,transcriber's ,note3  ,this version of 
the text cannot represent certain       
typographical effects4 ,italics are     
delimited with the underscore character 
as italic4  ,footnotes have been moved  
to follow the chapters in which they are
 referenced4                            
,a ,body of ,divinity                   
,a ,,body ,,of ,,divinity3     ,,wherein
 ,,the ,,doctrines ,,of ,,the           
,,christian ,,religion ,,are ,,explained
 ,,and                                  
,,defended4      ,,being ,,the          
,,substance ,,of ,,several ,,lectures   
,,on ,,the ,,assembly',s ,,larger       
,,catechism4                            
,,by ,,thomas ,,ridgley1 ,d4 ,d4        
,,with ,,notes1 ,,original ,,and        
,,selected1                        ,,by 
,,james ,p4 ,,wilson1 ,d4 ,d4           
,,in ,,four ,,volumes4                  
,,vol4 ,i4          ,,first ,,american  
,,edition1 ,,from ,,the ,,third         
,,european ,,edition4                   
,,philadelphia3    ,,printed ,,by ,,and 

,,for ,,william4 ,w4 ,,woodward1        
,,corner ,,of ,,chesnut ,,and ,,south   
,,second ,,streets4                     
#ahad4     ,district of ,pennsylvania1  
to wit3  ,,be ,,it ,,remembered1 ,that  
on the seventeenth day of ,may1 in the  
thirty-eighth year of the ,independence 
of the ,united ,states of ,america1 ,a4 
,d4 #ahac1 ,william ,w4 ,woodward1 of   
the said ,district1 hath deposited in   
this office the title of a ,book1 the   
right whereof he claims as proprietor1  
in the words following1 to wit3      8,a
 ,body of ,divinity3 wherein the        
doctrines of the ,christian             
religion1 are explained and defended4   
,being the substance of several         
lectures on the ,assembly's larger      
catechism4 ,by ,thomas ,ridgley1 ,d4    
,d4 ,with notes1 original and selected1 
by ,james ,p4 ,wilson1 ,d4 ,d4 ,in      
four volumes4 ,first ,american1 from the
 third ,european ,edition40  ,in        
conformity to the ,act of the ,congress 
of the ,united ,states1 intitled1 8,an  

,act for the encouragement of ,learning1
 by securing the ,copies of ,maps1      
,charts and ,books1 to the authors and  
proprietors of such ,copies during the  
times therein mentioned40--,and also to 
the ,act1 entitled 8,an ,act            
supplementary to ,an ,act1 entitled     
#8,an act for the encouragement of      
,learning1 by securing the ,copies of   
,maps1 ,charts1 and ,books1 to the      
authors and proprietors of such ,copies 
during the times therein mentioned1' and
 extending the benefits thereof to the  
arts of designing1 engraving1 and       
etching historical and other prints40   
,d4 ,,caldwell1 ,clerk of the ,district 
of ,pennsylvania4                       
,,to ,,the ,,reader4   ,in this first   
,american edition the original text     
remains unaltered1 the notes which ,dr4 
,ridgley had subjoined to his work are  
retained1 and for the sake of           
distinction1 printed in ,italics4 ,the  
other notes have been added by ,dr4     
,wilson2 and in every instance wherein  

they have been selected by him from     
others1 they are accompanied by marks of
 quotation1 and the name of the author  
or book from whence they were taken4    
,,preface4   ,the influence which the   
different sentiments of men1 in matters 
of religion1 have1 for the most part1 on
 their temper and behaviour towards one 
another1 affords very little ground to  
expect that any attempt to explain or   
defend the most important doctrines of  
,christianity1 should not be treated    
with dislike and opposition by some1 how
 much soever it may afford matter of    
conviction to others4 ,this             
consideration would have put a stop to  
my pen1 and thereby saved me a great    
deal of fatigue1 in preparing and       
publishing the following sheets1 had it 
not been over-balanced by what ,i       
cannot1 at present1 think any other than
 a sense of duty1 in compliance with the
 call of providence4 ,i heartily wish   
there were no occasion to vindicate some
 of the great doctrines of the gospel1  

which were more generally received in   
the last age1 than at present1 from     
misrepresentation1 as though the method 
in which they had been explained led to 
licentiousness1 and the doctrines       
themselves1 especially those of         
election1 particular redemption1        
efficacious grace1 and some others1 that
 depend upon them1 were inconsistent    
with the moral perfections of the divine
 nature3 these are now traduced by many1
 as though they were new and strange    
doctrines1 not founded on scripture1 nor
 to be maintained by any just methods of
 reasoning deduced from it1 or as if the
 duties of practical religion could not 
be inculcated consistently therewith4   
,if this insinuation were true1 our     
preaching would be vain1 our hope also  
vain1 and we should be found false      
witnesses for ,god1 and have no solid   
ground whereon to set our feet1 which   
would be a most tremendous thought4     
,and1 if this be not sufficient to      
justify my present undertaking1 ,i have 

nothing to allege of equal weight4  ,i  
must confess1 that when ,i took the     
first step1 in order to the setting this
 design on foot1 by consenting that     
proposals should be printed1 about two  
years since1 ,i reckoned it little other
 than an expedient to disengage myself  
from any farther thoughts1 and my       
friends from any expectation of it1     
which ,i could not well do1 but by      
having a proof of the backwardness of   
persons to encourage1 by subscription1 a
 work which would be so very expensive  
to the undertakers2 but1 the design     
being countenanced1 beyond what ,i could
 have imagined1 and numbers subscribed  
for1 with more expedition than is usual1
 ,i was laid under an obligation        
immediately to prepare my notes for the 
press1 and set forward the work1 which1 
through the divine goodness1 has been   
thus far carried on2 and ,i cannot but  
take occasion to express my grateful    
acknowledgment of the respect that has  
been shewed me1 by those who have       

encouraged this undertaking4 ,if it may 
answer their expectation1 and subserve  
their spiritual advantage1 ,i shall     
count my labour well employed1 and      
humbly offer the glory thereof1 as a    
tribute due to ,god1 whose interest is  
the only thing that demands all our     
time1 strength1 and utmost abilities4   
,if ,i may but have a testimony from him
 that ,i have spoken nothing concerning 
him that is a dishonour to his name1    
unbecoming his perfections1 or that has 
a tendency to lead his people out of the
 right way to the glorifying and        
enjoying of him1 my end is fully        
answered4 ,whatever weakness ,i have    
discovered1 arising from mine inequality
 to the greatness of the subjects       
insisted on1 ,i hope to obtain          
forgiveness thereof from ,god1 whose    
cause ,i have endeavoured to maintain2  
and1 to be excused by men1 as ,i may    
truly say1 ,i have not offered1 either  
to him or them1 what cost me nothing4 ,i
 have1 as far as ,i am able1 adapted my 

method of reasoning to the capacities of
 those who are unacquainted with several
 abstruse and uncommon words and        
phrases1 which have been often used by  
some who have treated on these subjects1
 which have a tendency rather to        
perplex1 than improve the minds of men3 
terms of art1 as they are sometimes     
called1 or hard words1 used by          
metaphysicians and schoolmen1 have done 
little service to the cause of ,christ4 
,if ,i have explained any doctrine1 or  
given the sense of any scripture in a   
way somewhat different from what is     
commonly received1 ,i have never done it
 out of the least affectation of        
singularity1 nor taken pleasure in going
 out of the beaten path1 having as great
 a regard to the footsteps of the flock1
 as is consistent with that liberty of  
thinking and reasoning1 which we are    
allowed to use1 who conclude nothing to 
be an infallible rule of faith1 but the 
inspired writings4  ,as to what ,i have 
advanced concerning the eternal         

generation of the ,son1 and the         
procession of the ,holy ,ghost1 ,i have 
thought myself obliged to recede from   
some common modes of explication1 which 
have been used1 both by ancient and     
modern writers1 in insisting on these   
mysterious doctrines1 which1 probably1  
will appear1 if duly weighed1 not to    
have done any great service to the      
cause1 which1 with convincing evidence1 
they have maintained2 since it is       
obvious that this is the principal thing
 that has given occasion to some modern 
,arians to fill the margins of their    
books with quotations1 taken out of the 
writings of others1 whom they have      
either1 without ground1 pretended to    
have been on their side of the question1
 or charged with plucking down with one 
hand1 what they have built up with the  
other4  ,whether my method of explaining
 these doctrines be reckoned just1 or   
no1 ,i cannot but persuade myself1 that 
if what ,i have said1 concerning the    
subordination of these divine persons1  

be considered in any other view1 than as
 an explication of the ,sonship of      
,christ1 and the procession of the ,holy
 ,ghost1 it will not be reckoned a      
deviating from the common faith of those
 who have defended the doctrine of the  
ever-blessed ,trinity2 and1 if it be an 
error to maintain that these divine     
persons1 as well as the ,father1 are    
independent1 as to their personality1 as
 well as their essence1 or to assert    
that the manner of their having the     
divine essence1 as some express it1 is  
independent1 as well as the essence     
itself1 then what ,i have delivered1 on 
that subject1 is to no purpose1 which1  
when ,i am convinced of1 ,i shall       
readily acknowledge my mistake1 and     
count it an happiness to be undeceived4 
,as to what respects the decrees of     
,god1 and more particularly those that  
relate to angels and men1 and his       
providence1 as conversant about sinful  
actions1 and the origin of moral evil1  
,i have endeavoured to account for them 

in such a way1 as1 ,i trust1 does not in
 the least1 infer ,god to be the author 
of sin2 nor have ,i1 in any instance1   
represented ,god as punishing sin1 or   
determining to do it1 out of his mere   
sovereignty1 as though he designed to   
render his creatures miserable1 without 
considering them as contracting guilt1  
and thereby procuring this to           
themselves4 ,and1 when ,i have been led 
to insist on the freeness of divine     
grace1 and the covenant of grace1 as    
made with ,christ1 and1 in him1 with the
 elect1 and maintained the absoluteness 
and independency hereof on the will of  
man to render it effectual to salvation1
 ,i have1 notwithstanding1 said as much 
as is necessary concerning the          
conditionality of our claim to the      
blessings thereof1 and the inseparable  
connexion that there is between         
practical religion and salvation1 which 
fences against the charge that is often 
brought against this doctrine1 as though
 it led to licentiousness4 ,this ,i     

