amid the awful scenes of the last day,
" when the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, the
elements melt with fervent heat, the earth also, and the
works therein, shall be burned up," we shall rejoice in his
changeless name.
To the wicked, this attribute presents another aspect.
Like the cloudy pillar it sheds effulgence on the path of the
just, but darkness and dismay upon the wicked. Because
God is unchangeable, iniquity shall not go unpunished; the
impenitent rejecter of offered mercy shall not, cannot, escape
the threatened vengeance. The stability of the Divine will
secures the fulfilment of every threatening, as it secures the
accomplishment of every gracious promise. " If we believe
not, yet he abideth faithful; he cannot deny himself:" and,
therefore, the despiser of his authority, and the trans
gressor of his law, must finally perish. To such, " there
remaineth nothing but a fearful looking for of judgment,
and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries."

CHAPTEB IV.
THE IMMENSITY OR OMNIPRESENCE OF GOD.

' Behold! the heaven, and the heaven of heavens, cannot contain tliee,'
1 Kings, viii., 27.

The omnipresence of Deity, so emphatically asserted in the
scriptures, is supported by the verdict of reason; but, ere we
proceed to the evidence, it will be proper to fix the sense
which we attach to this doctrine. The sentiments of men
are as diversified on this point as on others which have come
under our notice ; and that diversity appears, in- some cases,
to have arisen from abstruse and unprofitable inquiries as
to the mode of the Divine presence, and a vain attempt to
bring it under the domain of metaphysical science. The
schoolmen, who reduced his eternity to a moment, confined
his essence to a point. " One maintains, that God is a point,
indivisible indeed, but a point, however, that has the peculiar
property of occupying every part of the universe. Another,
that God was the place of all beings, the immense extent
in which his power had placed them. Another, that his
essence was really in heaven, but yet, repletively, as they ex
press it, in every part of the universe." Even the sensible
and eloquent Saurin, while censuring these conceits, so far
allowed himself to be influenced by abstruse and metaphy
sical subtleties, as to devote a paragraph to prove that God
is in no place. He candidly acknowledges that he finds it
difficult to make this intelligible and clear, not only to the
' unthinking multitude, but to those who cultivate the sci
ences, and are most intent upon refining their ideas.' There
is no wonder at the difficulty felt, for the attempt to prove
it is an attempt to prove what is contradictory both to
reason and scripture. So far from God being in no place,
the bible represents him as being in every place, and filling
all things with his presence.

208 THE OMNIPRESENCE OF GOD.
, Sir Isaac Newton, in a passage previously quoted, appears
to have considered space itself as a mode of the Divine exist
ence. He says, " God is not eternity nor infinity, but he is
eternal and infinite. He is not duration nor space, but he
endures and is present. He endures always, and is present
everywhere ; and, by existing at all times, and in all places,
he constitutes duration and space, eternity and infinity."
The same sentiment lies at the foundation of Dr. Clarke's
a priori argument, and is advocated by a modern writer of
no mean ability.* This sentiment we have already exam
ined, and stated our objections against it at length in pages
21-9. We hold that space, absolutely considered, is mere
nihility or nothing, and cannot, therefore, be either an attri
bute of Deity, or a mode of the Divine existence.
Some writers contend that God is virtually present every
where, and others say the essence of the Deity is expanded,
or diffused, throughout immensity. Bobert Hall says, "His
essence is diffused over all space," and such is the view of
Howe, Charnock, and other divines. Charnock thus argues:
" If his perfections be infinite, his essence must be so. How
God can have infinite perfections, and a finite essence, is
inconceivable by a human or angelic understanding; an
infinite power, an infinite wisdom, an infinite duration must
needs speak an infinite essence ; to own infinite perfections
in a finite subject is contradictory. The manner of acting
by his power, and knowing by his wisdom, cannot exceed
the manner of being by his essence  If, then, his
essence be not infinite, his power and wisdom cannot be
infinite, which is against both scripture and reason 
If, therefore, God have an infinite essence, he hath an infi
nite presence. An infinite essence cannot be contained in a
finite place ; as those things which are finite have a bounded
space, wherein they are, so that which is infinite hath an
unbounded space ; for as finiteness speaks limitedness, so *
infiniteness speaks unboundedness ; and, if we grant to God
an infinite duration, there is no difficulty in acknowledging
an infinite presence. Indeed, the infiniteness of God is
* Gillespie, author of " The Necessary Existence of Deity."

THE OMNIPRESENCE OF GOD. 209
a property belonging to him in regard of both time and place ;
he is bounded by no place, and limited by no time."*
Our own views-agree substantially with the representation
of the subject by Charnock and Hall; yet, we feel some hesi
tation in speaking of the essence of God as being " diffused "
or expanded, lest we should associate with the subject ideas
which are inappropriate to a purely spiritual existence. We
know so little of the nature of spirit, or of its mode of exis
tence, or of its being present in any locality, that we prefer
being content with a belief of the doctrine, without being too
curious in explaining and defining a subject, respecting which
our views must be inadequate, and our language still more
imperfect. Bespecting the mode of the Divine presence, we
feel, with David, that such knowledge is too wonderful for
us ; it is high, we cannot attain unto it.
The scriptures emphatically declare that God is everywhere
present, that he " filleth all in all," and that " the heaven,
and the heaven of heavens, cannot contain him." We be
lieve this doctrine in the popular form in which it is presented
in the sacred records. We hold that the Divine ubiquity
is such, that his personal consciousness, intelligence, power,
and every other perfection, is everywhere; that within and be
yond the bounds of the universe, there is not a point or space,
respecting which it may be said, God is not there. The
notion that God is the soul of the world, though false and
detestable in the" Pantheistic sense, which makes the uni
verse one being, and admits no distinction between the
Creator and the creature, is true, so far as it expresses the
pervading presence, and presiding and directing agency, of
the Deity through the entire universe. " The infinite Spirit
is present with every part of his creation, as intimately as
the soul of man is present throughout all the parts of that
corporeal substance which it animates and sustains." He
fills all space, penetrates all substances, and pervades all
minds. He is as intimately present with his creatures as
they are to themselves, and unites himself with the very
constitution of their nature. They exist within the bound-
* Charnock on the Divine Attributes.

210 THE OMNIPRESENCE OF GOD.
less ocean of his presence, the grasp of his omnipotence, the
sphere of his energy, and the hght of his countenance. In
him they live, and move, and have their being. Eobert Hall
observes, "We frequently speak of God dwelling in the
world by the manifestations of his power and providence ;
but it may with equal truth be said, that the world dwells
in God; all creatures being surrounded by his presence,
and enclosed in his essence. We cannot for a moment
conceive of such a Being, as separate from any part of the
universe, or point of space ; all creatures, spiritual and
material, subsist in Him, who, maintaining his own separate
existence distinct from the external world, exercises abso
lute universal dominion over all the beings he has formed.
This particular property of his nature, this peculiar mode of
his existence, renders him capable of being the all-compre
hending God, of holding in his own hand all the innumerable
creatures he has formed."
Bespecting the glorious attribute of omnipresence, the
testimony of reason is in harmony with the teachings of
inspiration. 1. The evidence, that God is everywhere present through
the universe, lies in the fact, that the universe is his work.
The vastness of creation will hereafter be considered ; we
have now .only to observe, that whatever may be the extent
of the universe, he must be everywhere present therein.
The workman must be present with his work — at least
during the time of his actual operation. On the same prin
ciple, wherever the creature exists, there must the Creator
be ; wherever his agency and operations can be traced, there
are traced indubitable evidences of his presence. It will not
be conceived by any sensible mind — by any mind admitting
the existence of a Creator — that as this Glorious Being formed
new systems in different regions of space, he was under the ne
cessity of withdrawing his presence from others where, he
had previously operated, and had to change his locality on
each occasion of putting forth his creating energy ? Yet, if
such an absurdity were entertained, it would be refuted by
the fact, that God is continually working in every part of

THE OMNIPRESENCE OF GOD. 211
the universe. Active and powerful agencies are everywhere
in unceasing operation. Light is every moment passing
from orb to orb, emitted from some, and reflected from others.
Every planet, and every sun, is moving with prodigious velo
city through space ; and, if the projectile motion shows a
forming God, does not the centripetal force, acting inces
santly, prove a preserving God ? and does not his preserving
agency evince his perpetual presence where that agency is
displayed ? Gravitation pervades all bodies, the most minute
atoms, as well as the largest globes that roll through immen
sity. Electricity, magnetism, and chemical affinity, are
acting every moment upon all material substances. There
is no space between the ' largest globes, and no interstices
between the smallest atoms, in reference to which we can
say, these various agencies are not continually acting. Can
we exclude the presence of the Deity from the universe he
has formed ? Where then shall we suppose him to be ? If
we suppose him to be present with one part of his operations,
on what principle can we exclude him from the other ?
Seeing the operations of his agency are apparent everywhere,
how can we suppose him to be absent from any place ; and
seeing they prevail incessantly, how can we conceive it pos
sible that his presence can be dispensed with for a single
moment of time.
The atheistic advocate of the development hypothesis
may, if he pleases, endeavour to generalize these agencies into
the laws of nature. On the same principle that he labours
to exclude the Divine hand from their origin, so he may
labour to exclude the Divine presence from their continued
activity. But we have exploded his hypothesis ; and, having
proved the Divine hand in the origin of nature, we contend
for the Divine presence and agency in its preservation and
continuance. It is vague and unsatisfactory to ascribe the
effects around us to the laws of nature. "A law cannot exe
cute itself; " it always refers us to an agency ; it is, in fact, only
the rule according to which an agency acts ; and that agency
we have shown to be C od himself. It was his Almighty agen
cy which created, and it is his Almighty agency which still

212 THE OMNIPRESENCE OF GOD.
operates through all creation, and wherever we see traces of
that agency, we see the tokens of his presence. Those tokens
are universal, and, therefore, God is everywhere present.
2. This argument is as applicable to the world of mind
as it is to the world of matter. The human soul, though
immaterial, is not capable of self-subsistence. It is, indeed,
a question with us whether matter itself could subsist
without the perpetual agency of God. As it required the
omnipotent fiat to bring both into existence, so both are
dependent upon the sustaining word or energy of God for
their continued existence. To us, it appears quite evident
that the continuance of a spirit's existence (assuming its
immortality) is not the necessary result of any inherent
and essentially vital energy in the spirit itself. The souls of
brutes expire with the body, and Why not the souls of men ?
Not because they are immaterial, for the souls of brutes are
immaterial. The question, Whether a thing be material or
immaterial, does not necessarily determine its immortality.
The body of Adam was material, yet was destined to immor
tality, if he had retained his original state ; and the souls
of brutes perish though they are immaterial. It is evident,
therefore, the certainty of the soul's immortality is not to be
determined by any psychological reasons, but by the will of
God; and that will, having determined it, supplies the agency
which preserves it in being. The prevalence, then, of
this agency, through the whole spiritual world, vast as it may
be, declares the presence of Him who exerts it.
It would be beyond the province of our argument to ad
duce the operations of God upon the soul of the christian —
enlightening, comforting, and sanctifying his nature — in
evidence of the omnipresence of Jehovah ; but the direct
agency of the Creator, in the operations of instinct, belongs
to the class of facts which are legitimately at our disposal.
The phenomena of instinct evince a high degree of intelli
gence somewhere; and that intelligence, we have proved,
does not reside in the animals themselves, but in God their
Creator. In the operations of instinct, therefore, we see innu
merable animals acting out the thoughts and purposes of God

THE OMNIPRESENCE OF GOD. 213
—acting under the suggestions and influences of an infinite
mind, ever present and ever operating. It is not for us to
explain the mysterious connection between the mind of Deity
and the various forms of animal existence, but we are certain
there is a connection of some sort ; it is not for us to dogma
tize on the mode by which the Deity imparts the influence
which suggests and directs the operations of animal instinct,
but we are certain that there is such an influence. The
facts prove the agency of God, and the agency proves his
presence. The preceding argument carries our conclusion, as to the
Divine presence, as far as the utmost verge of creation, but
other considerations extend this conclusion to infinity.
3. The ubiquity of Jehovah may be argued from his na
ture. He is self-existent, and absolutely perfect, therefore
infinite in all his perfections. But limitation and infinity
are contradictory ideas. If, therefore, we admit him to be
infinite in all his perfections, we cannot rationally suppose
him to be limited in his presence. Besides, to suppose
limitation, is to suppose an effect without a cause. The
limitation cannot be essential, for he is absolutely infinite in
all his attributes, and to contemplate it as an effect is absurd ;
for, seeing he is self-existent and eternal, he is before, and
above, all second causes, and there could be nothing to cause
any limitation. Besides, he is immutable as well as infinite,
and, therefore, it is impossible to conceive of any limitation
or restraint being superinduced upon any of his perfections.
As he was eternally infinite, so must he be still, and so must
he remain for ever.
From this it follows, that there is no point, either within
or beyond the bounds of the universe, where he is not.
Wherever there is created being, whether matter or mind,
there he is ; and in those vast regions of solitude and silence,
where no creature exists — so immeasurably distant that no
stray star-beam has ever reached — even there is God. His
being can have no limits.
4. It is impossible, even in thought, to limit the presence
of the Deity. We can conceive the universe to be limited ;

214 THE OMNIPRESENCE OF GOD.
indeed, as a creature, it must be finite ; this truth we feel
to be an intellectual necessity ; and as the universe is made
up of materials of diverse degrees of density, we have ocu
lar and tangible demonstration, that matter is not infinite
in quantum, but we cannot conceive the presence of God as
bounded. Locke observes, " It is true, we can easily, in
our thoughts, come to an end of solid extension ; the extre
mity and bounds of all body, we have no difficulty to arrive
at ; but when the mind is there, it finds nothing to hinder
its progress into endless expansion ; of that it can neither
find nor conceive any end. Nor let any one say, that beyond
the bounds of body there is nothing at all, unless he will
confine God within the limits of matter. Solomon, whose
understanding was filled and enlarged with wisdom, seems
to have other thoughts, when he says, ' Heaven, and the
heaven of heavens, cannot contain thee ; l and he, I think,
very much magnifies to himself the capacity of his own
understanding, who persuades himself that he can extend
his thoughts farther than God exists, or imagine any expan
sion where he is not." The universe, however vast, is a
creature limited in time and extent, but God, who is self-
existent and independent, has no beginning of his existence,
and can have no bounds to his presence.
5. To suppose a limitation of Jehovah's presence is to
suppose a limitation to his power. The universe, we have
seen, is finite ; there is, consequently, an immeasurable am
plitude beyond the utmost bounds of creation. Now, let us
suppose, that the Deity contemplated the progressive exten
sion of creation, by adding thereto worlds upon worlds, and
systems upon systems, beyond the confines of the present
universe, and to continue this progressive extension of hig
empire for ever. The supposition is rational ; it comports
with the power, wisdom, and all-sufficiency of Jehovah ; but
such an enlargement of creation could not be effected, if the
presence of Jehovah were limited, because, in the lapse of
ages, that extension would reach the limits of his presence.
A Being cannot exert his agency where he is not ; so, to
limit his presence is to hmit his power : to deny his ubiquity

THE OMNIPRESENCE OF GOD. 215
is to deny his omnipotence, and hmit the Holy one of Israel.
It is, in fact, to deny that " all things are possible with God."
Such a contradiction cannot be admitted, and, therefore,
we must conclude, on this ground, that his presence is
unbounded. THE VASTNESS OF THE UNIVERSE.
The omnipresence of Jehovah is thus established by the
clearest evidence, but, while it commands our assent, it over
powers our imagination. In contemplating the immensity
as well as the eternity of God, we feel we have a truth which
irresistibly forces itself upon the mind, but yet surpasses all
its powers of comprehension. Whatever numbers and sym
bols we call to our aid, they fall infinitely short of the reality.
Science has, indeed, greatly enlarged our conceptions of the
vastness of the universe, and yet the whole dwindles into a
point, contrasted with the ubiquity of the Divine Being. To
guage the extent of the universe, miles and leagues are too
short, and even the velocity of hght estimated by time, and
that time, stretched to millions of years, affords but a faint
idea of its magnitude. Light, the swiftest body in existence,
travels at the rate of nearly 200,000 miles in a second. Com
pared with other bodies, the Sun is near to us, yet it takes
eight minutes for a beam of light to pass from that orb to
our world — a distance of ninety-five millions of miles. The
planet Neptune, though belonging to our system, is said to
be distant 2,900,000,000 of miles, and it takes a journey of
four hours for a ray of hght to pass from the sun to that
planet. The great comet of 1680, at its aphelion, wanders
to a distance about twenty-five times more remote than
the planet Neptune, and it would take hght above four days
to travel from that distance to our world. Yet, that comet
belongs to our system — it is one of the group belonging to
the solar family. But vast as must be the circumference of
a sphere, whose radius stretches so far into the fields of space,
it is only a diminutive point compared with the distance of
the nearest body unconnected with this family group. The
time required for hght to travel from the centre to the cir-

216 THE OMNIPRESENCE OF GOD.
cumference of our system, we reckon by the narrow measures
of minutes, hours, and days ; but the moment we emerge
from hence to the nearest star, the journey of light, rapid
as it is, has to be computed by years.
The star a Centauri is computed to be two hundred thou
sand times farther from us than we are from the sun ; the
star 61 Cygni is three times the distance of a Centauri; and
the star a Lyrse is nearly three times more remote than 61
Cygni. Thus, the remotest of these three stars is so distant
that a ray of light would be thirty years in passing from it
to our world. We cannot realize these enormous distances,
and yet they are " but our first milestones among the track
less space." For, if we extend our observations to those stars
whose distance renders them only just visible to the naked
eye, we behold objects so remote that their light does not
reach us until one hundred and twenty years after it has
left the twinkling orbs. It is in vain to give this distance
in miles; we have to heap billions upon millions, until the
imagination becomes confused by their enormous multitude.
Yet, here, in these remote regions, we are only on the fron
tiers of creation. Beyond the visible stars, we come to that
faint hght called the Milky Way, whose belt infolds a space
far beyond the smallest stars visible to the naked eye.
This luminous zone consists of myriads of stars, which from
their distance are invisible to the eye, but they are resolved by
Herschel 's telescope, and, in one quarter of an hour, 116,000
of these stars were observed to pass through the field of
vision of that powerful instrument. These stars are esti
mated, on satisfactory data, to be four hundred and ninety-
seven times more remote from us than some of the fixed
stars ; and it would require one thousand six hundred and
forty years, for a ray of hght to pass from thence to our
world — or a cannon-ball, flying at the rate of 500 miles an
hour, would occupy more than two thousand, two hundred,
and sixty-seven millions, eight hundred thousand years in
passing through the same space ! How prodigious the dis
tance, then, of those orbs, whose light constitutes the Milky
Way; and yet we have made but httle progress through the

THE OMNIPRESENCE OF GOD. 217
vast systems of created being ; for, the Milky Way is, with good
reason, supposed to be the outer bounds of that great stellary
congregation, to which our sun, and his planets, and all visi
ble stars, belong. In depths of space, immeasurably beyond
the Milky Way, there lie other congregated systems, and
groups of congregated systems as large, or perhaps larger,
than the entire field of creation we have hitherto explored.
Our own galaxy, sufficient itself for a universe, and made
up of millions upon millions of suns, so remote that hght
itself cannot pass from one star to another, under hundreds
and thousands of years, is yet but a unit amongst myriads.
Beyond it are other galaxies, appearing, from their distance,
only as a faint and dubious hght; and beyond these, again,
are others ; and again beyond these are others ; the succes ¦
sion appearing in every part of the heavens, so long as instru
ments can be found capable of extending the view deeper
into space. The Nebula of Orion, though visible to the
naked eye, lies-a-deep so far away, that its hght cannot
reach us in less than sixty-thousand years after its de
parture; yet even this is near compared with others, for
Herschel states, that " the rays of hght, from some remoter
nebula?, must have been two millions of years on their way ;"*
and since the power of Lord Bosse's six feet mirror has pierced
yet deeper and deeper into space, it has brought some ne
bula? into view, which may be so distant that their light
does not reach us in less than thirty millions of years.-]"
Let us only reflect for a moment upon the fact, that light
travels at the rate of near twelve millions of miles in a,
minute, and yet objects are so distant that light itself
cannot pass from them to our eye, in less than a period of
thirty millions of years. It must be remembered, too, that
as these nebulas are seen in all parts of the heavens, this
amazing distance is only the radius of the known universe.
We must double it to find the diameter, and we must six times
double it to find the circumference : yet, even this is only
the sphere of the known congregated systems . But who can tell
* Sir W. Herschel, in the transactions for 1802, p. 408.
+ Professor Nichol.
d

218 THE OMNIPRESENCE OF GOD.
how far the beams of light, issuing from them on every side,
pierce into the depths of space ? How many times shall
we have to double the circumference of the whole, to reach
the utmost limit to which the flooding star-beams dart ?
What aids shall imagination call up to stretch its view to the
most distant rays, shot forth with the velocity of twelve
millions of miles each minute of time since the first moment
of creation? But hitherto, lost as we are in immensity; 'we
have been contemplating merely those objects which are
visible through the telescope ; yet, shall we suppose that our
little tubes and mirrors, in this corner of the universe, are
capable of sounding the depths of God's creation ? Bather
let us suppose, as reason and analogy require, that all we
have explored, and all we can explore, compared with what
remains unexplored, are but as the sands in an hour-glass
compared with the stupendous Andes, or the still more stu
pendous globe itself. This vast universe Jehovah fills with
his presence. He resides in every part. His being and
consciousness pervade the whole, his intelligence guides,
his power preserves, and his presence fills and replenishes,**
the whole. But, beyond creation, magnify it as we may —
let imagination roam till it is weary with squaring and
multiplying all we have yet contemplated — beyond all this,
there is an infinite amplitude where no planet rolls, no
nebula looms, no stray star-beam has pierced, no seraph's
wing has swept, and no creative fiat has yet reached — an
infinite amplitude, to which all imaginable creation bears no
proportion ; yet, Jehovah fills the whole — his presence and
attributes absolutely fill immensity. " The heaven, and the
heaven of heavens, cannot contain Him."
Reflections. — In the contemplation of such overpowering
majesty, what wonderful condescension does the Deity exhi
bit, in making man an object of his tender regard ! Well
might the Psalmist, when casting his eye on the vast and
glittering expanse, above and around him, exclaim, ' ' When
I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon
and the stars which thou hast ordained ; what is man that
thou art mindful of him, or the Son of man that thou

THE OMNIPRESENCE OF GOD. 219
visitest him." Yet, he is mindful of him, and numbers the
very hairs of his head.
, How consoling to the believer to remember, that, wherever
he is, and however diversified his condition, God is with
him ! How awful to the sinner to reflect, that all his crimes
and offences are committed in the immediate presence of
the Eternal Jehovah — his maker, and his judge ! Men may
shun the presence of their fellows, but they cannot escape
from the presence of him " who filleth all in all."
While the presence of God is everywhere, it is not mani
fested everywhere alike. In those boundless regions of immen
sity, where no created being is, there can be as yet no objective
manifestation ; but, in every part of creation, there is a dis
play of the Divine presence and perfections ; and wherever
intelligent beings reside, this display is recognized. Yet,
this recognition is diversified according to the capacities and
condition of the various orders of intelligent beings. Some
mentally behold the traces of his presence by the objective
display of his attributes, but have no sense of his favour ;
while others have both a mental perception of his presence,
and a consciousness of his favour ; for, he manifests him
self to his people as he does not to the world. As there is
thus a diversity as to the manifestation of the Deity's pre
sence in different regions of the universe, and as perceived
by intelligent beings of different states and capacities, it is
only reasonable to suppose, that there is a distinct region
where God, in a manner far more gloriously, unfolds his
natural and moral attributes, and reveals the tokens of his
favour to upright and holy intelligences. This rational sup
position is conformable to the revealed doctrine of the
spiritual world, where angels, and glorified human spirits,
are congregated to enjoy the beatific vision of God. As in
the Jewish temple, there was the outer court, the holy place,
and the most holy ; so, in the created universe, there are
inner and outer circles, if we may so speak, where the presence
of Deity is realized with various degrees of intimacy. The
mere philosopher sees him with his mental eye, but the
view, however imposing and grand, is cold and speculative —

220 THE OMNIPRESENCE OF GOD.
the believer feels him by consciousness, as well as sees him
by reason, and he rejoices in his relation to him as his
father and friend ; but the glorified in heaven, freed from
those earthly impediments which both obscure the vision
and blunt the moral sense, have a far clearer perception of
his glorious perfections, and a far more intense and blissful
consciousness of his presence and favour. Here we see God,
but it is through a glass, darkly ; but there, face to face.
In his presence is fulness of joy. At his right hand are
pleasures for evermore.

CHAPTEE V.

THE OMNISCIENCE OF GOD.

"His understanding is infinite." — Psalm cxlvii., 8.

I. The intelligence of God has been previously demon
strated from his works. The universe of matter, and of
mind, is the product of his wisdom as well as his power.
Matter, its laws and diversified operations — the protracted
concatenation of subordinate causes and effects — of means,
adaptations, and uses, of connections, dependencies, and rela
tions, pervading the entire fabric of nature — were conceived
and devised by his mind before his power brought them
into actual being. The phenomena of vegetable and animal
life and instinct ; and the still greater phenomenon of an
immortal mind, with its faculties of consciousness, perception,
memory, vohtion, and reason — its affections of love, fear,
hope, joy, aversion — and its intense susceptibilities of hap
piness and misery — are the products of Divine intelligence.
The mind which originated these wonders must possess a
degree of knowledge to which no limits can be assigned.
If it be said that, as nature is finite, all the manifestations
of intelhgence, furnished by nature, cannot yield a positive
proof that the knowledge of the Deity is absolutely infinite,
we reply, First — the exhibition of intelligence, thus afforded,
though finite, is so vast and diversified, that it defies us
either to fix any limitation to his knowledge, or rationally
to suppose any such limitation possible. And, Secondly —
it must be remembered, that the powers of endless expansion,
given to the creature, involve inexhaustible or infinite re
sources in the Creator. God could never give to the creature
capacities which could surpass his own fulness. The illimi
table growth and development of an immortal creature

222 THE OMNISCIENCE OF GOD.
necessarily imply resources absolutely bottomless and infinite
in the Creator.
II. The infinity of Jehovah's intelhgence may be argued
also, from his absolute perfection, which has been previously
established. Limitation in knowledge involves ignorance,
and ignorance is incompatible with absolute perfection. From
ignorance, may possibly result deception, and erroneous judg
ment, and, indeed, such results appear to us inevitable ;
but to attribute such qualities to the mind of Deity, is as
repellant to reason as opposed to revelation. His absolute
freedom from the possibility of error involves the possession
of infinite intelhgence.
III. The same attribute may be argued from the infinitude
of the Divine nature. It will be admitted that the Deity
knows himself, and, if he comprehend himself, he compre
hends infinity, and must possess infinite intelligence. His
understanding fathoms the depths of his own essence, and
all the resources of his power and boundless perfections.
Self-existent and independent, he must know all things
actually existing in himself; and, as the Source of all being,
as the author of all life, he must know all things, both
actual and possible in the creature. As the finite cannot
comprehend the infinite, it follows, that the mind which
comprehends the Deity, and all other things, must possess
infinite intelligence.
IV. The intelligence of the Deity is immediate. All things
within himself he knows by consciousness, and all things
adextra, or in the creature, he knows immediately by intui-'
tion, and by contact. There is here an infinite disparity be
tween him and the most exalted work of his hand. Some few
things we know by consciousness, and some by intuition,
but far the greater portion of our scanty store of knowledge'
is acquired through the medium of our senses, and by the
exercise of our reason. By consciousness, we know our own
existence, and the sensations and operations of our own
minds. By the organs of sense, we hold communication
with the external world ; and by reason, we deduce certain
truths and principles from the facts which consciousness-

THE OMNISCIENCE OF GOD. 223
and sense furnish to the mind. It is evident, from the
hmited faculties of our nature, that our stock of knowledge
must be comparatively contracted and confined. Our con
sciousness extends only to a few particular truths within the
narrow bounds of our own nature, and the organs of sense
are chiefly confined to the limits prescribed by our personal
presence. We can taste and feel only those objects with
which we are in contact ; we can smell and hear only those
which are near ; and, though vision can descry objects that
are distant, it can do httle more than ascertain their exist
ence. Thus, our presence and personal contact being con
fined to a hmited locality, our communication with the
surrounding universe must necessarily be very circumscribed.
Now, as reason can only deduce truths and abstract principles
from the materials thus furnished, it follows that our range
of knowledge must be very hmited and confined. No such
limits, however, can exist in the Deity, because there is no
limitation to his presence and attributes. By consciousness
he knows, at one view, all that there is in the depths of his
own nature, and, thus knowing the infinite resources of his
own nature, he must know intuitively all the possibilities of
being in the creature ; and from his omnipresence he must
recognize by contact, all the actual being there is in the
creature. Thus, all that is present, past, and future, must
be seen by the comprehensive glance of Jehovah.
The Present. God is every where present, and wherever
he exists, there all his attributes and perfections exist. It
is impossible to conceive the absence of any attribute where
his presence pervades. We cannot, even in thought, abstract
or detach his power, his knowledge, and his other perfec
tions from himself, or suppose them to be absent where he
is present. Consequently, wherever God is, he perceives,
he sees, he knows ; and, as he pervades all substances, and
fills all space, there can be nothing hidden from his view.
Thus, the whole universe lies open before him with greater
clearness than this page lies open before the eye of the
reader. All worlds revolving, and all creatures moving,
under the broad and open eye of the Creator, not a leaf falls,

224 THE OMNISCIENCE OF GOD.
not an atom floats, but is beheld and perceived by him who
is everywhere present. Man can only perceive such quali
ties as his senses are adapted to observe ; and it can never
be supposed that our five senses are competent to recognize
all the qualities of bodies : but the perception of Jehovah
penetrates every occult property of matter, sees the very
essence of every substance, and observes every secret phe
nomenon in nature. To him, nothing can be mysterious in
its nature, properties, operations, or results, for he made
every thing in the physical universe as it is ; it operates
according to his design, and nothing can escape his notice.
In the same complete and perfect manner, he observes
every being in the spiritual world, and every action and
thought of moral and accountable agents. The bright spirits
in heaven, radiant with the beams of his glory — human
minds, incarnate in earthly tabernacles — apostate demons,
and the souls of the lost in the invisible regions of woe —
are all beheld with the same minute and watchful observa
tion. Penetrating spirit as well as matter, all the operations
of mind lie equally under his eye, even as the most open'
and conspicuous actions of the hfe. Every principle we
cherish, every emotion that stirs in. our bosom, every desire
and imagination we indulge, every thought we conceive, and
the very motives which give a good or evil complexion to
our thoughts and deeds, are all known as fully as we know
them ourselves by consciousness. Nay, more so, for they
are penetrated by an . eye that not only sees their actual
existence, but appreciates their moral quality and tendency
with unerring exactness. To such a conclusion we are irre
sistibly carried by reason, and it is in perfect accordance
with the teachings of inspiration — " Neither is there any
ereature that is not manifest in his sight : but all things
are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom
we have to do."
The Past. In the same perfect manner does the know
ledge of Jehovah comprehend all that is past. As there is
no period in eternity in which he did not exist, there is no
period in the history of creation when he was not present

THE OMNISCIENCE OF GOD. 225
with every part in the same intimate and all-pervading
manner as he is this moment ; and, therefore, every part
has always been under his observation. As nothing in the
world of matter and of mind can elude his notice at this
moment, neither could anything elude his notice in any past
instant, nor can it in any future period. We must suppose
the very nature of Deity to change, before we can suppose
it possible for anything past, present, or to come, to escape
his knowledge. Nor can we rationally suppose it possible
for him to forget anything which he has observed. - The
faculty of memory in the creature is an excellence, and
every excellence which the creature has in a limited degree,
the Creator possesses in an unlimited extent. It may be
that even our forgetfulness of events may arise from the
connection of mind with a mutable and perishable organi
zation.* But however this may be, we can no more sup
pose the Deity subject to forget any fact or event in the
natural or moral history of the universe, than we can suppose
it possible for any such event to escape his observation at
the present moment. He is independent, absolutely perfect,
and immutable, and, therefore, the knowledge of all that is
past is as present to him as if it were occurring at this
instant of time.
The Divine Prescience. God foreknew all things. It has,
indeed, been maintained, that there is neither foreknowledge
nor after-knowledge with God. Thus the venerable Mr Wesley
states, " If we speak properly, there is no such thing as either
foreknowledge or after-knowledge in God. All time, or
rather all eternity, being present to him at once, he does
not know one thing before another, or one thing after ano
ther ; but sees all things in one point of view, from everlasting
to everlasting. " This is the notion of the schoolmen, adopted
by many divines, who, denying the succession of time, denied
also the succession of events — making the past, present, and
future, both of time and events, one eternal now, in the
* It is the opinion of the celebrated Isaac Taylor, that in eternity the
human soul will have the faculty of recalling the whole of its past history.
See Ms" Physical Tlieory of Another Life."

226 THE OMNISCIENCE OF GOD.
mind of Deity. The scholastic notion which confounds the
present duration with the past, and reduces all to one instant,
has been refuted before, and we need not dwell upon it again.
Dr. Beid has well observed, " the schoolmen made eternity
to be a nunc stans, that is, a moment of time that stands
still. This was to put a spoke into the wheel of time, and
might give satisfaction to those who are to be satisfied by
words without meaning. But I can as easily believe a
circle to be a square, as time to stand still." It is equally
trifling to intimate that the scriptures are not to be , under
stood literally, when they speak of God's "foreknowledge."
Either God knows events before they transpire, or he does
not. If we affirm that he does not, vj e charge him with
ignorance, and deny the express statement of the scriptures.
If he does know events before they transpire, then he must
have " foreknowledge," and the scholastic figment must be
rejected. That the Creator of the universe did foreknow all
that has transpired, and that he does now foreknow all that
ever will transpire, is a truth which is plainly taught in the
scriptures, and which is corroborated by the testimony of
reason. This foreknowledge we believe to be equally
applicable to the universe of matter and of mind.
Bespecting the material universe there will be no contro
versy between those who admit the existence of an intelli
gent Creator. The archetypes, or ideas of the universe,
existed from all eternity in the mind of Deity, and his
power formed it after the pattern in which his wisdom had
conceived it. From hence, indeed, arise its order and sys
tem, its exquisite arrangement of connections and harmo
nies, of means and ends, its uniformity and stability. It is
the execution of a plan originated and devised by the mind
of God. He knew it, therefore, before the fiat of creation
was issued by his almighty word. As matter was. made
and endowed with all its properties by God himself;
as he determined also the laws which guide its multiplied
operations, he must have known all the effects of those
operations from the beginning and onward through all
future ages. Bespecting the Divine prescience, in respect

the omniscience of god. 227
to the material universe, Saurin remarks, " God knows all
the effects of matter. An expert workman takes a parcel of
matter proportioned to a work which he meditates ; he
makes divers wheels, disposes them properly, and sees, by
the rules of his art, what must result from their assemblage.
Suppose a sublime, exact genius, knowing how to go from
principle to principle, and from consequence to consequence,
after foreseeing what must result from two wheels, joined
together, should imagine a third ; he will as certainly know
what must result from a third, as from a first and second ;
after imagining a third, he may imagine a fourth, and pro
perly arrange it with the rest in his imagination ; after a
fourth, a fifth, and so on to an endless number. Such a
man could mathematically demonstrate, in an exact and
infallible manner, what must result from a work composed
of all these different Wheels. Suppose, further, that this
workman should accurately consider the effects which
would be produced on these wheels; by that subtil matter,
which in their whirlings continually surrounds them, and
which, by its perpetual action and motion, chafes, wears,
and dissolves all bodies, he would be able to tell you, with
the same exactness, how long each of these wheels would
wear, and when the whole work would be consumed. Give
this workman hfe and industry proportional to his imagi
nation, furnish him with materials proportional to his ideas,
and he will produce a vast immense work, all the different
motions of which he can exactly combine ; all the different
effects of which he can evidently foresee. He will see in
what time motion will be communicated from the first of
these wheels to the second, at what time the second will
move the third, and so of the rest : he will foretell all their
different motions, and all the effects that must result from
their different combinations.
" Hitherto, this is only supposition, my brethren, but it
is a supposition that conducts us to the most certain of all
facts. This workman is God. God is the sublime, exact,
infinite genius. He calls into being matter without motion,
and, in some sense, without form. He gives this matter

228 the omniscience of god.
form and motion. He makes a certain number of wheels, or
rather, he makes them without number. He disposes them
as he thinks proper. He communicates a certain degree of
motion agreeably to1 the laws of his wisdom. Thence arises
the world which strikes our eyes. By the forementioned exam
ple, I conceive, that God, by his own intelligence, saw what
must result from the arrangement of all the wheels that
compose this world, and knew, with the utmost exactness,
all their combinations * * * He foresaw all the vicissitudes
of time, he foresaw those which must put a period to time,
when the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, when
the elements shall melt with fervent heat, when the earth,
with all the works that are in it, shall be burnt up." A
similar view of an all-comprehending and foreseeing intelli
gence is expressed by Leibnitz, Laplace, and other writers.
It cannot, indeed, be disputed, that Jehovah knows every
minute result that will flow from the mechanism of nature,
as exactly and certainly as the operator at an electric tele
graph knows the result which must follow from the touches
he gives to his mysterious machine.
But while nothing is more certain than that the Deity
does thus foresee all the effects which transpire from the
combined and multifarious operations of matter, with the
most perfect exactness, all such mechanical representations
of the universe are calculated to mislead the mind, by sug
gesting an independent action to nature, and, therefore,
require to be quahfied by the recollection of two important
truths, namely — that God himself is the ever-present and
all-pervading Agent, guiding and directing the whole ; and
that the general laws he has prescribed for the operations
of nature are not so absolute as to exclude special interpo
sitions, and interruptions by his own almighty hand. Such
interpositions, indeed, are repeatedly attested by geological
phenomena, as having occurred in different epochs of our
planet's history, and such will doubtless occur in its future
history. The believer in the christian revelation beholds
many such special interpositions in the miracles recorded in
the sacred scriptures, and, in these facts, the records of

the omniscience of god. 229
nature and of revelation unite in their testimony to the same
principle. These special interpositions, however, present no
exception to the exactness of the Divine prescience ; for,
they are a part of the Divine economy, foreseen and designed
from the beginning, equally with the physical and mathe
matical results of mechanical laws.
With the same absolute certainty does God foreknow the
actions and destinies of voluntary agents. But, here we
come to a subject on which the most opposite sentiments
have been maintained. The Divine prescience has been
pronounced incompatible with the free agency of man, and
divines, of opposite sentiments, to cut the knot they could
not untie, have each adopted one side of the truth, and
denied the other. Some, to maintain man's freedom, have
denied God's foreknowledge ; and others, to maintain God's
prescience, have denied man's freedom. It will be evident
to every individual, at first sight, that one class of these
divines must be in error, because each maintains an opposite
proposition ; and we think it not impossible to show that
both are in error. Let us, then, test these opinions, First,
by the teachings of revelation ; and, Secondly, by the dictates
of reason.1. The testimony of holy scripture is neither obscure nor
ambiguous on these subjects. As to Jehovah's knowledge,
it is declared to be infinite. " His understanding is infinite;"
and, if infinite, it must include a prescience of all voluntary
actions, as well as of all physical operations. To deny this
is to hmit the Divine understanding — it is to deny the
infinity so plainly asserted in the scriptures. David, asso
ciating God's omniscience with his omnipresence, directly
ascribes to him a prescience of the very thoughts of his heart.
" Thou knowest my downsitting and mine uprising; thou
understandest my thoughts afar off." The same doctrine is
implied in every prediction which has reference to human
actions. Such predictions abound in every part of the
sacred volume, and whether they refer to the destiny of
nations or individuals, they involve an exact foreknowledge
of the thoughts, affections, desires, passions, principles, and

230 THE OMNISCIENCE of god.
conduct, of individuals. It would be trifling to intimate
that these predictions are based upon merely a general
knowledge of man's moral history, for his general history
is made up of individual actions and occurrences, and in
many cases the predictions expressly refer to the history of
isolated individuals, as Jeroboam, Cyrus, Judas, and a cata
logue of other persons. It would also be profane, as well as
trifling, for, unless Jehovah foreknew the character and
history of individuals, his predictions would be no more
than lucky guesses and sagacious conjectures. The multi
farious prophecies, recorded in scripture, as clearly involve'
a prescienee of the thoughts and actions of voluntary agents,
as they do of the revolutions of the planets, or the opera
tions of any physical law. If God thus foreknew the
thoughts and affections of some men and of some nations,
he must have foreknown the moral history and destiny
of all men. To deny the Divine prescience, therefore, is to
deny the plain teachings of the sacred records ; it is to erect
our own speculations in opposition to the express declare
tions of God himself.
Yet, in the same emphatic manner, do the scriptures
assert the freedom and voluntary agency of man. They
always recognize him as a creature possessing and exercising
a self-determining faculty, capable of choosing the good and
refusing the evil. They appeal not only to his reason, but
to his will ; they ply him with motives to obedience, and
solemnly place life and death, blessing and cursing, before
him. They severely censure his evil actions, and not only
his evil actions but his evil thoughts and affections — clearly
indicating his power to resist and control both the one and
the other. They command him to exercise obedience, holy
. affections, and purposes — implying that with the offered aids
of grace, he is competent to give a holy direction to his
character, and a heavenly bias to the principles of the inner
man — the hidden principles of action. They make him
responsible for every action and thought, and suspend the
issues of an eternal destiny upon his. conduct in this life;
and, if he perish, they emphatically declare that his doom is

THE OMNISCIENCE OF GOD. 231
attribu table to no one but himself. " Ye will not come unto
me that ye might have hfe." " I called, but ye refused ; I
stretohed out my hands, but ye regarded not." " O that
thou hadst known, at least in this thy day, the things that
make for thy peace." If, then, the scriptures speak the
truth, and communicate that truth in language capable of
being understood ; if man be a moral agent and an account
able being, and if the principles of unchanging rectitude
direct the government of God, man must be a free agent —
he must possess and exercise a self-determining power.
From whioh it follows, that to deny either the prescience of
the Creator, or the liberty of the creature, is to deny the
authority of Divine revelation.
2. The notions thus opposed to scripture are equally repug
nant to reason. Indeed, to deny the voluntary agency of
man is to oppose our consciousness ; for there is no fact to
which our experience more clearly and emphatically bears
testimony, than to our moral hberty. We know we have
power to commit or avoid a certain course of conduct, be
cause our consciousness attests it ; and while our conscious
ness attests this truth, our judgment perceives its conformity
with our accountability to law, whether human or divine,
and the absolute injustice of any accountability in the absence
of this self-determining power. Hence, where reason and
freedom end, accountability terminates. Human conscious
ness attests our freedom, and human reason acquiesces in the
accountability Of our actions, because we are conscious of our
hberty and not otherwise. Here are principles which no
arts of sophistry can evade. They are co-existent with mind ;
they are immutable and eternal. We can no more eradicate
them than we can annihilate the mind itself.
Nor can the denial of God's foreknowledge be sustained
by reason, any more than by the 'scriptures. The, specious
theory has been advocated by great names, butis, in our view,
indefensible. Dr. Adam Clarke maintains, that " God has
ordained some things as absolutely certain. These he knows
as absolutely certain. He has ordained other things as con
tingent. These he knows as contingent." To reconcile this

232 THE OMNISCIENCE OF GOD.
doctrine with Jehovah's omniscience, it is urged, "That as
omnipotence implies the power to do all things, so omni
science implies the ability to know all things, but not the
obligation to know all things. He knows himself, and what
he has formed, and what he can do, but it is alleged, he is
not necessitated to know, as certain, what himself has made
contingent ; and that, as God, though possessed of omni
potence, does not evidently exert it to its utmost extent
—does not do all he might do — so, though he could know
all things, yet that he chooses to be ignorant of some things
because he does not see it proper to know everything which
he might know." We believe that the Doctor here states
the substance of all that can be urged in favour of this theory,
but, with all due deference to his talents and learning, we
regard his views as untenable.
(a) Our first objection to this theory is, that it gives an
unamiable aspect to the Divine character. It does not,
indeed, deny the capability of God to foreknow voluntary
actions, but represents him as voluntarily refusing to know
them — -as designedly excluding them from his cognizance.
Such a procedure involves, at least, a partial knowledge
or expectation of their character, and supposes a motive
for refusing to know them more perfectly. God can be
influenced by no motives but such as are wise and good,
but if it be wise and good to constitute beings free agents,
can it be wise and good to refuse to know the issue of their
freedom ? Such a notion seems to involve the idea, that,
had God known the result, he would not have given them
such a constitution, nor have placed them in such circum
stances. It represents the Deity as fearing to know the
issue or moral results of his own work ! How such reason
ing harmonizes with the character and perfections of Deity,
the wisdom, rectitude, and goodness of his administration,
or the stability of his government, we are at a loss to know.
In our view, it is incompatible with them. all. If it be wise
and good for God to constitute creatures voluntary agents,
and accountable beings, it is equally wise and good • to know
the issue of their nature and condition ; and if it be incom-

THE OMNISCIENCE OF GOD. 283
patible with wisdom and goodness to know the result, it was
incompatible with wisdom and goodness to give them the
nature they possess, and place them in the circumstances of
a probationary state. Our opponents will, we think, admit
the correctness of this statement, and, admitting this, their
denial of the Divine prescience must be abandoned.
(6) Our second objection to the theory is, that it denies to
Deity the attribute of omniscience. The parallel which Dr.
Clarke draws between omnipotence and omniscience is inad
missible. He states that, as omnipotence does not involve
the necessity of doing all things within the range of Almighty
power, neither does omniscience involve the necessity of
knowing all things possible to be known. But this is not a
correct representation of the nature of the two attributes.
Omnipotence is not an unlimited act of God, but the faculty
to act with unlimited energy — not the exertion of power, but
the ability to exert, or put forth power to an unlimited
extent. But omniscience, on the contary, is- not the mere
faculty of acquiring or obtaining a knowledge of all things,
but it is the actual knowledge of all things. Dr. Clarke's
view makes God merely omniscible, but denies his omni
science ; it supposes the Divine Being to: have a capacity for
boundless knowledge, but denies that the capacity is filled.
It supposes the Deity to be acquiring knowledge by experi
ence, to know his creatures more fully by the development
of their moral history, and to be growing wiser each day by
observing the proceedings' of moral agents. If our theorists
shrink from these consequences, they must renounce the
system which involves them.
(c) Our third objection to the theory is, that it denies the
independence, the absolute perfection, and immutability, of
the Divine Being. This result is seen in the preceding
argument. For, if the Deity be destitute of knowledge in
some respects, then is he partially ignorant, and a Being
to whom this quality apphes cannot be absolutely perfect.
Besides, if his knowledge be, in part, gradually derived from
the moral history of his creatures, then is he so far de
pendent upon things extraneous to himself : and thus his
f

234 THE OMNISCIENCE OF GOD.
independence is denied- If his knowledge accumulate by
experience, then must his views change,his judgment alter :
and thus immutability is denied. We cannot see how these
consequences can be separated from the denial of the Divine
prescience, and if they are felt to be repugnant to our reason,
and our respect for the Divine character, the theory which
involves them must be repudiated.
(d) Our fourth objection to the notion in question is, that
it is incompatible with the regularity and order of the Divine
government. In the economy of the material'universe, design
and object are everywhere conspicuous; and system and means
nicely adjusted to fulfil the design, to accomplish the object,
are seen pervading every part of his works. Nothing is
more obvious than that the intellect of Deity darted through
every part of the complicated system ere it was created, and
that the whole was adjusted and combined to fulfil the con
templated results. We should expect the same order and
foresight to characterize his government in the world of
mind — every rational creature being free, yet every event
foreseen with intuitive certainty, and provision made for
every exigency and state which would occur in the whole his
tory of moral agents, so that, amid all the changes of fallible
creatures, an ultimate purpose was contemplated, and that
purpose fulfilled. But the denial of the Divine prescience
involves the denial of such a system of order ; or if such a
system of order were devised, it must be liable to interruption
and disappointment. If God did not foresee the issue of
moral agency, he could not plan for a given purpose, or if he
did, he could only plan in the dark — his purposes must be
based on conjecture, on probabilities, and possibilities — and;
throughout the whole history of his government, must con
tinue to be liable to defeat and disappointment. Arrange
ments made in uncertainty and partial ignorance must often
be broken, and his government, if not in its principles, at
least in its administration, be subject to incessant fluctuation.
The vastness of his empire would only increase the embar
rassment by continually yielding events never expected,
causing emergencies never provided for, and thus compelling

THE OMNISCIENCE OF GOD. 235
the supreme Governor to be continually changing his plans,
laying aside some as no longer suitable, adopting new ones
to meet fresh exigencies, and these again in their time
becoming useless, because of new events never expected.
As President Edwards remarks, " In such a situation, God
must have little else to do but to mend broken links as well
as he can, and be rectifying his disjointed frame, and disor
dered movements, in the best manner the case will allow.
The supreme Lord of all things must needs be under great
and miserable disadvantages, in governing the world which
he has made, and has the care of, through his being utterly
unable to find out things of chief importance, which here
after shall befall his system ; which, if he did but know, he
might make seasonable provision for. In many cases, there
may be very great necessity that he should make provision
in the manner of his ordering and disposing of things for
some great events which are to happen, of vast and extensive
influence, and endless consequence to the universe, which
he may see afterwards when it is too late, and may wish in
vain that he had known beforehand, that he might have
ordered his affairs accordingly." Such a representation of
the moral administration, we know, is repulsive; it shocks our
sense of propriety to dwell long upon it; but these conse
quences logically result from denying God's prescience of
moral actions, and because thus repulsive to our reason, and
to our piety, the notion must be rejected.
On examination, then, it is found, that the two opposite
theories — the denial of man's free agency, and the denial of
God's foreknowledge of voluntary actions — are both unscrip-
tural and irrational. Such denials must, therefore, be repu
diated. We are bound to believe in both doctrines, because
both the voice of scripture and the voice of reason command
this belief.
3. There is yet another aspect of this theory which requires
a moment's consideration — namely, the alleged incompati
bility between prescience and contingent or voluntary actions.
It is affirmed that the two are irreconcileable. In reply
to this, we observe, it has already been shown that each

236 THE OMNISCIENCE OF GOD.
doctrine, viewed separately, is true — sustained both by reason
and scripture. It is evident that our voluntary actions are
free, and it is as evident that God foreknows them. If,
therefore, reason do feel a difficulty in harmonizing the two
propositions, that difficulty eannot neutralize either one truth
or the other. It may involve a mystery, but not a contra
diction. Each truth, separately considered, is abundantly
sustained by evidence proper to itself, and that which is
true in itself cannot be made untrue when compared with
another truth. If any proposition be true in its separate
and independent form, it must still be true when combined
with other propositions equally true. Truth is immutable
and eternal, and whatever difficulty or mystery there may
be to our minds, when attempting to harmonize its multi
farious combinations, the fact that it is true is a pledge
that it does harmonize, though we may be incompetent to
demonstrate the harmony. Thus it must be with respect
to the Divine prescience, and the volitions and actions of
moral agents : because each is true separately, they must
harmonize when united, and if there be a difficulty, it must
spring from the absence of a power to penetrate and com
prehend truth in all its various combinations and relations.
4. But let us look at this subject a Httle more narrowly.
Let us examine the pretended discrepancy between Divine
prescience and the freedom of human thought and action.
If it can be shown that this prescience involves no necessity,
it must be admitted that human volitions and actions though
foreseen are free ; and this we think can be made manifest.
Let the three terms in question — necessity, freedom, and pre
science, be each separately explained and compared with one
another. What is involved in necessity ? It is a resistless impulse
exerted for a given end?
What is freedom ? It involves a self-determining power
to will and to act.
What is prescience ? It is simply the knowledge of an
event before it transpires.