could not omit to mention1 that the     
reader might not entertain groundless   
prejudices against some of the doctrines
 insisted on1 before he duly weighs the 
method in which they are handled1 or    
considers whether my defence of them    
against the popular objections1 of that 
or any other kind1 be just or no4 ,some1
 it may be1 will see reason to conclude 
that it is2 and others1 who think that  
there are many unsurmountable           
difficulties on our side of the         
question1 may be convinced1 that there  
are difficulties of another nature1 as  
great1 if not greater1 attending the    
opposite scheme1 which they themselves  
maintain4 ,but this ,i rather chuse to  
submit to the impartial judgment of     
those who are not disposed to condemn a 
doctrine1 without desiring to know what 
may be said in its defence4  ,as to what
 concerns the work in general1 it may be
 observed1 that when ,i have occasion to
 illustrate an argument1 by making use  
of any criticism that may be of         

advantage to it1 or to give the sense of
 ancient writers1 either for or against 
what ,i have laid down1 ,i have inserted
 it in ,italics in the notes1 that it   
might not appear to be a digression1 or 
break the thread of the discourse4      
,though the title of every page mentions
 only the general subject of the        
question1 there is a table prefixed to  
each volume1 that comprises the contents
 thereof1 laid down in such a form1 as  
that the reader may easily see the heads
 of argument1 under every question1 in  
their proper method and connexion4      
,and1 at the end1 there is an index of  
scriptures1 in which only those are     
inserted that are either more largely or
 concisely explained4 ,this1 together   
with the table1 was drawn up by a kind  
brother1 which ,i thankfully            
acknowledge1 as having afforded me more 
leisure to attend to the work itself4#a 
,as to what concerns the second         
edition1#b it was undertaken at the     
request of some who did not expect that 

the former would be so soon out of      
print4 ,that which gives me great       
satisfaction is1 the acceptance it has  
met with from many judicious divines and
 others1 in ,north-,britain2 and ,i     
cannot but reckon the honour that the   
learned professors in the university of 
,aberdeen did me1 in signifying their   
approbation of it1 much more to be      
desired1 than the highest titles that   
could have been conferred upon me       
without it4  ,i have nothing farther to 
trouble the reader with in this preface2
 but would only request of him1 that1   
what thoughts soever he may entertain   
concerning the way in which ,i have     
endeavoured to state and defend some    
great and important truths1 he would    
search the scriptures1 and explain them 
agreeably to the divine perfections1 and
 not think the worse of the gospel1     
which stands upon a firmer basis1 than  
the weak efforts of fallible men1 who   
use their best endeavours to defend it4 
,if we had not a surer rule of faith1   

than the methods of human reasoning1    
religion would be a matter of great     
uncertainty1 and we should be in danger 
of being tossed to and fro1 and carried 
about with every wind of doctrine4 ,but 
our best security against this1 will be 
our having hearts established with      
grace1 and rightly disposed to make a   
practical improvement of what we learn2 
and1 if we are enabled to follow on to  
know the ,lord with minds free from     
prejudice1 and1 if under a due sense of 
our weakness1 we humbly present our     
supplications to him1 who is able to    
make us wise to salvation1 we may then  
hope to attain to that knowledge of the 
truth1 as it is in ,jesus1 which shall  
be attended with peace and comfort here1
 and crowned with blessedness and glory 
hereafter4  ,may the great ,god1 in     
whose hand is the life and usefulness of
 all men1 succeed1 with his blessing1   
what is humbly offered to his service1  
so far as it is adapted thereunto1 and  
approved of by him1 that hereby it may  

be conducive to the spiritual advantage 
of professing families1 and the rising  
generation4  ,footnote #a3    ,and      
besides the above-mentioned ,indexes    
there are now added to this   edition an
 alphabetical index to the whole matters
 contained in the   work4  ,footnote #b3
    ,and the same reason may be assigned
 why this third is now offered to   the 
public4                        ,,the    
,,contents ,,of ,,the ,,first ,,volume4 
,,quest4 ,i4 ,of glorifying ,god1 and   
the enjoyment of him4   ,with what      
distinction the glorifying and enjoyment
 of ,god may both be said to be man's   
chief and highest end1 ,page #ac  ,what 
it is to glorify ,god ibid      ,how    
,god glorifies himself ibid      ,how   
creatures glorify him #ad  ,what it is  
to enjoy ,god #ag      ,the connexion   
between glorifying ,god and the         
enjoyment of him #ah  ,contentedness to 
perish1 that ,god may be glorified1     
unjustly made a mark of grace #ai  ,to  
be quickened to duty by a respect to the

 heavenly glory1 no sign of a mercenary 
spirit #bj   ,,quest4 ,,ii4 ,of the     
,being of a ,god4   ,reasons why we     
should be able to prove this by         
arguments #ba  ,the ,being of a ,god may
 be evinced1 ,from the light of nature  
ibid      ,what meant thereby ibid      
,how it proves the ,being of a ,god #bb 
,from the works of creation #bd         
from creatures below man #cb      from  
the structure of man's body #cc         
from the nature of his soul #cd         
from the nature and office of conscience
 #ce      from the boundless desires of 
the soul #cg  ,from the consent of all  
nations ibid      ,objection1 ,that     
there have been some speculative        
,atheists1     answered #ch      ,the   
belief of a ,god took not its rise from 
human policy #dj      ,it was not       
propagated merely by tradition ibid     
,from the works of providence #da  ,from
 the foretelling future events #db      
,from the provision made for all #dc    
,particularly for man's safety #dd  ,the

 objections taken from the prosperity of
 the wicked1 answered #de  ,nothing     
short of revelation sufficient to give a
 saving discovery of ,god #dg   ,,quest4
 ,,iii4 ,of the ,holy ,scripture4   ,the
 names given to it #dh      ,why called 
a ,testament #ej  ,how the want of a    
written word was supplied to the church 
before ,moses #eb  ,whether the church1 
under the ,old ,testament1 understood   
the spiritual meaning of the laws       
contained in it #ec  ,whether the       
prophets understood their own           
predictions #ed  ,how far the ,old      
,testament is still a rule #ef  ,how the
 scriptures are a complete revelation of
 the will of ,god #eh  ,the scripture a 
sufficient rule of faith and obedience  
#ei      ,its properties as a rule #fa  
,it is the only rule ibid  ,human       
traditions of no divine authority #fb   
,the ,popish doctrine of them confuted  
ibid  ,the ,canon of scripture preserved
 entire #fe      ,is not perverted #ff  
,,quest4 ,,iv4 ,of the ,divine          

,authority of the ,scriptures4   ,in    
what respects called divine #fi  ,a     
divine revelation necessary #ga  ,not   
contrary to ,god's perfections ibid     
,inspiration not impossible #gb  ,the   
scripture proved to be the word of ,god 
ibid  ,from the majesty of its style #gc
  ,from the purity of its doctrines #gd 
,its holiness considered absolutely ibid
      ,and as compared with other       
writings #gf  ,from the harmony of all  
its parts #gh  ,dr4 ,paley on the       
genuineness of the scriptures1 in a note
 #gi      ,its harmony shewn in the     
accomplishment of many predictions #hf  
,it doth not contradict itself #hg      
,various objections answered #hh        
,rules for reconciling seeming          
contradictions in scripture #id         
,grotius on their authority1 in a note  
#ig  ,from its scope and design #ih     
,from the character of the penmen #ajb  
,these were faithful ibid      ,they    
were not imposed on #ajf      ,how they 
might know they were under inspiration  

#ajh      ,they mistook not the devil's 
impressions for divine revelation #aji  
,the words as well as matter of         
scripture were given by inspiration     
#aaj  ,from its antiquity and           
preservation #aab  ,from the testimony  
of ,god by miracles ibid      ,two      
objections answered #aad1 #aae      ,by 
the conviction and conversion of sinners
 #aaf  ,how ,christians come to a full  
persuasion of the divinity of scripture 
#aah  ,the inward testimony of the      
,spirit explained ibid   ,,quest4 ,v1   
,,vi4 ,the principal matters contained  
in scripture4   ,,quest4 ,,vii4 ,of the 
nature and perfections of ,god4   ,how  
we may conceive aright of the divine    
perfections ibid  ,of the communicable  
and incommunicable perfections of ,god  
#abb  ,nothing common between ,god and  
the creature ibid  ,god is a ,spirit2   
what a ,spirit is #abc      ,difference 
between other spiritual substances and  
,god #abd      ,independent #abd4       
,infinitely perfect #abf                

,all-sufficient #abg4 ,when this        
perfection is in effect denied #abg     
,eternal #abi4 ,his eternal duration not
 successive #acb4 ,how the     parts of 
time are attributed to ,god #acc        
,immutable4 ,when immutability is a     
perfection4 ,how peculiar to ,god       
#ace4 ,arguments to prove him so #acf   
,incomprehensible #ach      ,omnipresent
 #aci1 and ,almighty #adj               
,wherein his power appears #ada         
,what things ,god cannot do #adb        
,the improvement of this subject #adc   
,omniscient #ade4 ,he knows all future  
contingencies #adg          ,properties 
of ,god's knowledge #adi4 ,its          
improvement #aej          ,when it is   
practically denied1 ibid4      ,wisdom  
of ,god infinite #aeb      ,different   
from knowledge ibid      ,wherein it    
appears ibid      ,in ,creation #aed4   
,providence #aee4 ,redemption #aef      
,in the constant government of the      
church ibid      ,inferences from ,god's
 wisdom #aeh  ,holiness of ,god infinite

 #aei      ,what it is1 ibid4 ,instances
 of it #afj      ,his suffering the     
entrance of sin1 was no refection on it 
#afa      ',tis the standard of         
doctrines #afb      ,instances of       
doctrines which lead to licentiousness  
#afb1 #afc      ,when ,god's holiness is
 contemned #afc  ,justice of ,god       
infinite #afd      ,how distinguished   
from his holiness ibid      ,glory1 how 
called a reward #afg      ,afflictions  
of believers not properly a punishment  
ibid  ,mercy and grace of ,god infinite 
#afh      ,difference between goodness1 
mercy1 grace1 and patience #afi         
,mercy is either common or special #aga 
,grace free and sovereign #agb          
,discriminating #agc4 ,instances of it1 
ibid4 ,afflictions         not          
inconsistent with it #agd               
,leads not to licentiousness ibid       
,patience of ,god1 what it is #agf      
,whether devils are objects of it ibid  
,instances of ,god's patience #agh      
,wherein manifested to the wicked #agi  