THE OMNISCIENCE OF GOD. 237
Such being, we conceive, a correct representation of the
terms we have to inquire, Where lies the alleged incom
patibility of prescience with freedom ? Between freedom
and necessity there is an absolute and irreconcileable discre
pancy and opposition; for the assertion of the one is a direct
negation of the other. What is free cannot be necessitated,
and what is necessitated cannot be free. But prescience
involves no such opposition. For, simple knowledge is not
coercion, it is not impulse, it is not influence of any kind ;
it is merely acquaintance with truth, or the mind's seeing a
thing as it is. If I know the truth of a proposition in
Euclid, it is not my knowledge that makes it true. It was
a truth, and would have been a truth, whether I knew it
or not, even if I had never existed. So of any fact in history ;
so of any occurrence around me : my mere knowledge of
the fact did not make it fact, or exercise any influence in
causing it to be fact. So, in reference to the Divine pre
science ; it is mere knowledge, and is as distinct from force,
constraint, or influence, as any two things can be distinct
one from another. It is force which constitutes necessity,
and the total absence of force which constitutes liberty ; and,
as all force is absent from mere knowledge, it is evident
that neither foreknowledge nor after-knowledge involves any
necessity, or interferes in the least degree with human free
dom. Man could not be more free than he is if God were
totally ignorant of all his volitions and actions.
5. Still it is inquired, Can foreseen actions be otherwise
than as they are foreseen ? The word •• can " is not, we
conceive, a proper term to be employed in this question, as
this word contains the idea of potentiality or ability in the
creature. If, however, it mean, " Has the creature power
to act otherwise than as God foresees ? " we unhesitatingly
reply, he has that power, and that power is unconstrained
and free. But, if it be meant, " WiU the event be otherwise
than as God foresees it?" we reply, it will not, because God
foresees it correctly. The question proposed is the same
thing as to inquire, Does God foresee a thing correctly ?
or, Can truth be otherwise than true ? If God foresees an

238 THE OMNISCIENCE OF GOD.
event correctly, it will occur as he sees it, because he sees it
correctly. But its occurrence is not the result of his fore
sight ; it is not his foresight which causes the event, for it
has no influence over it at all. We know past events by
memory, but our memory has no influence in causing the
events which are past, nor has the Divine prescience any
influence in causing events which are future. Prescience
and memory are precisely the same both as to influence and
as to certainty. If memory be correct, it corresponds with
the events that are past, and, as God's prescience must be
correct, it corresponds with future events, because it is in
infallible conformity to truth. The past and the future
make no difference in the consideration of this subject, for
the question at issue is respecting the influence which mere
knowledge has upon the events known, and we have seen
that mere knowledge has no more influence upon events
than mere ignorance ; and the accordance of God's knowledge,
with all events, past, present, and future, arises simply
from its perfection — it accords with fact solely because it is
infallibly correct.
6. Is the question urged, How can it be possible for the
volitions and actions of free agents to be foreseen ? we reply,
It may, with equal propriety, be asked, How is it possible '
for God not to know all future events ? Both the possibility
of his knowing all things, and the impossibility of his not
knowing all things, are involved in the truth, that He is
God ! He is God, and is, therefore, a Being of infinite and
absolute perfection. He is God, and, therefore, free from
all ignorance, error, and possibility of deception. He is
God, and, therefore, knows himself, penetrates and compre
hends the infinitude of his own essence and perfections.
He is God, the Creator of all things, and what he creates he
knows thoroughly — comprehending himself, he must com
prehend the creature — the finite is as nothing to the infinite.
All things actual, and all things possible, are equally under
his eye. His glance pierces through all the complicated
modes of being, of thought, and of action, which ever did or
can take place. He sees what will be, and knows what will

THE OMNISCIENCE OF GOD 239
not be, and no one can curtail his knowledge without limiting
his perfections, and dishonouring his character.
7. Should any finally reply, — To affirm that God foreknew
all things, is to affirm that God knew that man would sin,
and with this knowledge the creation of man would have
been derogatory to his character, we reply — God did know
that man would sin, but we are not compelled to impugn
his intellect in order to exculpate his character. If the
creation of man, with a knowledge that man would sin, im
pugns God's character, so does the continuance of man's
existence impugn his character. Our opponents will not
deny that man sins, nor will they deny that God knows that
man sins, nor will they deny that God continues man in ex
istence while he is sinning, and continues to perpetuate a
race of sinful beings from generation to generation. Yet,
with these facts before them, they would shrink from im
pugning God's character. They have a logic, a philosophy,
and a theology too, by which they harmonize these events
with the Divine character ; and every one must admit, that
the same reasoning applies to the creation of beings whom
he knew would sin, as to the preservation of beings who do
sin. The question, as to the existence of moral evil, how
ever, has reference rather to the goodness and hohness of
the Creator than to his knowledge, and will be considered
in its proper place:
Reflections. — What solemnity there is in the truth, that,
wherever we are there is God — that his awful presence sur
rounds us, and his piercing eye perceives every action we per
form, every thought we exercise, every motive we cherish, every
sentiment and affection that stirs in our bosom. We may forget
God, but his presence is ever around and within us ; we may
wish for secrecy, but, however retired and hidden from man,
we are in his immediate presence, and under his immediate
inspection. The Mahometans have a proverb, that " where-
ever there are two persons present God makes the third."
Yea, wherever there is one present God makes the second.
We cannot escape from him, for he fills the universe ; we
can no more escape from ourselves, than we can from God.

240 THE OMNISCIENCE OF GOD,
Nay, though we could secure, at pleasure, intervals of obli
vion and unconsciousness, still God is there. Amid sur
rounding darkness, all is light with him ; and acts of secresy,
thoughts concealed, and purposes cloaked, are beheld with
the Same clearness and certainty as the most pubhc trans
actions of a city, or the proclamations of an empire.
If to such a Being we are accountable, How awful his
tribunal to which we must be summoned ! How unerring
the register of our deeds ! How searching the scrutiny of
our character ! How proportionate the final sentence to our
deserts !
In the contemplation of this attribute of Jehovah, how
essential must be the duty of sincerity ! Here, a heathert
may speak to us a profitable sentiment. Seneca observes;
" We ought always so to conduct ourselves as if we lived in
pubhc ; we ought to think as if some one could see what
is passing in our inmost breast ; and there is one who
does thus behold us ! Of what avail is it, then, that any
deed is concealed from men ? Nothing can be hidden from
God. He is present with our very souls, and penetrates our
inmost thoughts, and, indeed, is never absent from us."*
" He, therefore, who believes in the existence of God, should
never sin, neither secretly nor openly, "\ How inexpressibly
foolish the conduct of the hypocrite, when he knows his du
plicity and guile, his arts of deception and deeds of darkness,
are all under the inspection of God — though concealed from
man, to whom he is not amenable, they are open to the
view of that awful Being by whom he must be judged S The
thought, that we live in God's presence, and act under his
observation, should be a constant incentive to holiness,
should prompt us to shun the slightest contact with evil in
thought, word, and deed. We should " stand in awe, and
sin not."
The doctrine of God's omniscience is fraught with encou
ragement and comfort to the sincere and the upright. He,
whose presence is everywhere, and whose eye observes every
thought, is the friend of the good man, and it is always
* Seneca, Epist. 83. + Democrat, sentent.

THE OMNISCIENCE OF GOD. 241
delightful to have the presence of a friend. When misre
presented and mahgned, it is a solace to the upright that
God knows the sincerity and uprightness of our character.
When, through infirmity or want of opportunity, we fail to
accomplish some pious purpose, it is a comfort that God
knows our intentions, motives, and desires. When over
whelmed with trials and sufferings, it is a source of conso
lation to lift up our weepmg eye to heaven, like Hagar, and
exclaim, "Thou, God, seest me." It is an encouragement to
know, that our God is at hand to exercise his tender sympathy,
and impart his timely succours. When we draw nigh to God
in prayer, it inspires energy in our petitions, when we remem
ber that Jehovah sees our necessities, reads the earnestness
of our spirits, and observes our bosoms panting with eager
desire. When the Saviour thrice uttered to Simon the
appeal, " Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me," it was a
consolation to that true penitent, to be able, with confidence,
to refer the appeal back to his omniscient Saviour, saying,
" Lord, thou knowest all things, thou kno west that I love thee."
But this doctrine speaks the language of terror and dis
may to the wicked. He dislikes God ; the thoughts of him
are a burden intolerable to be borne ; and yet that awful and
dreadful Being is constantly with him ; through every mo
ment, and in every place, he is nearer to him than any other
object, and inspects and marks every evil action and thought.
Flee from God he cannot ; for where can he flee to be beyond
the pale of the Divine presence ? Elude his notice he cannot,
for God knows his acts before he has committed them, and
his thoughts before they are conceived. How terrible the
contemplation of this truth ! When the impious Belshazzar
saw but a hand writing on the wall of his palace, he " trem
bled, his countenance changed, his thoughts troubled him,
the joints of his loins were loosed, and his knees smote one
against another." But why this terror at the appearance
of a mere hand, seeing he was previously hardened and
unmoved, though, surrounded by the presence of God ?
Why this consternation at a few mystic characters on
the wall, seeing, a moment before, he cared not that the
g

242 THE OMNISCIENCE OF GOD.
all-seeing eye of God observed every thought of his licen
tious and malignant breast ? It was not the mere hand
writing that filled him with dismay, but the sight of that
strange and mystic object aroused bis mind to the conviction
of the fact he had forgotten — the fact that God was there — the
fact that the eternal Jehovah, whose name he was profaning,
whose authority he was despising, and whose laws he was
trampling upon with contempt, was in the place where he
sat, observing his conduct, and meditating the speedy punish
ment of his transgressions. God is not the less present
though no mystic hand appear ; nor his observance the less
exact, though no visible writing record the sinner's doom.
If the transgressor's eyes could but be opened to the reality
of his position, what horror would seize him 1 a sight more
dreadful than Sinai when in a blaze — more terrific than the
hand-writing on the wall of Belshazzar's palace — a sight
more awful than the drama of the world's conflagration
would burst upon his vision — he would see the offended
Deity on every side, he would behold himself enveloped
with the presence and attributes of the eternal God, his
Maker and his Judge. WISDOM.
" God is wise in heart, as well as mighty in strength. "
— Job ix., 4. Wisdom differs from mere knowledge, as it
includes sagacity, judgement, and the right use of knowledge.
Thus knowledge furnishes the materials with which wisdom
builds. The exercise of Divine wisdom involves the posses;
sion of other attributes on which we have not yet enlarged.
It supposes Almighty power, absolute rectitude, unbounded
goodness, and every other moral excellence, and implies that
all these attributes are exercised under the direction of infi
nite intelligence. Every production springing from their
combined exercise must be good in its nature and design,
and fitted to answer that design. Therefore, as in the Deity,
infinite intelligence is associated with every other perfection,
it follows that he must be " wise in heart, " and that all his
works must bear the impress of wisdom. "Jehovah, by

THE OMNISCIENCE OF GOD. 243
wisdom, hath founded the earth : by understanding hath
he estabhshed the heavens." Great and marvellous are his
works ; but in wisdom hath he made them all. Wisdom
devised the plan of the universe, and, when created, it was,
in all respects, in harmony with the Divine conception.
Hence, God looked, with perfect satisfaction, upon all that
he had made, and, behold, it was very good." All the
manifestations of design and contrivance — all the exhibitions
of adaptation, and the arrangement of means to their respec
tive ends — all the evidences of order and harmony in the
constitution of nature, are so many proofs of wisdom. Here
is a vast and boundless field for meditation ; as it expands
before us, it presents alluring invitations to inquiry and
research. 0 the depth of the riches both of the wisdom
and knowledge of God ! a depth never to be fathomed,
riches never to be exhausted. Bevelation declares, and
reason responds to the declaration, that the intelligent
universe will find delightful and ennobling employment
throughout eternity in exploring the wisdom of God. Exam
ples of this wisdom may be selected by thoughtful minds
from every part of the Creator's works. We cannot enlarge,
but, as a guide to the reader, we refer him to the general
indications of wisdom suggested in Chapters vii. and viii.,
Part I. ; to Bay on the Wisdom of God ; to Paley's Natural
Theology ; to the Bridgewater Treatises ; and to several
unpretending, yet truly excellent volumes, recently issued
by the Beligious Tract Society, and pubhshed at a rate
which places them within the means of the poorest artizan.

CHAPTEE VI.

THE POWER OF GOD.

" God hathspoken once ; twice have I heard this; that power belongeth
unto God'' — Psalm, lxii., 11.

In the passage we have prefixed to this chapter, power,
in an absolute and; exclusive sense, is ascribed to the Deity:
The meaning is, that Jehovah's power is underived and
unlimited, and that he alone is the source and fountain! of
all power: so that whatever power is possessed and exerted'
by the i creature, is derivedi from the Creator: This doctrine
of holy, scripture is unequivocally corroborated by the
testimony of reason.
Perhaps the most simple definition of power is— the ability
to, do., something, especially to produce some effect ; andt
the idea of Almighty power,- is the idea of abihty to do all
things. Thus, the proper conception of power always
includes agency, and agency is an attribute of mind, and
the mind that possesses this agency originally and without
limit, must, be God himself. The evidence therefore of power;
hke that, of intelligence., carries us to, the Deity as the only,
being who is, its original source and, fountain.
It was a sentiment taught by the ancient philosophers,
that all motion originates with mind, and, though transmitted
and continued through various means, it never commenced
except in a volition, either of the Supreme Mind, or of cre
ated minds. The facts elicited by modern philosophy have
removed this sentiment from the region of speculation to
that of established certainty. It now takes its place in the
category of estabhshed truths. We feel persuaded that
this truth has been demonstrated in our third, fourth, and
fifth propositions, and further, that another great truth —

THE POWER OF GOD. 245
the creation of matter, by the Supreme Mind — has been
established by a continuation of the same argument. Thus,
all existence as well as all motion, resulting from the vohtion
of Deity, it follows, that in the most emphatic and exclusive
sense — All power belongeth unto God.
Throughout the universe of matter and of mind we see
evidences of power in boundless variety, but as the universe
itself was created, whatever evidences of power it presents,
they must be so many proofs of the power of God.
In the creature we see two distinct kinds of power exerted.
The one, arbitrary and voluntary ; the other, fixed and me
chanical. The diversified motions of inanimate matter are
fixed, determinate, and uniform. Chemical, electrical, and
mechanical forces, operate according to fixed laws — the same
physical causes producing the same effects invariably, except
when interrupted by some miraculous interposition. But the
source of the power, thus exerted, does not reside in matter
itself. As matter is not eternal, nor motion self-originated, but
both derived from God, it follows, that all the power involved
in the multifarious motions of matter must be referred to
the Creator. The Eternal mind which originated their ex
istence, supplied the power which gives them impulse and
activity. In the various species of living creatures, we see an im
mense amount of power exerted spontaneously and volunta
rily. With man, there is a power still more freely exerted,
than that exerted; by the inferior tribes. It is less -under the
influence of instinct, and more completely under the domi
nion of reason, and; a self-determining faculty. Every, hu
man being knows, by consciousness, that he has a capability
of voluntary activity, of producing a variety' of effects. By
a simple vohtion of my mind, I can produce an immediate
action of the several parts of my body. I can produce mus
cular contraction and motion ; I can lift, my, arm, change
my position and locality. Here the effect is < immediate and
instantaneous. We perceive nothing- intervene between the
volition! of the mind, and the obedient act of the body:
Here there is the immediate contact of mind with matter ;

246 THE POWER OF GOD.
here, an instantaneous effect is produced upon a material
object by simple vohtion, and thus the supremacy of mind
over matter is clearly manifested. " The mind, indeed, to a
certain extent, and within its own sphere, possesses absolute
power, and whatever motion it wills, instantly takes place."
There is, therefore, as clear a distinction, and as wide a
difference, between the action of the chemical and mechani
cal forces in inanimate matter, and the voluntary motions
of rational beings, as can be conceived, and yet the power
exerted in both is solely the power of God. The evidence
of this is as clear in the one case as the other, for as the
voluntary agent derived his being from God, he derived all
the attributes of his being from God. His power to act,.
as well as his power to digest and assimilate food, came equally
from God. The power under the dominion of his will as weh
as that which operates mechanically and unconsciously in
his material system, is derived from the almighty Creator.!
" Power belongeth unto God."
The power of Jehovah is displayed in the creation of the
universe, in the wonderful operations which are incessantly
transpiring, and in the preservation of all things.
THE POWER OF GOD IN CREATION.
1 . The Creation of Matter. The act of creation involves om
nipotence. Whatever energies man may possess, he cannot
create a single particle of matter, nor can he annihilate one.
He cannot add a new property to any elementary particle of
matter, nor can he destroy one. He cannot change the laws
which regulate the properties of matter, nor can he for a
moment suspend them. He can dart his scrutinizing eye
into the various modifications under which matter presents
itself to. his observation ; he can subject it to the power of
his alembic, his battery, and his searching menstruum; he
can analyze and combine ; he can resolve the solid into the
gaseous, and can condense the gaseous into solid ; but he
has no power to create, to annihilate an atom of dust, nor
any power to destroy a single property of matter. So far

THE POWER OF GOD. 247
is the smallest atom above the action of the most formidable
powers which man can employ ; so distinct and impassable
is the boundary which marks the operations of the Creator,
from those of the creature. Creation is the work of God
alone ; and the bringing of the smallest atom into existence
involves, of itself, an act of omnipotence.
How exalted, then, must be our conceptions of the Divine
power, when we contemplate the immensity of creation!
"Lift up your eyes on high," says the prophet, "and see
who hath created these things, that bringeth out their host
by number ; He calleth them all by name : through the
greatness of his strength, and the mightiness of his power,
not one of them faileth to appear." Thus summoned by
the voice of inspiration to survey the manifestations of Je
hovah's power, let us, for a moment, gaze upon the magni
ficent spectacle. We have before descanted on the vastness
of the visible universe, as revealed by the space-penetrating
power of Lord Bosse's telescope, and stated, that a line
extending from two extreme Nebula?, in opposite parts of the
heavens, stretches over a space, through which a ray of light
cannot travel in less than sixty millions of years. Through
the immense sphere of which this is the diameter, it is esti
mated that millions upon millions, not only of orbs, but of
congregations of orbs, are scattered with gorgeous profusion,
and how far beyond this prodigious sphere no man knoweth ;
but the probability is, that it bears the proportion of a grain
of sand to a globe, compared to the outer boundaries of the
universe of God, yet all equally replenished and crowded
with galaxies, and diversified forms of existence. The world
we inhabit, large as it is, with its mountains and valleys,
its vast oceans and continents, is small compared with other
globes belonging to our system. The planet Jupiter con
tains a mass of matter, equal to fourteen hundred of our
earths, but the sun is three hundred and fifty-five thousand
times larger than our world. Overpowering as this magni
tude is, it is diminutive, compared with the size of some of
the fixed stars. The star Sirius is, with good reason, sup
posed to be equal in size to many of our suns, but the

248 THE POWER OF GOD.
solid contents of the bright star Vega, or a Lyra?, are
estimated to be 19,579,357,857,382,400,000,000, or, above
nineteen thousand, five hundred and seventy-nine trillions
of miles ; which is fifty-four thousand, eight hundred, and
seventy-two times larger than the solid contents of the
sun.* The magnitude of such a globe is altogether over
powering to the human imagination, and it baffles every effort
to approximate to a distinct conception of an object of such
amazing amplitude and splendour. Yet, have we reason to
believe, there are millions upon millions of such orbs
scattered through the spacious universe. The number of
telescopic stars in the Milky Way, has been estimated at
eighteen millions, but the Milky Way is only one collection
of stars, and seems to form a type of thousands of similar
clusters or galaxies, which are seen faintly looming in
regions, too remote for distinct conception. Sir John
Herschel himself has observed two thousand, five hundred
nebula?, or clusters of stars, and what multitudes more may
be observed by the superior power of Lord Bosse's telescope^
and what further numbers more may yet be discovered by
similar instruments in other hemispheres we are unable to
determine. In some of those already examined, the crowds
of stars are found so dense, that " ten or twenty thousand
stars appear compacted or wedged together, in a space not
larger than a tenth of that covered by the moon, and
presenting in its centre one blaze of hght."
The powers of arithmetic seem baffled with such numbers,
and the aggregate magnitude of such amazing bodies, con
founds the imagination, and almost crushes the human
spirit in its attempt to contemplate them, yet such are the
creatures of God ; such are the evidences of his power.
Every atom of the whole was brought into being by his
word ; yet an atom proclaims his omnipotence. In the
view of such a universe, what force and emphasis are given
to the inspired declaration, " Power belongeth unto God."
Nor can we suppose this work was a hard thing for the
Almighty to accomplish. The inspired narrative represents
* Dick's Sidereal Heavens.

THE POWER OF GOD. 249
the universe as ushered into being by his word. He spake
and it was done, he commanded and it stood fast. It was
the effect of a simple volition of his Almighty mind. Just
as a human action flows from -a mental determination, so
creation instantly followed the fiat of his will. The moment
before his fiat was issued, there was not an atom in being ;
the instant after, the material of these myriads of stupendous
worlds, declared that his will was obeyed.
2. The Creation of Spirit. The scriptures assert the
existence of various orders of spiritual beings. This is not
repugnant to reason. To an omnipotent Being all things
are possible, and the creation of matter declares the exist
ence of a power adequate to produce any other substance
which the Divine wisdom might determine. If God has
created matter, a substance so totally dissimilar to his own
essence, it is quite rational to suppose, not only the possibi
lity, but the probability of his creating beings of a nature
in some respects resembling his own. The existence, there
fore, of spiritual intelligences of various orders and capacities,
may be admitted as a truth conformable to reason ; and, as
what reason admits, revelation asserts, their existence is
another manifestation of creative energy.
THE POWER OF GOD DISPLAYED IN THE OPERATIONS OF NATURE.
The whole universe is in motion, and its motion is the -
effect of power, and of that power God is the only source .
and fountain.
1. It has pleased God, that a portion of matter should
be animated, and this is full of activity. Bespiration,
digestion, secretion, circulation, assimilation, reproduction, •
growth, and decay, are modes of activity which pervade
the whole animal economy ; and, in the vegetable kingdom
a similar process is going on, so that no portion of vitalized ¦ .
or organized matter can remain at rest. In inanimate
matter, too, there are forces in constant operation. The air
and the ocean are never in repose ; meteoric changes are
every moment transpiring. In the more compact and sohd
masses of the earth — rocks, mountains, minerals, and
h

250 THE POWER OF GOD
substances apparently the most stable — electrical, magnetic,
and chemical forces are ever active, producing a perpetual
circle of decomposition, solution, analysis and combination.
Not a particle of matter from the circumference to the centre
of our globe, but is acted upon by a variety of agencies. Not
an atom is completely isolated. It has properties which
influence other atoms, and they have properties which influ
ence it. Eeciprocal properties and influences pervade the
entire mass of the globe, from its surface to its deepest
recesses. This action is the result of Almighty power. A
similar process of motion and activity is, doubtless, the
characteristic of the masses of matter composing the
planets, the sun, and all those vast globes which are
diffused through the spacioiis universe. In addition to the
influences which thus operate upon the particles of matter
in each separate globe, there are activities of a wider
scope and mightier force, giving to those orbs prodigious
velocity through the regions of space. Centripetal and
centrifugal forces are incessantly acting upon worlds and
systems of worlds, and carrying them round in orbits of
amazing extent, and with a velocity compared with which,
a cannon ball moves with a tardy action. Stationary as
our own globe appears, it is moving in its sphere at the
rate of more than a thousand miles in a minute of time ;
the planet Mercury moves at the rate of one thousand,
seven hundred, and eighty-three miles in a minute. But
the comet of 1680, is said to move at the awful rate of
thirteen thousand, six hundred and sixty-six miles in a
minute. While each planet and comet of the solar system
is thus whirling round the sun with various degrees of
speed, the system itself has no fixed abode in space, but
is shifting its place among the stars ; and further, the
entire collections of stars, and nebulous clusters of stars,
are; with good reason, supposed to be revolving around
one common centre. The termed fixed, is now found to
be no longer applicable to any star in the heavens,
for, the apparent stability of their position arises from
that prodigious distance which makes the whole diameter

THE POWER OF GOD. 251
of our system dwindle to a point, and the duration of
a thousand years too short a period to perceive any
great variation in their locality ; and yet such variations
have been perceived, as afford ground to estimate that the
star Arcturus moves through space at the rate of above one
thousand miles a minute, that p Cassiopeia? moves at the
rate of two thousand one hundred and sixty miles a minute ;
but the double star, 61 Cygni, is estimated to be translated
through space with the astounding velocity of twenty mil
lions of millions of miles in the year. The varied velocities
just named may be regarded as examples of the activities of
the whole celestial machinery, and if they overpower our
imagination, How shall we conceive of the energy which at
first gave these huge bodies their motions, and which still
directs and guides them, with unerring exactness, regularity,
and ease, as they silently journey through the regions of
immensity? The mighty impulse was an emanation of
Jehovah's power. The centrifugal force which hurled the
ponderous masses into space is His — the centripetal force
which reins them in, and converts their rectihnear into an
orbicular motion is His. The hght which issues from them,
and darts through the whole area of the vast profound, at
the rate of twelve millions of miles in a minute of time,
received its momentum from Him. He who gave them
their being imparted these wonderful activities. Well may
he be emphatically called "The mighty God." Great is
our Lord, ;and of great power ; His understanding is infinite.
He telleth the number of the stars, and calleth them all, by
their names. He bringeth forth Mazzaroth in his season,
guideth Arcturus and his sons, and appointeth the ordinances
of heaven.
2. The power displayed by the.aGtivity of all created minds
proceeds from the Deity. Perhaps we have no standard by
which to form an exact estimate of the power possessed by
the human mind. We know it is capable of amazing acti
vity, and that it can exercise a hmited control over matter.
Besides moving at pleasure the several parts of the corporeal
system in which it resides, it can exert some degree of power

252 THE POWER OF GOD.
over surrounding objects. It can employ our bodily organs
in arranging, disposing, and modifying various material
substances, and transforming them into articles of utility
and elegance. It can operate further ; for it can avail itself
of existing forces in nature, and thus intellect can produce
effects where muscular energy fails. It can employ., the
lever, the pulley, the wheel, the screw, and the expansive
power of steam, to execute its will. Archimedes said he
could move the world if he had but a place on which to erect
his machinery; and, although this assertion must be re
garded as an extravagant hyperbole, yet it is evident that
man can, by the aid of external forces, produce effects truly
prodigious, both in magnitude and number, and his works
look more like the operations of some superior being than
of a creature so diminutive, and, apparently, so feeble as
man. We are aware, indeed it may justly be urged, that
the effects produced by the mechanism of external forces are
rather the evidences of intellectual sagacity than of spiritual
power ; but it may be urged, on the other hand, that if the
effects of mechanical instrumentality surpass the inherent
energy of the mind, the effects of muscular instrumentality
cannot be proved to limit its power. If the one be supposed
to surpass it, the probability is, that the other is inadequate
to the full degree of its capability. On the organs of its own
body it acts by immediate contact, and its power is evidently
restrained and held in by the feebleness of the instrumentality
it employs, just as the expansive force of steam is hmited
only by the strength of the copper and iron in which it is
confined ; and, were the full power of the mind exerted,
it would probably rend the vascular system, overcome the
adhesive strength of the bones, tendons, and muscles, and
break down the frail tenement in which it resides. In fact,
we cannot estimate the power with which the Creator has
endued the human mind over matter ; but the probabi
lity is, that, if the human mind were furnished with corre
sponding apparatus, its power over matter would be found
to surpass the strength of any inferior animal, as much as
it transcends them in the dignity and excellence of its

THE POWER OF GOD. 253
nature. This view is corroborated by the statements furnished
in the scriptures respecting the amazing powers of angelic
beings. There may be intellectual beings of various orders,
occupying every orb in the universe ; and, besides those who
reside in the material universe, there may be, and indeed
there are, countless multitudes of pure spiritual existences.
No arithmetic can calculate, no mind can conceive, the
number of intelligent beings with which the blessed God
has peopled his wide domain in the material and spiritual
worlds. All these are beings of intense activity, thought,
purpose, will, affections, and acts of power are being inces
santly put forth by these creatures. But all the energy thus
employed, and all the capabilities yet to be exerted by them,
are so many manifestations of the power of God. Nothing
is self-existent but the glorious Creator ; and, as the exist
ence of the creature is derived from God, so are the energies
they individually and collectively exert. Though their
volitions and actions are their own, the power involved in
their exertion is from God.
THE POWER OF GOD DISPLAYED IN THE PRESERVATION OF
NATURE.
The sacred records teach the doctrine that God's power
is constantly exercised in the preservation of his works, in
the continuance of their being and order, until they, have
subserved the purposes of his will. The supposition of
of God creating the universe and then leaving it to itself is
heathenish, and as irrational as it is heathenish. True
philosophy disowns it, and can no more recognise a universe
independent in its preservation than independent in its exist
ence. Existence derived is ever dependent upon him who
gave it, and powers and properties derived are dependent upon
him who bestowed them. Besides, the sacred records speak of
many direct and special interpositions, in which the estab
lished order of things has been interrupted by the determina
tion of the Creator. The waters of the sea have been divided,
and stood erect hke a wall of adamant ; the intensest flames
have had no power to burn, — the sun and moon have been
arrested in their course, — iron has had its gravity suspended,

254 THE POWER OF GOD.
— a handful of food has been augmented to a supply ade
quate for thousands, — diseases have been cured by a word,
— the orb of day has concealed his hght at noon, without
any physical cause, — and the corrupting carcase has become
reanimated. All these events, though above nature, are
quite consistent with the philosophy which reeognises the
Deity as presiding over his own work, as everywhere present,
and every moment exercising a directing and controling
agency. Second causes are but the instruments of his power,
and natural laws are but the rules which he has prescribed
for his own operations. These rules he can set aside, or diver
sify as he pleases, and the properties of matter operate only
through his agency, and in accordance with his will. Vast
as is the power thus continually put - forth, he fainteth not
neither is weary. The facility with which planets roll and
stars shine, seems to indicate the ease with which Jehovah
actuates and governs all things. Cicero represents the Deity
pervading and moving the universe as the soul moves the
members of the body, simply by a volition of his mind.*'
The simile, if devoid of a pantheistic meaning, is elegant1
and true to a certain extent, yet it falls short of fully repre
senting the fact intended; for a human being in time
becomes conscious of fatigue from exertion, however perfect
his control over muscular instrumentality. But Jehovah is
never weary with his incessant, multifarious, and Almighty
labours. As he sees all things without distraction, so he
operates through all without exhaustion or fatigue. In the
same perfect manner is his power continually employed in
the spiritual world. Our souls are in his hand, and by him
all spirits continue to subsist. " This also cometh forth
from the Lord of hosts, who is wonderful in counsel and
excellent in working."
It is puerile to allege, that as creation, however vast, is
finite, therefore no manifestations of power therein can prove
* Vos enim ipsi dicere soletis, nihil esse, quod Deus non possit effi-
cere, et quidem sine labore ullo. Ut enim hominum memhra nulla
contentione, mente ipsa ac voluntate moveantur : sic numine Deorum
omnia fingi, moveri, mutarique posse. — Cicero De Nat. Deorum. Lib.
iii. cap, 39, sec. 92.

THE POWER OF GOD. 255
God's power to be infinite. The manifestation is not to be
estimated merely by its extent, vast as it is, but also by its
nature and quality. That manifestation includes, as we
have seen, the act of creation, as well as motion, and a creative
power must be an infinite p.ower. It is impossible either to
fix any definite limit to such a power, or to conceive any
limitation possible. Moreover, the absolute perfection of his
nature involves the possession of every attribute in an unli
mited degree. Nor is our estimate of God's power dimi
nished by admitting that it cannot effect any thing contrary
to wisdom and goodness, for, the impossibility here contem
plated is no detraction from his natural energy, but a moral
necessity arising from the superlative excellence of his nature.
He cannot do evil, because he is infinitely and absolutely
good ; his power cannot contradict his wisdom and holiness,
because he is eternally and unchangeably perfect.
This doctrine opens a source of encouragement, confidence,
and joy, to God's people. Their God is the Lord, "The
Great God, the Mighty God, Jehovah of Hosts is his name ;
great in council, and mighty in work, and his eyes are upon
all their ways." This glorious Being is their Father, their
covenant God. They know that he who created them and
has received them into his favour, watches over them with
unceasing care, that the very hairs of their head are num
bered, and that all their concerns are in his hand. Assured
that his providence will preserve, his power defend, and his
grace cause all things to work together for their good ; they
may trust and not be afraid. None can pluck them out of
his hand, and no weapon formed against them shall prosper.
They may, therefore, dismiss all corroding anxiety, and all
distressing fears, knowing that he, in whom they have trusted,
is able to keep that which they have committed unto him
until the day of probation terminate ; and they may, without
presumption, rejoice in the assurance, that neither death,
nor hfe, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present,
nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other
creature, shall be; able to separate them from the love of God
which is in Christ Jesus.

CHAPTER VII.

THE BENEVOLENCE OF GOD.

" God is Love." — 1 John, iv., 8, 16.

Hitherto we have considered what are commonly termed
the natural attributes of Deity, we now proceed to contem
plate the moral dispositions and affections of his nature.
Properly speaking, however, all the attributes of Jehovah
are natural ; they are all equally essential to Deity.
Love is complacency in and affection for an object. But
no definition of love can so clearly depict its natilre as an
appeal to our own consciousness. We all know what love
is by experience, and an appeal to our own bosoms furnishes'
the best idea of its nature. We know what it is to love a
partner, a child, a parent. This is natural love. The'
christian knows what it is to love his brother and to love1
his God. This is spiritual love : a love produced in the
soul by God's renewing grace. Now, if God is love, an;
affection essentially the same in principle must dwell in his
mind. In the scriptures the affection is described by the
same word, whether applied to God or man, whether it
be our love to one another or our love to God, or God's love
to us, or whether it speak of God's love in the abstract, it
is the same ; and the affection itself must be the same in
essence, however vast the difference in degree. Love is
love, whoever may be its possessor or its object. To obtain, '
then, a correct idea of the love of God, we must consider
the affection in our own bosom, purified from all unholy
ingredients, and enlarged to a degree corresponding with
his own infinite capacity. This is what is meant by the
love of God — a pure, holy, benevolent affection, dwelling in
his mind in an infinite measure or degree.

the benevolence of god. 257
The passage of scripture standing at the head of this
chapter is very peculiar. It employs not an adjective to
express a quality, but it employs the noun itself, love ; it
affirms not merely that God is benevolent or loving in his
nature, but, that he is love itself. This pecuhar phraseology,
too, occurs twice in the same discourse ; we have it in the
eighth verse, and again in the sixteenth of the same chapter,
— " God is love. " We do not think, with some divines, that
this form of expression is intended to denote that love is the
essence of God, for, how can an affection be the essence of a
substantive existence ? At the same time it must be admit
ted by all who venerate and understand the scriptures, that
phraseology of so pecuhar a nature must be intended to
convey an important and a peculiar meaning — a meaning
in which this extraordinary assertion can be applied to no
other being but God. To us it appears designed to express,
not that love is the essence of God, but that love is essential to
God. That love is not an adventitious affection, but one
inseparable from his Being, and eternally existing in him ;
an affection not called into existence by the creation of
objects, or by the contemplation of any objects intended to
be created, but an affection which exists in the Divine mind
essentially and eternally, irrespectively of the existence of
any created being ; so that, had no creature existed, love-
would have had the same place in the mind of Deity. The
peculiar phrase was intended also to express the infinite
intensity of God's love — an intensity which could not be
so clearly and fully indicated by any other form of speech as
the one adopted — " God is love." The scriptural represen
tation of this truth is in accordance with the dictates of rea
son, as will be seen from the consideration of a variety of
important and obvious truths.
I. CREATION IS A proof of the divine love.
1. The act of creation was either necessary or voluntary.
That it was not the effect of an absolute necessity has
already been demonstrated. God never works from the
influence of any physical necessity, because no such necessity

258 THE BENEVOLENCE of god.
operates within him or upon him. Existing alone from
eternity,, there was nothing external to compel or induce
him to put forth his creative energy. Existing too as an
intelligent and voluntary Being, there could be no internal
necessity inducing the production of the universe. Creation,
therefore, does not emanate from the Divine essence as
water flows from a fountain, or as light beams from the sun.
The great First Cause does not act as material and secondary
causes operate. These act necessarily without intelligence
or choice on their part, but Jehovah always acts intelligently
and voluntarily, with particular purpose and design, knowing
that he does good, and intending to do so freely and from
choice. His works flow from his purposes, and his purposes are
the dictates of his wisdom, and, therefore, all his operations
are spontaneous and free.
2. If the creation of the universe was a voluntary act, and
that. act originated from a wise purpose, it follows, that the
purpose itself must haye originated from some motive ; for
to suppose God to act without a motive is to impugn his
wisdom. What, then, was the motive which operated in
the bosom of the Deity ? Was it a selfish one ? Was it a
sense of his own need? This was impossible ; for, as an
absolutely perfect Being, he could need nothing. From all
eternity he had been infinitely happy in the possessions of
his own all-sufficiency, and could need nothing. Was the
motive a malignant one ? This, also, was impossible ; for
there was -nothing in his nature to generate such a passion,
and nothing externally as yet existed to excite such a
feeling, nor could anything do this if it had existed. More
over, a malign feeling is the property of an imperfect nature,
but the nature of Deity necessarily excludes the possibility of
such a property ; and the works of the Deity furnish, as we
shall show hereafter, abundant evidence a posteriori that no
such passion had any place in his bosom. If, then, the
motive was neither a selfish nor a malignant one, it must
have been a benevolent one. Thus, reason and revelation
are one in their testimony. Creation must be the offspring
of love. Created existence, then, in all its varied forms,

THE BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 259
proclaims the goodness of God. The unnumbered worlds
which his Almighty hand has scattered throughout immen
sity, and the countless myriads of sensitive and intelligent
beings inhabiting them, are all the irradiations of his free,
spontaneous, and boundless love. His benevolenee inclined
his will to communicate himself and to do good. His love
both prompted his wisdom to devise, and his power to
effect, the wondrous universe of being.
Although the preceding argument is perfectly valid and
irresistible, as far as it extends, yet justice to the subject
requires it to be followed up by a view of the works of God.
We judge of the dispositions of a being by his doings, espe
cially by his proceedings towards others ; and, though we
cannot penetrate the heart, we can generally infer, with
infalhble certainty, as to the leading dispositions which
actuate the conduct of men. We know the class of actions
which flow from benevolence, and find no difficulty in distin
guishing them from the effects of hatred and malignity..
Let us then estimate the character of God by his works ;
let us judge of his disposition by referring to his deeds.
II. GOD HAS MANIFESTED HIS BENEVOLENCE BY IMPLANTING
LOVE TN THE NATURE OF SENTIENT BEINGS.
It is a fact worthy of observation, that in every animal
capable of reciprocating any emotion, we find the affection
of love. Some classes of animals appear to be too low in
the scale of existence to be the subjects of any emotion, or,
at least, of reciprocating any passion ; but in all where that
that capabihty exists, we believe it may be confidently stated,
that the affection of love may be found to exist. Among
the numerous irrational tribes it exists as an instinctive
passion, uniting the bird to its mate, the parent animal to
its young, and producing often a social and kindred attach
ment through the species. This affection, too, is frequently,
excited and reciprocated among animals of different species,
and is sometimes cherished by brute creatures towards
human beings with peculiar fondness and fidelity. In man,
also, this affection exists as an instinctive passion, exercising

260 THE BENEVOLENCE OF GOD.
a similar influence, and is the foundation of our social
attachments and relations. But when the heart of man
embraces the Gospel (we speak of an experimental fact),, it
becomes possessed of a higher affection — a love more refined,
more intense, and more ennobling, than an instinctive pas
sion — a spiritual principle which causes the soul to delight
in God as its chief good, and expands the bosom with a
consciousness of pure and ardent benevolence to man. The
scriptures reveal to us the existence of other orders of intel
ligent beings (whioh is perfectly consonant with reason to
admit), and these are described as under the influence of
of the same benevolent affection. The existence of this
amiable affection in the creature proves its existence in the
Creator. We are aware it may be replied, that most of the creatures
described as under the influence of the affection of love are
influenced also by other passions, and some of them of a
malign character. This cannot be denied, but several im
portant truths require to be well observed, which neutralise
any objection from this source.
1 . In estimating the character of God from his works, it
is an axiom that the dispositions and properties of the
Creator are to be inferred from the excellencies of the crea
ture and not from its defects. Now, the malign passions,
under any form, are marks of the creature's limited and
imperfect nature. Any disposition or temper repugnant to
love, whether it exist in the irrational tribes or in human
beings, is an evidence of inferiority and imperfection ; but
love is an excellence which ennobles and dignifies the creature
possessing it, and the dignity and excellence of the creature
rise in proportion to the degree in which this benevolent
affection is cherished and possessed. Now, as we cannot
infer the character of God from the imperfections of the
creature, we cannot ascribe to him any of the malign pas
sions ; but as we estimate his character from the superior
and the excellent dispositions he has planted in our nature,
we are carried to the conclusion that God is love — that he
has bestowed a measure of this excellent disposition upon

THE BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 261
the creature, because it dwells in infinite plenitude in
himself. 2. The nature of intelligent beings is so constituted, that
we approve of and admire benevolent affections, but disap
prove and condemn those of the contrary nature. Pure,
disinterested love, throws around the character of its pos
sessor an amiability, an attractiveness, which forces our
respect and admiration. Why should our nature be endowed
with an instinctive approbation of the benevolent affection,
but that it expresses the disposition of our Creator ? — that,
by our admiring what is amiable in his creature, we might
learn and admire a corresponding excellency in himself.
3. The malign tempers are sources of unhappiness and
misery. They render the possessor of them miserable, and
inflict misery on others ; but the benevolent affection is a
source of happiness to its possessor, and is calculated to
produce happiness in all towards whom it is exercised.
Love is not an indolent or speculative sentiment, but an
active principle. It prompts its possessor to effort for the
good of others. It renders the work of doing good our
element and delight ; and thus its exercise yields happiness
within and happiness without. It yields a rich harvest
of personal enjoyment in the holy work [of imparting peace
and enjoyment to all around. The universal diffusion of
love would, indeed, dry up every fountain of misery, and fill
the world with harmony, happiness, and joy. We ask, then,
is it conceivable that the Author of this beneficent princi
ple is a malignant Being ? Certainly not. He could not
give an excellence he did not possess, he could not fix the
seal of his approval on what he abhorred ; for, this is to
suppose a contradiction between his disposition and his
works. It is to suppose that his works, instead of being the
exponents of his disposition are the exponents of dispositions
diametrically opposite to his own ; which is to suppose not
only that he acts without motives, but that he acts contrary
to his own motives. All such suppositions involve absurdi
ties too flagrant to be entertained for one moment. God's
works cannot contradict, but express, his nature and disposi-

262 THE BENEVOLENCE OF GOD.
tion, and, therefore, if he has invariably associated happi
ness with the possession and exercise of benevolence, it is a
proof that he is benevolent himself- — and an evidence that
he approves of this amiable disposition in others. He
thereby stimulates the creature to imitate himself. In the
very constitution of our nature he says, " Be loving, for God
is love." There is no affection so refined in its nature, so
happy in its influence, and so ennobling in its effects, as
love ; there is none so widely diffused through creation, and
there is none so visibly impressed with tokens of Divine
approval — the inference is irresistible, that God is love.
III. GOD'S CARE FOR HIS CREATURES DECLARES HIS
BENEVOLENCE.
When a parent cheerfully provides for the necessities of
his offspring, it is justly regarded as an evidence of his love
for them ; and, if this care be uniformly manifested, no
rational mind will question its strength and sincerity. In
estimating God's disposition towards his creatures, we look
for similar evidence, and it constantly presents itself to our
view. Indeed, every manifestation of wisdom is accompanied
with some manifestation of goodness. It would be no service
to truth to neglect or gloss over the fact that there is suffer
ing in the world. This fact we shall look fully in the face
at the proper time. But, in this argument we have to
ascertain whether God evinces a paternal care for his crea
tures by providing for their welfare; for, if this disposition
be manifest, his benevolent disposition is proved. Now, all
inanimate nature is one vast and wonderful system, whose
operations are directed to the welfare of living beings, thus
affording a display not only of infinite intelligence and
Almighty power, but of boundless benevolence. The good
of sensitive and rational creatures is obviously the design of
all the Creator's works. That this good is. extensively and
very generally enjoyed we do maintain; but that this good
is invariably and in every instance fully realized by the
creature is what we do not affirm. The good intended
is, indeed, sometimes partially lost by the creature's own

THE BEVEVOLENCE OF GOD. 263
conduct, and sometimes by circumstances over which the
creature has no control ; but whatever this may prove, it does
not neutralize the clear and palpable evidences of a benevo
lent disposition and intention on the part of the Creator.
From the endless multitude of examples, which press upon
our view, only a few can be selected.
1. The phenomena of circulation and respiration. — Our mys
terious nature is so constituted that the circulation of
the blood, and the respiration of air, are essential to hfe.
It is the blood which continues to supply the waste of our
system, and to build it up with new material ; and, for
this important end, it penetrates every part of the body,
and is made to circulate through it with great rapidity — the
state of health depending upon the quality of the blood and
. z the regularity of the circulation. But the important func
tions of the blood are constantly exhausting some of its vital
properties, and it becomes necessary that its deteriorated
qualities should be discharged, and a fresh supply of vitali
zing properties should be as constantly imparted to it.
This is effected by respiration. Now, in the animal economy
we see an apparatus fitted for breathing, and in the sur
rounding atmosphere we see an element, or a mixture of
elements, exactly suited to nature's requirements — being
endowed with those properties which it is essential the
blood should imbibe to qualify it to support existence. In
order that these life-sustaining properties may be imbibed,
all the blood in the system is made to pass through the
lungs once during every few minutes of time. Hence, it is
necessary that the air and the blood should have the greatest
facility of contact, and to effect this the lungs are composed,
according to Dr. Keill and other anatomists, of one thousand
seven hundred and forty millions of membranous cells, com
municating with one another, and which, if expanded, would
extend, it is said, over a surface of one thousand five hun
dred square feet. Thus it is contrived, that a stratum of
blood of fifteen hundred feet, should every moment be
brought into contact with a corresponding stratum of air,
that the necessary properties of the latter may be imbibed

264 THE BENEVOLENCE OF GOD.
in sufficient quantity to support hfe, and with such facility
that a person in health is scarcely conscious of the act of
respiration. In reference to this wonderful process, which is alike dis
tinguished by wisdom and goodness, Dr. Smith states, as
the results of some experiments on the suhject — " 1. The)
volume of air ordinarily present in the lungs is twelve
English pints. 2. The volume of air received by the lungs,
at an ordinary inspiration is one pint. 3. The volume of
air expelled from the lungs at an ordinary expiration is a
little less than one pint. 4. Of the volume of air received
by the lungs at one inspiration, only one fourth part is
decomposed at one action of the heart, and this is so decom
posed in the five-sixth parts of one second of time. 5. The
blood circulates through the system, and returns to the
heart, in one hundred and sixty seconds of time, which is
exactly the time in which the whole volume of air in the
lungs is decomposed. 6. The quantity of blood that flows
to the lungs to be acted upon by the air at one action of the
heart is two ounces, and this is acted upon in less than one
second of time. 7. The quantity of blood in the whole
body of the human adult is twenty-four pounds avoirdupois,.
or twenty pints. 8. In twenty-four hours, twenty-four
hogsheads of blood are presented to the lungs to receive the,
influence of the vital air. 9. In the mutual action which
takes place between the quantities of air and blood which
come in contact in twenty-four hours, the air loses three
hundred and twenty-eight ounces of oxygen, and the blood
ten ounces of carbon. "
It is thus made apparent, that, in order to relieve the blood
of superfluous carbon, and supply it with a due proportion
of oxygen, there must be a relative proportion between the
action of the heart, and the action of the lungs — between
the quantum of blood discharged by each pulsation of the
heart, and the quantum of air inhaled by each inspiration
of the lungs — between the return of the blood after being
oxygenated, and the expiration of the deteriorated air after
the absorption of its oxygen — between the time required for

THE BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 265
the absorbing power of the blood, and the decomposing sus
ceptibility of the atmosphere ; and, unless these proportions
were exactly adjusted, the creature must die, or linger
through a suffering existence. Now to provide for all these
exigencies, to adjust all these multifarious proportions, to
harmonize all these relations, required an elaborate and
complicated organization, which only infinite wisdom could
accomplish. But it is accomplished. The Creator has
put forth his skill to secure the life, the health, and the
comfort of his creatures. Is this the result of malignity or
benevolence ? Is it not wisdom and power fulfilling the
suggestions of kindness and love?
2. We see a similar benevolent adaptation in the properties of
the atmosphere. An atmosphere of some properties would
destroy life instead of sustaining it. An atmosphere but a
little varied would produce discomfort and suffering. Air
was necessary with such properties as the blood required,
which the system could bear, and which could be inhaled with
safety and comfort. Such an atmosphere is that ocean of
fluid which envelopes our globe. It consists of three gases
— oxygen, nitrogen, ¦ and carbonic-acid, mixed together in
the following proportions : — supposing any given quantity of
air divided in 100 parts, there are 21 parts of oxygen,
78 parts of nitrogen, and 1 part of carbonic-acid gas, and
these are thoroughly mixed together, and equably diffused
through the space around us . The first of these gases supports
combustion, and is essential to hfe ; but the two latter des
troy life and extinguish flame ; and an animal placed in a
vessel filled with either of these two gases instantly dies, Yet,
the three gases, contrary as they are in their properties, are,
when mixed in the above proportions, exactly suited to the
animal system. If, however, these proportions were altered,
comfort and hfe would be destroyed. If the proportions of
oxygen were greatly increased, the flame of life would burn
too intensely for our present physical constitution, and we
should soon die ; if the proportions- of either of the other
gases were augmented, we should expire in agony from poi
son or suffocation. Nitric acid, or aquafortis, is a deadly

266 THE BENEVOLENCE OF GOD.
poison, yet it is composed of seventy-five parts of oxygen;
and twenty-five parts of nitrogen — merely a different combi
nation of the two principle gases forming our atmosphere.
Now, if the same proportion of these two gases constituted
common air, to breathe would be to inhale poison and death.
But our Creator has so ordered it that the atmosphere in all
parts of the world, consists of the same specified proportions
of three gases — oxygen, nitrogen, and carbonic-acid. Here,
then, is an economy which protects innumerable creatures
from poison, suffocation, and death, and secures for them
the blessings of hfe, health, and comfort. Is the author of
this economy a malignant or a benevolent Being ? Does
he hate the works of his hand, or is he even indifferent to
their welfare ? Is there not here the care of a parent, and
is not that care the offspring of love ?
But, to adapt the atmosphere to the life and health of the
creature, a variety of other provisions were requisite. The
air, on being decomposed by breathing, is unfit for a second
respiration, until it has undergone a renovating process.
When expelled from the lungs it consists chiefly of nitrogen,
with a small portion of carbonic-aeid gas, and to breathe
this again, for any considerable period, would destroy hfe.
The fatal effects of breathing over again the foul air ex
pelled from the lungs were seen in the case of the English
prisoners of war, treacherously driven, on the 30th June,
1766, by the Indian Nabob, at the point of the musket and
the sabre, into the dungeon called the black-hole, at Calcutta.
One hundred and forty-six were thus forced into a space of
only about eighteen feet square, and of that number one
hundred and twenty-three expired the same night, and the
twenty-three survivors were in a state of putrid fever. A
similar result occurred but a short time since, from closing
down the hatchway of an emigrant vessel. In such cases
the cause of mortality was the close confinement, preventing
both the escape of the putrid air expelled from the lungs
and the access of pure air from the surrounding atmosphere. ,
We see, then, what awful torment and death would await us
if no provision was made by our Creator, to shield us from

THE BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 267
the effects of our own breath, and give us every moment a
supply of fresh air. It is therefore ordained, that the noxious
gas expelled from our lungs shall immediately escape from
our vicinity, and be subject to a renovating process before
we inhale it again. As a short interval of time elapses
between each expansion of the lungs, the expelled nitrogen,
being specifically lighter than common air, has time to
ascend above our heads, from whence it passes into the
higher regions, while the carbonic-acid gas, in the mean
time, by its weight, descends, thus leaving a space between
which a current of pure air rushes into the lungs on the
next inspiration. The impure gases expelled soon become
agitated and diffused through the surrounding air, which,
by winds, tempests, evaporations, vast exhalations of oxygen
gas from vegetation, and meteoric influences incessantly
acting, is constantly undergoing such a purifying process as
preserves to it, in all latitudes of the world, the same pro
perties we have previously described, and, under all ordinary
circumstances, fits it to sustain life and promote health. Was
it a malignant disposition which made this provision for the
creature's welfare ? Did hatred or love dictate the origin of
these remarkable properties of the air, and devise a scheme
for the perpetual renovation of an element so essential to our
life and comfort? The inquiry itself suggests the only
answer which reason can give — God is love.
Another fact must close our remarks on the atmosphere,
though a folio volume would not exhaust the adaptations
suggested by the goodness of God in the constitution of
this invisible element. The fact we refer to is the facility
which these gases have of combining with one another, or
of their entering into union one with another, so that they
are completely mixed. Were not this the case, each gas
would form a distinct stratum, according to its specific
gravity. Carbonic-acid, being of the greatest density, would
form the lowest stratum ; oxygen, being the next in gravity,
would form the next stratum, and dispose itself immediately
above the carbonic- acid ; and nitrogen , being the lightest, would
form the uppermost stratum. The lowest stratum, consisting