,not inconsistent with justice #aha     
,how to be improved #ahc      ,by whom  
it is abused #ahd  ,truth1 ,god is      
abundant therein #ahf      ,how he is   
called a ,god of truth #ahg             
,faithfulness of ,god1 ibid4 ,no        
impeachment hereof that some            
threatenings have not been executed     
#ahh4 ,nor that some promises have not  
presently been performed #aij      ,how 
this perfection is to be improved #aia  
,,quest4 ,,viii4 ,of the ,unity of the  
,godhead4   ,how ,god is styled the     
living ,god #aid  ,unity of the ,godhead
 proved ibid      ,abernethy on that    
subject1 in a note #aig      ,was not   
denied by the wiser ,heathen #bjj       
,inferences from it #bjb      ,how we   
should conceive of it #bjc  ,different  
modes used in speaking of the           
perfections of ,god #bjd   ,,quest4     
,,ix1 ,x1 ,,xi4 ,of the ,doctrine of the
 ,trinity4   ,calvin on the word        
,person1 in a note #bjg  ,the doctrine  
of the highest importance #bji      ,how

 to determine the importance of a       
doctrine #baa      ,what knowledge of it
 necessary to salvation #bac  ,it is a  
great mystery1 #bad4 ,what a mystery is1
 ibid4  ,it is incomprehensible #baf    
,dr4 ,bates on mysteries1 in a note #bag
      ,objections on this account       
answered #bbj      ,whether to receive  
it be to use words without ideas ibid   
,whether the revelation of it be        
unintelligible #bba      ,whether that  
which is unintelligible be the object of
 faith #bbb  ,how this doctrine promotes
 religion #bbc      ,in what sense      
revelation is an improvement of the     
light of nature     #bbd  ,not contrary 
to reason1 though above it #bbf         
,when a doctrine is contrary to reason  
ibid  ,it is not chargeable with        
,tritheism #bbg      ,the use of reason 
in proving doctrines of pure revelation 
#bbi  ,it cannot be known by the light  
of nature #bcj      ,how it was made    
known to ,adam ibid      ,whether the   
heathen knew it #bca          ,whitaker 

on the word ,logos used by the ,jews1 in
 a note #bcc  ,trinity1 not to be       
illustrated by similitudes #bce         
,rules for interpreting scriptures      
relating to it #bcf      ,the word      
,trinity explained #bci  ,person1 the   
word explained #bci      ,the difference
 between divine and human persons #bdb  
,sacred ,three1 in what respect ,one    
#bdc          ,dr4 ,jamieson on the     
,trinity1 in a note #bdc      ,how their
 glory equal1 how the same ibid         
,personality of the ,son1 #bdh4 ,of the 
,spirit #bej      ,not metaphorically   
ascribed to either #beb  ,eternal       
generation of the ,son1 how understood  
by many #bei      ,another method of    
accounting for it #bfa      ,this       
account thereof proved #bfd             
,scriptures relating to ,christ's       
sonship explained #bgd      ,christ's   
sonship as ,mediator1 considered #bgf   
,another view of the subject1 in a note 
#bgi  ,procession of the ,spirit1 how   
understood by many1 #bfj4 ,what it is   

#bfa      ,the scripture doctrine of it 
#bhj  conomy of the sacred ,three       
explained #bia      ,how distinct works 
are ascribed to them #bib  ,the ,deity  
of the ,son proved ibid  ,from his      
divine names #bie      ,jehovah ,god's  
incommunicable name #bif          ,never
 given to creatures #big          ,it is
 not applied to angels #cja             
,christ's ,deity proved from it #cjb    
,god and ,lord1 how applied in scripture
 #cjd          ,christ's ,deity proved  
thereby #cjf          ,this argued from 
#a ,tim4 iii4 #af4 #caa          ,and   
from ,acts xx4 #bh4 #cac4 ,rom4 ix4 #e4 
ibid4          ,from #a ,john v4 #bj4   
#cae4 ,isa4 ix4 #f4 #cag          ,from 
,titus ii4 #ac4 ibid4 ,john xx4 #bh4    
#cai      ,when the word ,god is used   
absolutely #cba          ,its meaning   
when so used #cba      ,in what sense   
,christ is styled ,god by the ,socinians
 #cbb  ,from the ascription of the      
divine nature to him in ,col4 ii4 #i4   
#cbe      ,in ,philip1 ii4 #f4 this     

explained and defended #cbf             
,genuineness of #a ,john v4 #g4 defended
 #cbi  ,from his conference with the    
,jews #cce  ,from his ,attributes #cdb  
,eternity1 #cdc4 ,immutability1 ibid4   
,omnipresence #cde          ,this proved
 from ,john iii4 #ac4 #cdg              
,omniscience1 #cdi4 ,objections answered
 #cej      ,omnipotency #ceb  ,from his 
glorious titles #cec  ,from his work of 
creation #ceg          ,the ,socinian   
account thereof #cei      ,christ no    
instrument in creation #cfa      ,how   
the ,father made the world by him #cfb  
,men only moral instruments in miracles 
#cfe  ,from his works of providence #cff
      ,christ the ,governor of all      
things #cfg  ,from his acting as ,judge 
#cfh      ,subserviency of his kingdom  
to the ,father #cga      ,christ as     
,mediator below1 yet equal with the     
,father #cgd      ,inferiority of       
,christ1 how to be understood in        
scripture #cgf  ,from the worship paid  
him #cgg      ,christ the ,object of    

religious worship #cgi  ,from ,baptism  
#chb  ,from the doxologies applied to   
him #chf      ,anti-,trinitarians differ
 about the worship due to ,christ #chh  
,right to divine worship is             
incommunicable #chi      ,objections    
against the deity of ,christ answered   
#cia      ,dr4 ,priestley's             
disingenuity1 in a note #cig  ,of the   
divinity of the ,holy ,ghost #cih       
,his divinity proved ibid      ,from    
,acts v4 #c1 #d4 #djj      ,from his    
divine ,attributes #djd      ,from his  
divine works #dje          ,such works  
performed by him #djg      ,from the    
worship given to him #djh               
,objections answered #daj  ,practical   
inferences from the doctrine of the     
,trinity #dad   ,,quest4 ,,xii1 ,,xiii4 
,of ,god's ,decrees4   ,some things     
premised in general #dag                
,dissuasives from prejudices #dai  ,the 
general method laid down #dba  ,in what 
sense ,god fore-ordained all things #dbb
      ,that he did so1 proved #dbd      

,dr4 ,smalley on the origin of sin #dbe 
,purpose of ,god free1 wise1 holy #dcb  
,how it renders salvation necessary #dhd
      ,it is unchangeable #dha          
,repentance1 how ascribed to ,god #dhc  
,predestination1 the word explained #dcc
      ,consequences of denying it #dii  
,election1 the word explained #dcd      
,how used in the ,old ,testament #dch   
,how in the ,new #dda      ,fathers1    
their sense about this doctrine #ejg    
,election to salvation asserted in      
scripture #ddb      ,churches1 how      
styled elect #ddc  ,chosen1 part of     
mankind were so #ddg          ,these    
styled a ,remnant #ddi      ,a ,remnant 
chosen out of the ,jews #dej      ,men  
elected to sanctification as well as    
salvation #dfa      ,acts xiii4 #dh4    
explained and defended #dfc      ,men   
chosen in ,christ #dfg  ,supra-lapsarian
 and ,sub-lapsarian schemes differ #ddf 
,proofs of the doctrine of ,election    
ibid4          from ,god's              
fore-knowledge #deb          from his   

giving the means of grace #ded          
,jacob loved1 ,esau hated1 explained    
#def          ,objections answered #deh 
,the opposite doctrine1 how defended    
#eja  ,properties of ,election #dfi     
,misrepresentations of it answered #dfe 
,reprobation1 how to be explained #dhf  
,preterition a branch of it 7vide the   
note1 #ebi7 #dhh  ,predamnation         
considered from ,jude1 ver4 #d4 #dia    
,rom4 ix4 #bb4 and xi4 #g-aj4 explained 
#dib      #b ,thes4 ii4 #aa1 #ab4 ,psal4
 lxxxi4 #ab4 ,john xii4 #ci1 #dj4       
explained     #did  ,wicked1 how made   
for the day of evil #die  ,will of ,god 
secret and revealed #dga      ,is free1 
sovereign1 and unconditional #dgf       
,its absoluteness #dgg      ,that it is 
conditional1 cannot be proved from      
scripture #dhj      ,conditional        
propositions1 how understood there #dgi 
,how ,god will have all saved #eja      
,expectation of ,god not disappointed by
 the will of man #eje      ,god not     
really disappointed1 grieved1 or        

resisted #ejf  ,bounds of life fixed by 
him #ejh  ,stoical fate1 how it differs 
from ,god's decrees #eaf  ,objections   
against ,election answered #ejg         
,practical improvement of it #ebf  ,dr4 
,williams on election1 in a note #ebi   
,,the ,,introduction4   ,before we enter
 on our present undertaking1 we shall   
premise a few things leading to the     
subject matter thereof2 and that we may 
begin with what is most obvious1 let it 
be considered1  ,i4 ,that it is a duty  
incumbent on all who profess the        
,christian name1 to be well acquainted  
with those great doctrines on which our 
faith1 hope1 and worship are founded2   
for1 without the knowledge hereof1 we   
must necessarily be at a loss as to the 
way of salvation1 which none has a right
 to prescribe1 but he who is the author 
thereof4#c  ,,ii4 ,this knowledge of    
divine truth must be derived from the   
holy scriptures1 which are the only     
fountain of spiritual wisdom1 whereby we
 are instructed in those things that    

could have been known no other way1 but 
by divine revelation4  ,,iii4 ,it will  
be of singular use for us not only to   
know the doctrines that are contained in
 scripture2 but to observe their        
connexion and dependence on one another1
 and to digest them into such a method1 
that subsequent truths may give light to
 them that went before2 or to lay them  
down in such a way1 that the whole      
scheme of religion may be comprised in a
 narrow compass1 and1 as it were1 beheld
 with one view1 which will be a very    
great help to memory3 and this is what  
we call a system of divine truths1 or a 
methodical collection of the chief      
articles of our religion1 adapted to the
 capacity of those who need to be taught
 the first principles of the oracles of 
,god3 and if they are designed to give  
the world a specimen of that form of    
sound words1 which the church thinks    
itself obliged to hold fast1 and        
stedfastly to adhere to1 then we call it
 a confession of faith2 or1 if digested 

into questions and answers1 we call it a
 catechism4 ,and though systems of      
divinity1 confessions of faith1 and     
catechisms1 are treated with contempt1  
instead of better arguments1 by many who
 are no friends to the doctrines which  
they contain1 and who appear to be      
partial in their resentment1 in as much 
as they do not dislike those treatises  
which are agreeable to their own        
sentiments1 by whatever name they are   
called2 yet we are bound to conclude    
that the labours of those who have been 
happy in the sense they have given of   
scripture1 and the method in which they 
have explained the doctrines thereof1 in
 what form soever they have been1 are a 
great blessing to us2 though we are far 
from concluding that they are of equal  
authority with scripture1 or that every 
word which they use is infallible2 nor  
do we regard them any farther than as   
they are agreeable to1 or sufficiently  
proved from scripture4  ,,iv4           
,confessions of faith and catechisms are

 not to be reckoned a novel invention1  
or not consonant to the scripture rule1 
since they are nothing else but a       
peculiar way of preaching or instructing
 us in divine truths4 ,therefore1 since 
scripture lays down no certain          
invariable rule concerning this matter1 
the same command that warrants preaching
 the word in any method1 includes the   
explaining of it1 as occasion serves1 in
 a catechetical one4  ,v4 ,as there are 
many excellent bodies of divinity       
printed in our own and foreign          
languages1 and collections of sermons on
 the principal heads thereof2 so there  
are various catechisms1 or methodical   
summaries of divine truths1 which1 when 
consonant to scripture1 are of great    
advantage to all ,christians1 whether   
elder or younger4  ,,vi4 ,the catechisms
 composed by the ,assembly of ,divines  
at ,westminster1 are esteemed as not    
inferior to any that are extant1 either 
in our own or foreign languages1 the    
doctrines therein contained being of the

 highest importance1 and consonant to   
scripture2 and the method in which they 
are laid down is so agreeable1 that it  
may serve as a directory for the ranging
 our ideas of the common heads of       
divinity in such an order1 that what    
occurs under each of them may be reduced
 to its proper place4 ,it is the larger 
of them that we have attempted to       
explain and regulate our method by2     
because it contains several heads of    
divinity not touched on in the shorter4 
,and if1 in any particular instance1 we 
are obliged to recede from the common   
mode of speaking1 7though it is to be   
hoped not from the common faith1 once   
delivered to the saints7 we submit our  
reasoning to the judgment of those who  
are disposed to pardon less mistakes1   
and improve what comes with sufficient  
evidence to the best purposes4  ,the    
work indeed is large1 but the vast      
variety of subjects will render it more 
tolerable2 the form in which it appears 
is somewhat differing from that in which

 it was first delivered1 in a public    
audience1 though that may probably be no
 disadvantage to it1 especially since it
 is rather designed to be read in       
families than committed to memory1 and  
repeated by different persons1 as it has
 been4 ,the plainness of the style may  
contribute to its usefulness2 and its   
being less embarrassed with scholastic  
terms than some controversial writings  
are1 may render it more intelligible to 
private ,christians1 whose instruction  
and advantage is designed thereby4 ,it  
would be too great a vanity to expect   
that it should pass through the world   
without that censure which is common to 
all attempts of the like nature1 since  
men's sentiments in divinity differ as  
much as their faces2 and some are not   
disposed to weigh those arguments that  
are brought to support any scheme of    
doctrine1 which differs from what they  
have before received4 ,however1 the work
 comes forth with this advantage1 that  
it has already conflicted with some of  

the difficulties it is like to meet     
with1 as well as been favoured with some
 success1 and therefore the event hereof
 is left in his hand whose cause and    
truth is endeavoured to be maintained4  
,footnote #c3    8,,christianity10 it   
hath been said1 8is not founded in      
argument40 ,if it   were only meant by  
these words1 that the religion of ,jesus
 could not1   by the single aid of      
reasoning1 produce its full effect upon 
the   heart2 every true ,christian would
 cheerfully subscribe to them4 ,no      
arguments unaccompanied by the          
influences of the ,holy ,spirit1 can    
convert the soul from sin to ,god2      
though even to such conversion1         
arguments are1 by the agency of the     
,spirit1 rendered subservient4   ,again1
 if we were to understand by this       
aphorism1 that the principles   of our  
religion could never have been          
discovered1 by the natural and          
unassisted faculties of man2 this       
position1 ,i presume would be as        

little disputed as the former4 ,but if1 
on the contrary1 under the   cover of an
 ambiguous expression1 it is intended to
 insinuate1 that   those principles1    
from their very nature1 can admit no    
rational   evidence of their truth1 7and
 this1 by the way1 is the only meaning  
which can avail our antagonists7 the    
gospel1 as well as common sense1        
loudly reclaims against it4    8,the    
,lord ,,jesus ,,christ1 the author of   
our religion1 often argued1 both   with 
his disciples and with his adversaries1 
as with reasonable men1   on the        
principles of reason1 without this      
faculty1 he well knew1 they   could not 
be susceptible either of religion or of 
law4 ,he argued from   prophecy1 and the
 conformity of the event to the         
prediction4 ,luke   xxiv4 #be1 c4 ,john 
v4 #ci1  #df4 ,he argued from the       
testimony of ,john   the ,baptist1 who  
was generally acknowledged to be a      
prophet4 ,john v4   #cb1  #cc4 ,he      
argued from the miracles which he       

himself performed1 ,john   v4 #cf4 x4   
#be1 #cg1 #ch4 xiv4 #aj1 #aa4 as        
uncontrovertible evidences1 that   ,,god
 ,almighty operated by him1 and had sent
 him4 ,he expostulates with   his       
enemies1 that they did not use their    
reason on this subject4   ,why1 says he1
 even of yourselves judge ye not what is
 right8 ,luke   xii4 #eg4 ,in like      
manner we are called upon by the        
apostles of our   ,lord1 to act the part
 of wise men and judge impartially of   
what   they say4 #a ,cor4 x4 #ae4 ,those
 who do so1 are highly commended1 for   
the candour and prudence they discover1 
in an affair of so great   consequence4 
,acts xvii4 #aa4 ,we are even commanded1
 to be always ready   to give an answer 
to every man that asketh us a reason of 
our hope2   #a ,pet4 iii4 #ae4 in       
meekness to instruct them that oppose   
themselves2   #b ,tim4 ii4 #be4 and     
earnestly to contend for the faith which
 was   once delivered to the saints4    
,jude #c4 ,god has neither in natural   

nor   revealed religion1 left himself   
without a witness2 but has in both      
given moral and external evidence1      
sufficient to convince the   impartial1 
to silence the gainsayer1 and to render 
inexcusable the   atheist and the       
unbeliever4 ,this evidence it is our    
duty to attend to1   and candidly to    
examine4 ,we must prove all things1 as  
we are   expressly enjoined in holy     
writ1 if we would ever hope to hold fast
   that which is good4 #a ,thess4 v4    
#ba40    ,,campbell4                    
,quest4 ,i4       ,,quest4 ,i4 ,what is 
the chief and highest end of man8       
,,answ4 ,man's chief and highest end is 
to glorify ,god1 and fully to     enjoy 
him for ever4   #a4 ,it is supposed1 in 
this answer1 that every intelligent     
creature1 acting as such1 designs some  
end1 which excites endeavours to attain 
it4  #b4 ,the ends for which we act1 if 
warrantable1 may be considered as to    
their degree of excellency1 and1 in     
proportion to it1 are to be pursued by  

proper means conducing thereto4  #c4    
,there is one that may be termed the    
chief and highest end1 as having an     
excellency and tendency to make us      
blessed above all others3 this consists1
 as it is observed in this answer1 in   
the glorifying and eternal enjoyment of 
,god1 the fountain of blessedness4  ,if 
it be enquired with what propriety these
 may both be called chief and highest1  
the answer is obvious and easy1 viz4    
,that the former is absolutely so1      
beyond which nothing more excellent or  
desirable can be conceived2 the latter  
is the highest or best in its kind1     
which1 notwithstanding1 is referred1 as 
a means leading to the other2 and both  
these ends1 which1 with this            
distinction1 we call chief and highest1 
are to be particularly considered by us1
 together with the connexion that there 
is between them4#d  ,i4 ,we are to      
consider what it is to glorify ,god4 ,in
 order to our understanding of this1 let
 it be premised1  #a4 ,that there is a  

great difference between ,god's         
glorifying himself and our glorifying   
him2 he glorifies himself when he       
demonstrates or shews forth his glory2  
we glorify him by ascribing to him the  
glory that is his due3 even as the sun  
discovers its brightness by its rays1   
and the eye beholds it4 ,god glorifies  
himself1 by furnishing us with matter   
for praise2 we glorify him when we offer
 praise1 or give unto him the glory due 
to his name4  #b4 ,creatures are said to
 glorify ,god various ways3 some things 
do it only objectively1 as by them1     
angels and men are led to glorify him2  
thus the heavens declare his glory1     
,psal4 xix4 #a4 ,the same might be said 
of all other inanimate creatures which  
glorify ,god1 by answering the end of   
their creation1 though they know it not3
 but intelligent creatures1 and         
particularly men1 are said to glorify   
,god actively2 and this they do by      
admiring and adoring his divine         
perfections3 these1 as incomprehensible1

 are the object of admiration2 and      
accordingly the apostle admires the     
divine wisdom1 ,rom4 xi4 #cc4 ,o the    
depth of the riches1 both of the wisdom 
and knowledge of ,god2 how unsearchable 
are his judgments1 and his ways past    
finding out6 and as they are divine1 so 
they are the object of adoration3 ,god  
is to be admired in all the displays of 
his relative or manifestative glory2 and
 his work which men behold1 is to be    
magnified1 ,job xxxvi4 #bd4 ,but he is  
to be adored more especially for his    
essential perfections4  ,we are to      
glorify ,god1 by recommending1          
proclaiming1 and setting forth his      
excellency to others4 ,what we have the 
highest value for1 we desire that others
 may have the same regard to it with    
ourselves3 thus it is observed by the   
evangelist1 that when the disciples     
received their first conviction that    
,jesus was the ,messiah1 they imparted  
this to others2 as ,andrew to ,peter1   
and ,philip to ,nathanael1 ,john i4 #da1