868 THE BENEVOLENCE OF GOD;
of a gas destructive to life, would be of a depth or thick
ness probably of hundreds of yards, thus enveloping the whole
world with a poisonous fluid, and immediately extinguishing
all existence. The effect, now supposed, may be illustrated
by a well known fact. In Italy, there is a cave called the
Grotto del Cani, or the Dog's Grotto. In this cave there is
a natural exhalation of carbonic-acid gas, and a man who
attends on visitors usually enters with a dog, which he places
on the floor of the cave ; the dog soon dies, but the man is
not at all affected, for the carbonic-acid, by its weight, hes
at the bottom of the cave, forming a stratum of about eighteen
inches in depth, and above this the air is pure. Now, had
the three gases which form the genial atmosphere not had an
affinity for each other, so as to become diffused through and
mix with each other, the carbonic-acid gas now universally
diffused through the air would all have settled down in one
mass on the surface of the earth, like that in the grotto just
named, forming a stratum so deep as to envelope the highest
habitations. So, then, if the law of affinity, which unites
these gases, had never existed, hfe could not have been given ;
and were this law to be suspended even for a day, life would
become extinct. We know of no philosopher who can assign
any cause for this law, but the will of God. It exists,
but no one can philosophically explain why it exists. It is
an ultimate fact, for which, like many others, no cause
can be assigned but the will of God. We ask, then,
What disposition originated that law ? and what disposition
continues that law incessantly in operation ? Its existence
subserves life and comfort ; and What disposition can it be
which provides for the creature's life and comfort ? Is it a
malignant or a benevolent one ? If the provision of a father
for the preservation and comfort of his child's life and health
indicates not his hatred, but his instinctive love for it, so
does the ¦ conduct of God in the instance before us — it
emphatically proclaims that God is love.
3. The phenomena of nutrition proves the Divine goodness.
In the same manner does the bountiful supply of food
indicate the benevolence of God, While air is essential to

THE BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 269
supply the blood with oxygen, &o., food is essential to supply
the pabulum of which the blood is formed, and, as a portion of
the blood is continually being expended by assimilation, &c,
it becomes necessary that it should be regularly replenished
with the material afforded by food. To meet this necessity,
we see a combination of internal and external means ad
mirably adjusted. In the human system, we see an elaborate
organization for stimulating the appetite when food is re
quired, and for mastication, deglutition, digestion, secretion,
absorption, and assimilation, when food is supplied. In the
economy of external nature, we see a corresponding system
of adaptation. As neither man nor the inferior animals can
live on minerals or mere earths, the process of vegetation
converts the earths into nutritous aliments, and thus pre
pares them for the digestive organs of animal existence. This
process involves another system of organization, in which
other wonderful adaptations are seen. Again, if we step
further back to contemplate a preceding economy, which
anticipates and prepares materials for vegetable existence,
we see all nature operating like an immense laboratory, ever
actively employed in decomposing, resolving, and analyzing
unorganized substances, and fitting them to form the pabu
lum of vegetable life. Electricity, solar heat, evaporation,
rains, dews, winds, frost, snow, &c, are all so many
active instrumentalities, preparing materials which are di
rected first to cover the earth with vegetation, wherewith
next to nourish and sustain the existence of animal hfe.
How bountiful the supply thus provided ! and how abun
dant that which is most essential to the creature's immediate
wants ! If we cast our eyes abroad, how rich the vegetable
verdure which covers the earth's surface ! how thick the
fields stand with corn ! what an ample reward does nature
give to industry ! what profusion meets our eye, when, on
a summer's eve, we quit the dusky haunts of the crowded
city, and walk for an hour in nature's free domain ! If now,
in the midst of this bountiful supply, this luxuriant para
dise, we ask, What is the disposition of the Almighty Donor ?
What impelled him to originate such a complicated system,

270 THE BENEVOLENCE OF GOD.
which runs through all nature, to provide for the countless
myriads of creatures dependent upon him ? If we look at
their helplessness, and his independence — their daily neces
sities, and his unceasing bounty, what reply can reason utter ?
If we remember, that the suspension of his provisional ope
rations, for a single year, would extinguish all existence,
but that these operations never are suspended for a single
hour, what answer can our judgement give ? There is but
one, and it is beautifully expressed by the grateful Psalmist,
" The Lord is good to all, and his tender mercies are over
all his works." His wisdom ordains at the suggestion of
goodness ; his power works at the bidding of love.
4. Inviting as the subject is, our limited space puts a check
upon our pen ; yet we cannot refrain a few additional obser-'
vations. As the mouth is formed, for the admission of both
food and air, which, as we have seen, perform separate
functions, and enter into different parts of the system, there
are two passages from the mouth, one called the oesophagus,
leading to the stomach, and the other the larynx and wind
pipe, leading to the lungs. As the admission of food to the
lungs would not only be excessively painful and distressing,
but fatal, some organization was necessary to close the
larynx, while food is swallowed. This has been provided
for, by the construction of a little valve called the epiglottis,
which opens of itself, while we breathe, for the admission of
air, but which doses by muscles which act upon it in the
act of swallowing, and thus effectually secures the windpipe
from the intrusion of a single particle of food. This mechan
ism operates freely without any trouble on our part, and
without any emotion which renders us conscious of its
existence ; perhaps, indeed, not one person in a thousand is
at all aware of the organization, or thinks of the evils thus
prevented, or the benefits thus conferred. Had not this
organization been formed, the taking of food would have
produced paroxysms of coughing, sensations of violent
irritation, and ultimate death ; and were this organization
to be suspended, or its operation to be easily put out of
order, these dreadful results must follow. The author had

THE BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 271
a particular friend, who, from a disease in the throat, did
experience the irritation and the suffering consequent on
an imperfect action of the epiglottis, and, after lingering
awhile, expired. Need we again ask, What was the dispo
sition which induced Jehovah to construct the exquisitely
beautiful, yet simple and efficacious, organization in ques
tion ? The prevention of suffering, and the preservation of
hfe, are the objects clearly contemplated. What then
are the motives which induce a man to avert pain and suf
fering from a fellow-man, and plan and devise for his com
fort ? Malignity never employs genius to avert suffering ;
it is the office of benevolence and love. It is the motive
which incited the labours of a Howard, and other philan
thropists, whose fives have been spent in doing good. So
the provision in question is the effect of Divine wisdom and
power, stimulated by paternal and infinite love.
5. The mechanical structure of 'the animal system is an
elaborate combination of contrivances to meet the necessities
and promote the well-being of the creature, always suited to
the element in which it lives, and the instincts which prompt
its habits. In the human system we have the perfection
of animal organization. The bony structure forms a col
lection of basements, pillars, curves, and arches, built up and
adjusted, so as to give firmness to the fabric, and protection to
the vital organs, and are placed, inserted, and articulated, so
as to combine strength with convenience and facility of
action. On the bony structure the fleshy fibre is laid,
forming four hundred and seventy muscles, compacted and
levelled with inlayings of fat, and adjusted and bound by
ligaments and tendons, as so many puUeys, to give action to
the osseous frame-work. Through the muscular fibre, are
distributed the endless ramifications of the nervous tissue,
with the arterial and veinous conduits, and numerous vessels
for various purposes in the animal economy ; and over the
whole an elastic cuticle, forming a smooth, transparent, and
sensitive drapery, has been thrown by the Creator. We
cannot conceive of symmetry more elegant, proportions more
beautiful, and adaptations more complete, than are here

272 THE BENEVOLENCE OF GOD.
presented. All this exquisite contrivance is as much the
product of goodness as of wisdom. Not a joint, a hinge, a
pin, or a cord, of this complicated tabernacle, is redundant,
or can be dispensed with as unnecessary to the comfort and
welfare of the inhabitant. The material fabric is exactly suited
to the wants and requirements of the mind, and has been
fabricated for its use.
We can easily conqeive painful and distressing results to
have flowed from a different construction. Had the back
bone, for example, been one sohd, inflexible pillar, like the
thigh bone, any bending or voluntary curvature of the body
would have been impossible ; but the beautiful structure of
a series of vertebra?, nicely articulated, and combining firm
ness with flexibility, enables man to deflect his body at
pleasure ; yet, had such vertebras formed the bones of our
limbs, they would have been most inconvenient, and com
paratively, if not altogether, useless. As the head is a
mechanism where all the senses are concentrated, and by
which the mind has the most frequent and important com
munication with the external world, it became requisite that
it should be capable of turning freely every way, of moving
Vertically or horizontally, so as immediately to adjust the
organs of sight, hearing, &c, to every surrounding object
soliciting their attention. Without some contrivance for
this diversified action the head could not have been moved
at all, without, at the same time, moving the entire body:
and it is easy to see, that, with such an organization, we
should be subject to inconvenience, excessive trouble, and,
not unfrequently, to danger. A contrivance is formed to
meet the exigency, by a compound mechanism in the verte
bra? of the neck, including a hinge joint, with a tenon and
mortice. " First, — The head rests immediately upon the
uppermost of the vertebra? of the neck, and is united to it
by a hinge joint, enabling it to move forward and backward
as far either way as is necessary, or as the ligaments allow ;
and, secondly, — in the joint below is a mechanism resem
bling a tenon and mortice. This uppermost bone but one
has what anatomists call a process, namely, a projection

THE BENEVOLENCE- OF GOD. 273
somewhat similar in size and shape to a tooth, whioh, entering
a corresponding hole or socket in the bone above it, forms a
pivot or axle, upon which that upper bone, together with
the head which it supports, turns freely in a circle : and as
far in the circle as the attached muscles permit the head to
turn. When we nod the head, we use the hinge joint ; when
we turn the head round, we use the tenon and mortice."
This beautiful mechanism resembles that of a telescope, by
which that instrument may be turned upward' or downward,
laterally or horizontally, to, command an aspect from differ
ent parts of the heavens, without removing the stand' by
which it is supported. Sometimes a severe cold, causing a
stiff neck, gives us to feel, in part, and for a short time,
the serious inconvenience which we should have suffered
perpetually, but for the wise and benevolent adaptation noy/^.
mentioned. _-'
Had the legs been formed' of one- continuous bone, without
a, knee joint, Who can describe the inconvenience, suffering,
and danger, attending every effort to rest the body by sitting
or reclining, or of rising from that posture to an upright
position. Had the arms consisted each of one continuous
bone, without a joint at the elbow, the hands could never
have conducted food to the mouth, and myriads of important
offioes, now performed with ease and celerity, could never
have been performed at all. Had not muscles been con •
staicted by which to move the eye-lids at our will, the advan
tages and pleasures arising from the organs of vision would
have been greatly abated, and incalculable inconveniences,
and sufferings, must have been our lot. The writer is espe
cially impressed with this truth, from the fact of his having
once been brought into contact with a poor boy, apparently
about thirteen years of age, whose eye-lids had no muscular
action. Bis eyes were apparently good, but he could not
use them without the constant trouble of lifting up the
lids with his fingers, and thus holding them open so long as
he desired to see- an object; they closed the moment his
fingers let go their hold; and I observed, that, as the trouble
and, inconvenience of thus employing both hands were too
k

274 THE BENEVOLENCE OF GOD,
great to be constantly endured, one eye was generally not
used, and often both were closed in darkness. So much
does our well-being and comfort depend upon the diminu
tive organization which moves the eye-lid — an organization
which we all use through every moment of our waking
hours, perhaps without a thought of the contrivance, or the
benefits resulting therefrom.
In each of the cases adduced we have elaborate organiza
tion, embracing a wonderful combination of means, and
adaptations, and uses, requiring the most perfect and
unerring wisdom for its design and execution — and, What
is the object? Most obviously the good of the creature.
To save the creature from inconvenience, from unnecessary
toil and care, from suffering, and in many instances from
¦»p£<3mature death. Can such objects be contemplated by a
malignant being, or by one devoid of regard for our welfare ?
We know they never were, and we are sure they never can
be. The objects are those alone at which benevolence aims,
and in which love delights. These contrivances, and all
of a similar nature in the animal economy, are so many
evidences that our Creator is a God of love.
6. Similar examples crowd upon our attention,butwe must
forbear, leaving to the reader the pleasing and grateful task
of selecting and multiplying for himself instances of Divine
benevolence. The air we breathe, the food we eat, the rai
ment which covers our bodies and grows upon the skin of
the inferior tribes, the pleasing light and genial heat of the
sun, the succession of day and night by a law " sublimely
simple," the former adapted to labour and activity, and the
latter to refreshing repose ; the regular return of the seasons
by a law equally simple and subhme, dispensing in alternate
periods the blessings of solar influence and vegetation to
every part of the earth's surface ; the capacious ocean,
whose depths teem with innumerable creatures, whose
vapours, ascending, temper the atmosphere, and descending,
fertilize the earth ; the gentle breeze which fans us in the
summer's heat, and the howling tempest whose impetuous
wings agitate the atmosphere and sweep away pestilence and

THE BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 2 I 0
death ; the salubrious frosts which purge away noxious effluvia
from the air, and prepare the womb of nature for the fruc
tifying seed ; the earth's surface diversified by hill and dale,
and irrigated by rivers and springs ; her bowels fraught with
materials for our use, and the fecundity of her soil enriching
the face of creation with endless forms of beauty, and abun
dant stores of food; the animal and vegetable economy
fraught with adaptations for the well-being of sentient hfe —
all these, and ten thousand other wonders which a library
could not record, proclaim the goodness and the benevolence
of God, and summon the whole intelligent creation to gra
titude and praise.
IV. GOD'S PROVISION TO AFFORD ENJOYMENT TO THE CREATDBE
IS A PROOF OF HIS BENEVOLEXCE.
The benignity of Jehovah's disposition is manifest not
only by providing to shield his creatures from numerous
evils and sufferings, but also by providing for their enjoyment.
Whether we survey the rational or the irrational portion
of animated being, we find each endowed with some capa
cities for enjoyment, and provided with ample sources whence
that enjoyment may be derived.
1. Sensation. Every bodily sense is made an avenue of
-pleasure — a means of ministering gratification and delight.
What a boundless field of enjoyment is opened to us by the
sense of sight, by which the endless forms of beauty and
magnificence in the productions of nature and of art are
open to our view ! What delight is ministered to us by
the sense of hearing, by which the mellifluous harmonies
of music, the soft tones of friendship, and the thrilling
charms of eloquence, are made to vibrate through the soul !
What delicious gratification is afforded by the sense of
smelling, by which we are regaled with the aroma of flowers,
and the richest odours of nature are made to yield us pleasure !
Nor are the senses of touch and taste barren of the power to
produce agreeable sensations. In an inferior degree, the
lower animals share with us the pleasures of sensation, but
the faculty of reason vastly augments the power of sense to

276 THE BENEVOLENCE OF GOD.
gratify, because the, pleasure'of sensation , when combined with
reflection, is refined in its nature, and heightened in its inten
sity, by agreeable associations, and in some degree repeated by
recollection. To secure these pleasing sensations, a variety
of distinct organs are formed, of elaborate and exquisite
mechanism. Now, when we see enjoyment superadded to
comfort, pleasure joined with utility, and infinite skill
employed in securing for us these results, we Cannot mis
take the intention of the Creator, and the intention unfolds
the disposition. Thus, every organ of pleasing sensation,
and every pleasing emotion, declares the benevolence of
God. It proclaims his name and nature to 'be love.
2. Allied to those just named, are the various pleasurable
instincts of animated nature, some of which belong to -man,
rtjjd many others are widely distributed among the diversi
fied tribes of the animal kingdom. Nor is there any
instinct or appetite, but may be regarded as involving a
capacity for enjoyment, and as furnishing a stimulus to seek
for it, in some appropriate object or .pursuit. Many Of
these instincts are infallibly directed to the continuance and
preservation of the species, and all combine utility in some
form with individual gratification. Whether we carefully
study, or curiously glance, at'the history andhabits of'the
animal creation, we meet atevery turn with proofs of the crea
ture's happiness. We see itin their sportive diversions, and
their cheerful mien ; we hear it in the songs of melody they
pour, and the varied sounds, harsh or harmonious,- by -which
they spontaneously utter their delight. When, therefore,
in the first place, we see the creature endowed with-a capa
city for enjoyment ; in the second place, actuated by instincts
-prompting that enjoyment ; in the third place, nature abound
ing with sources to afford that enjoyment; in the fourth
place,.that enjoyment itself made subservient to utility; and
lastly, an organization adapted to the whole, Can we ifail to
see a benevolent intention? Is not the: goodness of the
Creator as conspicuous as his wisdom and power ?
3. The higher the nature of -the creature, the more di
versified and refined its enjoyments, and ihe < larger its

THE BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 277
capacities for those enjoyments. Human beings, standing as
they do on an eminent position, far above the inferior tribes,
have faculties of a higher order superadded to animal instincts
and propensities. They have reason, and, as the scriptures
assure us, an immortal existence. They have the faculties
of reflection, of voluntary recollection, association, combina
tion, and hope. The pleasures of sense and instinct are
heightened by the mental perceptions of beauty and taste,
and multiplied a thousand-fold by imagination, by memory
of the past, and hope of the future ; and all the enjoyments
arising from the social principle, are heightened by the
faculty of speech — of thus reciprocating affection, of uttering
the softest tenderest sympathies, of expressing and exciting
the most refined emotions, of 'blending thought with thought,
spirit with spirit, of assimilating mind with mind, and pro
ducing and perpetuating the most sacred and endearing
associations. We have a faculty for the perception of truth,
and a relish for its attainment, prompting to the acquisition
of knowledge, and enriching the mind with fcreasures more
durable than the material universe. We have a faculty for
communing with the invisible, for realizing the personal exist
ence of the All-glorious Creator, for ascertaining our relation
to him as our Father and Friend, for exchanging thoughts,
sentiments, and affections, with this exalted -Being, and for
deriving enjoyments from him of a nature infinitely sur
passing all created good. The soul' has- desires which nothing
sensual can satisfy, and capacities which nothing earthly can
fill. It roams among the infinite and the eternal, looks for
ward to perpetual existence, and feels that whatever is hmited
in space or duration is too narrow for the powers and the
capabilities of its being. It longs and pants for the infinite,
and cannot be satisfied with less. It is evidently formed
to know, love, and enjoy, the Deity, and he alone is an ade
quate source of possession- and enjoyment to the immortal
mind. The Bible assures us that God is accessible to the
human mind. This is in harmony with reason ; for, if the
Deity has created beings with such powers and capacities,, the
existence of those powers is a pledge they shall be gratified

278 THE BENEVOLENCE OF GOD-
from their appropriate source : if he has provided for every
exigency of instinct, reason tells us he has also provided
for every exigency of mind. The goodness so profusely
bestowed on the faculties of the lowest orders of creatures
guarantees the bestowment of every good which the highest
capacities of the highest nature are competent to receive.
The experience of the good man verifies the statements of
scripture, and answers to the deductions of reason. The
Christian does enjoy God, finds he has access to the Father
of spirits, is conscious of holy and transporting fellowship
with him, exults in the endearments of his personal smile,
and draws from him streams of enjoyment which satisfy and
replenish the mind ; he rejoices in God with joy unspeakable
and full of glory. We cannot deny the bestowment of higher
capacities for happiness upon a higher nature, for the fact
meets us at every turn, and the slightest consideration of
our own nature attests it ; the opening of sources of happi
ness adequate to fill, and thus meet all the instincts and
faculties of the highest nature with which we are familiar,
is equally obvious to every candid inquirer. These is but,
one motive to which such an economy can be attributed —
that is benevolence. Thus, in every department of the
Creator's works, we see wisdom and power fulfilling the
purposes of love.
V. THERE IS BENEVOLENCE DISPLAYED IN THE PRINCIPLES
OF jehovah's GOVERNMENT.
1. The benevolence so conspicuous in the work of creation,
and the economy of providence, is manifest also in the prin
ciples of his moral government. The scriptures declare that
we are subjects of Divine government, and reason cannot
but admit the truth. If our Creator be an intelligent Being,
and a portion of his creatures be intelligent, endued with
moral sense, and capable of exercising moral affections, and
performing moral actions, it is an evidence that they are
subjects of moral government, under law and obligation,
and amenable for their conduct. Men acknowledge a social
and political accountability to one another as members of a

THE BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 279
social or political community; and if this loose and adventi
tious relation to one another involves mutual obligation and
accountability, the intimate and essential relationship of a
creature to the Creator must involve far weightier obliga
tions and more solemn accountability. It may, therefore,
be inquired, Have the principles of the Divine government
over his creatures a benevolent aspect ? We aver that they
have. 2. The principles of mere justice required that the laws
imposed upon the creature should be such as he should be
competent to fulfil, and that his obedience should be com
patible with his well-being, but they required nothing more.
If any arrangement be made to connect reward and happi
ness with obedience, it must spring not from mere justice,
but from benevolence. Now, in the moral government of
God we see equity at the foundation, and benevolence erect
ing a superstructure of happiness thereon. The laws enjoined
upon the creature for the government of his moral conduct
are not merely just, they are benevolent and kind. They
are not only suitable to the creature's abihty, and in har
mony with his mental and moral constitution, but are cal
culated to excite delightful emotions, and constitute the
happiness of the creature in the very act of obedience.
3. We have seen that the lower orders of animated being
find happiness in obeying their instincts, or, in other words,
in fulfilling the laws of their being; and the same principle
pervades the moral economy. A rational being in doing
good and not evil to his fellow-creatures, in exercising bene
volent affections and actions towards them, is acting in
conformity with the law of his being, and thereby rendering
obedience to God. The exercise of this benign affection yields
personal happiness, and diffuses it to all around. Thus duty
and enjoyment are united. It is the same with regard to
the more direct homage we render to God. The sum of all
our duties to God may be compendiously expressed in the
word love. Eevelation itself has comprised our entire obe
dience to God in the exercise of love to him — " Thou shalt
love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, with all thy soul,

28.0 THE; BENEVOLENCE. OF, GOD.
with all thy mind, and with; all thy strength : " and this »V
is affirmed is the fulfilling of the, law. Is there any thing'
unreasonable in loving our Creator and Benefactor? If it
be reasonable for one man to love another from whom, per
haps, he has received no benefit, is it not reasonable that
man should love the Author of his existence and the Source.
of all his blessings? Is not the duty dehghtful as well as
reasonable ? There is no affection which yields enjoyment
equal to love. When exercised towards an equal, or even
an inferior, it affords a corresponding degree of happiness
to our own minds ; but, when the affection embraces a
nobler object-^the very author and essence of all natural and4
moral excellence, must it not afford a higher degree of enjoy
ment ? If the sympathetic blending of our souls with an
intelligent, benevolent, and excellent fellow creature, yields
a refined and ennobling delight, how much more an affection
ate union with; the mind of Deity, the source of all perfection, !
excellence, and happiness ? The experience of the good
man attests that this is the case. The christian finds that in
the keeping of God's commandments there is' a great reward. ¦
4. We can conceive of an economy perfectly equitable, and
yet widely different from the one we are now contemplating.''
Obedience to God is a duty we owe him. It is just in him
to require it, and it is only just in us to render it. To render
him obedience, is not to acquire merit, but*to pay a debt.
Obedience has no desert — it is a debt which it would be unjust
to withhold, and, therefore, the performance of a mere duty-
can no more give us an equitable claim to the Divine favour, or
to happiness, than the discharge of a just debt gives a man a
claim to the property of his neighbour. God could in equity-
have demanded our obedience, and have punished our disobe
dience, without either adding present pleasure to duty, or
rewarding us with future happiness. All we oould justly
require from God would, be simply abihty to obey, power
to do what he commands. The conjunction, therefore, of
positive and immediate enjoyment with obedience, the- ren
dering of duty a source of happiness, is what justice did
not require ; it is a gratuity bestowed by pure benevolejnges :

THE BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 28]
It is an economy, designed to allure us to happiness through
the medium of duty. It is malting the claims of justice
the basis on which to construct a kind and gracious economy.
Such a procedure speaks forth abundantly the goodness of
God. It proves that his proceedings in the administration
of bis moral government over his creatures, spring from the
same principle as that which gave the creatures their ex
istence, their faculties, and the place they hold in the scale
of being; and that prinoiple is love.
Mercy. We regard mercy not as an attribute distinct
from love, but as another aspect of Divine benevolence. It
differs not in its nature, but^ in its. object. It is goodness
"" exercised towards the sinner. Hence, in the scriptures the
richest displays of Divine goodness to sinful man are ascribed
both to mercy and love, as denoting one and the same prin
ciple. Thus we have both terms employed in the same
passage, " But God who is rich in mercy, for his great love
wherewith he loved us, even when we were dead in sins,
hath quickened us together with Christ. " The redemption
and salvation of men, is described in the sacred writings as
the greatest display of love which the Deity has exhibited
towards mankind, and they employ a phraseology indicative
of this. " God so loved the world, that he gave his only
begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not
perish, but have everlasting life. " " Herein is love. " " Be
hold what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon
us. ", Unquestionably the love set forth in the gospel has no
parallel in the displays of nature. Great as is the goodness
manifested in creation, in providence, and in such proceed
ings of the Divine government, as are cognizable to man,
there is in these no parallel to that peculiar form in which the
* love of God is exhibited in the economy of redemption. It
is above all comparison, and transcends all conception and all
prior expectation. The loftiest intelhgence in creation, we
believe, could never have conceived the thought, a priori,
that such a manifestation of love would have found a place,
at any period, in the history of God's moral government.
-. Yet, since the event has become a matter of history, we can
1

282 THE BENEVOLENCF, OF GOD.
see that there is nothing in it repugnant to the Divine
nature, or contrary to any aspect of the Divine character
presented before us in the other proceedings of the Creator.
On the contrary, it is in good keeping and in perfect har
mony therewith. Creation unfolds the fact that God, out
of pure disinterested love, has brought into existence innu
merable creatures, and providence shows us the Divine Being
taking care for these creatures, supplying their wants, giving
them capacities for enjoyment, endowing them with instincts
which stimulate them to seek for that enjoyment, and laying
all inanimate nature under contribution to afford them that
enjoyment. It shows us, further, that, among intelligent
beings, he has made love a duty which they all owe one
towards another and towards himself, and that he has con
nected the performance of duty, as well as the gratification
of instinct, with happiness. And, having left these impres
sions of his love on all the works of his hand, we cannot
regard redemption as a departure from the principle here
exhibited. It is rather a further development, a richer
manifestation of the same principle. We grant it is asto2-
nishing, but not astonishing as involving inconsistency in
the conduct of the Divine Being, or a departure from any
previous development of his nature ; but astonishing, simply,
in the same manner as many of the displays of his wisdom,
and power, and other perfections, are astonishing ; that is,
by their vastness and overpowering magnitude, in the con
templation of which our feeble minds seem to stagger with
amazement, and our bewildered feelings seek relief in excla
mations of wonder. Though the scriptural account, there
fore, of human redemption involves a display of love vastly
transcending all others in its imposing magnitude and gran
deur, it is in perfect harmony with the more hmited mani
festations of the same benevolent principle. It is the last
disclosure of the Divine goodness, which excels and tran
scends all others, as the brightness of noon exceeds the dim
twilight of morn, and involves complicated germs of Divine
truth and goodness to be unfolded for ever — affording to

THE BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 283
intelligent minds an everlasting and a perpetually bright
ening comment on the declaration that God is love.
OBJECTIONS GROUNDED ON THE EXISTENCE OF EVIL.
Truth does not require us either to exaggerate the exist
ence of good (if that were possible), nor blindly to disregard
the existence of evil. We wish to contemplate facts just as
they are, assured that God hath placed them before us for
investigation, with a design to afford us a proper view of
himself. The existence of evil is admitted, and, for the sake
of order, it may be contemplated under the two aspects in
which it is commonly described, — namely, moral evil and
physical evil.
First, Moral Evil. The existence of moral evil is alleged
as an objection to the goodness of God. To which we reply,
moral evil is sin, and sin is voluntary offence. Therefore,
moral evil is not the act of God. He neither sins himself,
nor forces any creature to sin. Holy and loving in his own
nature, all his proceedings are in harmony with - the moral
laws he has prescribed for the government of intelligent
beings. God, therefore, not being the author of sin, its
existence is no impeachment of his goodness.
If it be alleged that, as sin is hurtful to the creature, a
benevolent Creator ought to have prevented its existence,
we reply — To have prevented the existence of sin by an ab
solute determination, would have prevented the freedom of
all intelligent beings. As a consequence, this would have
prevented the existence of moral excellence, and converted
intelhgent beings into mere machines. No voluntary action
could have been performed, no deliberate acquiescence in
the Divine will could have been felt, no intelligent elective
preference of an obedient course could have been adopted ;
motives, emotions, mental determinations, moral sentiments,
affections, principles, and all the conduct flowing therefrom,
would have been irresistibly forced, and man have been as
incapable of moral excellence as moral pravity, and as in
capable of both as is the solar system. In such a state of
things, God could have had no moral empire, no mental

284 THE BENEVOLENCE OF GOD.
obedience, no intellectual servants and subjects, nor could
the creature have realized any moral development or excel- .
lency ; the mind would have been as passive as matter, and
God the only agent and operator in the universe of being.
The exclusion of free agency would thus exclude from
Jehovah's empire all moral government and the develop
ments of all those moral excellencies which reflect so much
real dignity, worth, and happiness on the creature. If,
therefore, God must have a moral empire at all, if moral
obedience must be rendered to him, and moral excellence
with its attendant glories and enjoyments must be developed,
intelligent beings must be free ; and if free, they must
be liable to sin. It is true they need not sin ; their
freedom excludes all necessity of departing from the right
way ; but the possibility of their doing so, is certainly involved
in a capacity for obedience and moral excellence. Such a
constitution, therefore, as renders the intelligent being free,
with all its attendant possibilities, is undoubtedly wise and
good, and is every way worthy of God.
Scholium. — It may here be remarked, that the existence
of nioral evil is an important fact, which, though it impugns
not the benevolence of Deity, yet, ought to be kept con
stantly ur view in investigating the evidences of Divine
goodness. For, as the love of God is not a mere fond and
blind affection, but an intelligent and discriminating regard
—a love directed in its exercise by wisdom and justice — a
righteous love, never setting aside the claims of truth and
rectitude, but unchangeably harmonizing therewith— such
a love is perfectly compatible with the punishment of sin ;
and, in a world where moral evil is acknowledged to abound, it
is vain and irrational to expect the displays of benevolence
unmixed with the manifestations of punitive justice. The
introduction of moral evil will necessarily render man often
the agent of his own misery, the instrument of frustrating
the designs of Divine goodness ; and moreover, will variously
modify the economy of God's providence towards his rebel
lious creatures, as certainly as that his moral government
exists, and as certainly as truth and justice are immutable

THE BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 285
principles of its administration. If, therefore, sufferings be
blended with enjoyments, it is a result to be expected as
inseparable from the existence of moral evil ; and to afford a
complete vindication of the Divine goodness, it is enough, if
amid much that is painful, there be among sinful creatures
under a system of gracious recovery, the continuance of
positive indications of tender regard, of clemency and good
will. If, however, in addition to these positive displays of good
ness, we find natural evils converted into means of moral disci
pline, aiming at the improvement and ultimate good of the '
erring creature, our views of the Creator's love will be greatly
enhanced. This we shall abundantly find in our subsequent
inquiries. Secondly, Bemorse and Mental Anguish. Our suscepti
bility of remorse and mental anguish does not impugn the
benevolence of the Divine Being. The very existence of re
morse and mental anguish implies the existence of sin, and
flows from it as its punishment. Unless, therefore, this
' impugns the Divine justice, it is in perfect harmony with his
benevolence. That it is not unjust for the sinner to suffer
these emotions will be admitted, and, if so, the capacity for
such emotions involves no injustice. If intelligent beings were
without such a capacity, they would have no moral sense,
no conscience, and be incompetent for moral obedience.
So far from our moral sense, or, in other words, our sus
ceptibility of remorse, impugning the Divine goodness, we
are prepared to say, that such a constitution affords an
additional proof of that goodness. In considering this
subject, however, it must be carefully observed, that a con
stitutional susceptibility is widely different from a constitu
tional propensity. A propensity is a disposition actively
operating, and stimulating the creature to a certain course.
Such are all instinctive propensities and passions; but
a susceptibility implies a passive state — a mere liability to
be subject to certain influences. Now it is remarkable that
such is the constitution of our nature, that, while we are
stimulated to enjoyments, we are merely susceptible of pains,

286 THE BENEVOLENCE OF GOD.
whether of body or mind. We have instincts and propem
sities actively prompting to what yields gratification and
delight, but are merely liable to sufferings; we are never
instinctively prompted to them. Thus, we are merely sus
ceptible of remorse and mental anguish. These emotions
do not, intrinsically or instinctively arise in our minds,
like the salient and spontaneous springs of joyous emo
tions. They are never experienced but when excited by some
course of moral action. In a well-ordered mind they are
never excited by good actions ; they are never excited by
actions that are indifferent in their character. They are
never excited by seeking happiness in any lawful object or
within a lawful extent. They are never excited except by
the exercise of bad affections and the practice of bad actions.
Thus, remorse and mental anguish are only the associates
of vicious conduct — the attendants and the scourge of moral
evil. Such a constitution, therefore, instead of impugning
the Divine goodness, affords an additional demonstration of
it. For, Why are remorse and mental anguish merely sus
ceptibilities, and not active instincts? Because God is good,
and is averse to our suffering unnecessarily. Why are these
painful emotions not excited by actions good in their nature,
or indifferent in their quality ? Because God is good, and
delights in our nature and happiness. Why are these painful
emotions connected only with evil dispositions and habits ?
Because God is good : he knows that sin is more hurtful and
injurious to our nature than suffering is : he knows that sin
is a moral poison, deteriorating and corrupting our princi
ples, and that remorse and anguish are necessary to deter
us from the commission of sin ; and therefore, he inflicts
the pain that he may rescue from the more deadly evil.
In this economy which connects misery with nothing but
sin, the aim of the Creator is seen — it is our welfare — our
best interest— the elevation and perfection of our moral
nature, that he seeks ; and while the aim of the Deity is
visible, his motive is equally conspicuous. It is love. A
procedure so obviously directed to the creature's hohness
and happiness, proclaims the Creator's goodness.

the benevolence of god. 287
Thirdly, Hereditary Depravity and Future Punish
ment. Nor can the doctrines of hereditary depravity and
future punishment be made to impugn the benevolence of
Deity. For human depravity is but the natural consequence
of sin, and future punishment is but the continuation of the
consequences of our own conduct. These awful truths do not
indeed furnish any weapons to the mere rationalist. They
are purely subjects of revelation, and if any opponent cross
the threshhold of revelation, in quest of objections, we may
enter the same domain of sacred truth, for weapons where
with to repel his assaults. The doctrines of human depravity
and future retribution, as revealed in the sacred oracles,
must be contemplated in sober and thoughtful connex
ion with the doctrine of human redemption by our Lord
Jesus Christ, and, if so, we become acquainted with the
most stupendous and overpowering manifestations of Divine
mercy and love. Eevelation declares, " That where sin
abounded, grace did much more abound. That as sin
hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign
through righteousness unto eternal life, by Jesus Christ
our Lord." It is true, all men are involuntarily the sub
jects of inherent depravity ; but it is equally true that all
are involuntarily placed in a state of grace and salvation.
The remedy is co-extensive with the disease. It is true,
alas, that some perish eternally, but it is the result solely
of their own obstinacy — their resistance of the purposes and
the promises of mercy ; and even their destiny, thus wilfully
sought, shall be made subservient to the good of the universe.
So that love is associated with justice even in the sinner's
doom, and the spirits of the lost shall be forced to confess
that God is righteous and good.
Fourthly, Physical Evil. Pain and Death are commonly
intended by the phrase, " physical evil. "
Pain. The distinction between a mere susceptibility and
& propensity, which we have already noticed in respect to the
mind, must be applied to the body. Pain, like remorse, is
a sensation which does not spring from instinct, or from
a natural propensity, as the social emotions do. It is a

288 the benevolence of god.
sensation to which we are merely liable, and which rarely
occurs except when some natural law has been transgressed,
and even then it seems intended and directed to produce
some ulterior good.
It is worthy of our notice, that, while bodily pain is not
an instinctive emotion, neither is there any part of our
¦physical organization formed with an intention to inflict
pain and suffering. This has been . lucidly stated by
Dr. Paley, "Evil, no doubt, exists, " he observes, •" but it
is never, that we can perceive, the object of the contrivance.
Teeth are contrived to eat, not to ache ; their aching now
and then is incidental to the contrivance, perhaps insepa
rable from it, but it is not the object. This is a distinction
which well deserves to be attended to. In describing imple
ments of husbandry, one would hardly say of a sickle, that
it was made to cut the reaper's fingers ; though, from the
construction of the instrument, and the manner of using it,
this mischief often happens. But if he had occasion to
describe instruments of torture or execution, this, he would
say, is to extend the sinews ; this' to dislocate the joints,
this to break the bones, this to scorch the souls of the feet.
Here pain and misery are the very objects of the contrivance.
Now, nothing of this sort is to be found in the works, of
nature. We never discover a train of contrivances to bring
about an evil purpose. No anatomist ever discovered a sys
tem of organization calculated to produce pain and disease ;
or, in explaining the parts of the human body, ever said
this is to irritate, this to inflame, this duct is to convey
gravel to the kidneys, this gland to secrete the humour
which forms the gout. If, by chance, he came to a part
of which he knew not the use, the most that he can say is,
that to him it appears to be useless : no one ever suspects
that it is put there to incommode, to annoy, or to torment.
If God had wished our misery, he might have made. sure of
his purpose, by forming our senses to. be as many sores and
pains to us as they are now instruments of gratification and
enjoyment; or by placing us among objects so ill suited to
our perceptions, as to have, continually offended us, instead
of ministering to our refreshment and delight. "

the benevolence of god. 280
The preceding arguments dispense with any objection
grounded on the creature's instincts and organization, and
prove that no purpose but that of benevolence dictated the
creature's constituton. We have still, however, to admit the
fact, that the creature is unquestionably swceptible of pain,
and that pain is often realized by us. This fact has, then,
to be accounted for.
It is impossible for us to determine, with precision, bow
much our susceptibility of suffering has been augmented
as a punitive result of sin. That such a consequence
would result, to some extent, from the introduction of moral
evil, is as reasonable to suppose, as it is to suppose that Jeho
vah governs the world in righteousness, and that intelligent
beings are accountable for their conduct. This truth which
reason suggests, revelation plainly declares and confirms.
But whatever extent of physical suffering may be attri
butable to punitive justice, the prevalence of clemency and
love, in tempering those sufferings, and giving them a salu
tary tendency, is very conspicuous ; for, pains and sufferings
are seldom experienced, except when some physical or
moral law is either transgressed or neglected, and even
then the suffering is directed to a wise and beneficent end.
A few examples will illustrate this truth.
1. Excess in eating, drinking, or any other indulgence, is
a transgression of the law of temperance and self-govern
ment, and a variety of physical evils result therefrom.
Gluttony produces plethora and gout ; drunkenness generates
dropsy, delirium tremens, and a host of miseries. Luxury
produces effeminacy, and often brings on destitution and
want. 2. Injustice, fraud, and oppression, are transgressions of
the law of ' love to our neighbour ; and all the cruelties,
wars, and murders, which afflict mankind, spring from the
indulgence of these depraved principles.
1 3. Filthiness is a neglect of the law of cleanliness — a law
suggested by our own comfort and convenience, and exem
plified by the habits of many brute animals. From filthiness
spring putrid fevers, and diverse pestilences. It is a
m

290 THE benevolence of god.
remarkable fact, that the plague has never visited London
since the streets were widened, and increased attention has
been paid to cleanliness ; and now, that destroyer finds his
victims almost exclusively in those parts of the world where
the inhabitants wallow in disgusting filthiness. Universal
cleanliness would probably banish this destroyer from our
world. 4. Lasciviousness is a violation of the law of continence ¦
and chastity. Debility, consumption, loathsome diseases,
premature deaths, and hereditary infirmities and pollutions,
stream forth from this degrading vice.
5. Indolence. The law of activity and industry is legibly
inscribed upon man's nature, and enforced by his own inte
rests, and by the instinctive habits of the animal creation.
Idleness is a neglect of this law, and its consequences are
squalid wretchedness and want ; which, in their turn, pro
duce other vices, and these vices again give birth to other
miseries. We need not multiply examples. They will suggest
themselves to every reflecting mind. It is clearly an esta
bhshed principle, that man can violate or neglect no law,
whether moral or physical, without entailing upon himself
pain, suffering, or some evil consequence ; and it is a truth
almost equally conspicuous, that, if he were to Hve in uniform
obedience to the laws of his moral and physical constitution,
which are the laws of God, there would be such an abridge
ment of his miseries, as would leave but few behind. The
faithful discharge of his duties to God, to himself, and his fel
low creatures, uniformly and universally persevered in would
immensely diminish the number and intensity of his woes,
and augment, in the same proportion, the sum both of his
temporal and spiritual enjoyments. The facts before us,
then, so far from impugning, accumulate the proofs of the
benevolence of God. For,
In the first place, the miseries in question are all self-sought
and self-inflicted; man is his own tormentor. Whatever evi
dence, therefore, there is of man's folly and depravity, there is
nothing here which reflects upon the character of his Maker.

THE BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 291
To the sins now under our notice, surely men are scarcely
prepared to add — that of attributing the consequences of
their own evil conduct to the Most High.
Secondly. — After all the good which man ignorantly and
wilfully throws away, a vast number of comforts and bles
sings are continued to him, vile as he is. This is the effect
of clemency and goodness.
Thirdly. — After all the miseries which man voluntarily
and impiously brings upon his own head, many others are
warded off, and almost all are mitigated by mercy.
Fourthly. — In connexion with the diseases brought by
man upon himself, there is a restoring process, in which
nature, by her own efforts, seeks the recovery of man from
the injuries inflicted upon him. Thus, when the drunkard
fractures a limb, nature at once commences a process of
reuniting it ; and when the libertine debilitates and pol
lutes his constitution by excesses, nature at once labours
to expel the poison infused, and to supply the energies
which had been wantonly exhausted. Indeed, the suffering .
experienced in most diseases, arises from the struggle of
nature to rectify human disorders, and restore the victims
of intemperance, of lust, and vice, to a state of health and
soundness. Surely no mind can be so bhnded as not to
perceive a benevolent intention in such . an economy. It
is a laborious and protracted effort to do the sinner good in
spite of himself, and presents the clearest evidence, of a pre
siding Mind, having infinitely more tender regard for him
than he has for himself.
Fifthly. — The connexion of pains with the violation of
moral and physical law, is as distinguished by clemency
as by justice, as they are intended to subserve a benevolent
purpose. If the abuse of a blessing were followed by its
immediate withdrawal, the goodness which originated the
gift at first could not be impugned, and if the connexion
of pain with the violation of law were merely punitive and
not restorative, the justice of God could not be impugned ;
/ but, when, throughout the whole economy of God, sufferings
are intended to produce a reformation of habits and the

292 THE BENEVOLENCE OF GOD.
prevention of greater evils, we have evidence of astonishing
clemency and goodness ; and such an intention pervades
the whole process of Divine Providence towards man, during
his probationary state. Thus the nausea, the head ache,
and sickness which follow the first drunken surfeit, are
gentle warnings to avoid that course in future ; and the
debility, the delirium tremens, and dropsy, which attend a
more advanced stage of intemperance, are still louder tones
of admonition to escape from the disgusting vice. Thus,
the squalid wretchedness, disease, and woe, resulting from
idleness, filthiness, and prodigality, are rebukes to the
miserable victims. The sufferings of the obscene libertine
utter a loud and intelligible warning, calling upon him to
, adandon his depraved course. Indeed, all the physical evils
j springing from sin are so many merciful admonitions to
irepentance and reformation. They are so many appeals to
J man's self-love, even when he is lost to every higher principle-^
declaiming against his vicious habits, and summoning him
to the path of virtue and obedience, lest iniquity be his utter
ruin ; and, generally, this appeal of nature, though gentle at
first, becomes louder and louder, as the danger becomes
more imminent — the tones of admonition, uttered by suffer
ing and woe, consequent on vice, assume a more startling and
terrific cry, as the rebel steps nearer the precipice of irre
coverable ruin. We ask, What principle could dictate this
economy ? The sinner's recovery to virtue and happiness
is obviously the object, and that is the object of clemency
and love. Punitive justice may indeed be manifested, but,
evidently, in harmonious connexion with tender compassion
—with unbounded goodness and love.
Fifthly, Physical Evils not arising fbom Vicious Habits.
— *It is alleged, however, that there are sufferings not immedi
ately arising from sin, or moral evil, so far as their causes
can be traced. We very much question, however, whether
such pains and sufferings ought to be placed in the category
of evils. Thus, if by accident, a man, or any other animal,
receives a bruise, a burn, or a cut, pain is instantly felt.
But, though, in such cases, pain is indeed experienced,

THE BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 293
and is unavoidable with our present constitution, the pain
we regard as no evil, but a benefit, and an indication of a
benevolent purpose. It is obvious, the suffering, in such
cases, is not punitive in its object, nor permitted for any
object but a beneficial one, namely, the preservation of the
creature. If no pain were felt from a bruise, we should
have no warning to escape from danger; if no smart were
felt from the fire, we might be burned to death before we
were conscious of having received injury ; if no pain were
experienced from a wound, a hmb might be amputated, or
a vital part be pierced before we were aware of any harm
being done. The connexion, therefore, of pain with any
injury done to the body, is a benevolent provision made for
our preservation. The goodness of God is further manifest
in having given the greatest sensibility to the outer surface
of the body, by having distributed an immense number of
nerves, like net-work, immediately under the skin, which, as
so many watchful sentinels, in a moment, give the alarm
when danger is near, and our instinctive aversion to pain
prompts us the next moment to escape. The same provi
sion is made for the'inferior animals as well for the human
species. Though devoid of reason, they are commonly as
susceptible of approaching evil as ourselves. Philosophy
may answer many important purposes to rational beings,
but sense and instinct are instrumentally the great preserva
tives of life, especially from immediate danger. Thus, on
the one hand, our senses and instincts are the avenues of
enjoyment; and, on the other, they are our guardians from
evil and danger. Such an economy indicates the benevolent
disposition of our Creator, and constrains us to rank pain
itself as being a benefit and a blessing to creatures having
a physical organization.
If it be asked, Why did not God secure our protection
without the susceptibility of pain and suffering? we may
reply to this question by proposing another, Why did God
form any creatures with a physical organization ? Why did
he not create all beings of one nature, and absolutely perfect ?
If there must be a gradation and a variety of existence, and

294 the benevolence of god.
that variety include a material organization, the conditions
of that existence exclude the supposition involved in the
inquiry; nor can the multiform manifestations of benevolence
in the actual condition of the creature be set aside by any
visionary scheme of optimism of which our imagination may
dream. A state of real existence is before us, and it is
fraught with proofs that God is love.
Sixthly, Death. — Whether we contemplate man's death
theologically or philosophically, it is in perfect harmony with
the Divine goodness. If viewed in the aspect of theology,
we behold it certainly as a punitive result of sin, yet, conr
nected with a merciful economy, which contemplates a resur
rection to a physical existence of transcendant dignity and
glory. Here superabounding goodness is apparent. If death
be contemplated philosophically, it impugns neither Divine
justice nor love ; for, the cessation of life does not neutrahze
the goodness displayed in giving life, and in providing for
the happiness of that life for a time. The non-continuance of
hfe merely limits the period of the goodness of God, in respect
to one generation ; but this limitation of hfe to one generation
affords scope for extending the same "blessings to others,
who, in their turn, share the same tokens of Divine clemency
and regard. Without death, man must be either removed
from this sphere while alive, or his species must cease to be
multiplied. Sin has deprived him of the privilege of being
removed by translation. He is taken away by death ; this
is punitive : but, seeing this punitive removal affords room
for multiplying existence to countless myriads, and seeing
Divine goodness immediately replenishes the vacancy by new
generations of the same race, on whom God continues succes
sively to heap the proofs of his regard, we see, in this econo
my, multiplying evidences that God is love. Similar remarks
apply to the inferior species of existence. Without death,
the Divine goodness must be hmited to one generation, and
all the social faculties and instinctive enjoyments, arising
from the propagation of the species, must soon have been
obliterated. But, by death, these enjoyments are continued,
and generation succeeds generation, in which new existences

THE BEVENOLENCE OF GOD. 205
run the same round of enjoyment, and repeat the same
manifestations of the goodness of God.
Death by Prey — Though the death of man is punitive,
the death of the inferior animals is not, for it is an essential
part of the physical system. The organization of existing
animals shows that death by prey was an event contemplated
by the Divine mind, and the characteristics of geological
strata show that it has obtained through every period in the
history of our planet, from the first dawn of animal being
until now. It was the characteristic of those geological
periods anterior to the introduction of moral evil, as well
as since : indeed, the existence of predatory animals is
attested in many of the earliest strata of our world. We have
already seen that the death of animals affords more ample
scope for the exercise of benevolence than the immortality
of the species ; and death by prey, so far from diminishing,
exalts our view of that benevolence. This statement may
shock the feelings of some who have been accustomed to
regard the system of prey as a formidable objection to the
Divine goodness. But let us examine the subject. Animal
existence must be sustained by food of some kind ; and as
mere earths and minerals are not adapted for this purpose,
the food must consist of either animal or vegetable mate
rial. Animal life is accompanied with enjoyment ; vegetable
life is incapable of sensation or emotion. Whether then is
it the more expressive of goodness, " that a certain portion
of that food should be animated and filled with pleasure
until it is wanted,"* or, that it should be inanimate and
incapable of enjoyment? We can have no hesitation in
replying — the former is an arrangement provided for securing
the greatest amount of happiness, and, consequently, the
most expressive of benevolence. " But, might it not have
been provided that carnivorous animals should feed upon
others after they had died a natural death ? " We ask, in
¦ return, why should this arrangement be preferred ? Is it
- in order to avoid the suffering of pain ? Then the present
arrangement is, doubtless, the most conducive to such a
* Dr. Harris.

296 THE BENEVOLENCE OF GOD.
result. When creatures die by accident, by disease, or by
old age, there must, in general, be the endurance of much
more pain than is felt in undergoing a sudden destruction
by some predatory animal. Myriads of smaller creatures
perish in an instant as prey for larger animals ; and others
who, from their size and strength, are capable of struggling
for a time against their antagonist, yet,, commonly, are soon
dispatched ; for nature has furnished their destroyers with
weapons for effecting sudden destruction, and has directed
them to attack those parts which produce almost instanta
neous death. Add to this the consideration that animals
have no idea of death, and, consequently, can have no fear
of it. They enjoy life without being once interrupted by
the thought of death. From the most obvious facts it
appears, that, in a vast majority of cases, the death of animals
preyed upon is instantaneous, in others it is effected with
the least degree of pain possible, and, in all, without the
animal having any conception of ceasing to live. Such
being the case, the- system of one animal preying upon
another is an arrangement worthy of God, for it displays
his benevolence, by providing for the greatest amount of
animal enjoyment, and the least degree of animal suffering.
Summary. — In contemplating the attribute of benevolence,
or love, we have seen it displayed in the creation of various
orders of animated existence — in providing for the supply of
the necessities of these creatures — in endowing them with
instincts and capacities for diversified enjoyment — in render
ing all nature subservient to that enjoyment — in implanting
in the nature of sentient beings a principle of love one for
another — in causing obedience to consist in the exercise of
agreeable emotions and affeetions — and in connecting happi
ness with obedience. We have examined sundry objections
derived from the existence of natural and moral, evil, and
shown that even here punitive justice is mixed and tempered
with kindness and love, and that in the elements of our
moral constitution, in our susceptibility of remorse, in our
bodily sufferings, and in death itself there are evidences of
goodness and love.

THE BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 297
What an amiable and glorious Being is God, when Con
templated as invested with the attribute of Love ! Did we
know him only as a self-existent and independent Being,
of Almighty power, and infinite majesty, he would be an
object of terror, and the contemplation of his existence and
character would be only calculated to fill us with dismay.
We should be overpowered with his greatness, instead of
being attracted by his goodness. Our souls would not dare
to approach him, nor could they feel any sympathy with him.
We should deem him inaccessible and inexorable. The
thought of him would be a burden, and the anxious mind
would seek repose by excluding him from its meditations.
But the perfection of love softens down the stern and awe-
inspiring attributes of his character, and throws a mild and
benignant splendour around him which the soul looks upon
with complacency. We behold in him a Father as well as
a Creator, and can think of him with delight as well as with
wonder. Instead of being repelled, we are attracted by the
beams of his glory ; instead of trembling with dismay, we
are inspired with filial confidence ; instead of seeking a refuge
from him, we draw near; and our language is, "My Father,
thou art my Lord and my God."
Impressed with his benevolent character, we see the obli
gation of loving him in return ; and, recognising him as our
Creator, we perceive that our love towards him should be
supreme-r-that he justly claims our undivided and our
highest affection. From the same aspect of his character,
we see, also, the . duty of our loving one another ; and feel
assured that, in so far as we thus imitate his example, we
fulfil his pleasure, realize his favour, answer the end of our
being, and secure the happiness we are fitted to enjoy.
" Beloved, let us love one another ; for love is of God ; and
every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God.
He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love." " He
that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him."

CHAPTEE VIII.