 #de4 so the woman of ,samaria being    
convinced hereof1 endeavoured to        
persuade all her neighbours to believe  
in him1 as she did1 ,john iv4 #bh1 #bi4 
,thus we glorify ,god by making mention 
of his name with reverence1 proclaiming 
his goodness with thankfulness1 and     
inviting others1 as the ,psalmist does1 
,psal4 xxxiv4 #h4 to taste and see that 
he is good4  ,but since this is a very  
comprehensive duty including in it the  
whole of practical religion1 it may be  
considered under the following          
particulars4  #a4 ,we glorify ,god by   
confessing and taking shame to ourselves
 for all the sins we have committed1    
which is interpretatively to acknowledge
 the holiness of his nature1 and of his 
law1 which the apostle asserts to be    
holy1 just1 and good1 ,rom4 vii4 #ab4   
,this ,joshua advises ,achan to do2 to  
give glory to ,god1 by making confession
 to him1 ,josh4 vii4 #ai4 ,and thus the 
penitent thief1 who was crucified with  
our ,saviour1 glorified ,god1 by        

confessing that he received the due     
reward of his deeds1 ,luke xxiii4 #dj1  
#da4 ,so did the ,levites1 in their     
prayer recorded by ,nehemiah1 when they 
said to ,god1 ,thou art just in all that
 is brought upon us1 for thou hast done 
right1 but we have done wickedly1 ,neh4 
ix4 #cc4  #b4 ,by loving and delighting 
in him above all things1 which is to act
 as those who own the transcendent      
amiableness of his perfections1 as the  
object of their highest esteem4 ,thus   
the ,psalmist says1 ,psal4 lxxiii4 #be4 
,whom have ,i in heaven but thee2 and   
there is none1 or nothing1 upon earth1  
that ,i desire besides thee4  #c4 ,by   
believing and trusting in him1          
committing all our concerns1 both in    
life and death1 for time and eternity1  
into his hands3 thus ,abraham is said to
 be strong in faith1 giving glory to    
,god1 ,rom4 iv4 #bj4 ,and the apostle   
,paul1 #b ,tim4 i4 #ab4 to have         
committed his all to him4  #d4 ,by a    
fervent zeal for his honour2 and that   

either for the honour of his truth and  
gospel1 when denied1 disbelieved1 or    
perverted2 or for the honour of his     
holiness1 or any of his other           
perfections1 when they are reflected on1
 or reproached1 either by the tongues or
 actions of those who set themselves    
against him4  #e4 ,by improving our     
talents1 and bringing forth fruit in    
proportion to the means we enjoy2       
herein1 says our ,saviour1 is my ,father
 glorified1 that ye bear much fruit1    
,john xv4 #h4  #f4 ,by walking humbly1  
thankfully1 and chearfully before ,god4 
,humility acknowledges that infinite    
distance which is between him and us2   
retains a due sense of our own          
unworthiness of all we have or hope for2
 and owns every thing we receive to be  
the gift of grace2 ,by the grace of     
,god1 says the apostle1 ,i am what ,i   
am1 #a ,cor4 xv4 #aj4 ,thankfulness     
gives him the glory1 as the author of   
every mercy2 and accordingly sets a due 
value on it1 in that respect4 ,and to   

walk chearfully before him1 is to       
recommend his service as most agreeable1
 whereby we discover that we do not     
repent that we were engaged therein2    
which is what the ,psalmist intends1    
when he says1 ,psal4 c4 #b4 ,serve the  
,lord with gladness4  #g4 ,by           
heavenly-mindedness2 when we desire to  
be with him to behold his glory4 ,to    
which we must add1 that all this is to  
be done in the name of ,christ1 our     
great ,mediator1 and by strength derived
 from him4  #h4 ,as we are to glorify   
,god1 by yielding obedience to his      
commanding will1 as in the aforesaid    
instances1 so we are to do it by an     
entire submission to his disposing will2
 particularly1 when under afflictive    
dispensations of providence1 we must own
 his sovereignty and right to do what he
 will with us as his own1 ,matth4 xx4   
#ae4 and that these afflictions are     
infinitely less than our iniquities     
deserve1 ,ezra ix4 #ac4 ,and we must    
adore his wisdom and goodness in trying 

our graces hereby1 and dealing with us  
in such a way as is needful1 and that   
only for a season1 #a ,pet4 i4 #f4 ,and 
we are to own his goodness in suiting   
our strength to our burdens1 and        
over-ruling all this for our spiritual  
advantage4 ,it also consists in an easy1
 patient1 and contented frame of spirit1
 without the least murmuring or repining
 thought2 concluding1 that whatever he  
does is well done1 ,psal4 cxix4 #fe4    
,and1 which is something more1 in       
rejoicing that we are counted worthy to 
suffer the loss of all things1 yea1 even
 of life itself1 if called to it1 for   
his sake2 of which we have various      
instances in scripture1 ,acts v4 #da4   
,heb4 x4 #cd4 ,acts xx4 #bd4  ,moreover1
 we ought to glorify ,god in all the    
natural1 civil1 and religious actions of
 life1 which are to be consecrated or   
devoted to him4 ,we enjoy the blessings 
of life to no purpose if we do not live 
to the ,lord1 and thankfully acknowledge
 that we receive them all from his hand2

 and whatever the calling be1 wherewith 
we are called1 we must therein abide    
with him1 and see that we have his      
warrant to engage in it1 and expect     
success from his blessing attending it1 
or else it will be to no purpose4 ,thus 
says ,moses1 ,it is the ,lord thy ,god  
that giveth thee power to get wealth1   
,deut4 viii4 #ah4 ,and1 in all our      
dealings with men1 we are to consider   
ourselves as under the inspection of the
 all-seeing eye of ,god1 to whom we are 
accountable for all we do1 and should be
 induced hereby1 to exercise ourselves  
always to keep consciences void of      
offence towards ,god and man4  ,as for  
religious duties1 wherein we have more  
immediately to do with ,god1 we are to  
glorify him1 by taking up a profession  
of religion in general1 as being        
influenced by his authority1 encouraged 
by his promised assistance1 and         
approving ourselves to him1 as the      
searcher of hearts3 and we must take    
heed that we do not rest in an outward  

form or shew of godliness1 without the  
power thereof2 or in having a name to   
live without a principal of spiritual   
life1 by which we may be enabled to put 
forth living and spiritual actions      
agreeable thereunto3 and all these      
religious duties must be performed by   
faith1 whereby we depend on ,christ1 our
 great ,mediator1 both for assistance   
and acceptance2 by which means we       
glorify him1 as the fountain of all     
grace1 in whom alone both our persons   
and services are accepted in the sight  
of ,god1 and redound to his glory4 ,and 
this is to be done at all times2 so that
 when our thoughts are not directly     
conversant about any of the divine      
perfections1 as it often happens1 when  
we are engaged in some of the more      
minute1 or indifferent actions of life2 
yet we are to glorify him habitually1 as
 having our hearts right with him2 so   
that whatever we do may refer ultimately
 to his glory4 ,as every step the       
traveller takes is toward his journey's 

end1 though it may not be every moment  
in his thoughts2 so the less important  
actions of life should be subservient to
 those that are of greater consequence1 
in which the honour of ,god and religion
 is more immediately concerned2 in which
 sense we maybe said to glorify him     
therein4  ,thus having considered1 that 
it is our indispensable duty to make the
 glory of ,god our highest end in all   
our actions1 we might farther add1 as a 
motive to enforce it1 that ,god is the  
first cause of all things1 and his own  
glory was the end he designed in all his
 works1 whether of creation or          
providence3 and it is certain1 that this
 is the most excellent end we can       
propose to ourselves2 therefore the most
 valuable actions of life ought to be   
referred to it1 and our hearts most set 
upon it2 otherwise we act below the     
dignity of our nature2 and1 while other 
creatures1 designed only to glorify him 
objectively1 answer the end for which   
they were made1 we1 by denying him that 

tribute of praise which is due from us1 
abuse our superior faculties1 and live  
in vain4  ,,ii4 ,the next thing to be   
considered is what it is to enjoy ,god4 
#a4 ,this supposes a propriety in1 or   
claim to him1 as our ,god4 ,we cannot be
 said to enjoy that which we have no    
right or claim to1 as one man cannot be 
said to enjoy an estate which belongs to
 another2 so ,god must be our ,god in   
covenant1 or we cannot enjoy him2 and   
that he is so1 with respect to all that 
fear him1 is evident1 inasmuch as he    
gives them leave to say1 ,psal4 xlviii4 
#ad1 ,this ,god is our ,god2 and1 ,psal4
 lxvii1 #f4 ,god1 even our ,god1 shall  
bless us4  #b4 ,to enjoy ,god1 is to    
have a special gracious communion with  
him1 to converse or walk with him1 and  
to delight in him2 as when we can say1  
#a ,john i4 #c4 ,truly our fellowship is
 with the ,father1 and with his ,son    
,jesus ,christ4 ,this enjoyment of ,god1
 or communion with him1 is1  7#a47 ,that
 which we are blessed with in this      

world1 which is but imperfect1 as we    
know and love him but in part1 and our  
communion with him is often interrupted 
and weakened1 through the prevalency of 
indwelling sin3 and that joy and delight
 which arises from thence is often      
clouded and sullied2 and1 at best1 we   
enjoy him here but in a mediate way1 in 
and under his ordinances1 as agreeable  
to this present state4  7#b47 ,believers
 shall enjoy him perfectly and          
immediately in heaven1 without          
intermission or abatement1 and that for 
ever2 this is called1 ,seeing him as he 
is1 #a ,john iii4 #b4 and being with him
 where he is1 to behold his glory1 ,john
 xvii4 #bd4 ,and in order hereto1 their 
souls shall be made capable or receptive
 hereof1 by the removal not only of all 
sinful but natural imperfections1 and   
shall be more enlarged1 as well as have 
brighter discoveries of the divine      
glory3 and this shall be attended with a
 perfect freedom from all the           
consequences of sin2 such as sorrow1    

divine desertion1 and the many evils    
that attend us in this present life2 as 
well as from all temptations to it4 ,so 
that their happiness shall be confirmed 
and secured to them1 and that with this 
advantage1 that it shall be impossible  
for them to be dispossessed of it4 ,this
 is certainly the most desirable end1   
next to the glory of ,god1 that can be  
intended or pursued by us4#e  ,,iii4    
,this leads us to consider the connexion
 that there is between our glorifying   
,god and enjoyment of him4 ,god has     
joined these two together1 so that one  
shall not be attained without the other4
 ,it is the highest presumption to      
expect to be made happy with him for    
ever1 without living to his glory here4 
,for in as much as heaven is a state of 
perfect blessedness1 they1 who shall    
hereafter be possessed of it1 must be   
trained up1 or made meet for it2 which  
is the grand design of all the means of 
grace4 ,how preposterous would it be to 
suppose1 that they1 who have no regard  

to the honour of ,god here1 shall be    
crowned with glory1 honour1 immortality1
 and eternal life1 in his presence      
hereafter6 ,therefore a life of holiness
 is absolutely necessary to the heavenly
 blessedness2 and since these two are so
 connected together1 they who experience
 the one1 shall not fail of the other2  
for this is secured to them by the      
faithfulness of ,god1 who has promised  
to give grace and glory1 ,psal4 lxxxiv4 
#aa4 ,therefore1 he who begins a good   
work in them1 will perform it1 ,phil4 i4
 #f4 and give them the end of their     
faith1 even the salvation of their      
souls1 #a ,pet4 i4 #h4  ,from the       
connexion that there is between our     
glorifying and enjoying ,god1 we may    
infer1  #a4 ,that it is a very          
preposterous thing for any one to assign
 this as a mark of grace1 that persons  
must be content to perish eternally1    
that ,god may be glorified4 ,it is true1
 it is alleged in favour of this        
supposition1 that ,moses1 and the       

apostle ,paul1 seem to give countenance 
to it2 one by saying1 ,exod4 xxxii4 #cb4
 ,if thou wilt forgive their sin2 and1  
if not1 blot me1 ,i pray thee1 out of   
the book which thou hast written2 the   
other1 ,rom4 ix4 #c4 ,i could wish that 
myself were accursed from ,christ1 for  
my brethren and kinsmen according to the
 flesh4  ,but to this it may be         
answered1 that ,moses1 in desiring to be
 blotted out of the book which ,god had 
written1 must not be supposed to be     
willing to perish eternally for         
,israel's sake2 but he is content to be 
blotted out of the book of the living1  
or to have his name no more remembered  
on earth2 and seems to decline the      
honour which ,god had offered him1 when 
he said1 ,exod4 xxxii4 #aj4 ,let me     
alone1 that ,i may consume them2 and ,i 
will make of thee a great nation2 he    
desires not the advancement of his own  
family1 if ,israel must cease to be a   
people1 to whom ,god had promised to be 
a ,god4  ,as for the apostle ,paul's    

wish1 it is either1 as some suppose1 a  
rash and inconsiderate flight of zeal   
for ,god1 and so not warrantable1 though
 in some respects proceeding from a good
 principle2 or rather1 as ,i humbly     
conceive the meaning is1 he could wish  
himself accursed from ,christ1 so far as
 is consistent with his love2 or he is  
content to be under the external marks  
of ,god's displeasure2 or deprived of   
the comfortable sensation of his love1  
or many of those fruits and effects     
thereof1 which the believer enjoys in   
this life3 for ,i cannot1 in the least1 
think he desires to be deprived of a    
real interest in it1 or to be eternally 
separated from ,christ1 on any condition
 whatsoever4#f  #b4 ,since the eternal  
enjoyment of ,god is one great end which
 we ought to have in view1 it is no sign
 of a mercenary spirit to have an eye to
 the heavenly glory1 to quicken us to   
duty2 seeing this is promised by ,god to
 those who are faithful1 thus1 ,psal4   
lxxxiii4 #bd4 ,thou shalt guide me with 

thy counsel1 and afterward receive me to
 glory4 ,the like promises we have in   
many other scriptures1 which are        
designed to excite our desire and hope  
of this blessedness2 therefore the      
exercise of these graces1 from such     
motives1 is far from being unlawful3    
yea1 it is commended in the saints1 who 
are said1 ,heb4 xi4 #af4 to desire a    
better country1 that is1 an heavenly4   
,and ,moses is commended for having the 
recompence of reward in view1 when he   
preferred the reproach of ,christ before
 the treasures of ,egypt1 ver4 #bf4     
,nevertheless1 when this respect to     
future blessedness is warrantable1 it   
must be considered as an expedient for  
our glorifying ,god1 while we behold his
 glory2 and when we consider it as a    
reward1 we must not look upon it as what
 is merited by our service1 or conferred
 in a way of debt1 but as a reward of   
grace1 given freely to us1 though       
founded on the merits of ,christ4       
,footnote #d3    ,he who glorifies ,god 

intentionally1 thereby promotes his own 
happiness4 ,our enjoying ,god is        
glorifying him4 ,the two objects        
coalesce4 ,vide note on page #ai4       
,footnote #e3    ,the answer connected  
with this question makes the glorifying 
and   enjoyment but one end2 and thus   
the enjoyment is supposed to consist    
in the glorifying ,god4  ,footnote #f3  
,it is not probable that the idea of a  
book of life1 which is not to   be      
understood literally1 was at all in use 
in the days of ,moses4 ,the   term  used
 by ,paul is not hypothetical1 but      
affirmative1 and in   the past tense1 ,i
 did wish1 or rather ,i was wishing to  
be   separated from ,christ4 ,the truth 
of this assertion no one1 who is        
acquainted with his history1 can doubt2 
for he had been a persecutor4   ,such a 
wish1 made after he was a subject of    
saving grace1 would have   been         
unnatural1 irrelevant1 impious and      
impossible4 ,it has been   nevertheless1
 zealously contended by some learned and

 pious modern   divines that1 8the      
benevolent person is disposed1 and      
willing to give   up1 and relinquish his
 own interest and happiness1 when       
inconsistent   with the public good1 or 
the greatest good of the whole40#g ,by  
benevolence they mean love to being in  
general1 without regard to   any        
excellency in that being1 8unless mere  
existence0#h be such4 ,in   this they   
place all virtue1 and all religion4 ,and
 that they may the   more clearly       
distinguish this species of love from   
that of   complacency and gratitude1 in 
which the party ever has his eye   upon 
his own advantage1 they usually adopt   
the phrase disinterested   benevolence1 
yet not wholly discarding the idea of   
the party's own   interest1 but viewing 
it only on the general scale with that  
of all   other beings4    ,true holiness
 consists in a disposition1 and suitable
 expressions of   it1 in conformity to  
the revealed will of ,god2 so far as    
this   accords with the good of the     

whole1 such benevolence will run        
parallel   with holiness2 but every     
attempt to substitute any other rule of 
action or ground of obligation than the 
authoritatively expressed will   of     
,god1 approaches the crime of idolatry4 
,it is certainly a very high   stand we 
assume1 when we profess to pass by all  
the amiableness1 and   excellency of the
 divine character2 and all his goodness1
 and mercy to   us2 and to love his     
being only together with created        
existences1   with the same independent1
 and dignified love of benevolence1     
which he   exercises towards his        
helpless creatures4 ,all the displays of
 his   perfections and compassions seem 
designed rather to elicit the           
affections of complacency and gratitude4
 ,that the advantages of   religion in  
this world1 and the next may be sought  
from selfish1 and   mercenary views is a
 lamentable truth2 but because carnal   
minds may   find their own destruction  
in aiming at the blessings which the    

spiritual only can enjoy1 this is no    
reason wherefore the saints   should not
 find their ultimate interest to        
accompany their duty in   every         
instance4 ,accordingly1 for their       
encouragement1 the blessings of   peace1
 and spiritual consolations here1 and of
 eternal happiness1 are   exhibited to  
their view in glowing colours4 ,but this
 would not have   been done if it were  
essential to the character of their     
love1 that   they should be willing to  
be separated from ,christ4 ,that we have
 by   nature a fearful propensity to    
earthly good1 which is vain1 illusory1  
disgusting and debasing1 must be        
acknowledged2 and that we are           
therefore required to deny our natural  
selves is known unto every   ,christian4
 ,but it by no means results1 that      
because we must turn away   from the    
temptations of temporal things1 we may  
not aspire to those   blessings which   
are spiritual and eternal4 ,god himself 
is eternally   happy in his own self    

complacency1 and has encouraged us to   
expect   everlasting happiness from the 
same source4 ,jesus ,christ1 whose      
benevolence towards us is an eternal    
appeal to our gratitude1 which          
supposes a regard to our own interest2  
in suffering death had respect   also to
 the joy which was set before him1 and  
shall see of the travail   of his soul  
and shall be satisfied4 ,love is        
essential to duty1 without   which it is
 forced1 and cannot be deemed obedience 
in the view of him   who searches the   
heart4 ,this has been noticed by the    
,saviour1 but he   has omitted those    
distinctions1 which are accounted so    
important in   modern times2 yet his    
doctrines are not less spiritual1 than  
ours   after we have sublimated the     
gospel to the highest pitch of          
refinement4  ,footnote #g3    ,dr4      
,,hopkins4  ,footnote #h3    ,president 
,,edwards4                              
,quest4 ,,ii4       ,,quest4 ,,ii4 ,how 
doth it appear that there is a ,god8    