THE HOLINESS OF GOD.

"Holy, Holy, Holy is Jehovah of Hosts." — Isaiah, vi., 3.

Holiness is an assemblage of all moral excellencies, to the
exclusion of all opposite properties. Hohness of nature im
phes the indwelling of all moral excellencies ; and Hohness
of character is the practical exemplification of these excel
lencies. Absolute Holiness imphes the possession and
exemplification of these moral excellencies in absolute per
fection. Such is the Holiness of God. The passage we
have placed at the head of this chapter contains a threefold
ascription of holiness to God. It would be irrelevant, and
lead us too far from the subject under our immediate con
sideration to show that this, threefold ascription, viewed in
its relation to the context, involves the doctrine of the
Trinity ; but, apart from this, it will be obvious to all minds
that holiness is here ascribed to God in the most emphatic
manner.- This solemn averment of scripture receives the
corroborative testimony of reason. This testimony, indeed;
is so unequivocal and decisive, that it necessarily flows from
a logical consideration of the Divine nature.
I. THE DIVINE NATURE NECESSARILY PRECLUDES THE EXISTENCE
OF ANY QUALITIES CONTRARY TO HOLINESS.
If there were any qualities in the mind of the Deity
repugnant to Holiness, those qualities must exist either
essentially, adventitiously, or voluntarily.
1. They cannot be essential to God for various reasons.
All the qualities repugnant to hohness are sources of unea
siness and misery ; but God is perfectly happy, and, there
fore, such malign qualities can have no place in his nature.

THE HOLINESS OF GOD. 299
Those qualities involve, also, the absence or want of some
thing. Thus, envy, malignity, injustice, and all other evil
properties imply a sense of uneasiness on account of not
possessing some supposed good. But God is totally inde
pendent and self-sufficient, and has been so from eternity ;
and, therefore, no quality indicative of want, weakness, or
dependence, can have place in him. All malign qualities
are the marks of imperfection ; they exist only in an imperfect
nature. But Jehovah is and always was absolutely perfect,
and, therefore, no malign property or tendency can exist
in him.
2. Neither can any disposition or habit contrary to hoh
ness be induced adventitiously. The Deity has no adventi
tious attributes. They are all essential and eternal. Inde
pendent in his existence, he is infinitely above the influence
of all created beings, and all external circumstances. Immu
table in bis attributes, he is Mable to no change. Therefore,
as he was free from all malign properties for an eternity-
prior to all creation, he must remain so for ever, for no extra
neous events can change the nature or character of an
independent and absolutely perfect Being.
3. Nor can any disposition or habit, repugnant to holi
ness, be voluntarily adopted. The adoption of any such
quality would involve a loss of some attribute, and a dege
neracy of nature, which, in the Divine Being, is impossible.
The same perfections, which have precluded all degeneracy
in. ages past, preclude it now, and must do so through all
ages to come. It is averred in Holy Seripture, that it is
impossible for God to he : and it is impossible, simply,
because he is God. As wisdom, in the abstract, excludes
folly, as veracity excludes falsehood, as love excludes every
disposition to injustice, and as immutability excludes change,
so the truth that God possesses absolute perfection, excludes
the possibility of all decay in nature, and deterioration in
principle or character. Nor can God be susceptible of any
motive inducing him to change his moral character. His
own wisdom is the rule of equity based on the fitness of
things ; and his will is the standard of holiness, based on

300 ' THE HOLINESS; OF GOD.
the goodness and perfection of his nature. What motive,
then, can induce him to deny himself — to imbibe a senti
ment, cherish a disposition, or perform an action, contrary
to his own nature ? No such cause can possibly be con
ceived. Not any in his nature, for that isn'the fountain,
source, and standard of perfection. Not any in the creatures,
for he is infinitely superior to the reach of their influence':
he can be imposed upon by no deceit, swayed by no bias,
and awed by no power. While thus incapable of being
influenced by any motive to deteriorate, he is influenced by
the most powerful motives to retain his perfections in their
untarnished glory for ever. He supremely delights in what
he is. He rejoices in the possession of all his attributes.
He delights in his wisdom, in his benevolence, in his vera
city, in his holiness, and in .his all-sufficiency ; and what he
infinitely delights to possess, he must infinitely delight to
retain ; and, therefore, throughout eternity, he must be
absolutely free from any quality opposed to holiness.
II. THE ATTRIBUTES OF THE DEITY NECESSARILY INVOLVE
THE POSSESSION OF ABSOLUTE HOLINESS.
1. As the moral attributes of God are not mere capacities,
but, for the most part, properties and dispositions essentially
active, so hohness is not a negative quality : it is not mere puri
ty, or the absence of evil and aversion to it, but an assemblage
of excellent qualities and dispositions energetically operating
in the Divine mind. The possession of infinite wisdom' and
love appears to us necessarily to involve the possession and
exercise of perfect holiness. Without love, wisdom might
be associated with mahgnity and injustice ; and, without
wisdom, love would be a blind, indiscriminating fondness,
unworthy of the Deity, and incompatible with absolute rec
titude and moral excellence. It is the possession : of both,
in infinite perfection, which renders Jehovah a Being of
absolute rectitude in his views, his will, his dispositions,
and affections.
2. Perfect holiness requires an infallible estimate of all
beings, and all things, in their nature, their relation, and

THE HOLINESS OF GOD. 301
character. Without this, objects abhorrent to holiness might
be approved and loved, while others, amiable and holy,
might be objects of aversion and punishment. Without
absolute rectitude of judgement, there could be no righteous
direction given to the dispositions and affections. An infal
lible estimate of all things, therefore, lies at the foundation
of absolute holiness. Jehovah has this estimate, for he is
infinite in wisdom. He cannot mistake truth for error,
right for wrong, justice for injustice, good for evil. He sees
all things as they are, with a view so comprehensive, a pre
cision so minute, and an estimate so absolutely infallible,
that his judgement is the standard of truth or falsehood,
right or wrong, good or evil.
3. Absolute holiness requires the dispositions, the affec
tions, and the will, to operate in perfect and undeviating
harmony with the estimate in which all things are held by
an unerring judgement — choosing, approving, and delighting
in what is true and good, and eschewing and abhorring what
is false and evil. Any discord or discrepancy between the
judgement and the moral dispositions, would involve a tarnish
upon the character. To know what was right, and approve
and choose what was wrong, or to be conscious of any bias
to evil, would be an evidence of a diseased and tainted
nature. That no such a discrepancy can ever be in the
attributes of the Divine being we have already shown. On
the contrary, his will approves, and his affections embrace
with delight whatever is good, and they are absolutely averse
to all that is evil.
4. While the independence, the all-sufficiency, and abso
lute perfection of his nature preclude the existence of any
motive or inducement to evil, his boundless love is an affec
tion incessantly attracting him to all that is good. He
cannot be indifferent to moral excellence ; wherever it may
exist, it is a quality which resembles himself, and he delights
in it. In the possession of infinite love there is a con
sciousness of benevolent emotion, with all those dispositions
to veracity, kindness, justice, and faithfulness which love
inspires. These dispositions are inseparable from love ;

302 THE HOLINESS OF GOD.
and love not only excludes all the contrary dispositions, but
gives activity to all these priniciples with an intensity corres
ponding with the intensity of love itself.
Veracity is an element of holiness, and it must exist in
the Deity in absolute perfection; for, as, by his unerring
wisdom, he knows what is true and right, and, as, by his
love, he delights in the same, there must be undeviating
veracity in all his statements and proceedings.
Faithfulness is an element of holiness, and it must exist
in the Deity in absolute perfection ; for, as he both knows;
and loves the truth, he must delight in conforming all his
conduct thereto. Hence the disposition which prompts to
unchanging fidelity, and secures the fulfilment of all his
promises and covenant engagements.
Benignity is an element of holiness, and this, as we have
shown at length, dwells, in infinite measure, in the bosom
of Deity. The boundless love of God, the overflowing foun
tain of his goodness, is a full security that benignity will
never be withheld wherever it can be righteously placed.
Justice is an element of hohness, and this perfection
must essentially characterize Jehovah. As, from his wis
dom, he cannot err, and, from his love, he cannot be unkind,
so, from both, it is impossible he can be unjust. The dis
position which prompts him to do more for the creature
than justice requires, certainly cannot allow him to do less.:
Infinite wisdom and goodness conjoined, secure the observ
ance of unchanging rectitude and equity in every part of his
moral administration. Justice involves the punishment of
sin, and this is only saying that his benevolence is not a
bhnd and indiscriminate affection, but regulated by wisdom.
He loves and delights in all whom it is wise to love and
delight in. But he cannot delight in the perpetrators of
evil, for that would be to act contrary to his wisdom, and
to deny his own nature. Though his love has no respect
to persons, it must have respect to character. To love the
wicked, and be averse to the righteous, would be unjust in
the highest sense: to love bpth alike would be to make
folly, not wisdom, his rule. A Being, infinitely wise, just,

THE HOLINESS OF GOD. 303
and good, must be averse to evil beings ; for their conduct
is opposed to every decision of his judgment, and every
affection of his nature. He can no more confound good
with evil than he can mistake truth for falsehood. His
heart can no more approve of a wicked being than his
understanding can believe a lie. Between the dictates of
his infallible understanding, and the dispositions of his
perfeot nature, there is an essential harmony ; and, because
there is such an essential harmony, the righteous cannot
but be approved and loved, and the wicked cannot but be
abhorred and rejected.
The Being, in whom there is no taint of moral evil, and
in whom veracity, faithfulness, love, and justice, exist in
absolute perfection, must be perfectly- holy in his nature,
dispositions, and character. This Being is God.
ITI. THE CONCLUSIONS TO WHICH WE ARE THUS LED, BY AM
'A PRIORI ARGUMENT, ARE ABUNDANTLY CONFIRMED AND
ILLUSTRATED BY *A POSTERIORI FACTS.
The various objective manifestations of the Deity, presented
in his works, afford indications of his holiness.
1. Creation. — The construction of the universe, the
exquisite symmetry of all organized beings, the laws which
obtain in both, the combination of means and ends, of adapt
ations, uses, and harmonies, which pervade all nature, evince
that the love of truth and order is an essential property of
the Divine mind, and is a guiding principle in his operations.
Such a love of truth and order, in the natural world, involves
a corresponding love of truth and order in the moral world;
and the mind which essentially possesses this property must
be holy ; for, sin is but another name for confusion and
disorder. 2. Provtdenoe. — The general connexion of evil results
with the transgression of physical and moral laws, and the
connexion of good results with the observance of those laws,
are evidences of Jehovah's love of truth and order, both in
the natural and moral world, and of his disapproval of
any infringement of that truth and order. Now, as moral

304 THE HOLINESS OF GOD.
goodness consists in obedience to those laws, and moral evil
consists in the transgression or neglect of them, we see,
in the pain inflicted, God's aversion to evil ; and, in the
enjoyment bestowed, we see his approval of virtue and holi
ness. It is thus that Jehovah has left the impression of
his nature on all the works of his hand.
But, it is alleged that there are exceptions to the principle
we have laid down. We believe, however, that there are
no absolute exceptions to the principle. There are, indeed,
many instances in which the evils resulting from sin are
not immediately and strikingly apparent, nor the blessings
resulting from obedience at once very conspicuous, to human
observation ; but yet, evils in the one case, and blessings in
the other, are certainly and universally consequent upon
certain courses of conduct.
It is admitted, indeed, that, in the present life, the dis
tribution of sufferings and enjoyments is not in exact pro
portion to the.character of men — the righteous often passing
through scenes of calamity and pain, and the wicked revel
ling in gratifications and pleasures ; but two important truths .
must be remembered : — First, that no man, in this hfe, sus
tains a character either absolutely good or absolutly evil, but
a mixture of both — no man being so absolutely vile, but that-
some remnant of good may be found in him in some part
of his history ; and no man so perfectly holy, but that sin
has, at some period, stained his character. This being
undeniable, it follows that the dispensations of providence
may justly assign to every man a mixed portion ,of enjoy-,-
ment and suffering, especially when it is a fact that no man's.
sufferings equal his deserts, while the enjoyment of all
vastly surpass any claims arising from their own goodness.-
Secondly, it must be remembered, that the scriptures repre
sent this life not as a scene of complete retribution, but one
of probation. This doctrine accords with existing facts;
and while, on this ground, it is entitled to our rational
assent, it satisfactorily accounts for any apparent anomalies
which the aspect of God's dispensations may present in
this transient life. We admit, then, that the amount of

THE HOLTNESS OF GOD. 305
temporal enjoyment or suffering is not in exact proportion
to the character of men, and account for it by the reasons
stated; yet we maintain, at the same time, that there is
such a constant and obvious connexion between vice and
misery on the one hand, and between virtue and happiness
on the other, as distinctly and loudly proclaims that the
Creator and Governor of the universe has an aversion to
sin and a love to hohness, and that, therefore, he is himself
a Holy Being. Falsehood, treachery, pride, injustice, idle
ness, lust, intemperance, and all other sins, combined, are
the sources of the complicated forms of misery which abound
in our world ; indeed, there is scarcely an instance of suf
fering, to which flesh is heir, but which- may be traced
to the violation of some physical or moral law. On the
other hand, veracity, justice, faithfulness, benevolence, con
tinence, temperance, industry, piety, and obedience to phy
sical and moral law, are productive of good to both body
and mind — of happiness to the individual and to society in
general. This connexion of sin and woe, of piety and
enjoyment, is not fortuitous and accidental, but fixed and
irrevocable : no ingenuity can evade, no force can destroy,
this connexion. It is an estabhshed ordinance of God ;
and, hke all the laws of matter and of mind, it exists
independent of human will, in defiance of human will, and
is universal and unchangeable. This ordinance, hke all
other laws of nature, originated in the will of God, and
originated in his will because it is in harmony with his
nature. He has an aversion to evil, and expresses that
aversion by connecting it with misery. He has a love for
virtue and hohness, and expresses that love by connecting
it with happiness. He is perfectly happy himself, because
he is absolutely holy ; and men participate in his happiness
in proportion as they participate in his hohness, — -just as
they conform to his moral image.
3. Our moral sentiments and emotions are expres
sive of the creator's holiness. — Though man is not
endowed with innate ideas, yet such is his mental constitu
tion, that he is formed to distinguish between the moral

306 THE HOLINESS OF GOD.
qualities of actions — to distinguish right from wrong, as well
as truth from error. However diversified the intellect, and
varied the education of mankind, yet, wherever there is
reason, there is a moral faculty, which has only to be
"enlightened to give it at least some degree of activity, and
develop its sensibility. It may be said, that the develop
ment of this faculty, in every instance, is owing to the
agency of the Holy Spirit. It is not our intention, at pre
sent, to inquire into the truth of this sentiment ; we have
to do with the mere fact, that all men have such a faculty.
Take the most untutored savage, and pour the rays of truth
upon his mind, and he becomes sensible of the distinction
between right and wrong, and of corresponding moral
emotions. An inherent principle is exeited, which answers
to the essential distinction in moral actions, approving the
good and condemning the evil. All men whose mental
faculties are at all exercised by reflection, know the differ
ence between falsehood and truth, deceit and sincerity,
treachery- and generosity, fraud and equity, cruelty and
kindness ; and such is their mental constitution, that they
condemn the one as evil, and approve the other as good.
This determination of the mind, as to the moral quality of
human actions, is not voluntary, but constitutional. It is a
sort of moral instinct, which, to a certain extent, is irresisti
ble. Let a man labour ever so hard to believe that an
act of treachery is as good as an act of generosity, and he
will find it impossible. The difference between good and
evil is an essential and an eternal difference, and the human
mind is constitutionally fitted to perceive this distinction j
and all the efforts of men to make the quality of these
actions change places, or to suppose them to be equally
indifferent, must be totally abortive. Men may become so
perverse and desperately wicked in their habits, that they
uniformly practise evil; yet still they are compelled to
pronounce and confess that their course is an evil one.
The essential difference in the quality of moral actions is
felt, as well as seen, by the human mind. We can no more
contemplate good and evil with the same emotions, than wa

THE HOLINESS OF GOD. 307
can think them to possess the same quality. We approve
the good, we condemn the evil. There is commonly a sense
of uneasiness in the contemplation of a wicked action.
When that aotion is committed by another, we feel displea
sure, sometimes abhorrence and horror — the kind and
intensity of the emotion depending upon the complexion
and character of the action ; but, when the action is our
own, the feeling is one of remorse, and sometimes of shame
and anguish. This sensation is not voluntary, but forced
upon us by nature.. If it were voluntary, wicked men
would speedily banish it from their minds. But, however
unwelcome the sensation may be, it clings to the wicked in
spite of himself. It comes unsought, and fastens upon his
heart as with the talons of a vulture upon his prey, and inflicts
a torture which often renders existence miserable. A wick
ed action may be secret, but secrecy cannot turn aside the
shafts of conscience. The perpetrator of crime may be so
high in station and power, that no human law can reach
him, yet he cannot escape the self-inflicted condemnation
and punishment which chafe his guilty spirit. There is a
poniard in his breast which no power can withdraw. It
strikes the victim with unerring aim and relentless justice.
However sycophants may flatter him in his vices, or the
trumpet of fame sound his hollow applause, and no human
voice dare to charge him with wrong ; still his own con
science sternly frowns upon him, and compels him both to
abhor himself and despise his flatterers. 0 ! what would
the wicked man give to deceive himself as easily as he could
deceive others — that he could evade the tribunal of his own
heart as easily as he could evade thepower of human law ? 0 !
that he could but forget some dark deeds in his history, and
sink them into everlasting oblivion ! But he cannot. They
are registered in his memory, and, hke so many grim
spectres, they haunt him by night and by day, and pierce
his bosom with insufferable anguish. Under the influence
of remorse, some have slowly pined away even unto death;
some have confessed and voluntarily surrendered themselves
to public justice; and others, unable to bear the self-reproach

308 THE HOLINESS OF GOD.
and anguish of their own conscience, have madly sought to
escape by putting an end to their existence.
Good actions, on the other hand, are contemplated with
complacency. When beheld in the conduct of others, we
cannot withhold our approval ; and, when conscious of them
ourselves, we are the subjects of agreeable emotions : con
science pronounces her approval, and we feel satisfaction
and delight. We cannot cherish a good disposition but it
yields us pleasure ; we cannot perform a good action but
it affords complacency; and we cannot reflect upon such
without approval and satisfaction. When memory recalls
them they are welcome; like kind and friendly visitors their
presence is hailed, and they yield us refined and hallowed
delight. Whether we recognize them by observation, by
consciousness, by reflection, or by memory, they afford
satisfaction and peace — they foster the principles of virtue,
and they discountenance vice.
So essential is the difference between good and evil, and
so inherent is our approval of the one and our condemna
tion of the other, that the malign passions themselves
corroborate the truth under our consideration. It is a
remarkable fact, that a wicked man cannot justify the exer
cise of his own malice, hatred, or any malign passion towards
a fellow-creature, without supposing his victim to be evil.
" Not the most furious or irascible of men can indulge
his passion until after he has attributed an ill intention to
the object of his wrath. To be angry with that which is
seen and confessed to be innoxious or devoid of hostile
feeling, is a reach of malignity that lies beyond the range
of human passions, even when most corrupted or most
inflamed. " And so, when hatred has become the settled temper of
the mind, there attends it a bad ingenuity, which puts the
worst possible construction upon the words, actions, looks,
of the abhorred object. Yet, Why is this, but because the
laws of the moral system forbid that any thing should be
hated but what actually deserves, or is at the moment
thought to deserve, abhorrence ?

THE HOLINESS OF GOD. 309
" The most pernicious and virulent heart has no power
of ejecting its venom upon a fair surface; it must slur
whatever it means to poison. To hate that which is seen
and confessed to be not wicked, is as impossible as to be
. angry with that which is not assumed to be hostile. And
the most depraved souls, whose only element is revenge,
feel the stress of this necessity not a whit less than the
most benign and virtuous. Whether the universe any
where contains spirits so malignant as to be capable of
hating without assignment of demerit, or attributing of ill
purpose to their adversary, we know not ; but certainly man
never reaches any such frightful enormity."*
It is now time to inquire, Why is the human mind thus
constituted ? How is it that man is formed with a faculty
for determining the quality of moral actions ? How is it
that he approves and justifies the good, and condemns the
wicked? How is it that his mental determinations on
all moral subjects are associated with moral sensibilities ?
How is it that complacency and satisfaction are uniformly
united with a consciousness of good dispositions and actions,
and remorse and anguish are associated with evil disposi
tions and actions ? How is it, finally, that even the malign
passions themselves cannot be justified, when exercised
towards a being confessed to be good, and that we are com
pelled at least to imagine a being to be evil ere we can
justify our hatred towards him ? Why are the malign pas
sions themselves thus compelled to do homage to virtue
and goodness ? It is not sufficient to reply, such is the
constitution of the human mind. It is possible to suppose
man might have had a different constitution, and, there
fore, there must be a reason for giving him this constitution.
It is not sufficient to say, that God thus made man because
it was his will ; for the question returns, Why was it God's
will ? The only reply is, Because it expresses his nature ;
and, if such be his nature, then he is a righteous and holy
Being. Throughout the wide universe of mind, the Creator
has left the brand of his aversion upon all evil dispositions
* Isaac Taylor on Fanaticism, p. 45.

310 THE HOLINESS OF GOD.
and actions, by rendering them so many sources of uneasi
ness and misery ; and impressed the seal of his approval
upon every good disposition and action, by rendering such
productive of satisfaction and happiness. And thus has he.
pubhshed to all intelligent beings the great truth, that their
Creator is a Being of absolute rectitude, of essential and
unchanging holiness.
IV. GOD'S MORAL GOVERNMENT IS DECLARATORY OF HIS
HOLINESS.
In the objective or external manifestations of hohness,
which have already been considered, the principles of God's
moral government are developed, and, to some extent,
illustrated; but there are some aspects of that government
which demand special attention.
Absolute holiness admits of no compromise of principle
or character. The principles of holiness are as immutable
as the Divine nature itself, and they must regulate the
Divine conduct towards the creature under all circumstances,
in all states of being, and through all periods of duration.
Those principles cannot change, because the Divine nature
is absolutely unchangeable. From which it follows that
the conduct of God, towards moral agents, will always have
respect to their character.
If the conduct of the creature exhibit uniform obedience
and holiness, the tokens of Divine benignity and favour will
be uniform and uninterrupted, unaccompanied with any
mark of displeasure or punishment.
If the conduct of the creature be one of unmixed evil and
absolute disobedience, the benignity and approval of God
must be totally withdrawn, and punitive justice must inflict
suffering and pain, as the penalty of sin.
If the character of the creature be one presenting a mix
ture of good and evil, of obedience and disobedience, it will
follow that the treatment of God will present a mixed cha
racter of clemency and punitive justice.
If pardon should ever be bestowed upon an offender, the
bestowment must be on conditions which harmonize with

THE HOLINESS OF GOD. 811
the strictest justice, and afford an equal manifestation of
the holiness and rectitude of the Divine character.
If these principles were reversed or neglected, in the
administration of the Divine government, the proceedings
of God would be no exposition of his character. But we
are sure that such a supposition can be entertained by no
rational mind. The operations of our Creator and Governor
must harmonize with his character, and publish that cha
racter to aU intelligent beings.
Now, the moral government of God, so far as we are able
to scan it, either by reason or revelation, exactly coincides
with the principles we have stated. Whatever may be the
nature of intelhgent beings, their history and condition, so
for as made known to us, furnish a practical exemplification
of the principles now laid down.
1. While Adam retained his innocence, his experience con
stantly realized unmixed manifestations of Divine benignity
and favour. While a stranger to sin, he was a stranger to
remorse, to suffering, to death. Being the subject of no
moral eviL he experienced no physical or natural eviL THs
state was happy, while his life was holy. The favour of the
Deity shone resplendent upon him, while the Divine image
remained unclouded on his soul. So the holy angels in
heaven, who have never sinned, and glorified human spirits,
who are made free from sin, are described as being in unin
terrupted enjoyment — in happiness unalloyed by evil, in
fruition which fiTls their capacities, and extends through
the whole eternity of their being. The bestowment of sueh
unmixed happiness upon holy beings illustrates our first
principle, and proclaims aloud the holiness of God-
2. Apostate angels are described as lost to all good
ness — as filled with the principles of evil operating within
them with unceasing activity — hating God and his works,
and employed incessantly in acts of rebellion and malignity.
From such the Divine benignity is absolutely withdrawn,
and they are everlastingly consigned to punitive justice.
Divine goodness cannot aDy itself with sin, for that were to
sanction what is repugnant to the Divine nature, which is

312 THE HOLINESS OF GOD.
impossible ; and, where only sin exists, its consequent
punishment must be inflicted without mixture. So with
regard to human spirits in the eternal world. Their pro
bation being ended, and the merciful influences of grace
being withdrawn, they, like devils, are become absolutely
evil, and, like them, are described as excluded for ever from
the Divine clemency, and given over to retributive justice.
The eternity of their punishment is the just and the necessary
consequence of the eternity of their evil nature, and the hoh
ness of God, which invariably connects misery with sin. Thus,
eternal punishment is nothing more than the continued
application of a principle which connects a just proportion
of suffering with sin.
3. Human beings, in the present hfe, present a mixed
character — neither absolutely evil nor absolutely good. In
a probationary state, and under a restorative economy, we
see in them the elements of both good and evil — virtue and
vice, benevolence and malignity, obedience and disobedience;
being strangely mixed together ih the same individual per
son, as well as in the world at large. Consequently, the
Divine government presents a mixture of clemency and
retributive punishment. This mixture is everywhere appa
rent in our world, as we have already proved. Amid
profuse displays of benevolence, we continually meet with
indications of a punitive character; and, amid -numerous
physical evils, we find continual manifestations of clemency
and goodness. Thus, the history of man is an instructive
and ample comment on the principle that the government
of a holy being must have respect to the character of moral
agents. Distinguished from holy angels by a mixture of
sin, we are distinguished from them by our sufferings and
punishment. Distinguished from devils by a mixture of
goodness, we are distinguished from them by our numerous
enjoyments, and the tempered manifestations of Divine
benignity. This distinction necessarily springs from the
holiness of our Creator and our Judge.
4. If ever pardon be granted to sinful creatures, it must
be on conditions which perfectly harmonize with the claims

THE HOLINESS OF GOD. 313
of justice, and afford an equal manifestation of the rectitude
and hohness of the Divine character. In such a mode is
pardon offered and bestowed to guilty man : —
First condition. — An ample atonement is made by the
propitiatory sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ. In this
atonement we see the broken law honoured, its Divine au
thority upheld, its righteous claims asserted and enforced —
we see justice revered and inflexibly maintained — we see
the holiness of the Divine character beaming forth with
ineffable radiance, and in harmony with the richest exhibit
ions of love. Mercy attains its object, yet no principle is
compromised. Every legal barrier to our salvation is thrown
down, yet the majesty of truth, the guards of moral order,
and the motives to obedience, are unimpaired. Justice and
benignity equally secure their object, and Jehovah is glori
fied in the redemption of a fallen world. In the cross of
Christ, the righteousness of God is declared — he is just,
and yet the justifier of the ungodly.
Second condition. — Bepentance is required. Thus, the
rectitude of the law, and the justice of the penalty, are
acknowledged — man justifies his Maker, charges home upon
himself his transgressions, renounces his evil ways, and
implores forgiveness. Here, again, the hohness of God is
manifested and confessed.
Third condition. — Faith is required. This act completes
the soul's submission to God. It involves an entire sur
render of the understanding, the reason, the judgement, the
will, the affections, and the person, to God. So long as
faith is withheld, rebellion is cherished in some form, and
for God to pardon a soul in this state would be to connive
at sin. But faith renders the submission of an intelhgent
being complete. It involves the principle of an unreserved
obedience, and a thankful acquiesence in God's revealed
method of forgiveness and salvation. Here, again, the hoh
ness of God is acknowledged.
Fourth condition. — As a condition of our continuance in
the Divine favour, and final salvation, it is imperatively
required that our faith should be productive of practical
P

314 THE HOLINESS OF GOD.
obedience, and personal holiness ; without this, our faith is
vain, and all our blessings forfeited. Thus, though the
penalties of the law are removed from the faithful believer,
its precepts are unrelaxed, and its high claims to obedience
are enforced.
Now, Why are these the conditions of our pardon ? Why
did not God pardon by the exercise of his mere prerogative?
Why this atonement, repentance, faith, and return to obedi
ence? Why this respect to justice, law, and moral obligation?
Why this inflexible determination to connive at no sin, to
dispense with no duty, but to maintain and perpetuate all
the principles of the Divine government unimpaired ? The
answer is, Because those principles are founded in the Divine
nature, and that nature is absolutely unchangeably and
eternally holy. The scheme of salvation aims as much at
the personal holiness of mankind, as it does at their deliver
ance from personal misery. It seeks the restoration of the
creature to purity, to rectitude, and the moral image of God,
and thus proclaims as much the essential holiness, as it
does the goodness and mercy, of God.
In whatever aspect, then, we contemplate the objective
manifestations of the Deity, whether in the order and har
mony of nature, in our mental and moral constitution, in
the dispensations of providence, or in the characteristics of
his moral government, we see the inscription standing out
in bold and prominent relief — holy, holy, holy is Jehovah
of hosts ; and, from every part of the Divine proceedings,
we hear the voice of the Eternal addressing us, in solemn
and impressive majesty, Be ye holy, for I am holy. The
highest dignity which our intellectual and moral nature can
attain is to be like God — to rise complete in his image,
which is righteousness and true holiness.

CHAPTEE IX.

GOD S DISPOSITION FOR COMMUNION.

" And God said, let us make man in our image, after our likeness." —
Genesis i., 26.

By Communion we mean not mere meditation or soliloquy,
but the affectionate and reciprocal intercourse of one mind
with another. That a disposition for such intercourse
essentially exists in the mind of the Deity is a doctrine
taught in the sacred scriptures. The existence of such a
disposition might, indeed, be argued dpriori, from the infinite
benevolence or love of the Divine being, but it is expressly
taught in a variety of forms in the sacred volume, and,
therefore, it may be affirmed to be an attribute of Jehovah
with as much propriety as wisdom, power, love, or any other
perfection of his nature. In this chapter we shall adduce
some of the forms under which this doctrine is presented
before us, and show that these are in accordance with sober
reason.
I. THE EXISTENCE OF THIS DISPOSITION WAS MANIFESTED IN
THE SACRED CONFERENCE RECORDED IN GENESIS I., 25,  AND
GOD SAID, LET US MAEE MAN, &C.
In this instance Jehovah is represented in actual inter
course and communion. The passage cannot be intended
to set forth merely an act of meditation or soliloquy, for the
language will not admit of this meaning. Meditation, or
soliloquy, is the act of a mind holding intercourse with itself,
whereas, the passage speaks of more than one. " And God
said, let us make man in our -image, after our likeness."
It is remarkable that the. pronoun, used three times in this
short passage, is plural in each case, plainly showing that

316 GOD'S DISPOSITION FOR COMMUNION.
the communion and intercourse of one mind with another
is both intended and expressed. A person may, in soliloquy,
say, " I will do so and so,- " but he cannot say, " We will effect
this or that, " unless he is conversing with another. There
was here a union of thought and purpose which preceded a
union of act, and the union of the thought and purpose
which preceded was as real as the united act which followed
in the creation of man.
Some have endeavoured to account for the phraseology by
supposing that the plural pronoun is used in conformity
with the custom of monarchs and potentates in issuing their
decrees and proclamations. This, however, is a mere suppo
sition, gratuitously made — a supposition not only unsup
ported by proof, but contradicted by the clearest evidence.
For, in the first place, no such' custom existed at that period
from which the phraseology could be borrowed': The lan
guage in question was used before kingdoms were formed,
indeed, before man existed. The idea of Jehovah borrow
ing a figure from human customs, prior to human existence,
is a piece of folly which borders on insanity. In the second
place, had the pompous custom of using the plural for the sin
gular existed, it is inconceivable that the holy, true, and faith
ful Jehovah would have adopted it. It is , indeed, in accordance
with the vanity and arrogance of earthly potentates to assume
the style of God, but incompatible with all correct views of
God, to suppose him borrowing his titles from the arrogant
assumptions of man. Thirdly, the language in question
is not a mandate or a proclamation, but it is the language
of converse and communion. This conclusion is so obvious
that it has been admitted even by those who oppose the doc
trine which it involves, and hence another evasive inter
pretation has been adopted.
It has been said that the language is certainly expressive
of intercourse, but it is the intercourse of God with the
holy angels. This flimsy sophism is, however, easily refuted ;
for, in the First place, the sacred records never intimate
that God makes the angels his counsellors, but they plainly
teach the contrary ;— the scriptures demand, " With whom

GODS DISPOSITION FOR COMMUNION. 317
took He counsel, and who instructed Him ? " — a challenge
which has the force of the strongest negation. " Behold,
he putteth no trust in his servants, and his angels he
chargeth with folly. " Secondly, the angels are never de
scribed as the creators of anything, even of the meanest rep
tile, or of an atom of dust. How then can it be supposed
that they participate with God in the creation of man, the
noblest work of God ? Thirdly, we are commanded to render
supreme worship and homage to our Creator, and if we had
been created by angels, it would have been lawful to worship
them ; but we are expressly forbidden to worship angels ;'
they are, therefore, not our creators in any sense which can
be conceived. From which evidence it is manifest that the
communion in question could not have transpired between
the Deity and the angels.
But if the Deity did not in this instance commune with
angels, With whom then did he hold communion ? This
inquiry has to be answered hereafter. We have at present
only to do with the simple fact that the scriptures represent
the Deity as holding communion with some mind or minds,
at a period antecedent to the creation of man, and this fact
involves a pre-existent disposition for such communion. We
would desire the reader to waive, for the present, all diffi
culties which may naturally suggest themselves to his mind,
in the consideration of this subject, and solely confine his
attention to the fact, that the scriptures represent God as
holding communion at the interesting period referred to — a
fact which clearly involves a disposition for such intercourse
as an attribute of his nature. We proceed to consider in
the next place —
II. THE SCRIPTURAL FACT THAT MAN IS MADE IN GOD's IMAGE,
INVOLVES IN THE CREATOR A DISPOSITION FOR COMMUNION.
We have previously called attention to the scriptural de
claration, that God made man in his own image and likeness.
There is much implied in such a representation of our spirit
ual nature. It refers us to every excellency in our own spirit,
as a manifestation or type of some corresponding perfection

318 god's disposition fob communion.
in " the Father of spirits." And, indeed, this appellation,
" The Father of spirits," involves the same interesting truth.
It is a phraseology never applied to express the relation
between God and the inferior animals. God is their Creator,
but he is " our Father." He gave the brute species, as
well as us, an existence, but he has given to our souls his
likeness and image — and is, therefore, emphatically — "The
Father of spirits." Such language denotes resemblance.
Such a resemblance, in some respects, as exists between
beings having a similar nature. God is a spirit ; so is the
human soul, and, as that soul was made in the image and
likeness of its Author, it must possess many properties and
attributes which correspond with the nature of Deity. Hence
a certain author asks, " Whence come the conceptions under
which we include that august name, (God) ? Whence do we
derive our knowledge of the attributes and perfections which
constitute supreme Being ? I answer, we derive them from
our own souls. The Divine attributes are first developed in
ourselves, and thence transferred to our Creator. The idea
of God, sublime and awful as it is, is the idea of our own
spiritual nature purified and enlarged to infinity. In our
selves are the elements of the Divinity. God, then, does not
sustain a figurative resemblance to man. It is the resem
blance of a parent to a child, the likeness of a kindred nature.
"We call God a Mind. He has revealed himself as a Spirit.
But what do we know of mind but through the unfolding of
this principle in our own breasts ? That unbounded spiritual
energy, which we call God, is conceived by us only through
consciousness, through the knowledge of ourselves. We
ascribe thought or intelligence to the Deity as one of his
most glorious attributes. And what means this language ?
These terms we have framed to express operations or facul
ties of our own souls. The infinite light would be for ever
hidden from us, did not kindred rays dawn and brighten
within us. God is another name for human intelhgence,
raised above all error and imperfection, and extended to all
possible truth.
" The same is true of God's goodness. How do we under-

GOD S DISPOSITION FOR COMMUNION. 319
stand this, but by the principle of love implanted in the
human breast ? Whence is it, that this Divine attribute is so
faintly comprehended, but from the feeble development of it
in the multitude of men ? Who can understand the strength,
purity, fulness, and extent of divine philanthropy, but he in
whom selfishness has been swallowed up in love ?
" The same is true of all the moral perfections of the Deity.
These are comprehended by us, only through our own moral
nature  Do we understand, through sympathy, God's
perception of the right, the good, the holy, the just ? Then
with what propriety is it said, that in his own image he
made man?"*
John Howe remarks, " He hath made him (man) in his
own image ; and he, being the Father of Spirits, hath placed
a spirit in man, so agreeable to his own spiritual nature ;
and by his own inspiration given him that understanding,
that the mind begotten corresponds, by its most natural
frame and constitution, to the mind that begot, the vovg
narpiKog (as it was anciently called), his own eternal mind."\
Dr. Wardlaw observes, respecting the constitution of ra
tional beings, that, formed "in the possession of reason and
holiness, they were made after God's own image. In them
the principles of moral rectitude, being a transfusion from
the fulness of the Deity, were the same in kind as in the
fulness from which they were imparted — the same in the
created nature as in the uncreated — the same in the stream
as in the fountain  His nature was then a fair and
faithful indication of the nature of God ; the excellence of
the Maker being made apparent in the excellence of his
work, "j
These remarks are just and appropriate. The original
truth of God's existence was, indeed, derived from revelation ;
but there is no created object which affords so full and clear
a manifestation of the perfections and character of God, as
the excellencies which God has implanted in the human soul.
If, therefore, a disposition for communion dwell in the mind
* Charming, on Likeness to God. + Howe's Living Temple.
{ Wardlaw's Christian Ethics, 217.

320 GOD'S DISPOSITION FOR COMMUNION.
of the infinite Spirit, we should expect to find a corresponding
disposition inherent in the human spirit. Indeed, the truths
we are now considering involve correlative propositions.
They reflect evidence upon each other ; they mutually sus
tain each other. So that, assume which we may in the
premises, it involves the other in conclusion. If, on the one
hand, we assume, as the scriptures teach, that there is, in the
Father of Spirits, a disposition for communion, it follows
that the same disposition should be found in the human
spirit, because it was formed in the Creator's image and
likeness. Or if, on the other hand, we assume, as a fact, that
there is in man a disposition for communion, it follows that
a similar disposition must dwell in the Deity, for the reason
already assigned. Were it otherwise, there would not be
likeness, but great dissimilarity. If in God there were this
disposition, springing from the fulness of his benevolent
nature, but in man there were no such disposition ; or, on
the other hand, if in man there were this disposition, spring- ,
ing from an inherent affection, but in God there were the
total absence of any such disposition, — the two natures would
be exceedingly unlike, and the assertion that man was
created in God's likeness must be either given up, or so
qualified as to leave but little significance. We can hardly
conceive of two minds more unlike each other than the
diverse complexions which the possession or non-possession
of this disposition would involve: The one complacently
delighting to communicate its thoughts and affections ; the
other averse to all such intercourse. The one rehshing the
society of a kindred spirit, and loving it with ardent affec
tion ; the other averse either to receiving or reciprocating
any such affectionate intercourse. It is quite evident that
two such minds must be most -unlike each other in natural
qualities, and that the most opposite moral qualities must
spring from these contrary dispositions. The one disposition
conforms to the nature of the .misanthropist, and the other
to the philanthropist. The- one' is' fitted for the highest de
velopment of the malign tempers ; the other must delight
in the exercise and development of the most benevolent

GOD'S DISPOSITION FOE COMMUNION. 321
affections. Such a disparity of nature is totally incompatible
with intimate resemblance ; and, therefore, he who admits
man to have been formed in God's image and likeness must
admit that, if a disposition for communion dwell in the
spirit of the creature, it must dwell in infinite plentitude and
perfection in the Creator.
We ask, then, Does there dwell in the mind of man a
disposition for communion? All will admit that there
does. What, indeed, is society, but the hving evidence
and development of this disposition ? What is speech, but
the vehicle through which this disposition puts itself forth
in audible words ? What is writing, but a more diffusive
vehicle by which man pours his thoughts, desires, emotions,
and affections, into the souls of his fellow-men, with a
copiousness, and to an extent, which give a kind of ubiquity
to his presence? It is, in fact, the expression of the vehe
ment desire of the mind for fellowship with mind — ;the
' disposition for communion breaking through the bounds of
limited location, and seeking to gratify itself by intercourse
with kindred spirits in every hemisphere and in every age.
Were this disposition to become extinct, the whole frame
work of society would immediately dissolve ;' and every man,
fleeing from, and repelled by, his fellow-man, would seek
seclusion, and hve for no one, care for no one, but himself.
It is the existence of this disposition which erects the social
structure, which forms every family, and builds up every
community. The evidence of man's disposition for com
munion is too'palpable and diversified to require amplifica-:
tion. It connects itself with every instinct, unites itself
with every ennobling affection, gives a complexion to every
habit, and is an element in every cup of felicity. The
Divine Being, who said it is not good for man to be alone,
uttered a truth, of which man's intellectual, moral, and
social nature furnishes the most ample illustration.
Seeing, then, that this disposition is essentially inherent
in the human mind, and seeing that revelation affirms that
the human mind is formed in the image and hkeness of,
God, the same disposition must dwell in the mind of the:
1

822 GOD'S DISPOSITION FOR COMMUNION.
Creator. There is no excellence dwells in man, but it i»
the reflection of a corresponding excellence in God himself.
To suppose the contrary would be to suppose that the
Creator has endowed the creature with perfections which
he himself does not possess, which is a palpable absurdity
and contradiction. The Creator may be supposed to with
hold from the nature of the creature various perfections
which he himself possesses, but it cannot be supposed he
could give to the creature any measure of an excellence of
which himself is destitute. Indeed, the absolute perfection
of his nature excludes the possibility of the absence of any
excellence. It comprehends every perfection in kind, as
well as in unhmited degree. The existence, therefore, of
any excellence in the created spirit is an a posteriori proof
that it dwells in infinite perfection in the Father of spirits.
Thus reason and revelation concur in ascribing this attribute
to Jehovah.
The only sophism which can be urged against this con-
elusion is, that the disposition for communion is not a
perfection, but the mark of an imperfect and inferior nature*
This sophism, we think, may be very easily refuted ; and^
ere we close this chapter, that refutation shall be givent'
In the meantime, let it be taken for granted, that the dis-,
position in question is an excellency, a perfection, an evi
dence of a superior nature. To this proposition, the cordial
believer in the Christian scriptures will find no difficulty in
yielding his assent, seeing he finds this disposition ascribed
to Deity in the passage already adduced at the head of this
chapter.
EX SPIRITUAL RELIGION CONSISTS CHIEFLY IN THE EXERCISE
OF THIS DISPOSITION.
Experimental rehgion is the affectionate communion of
saints, one with another, and with God, their heavenly
Father. It is the sanctified exercise and development of,
the principle in question. It is so vitally essential to
religion, that there eould be no experimental piety without

GOD S DISPOSITION FOB COMMUNION. 823
it. In its absence, men must for ever have remained in a
state of alienation from one another and from God.
Church fellowship evinces this disposition for communion,
God has ordained church fellowship both as a duty and a
privilege. But what is church fellowship, except the rehgious
communion of mind with mind ? And why are believers
congregated together, but for the exercise of this com
munion? Church fellowship is founded upon the dispo
sition in question. Had not this disposition been inhe
rent in our nature, church fellowship would never have been
ordained ; and, were it to become extinct, both the duty and
the privilege would cease, because the thing would be im
practicable. Even the external organization of a church
could not exist in the absence of this disposition. It was
because the mind of the psalmist delighted to have fellow
ship with kindred souls that he joyfully exclaimed, " I was
glad when they said unto me, Let us go into the house of
the Lord. Our feet shall stand within thy gates, O Jeru
salem ! " " 0, magnify the Lord with me, and let us exalt
his name together ! " " Come and hear, all ye that fear
God, and I will tell you what he hath done for my soul ! "
Thus the psalmist delighted in sacred fellowship. The
desire for communion was indeed natural to him as a
human being — an inherent element of his mental consti
tution ; but his delight in the fellowship of saints was the
effect of rehgious influence : it was rehgion recognizing and
appropriating to its sacred use a disposition of our social
nature. All spiritual rehgion is grafted on this principle. The
essence of rehgion is love — love to our fellow-creatures and
love to God. Love to a fellow-ereature is such, affection for
him as delights to hold communion with him. Love to
God is the same affection, exciting the same disposition in
a still 'higher degree. Under its influence, the affections
go out towards him, the thoughts dwell upon him, the soul
delights in him ; and all the religious exercises of the soul
are so many acts of communion with him. What is prayer,
but the utterance of the soul's desires after God, its yearn-

324 GOD'S DISPOSITION FOR COMMUNION.
ings for more of his presence, his grace, and blessing?
What is praise, but the effusion of the soul's gratitude and
affection ? What is adoration, but the soul's utterance
of solemn reverence and devotedness ? What is confession,
but the soul's contrite acknowledgment of sin before him ?
What is faith, but the exercise of the soul's confidence in
God's veracity and goodness ? What is hope, but the out
goings of its desires and expectations ? What is joy, but
the soul's exultant delight in God ? In all these, and every
other religious exercise, there is the communion of man's
spirit with the Spirit of his Maker : it is the fellowship of
the created mind with the eternal and uncreated mind.
This is religion, and it is the religion which God requires
and commands. " My son,- give me thine heart." In the
absence of this fellowship there is no religion ; and, without
it, the profession of religion is but formality and hypocrisy,
which God despises and condemns. No external rites, no
well-ordered ceremonials, no imposing pageantry, can be a
substitute for this. Even morality and good works, apart
from this fellowship with God, are of no avail. So essen
tial is communion with God to the very existence of true
religion, and so expressive is God's approval of that spiritual
exercise in which the soul realizes fellowship with himself.
Yet, in all the intercourse with God which genuine reh
gion affords, there is no creation of any new faculty in the
soul of man. The faculty, and the disposition too, of the
human mind to hold communion with other minds existed
prior to the renewing power of grace ; but then it required
a right — a heavenly direction. Before conversion, the mind
of man seeks to ally itself only with other human minds,
like itself in disposition and character ; but, under the
influence of religion, it allies itself with the pure, the holy,
the infinite mind of Deity, and here it finds supreme satis
faction and delight. Before conversion, hke the unsup
ported vine, it was prone, and grasped the creature ; but,
afterwards, it shoots upward, and lays hold of the infinite
and the eternal. The tendrils of the vine evince its inhe
rent tendency to embrace an object ; and the fellowship of

GOD'S DISPOSITION FOR COMMUNION. 325
man with man shows that the disposition is inherent and
natural, but it requires the renovating power of grace to
give this inherent tendency a heavenly direction. Now, the
existence of this property in man is an evidence that a cor
responding disposition dwells in him who created man.
He could not have given man a disposition diametrically
opposite to his own. He gave it man because he had it,
and delighted in it himself.
This intercourse, or fellowship, as the term implies, is
reciprocal. This, indeed, is implied in the very terms.
God communes with man, as well as man with God.
" Truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son,
Jesus Christ." Every one, who understands experimental
religion, knows what is meant by fellowship or communion
with God ; and he knows that, in this holy enjoyment,
there is as direct and sensible a communication from the
mind of God to the mind of man, as there is between any
two human minds when in fellowship one with another.
What is the love of God shed abroad in the heart, but such
a manifestation of the love and favour of God communi
cated to our spirits, as fills us with love and joy? It is the
Spirit of God speaking to our consciousness that we are
accepted and beloved, and imparting the assurance of this
estate, by dismissing every fear from our minds, and in
spiring them with joy unspeakable and full of glory. A
variety of other phrases indicate the same truth. The pre
sence of God — his dwelling in our hearts — his teaching us
his holy will— his enlightening our minds — his shining
into our souls — his talking with us — his imparting peace
and comfort — his hearing our prayers — his accepting of
our praises — his leading, guiding, strengthening, directing,
and sanctifying of our souls, with similar phrases, perpe
tually occurring in the scriptures, are all indicative of the
communion of God's Spirit with the spirit of man. The;
sacred writings are full of this doctrine — are replete with
promises and declarations of God's disposition to commune
with man, and fraught with examples which illustrate their
truth. When man was in Paradise, communion with God

326 god's disposition for communion.
was a privilege daily conferred. When the tabernacle was
set up under the Mosaic dispensation, the promise was,
" And there will I meet with thee, and there will I commune
with thee, from above the mercy-seat from between the
cherubim." Under the New Testament economy, it is
declared to be our privilege to " have our fellowship with
the Father, and with his son, Jesus Christ." So that no
one, who receives the scriptures as the oracles of God, can
doubt for a moment the truth, that experimental religion
pre-eminently consists in the exercise of fellowship with
God — in the realizing of direct communion with the Father
of spirits.
Nor should it be forgotten that the more eminent our
piety the more intimate our fellowship with God. The
more nearly we resemble him in hohness — the more com
pletely we are restored to his moral image, the more intense
is our desire for this fellowship ; and the more rich and
abundant are the communications of hght, comfort, love,
and joy, from God, our heavenly Father. Since, then, this
communion is reciprocated by God himself — since the Father
of spirits has made experimental rehgion to consist in our
intercourse with, him, and since he communes with his
people in every act of spiritual worship, What is more evi
dent than the existence of this disposition in the Deity
himself. If our intercourse with mind evinces the existence
of the disposition in our nature, does not his intercourse
with us evince the existence of the same disposition in his
blessed nature ? Could he make rehgion to consist in that
act of mind to which his own nature is averse ? Would he
commune with us, if his Spirit did not take pleasure in it ?
Would he make his intercourse with us a cause of purest,
serenest, holiest enjoyments, if he had not a blessed pro-
pension to this exercise in his own infinite and eternal
nature? Only one answer can be furnished to these in
quiries, and that answer must be — God does delight in
the communion of his Spirit with the spirit of the creature,
and the disposition to this is an essential property of his
own nature.

god's disposition for communion. 327
The reciprocation of this holy fellowship is not confined
to the present state of existence. As an essential element
of our being, the disposition survives the dissolution of our
animal nature, and is perpetuated through all eternity ; and
the privilege of its gratification ii? destined to be continued
throughout the whole length of our existence. Indeed, the
chief distinction of heaven from earth is our freedom from
all those restraints and impediments which, in the present
life, interrupt and hmit our communion with God. There,
our nature being more perfect, and our condition more
exalted, our intercourse with God will be more direct, and
the manifestations of himself to the soul more immediate
and- transporting. The chief bliss of heaven will consist in
our being constantly with God, dwelling in his immediate
presence, favoured with uninterrupted intercourse with him,
with perpetual consciousness of his favour and communica
tions of his love. In all the symbohcal representations of
heaven are those which indicate the most intimate and
• delightful intercourse between the ransomed soul and the
eternal God. As our spirits become more like his Spirit,.
the nearer their union, the closer their fellowship with him.
Thus, the spirit of the sanctified creature, and the Spirit of
the all-glorious Creator, are destined to be in contact and
communion for ever. It is not an occasional but a perpe
tual flow of thought, feeling, and intercourse j not a tran
sient, but an eternal communion. There is not to be a
moment, throughout the immeasurable ages of eternity, but
in which the mind of Deity is to be in communion with the
minds he has created. We ask, then, Would the Deity
have imposed upon himself an exercise to which his dispo
sition is repugnant ? Would he have estabhshed a principle
which perpetuates that exercise throughout eternity, had
his nature been averse to it? The answer may be confix
dently anticipated. The economy which imposes upon his
own mind an obligation to have eternal intercourse with
other minds is a moral demonstration that the dispositioa
to sueh intercourse is an essential property or attribute in.

328 god's disposition for communion.
God. He has thus ordained it because he delights in it,
and he dehghts in it because such is his nature.
The argument which conducts us to this conclusion be
comes vastly enlarged in its breadth and fulness, when we
contemplate another fact which philosophy and religion
combine to support ; namely, that the human spirit is only
one order of mind amongst the universe of intelhgent and
rational minds, in which the same disposition for commu
nion is inherent. As our world is but a small, dependant
planet in the solar system, vastly surpassed in magnitude
by other planets in the same system ; and as that system
is but one small family group, amid myriads of others which
are congregated in our stupendous galaxy ; and as our
galaxy, vast as it is, forms but one of similar congregations
which, in thousands, are scattered through immensity,—
who will affirm that the intelligent beings on our diminu-
tive planet are the only beings who possess an intelligent
and moral nature? Who will venture upon the puerile
supposition, that, among the millions of bright orbs which
spangle in the blue firmament, this dark corner of the
universe is the only spot where intelhgent natures reside ?
The supposition is not defensible for a moment. Philo
sophy affords the highest probability' that, as matter is
subordinated to the welfare of mind, and seems to exist
only for the welfare and development of mind, there
fore, the universe is peopled with mind ; and that the num
ber of human spirits bears no greater proportion' to the
countless multitudes of other intelligent beings, than our
world bears to the infinite number of orbs which bespangle
the heavens. This rational deduction of philosophy derives
support from revelation, which expressly asserts the exist- >
ence of countless myriads of other spirits of various "orders
and rank in creation. And, in looking at the instructions
furnished respecting the nature, the employments, and econo
my, of all holy intelligences, our attention is arrested by the
existence of the same disposition for communion as that
which dwells in our own minds; and the same fact, that,

god's disposition foe communion. 329
while their minds delight in fellowship with God, God
himself delights in fellowship and communion with them.
Indeed, so far as the economy of other spiritual natures is
unfolded to us in the scriptures, the disposition for commu
nion among holy intelligences seems as universal in the
world of mind as gravitation does in the world of matter.
Wherever intellect and goodness characterize mind, so does
the disposition for communion. The higher the intellectual
nature, the holier the moral attributes, of spiritual beings,
and the more intense is their disposition for fellowship with
God, and the more abundantly does God recriprocate this
intercourse with them. The disposition for communion in
variably increases with the capacity of the creature, and the
capacity of the creature is the only limit to the communica
tions imparted by the Creator. What, indeed, are those
radiant circles of happy beings around the Divine majesty,
beheld in vision by the favoured apostle, but gradations of
holy intelligences ? What is their worship but the recipro
cation of holy thoughts and affections with the great fountain
of purity, knowledge, and happiness ? And what the rela
tive position they occupy, as it is nearer, or remoter from,
the throne, but a description of the relative perfection of
their nature, and their proportionate enjoyments in fellow
ship with the uncreated and eternal Mind. When oux
philosophy is thus sanctioned and hallowed by revelation,
we may cast our thoughts abroad through the -universe, and
contemplate mind as co-extensive with matter, existing in
boundless variety and in countless multitudes. In this
case, there seems no danger of our calculations outstripping
facts ; indeed, no possibility of our conceptions stretching
so far as to comprehend the vastness of the universe of
created mind. Yet, reasoning from analogy, all intelligent
minds are originally endued with the same disposition for
communion and intercourse with one another and with God.
This may be regarded as a part of the mental constitution
of all intelhgent beings.
If any beings lose their disposition for communion with
God, it must be the consequence of some awful deteriora-

330 god's disposition for communion.
tion in moral principle. If ever they lose this disposition
for fellowship one with another, it is because they allow
malignant principles to acquire the absolute ascendancy
over them. But it may, indeed, be doubted, whether the
innate disposition of mind for communion with mind can
be totally eradicated, even by the deepest, the most virulent
and consummate, depravity. When human or angelic
spirits become alienated from God, and, therefore, lose all
disposition for communion with him, they still seek the
fellowship of their kind. The worst of men, and even in
fernal spirits, band themselves together for the accomplish
ment of their purposes, and form a kind of society ; thus
proving, that, amid the complete wreck of every moral ex
cellence, this original element of the mental constitution
still survives, — the disposition of mind to hold fellowship
with mind clings to the wretched spirit when virtue and
holiness have expired.
But, wherever goodness dwells with intelligence, the
mind seeks for fellowship with God. This we see in an
gels, in cherubim, in seraphim, in the Living Ones next
the throne, and in all orders of the heavenly hierarchy ;
and this we see in man, when restored by grace to his ori
ginal resemblance to the Divine image. Doubtless, the
same disposition exists, in full force and activity, in every
part of the intelhgent universe, where beings are not tar
nished by sin or corrupted by depravity. We have before
us, then, the sublime fact of all intelligent creatures origi
nally formed with a capacity, and endued with a disposition,
to hold communion with their Maker for ever ; a proof that
their Maker himself has a disposition to hold communion
with them — a proof that the eternal and uncreated Spirit
intends to have intercourse with them throughout the whole
period of their being. This disposition existed in his mind
ere the creature was formed, and is, of course, an essential
attribute of his mind, as it is an element of the creature's
mental eonstitution. It must have supplied the motive for
giving the creature the disposition in question. He im
parted it to intelhgent minds because it existed in his own.

GOD s disposition fob communion. 331
Because he had it, and delighted in it as an element of his
own perfect nature, he gave it to all inteUigent beings, that
they might resemble himself, and that they might thereby
be fitted to participate of his eternal beatitude and felicity.
We may now notice the objection to which allusion has
already been made. The objection anticipated is, that a
disposition for communion imphes an imperfect and a
dependent nature, and cannot, therefore, be reasonably
ascribed to Jehovah, who is all-sufficient and independent.
This objection cannot, of course, be urged by one who cor
dially assents to the testimony of scripture, because the
scriptures, we have seen, directly represent the Deity as
holding intercourse with mind at a period prior to the
creation of man; and this intercourse he could not have
held had he not possessed an inherent disposition for it.
The intercourse described is perfectly voluntary; it was
uninfluenced and unconstrained by anything ad extra.
" And God said, Let us make man in our image and like
ness." Thus, the converse, or communion, sprang freely
from the Divine vohtion, and, if from the Divine volition,
it must have been from an inherent disposition ; and such
an inherent disposition was not a casual or adventitious
impulse, but an essential property of the Divine nature.
This must, we think, be irresistible to every mind which
reveres the testimony of the sacred volume. Moreover, that
a Being, possessing such an inherent disposition, should
give a similar disposition to all intelhgent beings, is an act
in perfect accordance with his own blessed nature. That
he should himself commune with the minds to which he
has imparted this disposition, is a part of his providential
and moral economy, equally in harmony with his nature ;
and, further, that he should make fellowship with his own
mind a duty incumbent on all intelligent beings, and an
essential element of all religion, of all-spiritual devotion, is
an arrangement which might be anticipated, a priori, from
the nature of the Creator. Thus, facts harmonize with
principles, and the testimony of the scripture we have
referred to is corroborated by reason.

332 god's disposition for communion.
Thus the objection in question not only derives no sup
port from scripture, but it is contradicted by the sacred
records. We think it will be no difficult task to refute the
objection on philosophic grounds.
1. If a disposition for communion be evidence of an
imperfect nature, then it follows that the absence of this
disposition is a mark of excellence, and is, indeed, essential
to the perfection of an intelligent being. Does not this, at
first sight, seem an absurdity ? Would the absenee of this
disposition be a mark of human excellence ? Would a man,
averse to fellowship with his fellow-man, and averse to fel
lowship with God, be a more amiable and excellent being
on that account ? With all his thoughts and affections con
centrated only on himself, dwelling in solitude, hating so
ciety, and averse to his Creator, would he possess a supe
rior nature, and exhibit more excellence of character, than
he would with the contrary disposition urging him to delight
in the society of mankind, and to exercise his thoughts,
sympathies, and affections, towards them and towards God ?
Would an angel devoid of this disposition evince a higher
nature, and manifest superior moral excellence ? If so, the
Creator must have greatly erred in forming their intellectual
and moral constitution. In giving them a disposition for com
munion, he must, on this principle, have placed an effectual
barrier to their superiority and excellence ! We may fur
ther ask, Can we suppose the Deity himself to be more
excellent in his nature if this disposition were absent from
him ? The absurdity of the notion is so transparent that
we blush to pursue the inquiry. Had Jehovah been averse
to this communion with intelhgent beings, he would never
have created them ; or, if he had created them, he never
would have given them a disposition to which his own
nature is repugnant ; and to suppose that he would have
made their communion with himself a rehgious duty, and
have reciprocated that communion with them for ever, is to
suppose that he acted not only without motive, but against
motive. It is, indeed, to suppose a tissue of palpable
absurdities and contradictions.

GOD S DISPOSITION FOR COMMUNION. 333
2. So far from the absence of this disposition being a per
fection, its absence is undoubtedly, in every instance, an
evidence of imperfection and inferiority. This truth is
confirmed by facts issuing from every part of the universe.
The absence of the disposition for communion can only be
supposed possible from three causes, namely, the absence
of intelligence, the absence of love, or the absence of both
H it arise from the want of intelligence, it argues a mental
imperfection, for intelligence is essential to any degree of
mental excellence. If it arise from a want of love, it imphes
a moral imperfection, for a benevolent affection is essential
to moral excellence. The Deity is benevolent, and it is
only in proportion as the creatures imitate him in this
property that they can exhibit a superior moral nature. If
it arise from the absence of both intelligence and love, it
argues both mental and moral imperfection. If we look at
the creatures below the human species we find this disposi
tion disappearing just in proportion to the imperfect nature
by which the species are distinguished. Some creatures
have it not because of the absence of a capacity for it, and
others have it in an inferior degree because of the predomi
nance of malign tempers — as in creatures of prey which
mostly five in comparative solitude. If we look at the
human race, we find men excelling in intellect and moral
dignity just in proportion as this disposition for communion
is exercised ; and in the christian, who daily holds commu
nion with the Father of spirits, we see the highest develop
ments of moral excellence and dignity adorning human
nature. T£ we contemplate the properties of intelhgent
beings above us in nature and capacity, we find those exhibi
ting the highest excellence holding the most intimate fellow
ship with Deity ; and those exhibiting the most consummate
depravity, the most virulent malignity, hving in a state of
alienation from God — averse to the Deity, and as much
averse to each other as their nature will admit. It is a remark
able fact that, just in proportion as any nature is excellent, this
disposition is predominant. In proportion as any nature is
inferior this disposition is wanting. In proportion as this

334 god's disposition foe communion.
disposition is cherished the nature becomes improved and
exalted. This disposition, is always the associate of excel
lence, and the more excellent the nature the more intense
and active is its operation. From these facts it follows
that the disposition itself is an excellence, and in ascribing
it to the Divine nature we are ascribing to Deity a glorious
attribute and an essential perfection. Without it the Deity
himself would not be perfect. Perhaps the inquiry may be
suggested, Does not this disposition involve a state of
dependance, and does not dependance argue an imperfect
nature ? We reply, A disposition for communion does not
necessarily imply a state of dependance, any more than love
implies a state of dependance. Love to an object imphes
no dependance upon it. It can be exercised by a higher
nature towards a lower, as well as by a lower nature towards
a higher. Pure benevolence operates unaccompanied by
the least expectation or hope of being benefited thereby.
Thus it often operates among men, and thus it always operates
in the mind of Deity. Now, the disposition for communion
is excited chiefly by love. We do not say that among
creatures of imperfect natures no other affection excites
this disposition. It is true, indeed, that other affections,
such as sorrow, grief, anxiety, and such-like passions, often
excite the disposition in question, but it is equally true that
love is the most powerful and active affection which excites
in one mind the disposition for fellowship with another
mind. As John Howe observes, " When looking into ourselves
we find there is in us a disposition, often upon no necessity,
but sometimes from some sort of benignity of temper, unto
conversation with others." Indeed, this disposition is
often excited from a pure, benign feeling, to communicate
something to others, to administer to their welfare and
happiness. It is the effect of goodness overflowing its own
bounds and extending to others. Such a benign disposition
is compatible with the highest dignity and excellence. It
is, in fact, not merely compatible therewith, but is an
essential element of that excellence. If it be an element

GOD S DISPOSITION FOR COMMUNION. 335
of excellence in the creature, where that excellence is limited,
it must be an element of the infinite excellence of the Creator.
If it flow necessarily from benignity in the creature, though
that benignity is finite,, it must-flow from that infinite ocean
of benignity which dwells in the Creator. If the creature
with but a spark of love has this disposition, the Creator,
who is the origin and boundless source of love, must have
it in an immeasurable degree. So far from - being a mark
of imperfection and dependence, it is an essential element
of perfection.
Thus, an examination of this objection elicits new evidence
in support of the doctrine it. was intended to overthrow ; for,
if the absence of this disposition for communion be an evi
dence of an inferior nature, the presence of this disposition
is essential to God's perfection. To deny that it dwells in
the Deity is to deny the perfection and excellency of his
nature. If God be a Spirit of infinite excellence and good
ness, ..he must possess the disposition in a measure propor
tionate to his infinite excellence and perfection.
Summary. — In reviewing the argument, we find,
* 1 . That the scriptures ascribe this disposition to the Deity.
2. That it exists as an excellence in the spiritual nature
of man, who is said to be created in God's, image.
3. That the essence of all spiritual religion consists in
the fellowship of saints, and communion with God.
4. That this communion is reciprocated by God himself.
S . That this reciprocal intercourse is.greater in. proportion
to our holiness, of heart ; the more intimately we re
semble him, the more intimate our fellowship- with
him.
6. That this communion, is maintained in ,both worlds —
earth and heaven — in time and in eternity.
7.1 That the same disposition exists in all other holy and
intelligent beings — and; the higher and holier the
nature of any intelligent being, the more intimate
and delightful its fellowship with God. Thus all
intelligent beings have communion with God, and
God with them, for ever and ever.

336 GOD'S DISPOSITION FOR COMMUNION.
8. We examined objections, and new evidence was elicited
in proof of the general proposition.
It thus becomes evident, both from scripture and reason,
that this disposition for communion must exist in the mind
of Deity. The scriptures teach us directly that it does, and
reason deduces the same conclusion from obvious facts. God
gives to a created mind no excellence but what dwells in his
own nature ; he could not himself delight to hold fellow
ship with all created minds, and that, for ever, unless the
disposition belonged to his own blessed nature.
As this disposition belongs to God, it is an eternal and
essential property of his nature. Being absolutely perfect,
he acquires no new excellence,- and being immutable, he
loses no quality he ever had. As this disposition exists
within him now, it cannot be adventitious but essential, it
always existed in the same intensity and degree, and through
out eternity it will continue the same. Had no intelligent
creature existed, it would have dwelt within him ; and if the
whole intelligent universe were to be destroyed, it would
remain with him through all eternity.
In closing our observations on the Divine attributes, it
must not be supposed that we have enumerated all Jehovah's
perfections., or that any stretch of human thought can con
ceive adequately of his nature. But it is a pleasing and
elevating thought that our minds are formed to receive
eternally brightening and enlarging perceptions of his cha
racter. As Eobert Hall has observed, " The idea of the
supreme Being has this pecuhar property ; that as it admits
of no substitute, so from the first moment it is formed, it is
capable of continual growth and enlargement. God himself
is immutable ; but our conception of his character is con
tinually receiving fresh accessions, is continually growing
more extended and refulgent, by having transferred to it
new elements of beauty and goodness ; by attracting to
itself, as a centre, whatever bears the impress of dignity,
order, or happiness. It borrows splendour from all that is
fair, subordinates to itself all that is great, and sits enthroned

GOD'S DISPOSITION FOB COMMUNION. 337
on the riches of the universe."* Whatever excellencies there
may be in existence theymust essentially dwell in God's nature.
Absolute perfection includes^ all possible perfection — in all
variety and in unlimited degree. Such a Being must be infi
nitely, independently, and eternally happy. All the elements
of greatness, goodness, and happiness, essentially belong to
him — to whom be all honour, and glory, and blessing, ever
more. Amen. * B. Hall's Modern Infidelity.

PART III.
THE HOLY TBINITY.

CHAPTEE I.
THE SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE OF THE HOLT TRINITY STATED.

" Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the Name
of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." — Matt., xxviii., 19.

The same method we pursued in discoursing on the existence
and attributes of God, we shall pursue in our observations
on the Trinity — that is, our first appeal must be to the
scriptures of truth. This is the source of our knowledge.
That holy oracle first proclaims the Divine existence and
perfections of God, and then reason gives her humble but
emphatic response. We are solely indebted to revelation for
our knowledge as to the mode of God's existence. That
mode the Bible tells us is a unity of essence, with a trinal
distinction of persons. The Lord our God is one Jehovah,
" but this Jehovah comprehends the existence of Father, Son,
and Holy Ghost. To the Bible, therefore, we make our
first appeal, and then we humbly ask, Does reason harmo
nize with the instructions given ? Does its verdict corrobo
rate the testimony of the heavenly oracle ? We maintain
that it does. It would be incompatible with our design to
adduce in this place the whole volume of evidence furnished
by the scriptures. We simply refer to one passage out of a
multitude, in which a trinal distinction of persons is clearly
and unequivocably taught.

THE HOLY TRINITY. 839
No one will deny that the passage of scripture standing at
the head of this chapter clearly recognizes a distinction in the
names therein mentioned. This distinction is not merely
nominal, but real. Each name designates a distinct person.
The Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Father, but
each is distinguished from the other, and the Holy Ghost
is distinguished from both. These names, therefore, repre
sent three .distinct personalities, and the ordinance of Bap
tism here enjoined, recognizes the three persons as consti
tuting the Godhead. Baptism is a rehgious ordinance,
appointed by Divine authority, and of universal obligation.
The obhgation to administer this ordinance is correlative
with the duty to propagate Christianity. The obhgation of
doing both is enforced by the same authority, is enjoined in
the same command, and expressed by the same breath.
The duties of teaching and baptizing all nations are thus in
separably united, and they co-operate to the same result.
It will be admitted that Christianity is a system of religion
which instructs men in the knowledge of God, and compre
hends the clearest revelation which God has made of him
self to mankind. The command, therefore, to teach Christi
anity, is an injunction to teach men the knowledge of the
true God. Now, the ordinance of baptism was estabhshed
as an initiatory rite of the christian system — a rite performed
on introducing men to the knowledge of the true God. It
was, therefore, intended to be a visible symbol of christian
truth, and its practical utility consists mainly in assisting
men to form right conceptions of God, and their relation to
him. It was to be combined with oral instruction, in order
that a visible symbol might unite with oral discourse, in
communicating to the mind right views of God and of
Christianity. As this ordinance was performed by the authority of God,
it was performed in his name. This is expressly stated.
" Baptizing them in the Name " — of whom ? certainly in
the name of that God set forth in the christian system ;
and that name is three-fold — The Father, the Son, and the
Holy Ghost. Baptism, as a -christian ordinance, is a solemn

340 THE HOLY TRINITY.
recognition of God as our Creator, our Sovereign Lord,' who
alone has an absolute right to our services and our hearts.
Who, then, is this glorious Being, and what is his name ?
The formula declares'him — The Father, the Son, and the
Holy Ghost. Baptism is a solemn act of worship, directed
exclusively to the true God. Who is this Being who is the
only proper object of worship ? The ordinance asserts him
to be the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Bap
tism is a solemn act of personal dedication to God. The
above passage declares this Being, to whom we are thus conse
crated by baptism, to be the Father, the Son, and the Holy
Ghost. Finally, baptism is a sign and seal of a covenant
between us and God. A covenant in which we receive the
word of God for our oracle, his will for our law, his example
for our pattern, and his glory as the sole end of our exist
ence; and in which God gives himself to us, and imparts
all the blessings and privileges of salvation. Who, then, is
the glorious Being, with whom we enter into this most
sacred and important relationship? He is here set forth
as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost
This formula, therefore, explicitly teaches a trinal dis
tinction in the Godhead, the personality of each distinction,
and the proper Deity of each person. The distinction is
expressed in the words employed. The Father holds a
specific relation, so does the Son, and the Holy Ghost.
We cannot confound one with the other, without confounding
the use of terms, torturing the most explicit language of
scripture, and abusing our own minds. As the words
Father, Son, and Spirit, are distinct in their meaning, so
they express things really distinct from one another. If a
distinction be thus obvious in the passage, so is it equally
evident that this distinction is personal, for each sustains
the same personal relation to us. If baptism express, as
we have stated, a recognition of the true God, an act of
worship directed to the true God, a dedication of ourselves
to the service and glory of the true God, and an entering
into a covenant relationship with the true God, then must
each, whom we thus solemnly recognize in baptism, be a

THE HOLY TRINITY. 341
proper person; that is, a conscious, intelligent existence.
It is obvious we can sustain the relations of creature, wor
shipper, servant, covenanter, to no one but a personal exist
ence ; nor can any other than a personal existence sustain the
corresponding relations to us. Indeed, it cannot be objected
by any one, that the true God whom we worship, and with
whom we covenant, is a person— a conscious, intelhgent
existence ; and it will not be denied that, in the formula of
baptism, the name of the Father expresses a personal
existence. But, if the Father be a person, so must the Son,
and so must the Holy Spirit; for they each stand in the
same relation to us in this formula. Baptism is performed
not in the name of the Father only, but in the name of the
three ; and, therefore, all that baptism expresses in refer
ence to the Father, it expresses in reference to the Son and
Holy Spirit. There is here no difference at all. If it be
essential that the Father should be a person — a conscious,
intelhgent existence — in order to receive our worship, our
homage, our dedication, and to enter into a covenant rela
tion with us, it is equally essential to the Son and the Holy
Spirit. The evidence, therefore, of distinct personality is
irresistible. We may as well deny the Divine authority of
the passage altogether, as attempt to deny the distinct per
sonality of any one of the three. In the same emphatic
manner, and by the same reasoning, the proper Deity of
each is taught in this formula. The evidence, which proves
the personality of each, conducts us infallibly to the Deity
of each. Each stands precisely in the same relation to us
as our Lord, our Creator, our Sovereign, our Lawgiver, and
our covenant God. As certainly, therefore, as the Father
is our God, the Son and the Holy Spirit are our God. In
being baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit, we are baptized in the name of the triune God.
This plurality of persons must, however, be so understood
as to be consistent with unity of essence. For the same
divine authority, which avers the trinal distinction of Fa
ther, Son, and Holy Spirit, teaches emphatically a oneness
of essence. ' ' Hear, 0 Israel ; Jehovah, thy God, is one Jeho-

342 THE HOLY TRINITY.
vah," Now, in this passage, the word wstjk, Elohim, which
expresses personalities, is plural, but the word, mv Jehovah,
which expresses essence, is singular ; and the same truth is
taught in a multitude of passages. If it be demanded,
What do you intend by a plurality of persons, and oneness
of essence? we reply, We intend — distinct consciousness,
combined with the united possession of the same nature
and attributes. We do not, indeed, profess, that this is a
full or adequate enunciation of the doctrine, but it doubt
less expresses what is sufficient for our present purpose,
namely, — The existence of unity compatible with plurality,
and plurality consistent. with unity. Moreover, it expresses
the views in which all orthodox christians are agreed, and
we believe it accords with the truth as it is taught in the
scriptures, and as it actually exists in the Godhead.
Such is the doctrine of the holy scriptures, and, therefore,
the sabellian notion which denies the distinction of Persons,
and the Unitarian heresy which denies the Deity of the Son
and Holy Spirit, are both diametrically opposed to the
teachings of inspiration. We have now to inquire, Does
this doctrine of holy scripture harmonize with reason ? The
Unitarian affirms that it does not. He denies the doctrine
heeause it is, as he alleges, " irrational." We believe the
doctrine because it is scriptural, and we are assured it is
rational because it is scriptural. As before stated, it may be
affirmed, a priori, that in unbelief there is folly as well as sin ',
that it involves a violation of the laws of mind as well
as ihe laws of God; and this we hope to demonstrate in the
following chapters.

CHAPTEE II.
THE DOCTRINE OF THE HOLY TRINITY IS SUSTAINED BY THE
VERDICT OF REASON.

In order to establish our position it will be requisite for us
to show, first, that the doctrine is not in any sense repug
nant to season ; and, secondly, to prove that it is sustained
by reason.
First. The doctrine is not repugnant to reason, for it is not
opposed to any abstract truth. It is an abstract and self-
evident truth, that one is not three, and that three are not
one. It is an abstract and self-evident truth, that no being
can be on© and three at the same time and in the same
sense ; and, therefore, to affirm this, would be to- contradict
a self-evident proposition, and to maintain a palpable absurd
ity. But this is not the doctrine of the scriptures, nor
does it bear any semblance to it. The doctrine that, in the
Godhead, there are distinctions in personal consciousness,
combined with identity of nature and attributes, is nothing
more than to affirm that — a being may be singular in one
sense and plural in another ; and this involves no contra
diction. It is perfectly consistent with abstract truth, and
is illustrated by actual truth : we have numerous illustra
tions of it in the phenomena of nature. In the constitution
of a human being, we have a conjunction of unity and pfc
rality. A human being is one, but- his mature is twofold.
There is a spiritual principle, called the soul, and a mate
rial, organization, called the body ; yet these two natures, so
diverse im their properties^ make but, one being or person,
realized by one consciousness. We have here an illustra
tion of the truth in question — that a being may be single
in one sense and plural in another ; and it is a demonsteav
tion of, at least, the possibihty of the truth being exemplified

344 THE HOLY TRINITY.
in the Divine nature. If the nature of the creature involve
an exemplification of the principle, On what ground can it
be excluded from the Creator? If fact demonstrate that
the truth in question is illustrated in the economy of human
nature, to deny its applicability to the Divine nature, is to
reason against analogy and fact. It is, indeed, to assume,
that the nature of the Creator is more hmited than that of
the creature. It is to say that God can illustrate a truth
in his works, of which he cannot possibly have any coun
terpart or correspondence in himself. To us this appears
the quintessence of presumption and absurdity.
Should it be alleged that there is no analogy in the ex
ample adduced, because in a human being the personality
is one though the nature be two, but in the Trinity the
personality is said to be plural while the essence is singular,
We reply, the objection thus adduced can have no force ; for,
if in the constitution of a being plurality and unity are seen
harmoniously and consistently conjoined, the principle for
which we contend is estabhshed. It matters not whether
the personal consciousness be single and the nature plural,
as in the constitution of a human being ; or whether the
personal consciousness be plural and the nature single, as
in the Deity ; the principle of plurality being compatible
with unity, is as clearly and obviously exemplified in the one
case as in the other. There may be a mystery in each, but,
abstractedly considered, it is difficult to say which we should
deem the greater mystery, were they both equally new to us, and
both proposed together, at the same time, to the mind for its
decision. Had we never heard of either until now, and
some superior being were to demand from us, "Which do
you think is the greater mystery, whether for a being purely
spiritual to be three in person and one in nature, or for a
being to be one in person and two in nature ? " we are in
clined to think that, supposing the absence of all bias from
our past experience, we should regard it as more mysterious
for such a heterogeneous compound as mind and matter to
form one person, than for a three-fold consciousness to reside
in one purely spiritual and homogeneous nature. Such is

THE HOLY TRINITY. 346
our oonviotion ; but, irrespective of this, the fact itself, of our
nature presenting a constitution in which plurality consists
with unity, shows that the scriptural doctrine of the Trinity
is perfectly compatible both with abstract and actual truth.
Nor can a single a posteriori argument against the Trinity
be drawn from any part of the economy of nature. It is
true the universal prevalence of law and harmony, the uni
form subservience and adaptation of means to ends, the
regularity, order, and certainty, everywhere prevalent, argue
a unity of purpose and design in the mind of the great Cre
ator, but these manifestations furnish no evidence against a
plurality of persons in the Godhead. As Paley justly ob
serves, in reference to the argument drawn from nature as
to the unity of God — " Certain, however, it is, that the whole
argument for the divine unity, goes no farther than to a unity
of counsel." If, indeed, the doctrine of the Trinity taught
that there existed three supreme intelligences, co-equal, but
separate in nature, and different in disposition and attri
butes, then the doctrine would both involve a physical im
possibility, and be contradicted by the harmony, regularity,
and order, of nature. But the doctrine asserts the opposite
of this — it proclaims unity of essence and attributes, and,
by necessary consequence, the same union of disposition,
counsel, purpose, and operation, in the Divine Persons, as
we see demonstrated in the harmonious economy of nature.
If the phenomena of nature utter any testimony at all on
this subject, it is not against, but in support, of the scriptural
doctrine respecting the Godhead. If the attributes of Deity
involve a plurality of persons as a necessary truth, and if
the phenomena of the' universe demonstrate the existence of
those attributes, then the voice of nature is not absolutely
silent on this great and important doctrine, but speaks
unequivocally in its favour.
When sophisms are exploded, and no further objection
against a doctrine can be established, we often hear the
murmur of dissent uttered on account of its mysteriousness.
Thus it is with respect to the Holy Trinity. When the
dissident is disarmed of his arguments one by one, he still
t

346 THE HOLY TRINITY.
urges that he is not able to conceive how such a plurality
and unity can exist in the Deity. We reply, sober reason
does not require us to explain the " how " a thing exists, but
to furnish evidence that it "does " so exist, and to show that it
is irrational to deny its existence. The mode of a thing's
existence is quite distinct from the evidence which deter
mines the certainty of its existence, and a logical reasoner
will constantly keep this distinction in mind in all his inqui
ries after truth. He will never reject the evidence.! which
proves a fact merely because he cannot explain every mode
connected with that fact. He will accept clear and satisfac
tory evidence of a fact, and rest in the certainty of the same,
and wait for further hght as to its mode. The same princi
ple should guide us in seeking for Divine truth; it is subject
to the common laws of evidence, and both logic and candour
require its evidence to be treated hke that on all ordinary sub
jects. The duty of any inquirer is therefore not to demand
such an explanation of the Godhead as shall unfold to him
every mystery respecting the Trinity, but to seek for satis
factory evidence respecting its truth, and allow his judge- .
ment to be determined by the character and strength of
that evidence. Until that is done, his unbelief is an offence
against reason as well as against God. There are multitudes
of facts in the economy of nature which are irresistibly evi
dent, and yet they involve inquiries which no one can answer
— mysteries which no philosopher can explain. We know
the human mind can act directly upon matter, but who
can explain its mode ? We are familiar with the facts of
nutrition, growth, assimilation, animal and vegetable life,
chemical affinity, gravitation, heat, combustion, &c, but in
quiries into each phenomenon soon show how short is our
sounding line. We almost immediately get into depths we
cannot fathom, and meet with ultimate facts which our rea
son can no more explain than it can the mode of God's ex
istence and the mystery of the Trinity. But though we
cannot explain the mode of natural phenomena we never
question their reality, for that would be to deny the evidence
of reason and often of sense. So with regard to the Trinity.

THE HOLY TRINITY. 847
It belongs to the category of ultimate facts, and any thing
inexplicable as to its mode must be regarded quite distinct
from the evidence of its truth. We have already proved
that there is nothing in the doctrine incongruous with either
abstract or actual truth, and now we are prepared to adduce
positive evidence in its support. If we are not prepared to
explain " how " it is, we are prepared to show " why " it is,
and " why" it cannot but be. If we cannot unfold the mystery
of the mode, we can adduce the evidence which proves the
reality and certainty of the doctrine ; and this is as much as
any philosopher can do with regard to any phenomenon in
nature which involves an ultimate fact.
In conducting our argument on the direct evidence for a
plurality of persons in the Godhead, it will conduce to order,
and facilitate reference, if we arrange the successive steps of
the argument into several general propositions.
PROPOSITION I.
Our first proposition must be merely a compendious summary of
truths previously established. The existence of the Deity is a neaes
sary truth, and, if so, all the attributes of Deity must exist necessa
rily and eternally, even, as his essence ; they cannot be separated from
it even in conception.
To suppose any of his attributes were derived, would be to
suppose that he was dependent upon something, which is
incompatible with his necessary existence. To suppose that
they had a beginning, would be to suppose that there was a
prior eternity in which heexisted without possessing them,
which is the same thing as to undeify him. To suppose that
any of his attributes can ever cease to exist is absurd, be
cause it is to suppose him to cease to be what he essentially is
=-the self-existent, independent, and immutable Jehovah.
If his existence be esential and eternal so must all his at
tributes be essential and eternal. Whatever may be pre
dicated of the nature of God now, may be predicated as be
longing to that nature through all eternity past and to
come. Therefore absolute perfection, all-sufficiency, immuta
bility, omnipresence, omniscience, wisdom, omnipotence,

348 THE HOLY TRINITY.
infinite goodness and love, perfect holiness, and a dispo
sition for communion, being attributes, of the Eternal God
now, always were his attributes, and for ever will be-,
without deterioration or change in any respect. The truths
embodied in this proposition have been fally established in
the second part of this work, and are so generally acknow
ledged by Divines of all persuasions that it is unnecessary to
do more than to give this brief statement of them under one
general proposition, as the foundation of our argument.
PROPOSITION II.
Some of the attributes and perfections of the Deity are active
powers or faculties, such as the attributes of intelligence or
wisdom, of power,, love, holiness, a disposition for communion,
&c. These are active now. The scriptures declare it, and
reason corroborates, it; and, having existed eternally and im
mutably in God, they must have existed not as latent qualities,
or mere capacities, but as essentially and eternally active.
Their activity is as essential as their existence, and, therefore,
eternal. Several of the ancient philosophers held the eternal activity
of the Divine attributes as a truth so self-evident, and so fully
estabhshed, that they erroneously grounded upon this the eter
nity of matter. Plato, reasons that the world is an eternal
effect, proceeding from an eternal Cause ; for, he says, " the will
of God, and his power of acting, being necessarily as eternal as
his essence, the effects of that will and power must be sup
posed coeval to the will and power themselves ; in the
same manner as light would eternally proceed from the
sun, or a shadow from an interposed body, or an impres
sion from an imposed seal, if the respective causes of these
effects are supposed eternal. " * On this ground he main
tained the eternity of the world. Aristotle, after him,
held the same doctrine. He contends, that " God, who is
an immoveable (immutable) nature, whose essence is en
ergy, cannot be supposed to have rested, or slept, from
* Zacharise Seholast. Dispnt. Quoted hy Dr. S. Clarke, in prop, iii. on
the Being and Attributes of God.

THE HOLY TRINITY. 849
eternity, doing mothing at ah, and then, after infinite ages,
to have begun to move the matter, or make the world. "|-
The reasoning of these men is exceedingly like that of pow
erful minds, without the advantage of the light of the christian
revelation. It is partly true, and partly erroneous, — the
premises are true, but the conclusions are false. The pro
position they laid down, as an estabhshed and incontro-"
vertible principk — namely, the eternal activity of the Divine
attributes — is true ; this was too clear to be doubted : but
the eternity of matter does not follow from thence. If there
were no other mode in which the Divine attributes could
have been exercised than in the creation of matter, or in
reference to some extraneous objects, then their reasoning
would have some force ; but this assumption is not true.
There are other modes in which the active powers of the
Divine Being can be employed, without the creation of
either matter or spirit — without the existence of any ex
traneous objects whatever, as we shall prove hereafter.
Were it not so, indeed, there would be no adequate mode
in which the Divine attributes could find their full and
appropriate operation, foa? the attributes are infinite, and
creation, however vast, is but finite and limited. Besides,
the eternity of matter, and the eternity, too, of any crea
ted mind has before been disproved. Both reason and
scripture have conducted us to this conclusion, ,ia the
first part of this work. Yet the testimony of the above
distinguished philosophers is valuable, as to the fundamen
tal principle contained in our present proposition. It, was
with them a settled principle, an axiom which lay at the;
foundation of their reasoning, that the active powers, or
attributes, of Deity must have been eternally exercised.
This is the doctrine, in the proposition now before the
reader, and it is sustained by the following argument : —
1. Great absurdities, and eotttadictions wouM be involved
in maintaining the contrary. The nature of the argument re
quires, us to notice these absurdities, but let every allusion to
+ Met. Lib. xiv., c. 6. Quoted hy Cudworth, in his Intellectual
System, chap, iv., p. 417.

350 THE HOLY TRINITY.
the Divine nature be made with modesty, reverence, and awe.
Be it observed, then, that to deny the eternal exercise of
the Divine attributes is to suppose that God was eternally
in a state of inactivity ; for, if the exercise of his attributes
be not eternal, there must have been a period when they
began their action ; and, if there was a period when their
action began, there must have been a prior eternity in which
they did not operate ; and this involves the most absurd conse
quences. Thus, if this absurd supposition be apphed to
his intelligence, it affirms there was an eternity in which
the Divine Being knew nothing. If apphed to his power, it
affirms that there was an eternity in which he did nothing.
If apphed to his love, it affirms that there was an eternity
in which he loved nothing. If applied to his disposition for
communion, it affirms that there was an eternity in which
he communed with nothing. If apphed to his holiness, it
affirms that there was an eternity in which this attribute
was never exercised. Indeed, the notion involves such
absurdities, that the mind recoils from them, as insulting
to that glorious Being who is the object of our contemplations.
It avails nothing to plead that infinite faculties were
eternally in the Divine nature, and, though not eternally
exercised, they were inherent in his nature, and ready to be
brought into exercise at any period when the Divine Being
should determine. The attributes of Jehovah are not mere :
faculties, or negative qualities, or latent properties, but are
essentially active powers. Omniscience, or infinite wis
dom, for instance, imphes not a mere capacity, or faculty,
to know all things hereafter, but the actual and immediate
knowledge of all things — of all things actually comprehended
in his own nature, of all things designed to be accomplished
by his own operations, and of all things both certain and '
possible in the creature. Thus, the existence of the faculty
necessarily imphes its exercise. So love is not a mere
capacity to love, but the actual possession of that benign
affection, the operation of which is essential to its existence;
for a. being not to love is to be without love. So of holiness.
It is not the mere absence of evil, or any mere negative

THE HOLY TRINITY. 351
quality, or a mere faculty for certain moral excellencies,
to be hereafter developed ; but an assemblage of moral dis
positions and excellencies, actually existing in the Divine
mind, and their operation is essential to their existence.
To deny the eternal activity of these attributes is to deny
their eternal existence. To admit their eternal existence,
and deny their eternal exercise, is a palpable contradiction.
Their exercise is involved in their existence, and, whatever
be the duration of their existence, must be also the duration
of their exercise. If, then, there never was a period when
these glorious attributes did not exist, there never was a
period when they were not exercised.
2. The eternal exercise of the Divine attributes, is essen
tial to the infinite and eternal happiness of God. Perfect
happiness must be essential to Deity, for it is an element of
absolute perfection ; so that if he be absolutely perfect, he
must be infinitely happy. But does not the infinite happi
ness of God essentially flow from the exercise of his attri
butes. Can we conceive him to have been eternally happy
in a state of absolute inactivity ? For example, It is declared
in scripture that God is love, and reason proves the declara
tion to be true. We know that happiness and love are
essentially connected in the creature. Can we suppose
them separated in the Creator ? Can we suppose the Deity
to have been eternally happy without love ? We may answer
the inquiry by demanding, Could we suppose the Deity to
continue his happiness now, if he were henceforth to cease to
love ? Every rational mind will reply, No. If, then, God
could not continue to be happy, were he now to cease to
-exercise his love, neither could he have been happy through a
past eternity, without the exercise of the attribute of love.
If then, God was always happy, he always exercised his
love. The happiness of the Deity and the exercise of his
attributes are co-essential and co-eternal.
3. The same conclusion flows from the absolute perfec
tion of the Divine nature. Activity is an element of per
fection ; hence inactivity is the property of an inferior nature,
and activity an essential property of a superior nature.

852 THE HOLY TRINITY.
Inanimate matter is the lowest form of existence, and it has
no inherent activity. As Bishop Wilkins observes, " It
cannot move unless it be moved ; and cannot but move
when impelled by another. " It is essentially passive ; but
spirit is superior to matter, and it has voluntary activity.
This is one element of its transcendent superiority. It
moves itself, and it moves material substances. Angelic
beings are described as being endued with powers of ama
zing activity, and so are human spirits in the future world.
It seems to be a law pervading the Creator's works, that the
activity of both mental and moral powers is correlative with
the dignity and excellence of the creature. Can we recog
nize this as a perfection in the created spirit, and deny ' its
existence in the Deity — the uncreated spirit from whom it
proceeded ? This is to contradict analogy, and to reason
against that evidence which shines as with a flood of light
from every source. Besides, it is to deny Jehovah's absolute
perfection. For, what is absolute perfection but the posses
sion ,©f all possible perfections, natural and moral, and the
possession of all perfections in infinite measure and degree,
so as to exclude -the possibility of any perfection being added
numerically, or augmented in its measure ? But to affirm,
that, for an eternity, the faculties of intelhgence, power, love,
holiness, &c, were not exercised, is to exclude them from
the category of proper attributes, and reduce them to mere
latent powers, waiting for future development. This is to
affirm a contradiction, and an impossibility, as we have already
:shown ; and, indeed, were this conceivable as an abstract
possibility, it would rob the Divine Being not onlyof absolute
perfection, but even of such limited perfection as exists in
the creature. The excellency and perfection of a, created
spirit consist not in its possessing latent powers, to be
developed in future, but in its present active exercise of
those powers. All moral excellence especially appears in
the creature!s exercise of its moral powers. Its veracity, love
and hohness, consist in the true, benevolent, and holy exer
cise of its powers. Had it been always inactive, theseexcel-
lencies would never have belonged to it, and were it to become

THE HOLY TRINITY. 888
henceforth inactive, they would cease to be. If we abstract
activity from the creature, we abstract all these .excel
lencies at once ; it henceforth becomes impossible for them
to exist. Their essence consists in the activity of the crea
ture. Now in no other way can we conceive the Deity to.possess
any moral excellence or perfection than -by supposing bis
attributes to be active. Deny the activity of these attributes
and we deny the natural perfection and moral excellence of
the Divine Being. The exercise of the Divine attributes is
the characteristic of the Divine Being now. Scripture, rea
son, and fact, abundantly prove this truth ; it is as evident
as God's existence. We may, then, simply ask, that, ,seeing
Jehovahds absolutely perfect now in the. exercise of his attri
butes or, active powers, Could we conceive him to .remain, abso
lutely perfect, if he were to cease their exercise, and cease
their exercise for ever ? We feel assured that such an eter
nal cessation would ,be incompatible with his absolute per-
fection.in future; iand, if incompatible with it for the future
eternity, it is equally incompatible with it during the past
eternity. The exercise of the Divine attributes now- — of
his wisdom, power, love, hohness, &c. — is an essential ele
ment of his absolute perfection now. This is admitted-
But, if .the exercise, of these attributes ibe essential now, , it
will be essential to that perfection for all eternity to come,
and, if essential for. all. eternity to come, it must ,have been
essentiaLfor all eternity past. Therefore, ifor„sofong a, period
as we suppose the Deity tohave been inactive, we suppose
him toihave been imperfect ; and, fpr.so long a.period as.we
suppose him to have been absolutely perfect, .we must sup
pose him to .have been active. If, then, .we suppose him to
have, been, absolutely perfect from all. eternhyyhe: must have
been eternally and essentially active in ,tlie exercise of his
glorious attributes.
4. The same Conclusion flows from the, attribute of im
mutability. If. .we contemplate the Divine.Being as .exhibited
to us in the volume of inspiration and of nature, , we behold
ttm as constantly active — exercising, all, the attributes of his
blessed nature---exereising.wisdom,. power,. love, and, perfect

354 THE HOLY TRINITY.
holiness, and communing with all the holy intelligences
his hands have made. But to suppose these attributes
to have been eternally inactive, or existing as mere latent
qualities, is to contemplate the Divine Being as essentially
different from what he is now. To suppose him eternally
(we would speak with reverence) as knowing nothing, doing
nothing, communing with nothing, and loving nothing, is
to contemplate him in a state perfectly contrasting with
those present characteristics of the Divine Being, which are
furnished to us both in the volume of revelation and of
nature. We cannot conceive a greater disparity or unlike-
ness than what is here presented. Of course such a notion
is perfectly incompatible with the unchangeable nature of the
blessed God. Only a very brief process of reasoning seems
requisite to decide the argument before us. We have only to
inquire — As the attributes of the Deity are actively exercised
now, would the entire suspension of their exercise henceforth
and for ever be compatible either with his absolute perfection
or his immutability ? If the exercise of the wisdom, power,
love, and holiness of God were at once to cease, would
that accord with his unchangeable nature and character ?
Every one will admit it would not ; even a momentary sus
pension of them, or any of them, is inconceivable. How
then can we conceive a suspension of them for an eternity
past, to be compatible with their present activity and the
immutability of the Divine nature ? The only answer is, the
conception is impossible — it is an absolute contradiction. If
Jehovah exercise his attributes now, and his nature be
immutable, then he must have exercised them from all
eternity. Thus the same conclusion flows from his immu
tability as from his absolute perfection — both necessarily
involve the truth, that the eternally blessed and eternally
glorious Deity is essentially and eternally active.
Scholium. Although the eternal activity of the Divine
being is a necessary truth, it does not follow that his acts
must be absolutely and eternally uniform, to the exclusion of
variety in his operations. Such a notion is contradicted by
his intelligence and freedom. He does not act from neces-

THE HOLY TRINITY. 856
sity or constraint, but intelligently and voluntarily. It is
true that his absolute perfection, happiness, and immuta
bility, involve the eternal exercise of his attributes, but the
mode of exercising them is spontaneous and free. This
truth the nature of the Deity implies ; this truth the preceding
arguments admit ; and this truth is illustrated by facts. Crea
tion and Providence present some particular modes in which
the Divine attributes have been exercised in time, but it does
not follow that creation and Providence are essential to the
exercise of the Divine attributes, or, that they are the prin
cipal modes in which they are exercised now. Prior to
either creation or Providence they were appropriately exer
cised, and that as freely and voluntarily as they are now.
Our argument leads us to such an eternal exercise of the
Divine attributes as bis immutabhity and absolute perfec
tion require, but this leaves the modes of Jehovah's operations
freely under the direction of his intelhgence and goodness,
and, therefore, open to boundless variety. The several modes
in which the Divine perfections have been exercised through
past eternity, in which they are exercised at the present period,
and will continue to be exercised through all eternity to come,
will hereafter be considered. We have at present to fix
our attention solely upon the truth that the active powers
involved in Jehovah's attributes must have been eternally
exercised in some mode. proposition in.
The exercise of the Divine attributes necessarily implies both
Agent and Object.
If intelhgence be exercised, there must be an object known,
as well as the agent who knows. If power be exercised,
there must be both agent and object in its exercise. If love
be exercised, there must be an object beloved as well as the
agent who loves. If the disposition for communion be exer
cised, there must be both agent and object, and such
reciprocity in the exercise as involves their being mutu
ally agent and object to each other. If holiness be exer
cised, those excellent dispositions and moral affections which

356 THE HOLY TRINITY.
constitute holiness, necessarily imply both agent and object.
We cannot conceive the possibihty of an attribute being
exercised without, at the same time, conceiving of both
agent by whom, and the object in reference to whom, the
attribute is exercised. This is too plain to require further
argument. It requires only to be stated in order to its being '
admitted as A self-evident proposition.
proposition iv.
The Agent arid Object cannot be numerically, identmMy,
and, iii every respect, the same. They involve such different
relations to each other as cannot be sustained by one absolutely
solitary existence.
We may, perhaps, admit one exception to this general propo
sition. In reference to knowledge, the agent and the
object may be numerically and personally the same. An
intellectual being may know himself, may be the object on
which his own intellect is exercised, and thus be agerit and
object at the same time and in the same act. But, in
reference to the exereise of other attributes, the distinction
between agent and object is at once apparent. Thus, in
reference to goodness or benovolence, the being who exercises
this affection is distinct from him towards whom it is exer
cised. In reference toholiness, the being who exercises the
principles of truth, justice, kindnesss &c, and all the dispo
sitions and principles involved in hohness, must be distinct
from him towards whom these dispositions and principles are
exercised. So of communion, the reciprocity of minds
conscious of mutual sentiments and affections, involves a
distinction of agent and object mutually sustained. These
examples indicate that in reference to some attributes, agent
and object cannot be identically and numerically the same,'
— such a distinction in relation is involved, as cannot be
sustained by one absolutely solitary existence. To many
minds this important truth will appear to be self-evident,
but the following considerations will, we think, render it
obvious to every candid mind.
1 . Let us suppose a created spirit possessing the ordinary

THE HOLY TRINITY. 857
attributes of mind, so isolated from the universe, as to exist
in absolute solitude, and be unconscious of the existence of
any being but itself — without any idea of either creature or
Creator. Such a supposed state would be to the spirit thus
isolated, equivalent to actual and absolute solitude. Let
us now ask, How could this being exercise the attributes of
power, of love, of holiness, and of a disposition for commu
nion ? We will not say that the faculty of knowledge might
not be exercised to a very limited extent. This spirit would
certainly be conscious of its own existence, but beyond
this we conceive, there could be but httle intelligence even
of its own nature. But leaving the attribute of intelligence,
we ask, how could the other active powers, with the affections,
and dispositions of its nature, be exercised, without one
single object in existence towards whom they could have
any relation. For example, How could this spirit exercise
the amiable affection of love or benevolence without the
knowledge of any being towards whom it could be benevolent ?
To say that this isolated being might love himself, is to
evade the question ; for self-love is not benevolence. When
it is said in Scripture that God. is love, it is not meant that '
God loves himself. It is a love which he has exhibited
towards others, and a love which we are required to imitate.
Love is, therefore, an amiable, benevolent affection which
inclines one mind towards another, and causes it to delight
therein with a benevolent complacency and regard. If there
were but one being in existence beside itself, it might love that
being, but without the existence of that one being, the amiable
affection of love could not be exercised by it at all. As the
exercise of love necessarily imphes an object as well as an
agent, so it is self-evident the agent and object cannot be
numerically and personally the same, but, must in some
respects be distinct.
2. We ask again, how could this spirit, thus isolated
from all existence but itself, exercise the sentiments and
dispositions, comprehended under the term hohness ? We
can conceive of it as absolutely free from sin, but mere freedom
from sin is a negative quality. Holiness includes notonlyfree-

358 THE HOLY TRINITY.
dom from sin, but much more than that. It is not made up of
negative qualities or latent properties, waiting for an occa
sion to be developed, but it consists of the actual possession
and exercise of holy sentiments, dispositions, affections, and
principles, such as truth, goodness, justice, faithfulness, &c.
This is the holiness ascribed to God in the bible, and this
is the holiness of man, and of all other intelhgent beings
who are holy. The principles of holiness, indeed, are essen
tially the same in all beings. Now the exercise of these
holy sentiments, dispositions, and principles, involves certain
moral relations to others, and those relations involve the
actual existence of others as well as ourselves, together with
our knowledge of their existence, and our consciousness of
the relations subsisting between us and them. It is evident,
therefore, that a spirit supposed to exist in absolute soli
tude could not exercise these moral sentiments, dispositions,
and principles, because, not knowing of any being in exist
ence but himself, he could not be conscious of any moral
relations. If not conscious of any moral relations, he could
not be the subject of any moral sentiments or emotions.
A being in absolute solitude, and unconscious of any exist
ence but his own, could neither be just nor unjust, good pr
evil, true nor false, holy nor unholy. Whatever latent
powers and faculties there might be inherent in his nature,
they could never be exercised nor developed without being
directed towards an object or objects in some sense distinct
from himself. As, therefore, it is evident that the exercise
of holy sentiments, affections, and principles, implies an
object as well as an agent, and as the object and agent can
not be numerically and personally the same, the exercise of
the attribute of holiness involves the existence of others dis
tinct from self or individual consciousness. The argument
thus applicable to man, or to any intelligent spirit in a state
of absolute solitude, is applicable to the eternal Spirit, so far as
we have any rational conception of his nature and attributes.
3. The disposition to communion, which both Scripture
and reason ascribe to Jehovah, involves a distinction between
agent and object, or rather necessarily implies the reciprocal

THE HOLY TRINITY. 859
intercourse of minds in which each is mutually agent and
object. This disposition therefore could not be exercised
by a Spirit existing in that absolute solitude before described,
and conscious of the existence of nothing but himself. To
say that he might hold communion with himself is to assert
what is irrevalent, for self-communion is mere meditation
or soliloquy. Communion properly implies the affectionate
intercourse of mind with mind, in which there is a recipro
cation of thought, sentiment, will, purpose, and a loving dis
position. Such is the intercourse of one human mind with
another, and the human soul with God ; and such must
be the communion of any holy intelhgent being with
another. Such was the communion of the Divine Being
when he said " Let us make man in our own image and
after our likeness." It was not soliloquy but intercourse, —
the reciprocation of thought, sentiment, will, purpose, with
a view to a united act in the production of a most important
event — the creation of an intelligent and moral being.
There was here as really a union of thought, will and pur
pose, as there was a union of act. Now to suppose a Spirit
existing in such absolute solitude as renders it unconscious
of the existence of any being but itself, is to suppose it
placed in a condition in which the disposition for communion
can never be experienced. As therefore the exercise of this
disposition involves the act of minds which are reciprocally
object as well as agent to each other, and as it is evident that
the object and agent cannot be numerically and identically
the same, it follows that the exercise of this disposition in
volves the existence of others distinct from self and indi
vidual consciousness. The argument thus applicable to man,
or to any intelligent being, is applicable to the eternal Spirit,
so far as we have any rational conception of his nature and
attributes. PROPOSITION V.
In the exercise of some of the Divine attributes, it is essential
that the object as well as the agent should be a conscious and
intelligent existence.
This truth is demonstrative, especially as it applies to the

360 THE HOLY TRINITY.
moral attributes, such as truth, justice, hohness, love, and
the disposition for communion. The establishment of the
preceding proposition will render this so evident as to require
but a brief consideration. Power may, indeed, be exerted
upon a material and inanimate object, and goodness may
be exercised towards sentient beings who are without reason,
but the moral attributes suppose a moral relation, ,and can
only have their appropriate exercise when their objeet, or
objects, possess an intelligent and moral nature. If we
exercise veracity, justice, or hohness, towards any being,
that being must be capable of understanding and apprecia
ting veracity, justice, or holiness ; and, as such, must be
intelhgent, must possess intellect, moral sentiments and
affections, and, therefore, have a real personal existence.
So the love of an intelligent being can only have for its
appropriate object an intelligent existence. There may,
indeed, be admiration, approval, and a certain kind of fond
ness, exercised by us towards objects which are irrational,
but what we understand by love — proper, and in its highest
sense, whether as a natural or moral affection — requires, we
think, an intelligent nature for its Object. Thus, natural
affection is the love of one person towards another — a person
is its agent, and a person its object. We may admire a rose,
a landscape, a painting, or a poem, but this is not to -be con
founded with love, which, as a natural affection, and in its
highest sense, can only have a person for its proper objeet.
We may be fondly attached to a brute animal, but this is
not to be confounded with natural affection, or love in its
highest sense. It does not appear to us that such an affec
tion can be appropriately exercised except toward objeets
capable of reciprocating the affection. But, be this as it
may, religious love, as a.moral affection, is always the love
of a person. Not the mere approbation of certain principles,
and the admiration of certain facts, but the affections ardently
cleaving to-a conscious, inteUigent, moral being. Sueh is the
christian'slove to God, -and 'to 'his brother. Such, too, is
the love of God. As a Being of infinite intelligence and
excellence,/ his affection of love could not' be satisfied without

THE HOLY TRINITY. 861
having a conscious, intelligent, moral being for its object —
capable of appreciating and reciprocating the affection.
The disposition for communion could be reciprocated with
no other than an intelligent existence. As before stated, it is
the intercourse of mind with mind — the interchange of
thought, purpose, benign and affectionate complacency.
Such reciprocation proves, beyond dispute, that the object, as
as well as the agent, must be a conscious, intelhgent existence.
Summary of the five propositions. — We have seen, then,
by the first proposition, that the attributes of God are as
essential as his existence — By the second proposition, that
the exercise of his active powers has been eternal — By the
third proposition, that the exercise of an attribute requires
an object as well as an agent — By the fourth proposition,
that the object and agent are not identically, and in all res
pects, the same, but have a real distinction one from another
— And by the fifth proposition we have seen, that, in refer
ence to the exercise of the moral attributes, the object must
be an inteUigent, conscious, personal existence. We have
now to ascertain who or what the object, or objects, must be, in
reference to which the attributes are exercised. God, himself,
we know, is the agent, but, Who or what is the object, or
the objects, in question ? To answer this inquiry, we must
pass on to other propositions. PROPOSITION VI.
Created existence presents a vast collection of objects in refe
rence to which the Divine attributes have been, and still are,
exercised; but vast as is the aggregate of these objects, the
whole are not sufficient either in duration or extent, for the full,
eternal, and infinite exercise of the Divine perfections.
Every active attribute of Deity with which either scrip
ture or reason makes us acquainted, finds a limited sphere
of operation in the vast universe. We have, already, seen
numerous evidences of this truth in the chapters composing
the second part of this work. We have seen power exerted
in the creation of matter and mind, and in the mighty
e-perationa of nature and providence. We have seen intel-
w

362 THE HOLY TRINITY.
ligence and wisdom in the manifestations of contrivance
and design, in the constitution of law, order, adaptation,
and harmony in the economy of the universe. We have
seen goodness and love in the ample provision made to
supply the wants, and provide for the happiness of sentient
existence, and especially of intelligent and moral creatures.
We have seen holiness displayed in the constitution of our
moral nature, and in the law which connects happiness with
goodness, and suffering with sin. We have seen God's dispo
sition for communion abundantly manifested by his impart
ing this disposition to all intelligent beings, by making
fellowship with himself a rehgious duty, and his own recip
rocation of that fellowship or communion with upright
intelligences, their common privilege both in a state of proba
tion and of reward. And when we look at the vastness of
the universe, and the countless myriads of beings of various
kinds and orders, which fill the great temple of nature,
we are lost and overpowered with the view we thus obtain
of the energy there must be in the Divine being, in order to
the creation and preservation of the whole universe of. mat
ter and of min.d. Yet, after all, when we contemplate God,
the Almighty Agent, — the duration of his being, and the
infinitude of his perfections, we are forced to the exclama
tion of Job, — "Lo, these are parts of his ways." They
are but "parts" of his ways, only a limited portion of the
boundless operations of the active attributes of his infi
nite nature. The universe is not, cannot be, the adequate
sphere for the full exercise of the Divine perfections. This
is the truth embodied in the proposition before us, and may
be demonstrated as follows : —
1. The universe is only of finite duration. There was
a period when it did not exist : when, neither in its pre
sent form, nor in its primordial elements, it had any being
— when, indeed, there was neither matter nor mind in
existence. But as Jehovah's existence is eternal, so are
his attributes eternal ; and as his active powers are exercised
now, so have they always been from all eternity. This was
proved under our second proposition. Seeing, then, that

THE HOLY TRINITY. 863
the universe is only of finite, and Jehovah of infinite dura
tion, and the exercise of his attributes has been coeval with
his being, it is impossible that the universe can be the
adequate sphere for the exercise of his active attributes.
It does not obviate this conclusion, to give to created exis
tence a vast antiquity. We may extend its duration into the
past, as remotely as we please ; we may multiply its ages by
millions of millions, and then again by trillions ; we may sup
pose its antiquity expressed by a line of figures so extensive,
as to reach from hence to the remotest nebula ; but, after
all, this period is only finite, and bears no proportion to
the infinite. There was still a prior eternity ere creation
was brought forth, and during that period the active attri
butes of Jehovah were exercised. His wisdom, his power,
his goodness, his love, his holiness, his disposition for com
munion, were adequately exercised during those awful ages,
the vastness of which almost makes our spirits faint, when
we ponder them. Compared with the duration of Jehovah's
being, creation is but of yesterday, and, therefore, cannot
be the adequate or only sphere for the exercise of Jehovah's
attributes. 2. The existence of the universe was a contingent event,
but the exercise of the Divine attributes is essential. A
contingent event is one which may be or may not be ;
the non-existence of which may be conceived as possible.
Thus the universe not being self-existent but dependent
upon the will of the Creator, it is conceivable that it might
not have existed. As there was an eternity in which it
had no being, it might have had no being at this period ;
it might have had no being for myriads of ages to come ;
indeed, it might not have had to exist through all future ages.
Its existence was a contingent event. To suppose the exer
cise of the Divine attributes, therefore, to be confined to
the creation, preservation, and government, of the universe
is to make their exercise to depend upon a contingent event.
It is to make the exercise of Jehovah's attributes not only
to be limited to the short duration of the universe, but to
be dependent upon the contingent conditions of its existence.