,,answ4 ,the very light of nature in    
man1 and the works of ,god1 declare     
that there is a ,god2 but his word and  
,spirit only1 do sufficiently     and   
effectually reveal him unto men for     
their salvation4   ,before we enter on  
the proof of this important doctrine1   
let it be premised1 that we ought to be 
able to prove by arguments1 or give a   
reason of our belief that there is a    
,god4  #a4 ,because it is the foundation
 of all natural and revealed religion2  
and therefore it must not be received   
merely by tradition1 as though there    
were no other reason why we believe it1 
but because others do so1 or because we 
have been instructed herein from our    
childhood2 for that is unbecoming the   
dignity and importance of the subject1  
and would be an instance of great       
stupidity1 especially seeing we have so 
full and demonstrative an evidence      
thereof1 taken from the whole frame of  
nature2 in which there is nothing but   
what affords an argument to confirm our 

belief that there is a ,god4  #b4 ,there
 is a great deal of atheism in our      
hearts1 by reason whereof we are prone  
sometimes to call in question the being1
 perfections1 and providence of ,god4   
,to which we may also add1 that the     
,devil frequently injects atheistical   
thoughts into our minds2 which is a     
great affliction to us1 and renders it  
necessary that we should use all        
possible means for our establishment in 
this great truth4  #c4 ,the abounding of
 atheism in the world1 and the boldness 
of many in arguing against this truth1  
renders it necessary that we should be  
able to defend it1 that we may stop the 
mouths of blasphemers1 and so plead the 
cause of ,god1 and assert his being and 
perfections against those that deny     
them2 as ,psal4 xiv4 #a4 ,the fool1 who 
saith in his heart there is no ,god4    
#d4 ,this will greatly tend to establish
 our faith in those comfortable truths  
that arise from our interest in him1 and
 give us a more solid foundation for our

 hope1 as excited by his promises1 which
 receive all their force and virtue from
 those perfections which are implied in 
the idea of a ,god4  #e4 ,this will make
 us set a due value on his works1 by    
which we are led to conclude his eternal
 power and ,godhead1 and so to admire   
him in them1 ,job xxxvi4 #bd4 ,remember 
that thou magnify his work1 which men   
behold4  ,we shall now consider those   
arguments mentioned in this answer1 by  
which the being of a ,god may be        
evinced2 as1  ,i4 ,from the light of    
nature in man1 by which we understand   
that reason which he is endowed with1   
whereby he is distinguished from1 and   
rendered superior to1 all other         
creatures in this lower world1 whereby  
he is able to observe the connexion of  
things1 and their dependence on one     
another1 and infer those consequences   
which may be deduced from thence4 ,these
 reasoning powers1 indeed1 are very much
 sullied1 depraved1 and weakened1 by our
 apostacy from ,god1 but not wholly     

obliterated2 so that there are some     
remains thereof1 which are common to all
 nations1 whereby1 without the help of  
special revelation it may be known that 
there is a ,god4  ,but this either      
respects the principle of reasoning1    
which we were born with1 upon the       
account whereof infants are called      
intelligent creatures2 or the exercise  
thereof in a discursive way1 in the     
adult1 who only are capable to discern  
this truth1 which they do more or less1 
in proportion to their natural capacity1
 as they make advances in the knowledge 
of other things4 ,now for the proof of  
the being of a ,god from the light of   
nature1 let the following propositions  
be considered in their respective order4
  #a4 ,there hath been1 for many ages   
past1 a succession of creatures in the  
world4#i  #b4 ,these creatures could not
 make themselves1 for that which is     
nothing cannot act2 if it makes itself1 
it acts before it exists2 it acts as a  
creator before it exists as a creature2 

and it must be1 in the same respect1    
both a cause and an effect1 or it must  
be1 and not be1 at the same time1 than  
which nothing can be more absurd2       
therefore creatures were made by        
another1 upon which account we call them
 creatures4  #c4 ,these creatures could 
not make one another2 for to create     
something out of nothing1 or out of     
matter altogether unfit to be made what 
is produced out of it1 is to act above  
the natural powers of the creature1 and 
contrary to the fixed laws of nature2   
and therefore is too great a work for a 
creature1 who can do nothing but in a   
natural way1 even as an artificer1      
though he can build an house with fit   
materials1 yet he cannot produce the    
matter out of which he builds it2 nor   
can he build it of matter unfit for his 
purpose1 as water1 fire1 air1 c4 ,all   
creatures act within their own sphere1  
that is1 in a natural way3 but creation 
is a supernatural work1 and too great   
for a creature to perform2 therefore    

creatures cannot be supposed to have    
made one another4  #d4 ,if it was       
supposed possible for one creature to   
make another1 then superiors must have  
made inferiors2 and so man1 or some     
other intelligent creature1 must have   
made the world3 but where is the        
creature that ever pretended to this    
power or wisdom1 so as to be called the 
,creator of the ends of the earth4  #e4 
,if any creature could make itself1 or  
other creatures of the same species1 why
 did he not preserve himself2 for he    
that can give being to himself1 can     
certainly continue himself in being8 or 
why did he not make himself more        
perfect8 ,why did he make himself1 and  
other creatures of the same species1 in 
such a condition1 that they are always  
indigent1 or stand in need of support   
from other creatures4  ,or farther1     
supposing the creature made himself1 and
 all other things1 how comes it to pass 
that no one knows much of himself       
comparatively1 or other things8 ,does   

not he that makes things understand     
them8 therefore man could not make      
himself1 or other creatures4  #f4 ,it   
follows therefore from hence1 that there
 must be a ,god1 who is the first cause 
of all things1 necessarily existing1 and
 not depending on the will of another1  
and by whose power all things exist2 ,of
 him1 and through him1 and to him are   
all things1 ,rom4 xi4 #cf4 ,in him we   
live1 and move1 and have our being1     
,acts xvii4 #bh4  ,thus much concerning 
the more general method of reasoning1   
whereby the light of nature evinces the 
being of a ,god2 we proceed1  ,,ii4 ,to 
consider more particularly how the being
 of ,god may be evinced from his works4 
,the cause is known by its effects2     
since therefore1 as was but now         
observed1 creatures could not produce   
themselves1 they must be created by one 
who is not a creature4  ,now1 if there  
be no medium between ,god and the       
creature1 or between infinite and       
finite1 between a self-existent or      

underived1 and a derived being2 and if  
all creatures exist1 as has been shewn1 
by the will and power of their ,creator1
 and so are finite and dependent2 then  
it follows1 that there is one from whom 
they derived their being1 and on whom   
they depend for all things2 that is1    
,god4 ,this is usually illustrated by   
this similitude4 ,suppose we were cast  
on an unknown island1 and there saw     
houses built1 but no men to inhabit     
them1 should we not conclude there had  
been some there that built them8 ,could 
the stones and timber put themselves    
into that form in which they are8 ,or   
could the beasts of the field build     
them1 that are without understanding8   
,or when we see a curious piece of      
workmanship1 as a watch1 or a clock1    
perform all its motions in a regular    
way1 can we think the wheels came       
together by chance8#aj should we not    
conclude that it was made by one of     
sufficient skill to frame and put them  
together in that order1 and give motion 

to them8 ,shall the clay say to him that
 fashioned it1 ,what makest thou1 or thy
 work1 ,he hath no hands8 ,isa4 xlv4 #i4
  ,this leads us to consider the wisdom 
of ,god in his works1 which demonstrates
 his being4 ,this the ,psalmist mentions
 with admiration1 ,psal4 civ4 #bd4 ,o   
,lord1 how manifold are thy works2 in   
wisdom hast thou made them all6 ,when we
 see letters put together1 which make   
words or sentences1 and these a book1   
containing the greatest sense1 and the  
ideas joined together in the most       
beautiful order1 should we not conclude 
that some man1 equal to this work1 had  
put them together8 ,even so the wisdom  
that shines forth in all the parts of   
the creation1 proves that there is a    
,god4 ,this appears1  ,in the exact     
harmony and subserviency of one part of 
the creation to another1 ,hos4 ii4 #ba1 
#bb4 ,i will hear1 saith the ,lord2 ,i  
will hear the heavens1 and they shall   
hear the earth4 ,and the earth shall    
hear the corn1 and the wine1 and the    

oil1 and they shall hear ,jezreel4 ,one 
part of this frame of nature ministers  
to another4 ,thus the sun1 and other    
heavenly bodies1 give light to the      
world1 which would be no better than a  
cave or dungeon without them2 and afford
 life and influence to plants and trees2
 and maintain the life of all living    
creatures4 ,the clouds send down rain   
that moistens the earth1 and makes it   
fruitful2 and this is not poured forth  
by whole oceans together1 but by small  
drops1 ,job xxxvi4 #bg4 ,he maketh small
 the drops of water2 they pour down rain
 according to the vapour thereof2 and   
these are not perpetual1 for that would 
tend to its destruction4 ,the moist     
places of the earth1 and the sea supply 
the clouds with water1 that they may    
have a sufficient store to return again 
to it4 ,the air fans and refreshes the  
earth1 and is necessary for the growth  
of all things1 and the maintaining the  
life and health of those that dwell     
therein4 ,this subserviency of one thing

 to another is without their own design 
or contrivance2 for they are not endowed
 with understanding or will2 neither    
doth this depend on the will of the     
creature4 ,the sun doth not enlighten or
 give warmth to the world1 or the clouds
 or air refresh the earth at our        
pleasure2 and therefore all this is     
subject to the order and direction of   
one who is the ,god of nature1 who      
commands the sun1 and it shineth1 and   
the clouds to give rain at his pleasure4
 ,it is he that gave the regular motion 
to the heavenly bodies1 and1 by his     
wisdom1 fixed and continues the various 
seasons of the year1 summer and winter1 
seed-time and harvest1 day and night1   
and every thing that tends to the beauty
 and harmony of nature2 therefore these 
curious1 and never-enough to be admired1
 works1 plainly declare that there is a 
,god4 ,this is described with           
unparalleled elegancy of style1 ,job    
xxxvii4 #i1 c4 ,out of the south cometh 
the whirlwind2 and cold out of the      

north4 ,by the breath of ,god1 frost is 
given2 and the breadth of the waters is 
straitened4 ,also by watering he        
wearieth the thick cloud2 he scattereth 
his bright cloud4 ,dost thou know the   
balancings of the clouds1 the wondrous  
works of him which is perfect in        
knowledge8 ,how thy garments are warm   
when he quieteth the earth by the       
south-wind8#aa  ,but that we may farther
 evince this truth1 we shall lay down   
the following arguments to prove the    
being of a ,god1 which appears1  ,i4    
,from those creatures that are endowed  
with a lower kind of life than man4  #a4
 ,no creature can produce a fly or the  
least insect1 but according to the fixed
 laws of nature2 and that which we call 
life1 or the principle of their         
respective motion and actions1 none but 
a ,god can give2 so that his being is   
plainly proved1 from all living         
creatures below man1 which are          
subservient1 many of them1 to one       
another1 and all to man1 and that not by