364 THE HOLY TRINITY.
It is, in fact, to affirm positively, that, for the eternity prior
to creation, they were not exercised at all ; that possibly
they might not have begun to be exercised even yet ; that
possibly they might not have had to be exercised for millions
of ages to come ; and, further, that possibly they might never
have had to be exercised through all eternity to come ; which
is to say, that the wisdom, the power, the goodness, the love,
and the holiness, of the Deity might possibly never have had
any exercise at all ; and, therefore, that his moral perfec
tions might possibly never have had any actual existence.
For, to make their exercise depend upon a contingency, is
to make them subject to all the conditions involved in that
contingency. The contingency of the universe being . such
as we have stated, such must have been the contingency of
the exercise of the Divine attributes in the case supposed. Such
a supposition, however, is too absurd to find a place for a
moment in our convictions . It must be immediately rej ected,
and the contrary proposition be the decision of our judge
ment. The exercise of the Divine attributes, therefore,
being essential and eternal, and Nature being a contingent
event, it cannot be the adequate or only sphere for the
exercise of the Divine attributes.
3. Nature cannot be the adequate and only sphere for the
exercise of the Divine attributes, because God is indepen
dent of the creature. As God's existence is independent,
so are his attributes ; and, as the existence of his attributes
is independent, so is their exercise. To maintain that the
universe is the only sphere for the exercise of his attributes
is to deny God's independence, and make him dependent
upon the creature. His happiness, his holiness, and absolute
perfection, are essentially connected with the exercise of his
attributes. This has been proved under the second proposi
tion ; therefore, to confine the exercise of the Divine attributes
to the creatures is to deny this important truth, and to make
God dependent upon them for his happiness, holiness, and
perfection, which is absurd. What God is, he is of himself,
and by himself, and cannot be dependent upon any thing
created — upon anything extraneous to his own essence.

THE HOLY TRINITY. 365
Cicero represents Velleius as proposing to his opponents
the strange inquiry — " What was it that induced God to
adorn the heavens with stars and bright luminaries ? Whe
ther he was previously like one who lived in a dark and
comfortless habitation and desired a better residence ? If
so, why was he so long a period without the gratification of
his desire ? "* An irreverent and impious inquiry : but the
notion which confines the exercise of the Divine attributes
to the universe lies open to this profane and sarcastic inquiry
of the Epicurean, and is incapable of answering it. If, as
we have before proved, the exercise of God's attributes was
essential to his happiness, holiness, and absolute perfection,
and, if that exercise had no object or sphere but the universe,
then the Divine being could not have been perfect or happy
until the universe was formed ; but both scripture and
reason abundantly prove that he is the blessed God ; abso-
'¦¦ lutely blessed ; and blessed for ever. Blessed in himself;
infinitely and independently blessed from all eternity, and
to all eternity, Absolutely perfect, and infinitely all-suffi
cient, needing nothing that he has made. From all eternity
he was as happy and perfect as he is now. Had the uni
verse been yet unborn he would have been equally perfect
and happy ; had the first act of creation been postponed
millions of years beyond the present date, he would have
been absolutely happy in the exercise of all his perfections,
and if it had been determined that creation should never
take place through all eternity to come, still would the
Divine nature have been essentially active and infinitely
happy for ever. To deny this is to deny the independence
of the everlasting God, and contradict one of the essential
characteristics of the Deity. . To admit the absolute inde-
pendance and all-sufficiency of God, is to admit that the activity
* Quid autem erat, quod concupisceret Deus, mundum signis et
luminihus, tanquam Aedilis, ornare ? Si ; ut Deus ipse melius habitaret ?
antea videlicet tempore infinito in tenebris, tanquam in guTgustio,
habitaverat. Post autem varietatene eum delectari putamus, qua caelum
et terras exornatas videmus ? Quae ista potest esse oblectatio Deo ?
Quae si esset, non ea tamdiu carere potuisset.— Be Natura Beorum,
Lib. i., c. 9.

366 THE HOLY TRINITY.
of his eternal energy, and the source of his infinite happi
ness, were prior to, and independant of, all created existence.
4. The universe is finite, and, therefore, cannot be the
adequate and only sphere for the exercise of the Divine
attributes. The extent of the universe, like its duration,
however vast it may be, is limited ; but the attributes of
Jehovah are infinite and unlimited. It is evident, therefore,
that the universe, vast as it is, is not adequate to fill the
capacities of the Deity, nor to afford scope for the full and
boundless exercise of his attributes. If the active faculties of
Jehovah are at any period exerted to an extent corresponding
with their natural infinity, the objects on which they are exer
ted, or in reference to which they are exercised, must be cha
racterized by a corresponding infinitude. Thus respecting his
faculty for infinite intelligence, the object or objects answer
ing to that capacity must have no limits ; but the universe
of matter and of mind has limits, and, therefore, the uni
verse, in all its magnitude, cannot be that object. It is too
diminutive. So with respect to love. This attribute is infi
nite, and, if it be exercised in a degree proportioned to its
infinitude, the object it embraces must be infinite. But
every created mind is finite, and the entire aggregate of
created mind in the universe is finite, and, consequently,
inadequate to the reception of infinite love. . So with regard
to the disposition for communion, so clearly ascribed to
Deity both by scripture and reason. This disposition, to be
exercised in a mode proportioned to the capacity of the
agent, requires an infinite capacity in the object. But,
seeing all the created minds in the universe are but finite,
what created intelligence is fully adequate to reciprocate the
sublime intercourse of Deity. If communion involve reci
procity of intercourse, to render it perfect there should be
corresponding faculties and capacities, as well as correspond
ing dispositions. If the minds engaged in communion are
- mutually agent and object to each other, there should be
proportionate powers and capabilities in each. If the one
be infinite, so should the other, or the intercourse can be
but partial and limited. To comprehend the thoughts, pur-

THE HOLY TRINITY. 367
poses, will, affections, and moral dispositions of an infinite
mind, and perfectly to reciprocate them, requires infinite men
tal and moral faculties and capacities. If, then, the disposition
of the Deity for communion be exercised perfectly, or to its
fullest extent, it is obvious there is no created mind adequate
for this exercise. So with regard to the infinite holiness of
God. It is impossible that the profound sentiments, the
affections, and dispositions, involved in perfect and absolute
holiness, can have an adequate object in the creature.
5. An argument, leading to the same conclusion, may be
deduced from the analogy of the human mind. The soul of
a human being, though finite, can be satisfied with nothing
less than the infinite. Vast as creation is, it is not adequate
to the capacities of the human mind. The whole universe
is not sufficient for it. Nothing that has limitation or
bounds seems adequate to its aspirations, to its ever growing
powers, and its interminable existence. If a human spirit
were informed that it was permited for ever to have access to
all created objects, but that created beings alone were to be the
objects of its thoughts, its contemplations, its affections, its
fellowship, and its sources of happiness, for ever, and that it
could not be allowed to have the infinite Being for its object, it
would feel itself restrained and confined, and long to emerge
into the infinite. Though finite itself, it would feel that its
powers of reflection, its faculties formed for endless develop
ment, and its immortal duration, fitted it for something
greater than the whole universe. God alone is the proper
object of a being having a rational, moral, and immortal
nature. In the Deity there is an abyss of knowledge, of
love, of perfection, of blessedness, which a created mind
cannot fathom ; and, because it cannot fathom that abyss,
it enjoys the consciousness of sufficiency, of satisfaction,
of perpetuity, of sources inexhaustible and eternal. A
spirit, whose existence is endless, and whose mental
and moral faculties are formed for boundless expansion,
feels that it cannot rest, unless in the possession of God ;
for, no other object is suited to its nature. Now, it is in
harmony with our mental constitution and requirements,

368 THE HOLY TRINITY.
that God has graciously rendered himself accessible to all
intelhgent beings. But, if finite objects are not adequate
to the faculties of a finfte mind, How can they be adequate
to the faculties or attributes of an infinite mind ? If the
mind of man feels the whole universe too httle for its capa
cities, How can it be sufficient for the infinite capacities of
the mind of Deity ? If man, or angel, can rest in nothing
but in the infinite, How can the mind of Jehovah rest in
less ? Thus, analogy carries us to the same conclusion —
The universe, being finite, cannot be the adequate sphere
for the full exercise of the Divine attributes and perfections.
The sum of the whole argument, sustaining our present
proposition, is this : — Jehovah's attributes have been exer
cised eternally, but the universe has existed for only a limi
ted duration, therefore God must have exercised his attributes
before any creature existed. The exercise of the Divine
attributes is essential, but. the existence of the universe was
contingent, and that which, in itself, is essential cannot be
based upon a contingency. The exercise of the Divine
attributes must be independent, because essential and eter
nal, and, therefore, cannot depend upon the existence of a
creature. The attributes of Deity are infinite, but the whole
assemblage of creation is only finite, and, therefore, cannot
be the adequate and only object for the full exercise of the
Divine perfections. If we select ahy one of these reasons,
it will, of itself, sustain our conclusion; but, when the whole
are put together, and combined, they furnish a four-fold
exemplification of the absurdity of denying the .proposition
which stands at the head of this argument. Created exist
ence cannot be the adequate and only object for the exercise
of Jehovah's infinite perfections. We must, therefore, look
for something infinitely anterior and superior to all creation.
PROPOSITION VII.
The mental archetypes of created existence could not be the
adequate objects for the exercise of the Divine attributes.
By mental archetypes we mean the ideas of the various ob
jects of whichthe universe consists, as they existed in the mind

THE HOLY TRINITY. 869
of God before he gave them actual being. Though the actual
universe be of only hmited existence, yet, we must admit
these archetypes to have been eternally in the mind of Deity;
for, to deny this would be to deny the infinite knowledge of
God, and to suppose him to have gradually received acces
sions to his intelligence, which is absurd. These archetypes,
however, cannot be an adequate sphere for the full exercise of
Jehovah's infinite attributes. Some of the reasons stated in
support jt>f the preceding proposition apply with equal, nay,
with augmented force, in sustaining our present proposition.
Though these archetypes were eternal, they were finite, and,
therefore, insufficient. If the objects, when actually existing,
are inadequate, the mere ideas of those objects must be
equally insufficient, and, therefore, eternally insufficient.
Besides, having proved that God is independent of the objects
when they actually exist, he must have been equally indepen
dent of the ideas, or archetypes, prior to creation, and, there
fore, eternally independent. The notion of God being eter
nally dependent upon mere ideas for the exercise of his
attributes is too absurd to be held for a moment. God is not
dependent upon anything, but absolutely and eternally inde
pendent. Moreover, mere ideas, or archetypes, having no sub
stantive or personal existence; are not objects on which all the
Divine attributes can be exercised. The mind of Deity might
indeed contemplate them, and thus they would be objects of
bis intelligence ; and his certain prospect of creatures who were
to be brought into being might give exercise to some of his moral
attributes : but these archetypes could not beobjectsof bis actual
power, his actual personal love and communion. When power
iB actually exerted, it must have a substantive existence for its
object. When a moral affection is exercised, it must have a per
sonal existence for its object. When the disposition for commu
nion is exercised, it must have a mind for its object, capable
of reciprocating thought, sentiment, purpose, and benign
affection. It must, in fact, not be a mere idea, but a con
scious, intelligent, moral being, or mind. Whether, there
fore, we look at the absolute independence and infinitude of
the Divine nature, or the unsubstantial and impersonal

370 THE HOLY TRINITY.
existence of the mental archetypes of the created universe,
we are irresistibly carried to the conclusion, that those arch
etypes could not be the adequate and only sphere for the
exercise of the Divine attributes. <
If, then, neither created existence itself, nor the arche
types of that creation, though eternally in the mind of Deity,
afford an adequate sphere for the exercise of his attributes,
we have still to determine what that sphere is. It is evident
we must look to the Divine nature itself. This carries us
to our next proposition. PROPOSITION VIII.
The Divine nature itself is the only sphere in which God's attributes
can have adequate scope for their fullest exercise.
It accords well with the independence and infinite excel
lence of the Divine Being, to say that all his resources are
in himself. This is one fundamental distinction between
the Creator and the creature, the perfect and the imper
fect nature, the independent and the dependent being. The
creature looks for happiness to something out of himself,
because he has nothing but what is derived — even his very
being. We have seen, too, that his only sufficiency is in
God. This accords well with the fact, that he received his
being, and his all from God. But God himself receives
nothing from the creature, but his own. He gives all, but
receives nothing. It is rational, therefore, to suppose that
the fountain of all being, and of all blessing, should find
his felicity, and the only adequate sphere for the infinite
exercise of his own attributes, in his own nature. To this
great truth, we are necessarily conducted by the preceding
arguments. The Creator and the creature, comprehend all
existence. If then the attributes of Deity have been eternally-
exercised, and neither the creature nor the archetypes of
the creature be the adequate sphere of the Divine attributes,
then the Divine nature itself must be that adequate sphere.
There is nothing infinite but God himself, and that he is
infinite and absolutely perfect, scripture and reason abun
dantly attest. His absolute perfection and infinity, are as

THE HOLY TRINITY. 371
essential as his existence, and, therefore, his own nature must
be adequate to the fullest scope of the exercise of his attributes ;
and as the eternal exercise of his attributes, is as essential
as the existence of his attributes, it follows, that not only
must his nature afford an ample sphere for the fullest
exercise of his attributes, but such must be the pecuhar
mode of his Being, as to admit the possibility of the
Divine attributes being exercised within, and upon itself.
This peculiar mode, too, must be an essential element of the
absolute perfection of the Divine nature ; for, if in that nature
there was no mode admitting of this exercise, then, this
exercise of the Divine perfections could not take place, and,
consequently, the Divine nature must be essentially imper
fect. Absolute perfection, and infinite all-sufficiency, imply
that the nature of God is such, that it is equal in its vast
ness to afford scope for the fullest exercise of its own powers,
and that it has within itself, such a pecuhar mode, as
renders that exercise possible and practicable. To this
conclusion, we are necessarily shut up, by the preceding
train of argumentation. PROPOSITION IX.
If the Divine nature be the only adequate sphere of the
activity and exercise of the Divine attributes, then the peculiar
mode of the Divine nature must admit of both agent and
object -within itself.
Under proposition II. it was proved that the exercise of
the Divine attributes necessarily requires an object as well
as an agent, and, in propositions VI. and VII., it was shown
that neither the universe, nor the archetypes of the universe,
could be the adequate object, and therefore both object and
agent must exist in the Divine nature. As we cannot deny
that both object and agent are necessarily implied in the
exercise of the Divine perfections, and as we can find no
adequate object in finite beings, we have no alternative but
to conclude, that such must be the pecuhar mode of the
Divine nature, that it admits both object and agent within
itself.

372 THE HOLY TRINITY.
PROPOSITION X.
If the Divine nature admit of both agent and object within
itself, there must be some plurality in the Godhead.
Under proposition IV. it was proved that agent and object
cannot be numerically, identically, and in every respect the
same, for they involve such different relations to each other,
as cannot be sustained by one absolutely solitary existence.
There must, therefore, be such a distinction between agent
and object, as involves plurality of Some sort : see pages
356-9. PROPOSITION XI.
If the Divine nature admit of some plurality, it must be a
plurality of Persons.
It would be irrational to suppose a plurality of essences,
for this the argument does not require ; it is contradicted by
the testimony of scripture, and rendered improbable by the
harmony, concord, and regularity of nature ; yet the plural
ity is real, and not nominal, as proved in proposition IV.
It cannot be a plurality of offices, for mere offices, however
diverse, cannot be agent and object to one another. Nor
can the plurality consist of the Deity and his attributes,
for neither can these be reciprocally agent and object one to
another. The plurality must consist of persons— of per
sons possessing distinct consciousness. This has been
proved under the fourth proposition, and the following
remarks may be added : —
In reference to some of the attributes, especially the
moral perfections, the agent and the object stand in such
relations as can be sustained only by Persons — mutually
possessing intelligence, consciousness, and moral agency.
Thus the love or moral benignity of God cannot in its highest
character, be exercised towards any but a conscious and
intelligent object. The attribute of hohness, including
veracity, justice, and faithfulness, cannot be, in its highest
character, exercised toward any being but one capable of
appreciating truth, justice, faithfulness, and moral exceUence.
Such an object must be a person.

THE HOLY TRINITY. 373
The act of communion, as before stated, implies the
reciprocal intercourse of thought, disposition, will, purpose,
and benign affection. Therefore, if the agent be a person,
so must the object be a person, for they are reciprocally
agent and object to each other. At present we speak not
of the dignity involved in the object as well as the agent,
sustaining these relations, and reciprocating this intercourse
in its infinite extent. This must be noticed hereafter.
At present we call attention merely to the fact, that the
object as well as the agent must be a person, and, if so,
the plurality in the Divine nature, must be a plurahty of
Persons. Thus reason conducts us step by step to a conclu
sion in perfect harmony with the doctrine of revelation — that
there is a plurality of persons in the Godhead ; and thus the
thesis at first propounded, becomes established as a rational
deduction, and reason and scripture are seen to harmonize.
Nor are we aware that in this argument we have assumed
any principle without proof, or taken any proposition for
granted. Each proposition in the series rationally springs
from its predecessor. The whole is built upon estabhsh
ed and unquestionable data, and the final conclusion is as
logically necessary as the first principle.
The preceding argument does not indeed determine
whether there be two or three persons in the Godhead, but
it determines that there is a plurality or a distinction of
persons in the Deity. The Holy Scriptures, however, deter
mine that the Persons are three— the Father, the Son, and
the Holy Ghost. It will hereafter be shown that this is
consonant to reason. PROPOSITION XII.
Each person existing in tfte Godhead must exist necessarily and

Whatever exists in the Deity must be necessary and eternal.
There can be nothing in the Divine nature that is contin
gent or adventitious. Even every Divine attribute is essential
and eternal : see proposition the first. Now, what applies to
attributes must apply with greater force to persons. Thus, if

374 THE HOLY TRINITY.
unity be essential to Deity, so is plurahty. The plurality
is absolutely essential to the Divine nature, and constitutes
the Deity : therefore the persons unitedly possess the Divine
nature and essence, and each is necessarily and eternally
existent. PROPOSITION XIII.
The persons in the Godhead must possess infinite attributes .
Each person existing essentially and eternally must pos
sess the attributes connected with essential being; each
person existing in the Divine essence must possess the per
fections of that essence. Therefore the infinite wisdom,
power, goodness, holiness, and the absolute, natural, and
moral perfections of the Father, must be those of the Son
and Holy Spirit. The same truth flows from the exercise
of the Divine attributes. For, if an infinite agent requires -
and implies an infinite object, then, the persons in the God
head being mutually agent and object to one another, each
must be infinite. See proposition VI. and VII.
PROPOSIITON XIV.
The Persons in the Godhead must be coequal.
Infinity does not admit of gradations. There is nothing be
tween the finite and the infinite. If one Person in the God
head were at all inferior to another in dignity and glory, in
natural or moral excellence, he must be infinitely inferior.
But each person, as shown in the former proposition, is infi
nite. Each, possessing the Divine essence, must possess the
Divine attributes : each, therefore, must be infinite in all his
perfections ; and, if infinite in his perfections, there can be no
inferiority or superiority. Therefore, the Divine Persons
must be coequal in power, glory, and dignity. Nor is this
equality incompatible with the relations in which the Persons
stand to each other, as Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.
PROPOSITION XV.
As each person essentially possesses the Divine attributes
so each must have eternally exercised them. For, it has
been demonstrated, that activity is involved in the very

THE HOLY TRINITY. 375
existence of the Divine nature, and it follows, that this
activity belongs to each person. If it be essential to one
Divine person, it must, for the same reasons, be essential
to the others ; it cannot be predicated of one, and excluded
from another. As an essential perfection, it must be the
eternal characteristic of each blessed person in the Godhead.
PROPOSITION xvi.
As each person in the Godhead has eternally exercised the
Divine attributes, it follows, that they must have been reci
procally agent and object one to another from all eternity, and
must continue such to all eternity. This shows us how the
Divine nature is to itself a sphere of infinite activity, and a
source of infinite blessedness, independent of the existence
of any created being.
Dr. Wardlaw reverently asks, " What were the occupa
tions of the Divine mind during that eternity which preceded
creation?" and "he then remarks, "We feel as if we were
chargeable with presumption, in having even so much as
ventured to put the question into words ; — so infinitely is
the subject beyond the range of our short-sighted secupla-
tions — wrapt in a secrecy so profound and awful — the secrecy
of him 'whom no man hath seen, nor can see' — of the depths
of whose nature there is no line of created intelhgence that
can take the soundings."* We admire, and would imitate,
the reverential spirit of the good doctor, but we think it does
not require us to sound the depths of the Godhead, in order
to say that those occupations must have been the reciprocal
exercise of the Divine perfections by the persons of the
Godhead. This exercise, we have before seen, was essential, and
here we see infinite scope for that exercise, and infinite
blessedness as the result. Baxter says, " the love of bene
volence is a natural perfection in God, but the exercise of
it is not necessary, because the being and felicity of the
creature is not necessary."! This assertion involves an
inconsistency. If the attribute was necessary, its exercise
* Wardlaw's Christian Ethics, p. 215.
t Baxter's Practical Works, vol. xx., p. 482.

376 THE HOLY TRINITY.
was also necessary. Baxter's inconsistency arose from suppo>
sing that only created beings could be objects of benevolence.
Benevolence is benignity or good will, and it was eternally
exercised and reciprocated by the persons in the Godhead,
before any creature was brought into being. The Father,
Son, and Holy Ghost, living eternally in essential union,
sustained the most intimate relations, and from these relations
and the mutual possession of the Divine attributes, there
must have subsisted the most intimate and endearing affec
tion. Each must be full of benevolence and love to the other.
Each loves, and each is loved in return. From all eternity
the Father infinitely loved the Son, the Son infinitely loved
the Father, and each infinitly loved the Holy Spirit, and
the Holy Spirit infinitely loved both. Infinite delight and
blessedness must be associated with the consciousness of
this infinite love one for another. The Father complacently
sees his own image in the Son, and both see their image in
the Holy Spirit, not dimly and imperfectly reflected as in the
creature, but clearly, perfectly, and infinitely — full-orbed in
all the transcendent excellency and glories of absolute Divi
nity. Between minds, thus united to each other, and com
placently delighting in each other, there must be the most
perfect fellowship and communion. With equal intelhgence,
the infinite thoughts and conceptions of the one would be
comprehended by the others. The holy will of one would
harmonize with the will of the others. The vast purposes
and designs of one would be approved and delighted in by
the others. All the mental operations, all the benevolent
affections, and all the moral emotions, of the Deity, would
thus be mutually reciprocated and approved with ineffable
complacency. Though we are unequal in our thoughts
and conceptions, diverse in our sentiments, imperfect in our
nature, and often inconstant in our affections, yet, the
sanctified fellowship of human minds, one with another, is
a prolific source of refined and exalted enjoyment. Still
more refined and exalted is our enjoyment flowing from fel
lowship with God. What, then, must be the bliss springing
from the communion of the Divine Persons, infinite in their

THE HOLY TRINITY. 377
attributes, absolutely perfect in all their qualities, essentially
intimate, indissoluble, and eternal, in their relations ; and
identical in all their thoughts, purposes, dispositions, and
affections? Here must be harmony corresponding with abso
lute perfection of nature. Here must be enjoyment corres
ponding with infinite capacity. Thus, the attribute of holi
ness would be exercised and manifested between the Persons
of the Godhead. Though existing in ineffable union, yet
possessing distinct consciousness, they must sustain moral
relations to each other, and hence their intercourse must
evince and ehcit their moral dispositions — must develop
their moral qualities. And, each mind being infinite in
its capacity, the absolute rectitude of the Divine nature, all the
moral excellencies, and the infinite depths of the Divine
perfections, would be unfolded to, and reciprocated by, each
Person — the Father towards the Son, the Son towards the
Father, and both towards the Holy Ghost. Further speci
fication may not be necessary ; nor is it possible for us to
conceive all the infinite modes in which the Divine attributes
would be eternally exercised by the Persons of the Godhead
towards one another. But we may rest assured, that, seeing
there are distinct personalities, with infinite attributes and
capacities in each, and seeing these Divine Persons exist in
eternal relations and essential union, there must be adequate
scope for the fullest activity within the boundless sphere of
the Divine nature itself, and resources therein of infinite
and eternal felicity. PROPOSITION xvn.
The works of God ad extra, are the works of each person in
the Godhead.
In the operations of Deity we have to contemplate the
Divine attributes exercised not only eternally and recipro
cally and within the sphere of the Divine nature, but in the
production of dependent creatures. After existing from
eternity without any external manifestation, it pleased God,
at the predetermined period, to issue the Almighty fiat in
the creation of the material and spiritual universe. Now, if
y

378 THE HOLY TRINITY.
each person possess and exercise the same attributes; it follows,
that these external operations of God must be the works of
eaeh person. The distinction existing between the perso
nal consciousness and relations in the Godhead may, indeed,
admit of such a distinction in their operations, ad extra, as
that one mode of acting may, by the Divine counsel, be more
especially assumed by one person than by another ; yet in
all operations there must be such a harmonious concurrence
of will, purpose, and design, and such a co-operation in the
exercise of the Divine attributes, that the works of creation
and providence must be the works of each. Thus the mate
rial universe, and the universe of mind, the creation and
preservation of rational and irrational creatures, is one great
effect of the conjoint operation of the three persons in the
Godhead. PROPOSITION xviii.
All creatures stand in the same relation to each Person im,
the Godheadl
As the universe of matter and of mind is the work of
each Person, and of all unitedly, it follows, that we stand
related to each Divine Person as our Creator and God ; and
as we stand in the same relation to each, we owe to each
the same duties arising from that relation. Thus, if homage,
worship, love, and obedience, be due to one, we owe the
same duties to each Person in the Godhead. Therefore, to
deny the Deity of one Divine Person, is to insult the majesty
of the other Person's ; and to present homage to one, while
refusing it to another, is to present a sacrifice which cannot
be accepted. Though distinct in personality, yet united in
essence and attributes, one Divine person cannot be denied
or insulted without an affront being received by the Three.
PROPOSITION XIX.
The scriptural doctrine which determines the Divine persons
to be a triad, is consonant to reason.
It has already been proved, that there mustbe a plurality
of persons ; revelation explicity declares that plurality to be

THE HOLY TRINITY. 879
three, and this doctrine is conformable to the testimony of
reason. A plurality is essential, but no reason oan be con
ceived why that plurality should be more or less than Three.
While the sacred volume asserts that there are three persons,
we think there are grounds for supposing this truth also is
involved in the essential activity of the Divine persons.
The preceding argument which proved that there must be
a plurality of persons, was based upon the truth — that as the
attributes of the Divine being are essential and eternal, so
those which involve activity must have been exercised eter
nally, their activity being coeval with their existence. It has
since been proved in proposition xv., that this activity belongs
equally to each person-^that as each person possesses the
Divine nature and attributes, and as activity essentially
belongs to one person, it must belong to each. Now if
activity be essentially the characteristic of each person con
templated distinctly, it is reasonable to suppose it is their
characteristic conjointly. Viewing the intimate union and
essential relation of the Father and the Son, it is reasonable
to suppose, that they would exercise the Divine attributes
conjointly. Now, any conjoint infinite act must have an
infinite object, which shall stand in the same relation to
both ; and if an infinite object, it must be something not
ad extra, but, within the Divine nature, as proved in propo
sitions VI., VII., VIII. This object, too, must be a person —
a conscious intelligent object, as proved in proposition V.
If, then, this object be a person, an infinite person, and if
this person exist in the Divine nature, then must the Divine
nature be of such a peculiar mode as admits, within itself,
the eixstence of a Third person, which must have the same
relation to the other Two persons, being the object of both.
This is the doctrine of holy scripture, and thus, revelation
and reason are seen to harmonize, in this important truth
as well as in others.
Should it be asked, Does not this reasoning afford ground
for rationally supposing that there may be more persons than
three ? our reply is, we think not. In the above argument
it is shown, that the conjoint activity of two persons has

380 THE HOLY TRINITY.
an infinite object in the third. Thus Father and Son being
conjoint agents, say in the exercise of infinite love, have the
Holy Spirit for an object ; the Son and Spirit being con
joint agents, have the adorable Father for an object of their
infinite love; and the Father and Spirit being conjoint
agents, have the Son as the blessed object of their infinite
love. This completes the relations and reciprocity of the
persons, and reason can demand no more. Besides, we do
not assume to be capable of affording a rigid a priori demon
stration in this argument. Our aim is simply to show
that the doctrine of Bevelation which expressly determines the
persons to be a triad, is consonant to reason. In this, we
trust we have succeeded. We clearly see how a conjoint
action of two persons requires an infinite object, and as
this completes the reciprocity and the relations between the
persons, reason requires no more, and the Holy Scriptures
teach no more. This harmony between the teachings of
revelation and the deductions of reason, must be satisfac
tory to every mind who reveres the sacred truths of the
Bible, and restrains the dictates of human reason, within
their proper province. proposition xx.
The preceding arguments, for a plurality of persons, combine
to sustain the scriptural doctrine of the unity of the Divine
essence. All truths must agree with one another. Sometimes,
indeed, through the feebleness of our faculties — the faint
degree of light we have upon a subject, — there are para
doxical appearances, and seeming inconsistences, which
somewhat embarras our judgement. Yet, when two pro
positions are found to be true, if contemplated in their
isolated condition, we are intuitively certain they must be
equally true when combined. It is, however, always satis
factory When we find the arguments in support of one truth
uniting their strength to support and establish another truth,
embodied in a distmct and separate proposition. Thus it
happens with regard to the two distinct propositions respect^

THE HOLY TRINITY. 881
ing the Godhead, namely, the plurality of persons, and the
unity of essence ; both doctrines are taught in the scriptures,
and, therefore, both must be essentially and eternally true.
The plurality of persons we have shown is in accordance with
reason, and, indeed, necessarily involved in the eternal ex
ercise of the Divine attributes; and the same general argument
leads to the conclusion that the Deity, though three in per
son, must be one in essence.
If the Divine Persons are reciprocally and adequately
agent and object to one another, it follows, that they must
possess absolute equality in intelligence, in love, in holiness,
in all dispositions, affections, and powers. It has been
shown, that, without this equality in the object, the exercise
of the Divine perfections by the agent would be restrained
and inadequate. It would not be commensurate with the
capacities of the agent ; and, from unequal powers and attri
butes, it must follow, that there could be no full or adequate
reciprocity. Seeing, however, that the all-sufficiency and ab
solute perfection of the Divine nature necessarily involve
the adequate exercise of the Divine perfections, it follows,
that the persons who are mutually agent and object to each
other must be co-infinite, and therefore co-equal, and this
argues unity" of essence.
Most theologians, however diverse in their sentiments on
other points of doctrine, have contended that there can
be but one infinite essence in existence. This almost uni
versal agreement of sentiment is a fact which strongly argues
how accordant the doctrine of God's essential unity is with
the unsophisticated judgement. In addition to the evidence
derivable from the reasoning of these authors, we adduce
pecuhar reasons springing from the foregoing argument.
1. Intelligence. — That the Persons may be reciprocally
agent and object to one another, we have shown that each
must have infinite intelhgence. Now, as truth is essentially
and immutably the same, it follows that different degrees of in
telhgence can only arise from partial ignorance, and difference
of judgement from liability to error, and indeed actual error./
If such diversity were the characteristics of any one of- the

382 THE HOLY TRINITY.
- persons it would be a proof of a different nature ; it would
involve an essential difference, and be incompatible with
identity of essence. But, as the intelligence of each is infi
nite, there can be no diversity in kind or degree of knowledge,
no difference in judgement. Each person has absolutely
the same wisdom ; and, therefore, the Divine three must
have the same views and the most perfect unanimity on all
subjects. This eternal, unvarying, and immutable, unani
mity of views and sentiment, on all subjects, is a powerful
argument for oneness of essence or nature.
2. Love. — We have seen that each Divine Person exercises
the same love — the same in its purity, its intensity, and
immutability. Now, it is the characteristic of minds, essen-
tialy separate and different, to possess a corresponding diffe
rence of affection — the difference being one either in the
nature, the intensity, or the objects, of their affection. Such
a variety is incompatible with identity of essence. But an
affection of exactly the same nature, always exercised toward
the same objects, and with the same degree of intensity and
constancy, throughout eternity, argues an identity of essence.
Such, then, is the identity of their love. In it there is not
the least diversity ; there never was, nor can jthere be for
ever, and hence we argue their identity of essence.
3. The disposition for communion, We have seen that the
disposition for communion is exercised by each person, and
hence their reciprocal and eternal intercourse one with
another. This disposition exists in the same intensity in
each person ; and with the same disposition there is the
same capacity for its exercise. If either the disposition or
the capacity of one exceeded that of the other, the intercourse
could not be in the fullest sense reciprocal, and, consequently,
could not be perfeet. It must be restrained and imperfect,
nor could the essence of the persons be identical. But
we have previously seen the communion is perfect. The
thoughts, the will, the purposes, the principles, and the be
nign affections, of the one are identical with, and recipro
cated by, the other. There is no defect, no diversity whatever.
The harmony is complete ; the concord uninterrupted and

THE HOLY TRINITY. 888
eternal. Such absolute harmony in the three Persons strongly
argues an indentity of essence.
4. Holiness— We have seen that the dispositions and
principles comprehended under the generic term holiness
are reciprocally exercised by each Person in the Godhead.
Now the exercise of the attribute of absolute holiness by the
several persons throughout eternity, implies the same clear,
comprehensive, and immutable views of truth, of all relations,
duties, and obligations, without the least obscurity, defect,
or diversity in each Person ; it implies also the same
unchangeable principles of rectitude in each Person ; the
same benign and holy dispositions, and moral affections ;
the same moral faculties and capacities in each, without the
least diversity, defect, or change. Indeed the least differ
ence in moral sentiment, dispositions, or faculties, would
necessarily imply a different nature. But, seeing there is
no diversity at all, either in moral sentiments, moral quali
ties, or capacities, but eternally and immutably the same
both in their nature and the extent of their exercise, such
perfect identity in holiness argues an identity of nature.
Thus the arguments adduced to demonstrate a plurality
of Persons in the Godhead, so far from being incompatible
with the unity of the Divine essence, clearly imply that
unity. All truths must accord with one another, and because
the propositions in our arguments are true, they agree with
both doctrines relating to the Godhead— namely, the plura
lity of persons, and the unity of essence. — -The decisions of
sound reason accord with the teachings of revelation which
exhibit to man his glorious Creator as three in person and
one in essence. — Jehovah, our Elohim, who, in the clearness
and plenitude of the christian economy, is placed before us
under the appropriate designation of Father, Son, and Holy
Ghost. Summary of the general argument.-^-k. brief recapitulation
of the principles estabhshed may assist the reader, by pre
senting under his eye, at one view, the great truths which
sustain the doctrine originally laid down. It was first shown
that the doctrine was not !repmgnant to reason, and then,

384 THE HOLY TRINITY.
in the positive argument, the following propositions were
estabhshed : —
1. That all the attributes of the Divine nature are essen
tial and eternal, equally so with the Divine essence.
2. That the active powers involved in the Divine attributes
have been eternally exercised.
3. That the exercise of the Divine attributes implies the
existence of object as well as agent.
4. That the object and agent involve an essential and
real distinction, as they cannot be numerically and
identically the same.
5. That the object, as well as the agent, must (at least
with reference to the exercise of the moral attributes)
be a conscious, intelligent, and moral Being, because
they are reciprocally agent and object to each other.
6. That no adequate object can be found in created exist
ence, because all created existence is limited, both in
its duration and its nature.
7. That no adequate object can be found in the archetypes
of creation, for although they existed in the mind of
Deity prior to creation, they are impersonal and
finite.
8. That only in the Divine nature itself can an infinite
and adequate object be found.
9. That, therefore, the Divine nature must exist in such
a pecuhar mode as comprehends within itself both
agent and object.
10. That, seeing agent and object are comprehended in
the Divine nature, there must be some plurahty.
11. That the plurahty thus existing in the Godhead must
be a plurahty of Persons.
12. That each Person must exist in the Godhead neces
sarily and eternally.
13. That each Person in the Godhead must possess infi
nite attributes, because nothing finite can exist es
sentially in the Divine nature.
14. That the Divine Persons, being infinite, must be
co-equal in dignity and glory.

THE HOLY TRINITY. 885
1 5 . That each Divine Person must have eternally exercised
the Divine attributes.
16. That, as each Divine Person has eternally exercised
the Divine attributes, the Persons must have been
reciprocally and eternally agent and object to one
another.
17. Each Person having mutually and eternally exercised
the Divine attributes, it follows that all the operations,
ad extra, must be the works of each Person, and of all
conjointly.
18. That allfinite beings stand in the same relation toeach
Person as creature and Creator, and owe to each the
same homage, obedience, love, and devotion.
19. That the Persons are three, and three only, is a
doctrine in conformity to reason, as well as Holy
Scripture.
20. That the arguments which thus sustain a personal
plurahty are in harmony with the unity of the Divine
essence, and rationally support this doctrine.
It is thus made manifest, that neither Sabellianism, which
denies the distinction of the Persons ; nor Unitarianism,
which denies the Divinity of two of the Persons ; nor Trithe-
ism, which denies the unity of the Divine essence, has any
more foundation in reason than it has in scripture. Sabel
lianism cannot be rational, for reason unites with scripture
in proving a plurality of persons ; Unitarianism cannot be
rational, for reason unites with scripture in proving the di
vinity of each person : and Tritheism cannot be rational, for
reason unites with scripture in establishing the unity of the
Divine essence. It thus appears that the orthodox creed of
three persons in one God, so far from being an enormous
tax upon human credulity, is in harmony with the soundest
philosophy. If to believe without evidence be credulity,
then that credulity is justly chargeably upon the opponents
of this doctrine. If to believe against evidence (against the
evidence of scripture sustained by the deductions of reason)
be a species of fanaticism, then that fanaticism belongs to

SWb THE HOLY TRINITY.
<rar opponents. But if to believe according to evidence be
rational, then the faith of the orthodox christian is rational.
THE DILEMMA OF AN OBJECTOR.
We know of no objections, of any moment, but what have
already been answered, either directly or by implication, in
the process of argumentation we have pursued. But if,
indeed, there were some tangible difficulties which might be
alleged, and which it might be impossible, with our present
amount of knowledge, to remove, still no mere difficulty
could overturn or set aside any demonstrated principle.
Such a principle takes its legitimate place in the category of
truths, and remains a truth notwithstanding the difficulty
connected with it. The truth arises from our knowledge,
the difficulty arises from our ignorance ; and what we know
as a truth cannot be set aside by what we do not know. It
is the part of a logical mind to retain every estabhshed truth,
and wait for accessions to our knowledge, by which to remove
any existing difficulty. The conclusion of our argument
appears to us to flow necessarily from the premises involved
in the preceding propositions. An opponent, who calls in
question the correctness of our reasoning, is bound to prove
either that our conclusion is false, or that our premises are
unsound. If he can do neither, his objections are irrational.
The propositions from first to last are, we conceive, insepa
rably connected, and the conclusion is as necessarily true
as the first proposition. Any attempt to invalidate them
must, we think, involve an objector in contradictions and
absurdities, as a brief investigation will make apparent.
Let us notice the consequences of an objector denying any
of the propositions included in this chain of argument.
1. If he deny the first proposition — that the attributes of
Jehovah are essential and eternal, his denial implies that
for an eternity God was without them. He thus makes
the existenoe of God's attributes contingent, and involves
the possibility that he might never have had them at all.
Is this rational ? Can we indeed conceive a greater absur
dity ? The notion is incompatible with the immutability

THE HOLY TRINITY. 387
and absolute perfection of the Deity, and, indeed, incom
patible with his essence. It undeifies Jehovah, and denies
the eternity and self-existence of his essence; for if his
attributes are adventitious and contingent, so is his essence,
as they cannot be separated from it even in conception. The
notion, therefore, must be rejected on account of its
absurdity. 2. If the objector admit the eternal existence of all the
Divine attributes, but deny the eternal exercise of God's active
powers and energies, we ask him for proof, but he can give
us none. He is denying without any authority, either from
scripture or reason. Moreover his denial imphes that
there was an eternity in which God did not exercise his
active powers. Is; this a rational supposition ? His denial
involves also a denial of the existence of some attributes,
because their activity is essential to their very existence.
Thus the attribute of omniscience involves the actual know
ledge of all things. Thus, the attribute of infinite love
implies the exercise of love ; for, if a being do not love, he
is without love. Thus holiness involves the exercise of
moral dispositions, and for a being not to exercise them is
to be without hohness. To deny the exercise of these and
other attributes is then to deny their existence, and involves
the absurdity before mentioned. The immutability and
absolute perfection of the Deity at once annihilate all such
futile objections.
3. If he admit the eternal exercise of some of Jehovah's
active attributes, but deny the activity of others, again we
ask him for proof.* But he has no proof to give from reve
lation or from reason. We ask, then, can it be rational to
believe without proof ? His denial is, indeed, contradictory
to reason, for it imphes that God is essentially different now
from what he was during a prior eternity. This amounts
to a denial of his immutability and absolute perfection.
* But if our argument only proved the eternal exercise of one Divine
attribute which required an intelligent object, it would be sufficient to
establish a plurality of persons. Thus before an objector can resist our
argument he must be prepared to prove that God from all eternity never
exercised one attribute which required an object.

388 THE HOLY TRINITY.
For instance, to admit the eternal exercise of wisdom, but
to deny the eternal exercise of love, or holiness, or power,
or a disposition for communion, is to change the character
of God, and, in effect, to undeify him. We cannot conceive
of Deity to be immutable and absolutely perfect, and, yet, to
have existed from all eternity without the exercise of love,
or holiness, or power, and the objection which involves the
supposition must be rejected as an absurdity.
4. If he admit that the attributes of Deity must have
been exercised eternally, but deny that their exercise involves
the existence of any object, we reply, his denial implies an
impossibility. For, if a being know something, that some
thing known is the object — if he love something, that
something loved is the object, and so of the other attributes.
The exercise of each involves the existence of object as well
as agent.
5. If he admit that the exercise of an attribute requires
an object las well as an agent, but deny that the object is
a personal existence, we reply, none but a personal existence,
or a conscious intelligent mind, can be the object with
respect to the exercise of some of the Divine attributes.
For instance, love or benignity cannot be exercised towards
mere unorganized matter, nor, in its highest sense, towards
any object, except it be a rational mind. Hohness imphes
moral relations, such as can exist only between moral agents ;
it imphes dispositions and affections which can only be exer
cised towards moral agents. So the disposition to commu
nion can be exercised only between conscious and inteUigent
minds, and such minds must have a real personal existence.
The objection therefore cannot stand ; it involves a contra
diction to reason.
6. If he admit that the object, as well as the agent, must
possess a conscious, intelligent, and personal existence, but
contend that the objects exist in the created universe, we
reply, This cannot be ; for, the objects constituting the cre
ated universe are not eternal. Besides, if they were eternal,
they would be inadequate, because finite and limited. This
objection, therefore, falls to the ground.

THE HOLY TRINITY. 389
7. If he admit that no created being can be the object,
but contend that the archetypes, or ideas, in the Divine
mind were the objects, we reply, These ideas have no perso
nal and substantive existence, which the exercise of the
Divine attributes necessarily requires in the objects, as well
as in the agent ; and, moreover, if they had, they are inade
quate, because finite. This objection, like the former, has
no rational foundation.
8. If he admit that the object as well as agent cannot be
either in external nature or in the archetypes of nature,
then he must admit the existence of a plurahty of persons
who, from eternity, have been mutually agent and object to
one another in the reciprocal exercise of the Divine perfections.
9. If he contend that this conclusion involves the existence
of three separate beings, as distinct from each other in essence
as in personal consciousness, we reply, The argument does not
sustain this conclusion. It necessarily proves the existence
of a plurality in consciousness ; and, in connexion with this
truth, it affords powerful evidence that there must be a unity
of essence. The reciprocal possession and exercise of the
same attributes, the same perfections, the same dispositions,
and the same affections, involve the possession of an identi
cal nature and essence ; for, where there is no difference, or
variety, in any property, it is irrational to suppose a different
nature, or essence ; and if the essence be one, the persons
cannot be separate beings. They are distinct in personality,
yet united in essence.
10. If the objector admit a oneness of essence, but argue
for a gradation of dignity in the Persons, he reasons incon
sistently ; for, identity of nature and attributes necessarily
imphes equality in the Persons. Any inferiority would
imply an infinite disparity; but this is impossible, seeing
each Person possesses the same attributes in infinite measure.
11. If he finally admit this, as we conceive he must, he
admits, with us, the Divine nature to consist of a plurality
of Persons, with unity of essence.
12. If he admit this, he will find no difficulty in admit
ting the truth of the scriptural doctrine which restricts the

390 THE HOLY TRINITY.
plurahty to three Persons — Father, Son, and Holy Ghost,
especially as this truth also is sustained by the verdict of
reason, as we have shown in proposition XIX.
13. In admitting this, he recognizes, with us, each Person
in the Godhead as sustaining the same relations to mankind,
and to the whole intelligent- universe, as our Creator and
our God, claiming the same homage, adoration, obedience,
affection, and devotedness. This is the Deity in whose
name we are baptized, to whom we are consecrated in that
holy ordinance, and with whom we enter into- covenant rela
tion as our God for ever and ever, whose we are and whom
we serve — the glorious Trinity of Father, Son, and Holy
Ghost. 14. In the reception of this doctrine, he finds reason and
revelation harmonize, and he is able to see how the Divine
attributes have been infinitely exercised from eternity, irre
spective and independent of all created being. He has no
need either to deny the existence and exercise of the Divine
attributes ; or, hke Plato, Aristotle, and other ancient philo
sophers, to suppose the eternity of the universe, in order to
find an object for the exercise of the Divine perfections, for,
even if the universe were eternal, it would be inadequate. He
sees that the only adequate sphere for the exercise of the
Divine attributes is the Divine nature, and the absolute
perfection and all-sufficiency of the Divine nature necessarily
involve a mode of existence which admits their exercise reci
procally by the Persons in the Godhead.
He sees the faculty of infinite intelligence or wisdom
exercised by each, in penetrating the infinite depths and
capabilities of the Divine nature, in reciprocally compre
hending the thoughts, purposes, will, and operations- of an
infinite mind. He sees infinite energy in that essential
vitality which characterizes each. He sees infinite love,
reciprocally exerted by the Divine persons, existing as they
do in essential union, and the most intimate and endearing
relations. The Father, infinitely delighting in the Son and
Spirit, and the Son and Spirit infinitely delighting in the
Father, and in each other. He sees the disposition to

THE HOLY TRINITY. 391
communion exercised without bounds. The intimate union,
the endearing relation and infinite love of each, giving infi
nite intensity to the disposition, and the capacity of each
affording infinite scope for its gratification ; every thought
however vast ; every purpose however profound ; every voli
tion ; every affection, however intense, being fully understood,
appreciated, and reciprocated by each person, in eternal
harmony and delectation. He sees how infinite holiness
can be exercised and manifested. In the eternal relations
of the Divine persons, in their infinite capacities and powers,
he sees how truth, faithfulness, justice, benignity, and all
moral qualities and affections have an infinite scope, and
can be exercised without any hmit either in their duration or
extent. He sees no other mode than that of the personal
distinctions and eternal relations, and no other scope than
that of unbounded capacity, in which the attributes of God
can be exercised in all their infinitude ; but, he sees both
the mode and the capacity existing in the scriptural doc
trine cf the Trinity. He sees that infinite blessedness must
be the associate of such a union of the persons, from such
a anode of their existence, and from such a reciprocal exer- -
cise of the Divine perfections. If finite happiness flows from
the exercise of finite benign affections, from finite and im
perfect intercourse, from, finite and imperfect holiness, he
sees that infinite and eternal happiness must flow from such
attributes when exercised without limit, without imperfec
tion, and without interruption. Such, then, must be the
essential, eternal, and independent blessedness of the Triune
God. Through the infinite ages which preceded the first
fiat «if creation he was thus blessed ; had creation not yet
existed he w<»uld have been thus blessed ; had creation been
postponed for myriads of ages yet to come, he would have
been thus blessed ; and had it been determined that creation
should never take place at all he would have remained thus
infinitely blessed. The Divine nature itself, comprehending
a plurality of persons, with a unity of essence, constitutes
an independent sphere of eternal activity, and an inde
pendent source of infinite blessedness.

392 THE HOLY TRINITY.
While, in this argument, he sees that the Divine nature
itself, from its eternity, its infinity, and its trinal distinction
of persons, is the independent and eternal sphere of its own
activity, and the source of its own infinite blessedness, he
can perceive no discrepancy with this doctrine in the creation
of the universe. The one presents before us the eternal and
infinite mode of the exercise of the Divine perfections, but
the other presents us with a particular and finite mode of
their exercise. Thus, creation existed not because it was
essential to Deity, but because' he willed it; not because the
exercise of his perfections could not take place without it,
but because his wisdom determined it. He determined its
mode, its particular limitation, its laws, its arrangements,
its operations, its varieties of being, the date of its origin,
the duration of its continuance in any particular state, and
every other characteristic and property belonging to it. He
resolved that there should be other intelligent beings besides
himself, not because he needed them, as the only mode of
exercising his moral attributes, or was constrained by any
internal necessity to create them, but because it was his
pleasure to give them existence, and cause them to partici
pate of his love and happiness. At a determined period he
gave them their being, he made them capable of knowing,
loving, obeying, and enjoying, him. He gave them a moral
nature, impressed upon them his own likeness, and imparted
to them immortality. Creation was intended to be an
external manifestation of himself; and rational and moral
beings were fitted to perceive that manifestation, so that,
looking into the great mirror of nature, they might see the
reflection of the wisdom, power, goodness, and glory, of the
Creator ; and, rightly exercising their own faculties, and hv
ing in obedience to- his will, they might enjoy his favour,
realize perpetual communion with him, and participate of
the joys springing from his benignity, through time and
eternity. Though such a particular manifestation of the
Deity could, neither in its duration, nor its extent, be an
adequate sphere to the exercise of his infinite attributes, nor
a source of happiness adequate to his infinite capacities —

THE HOLY TRINITY. 898
for the finite cannot fill the infinite — yet, creation was in per-
feot accordance with his independence, his absolute perfection,
and all-sufficiency. It was, indeed, because his nature and
mode of being were eternally such as we have proved them
to be, that there could be any external manifestation of the
Deity. Had not the Divine attributes been exercised eter
nally, they never could have commenced their operations in
time ; had they not been exercised within the Divine nature,
they never could have been put forth and displayed in the
actual existence of the universe. The wisdom, the power,
the benignity, the hohness, and all the active perfections of
God we behold in nature and providence, are so many evi
dences and manifestations, that these active properties existed
in the Deity prior to creation and providence, and that they
existed in him eternally, essentially, and unchangeably.
The plurality of persons, conjoined with the unity of es
sence, presents a mode of existence which harmonizes with
universal truth, so far as we can investigate that truth, whether
in the nature of the Deity, or in the objective manifestations
of his existence and perfections. The a priori argument
from the Divine nature proves it, and the a posteriori argu
ment from created nature accords with it. We see nothing
. discordant with the doctrine of the Trinity but what is
discordant with truth. We see no way of resisting it but
that of perverting our reason, and resisting evidence which
has the force of a moral demonstration. The rejection,
therefore, of this doctrine is an exhibition of folly, as well as
of sin ; it is irrational, as well as wicked ; it is a violation of
the laws of mind, as well as the law of God. Were there
no attainable evidence of this doctrine in the present life,
it would be our bounden duty to yield it our imphcit and
unwavering credence on the testimony of God; for, our
allegiance to him involves the submission of our understand
ing to his teaching, as well as our will to his absolute con
trol; but when revealed truth is sanctioned and corroborated
by reason, the sin of rejecting it becomes enormously aggra
vated, and we are worthy of the greater condemnation and
punishment.

CHAPTER III.
THE MODE OF THE ARGUMENT IS SUSTAINED BY THE COLLATERAL
TESTIMONY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE.
Whatever doctrine or proposition is revealed from heaven
is true, but it is not the, fact of its being thus revealed that
makes it true. It was absolutely true before it was revealed,
and would have been eternally and unchangeably true had
it never been revealed to man. Though it should remain
for ever unknown to man, it would be known to God,, and
recognized by his omniscient and infallible mind as absq^
lutely true. All that revelation does then, in respect to
any truth, is to make it known to man, and thus, invest it
with Divine authority ; and the duty of man is to receive it
cordially and thankfully as truth. J*!^1 resPect to some
doctrines thus revealed from heavenTftmay be that we are
not able to produce any demonstration of their truth, but
it is certain we can produce, no demonstration to the con
trary. It therefore is our duty to admit, them as truths
because of their divine authority. The fact that they are
revealed from heaven is a guarantee to us that they are
true, for they are declared by that God who cannot be
deceived himself, and who cannot deceive his creature?.
His infinite wisdom precludes the possibility of his, being
deceived himself, and his unchangeable goodness precludes
the possibility of his deceiving others. Therefore, whatever
doctrine or proposition he declares in his blessed word must
be unchangeably, eternally, and absolutely true. This is a
fundamental principle which every rational mind must
admit. If* then, it be received as a fundamental principle
that every doctrine which God reveals is true, it follows
that whenever a process of reasoning contradicts the scrip
tures, it must be false. There must be error somewhere in
the argument, either in the premises or in the conclusion.
But on the other hand, whenever we reason correctly, both

THE HOLY TRINITY. 395
our process of argument, and our conclusion, must be in
conformity with revelation. If, then, the doctrine of the
Trinity be revealed from heaven, no rational argument can
disprove it. This is impossible. Every argument which
affects to disprove it, must be false somewhere^either the
premises are untenable, or the conclusion is illogical.
The conclusion of our argument on the Trinity is un
questionably in harmony with the scripture doctrine, and
must be true ; and, if the process of argument which leads
to this -conclusion, be correct, it will follow, that the premi
ses themselves are also in harmony with scripture. Since
the argument was conceived and written out, we have been
struck with a variety of instances, in which its leading and
fundamental propositions, are sustained by incidental decla
rations of Holy; Scriptttre. The fundamental principles in
the argument are these — that as the Divine attributes are
exercised mow, so if God!be unchangeable, they must have
been exercised not' merely within the limited period of cre
ation, but eternally; and, as their exercise requires an
object, that object must be eternal also ; and, as their exer
cise, to be adequate, must be infinite, so their object must
be both infinite and eternal; and, as the object must be a
conscious personal existence, so the Divine nature which
alone is infinite and eternal, must be characterized by such
a pecuhar mode as includes a plurality of persons.
After this argument was elaborated by rational induction,
the inquiry naturally suggested itself to the mind of the
author — seeing the conclusion of the argument is in perfect
accordance with the Holy Scripture, Do the several premises
in the process of the argument, derive any sanction from
the same Divine authority? Do the scriptures speak at all
on the fundamental principles here laid down by reason,
and if they do, what is their testimony? Contemplated
/purely as a rational argument, it was not incongruous to
make this inquiry, and it certainly could not be without
some- interest and importance. The inquiry thus suggested
Soon brought before the mind a variety of texts, which
uttered no equivocal testimony in support of the leading

396 THE HOLY TRINITY.
principles of our argument. It will at once be seen that
any passages available for this object must refer to the con
dition of the Divine existence as it was prior to all created
being, and totally independent and irrespective of all created
being ; and several such passages are supplied in the word
of God. While there is not a single text in the bible which
represents the attributes or active perfections of the Deity
as being dormant or latent prior to creation, there are seve
ral which describe them as in active operation prior to the
first fiat of creative power. While there is no passage which
represents God, in the exercise of his attributes, as being
both agent and object in the same act, abstractedly and
absolutely considered, there are several passages which repre
sent his attributes as being so exercised as to involve agent
and object distinct from one another. While there is no
passage which represents God as existing in that absolute
oneness which excludes all plurality from his nature, there
are several which describe him prior to all creation, existing
in such a plurality as admitted of the reciprocal exercise of
love, communion, hohness, &c. It is our duty to adduce a
few of these remarkable portions of scripture.
I. The eternal exercise of love. — In our argument we laid
down the proposition that love requires an object as well as
an agent, and the object must be co-eternal and co-infinite
with the agent. Our blessed Lord expressly declares that
the Father loved him before the era of recorded time, or,
before the foundation of the world — "Father, I will that
they also whom thou hast given me be with me where I
am ; that they may behold my glory which thou hast given
me : for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world."
— John xvii., 24. This passage carries our minds back to
eternity — to the ages which preceded any created existence.
The foundation of the world means the beginning of time :
since the foundation, or from the foundation, of the world
means since time began to be : but before the foundation of
the world means eternity — the infinite ages prior to any
created existence. Take a few examples. Christ is said to
have been " slain from the foundation of the world — "*
* Eev. xiii., 8.

THE HOLY TRINITY. 397
that is, set forth by type, promise, and prophecy, as a sacri
ficial victim through all the ages of time. But in another place
he is said to have been ordained to be a Saviour prior to this
period — even from eternity : as the apostle Peter states, He was
"foreordained before the foundation of the world."* So saints
were chosen in Christ to gospel privileges from eternity; as
Paul says, " According as he hath chosen us in him before
the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and
without blame before him in love."f Thus it is clear as the
light of day, that the phrase, " before the foundation of the
world," means that dateless eternity which preceded all
created existence. The Psalmist in like manner refers to
the infinite ages prior to creation, and speaks of that period
as the eternity of God's existence — " Before the mountains
were brought forth or ever thou hadst formed the earth and
the world, even from everlasting to everlasting thou art God. "J
The Bedeemer's words, therefore, carry us back to that
awful eternity which preceded creation, when there was not
a creature yet formed, and show us the condition of the
Divine existence at that period. What, then,, was the con
dition of the Divine existence during that preceding eternity ?
Was it one of inactivity ? On the contrary, it wa§ one of
love ; it was one in which the benevolent affection was in
full exercise. What then did God love ? Was it mere self-
love, or was it a benevolent love directed to an object? It
was a love directed to an object, as truly, as really, as it is
this moment. Who, then, was the object of this love prior
to all creation, prior to the existence of any created being, and
during the awful eternity of his existence ? Our Lord's words
give the answer most emphatically. " Thou lovedst me
before the foundation of the world," — when there was no
being as yet in existence, when the universe was unborn,
when there was as yet no external manifestation of his per
fections. The eternal Father loved, and the eternal Son
was the object of his love. This corroborates the leading
principle of our argument — that love requires an object as
* 1 Peter, i., 30. + Ephesians i., 4. J Psalm xc., 2.

398 THE HOLY TRINITY.
well as an agent, and the object as well as the agent must
be a person, and must be eternal.
II. The Father and the Son existed in mutual glory, during
that eternity which preceded creation. " And now 0 Father,.
glorify thou me with thine own self, with the glory which I
had with thee before the world was. " John xvii., 5. This
passage carries us back to the same dateless period of eter
nity, to the ages prior to the existence of any created object,
and represents both Father and Son enjoying together a
state of glory. The -passage is very remarkable, and worthy
of a thorough investigation. To elicit the meaning and
application of the passage, it is requisite to inquire, First,
What is meant by the glory of God, and, Secondly, What is
intended by Christ having thisiglory with the Father himself.
1. The glory of God means his estate of dignity, perfection,
and blessedness. Our Lord's words clearly indicate, that
whatever glory God has now he had before a creature was
formed; for,. he speaks of his glory "before the world was."
If it be essential to his glory now to be holy, just, benevolent,
wise, powerful — to .possess and exercise all his attributes, it
was equally an element of his glory before the world was.
We cannot detach any of these properties, qualities, or per
fections, from God, without detracting from his glory. We
cannot suppose him to have been deficient in any one of
them prior to creation, without supposing his glory to have
been less at that -period than what it is now. But, as our
Lord's words imply, he had the same glory before the world
was, they necessarily imply that he had the same elements
of -perfection, dignity, and happiness, from all eternity, and,
therefore, the Scriptures being our. guide, his attributes
were exercised eternally.
&. Our Lord teaches that he had this glory with the Fa
ther before the world was ; he therefore participated with
him in the dignity, perfection, and blessedness of his nature
from all eternity. As our Lord's language necessarily carries
us to aiperiod- anterior to all creation, it necessarily refers to
the condition of the Divine existence, independent of, and
abstracted from, all created being. What then was that

THE HOLY TRINITY. 899
condition of the Divine existence ? It was one of glory
mutually enjoyed by a plurality — the glory arising exclusively
from the Divine nature. " Glorify thou me with thine own self
(napa o-eaurfji)" — notwith any external dignities or honours, but
with thine own abstract self, thy very nature, thy very being,
thine own essential perfections, even " with the glory which
I had with thee (irapa <roi) before the world was." Thus it
is evident that from all eternity the Son enjoyed a glory in
or with the Father's own self. This glory, then, was not
adventitious but essential, not created but uncreated, not
external but internal, or within the Divine nature : it was *
a glory within the very self or essential being of the Deity.
The passage before examined represents the Father as loving
the Son before any created being existed, and this passage
represents Him and the Son together enjoying a glory which
had no source but his own self, his own essential being, and
that before the world was. The two periods referred to in
each passage are, therefore, the same — they both carry us
to that eternity before a creature was yet in existence ; and
they both describe the same state of being ; for, if the Son
was eternally loved by the Father, he must have enjoyed his
eternal and essential glory ; and if he enjoyed his essential
glory, he must have been an object of his eternal love.
There is a beautiful and expressive harmony in the phrases
employed in these passages. As the reference is to a state
of being prior to all creation, it is evident that whatever love
and glory were reciprocated must have been with the Deity
alone ; and hence the appropriate phrase " with thine own
self." There was as yet no created being who could give
him glory, who could love or glorify either Father or Son.
If glory was enjoyed, or if love was reciprocated, in unison
with any being at all in that anterior eternity, it must be
with the Deity alone, as our Lord states, ' ' with thine own self. "
He is speaking of a period when, as yet, the foundations of
the world were not laid, when the matter of the universe
was not called into being, when no seraph had gazed upon
his majesty, when no radiant worshipper had veiled his face
and fallen prostrate before him, when the vast solitudes of

400 THE HOLY TRINITY.
space were untenanted, and the silence of eternity unbroken
by the voice of any created being, and when the Godhead
existed alone. It was then that the Son was loved by the
Father ; it was then that he had a glory with the Father's
" own self, " and with no other — in unison with his infinite
and eternal being.
3. This language is expressive also of agent and object exist
ing in the Deity. If the Son had a glory with the Father's
" own self," and the Father with the Son, there was distinct
consciousness, and mutual recognition, reciprocal love, hoh
ness, communion, and blessedness, in which they were
mutually agent and object one to another. This scriptural
representation then is in harmony with our argument, and
sustains its fundamental premises.
III. In our argument we have stated, that if in the God
head there be a plurality, who are mutually object and
agent to each other, they must thoroughly know each other.
The thoughts, purposes, and will, of each, must be recipro
cally understood and comprehended. This, too, is expressly
asserted in the sacred scriptures, and asserted in reference
to each person— the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.
Thus the Father and the Son are declared mutually to
know each other. Our Lord says, " As the Father knoweth
me, even so know I the Father."* No one will dispute the
perfect knowledge of the Father, but here, the same perfec
tion is ascribed to the Son. In the same perfect manner
the Holy Ghost is declared to have a knowledge which
pierces into the very depths of the Godhead, and compre
hends every thought, purpose, disposition and affection. "For
the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.
For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit
of a man which is in him ? Even so knoweth no man the
things of God, but the Spirit of God."-)- Just as a human
soul is conscious of all its own thoughts, desires, emotions,
and determinations ; so the Holy Spirit is conscious of all
that passes in the mind of Deity. In the same express
manner God the Father is said to know the mind of the
* John, x., IS. + 1 Cor., ii,, 10, 11.

THE HOLY TRINITY. 401
Spirit. " He that searcheth the heart, knoweth what is the
mind of the Spirit."*
These scriptures, therefore, teaching such absolute knowr
ledge by, and of, each person — by the Father, the Son,
and the Holy Ghost, plainly declare that they are recipro
cally agent and object to each other; and if so now, they
must have been so from all eternity. For the knowledge
of the Father comprehends all the events of eternity — all
that exists in his own nature ; and all that has, does, or will
exist in external nature. If, then, the Son comprehends
this, he must be eternal ; and if the Spirit comprehends
this, he must be eternal also. Each person must also be in
finite. No finite mind can comprehend infinity ; for, says
the Saviour, '' No being (not no man, for that word is not
in the original, but) — no being- knoweth the Son but the
Father, "f Thus the teachings of holy scripture give
direct support to the several premises in our argument.
IV. The mutual knowledge, love, and glory, here eternally
ascribed to Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, imply the most
intimate communion, the most delightful fellowship, . one
with another. From what we know of the laws of mind, a
delightful fellowship must subsist between human beings
when they have mutual views, harmonious sentiments and
-affections ; and it is irrational, and, indeed, impossible, to
suppose a different result in the Three Divine Persons. If
the Father is conscious of all the thoughts, intentions, pur
poses, and dispositions of the Son, and the Son of the
Father, and the Holy Ghost of both, and both of the Holy
Ghost; and if this mutual knowledge be combined with
reciprocal love, there must be the most intimate and delight
ful communion. This itself in fact is actual communion of the
most intimate and exalted kind which can be conceived :
a communion yielding felicity as infinite as their capacities,
and as durable as their existence. If, then, the sacred
scriptures teach that this was the condition of the Divine
nature prior to all creation — during those dateless ages of
* Bom., viii., 26.
f Kal 6vSeig emyiviiaxu rbv iwv u /*ij b varnp. — Mat. xi., 27.
2

402 THE H01Y TRINITY.
eternity when there was nothing in existence but the Deity,
it is obvious that our argument from reason is corroborated i
by the testimony of revelation — the premises of our argument,
as well as the conclusion, have the direct sanction of Divine
authority. Though it was not the consideration of these
special texts of scripture which suggested the argument at
first, it is satisfactory to find the harmony and consistency of
reason and scripture thug demonstrated.
V. Our argument for the essential union of the persons is
also sanctioned by the testimony of Scripture. The apostle
John declares, that, " In the beginning was the Word, and
the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The
same was in the beginning with God."* The period in
tended by thephrase-rr-w the beginning, is the eternity which
preceded creation. This is too obvious to be rationally
doubted. The whole context irresistibly proves it. The
evangelist speaks of two distinct periods. He speaks first of s
the condition of the Divine existence prior to creation ; and
then proceeds to speak of creation itself, Having spoken,
in the two first verses, of what was the condition of the
Divine existence before creation, he observes in the. next
verse " All things were made by him (the Divine word), and
without him was not anything made that was made." This
shows plainly that he speaks of two periods-^— eternity and^
time ; and it so clearly fixes and defines the first period of,
which he was speaking that we cannot mistake it. That
period was evidently the eternity prior to the existence- of
any created thing — not only prior to the existence of our
world, but prior to all things, for, he emphatically declares
" without him was not any thing made that was made,"
What, then, does he affirm was the condition or mode, pf
the Divine existence, during those awful and dateless ages of
eternity? Did the Deity then exist in absolute oneness ?
Was there no plurality at all? The apostle expressly af
firms that the Divine Logos was then in existence^-that he
was co-existent with God, for " he was with God, and he was.
* John i. 1. Sic mos Hebrms Eternitatem populariter describere.
Grotius. Such was the Hebrew manner of setting forth eternity.

THE HOLY TRINTTY. 403
God." Carry back, then, the period of the existence of the"
Father as remotely as we may, we have the same duration
ascribed to the Son. During whatever period the Father exist
ed, the Logos was with him. If the Father was eternal, so was
the Son, for he was with him. There is no difference — the
same eternity is applicable to one Divine person as the other.
Here, then, was plurahty, an eternal plurality.
But this plurality is compatible with the most intimate
and essential union of nature, for it is declared " the Word
was with God." The apostle intended this union to be as
vividly impressed upon our minds as the Divine plurality,
for he asserts the one in immediate connexion with the
other, and he asserts it twice. Not content with once
uttering the assertion—" The Word was with God," he im
mediately reiterates the truth, " the same was in the be
ginning with God." There is a pecuhar emphasis intended
by this repetition. It is, indeed, the apostle's usual man
ner of marking the importance of a subject, of expressing its
peculiarity, and drawing special attention to it. The phrase
rendered with God (irpbg rbv eebv) is expressive of the most
intimate union compatible with distinction. It is, indeed,
synonymous with the passage before quoted from John xvii. 5,
where our Lord speaks of the glory which he had with the
Father before the world was. The same truth is repeated
in John's first epistle i., 2. — " That which was from the
beginning which we have heard, which we have seen with
our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have
handled of the Word of Life. For the Life was manifested,
and we have seen n, and bear witness, and shew unto you
that Eternal Life, which was with the Father, (irpbg rbv
rtarkpa) and was manifested unto us. He who is here cal
led the Word and the Life, is declared to have been mani
fested in the flesh, and so manifested that the apostle had
seen him, and heard him, and handled him; but, prior to
this manifestation, he was with the Father— that is, as we
have shown, existed from eternity in the most intimate-'
union with him. In another place the same essential union,
is asserted by bis being " in the bosom of the Father, " and

404 THE HOLY TRINITY.
by his being one with the Father — " I and my Father are
one." So intimately one in nature, attributes, and propriety,
that the Redeemer could say, " All things that the Father
hath aire mine." So intimately one in nature, attributes,
and operation, that he was the express image of his person,
and could say to the inquiring disciple, "He that hath
seen me hath seen the Father, how, then,' sayest thou show
us the Father. Believest thou not that I am in the Father,
and the Father in me? The words that I speak unto you
I speak not" of myself, but the Father that dwelleth in me
he doeth the works. Believe me that I am in the Father,
and the Father in me." These, and all such passages, serve
to unfold more clearly and fully the meaning of the apostie's
language, "when, referring to the eternal existence of the
Divine word, he declares^that he was in the beginning with
God ; and the meaning of our Lord's own words, wheh he
speaks of being loved by the Father before the foundation
of the world, and of enjoying a glory with the Father — with
the Father's own self, before the world was.
'. Such, then, are some of the representations which the
scriptures afford, when they make any reference to the
condition of the Divine existence prior to creation. They
never set forth the Deity as dwelling in that absolute, one
ness which excludes all plurality and distinction of persons,
nor in that absolute solitude which excludes the possibility
of bis attributes being exercised upon some object. But they
represent Jehovah as a plurality of persons from- all eternity,
loving and being loved, as mutually enjoying glory together,
as communing with, and realizing felicity one with another —
the sphere of the eternal activity, and the source of the
Divine happiness, being solely comprehended in the bound
less ocean of the Divine nature. This, then, is the doctrine
» The phrase irpbg rbv Bebv expresses the sense of the dative —
irapa atavr<£, with thyself; and irapa aoi, with tliee — John xvii., 5.
Thus it is rendered by Ignatius, irapa irarpi. Compare also irpbg
rtpag, Mark vi., 3., with Prov. viii., 30., where, in the SeptuaginJ, wis
dom is said to have been irapa. rfi 6ew; and Sapientia ix., 9., where the
same sense is given to fiera aov if <ro*pia.

THE HOLY TRINITY. 405
of the sacred records respecting God, whenever they carry
our thoughts to the mode of God's existence, during those
immeasurable ages of eternity which preceded the first fiat
of creative energy ; and, here we find the premises of our
argument sanctioned by Divine authority — we see the dictates
of reason corroborated by the teachings of revelation.
VL We may notice another passage which directly con
firms our reasoning on the absolute independence and all-
sufficiency of God, and. on the Divine nature itself being
the only adequate sphere of his own activity, and the source
of his happiness. The passage we refer is the following,
" Who is hke unto Jehovah, our Elohim who dwelleth on
high, who humbleth himself to behold the things, that are
in heaven and in earth ?" Now, the things that are in hea
ven and in earth are all things that exist besides himself; all
created beings, whether material or immaterial ; whether
rational or irrational ; whether human or angelic, the highest
as well as the lowest. It is here said to be a condescension
on the part of God to behold them, to notice them ; and if
a condescension to behold them, he is absolutely independent
of them — independent of their very existence — absolutely
-independent of them for his happiness, his perfection, his
glory, and the exercise of his attributes. If he is thus inde
pendent of them now, he always was, for he is unchangeable.
And, if absolutely and eternally independent of them, there
.was no need for his creating them ; such must be his nature
and the mode of his existence, that it has, within itself alone,
a source of blessedness, and a sphere of activity, adequate
to its infinite faculties, energies, and capacities. Such a
nature, we have shown, implies a plurality — object as well
as agent within itself, and both agent and object must be
persons — infinite, eternal, coequal persons. Thus, the ra
tional interpretation of this passage involves both the pre
mises and the conclusion of our argument. — Season and
scripture lead to the same result.
, Yet, though absolutely independent and eternally blessed
as the Deity is in himself, essentiallyunited and completely
happy as the Divine persons are in themselves, they do not

406 THE HOLY TRINITY.
exclude the creatures from their regard. Though a regard
to created existence is a condescension, they do condescend'
to behold the things that are in heaven and in earth. It
was their blessed will to create them^ it is their blessed will
to regard them, to supply their need, to promote their wel
fare and happiness. The essential glory and infinite bles
sedness of the Divine persons are with themselves, as much so
since creation, as in those immeasurable ages which preceded
creation; but they love the work pf. their own hand, and
delight to do them good, though they need them not. Thus
their regard to the creature springs from pure, disinterested
benevolence. Their all-sufficiency resides in their own infi
nite nature. The adequate sphere for the operation of their
own essentially active energies, and the source of their abso
lute blessedness, reside in themselves ; thus it was prior to all
created being — thus it has been during the existence of'-
created being — thus it is now, and ever shall be through the .
infinite ages of eternity to come.
DIRECT TESTIMONY OF THE SACRED SCRIPTUEE, AS TO THE
DOCTRINE OF THE HOLY TRINITY.
As this volume may fall into the hands of some readers
who are not in possession of the Author's first volume of
Theology, wherein the scripture doctrine of the Trinity is
copiously unfolded, it may be proper to close this chapter-
with a brief and concentrated view of the direct evidence
which the sacred scriptures so richly furnish, in reference
to that important doctrine, which, has been established by;
a process of rational argumentation.
First. — The names of God are directly applied to Father,
Son, and Holy Ghost. This is never questioned respecting
the Father. The. Son is designated God— the true God^*s'
the blessed God— the great God — the mighty God — God
over all — the Lord God — Jehovah.— Jehovah of Hosts. See
John, i., 1. 1 JohD, v., 19, 20. Bom., ix., 5. Titus, ii.,.
13. Isaiah, ix., 6. Luke, i., 16—17. Eph., iv., 8, 9, 10,
compared with Psalm lxviii., 18. Isaiah, vi., 1 — 3. The:
Holy Ghost is designated God — Lord — Jehovah — Jehovah

THE HOLY TRINITY. 407
God — the God of Israel — Jehovah God of Hosts. Acts, v.,
8—9. 2 Cor., iii., 18. Acts, i., 16 — 20, compare with
Psalms xlix. and cix. Luke, i., 67. Judges, xv., 14.
Isaiah, vi., compared with Acts, xxviii., 25, 26, 27. From
a view of these and a multitude of other passages, it is evi
dent, that the peculiar and proper names of Deity are
apphed to the Divine three— the Father, Son, and Holy
Ghost. Secondly. — The attributes and perfections of God are those
of a Trinity of Persons.
1. Each glorious person is declared to be eternal. Of the
Father it is said, " From everlasting to everlasting thou art
God." Of the Divine Word it is said, " He is the Alpha and
the Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last; "
that "he was in the beginning with God; " and that !'his
goings forth have been from the days of eternity.'' And of the
Holy Ghost it is said, that " Ghrist, through the Eternal
Spirit, offered himself without spot a sacrifice to God. " —
Psalm xc, 2 ; Eev. i., 8 ; Heb. ix., 14, &c.
2. The power of God is the power of the blessed Trinity.
Speaking of the Father's agency, the Apostle says that he
was " appointed a minister of the Gospel by the grace of
God given unto him by the effectual working of God 's power."
Speaking of the Son, he saith, " Most gladly will I glory in
mine infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon
me." And, speaking of the Holy Ghost, he saith that
" signs and wonders were wrought by the power of the Spirit
of God." Eph. iii,, 7 ; 2 Cor. xii., 9 ; Bom. xv., 19.
3. The omnipresence of God is the omnipresence of the glorious
ThreemOne. "Do not I fill heaven andearth, saith Jehovah."
Of the Son it is said, that " he filleth all in all. " To Moses
God said, '* In all places where I record my name I will come
unto thee, and I will bless thee. " Christ said, asserting the
same Divine attribute, "For where two or three are gathered
together in^ny name, there am I in the midst of them." Of
the Holy Ghost the Psalmist said, " Whither shall I go from
thy Spirit! or, whither shall I flee from thy presence?" And,
agajn, the Holy Spirit, to denote his omnipresence, is said to

408 THE HOLY TRINITY.
dwell in the hearts of God's people. Thus it is evident the
omnipresence of the Deity is the omnipresence of the Trinity
in Unity. Jer. xxiii., 24; Eph. i., 23.; Exod. xx., 24;
Matt, xviii., 20 ; Psal. cxxxix., 7.
• 4. The holiness of God is the holiness of the glorious
• Trinity. " Who would not fear thee, 0 Jehovah, and
glorify thy name, for thou only art holy? " ' Of Christ'it is
said, that he is " the Holy One." " But ye denied the Holy
One, and desired a murderer to be released unto you."
The Spirit is emphatically called " the Holy Ghost." " Ye
have an unction from the Holy One." And of the whole
Trinity the cherubim and seraphim exclaim, "Holy, holy,
holy, is Jehovah of Hosts." Bev. xv., 4 ; Acts iii., 14 ;
1 John, ii., 20- ; Isaiah vi., 3.
5. Truth, as an attribute or perfection of God, is the attri
bute of the blessed Three in One. Of the Father it is said, by
Christ, " He that sent me is True. " Of the Divine Word itis
declared, ' ' These things saith he that is Holy, he that is True,
he that hath the key of David." " This is the True Gdd and
Eternal Life. " Of the Holy Ghost it is said, " It is the Spirit
that.beareth witness, because the Spirit is Truth." Thus,
the Truth of God is the truth of the Trinity in Unity.
John vii., 28 ; Bev. iii., 7 ; 1 John, v., 20 ; 1 John, v., 6.
6.' The Omniscience of God is the Omniscience of the
Triune Jehovah. Of the Father it is said, that " he search
eth the heart." Christ also declares, "All the churches
shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and the
hearts." Of the Holy Ghost it is said, that " the Spirit
searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. For,
What man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit'of
man, which is in him ? even so the things of God knoweth
no man, but the Spirit of God." Jer. xvii.; 10; Eev. ii.,
23; 1 Cor. ii., 10, 11. Here is an appeal to our own con
sciousness. As a man knows his own thoughts, affections,
and emotions, and as no one else can know them but him
self ; so the Holy Ghost,- penetrating the profound depths of
the Godhead, understands and comprehends all the thoughts
and purposes, and is conversant -with all the' dispositions

THE HOLY TRINITY. 409
and affections, in the mind of the Deity throughout the
ages of eternity.
7. The benevolenoe of God is the benevolence of the
ever blessed Three m One. The prophet Nahum says " The
Lord is good," " He is a stronghold in the day of trou
ble." And it is said, " God so loved the world, " &c. Of
the Son, also, it is said, that " Christ loved the church, and
gave himself for it, that he might sanctify and cleanse it
with the washing of water by the word," and so on. And
of the Holy Ghost it is said, by the Psalmist, " Thy Spirit
is Good (benevolent) : lead me in the land of uprightness."
And Nehemiah, enumerating God's great benefits to the
ancient Israelites, says, " Thou gavest them thy Good
Spirit, or, thy benevolent Spirit. " Now, here we have it
proved that the goodness of God is the goodness of the
Trinity in Unity. Nahum i., 7 ; Psalm cxliii., 10 ; Eph.
' v., 25 ; Neh. ix., 20.
8. The disposition for communion is ascribed to the Ever
Blessed Three. It is exercised towards the saints by the
Father, and the Son ; " For truly our fellowship is with the
Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ." Also with the
Holy Ghost ; " The communion of the Holy Ghost be with
you all, Amen." It was also reciprocally exercised by the
Divine persons before man was created ; and " God said,
let us make man in our image — after our likeness. 1 John,
i., 3 ; 2 Cor., xiii., 14 ; Gen. i., 26.
Thus, then, the attributes of eternity, of omnipotence,
of omniscience, .of omnipresence, with the moral perfec
tions of truth, of love, of hohness, and the disposition! for
communion in their infinite perfection are the attributes of
a Trinity in Unity. All the perfections which belong to
the Father belong also to the Son and to the Holy Spirit ;
which proves as clearly as language and facts can prove,, that
in the Godhead there are Three Persons ; and that; in
essence and perfections, these Three are One.
Thirdly. — We observe that the works of God are also the
operations of the Trinity in Unity.
1. Creation. The creation of the world is ascribed to
3

410 THE HOLY TRINITY.
the eternal and almighty Three in One. Of God it is said,
" that the heavens and the earth are the work of his
hand." Of Christ it is said, that " by him all things were
made, visible or invisible," And of the Holy Ghost it is
said, "The Spirit of God moved upon the face of the
waters "—-arranging and distributing the conflicting elements,
impregnating them with their first principles, and disposing
them into that order and harmony which resulted in the
beauty and glory of the universe. And, again, it is said in
Job, "by his Spirit he hath garnished the heavens." John
i., 3; Gen. i., 2; Job xxvi., 13. Thus, creation is ascribed
to each ; and yet these Three are One ; for in the first verse
of the Bible it is said, " In the beginning God created the
heaven and the earth." And the noun, though plural, is
constructed with a singular verb and pronoun.
2. The creation of man, the most noble and important
work of God on earth, is ascribed to the Divine Three.
Of the Father, it is said, that " Jehovah God formed man
out of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils
the breath of life." Of Christ it is said, that " by him all
things were made, whether visible or invisible ;" which of
course comprehends man. And of the Holy Ghost it is
said, by Job, " The Spirit of God hath made me, and the
breath of the Almighty hath given me hfe." Gen. ii., 7 ;
John i., 3 ; Job xxxiii., 4.
Viewing man thus, as the work of the Trinity — of Father,
Son, and Holy Ghost, we clearly see the reason and force of
the language, " And God said, let US make man in OUB
image, and in OUB likeness," &c. Gen. i., 26. And in
this view we see why man is called upon to remember his
Creators. Eccles. xii., 1, — " Eemember now thy tni-o, thy
Creators, in the days of thy youth." In the language of
Scripture there is always a propriety and force which is seen
by diligent and careful examination. See the force, .the
beauty, and the propriety, of Scripture language in these
instances. 3. The preservation of all things is the work of the Triune
•God, Providence is everywhere ascribed to the Father.

THE HOLY TRINITY. 411
So it is to the Son; for "he upholdeth all things by the
word of his own power," and " by him all things consist."
So the same work is ascribed to the Holy Spirit; for, says
the Psalmist, " Thou sendest forth thy Spirit, and they are
created, and thou renewest the face of the earth." Heb. i., 2 ;
Col. i., 16; Ps. civ., 30.
4. The Trinity in Unity raised the body of Christ from
the dead. Of the Father it is said, " God hath both
raised up the Lord, and will raise up us by his own power."
The same is asserted by Christ. "Destroy this temple,
and in three days I will raise it up." " I have power to
lay down my life, and I have power to take it up again."
And the same great work is ascribed to the Spirit. " Christ
was put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit."
1 Cor., vi., 14 ; John ii., 19; x., 18 ; 1 Peter iii., 18.
5. The raising of all mankind is the work of the Ever
Blessed Three. Of the Father it is said, "that he
raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth whom he will." Christ
declareth, "Even so the Son quickeneth whom he will;
and " all that are in their graves shallhear his voice, and
come forth." The same work is ascribed to the Holy Ghost.
" For it is the Spirit that quickeneth." " For if the Spirit
of him that raised up Christ from the dead dwell in you,
He that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken
your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you." John
v., 21, 28. Bom. viii., 11.
6. The inspiration of prophets and apostles is ascribed
to the glorious Three in One. "All Scripture is given by
inspiration of God." To Christ the same act is ascribed.
For " the prophets searched what or what manner of time
the Spirit of Christ, which was in them, did signify, when it
testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory
that should follow.'' The same inspiration is directly as
cribed to the Holy Ghost. " For the prophecy came not in
old time by the will of man ; but holy men of God spake as
they were moved by the Holy Ghost." 2 Tim., iii, 16;
1 Pet., i., 10, 11 ; 2 Pet., i., 21.
7. In like manner to give commission and authority to

412 THE HOLY TRINITY,
ministers of' the gospel is .ascribed to the Triune Dieity.
In reference to the Father, says Paul, "Our sufficiency is
of God; who hath made us able ministers of the New Tes
tament." The same act is ascribed to the Son ; for, says
Paul, of Jesus Christ, " he counted me faithful, putting me
into the ministry." To the Spirit the same commission^
and authority are ascribed. " Take heed, therefore, to the
flock of God over which the Holy Ghost hath made you
overseers." 2 Cor., iii., 5, 6 ; 1 Tim., i., 12 ; Acts xx., 28.
8. To dwell in the hearts of -God's people is ascribed tq-
the omnipresent Trinity,. " I will walk in you, and dwell
in you, and be a Father unto you, ,saith the Lord God." The
same is affirmed of the Son. " For, know ye not that Christ
is in you, except ye be reprobates?" And "Christ in you
the hope of glory" is the common privilege of God's people.
The same is affirmed of the Spirit. "For know ye -not that
your bodies are the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in
you? " Thus the Triune God dwells in the heirs of glory ;
sealing their adoption, witnessing their acceptance, and
preparing them for heaven. 2 Cor., vi., 16; xiii., 5 ; Col. i.,
27; 1 Cor., vi., 19.
9. The work of sanctification is ascribed to the holy
Trinity. " Jude, the servant of- Jesus Christ, to them
that are sanctified by God the Father." Of Christ it is
said, " He that sanctifieth-and they that are sanctified are
all of one ; for which cause he is not ashamed to call them
brethren." Again, " Ye are washed and sanctified in the
name of the Lord Jesus, and -by the Spirit of our God."
Jude i. ; Heb. ii., 11.; Cor. vi., 11.
Such are the united acts of the three persons in the God
head — the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost — to create the
universe i to form mankind ; to preserve all things ; to raise
the dead body of Christ, and all mankind at the last day :
a work equal to creation itself — to inspire prophets to fore
tell things to come ; to commission and authorise apostles
and ministers ; to dwell in the hearts of God's people ; to
hold fellowship with the saints ; and to sanctify us through
out body, soul, and spirit ; — such,, and a hundred other acts,

THE HOLY TRINITY. * 418
had we space to go through them — all actions peculiar to God
— actions which none but God oould perform, are ascribed
to each person in the ever-BLESSED AND GLOBIOUS
TEJNITY— FATHEE, SON, AND HOLY GHOST.
In the Fourth Place, the Divme worship ascribed to God is
ascribed to the Trinity in Unity.
We might adduce a multitude of passages to prove that the
Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, are to be worshipped, but this
has been amply done in our first volume, therefore we shall
now adduce merely those passages of scripture in which
the three persons are conjointly worshipped.
This worship of the Triune God is rendered by the Hosts
of heaven. We refer, in the first place, to the 6th of Isaiah.
Here the seraphim, veiling their faces with their wings,
worship and adore Jehovah of Hosts ; and the Jehovah of
Hosts includes, as the context proves, the Father, the Son,
and the Holy Ghost. The word Jehovah, which occurs
several times in that chapter, though singular in form,
refers to a plurahty of persons; and, by comparing scripture
with scripture, we shall soon find that, in this plurahty, there
is a clear and distinct reference to the Father, Son, and
Holy Ghost. That there was here a representation of the
Father needs ,no proof, as it is no matter of dispute ; all
Unitarians acknowledging that " Jehovah of hosts " is his
appropriate designation. That there was here also the pre
sence ef the Son and the Holy Ghost we can soon render
evident from Divine authority.
That there was here the presence of the Son we learn
from the Apostle John, who, speaking of Christ in chap, xii.,
41st verse, says, " These things said Esaias, when he saw
HIS GLOEY, and spake of him." He saw Christ's glory,
and spake of him. So there was here the. presence of the
Son. That there was here the presence also of the Holy
Ghost, is manifest from Acts xxviii., 25, 27, where the pro
phecy uttered in this vision is said to be spoken by the
Holy Ghost. Now, attend unto the words of Paul, " Well
spake,"— who?— " Well spake the HOLY GHOST by
Esaias the prophet unto our fathers, saying, Go unto this

414 THE HOLY TRINITY.'
people and say, Hearing ye shall hear, and shall not under*
stand ; and seeing ye shall see, and ye shall not perceive."
Thus, then, the Triune God — the Father, Son, and Holy'
Ghost, constitute the Jehovah of hosts exhibited in this
sublime vision of the prophet. Here we see the reason for
using the plural US in the eighth verse. There was a
plurality of persons intended, the scripture informs lis, and
hence the language, " Who will go for US."
The presence of the Trinity being thus established, it
will follow that the sublime adoration, presented by the sera
phim, must be ascribed to each Person with equal reverence and
awe : and hence the three-fold repetition in the language they
employ, " Holy, holy, holy, is the Jehovah of Hosts ;"— •
that is, holy is the Father, holy is the Son; and holy is
the Divine Spirit ; equally Holy, eternally blessed, and alike
to be adored, and praised, and exalted, by all the creatures
he has made !
It is in harmony with this, that, in a similar vision which
St. John had of the heavenly world, ho had a similar dis
play of the Divine glory, and beheld the same description
of exalted spirits before the eternal throne, and heard exactly
the same language of three-fold adoration employed, " Holy,
holy, holy, Lord God Almighty." — Bev. iv., 8. The Father,
Son, and Holy Ghost, had been previously mentioned in this
very passage ; and, therefore, there can be no doubt but that
this triple ascription of praise, like that in Isaiah's vision,
was rendered to the Triune God. There i§ no possibility'
of evading this argument, but by proving that there was
not the presence of the Son, and the Spirit, as well as the
Father. Such is the worship of heaven.
Worship is likewise equally rendered by the church to
the Triune God. We have an indication of this under"
the Old Testament dispensation. Although the Jewish eco-'
nomy was a dark and obscure one compared with the bright
ness of the Christian dispensation, and we are not to
expect the same clear and complete discoveries of God in the
Old Testament as in the New, yet the doctrine of the
Trinity was intimated, as we have before shown, by the plural

THE HOLY TRINITY. 413
namegiven to God — Elohim, constructed with verbs and pro
nouns in the singular : and the spiritually-minded Jews recog
nized the doctrine thus implied. In the three-fold form of
the benediction which the High Priest was authorized to pro
nounce, this doctrine clearly appears to be recognized. Num
bers vi., 24, 25, —
" JEHOVAH bless thee, and keep thee ;
JEHOVAH make his face shine upon thee, and be
gracious unto thee ;
JEHOVAH lift up his countenance upon thee, and
give thee peace."
Here the term Jehovah is thrice repeated ; and, though
we have not the names of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost,
mentioned, we have a blessing recognized as proceeding
from each, corresponding beautifully and harmoniously with
the solemn form of benediction employed by the apostle,
namely, " The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ,
And the love of God,
And the communion of the Holy Spirit,,
Here, then, we have a threefold form of benediction in
the old economy, and a three-fold form in the new economy.
In the original form, we have not the appellation Father,
Son, and Spirit, mentioned ; but, in the new economy, we
have the whole Three mentioned, and spiritual blessings are
sought from each by prayer. Now, here is the reason why
we find that a plural noun is not employed in the New Tes
tament — the plural noun is done away by the brighter ma
nifestation and distinct appellations of Father, Son, and
Holy Spirit.
In the form of baptism, also, we have the worship of the
Triune God. " Go ye and teach all nations, baptizing
them in the name —
OF THE FATHEB,
AND OF THE SON,
AND OF THE HOLY GHOST."
Baptism is a solemn initiatory rite, in which the soul is
brought into immediate recognition of the True God, who

be with you all.
Amen."

416 THE HOLY TRINITY.
alone is the proper object of our worship. This has already
been shown; baptism, indeed, is itself a solemn form of
worship, in which we dedicate ourselves to God. This God
whom we worship, and with whom we covenant to love, serve,
and obey, to whom we consecrate ourselves, and who merci
fully and graciously gives himself to us, is the Father, the
Son, and the Holy Ghost.
Since, then, the word of God declares that there is but
One God ; and since the same word as expressly teaches us
that Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are invested with the
names and attributes of Deity, to whom, equally, all the
works of God are ascribed, to whom all homage is ascribed,
we have a perfect demonstration that the sacred scriptures
teach the important doctrine of the Holy Trinity — Three in
One, and One in Three.
Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy
Ghost ; as it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be,
world without end. Amen.

NOTES ILLUSTBATIVE AND CONFIRMATORY OF THE
SEVERAL ARGUMENTS DERIVED FROM THE
SCIENCE OF GEOLOGY, &c.

The argument derived from Geology, in support of several pro
positions in the first part of this work, is based chiefly upon the
facts recorded by Lyell, Buckland, and Mantell; but, since that
argument was sent to press, the author has met with the work of
Professor Anstead, which brings geological discovery down to the
period of 1844. It is satisfactory to find that the more recent dis
coveries, recorded in Mr. Anstead's work, furnish additional evi
dence io support of our argument for a Divine Creator.
Respecting the regent origin of man, Professor Anstead

" The remains of man have never yet been discovered in a fossil
state, except in a limestone very rapidly forming in the island of
Guadaloupe, and under circumstances which leave no doubt of the
recent origin of the deposit. — Anstead's Geology, vol i., 81.
ATHEISTIC THEORY OF THE EVOLUTION OF A HIGHER FROM A
LOWER SPECIES DISPROVED.
With regard to this, Professor Anstead makes the following
emphatic observations : " It is not true — it is, on the contrary,
distinctly disproved by every day's research in palaeontology, that
there was, in the history of the development of organized life, any
successive or graduated scale adhered to, or any thing like a suc
cessive development of species in the same natural family, the
newer being more highly organized than-sthe older. The cephalo
poda, the most highly organized of all the invertebrata; were the
inhabitants of the most ancient seas with whose existence we are
acquainted. Sauroid fish, those which most nearly approach the
higher or. reptilean type, were among the first created of the finny
tribes. Of the reptilean, laoertine, and crocodilian animals, it was
by no means those of least complicated organization that accom
panied the batrachians during -the close of the palaeozoic and the
commencement of the secondary period; and numberless other
instances might be quoted, having the same tendency. •
" There is no such thing apparent in the works of the great
,A.uthor of nature, as profiting by the experience of past imperfec
tions and errors. There is infinite variety in working out a plan
whieh,, even to our limited capacity, is shown to be of perfect
beauty ; and in this variety there is a constant harmony strikingly
analogous to the operation- .of, the laws whieh govern the material
universe. The palaeontologist must now reject, almost with ridi
cule, the wild theories on this subject which have sometimes been
indulged ih during an earlier condition of his science." Anstead's
Geology, vol. i., 496. 4

418 , NOTES.
Thus it always has been and always must be — The progress of
science augments and brightens the evidences of natural theology.
God's works must demonstrate his existence, and illustrate his
nature, to mankind.
ON THE IMPRESSIONS OF THE FOOTSTEPS OF BIRDS AND AMPHI
BIOUS REPTILES, &C, ON THE NEW RED STONE.
In page 75, we remark, that, in the earlier formations of the New
Red Sandstone, there are impressions of the feet of several animals,
some, apparently, of the tortoise kind, and one of an extraordi- .
nary animal called the Chirotherium. To determine precisely the
genus of the animals, whose footsteps are thus traced, engaged for
some time the attention of geologists, apparently with Uttle hope
of success, but more recently there have been discovered in Red
Sandstone, of the same date, some hones of animals which are sup
posed to he of the same genus as the chirotherium,* — the large
animal whose foot prints are left upon the New Red Sandstone.
Respecting the foot prints of this extraordinary animal, and the '
means by which geologists judge of its characteristics, Professor
Anstead has the following observations : —
" It may appear at first sight, that nothing can be more fleeting,
or less likely to he handed down to future ages, among the fossils '
of a bed of sandstone, than the casts of the impressions of the
footsteps of an animal, who may hy chance have walked over that
bed when it existed in the condition of loose sand, forming a sea
shore. A little consideration, however, will show that this is, in
fact, a very possible occurrence : as, if the wet sand should he. im-
mediately covered up with a thin coating of marl, and another
layer of sand he superimposed, such an impression will be per
manently preserved. In after ages, also, when the soft sands have
become sandstones, and are elevated above their former level, the
stone splits asunder wherever a layer of different material occurs;
and thus it happens that the oasts of the footsteps may be pre
served and exhibited, although all other traces of the former
existence of the animal are lost.
" At any rate, such markings have long been known to exist in
various parts of the New Red Stone, quarried near Liverpool, in
others at Hildhurghausen, in Saxony, and again in other beds of
sandstone, supposed to be of the same date, in Connecticut, in the
United States of America. Those found in Europe consist partly
of the footsteps of small animals, supposed to he tortoises and
turtles, but contain also among them, others, belonging to a much
larger animal, and differing entirely in shape and proportions from
such as would he left by any known quadruped or reptile. The
American specimens have been referred by Dr. Hitchcock to large
birds. " The larger foot marks found impressed on the marly sandstone
in Europe, hear a singular resemblance to the impressions that
would be made by the palm and expanded fingers and thumb of
* The Hand Beast.

NOTES. 419
the human hand, and, for that reason, the name Chirotherium Iviip,
a hand, Oqpiov, a beast,) was proposed to designate the unknown
animal by which they had been produced. The dimensions are
various; but in all cases the prints of what appear to have been
the hind feet are considerably larger than those of the fore feet; so
much so, indeed, that in one well preserved slab containing
several impressions, the former measure eight inches by five, and
the latter not more than four inches by three. In this specimen,
the print of the fore foot is not more than an inch and a half in
advance of that, of the hinder one, although the distance between
two successive positions of the same foot, or the length of a pace
of the animal, is fourteen inches. It, therefore, appears, that the
animal must have had its posterior extremities, both much larger
and much longer than the anterior; but the peculiarity is pos
sessed in common with many existing species, such as the frog,
Ihe kangaroo, &c. ; and beyond this and certain appearances in
the sandstone, as if a tail had been dragged behind the flTiima.1, in
some sets of foot prints, but not in others, there is nothing to sug
gest to the comparative anatomist any idea of even the class of
vertebrata to which the animal should be referred.
" Within the last few years, however, certain fragments have
been found in some of the quarries of New Red Sandstone, of the
same age as those in which the foot prints occur, and several
teeth, the careful examination of which, by Professor Owen, has
given great interest to these singular fossils, and may almost be
said to have explained the nature of the animal of which such
indications have been preserved.
"Before Professor Owen had the opportunity of examining
these remains, several teeth found in the Keuper of Wurtemberg,
had been referred to new genera of sauiians, under the names
Mastodonsaurus and Phytotaurus; but on placing thin slices of
similar teeth under a powerful microscope, they were found to
possess a remarkably complicated structure, approximating the
animal rather to the fishes, than the saurian reptiles. Shortly
after this, several fragments of bones from the same locality were
found, and came under the observation of Professor Owen, who
was thus enabled to arrive at more satisfactory conclusions, and to
describe the structure of several species (amounting in the whole
to five), all of which he referred to the same genus, including in it
also the supposed sauiians of Wurtemberg. This genus he named
Labyrinthodon, in consequence of the labyrinthine appearance ob
servable in the minute structure of the teeth. I will endeavour to
give, in a few words, the results of the investigations upon which
the genus was founded, and the different species determined.
"In the first place it appears, that the animal must have he-
longed to the batrachian order of reptiles, and that the different
species varied considerably in size, the smallest, hitherto deter
mined, much exceeding the dimensions of the largest living species
of the same order, but the larger ones actually measuring several
feet in length.
" The cranium of the Labyrinthodon was broad, depressed, and

420 srawsft
flattened, like thai of the alligator, the- outer, surface being, also-
strongly sculptured; the' condition of the nasal cavijy. indicates, a
resemblance to the saurians, in; the mode of respipatfoni and,
although the modifications of the jaws prove, thiaextinct genus, to
have been essentially batrachiap, it must, in. many points, es-r
pecially in the proportions of the head,, have approximated to the
higher saurians; while in others, such as the biconcave structure
Of -'the vertebrae,' and the mode in which the teeth were reproduced,
and. subsequently became fixed to, the bone, it presents affinities
scarcely less remarkable to fishes. The arrangement of the .teeth
is illustrative of the batrachian character, one row of small teeth
extending transversely across the anterior, extremity of the vome
rine hones, and another longitudinal row being continuedbackwards
along the exterior margin of the palatal hone.
"The extremities offer analogies partly with the Batrachiams,
and partly with the crocodilean ' tribe, the principal resemblance
to the latter being seen in some hones of the pelvis.
"With regard to the proportions and dimensions of this singular
genus, there has been found one fragment of a lower; jaw, between
nine and ten inches in length, and corresponding to the,, same
part in a crooodue. six or seven feet long ;( but fragments of, bones
of hinder extremities, found in the same quarry, and referrjblg, to
the same species, are as large as those of a crocodile four, times
that length.' Now, if, as is 'probable', these belonged to the same
individual, the hinder extremities must have been of a magnitude.;
utterly disproportionate, when compared with those of existing
saurians; but1 of very fair proportions, when considered, with
reference to some of the living tail-less batrachians.*.
' "Tt appears, then, that there are. found in, the New Red Sand
stone certain foot prints indicating an animal remarkable for the
disproportionate magnitude of its . posterior extremities, and» also
for the singular shape of the foot. In the beds of the ,same forma
tion are found also the teeth and hones of a batrachian reptile, of
dimensions and proportions sufficient to produce the foot prints,
and of which the structure of the teeth, and, of the bones Qf-thej
extremities, is remarkable and anomalous. Perhaps.it is, hardly
too much to assume, that the animal is discovered, whose footsteps
have excited so much curiosity, and that the Chirotherium is the
same as the Libyrinthodon." From the above representation it
appears obvious that this creature was an aquatic or amphibious,
and not a properly, terrene, animal."
In reference to the foot prints of birds, some of which are, of gigan
tic size, discovered in New Red Sandstone of the same era, Brpfes-,
sor Anstead observes that no bones of birds belonging to this era
have yet been discovered, but he states that Mr. Lyell has examined
the locality in whieh the impressions are found, and. he concurs
entirely in 'the views of Professor Hitchcock, as before expressed,
respecting the fact that the impressions were undoubtedly made by
birds of that early period. He remarks, that " The sandstones, being
separated by several thin laminae of green shale are very favourably
Professor Owen's Eeport, ante cit., p. 188:

NOTES.

431

oircumstanoedfor the perfect preservation of the impressions; and
the footprints here, asjfn other oases, are aeeompamedVmanv other
appearances, such as the ripple marks commonly seen on a^andy
shore, at low water; casts of rooks in the sandy clay; and not un-
frequently, pecuhar rounded, marks, which have been supposed by,
JJr. tiuokland, to have been produoed by the dropping of beavv.
ram, on the soft mails by the sea side. J'
• "It may be worth while to mention, with reference to the large
proportion of the foot marks of birds foundin America, that the
remains of Struthious birds (birds allied to the ostrich) have been
found m a semi-fossil state in New Zealand* the feet of whieh are
sufficiently large to have produced sueh marks.- The- animal to
which. these remains belonged is calculated by Professor Owen to
have attained the height of at least ten feet."— Anstead's Geoloau.
vol. i., 306—312. y!f'
Thus, recent discoveries furnish increasing evidence of thesfact
laid down in our argument in page 75. The existenoe of birds in
the earlier formations of the New Red, Sandstone, at a period as
early as the first appearance of amphibious reptiles, is- a- direct con
tradiction to the hypothesis of. a gradual development or evolution
of the species. ON SPONTANEOUS GENERATION.
. Animalcula. In,pages 80— 86; we have considered the develop
ment hypothesis as to the production of animalcules, and fur
nished, as we think, satisfactory evidence, that these diminutive
beings are propagated by living predecessors as necessarily as the
animals of largest species and the most complicated organization.
That they are not spontaneously produced by animal and vegetable
matter, the. following interesting experiment may be regarded as fur
nishing an additional proof. A careful.observer of nature states,
" Tnlled a glass flask half full of distilled water, in which Imixed
various animal and vegetable substance; Ithen closed it with a good
cork, through which I passed two glass tubes, but at right angles,
the whole being air tight. It was next placed in a sand bath, and
heated until the water boiled violently, and thus all parts had
reached a temperature of 212° Fahrenheit.. While the watery va
pour was escaping by the glass tubes, I; fastened at each end an
apparatus which chemists employ for collecting carbonic acid;
that to the left was filled- with concentrated sulphuric acid, and the
other.with a solution of potash. By means of. the boiling heat,
every thing living and all genus in the, flask, or in the tubes were
destroyed, and all access was cut off by, the sulphuric acid on the
one side, and by the potash on the other. I placed this, easily
moved ^apparatus before my window, where it was exposed to the
action of light, and also,, as I performed my experiments in the
summer, to that of heat. At the same time, I. placed near it an
open vessel, with the same substances that, had been introduced
into the flask, and, also after having subjected them to a boiling
temperature. In order now to renew constantly, the air. withinthe
flask, I sucked with my mouth, several times a day, the open end

422 NOTES.
of the apparatus filled with the solution of potash, by which pro
cess the air entered my mouth from the flask through the caustic
liquid, and the atmospheric air, from without, entered the flask
through the sulphuric acid. The air was, of course, not altered in
its composition by passing through the sulphuric acid into the
flask, hut if sufficient time was allowed for the passage, all the por
tions of living matter, or of matter capable of becoming animated,
were taken up by the sulphuric acid and destroyed. From the
28th of May until the early part of August, I continued uninter
ruptedly the renewal of the air into the flask without being able,,
by the aid of the microscope, to perceive any living animal or ve
getable substance, although during the whole of the time I made
my observations, almost daily, on the edge of the liquid ; and,
when, at last, I separated the different parts of the apparatus, I
could not find in the whole liquid the slightest trace of infusoria^pi
conferva, or of mould; but all the three presented themselves in
great abundance a few days after I had left the flask standing open.
The vessel which I placed near the apparatus contained, on the
following day, vibriones and monads, to which were soon added
larger polygastric infusoria, and afterwards rotatoria." Curiosities-
of animal life, 137.
From the above experiment it would appear, that the ova or
genus of these diminutive creatures float unpercieved in the atmos
phere, and become developed when situated in a matrix which
favours their development: ON CEIiULAB DEVELOPMENT.
The organic structure of both plants and animals is composed
of cells as the elementary basis, and, because the most complicated
structures, when traced to their ultimate points of organism, are
found to consist of simple cells, the author of the Vestiges of Crea
tion has the sagacity to conclude, that man is only the latest and
most perfect development of the monad — the simplest form of
cellular organization. He says, " The idea which I form of the
progress of organic life upon our earth — and the hypothesis is ap
plicable to all similar theatres of vital being — is, that the simplest
and most primitive type, under a law to which that of like pro
ductions is subordinate, gave birth to the type next above it; that
this organ produced the next higher, and so on to the very
highest, the stages of advance being in all cases very small, namely,
from one species only to another ; so that the phenomenon has
always been of a simple and modest character."
This pretended advancement by a very slow progress, we have
shown, is contradicted by the most obvious facts in Geology, which
prove that species of the highest organization were sometimes
contemporaneous with, and sometimes anterior to, other species ,
of the same class : and as to the theory of cellular development
itself, Dr. Mantell furnishes the following decisive and triumphant
reply: " Although it is now a received physiological axiom, that
cells are the elementary basis, the ultimate limit, of all animal and
vegetable structures, and that the varied functions, in which

NOTES. 423
organic life essentially consists, aro performed by the agency of
cells, which are not distinguishable from each other by any well-
marked characters; there is not any ground for assuming any
identity between the primary oells, even of the simplest species of
animals or vegetables, much less between those of more compli
cated organisation. The single cell which embodies vitality in
the monad, or the yeast fungus, is governed by the same immuta
ble organic laws which preside over the complicated machinery of
man and the other vertebrata; and the single cell which is the
embryotic condition of the mammal, has no more relation to the
single cell, which is the permanent condition of the monad, than
has the perfect animal, into which the mammalian cell becomes
ultimately developed. The cell that forms the germ of each
species of organism is endowed with special properties, which can
result in nothing but the fabrication of that particular species.
The serious error, which pervades the theory advanced in the work
entitled " The Vestiges of Creation," has arisen from its author
having, in many instances, assumed analogy to be a proof of
identity. There is an analogy between the human embryo and
the monad of the volvox, in that each consists of simple cells; hut
there is no more identity between thy human and the polygastrian
cells than between the perfect man and the mature animalcule."

THE VIEWS OF SEVERAL AUTHORS ON THE TRINITY.

The general reader will be aware that, in several eminent writers,
some incidental thoughts and observations may be found which
substantially correspond with some of the principles laid down in
our general argument. Howe, in his Calm Discourse on the
Trinity, observes: —
" We do know of the actual union of two things of very different
natures, so as to be one thing ; and have no reason to think the
union of two or more things, of the same sort of nature, with suf
ficient remaining distinction, less possible or less intelligible.
" Upon the whole, let such a union be conceived in the being
of God with such distinction, and one would think the absolute
perfection of the Deity, and especially the perfect felicity thereof,
should he much the more apprehensible with us. When we con
sider the most delicious society which would hence ensue among
the so entirely consentient Father, Son, and Spirit, with whom
there is so perfect rectitude, everlasting harmony, mutual com
placency, unto highest delectation; according to our way of con
ceiving things, who are taught by our own nature (which,, also,
hath in it the Divine image) to reckon no enjoyment pleasant,
without the consociation of some other with us therein, we, for our
parts, cannot but hereby have in our minds a more gustful idea of
a blessed state, than we can conceive in mere eternal solitude.

424 ! notes.
" God speaks toms, as men, and will not blame us for conceiving
things so infinitely above us according to the capacity of our na
tures, provided we do not assume to ourselves to be a measure
for our conceptions of him, further than as he is himself pleased
to warrant and direct us herein  .When looking into our
selves, we find there is in us a disposition, often upon no necessity,
but sometimes from a sort -of benignity of temper, unto conversa
tion with others ; we have no reason when other things concur,
and do fairly induce, and lead our thoughts this way, to appre
hend any incongruity in supposing God may have some distinct
object of the same sort of propension in his own most perfect
being too, and therewith such a propension itself also.
" We are not, I say, strictly to measure God by ourselves in
this, further than as he himself prompts and leads us; but if we §0
form our conception of Divine bliss, as not to exclude fror%it
somewhat whereof that delight in society which we find in our
selves may be an imperfect faint resemblance, it seems not al$o>-
gether disagreeable to what the scriptures also teach us to con
ceive concerning him, when they bring in the ' eternal wisdom,
saying, as one distinct from the prime author, arid parent of alt
things, ' Then was I by him, as one brought up with him, and
daily his delight.' " — Prov. viii., 30. Howe's Works, vol. iv., 33U.
Dr. Watts expresses the same view, apparently having formed
it from Howe.
" Our admiration may be raised yet higher if we make one ex
cursion beyond all created nature, and lift our thoughts upwards to
'the, blessedness of the Glorious Trinity. AU 'their, infinite; and
unknown pleasures are derived from their ineffable union and
communion with one Go.db.ead, their inconceiyeable nearness to
each other in the very centre and spring of all felicity.. They are
inseparably and intimately one God ; they are eternally One God,
and therefore eternally blessed; 1 John, v., 7., which text I believe
to be authentic and Divine, and that upon just reasons, notwith
standing the cavils and criticisms that have endeavoured to blot
it out of the Bible. Nor is their blessedness nor their nearness a
dull inactive state: knowledge and mutual love1 make up" their
heaVenso far as mortals dare conceive of it, and so far as we have
leave to speak of God after the manner of inen;
" Knowledge— an eternal blissful contemplation of all the infinite
beauties, powers, and properties of the Godhead, and 'of all tfie
operation of these powers in an inconceivable variety among crea
tures — this is the glorious employment of God. His own know
ledge of infinite truths, whether wrapt Up in his own nature; dr
unfolded and displayed in his' works, is a pleasure becoming the
Deity, and each sacred person possesses this unknown pleasure.
" And, besides the general glories of the Divine nature, we may
suppose that a full and comprehensive knowledge df the sameness,
the difference, the special properties, and the mutual felati&nS,, of
the three Divine persons, which are utterly mcampVenenSIble' to
mortals, and perhaps far above the reach of all created minds, in the
incommunicable entertainment of the Holy Trinity, and makes

NOTES. 426
a part of their blessedness.'' In reference to this mystery, God
may be said to dwell in thick darkness, — 1 Kings, viii., 12., or,
which is all one, in light inaccessible. 1 Tim., vf, 16. We are
lost in this glorious, this Divine abyss, and overcome with daz
zling confusion. But the ever-blessed Three behold these unities
and distinctions in the clearest light. As the Father knoweth me
so know I the Father, saith Jesus, the eternal Son. John, x., 16.
And, as the spirit of a man knoweth the things of a man, so, the
things of God are known to his Spirit, for he searcheth the depths
of God. 1 Cor., ii., 10, 11: as it is expressed in the original,
ra fiaQn tov Ocov.
" May we not suppose the blessedness of the sacred Three to con
sist also in mutual love? May I call it a perpetual delightful
tendency, and active propensity, toward each other. An eternal
approach to each other with infinite complacency — with arms of
inimitable love, and with sensations of unmeasured joy? Thus
saith the Son of God under the character of Divine wisdom.
Prov., viii., 23, 30. I was set up from everlasting, from the
beginning, or ever the earth was. Then was I by him as one
brought up with him, and I was his daily delight, rejoicing always
before him. As the Father loveth the Son, so the Son loveth
the Father.
" As the Father delights infinitely in his perfect image, so may
we not venture to say the Son takes infinite delight in the glorious
archetype, and thus imitates the Father? Will not the expres
sions of the apostle Paul, Heb. i., 3, arid the words of Christ him
self, John v., 19, 20, encourage and support this manner of
speaking? He is the brightness of the Father's glory, and the
express image of his person. The Father loveth the Son, and
showeth him all things that himself doeth, and what things soever
he seeth the Father to do, these also doeth the Son likewise.
And this seems to be the foundation of those glorious offices of
raising the dead and judging the world, which, in the following
verses, are committed to the Son, that all men may honour the
Son as they honour the Father.
"As the blessed Three have an unknown communication in the
Godhead, or Divine nature, so they must have an unspeakable
nearness to each other's person, an inconceivable in-being and
in-dwelling in each other. John xiv., 10. Each is near to the two
other Divine subsistences, and this mutual nearness must be at
tended with delight and felicity unknown to all but the blessed
Three who enjoy it. O, glorious and divine communication!
The father for ever near his own image, the Son, and herein
blessed ! The Son never divided from the embraces of the Father,
and, therefore, happy ! The Spirit everlastingly near them both,
and, therefore, he is the ever blessed Spirit. And all these united
in one Godhead, and, therefore, infinitely and for ever blessed !
" The Father is so intimately near the Son and Spirit, that no
finite or creative natures, or unions, can give a just resemblance
" In vain we may run through all the parts and powers of nature
5

426 NOTES.
and art to seek a full resemblance of the mutual propensity and
love of the blessed Three towards each other. Mathematicians
talk, indeed, of the perpetual tendencies and infinite approxima
tions of two or more lines in the same surface, which never can
entirely concur in one line. And if we should say that the three
persons of the Trinity, by mutual in-dwelling and love, approach
each other infinitely in one Divine nature, and yet lose not their
distinct personality, it would be but an obscure account of this
sublime mystery. But this we are sure of, that for three Divine
persons to be so inconceivably near one another in the original
and eternal spring of love, goodness, and pleasure, must produce
infinite delight. In order to illustrate the happiness of the sacred
Three, may we not suppose something of society necessary to ,the
perfection of happiness in all intellectual nature ? To know, and
be known, to love and to be beloved, are, perhaps, such essential
ingredients to complete felicity, that it cannot subsist without
them. And it may be doubted whether such mutual knowledge
and love, as seems requisite to this end, can be found in a nature
absolutely simple in all respects. We, for our parts, cannot but
hereby have in our mind," a more gustful idea of a blessed state
than we can conceive in mere eternal solitude.
" And, if this be true, then the three differences, which we call
personal distinctions in the nature of God, are as absolutely neces
sary as his blessedness, as his being, or any part of his perfections.
" These are glories too Divine and dazzling for the weak eye of
our understanding, too bright for the eye of angels those morning
stars, and they and we must fall down together, alike overwhelmed
and confounded. It is one infinite transport, that runs through
the Father, Son, and Spirit, without beginning and without end,
with boundless variety, yet ever-perfect and ever-present, without
change, and without degree, and all this because they are so near
to one another, and so much one with God. — Watts' s Works, vol. i.,
p. 178, 181.
Professor Kidd, in the year 1815, published "An Essay on the
Doctrine of the Trinity," in which he argues", from the essentially
vital energy of the Divine nature, the necessary emanation of a
second person; and, from their necessary conjoint united act, the
procession of the third person in the Godhead. We had not
seen this work before our own argument was elaborated and
written out. Several of the principles and propositions main
tained by Professor Kidd are in harmony with our own, though
the mode of the argument is different. Indeed, from what is
stated above, it will be seen, that Mr. Kidd applies his argument
further than we have felt justified in carrying it as a rational
demonstration — He endeavours to prove not only that a plurality
of persons in the Godhead is sustained by the verdict of reason,
but that the peculiar relations of the persons must necessarily
result from the essentially vital energy of the.Deity. We honour the
author's motives, but, before we can either admit or reject his rea
soning, in toto, we must give his volume a more careful and search
ing in vestigation than we have yet had the opportunity of doing.

NOTES. 427
Our present view is this— that the existence of a plurality of persons
in the Godhead is demonstrable; but, that the peculiar relations of
the Son, as a filial emanation from the Father, and of the Holy
Ghost, as a procession from both, though not incongruous to rea
son, yet, is not capable of demonstration by rational argument.
The objections which have been alleged against this doctrine, on
the ground of its being incompatible with the eternity of the Son
and Spirit, are puerile objections. They are totally without founda
tion, and the dogmatical and positive manner in which th ey have been
put forth by some is to be deeply deplored. Such objectors often con
fute their own principles. The eternity of the Divine attributes is
maintained by them, although these attributes have the Divine
essence as their source. The eternity of the exercise of at least
some of the Divine attributes is held by them, although that exer
cise is voluntary. Even the eternity of the Divine purposes is
admitted by them, although those purposes are voluntary. Now,
the filial relation of the Son, and the procession of the Holy
Ghost, are never represented as the result of any voluntary act,
but absolutely necessary, as the essential mode of the Divine na
ture. There is, therefore, great feebleness, gross inconsistency,
and palpable contradiction, in this reasoning. To admit a volun
tary act to be eternal, and to deny that a necessary condition of the
Divine nature can be eternal, is absurd. The relation of the Son
and Spirit to the Father is perfectly compatible with their eternity
and absolute perfection. If essential, they must necessarily be
eternal. Storr and Flatt have published a rational argument for the
Trinity, but this work we have not seen.
Dr. Harris, in his profound work on the Pre-Adamite Earth,
sufficiently intimates his views on this interesting subject in the
following passage : —
"If the operation of infinite activity, either of love, or power, or
of any other excellence, be essential to infinite perfection, and if
such activity could not be agent and object at the same time and
in the same act, and yet no object, ad extra, existed from eternity,
then it must have existed in the Divine nature itself; in other
words, the Divine nature must include it as one of its necessary
conditions, or essential perfections ; that, if no exercise of the Divine
'efficiency, ad extra, can ever be adequate to its infinite perfection,
then must it be one of the excellencies of the Divine nature, not
only that it should include a plurality of distinctions, but that the
adequate sphere of its infinite activity should be its own infinite
perfections— that, if a God in unity, without internal distinctions,
or diversity of modes, be incapable of moral affection because
having had nothing, ad extra, from eternity to love, then such in
ternal, distinctions, must ever have existed as elements of reci
procal, social, self-sufficient perfection; and if such plurality be an
excellence, and if unity be an excellence also, and if there be any
respect in which this plurality of one kind can consist as an ex
cellence with this unity of another, then it will certainly be in
cluded in absolute perfection. And, further, this perfection implies

428 NOTES.
not only that all the excellence which it includes is simple, un-
compoanded, one, but that God and it are identical-, that it is not
an adjunct of his being, but his being itself:" — Pre-Adamite Earth,
p. 4.

GLOSSARY

Animalculum, a very small microscopic animal Animalcula is
the plural.
Articulate, a jointed animal.
Axiom, a proposition evident at first sight
Batrachian, having the nature and properties of the frog.
Chemical affinity, the tendency of certain elementary particles to
combine with each other in fixed and definite properties.
Corollary, the conclusion of an argument
Fauna, and Flora, the various kinds of animals peculiar to a
country constitute its Fauna, as the various kinds of vegetables
constitutes its Flora.
Fungus, soft spongy vegetables, such as the mushroom. Fungi
is the plural
Genera, the plural of genus, a term which comprehends species.
Hornblende, mineral of a dark green or black colour.
Hybrid, a mongrel animal, whose sire is of one kind and dam of
another.
Igneous, fiery.
Mammalia, a class of animals which suckle their young.
Mica, a simple mineral, the shining silvery surface seen in granite
and Gneiss.
Mollusk, a soft-bodied animal, such as shell-fish,, &c.
Pterodactyle, ac winged reptile.
Rotifer Vulgaris, a microscopic animal, which has a wheel-like
organization.
Saurian, an animal of the lizard kind.
Schist, same as slate.
Scholium, an explanatory observation.
Silurian rocks, a name given to the oldest rocks in which organised
fossils are found ; these rocks abound in Wales, and take their
appellation from the classic name, Silures, anciently applied
to the inhabitants of that locality.
Strata, the plural of stcatum.
Stratum, a bed, or layer, commonly applied to geological formations.
Vomerine, relating to the lower part of the nose.
Zoophyte; a creature partaking of the properties of both animal
and plant, such as coral, sponges, &c

INDEX.

Absolute perfection of Deity. .7S.195.
All-sufficiency of Deity  196.
Animal fossils found earlier than vegetable  76 — 77.
Animalcula — their mode of propagation  82.
 their tenacity of fife  84.
 their economy not yet fully known  85.
Argument a priori and a posteriori defined  19 — 20.
Argument a priori not applicable to prove the existence of God. .. . 20.
Argument on the existence of God, mode of conducting it stated
 19—29—30.
Aristotle on the eternal exercise of the Divine attributes  348.
Astronomy proves the non-eternity of the earth and of all celes
tial systems  48 — 54.
Atmosphere, The, its properties  265.
Attributes of God as asserted in Holy Scripture  178.
B.
Baptismal formula, expressive of a Trinity of persons  338.
 a declaration of the Triune God — of our Creator — of the pro
per object of worship, and of our covenant God  339, 340.
Benevolence of God.;. ...256— 297.
Benevolence proved by creation  257.
 by implanting love in the nature of sentient beings. ..259.
 by his care over his creatures  262.
 by the anatomical structure of the creatures  270 — 27.5.
 by the abundant provision for theirwelfare  268 — 269.
 by his provision or their happiness  275.
 by the principles of bis moral government  278.
Objections answered  283 — 286.
Birds, their existence coeval with amphibious reptiles  75.
C.
Cause and effect are not mere succession  33.

Cells of bees, their mathematical construction  133.
Chemistry, its laws prove the non-eternity of the world  54 — 58.
Circulation of the blood  263.
Chance, The doctrine of.  113.
Chance, the hypothesis of, refuted by five arguments  101 — 1 14.
¦  by proofs of order, 102 — by constancy and fixed laws,
102=^by direct evidences of design, 105 — by universal
order and adaptation, 106 — by the perfect state in which all
organisms have brought forth in all ages, 110.
Comets of Encke and Biela prove a resisting medium  49 — 53.
Clarke, Dr. Adam, his views of the Divine prescience erroneous
 231—239.

INDEX. 431
Creation, its scriptural meaning..'. ...153.
D.
Development hypotheses of Buffon, Lamarck, Mirabaud, Mond-
boddo, Vestiges of Creation, &c, examined and refuted 
61—100. *\\
Death of man, Penal  294. ^
Death of animals by prey — a benevolent economy  295..-
Dilemma, The, of an objeotorto the argument for the Trinity. ..386.
E.
Effect, Every, must have a cause  31—36.
Eqiulibrium, its law, tending to the universal cessation of active
forces  54 — 58.
Eternal, something must necessarily be eternal  37, 38.
Eternal exercise of the Divine attributes, held by ancient philo
sophers  348.
 necessary to the absolute perfection and happiness of
God  351.
 ¦ to the immutability of God  353.
 how they are mutually and reciprocally exercised by the
persons of the Godhead  375, 390, 391.
Eternity, Our idea of it  25.
Eternity of God  187. F.
Faithfulness of God  302.
Foetal development, its various stages afford no sanction to the
development theory  79.
Future punishment consistent with benevolence  287.
Geological strata, their general order briefly stated  42.
Geology, its discoveries in harmony with scripture  40.
Geology affords proof that existing species are not eternal  43.
Geology proves that antecedent species had a beginning  45 — 47.
Geology disproves the development theory  71.
God's existence not discovered by human reason alone  14 — 18.
God, the only sufficient sphere of his own activity, and the only
source of his own happiness  370.
God, absolutely free.. ....202, 203.
God, a Being distinct from the universe, because he is unorigi
nated  141.
God, because he is infinite, but matter finite  142.
God, because his properties, and those of matter, are essentially
different  142—146.
God's disposition for communion  3] 5.
 proved from scripture.. ....315— 316. _,^.
 proved by his implanting this disposition in man.. .317 — 322>2f:
 -by his making the exercise of this disposition am essential
element of spiritual religion  322.
 by his reciprocating this intercourse  325.
 by his implanting the disposition in all intelligent beings
 328.

433 INDEX.
God's disposition for communion proved by his continuing the exer
cise of this disposition in all intelligent natures through all
eternity  327.
 Objections answered  331 — 335.
Gravitation, all material nature subject to its influence  52.
Gravitation, conjoined with^a resisting medium, producing a
gradual condensation of starry clusters  52.
Grotto del Cani. ..... 268. H.
Halley, Dr., his conjecture, in his Miscellanea Curiosa, respecting
a resisting medium  49.
Hereditary depravity consistent with divine goodness  287.
Hume's sophisms exposed and refuted  33 — 120.
Holiness of God  298—314.
 proved, a priori, from the absolute perfection of the Divine
nature  298.
 proved, dposteriori, from God's acts in creation  303.
 in providence  303.
 in our moral sentiments  305.
 by his moral government  310 — 314.
Human skeletons imbedded in limestone rock  43.
Human soul, The, not satisfied with any thing finite  367.
 its resemblance to God  182 — 186.
Human freedom asserted in scripture  230.
Human freedom vindicated by reason  231.
Human nature presents the mystery of two diverse substances
with one consciousness  343. I.
Idealism, shown to spring from an abuse of the faculties  163
—168.
Igneous origin of granite  46.
Immutability of Deity  197.
Immutability does not exclude the exercise of dispositions and
affections  199.
Immutability does not imply absolute uniformity of action  200
—354.
Immutability does not involve fatalism  202.
Independence of Deity  196.
Infidel, An, converted by examining a flower  112 — 114.
Intelligence of the Creator, the doctrine stated  118.
Intelligence, Proofs of  118 — 140.
Intelligence. — If intelligence be required to understand a problem,
greater is required to originate it  122.
Intelligence proved from all the sciences, viz: — Astronomy, 123 —
Chemistry, 124 — Anatomy,124 — Optics, 126 — Organs of Sense
129— Instinct, 131— 139— Human Intelligence, 129— Intelli
gence and Benevolence associated, 262.
Instinct defined  131.
Instinct, its operations directed to specific results  132.

INDEX. 488.
Instinct direoted by vast knowledge, wonderful skill, and infallible
judgement  132 — 139.
Instinct never aoquired by learning or imitation. .....135.
Instinct, uniform in its impulses  136.
J.
Justice of God  302. , x
L.
Life not essential to matter  81. M.
Man, his reoent origin  43.
Man made in God's image  182—186 — 317 — 322.
Materialism shown to spring from an abuse of the mental faculties
 163—168. f.
Matter, its eternity not necessary, admitted even by the atheist
himself.  60.
Matter proved to he not eternal  147 — 155.
Matter, eternity of, a mere -assumption  59 — 147.
 its admission of no avail to atheism  61 — 148.
 its supposition involves a tissue of absurdities  149.
 contradictory to the known fact that some of its pro
perties could not have been eternal  150 — 152.
Mercy, another aspect of benevolence  281.
Moung Long, an Indian Sceptic  166.
Milky Way, number of stars of  248.
Mystery, its meaning explained  11.
Mystery no contradiction to reason  12.
Mystery holds the same place in theology as an ultimate fact in
philosophy  346.
Moral evil, its existence considered  283.
Moral government of God — benevolent  278.
 —Holy  310.
N.
Nebular hypothesis refuted by seven arguments  87 — 101.
 The hypothesis, has no foundation in astronomical
fact  89.
 physically impossible that the nebulous state of matter
can be eternal  92.
 if any nebulous matter exist now, it must have been
created  94.
 The hypothesis, disproved by the arrangement of 'the
planetary system  94.
 by the fact that the luminous body is in the centre, and
light collocated there  97.
 by the relative distances, bulk, and density of the planets

by the destiny of the system to change and dissolution
.100.

434 INDEX.
Necessity, physical, stated  114.
Necessity, The hypothesis, refuted by four arguments  l-l'6-i-l 1 7.
Necessity, God does not act from necessity  202.
Notes on the recent origin of man...%..417 — on the absurdity of
the development hypothesis. .i... 417 — on the foot prints upon
the new red sandstone  418 — on the animal called the
Chirotherium  418
Notes on spontaneous generation  421
Notes on cellular development  422
Notes on the views of eminent divines on the Trinity — Howe,
Watts, Kidd, Harris  423 — 425
Nutrition, its economy a proof of benevolence... ...268.
O.
Omnipotence of God proved.. ....243 — 256.
^L- — by the creation of matter  246.
¦ — = — - by the creation of spirit.... ....249.
 by the various operations of nature. .....249.
 by the energy of created minds... ...251.
 by the preservation of nature  253.
Omnipresence of God.. ...^207 — 220.
 pervades every part of the material and spiritual universe
......210.
 proved by God's absolute infinity  213.
 extends beyond the universe, and is infinite. .....218.
Omniscience of God  221 — -243.
 proved by creation and providence  221.
 by his absolute perfection-.... ..222.
 comprehends a complete knowledge of the past.  224
— the present.. .-..^223 — the future  225.
Organization of the earliest animals complete.. ....75.
P.
Pain not inconsistent with God's goodness.. ....287.
Physical evil  287.
Pantheism, ancient and modern, described  156.
 fraught with absurdity and payable contradictions  161.
 idolatrous  168 — infidel in its character.. .,.'-.169— licen
tious  171 — its prevalence and awful influence.  1 71 — 1 77
-' - its errors and contradictions do homage to scriptural truth
 167—168.
- - - , 'blasphemous... -... 173 — 175.
Plato on the eternal exercise of the Divine perfections  348.
Pope, Ms poetry pantheistic..*... 171.
Prescience of God compatible with man's -free-agency...... .'229---'-243.
R,
Rational argument for the Trinity sustained by the collateral
testimony of scripture  393.
Reason, its prerogative...... .9 — what reason req|aire& ita reference
to any revealed doctrine  345 — 346.

INDEX. -^86
Reflections on the majesty of God  180.
Reflections on the eternity of God  188.
Reflections on the immutability of God  .197.
Reflections on the omnipresence of  218.
Reflections on the omniscience of God  239 — 242.
Reflections on the power of God  255.
Reflections on the goodness of God  296i
Reflections on the holiness of God.. ....314.
Reflections on God's disposition for communion  335.
Remorse a proof of benevolence  285.
Resisting medium, its certainty established  49.
 its effects described  50.
Respiration, its economy  263.
Revelation not contrary to reason  9.
S.
Sagacity of animals, not confined to any particular type of orga
nization  69.
Scholastic notion of eternity refuted  189 — 193.
 of God's omnipresence refuted, and the scriptural doctrine
stated  207—210.
Souls of brutes not naturally immortal  146.
Space, neither a mode nor an attribute, but absolute nonentity... 26.
Space, how we get the idea of it  26.
Species, real, permanent, and impassable...... 62 — 70.
 no transmutation of, by generation  63.
 no existing generation 'of, more perfect than its predecessors
 65.
 not any in a state of transmutation  65 — 69.
Spirituality of the Divine nature  141 — 154.
Spontaneous generation disproved  80 — 86.
T.
Telescope and the human, eye compared, both proofs of design
~„..127.
Testimony direct of holy scripture respecting the Trinity  406
— ascribes the names of Deity to each person  406 — ascribes
the attributes of Deity to each person  407 — ascribes the
works of God tp each, person  409— ascribes worship, and
homage to each person  4J3
Transmutation of species not possible  62.
Transmutation, even if possible, would deteriorate,, not. develop
and improve existing species. ...,., 63.
Trinity, Holy, the scriptural doctrine stated  338 — 342.
Trinity in unity expressed by the name of Jehovah, our Elohim
 341.
 the doctrine sustained by the verdict of reason, proved m
twenty propositions  343 — 393.
prop, I.— All the attributes of Deity essential and eter
nal  347.
II. — The active energies of God have been exerted
eternally  348.

436 INDEX.
Prop. III. — The exercise of an attribute implies both agent
and object  355.
„ IV. — Agent and object must be distinct and not
identically the same  356,
„ V. — The object, as well as the agent, must be a
conscious intelligent existence  359.
„ VI. — No adequate object amqngthe creatures.. .361.
„ VII. — Mental Archetypes not adequate objects. ..368.
„ VIII — Object and agent must both exist in the Divine
nature  370.
„ IX. — The peculiar mode of the Divine existence must
be such as admits both object and agent
 371.
,, X. — Then there must be a plurality in the Godhead
 372.
-, „ , XI. — The plurality must be one of persons  372.
„ XII.— Each person must exist necessarily and eter-
' nelly  373. .
„ XIII. — Each person must possess infinite attributes
 374.
„ XIV. — The persons must be co-equal  374. •
„ XV. — Each person must have exercised the divine
attributes eternally  374.
„ XVI. — The divine persons must be reciprocally agent
and object.. ....375.
„ XVII. — All the works of Deity must be the works of
each and, all conjointly...;.. 377.
„XVIII — All the creatures hold the same relation to each
person  378.
„ XIX. — The limitation of the persons to three, accordant
to reasOn  378.
„ XX. — The same arguments which prove a plurality of
persons prove a unity of essence... ...380.
Truth perceived only by the right use of our faculties.. .161 — 166.
U.
Unbelief irrational as well as sinful  346—385.
Unity of essence in the persons of the Godhead argued from their
having the same intelligence, love, communion, holiness. ..380
Universe, The, an effect  39—317.
 finite both in duration and extent, and inadequate to the
full and eternal exercise of the Divine perfections  362-^366.
V.
Vastness of the universe  215.
Vegetables do not produce even the lowest kind of animal life. ..70.
Veracity of God  302.
Vicious habits corrected by physical evils and mental anguish
 289.

WORKS BY W. COOKE,
Published by Pamridge and Oaket, 34, Paternoster Row;
and by J. Bakewell, 80, Newgate Street, London.
THEIOTES:
Or an Argument on the Existence, Perfections, and Personal Distinctions -."
of the Deity ; intended as an Antidote to Atheism, Pantheism, Unitarian- 'f
ism, and Sabellianism.
12«»o., pp. 450, cloth, gilt lettered, 5s. Same Work, on better
paper, Svo., 7s. 6d.
CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY,
Second Edition, {Sixth Thousand,)
12mo., pp. 560, cloth, gilt lettered, 5s. Same Work, on better
paper, 8vo., 7s. 6d.

THE TESTIMONY OP THE ANCIENT JEWISH
CHURCH WITH respect to the DIVINE LOGOS, &c,
being a Reply to Dr. F. R. Lees. — 4d.
The above work is embodied in the second edition of " Christian Theology," but
is published separately for those who have purchased the former edition.

" Unanswerable and triumphant is the reply here given to the bold
and vaunting declamation put forth by Dr. Lees, in his criticisms upon
the statements made by Mr. Cooke, in his tract on the Holy Trinity
 The masterly pamphlet now before us has completely turned the
tables upon Dr. Lees, and proved him to be boastful and vapouring ; that
he is not to be trusted, either as to his literary correctness or logical accu
racy, even when he speaks as with oracular authority." — Wesley an
Association Magazine for Nov., 1847.
" When ignorance, impudence, and scepticism combine against the
truth, and aim at blasting the literary reputation of a christian minister,
it is nothing but right that the merited reproof should be administered,
and the needful refutation given. Mr. Cooke very quietly disposes of
the false assumptions and allegations of his opponent, and, by an anay
of evidence that cannot be gainsaid, fully establishes his point. The
tract evinces considerable research, and is written with the usual
ability of the author." — Methodist New Connexion Mag. for Oct., 1847.
" We read it soon after it reached us, and are prepared to say, that it
displays the author's mastership of his subject as strikingly as any of
his valuable productions. It shows that little dependance is to be placed
on the learning, argumentation, or integrity of Dr. Lees, especially as a
polemic one. The Doctor is placed in a predicament that must make him
blush, unless he be past blushing. Were we among his friends, we
should advise him to give up the contest with the bruises he has received,
lest his public credit should be ultimately ruined. — Prim. Methodist
Magazine for November, 1847.

WOEKS BY W. COOKE.

" This small pamphlet, of only forty-six pages, contains the well-digested results
of much learned research, on. a subject profoundly interesting to the Biblical Student
and is presented in a manner calculated to interest the general reader. The origin
of the pamphlet is worth stating. It appears that the author had, in his ' Treatise on
Theology,' affirmed the well-known fact, that the ancient Jews in their Targums
speak of a Divine Person under the name of Memra, or the Word, distinct from the
Father, &c. ; and had referred to Walton's Polyglot, as containing the Targums of
Jonathan and Jerusalem. Now this Dr. Lees, Editor of the 'Truth Seeker,' but
who is clearly not given to seek the truth in Polyglots, not only denies that the doc
trine in question is to be found in the Targums, but denies, even in the face of all the
learned libraries in the kingdom, that the Targums themselves are to be found in the
aforesaid Polyglot Whether it is that the E ditor of the ' Truth Seeker ' has sought
ibr truth until he has become 'blinded by its excessive light;' or that he sought to
ascertain' the contents of the Polyglot mesmerically, by applying the outside of the
folios to his forehead, and failed; or that he modestly ventured to speak for Walton
without consulting him ; so it is, that with the Targums extending through the last
390 pages of the 4th volume, he was yet wonderfully enabled to deny, m capitals,
that they are contained in the work. Eor our own satisfaction, and not at all as doubt
ing Mr. Cooke's accuracy, (our, previous knowledge of the Targums was quite in
favour of this,) we have turned to every pasage in question between Mr. Cooke and
his opponent, and find, as might have been expected, that the translations and con
structions of them are literally correct. He has evidently had to do with an opponent
of that numerous class, in dealing with which the labour cousists, not so much in
answering argument, as in correcting of ignorance, and in putting reckless assertions
in an answerable form. But he has acquitted himself in a manner which shows him
valiant for the truth, as able as he is valiant, and which entitles him to the thanks of
all lovers of sound doctrine.'' — Biblical Reviews Jan*t 1848.

THE AUTHENTIC REPORT

THEOLOGICAL DISCUSSION
Between the Rev. W. Cooke and Mr. J. Barker, held during Ten
Nights, in Newcastle-upon-Tyne ; the whole comprising 504 pages,
price 2s. in cloth boards, and 2s. 6d. half-bound in roan.
Review from the Christian Witness for May, 1846. — Edited by
Rev. J. Campbell, B.B.
" We confess to strong personal partialities for this species of publi
cation ; notwithstanding its essential drawbacks, it has great and impor
tant advantages. There is a life, a nerve, a power, in such volumes
which rarely characterize the peaceful productions of the solitary student.
In the volume before us there is, moreover, a vast range both of subjects
and of illustrations, conducted, on the part of Mr. Barker, with all the
hardihood that infidelity can impart, and, on that of Mr. . Cooke,
with a decision, intelligence, a dexterity, and a propriety, such as
became the representative of truth. The work will be read by young
men with no prdinary interest, as there is much in it calculated to sti
mulate thought and sharpen reason.
From the Christian Examiner for July, 1846. — Edited by
Rev. J. Carlisle, B.B.
" That Mr. Cooke demolishes the arguments, if we may call them by
this name, of his opponent, we need not say ; — in fact, his victory is
triumphant. We advise all classes of our readers to read this discus
sion; and we are happy to say that the cheapness of the volume places
it within the reach of all classes. We shall rejoice to hear of its rapid
and extensive sale."

WORKS BY W. COOKE. 111.
From the MelhodM New Connexion Magazine for March, 1846.
' In bringing this work before our readers, we have no hesitation in
expressing our most decided conviction of the signal triumph whioh Mr.
Cooke achieved over his opponent. We exultingly express our high
admiration of the learning, talent, research, and intellectual power dis
played by our esteemed brother. — As for the opponent of Mr. Cooke,
the less said of him the better ; every remembrance of his history is
calculated to excite only feelings of disgust, indignation, and sorrow."
From the Primitive Methodist Magazine for February. 1846.
" From the position occupied by Mr. Barker, he must be denominated
an infidel; and, as suoh, he brought much cunning and sophistry to
bear upon his antagonist; but, happily for the truth, his antagonistwas
a giaut, who rubbed his stricken places as slight scratches, and finally
laid his mischevious disturber down at his feet."
From the Universe for July 10th, 1846.
"Infidelity has had more acute, philosophical, eloquent defenders than
Mr. Barker ; but our impression is, that scepticism never sent forth a
champion more cool in cunning, more bold in the statements made, and
more determined in defending every position assumed, than he.
" In anticipating the struggle betwixt these combatants, some friends
of orthodoxy trembled, lest the ark of Truth should be taken. We had
no fears for the result. That result has been what we confidently an
ticipated from the piety, the sound and extensive learning, and fervid
yet chastened eloquence of Mr. Cooke.
" Mr. Cooke's speeches on the Incarnation of our Lord, and the
Trinity, are masterly, and are of themselves sufficient to earn distinction
for him within and beyond his own denomination."

TEETOTALISM purified from unsound and dangerous
opinions, and placed upon a rational and scriptural founda
tion. Second edition, price 4d.
" I have read your admirable pamphlet on Total Abstinence, and it
has my great and unqualified approbation. It is christian in spirit, con
clusive in argument, and places the question on the only rational and
safe foundation. It is my Teetotal creed."— Rev. John Angell James,

CHRIST'S UNIVERSAL REIGN. A SERMON.— Sixpence.
JUBILEE SERMON.— Fourpence.
A DISCOURSE on the CHRISTIAN SABBATH,— One penny,
or seven shillings the hundred.
A TRACT on the CHRISTIAN MINISTRY and its claim to
support, — l£d. -
gss- All the above Works may be had from the Publishers named
on the title-page.

WORKS BY THE REV. P. J. WRIGHT.

THE STUDY OP CREATION, and Otheb Subjects.
(Third Thousand,) p.p. 242 ; in cloth, lettered, 2s. ; cloth,
gilt, 2s. 6d.
" This is a beautiful little volume, fraught with important sentiments and gems of
thought. The doctrines inculcated are sound, the thoughts and sentiments indicate
the combination of vigorous intellect, with a vivid imagination, and the poetical effu
sions are of superior merit. We cordially recommend the work, as calculated to pro
mote intellectual improvement, and stir up the best affections. It resembles a sacred
annual, and is well adapted to be presented either as a memento of affection, or a
reward to elder scholars." — Methodist New Connexion Magazine.
" The topics are both philosophical and theological, and they are presented in a
very pleasing and instructive manner. The work exhibits amplitude of thought,
richness of style and illustration, and is highly creditable to its Author." — Wesr
leyan Association Magazine.
" Tho merits of the Study of Creation are such as entitle it to a distinguished po
sition amongst the more able and elegant of its own class ofliterary productions."—
West Briton.

THE WAY OF SALVATION : A Reply to the Important
Inquiry, "What must I do to be Saved?" (Second
Thousand,) in stiff covers, 6d. ; in cloth, gilt, ls.
"To afford wise counsel in reference to this all absorbing question, and a powerful
stimulus to seek its practical solution, is a service of inexpressible value. To the
merit of having rendered such a service, the writer of this little book is entitled.
Experimental proof is blended with luminous statement, and the whole accompanied
with most suitable practical directions. The style is eloquent and impressive. We
cordially wish, an extensive circulation." — Methodist New Connexion Magazine.
" We most cordially recommend this work, as well adapted to instruct inquirers
respecting the evils they are required to avoid, the means they should use, and the
nature of the faith in Christ, by which they may attain to the possession of salvation."
— Wesleyan Association Magazine.
" I have read your ' Way Of Salvation* with great pleasure. It is admirably con
ceived and. executed. It will, by the blessing of God, accomplish great good." —
Bev. 8. HuVme.

A MANUAL of INSTRUCTION, for Catechumen Classes,
the Bible Classes of Sabbath Schools, and Children at
Home. Manual I., " The Old World," price 6d.
" We have been too long content with the ordinary routine of reading, spelling,
&c. We must aim at imparting knowledge — scriptural and saving knowledge— in
connection with historical, and even the elements of scientific knowledge. With
such impressions and convictions, we are glad to see the issue of the first part of Mr.
Wright's work. We know of no work of the kind- so calculated f6f usefulness." —
Meth. New Con. Magazine.

Published by Partridge and Oakey, 34, Paternoster Row;
J, Bakewell, 80, Newgate Street, London. May be had of all
Booksellers.

NEW EDITION OF THE REV. T. ALLIN'S WORK.

Treparing for Publication, The FOLLY of MODERN
ATHEISM ; the IMMATERIALITY and IMMOR
TALITY of the SOUL; and other subjects.
Second Edition, Revised and Corrected, Cloth. Lettered, 12mo.
Price 8s.
SAME WORK, on better paper, 8vo., 5s.

The former edition of this work having been long exhausted, the Author is
induced, by solicitations from many friends, to re-publish it, revised and corrected ;
and at a price which, he trusts, will bring it within the reach of all.

"The title of this volume indicates that these discourses belong not to the com
mon order of sermonizing ; and we are led to expect, in the perusal of them, a train
of thought and argumentation, which will carry the mind of the reader into an un
frequented path. In these expectations we have not been disappointed. They have
been gratified to the full, and in some instances eveu surpassed- — Independently of
those who may be exposed to the assaults of such as are enemies to God, it would be
well for every Mend of truth and virtue to be prepared with arms. This the volume
before us will furnish at a comparatively trifling expense. It has nothing to do with
the localities of a creed. lu these respects it is founded on a basis which all the
contending factions acknowledge, and we should rejoice to find it occupying a place
iu every Christian and Infidel's library." — Imperial Mag.
" The notes appended to these discourses are recondite, numerous, and valuable.
Chemistry, anatomy, physiology, natural and moral philosophy, metaphysics, and
history, ancient and modern, are all summoned to give testimony against Atheism. —
The work is a durable monument of the talents and piety of its author, and a solid
defence of the best of all causes — the cause of God." — New Methodist Mag.
" It would be highly praiseworthy, in such, persons as have it in their power, to
deposit copies of this work in publio libraries to which Sceptics and unbelievers
resort, and in any way to place it within the reach of those who unhappily deny
their Maker and their Redeemer. It is well written, and the argumentation is
conclusive." — "Wesleyan Magazine.
" Books like this ought to be recommended, and brought under the publio eye."
— Christian Advocate.
Orders may be forwarded to J. Bakewell, 80, Newgate Street, London ;
to the Authob, Altrincham, Cheshire; or to J. B. Williamb, 39, White-
chapel, Liverpool.

Just Published, Foolscap 8vo., 80 pp.
FAITH AND ASSURANCE.
BY S. HULME.
Paper covers, U. ; Cloth, gilt lettered, Is.; on better paper, Is. 6d.
Partridge and Oaks y, Paternoster Row ; and J. Bakewell, 80, New
gate Street, London.

WORKS BY T. AND F. BULLOCK.
UNDER THE PATfipiSAGE OF HEB MAJESTY, THE QUEEN,
and Dedicated, by permission, to the Eight Honourable Lord Ashley.
Foolscap 8vo., Cloth, gilt lettered, price 4s.
POPULAR EDUCATION,
AN ANTIDOTE TO JUVENILE DELINQUENCY, AND A GREAT
SECURITY OF NATIONAL VIRTUE. By Thomas and Fkanoib
Bullock,
Attention is respectfully invited to the following recommendations
of the ahove Work, selected from Reviews, &c. : —
FROM THE REV, J. JORDAN, B.A., VICAR OF ENSTONE.
"What would our forefathers say if they were to rise from the dead and behold cur
wonderfully rapid means of transit, either on our railroads, or in our steamships;
or, what would they say at beholding our public highways lighted with gas, or the
metropolis itself illuminated by the ¦ electric spark ? Well might they exclaim and
express their astonishment at such physical wonders as these. And, yet we have
springing up around us, and that from sources which some would deem unequal to
such a work, while others would esteem such employment perilous to the well-being
of society; still, greater marvels tha'n those referred to above,-and a more wonderful
illumination than any that the physical world is capable of effecting or enjoying."
* * * "A volume of deep thought and admirable sentiment." * * * "The
work, as its title indicates, is dedicated to the subject of Popular Education; but
its scope is farmore extensive than such a title would at first lead us to suppose, for
it not only addresses itself to the education of the young, and their best training in
spirituality and virtue, butit attempts also the far more difficult problem of enquiring '
and considering how those who have .grown up in vice, and have become the real
pests and perils of society, may be recovered and rendered the ornaments and safe
guards of the nation." — Working Man's Charter, p.p. 94, 95, Sfc.
FROM THE 'ECHO' OF JANUARY 24, 1849.
"Merit's the support of all who are interested in the elevation of our fellow
countrymen." " It will be in the recollection of our readers that our beloved Sovereign liberally
aided the Authors of this Work, and we are gratified that its execution is worthy of
such distinguished patronage. We anticipate a large circulation, and strongly re
commend it io our readers, who will find it amply repaying an attentive perusal."
FROM THE REV. W. COOKE.
" Our Authors take a comprehensive view of the important subject of Education,
and pleadthe cause with strong sense, sound argument, and eloquent earnestness,
alike creditable to their intellect and heart. We have no hesitation in cordially re
commending the volume to our readers." — Methodist New Connexion Magazine.
FROM DR. CAMPBELL.
" While the Writers of* jthis Book will be allowed on all hands to deserve weU for
their motive, they merit praise for its execution. It is carefully put together, and
pervaded by an excellent spirit." "Among Christians there will be very little oppo
sition to the views of Messrs. Bullock: the only thing is to show by what means the
rising millions of this great nation can be brought under such education."— Christian
Witness, March, 1849, Crown 8vo., p.p, 24, Price 2£d.,
AN ANTIDOTE FOR INFIDELITY.
BY THOMAS BULLOCK.

Crown &vo., p.p. 24, Price 2f d.
THE DIVINITY 0E THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION PROVED.
BY FRANCIS BULLOCK.
Pabtbidge and Oakey, Paternoster Row, London; or the Authors,
Chapel Street, Cheadle, Staffordshire.