 our ordering2 therefore this is done by
 the hand of him who is the ,god of     
nature4  #b4 ,the natural instinct of   
living creatures1 every one acting      
according to its kind2 and some of the  
smallest creatures producing things that
 no human art can imitate1 plainly      
proves a ,god4 ,thus the bird in        
building its nest2 the spider in framing
 its web2 the bee in providing          
store-houses for its honey2 and the ant 
in those provisions which it lays up in 
summer against winter2 the silk-worm in 
providing cloathing for man1 and in     
being transformed into various shapes1  
and many others of smaller sort of      
creatures1 that act in a wonderful way1 
without the exercise of reason or       
design1 these all prove the being of    
,god4  #c4 ,the greater1 fiercer1 or    
more formidable sort of living          
creatures1 as the lion1 tiger1 and other
 beasts of prey1 are so ordered1 that   
they fly from man1 whom they could      
easily devour1 and avoid those cities   

and places where men inhabit1 that so we
 may dwell safely4 ,they are not chased 
into the woods by us2 but these are     
allotted1 as the places of their        
residence by the ,god of nature4  #d4   
,those living creatures that are most   
useful to men1 and so subject to them1  
viz4 the horse1 camel1 and many others1 
these know not their own strength1 or   
power1 to resist or rebel against them2 
which is ordered by infinite wisdom3 and
 there are many other instances of the  
like nature1 all which are very strong  
arguments to prove that there is a ,god1
 whose glory shines forth in all his    
works4  ,,ii4 ,from the structure of    
human bodies1 in which respect we are   
said to be fearfully and wonderfully    
made2 this1 if it be abstractedly       
considered without regard to the fixed  
course and laws of nature1 exceeds the  
power and skill of all creatures1 and   
can be no other than the workmanship of 
a ,god1 and therefore is a demonstration
 of his being and perfections4 ,no man  

ever pretended to give a specimen of his
 skill therein4 ,the finest statuaries  
or limners1 who have imitated or given a
 picture1 or representation of human    
bodies1 have not pretended to give life 
or motion to them2 herein their skill is
 baffled4 ,the wisest men in the world  
have confessed their ignorance of the   
way and manner of the formation of human
 bodies2 how they are framed in their   
first rudiments1 preserved and grow to  
perfection in the womb1 and how they are
 increased1 nourished1 and continued in 
their health1 strength1 and vigour for  
many years4 ,this has made the inquiries
 of the most thoughtful men issue in    
admiration3 herein we plainly see the   
power and wisdom of ,god1 to which alone
 it is owing4  ,here it may be observed1
 that there are several things very     
wonderful in the structure of human     
bodies1 which farther evince this truth4
 ,as1  #a4 ,the organs of sense and     
speech4  #b4 ,the circulation of the    
blood1 and the natural heat which is    

preserved for many years together1 of   
which there is no instance but in living
 creatures4 ,even fire will consume and 
waste itself by degrees1 and all things1
 which have only acquired heat1 will    
soon grow cold2 but the natural heat of 
the body of man is preserved in it as   
long as life is continued4  #c4 ,the    
continual supply of animal spirits1 and 
their subserviency to sense and         
motion4#ac  #d4 ,the nerves1 which1     
though small as threads1 remain         
unbroken1 though every one of these     
small fibres performs its office1 and   
tends to convey strength and motion to  
the body4  #e4 ,the situation of the    
parts in their most proper place3 the   
internal parts1 which would be ruined   
and destroyed if exposed to the injuries
 that the external ones are3 these are  
secured in proper inclosures1 and so    
preserved1 ,job x4 #aa4 ,thou hast      
cloathed me with skin and flesh1 and    
hast fenced me with bones and sinews4   
#f4 ,all the parts of the body are so   

disposed1 that they are fitted for their
 respective uses1 as being situate in   
those places which render them most fit 
to perform their proper actions4  #g4   
,the differing features of different    
bodies1 so that we scarce see persons in
 all respects alike1 is wonderful1 and  
the result of divine wisdom3 for even   
this is necessary for society1 and our  
performing the duties we owe to one     
another4  #h4 ,the union of this body   
with the soul1 which is a spirit of a   
very different nature1 can never be     
sufficiently admired or accounted for2  
but gives us occasion herein to own a   
superior1 infinitely wise being4 ,which 
leads us1  ,,iii4 ,to consider how the  
being of ,god may be evinced from the   
nature of the soul of man4 ,he is said1 
,zech4 xii4 #a4 ,to have formed the     
spirit of man within him4 ,and hereby   
his power and wisdom1 and consequently  
his being1 is declared4 ,for1  #a4 ,the 
nature of a spiritual substance is much 
less known than that of bodies2 and     

therefore that which we cannot fully    
understand1 we must admire4  ,if the    
wisdom and power of ,god is visible in  
the structure of our bodies1 it is much 
more so in the formation of our souls2  
and since we cannot fully describe what 
they are1 and know little of them but by
 their effects1 certainly we could not  
form them2 and therefore there is a     
,god1 who is the ,father of spirits4    
#b4 ,the powers and capacities of the   
soul are various1 and very extensive4   
7#a47 ,it can frame ideas of things     
superior to its own nature1 and can     
employ itself in contemplating and      
beholding the order1 beauty1 and        
connexion of all those things in the    
world1 which are1 as it were1 a book1 in
 which we may read the divine           
perfections1 and improve them to the    
best purposes4  7#b47 ,it takes in the  
vast compass of things past1 which it   
can reflect on and remember1 with       
satisfaction1 or regret3 and it can look
 forward to things to come1 which it can

 expect1 and accordingly conceive       
pleasure or uneasiness in the           
forethoughts thereof4  7#c47 ,it can    
chuse or embrace what is good1 or fly   
from and reject what is evil and hurtful
 to it4  7#d47 ,it is capable of moral  
government1 of conducting itself        
according to the principles of reason1  
and certain rules enjoined it for the   
attaining the highest end4  7#e47 ,it is
 capable of religion1 and so can argue  
that there is a ,god1 and give him the  
glory that is due to his name1 and be   
happy in the enjoyment of him4  7#f47   
,it is immortal1 and therefore cannot be
 destroyed by any creature2 for none but
 ,god has an absolute sovereignty over  
the spirits of men2 ,no man hath power  
over the spirit to retain the spirit2   
neither hath he power in the day of     
death1 ,eccles4 viii4 #h4  ,,iv4 ,from  
the nature and office of conscience1    
which is that whereby the soul takes a  
view of itself1 and its own actions1 as 
good or evil2 and considers itself as   

under a law to a superior being1 from   
whom it expects rewards or punishments2 
and this evidently proves a ,god4 ,for1 
#a4 ,conscience is oftentimes distressed
 or comforted by its reflection on those
 actions1 which no man on earth can     
know3 and therefore when it fears       
punishment for those crimes1 which come 
not under the cognizance of human laws1 
the uneasiness that it finds in itself1 
and its dread of punishment1 plainly    
discovers that it is apprehensive of a  
divine being1 who has been offended1    
whose wrath and resentment it fears4    
,all the endeavours that men can use to 
bribe1 blind1 or stupify their          
consciences1 will not prevent these     
fears2 but the sad apprehension of      
deserved punishment1 from one whom they 
conceive to know all things1 even the   
most secret crimes committed1 this makes
 persons uneasy1 whether they will or   
no4 ,whithersoever they fly1 or what    
amusement soever they betake themselves 
to1 conscience will still follow them   

with its accusations and dread of divine
 wrath3 ,the wicked are like the        
troubled sea1 when it cannot rest1 ,isa4
 lvii4 #bj4 ,a dreadful sound is in his 
ears2 in prosperity the destroyer shall 
come upon him1 ,job xv4 #ba4 ,terrors   
take hold of him as waters1 a tempest   
stealeth him away in the night4 ,the    
east-wind carrieth him away1 and he     
departeth2 and as a storm hurleth him   
out of his place4 ,for ,god shall cast  
upon him1 and not spare2 he would fain  
flee out of his hand1 ,job xxvii4 #bj1  
#ba1 #bb4 ,the wicked flee when no man  
pursueth1 ,prov4 xxviii4 #a4  ,and this 
is universal1 there are none but are1   
some time or other1 liable to these     
fears1 arising from self-reflection1 and
 the dictates of conscience2 the most   
advanced circumstances in the world will
 not fortify against1 or deliver from   
them1 ,acts xxiv4 #be4 ,as ,paul        
reasoned of righteousness1 temperance1  
and judgment to come1 ,felix trembled4  
,even ,pharaoh himself1 the most        

hard-hearted sinner in the world1 who   
would fain have forced a belief upon    
himself that there is no ,god1 and      
boldly said1 ,who is the ,lord1 that ,i 
should obey him8 yet he could not ward  
off the conviction that there is a ,god1
 which his own conscience suggested4    
,therefore he was forced to say1 ,exod4 
ix4 #bg4 ,i have sinned this time2 the  
,lord is righteous1 and ,i and my people
 are wicked4 ,and indeed all the        
pleasures that any can take in the      
world1 who give themselves up to the    
most luxurious way of living1 cannot    
prevent their trembling1 when conscience
 suggests some things terrible to them  
for their sins4 ,thus ,belshazzar1 when 
in the midst of his jollity and drinking
 wine1 having made a great feast to a   
thousand of his lords1 when he saw the  
finger of a man's hand upon the wall1 it
 is said1 ,dan4 v4 #f4 ,the king's      
countenance was changed1 and his        
thoughts troubled him2 so that the      
joints of his loins were loosed1 and his

 knees smote one against another4  ,thus
 concerning those dictates of           
conscience1 which make men very uneasy1 
whereby wicked men are forced to own    
that there is a ,god1 whether they will 
or no2 we now proceed to consider good  
men1 as having frequently such serenity 
of mind and peace of conscience1 as     
affords them farther matter of          
conviction concerning this truth4 ,it   
is1 indeed1 a privilege that they enjoy1
 who have the light of scripture        
revelation1 and so it might have been   
considered under a following head2 but  
since it is opposed to what was but now 
brought1 as a proof of the being of a   
,god1 we may here observe1 that some    
have that composure of mind1 in         
believing and walking closely with ,god1
 as tends to confirm them yet more in   
this truth4 ,for1  7#a47 ,this composure
 of mind abides under all the troubles  
and disappointments they meet with in   
the world3 those things which tend to   
disturb the peace of other men1 do not  

so much affect them2 ,he shall not be   
afraid of evil tidings2 his heart is    
fixed1 trusting in the ,lord1 ,psal4    
cxii4 #g4 ,and as this peace abides     
under all the troubles of life1 so it   
does not leave them1 but is sometimes   
more abundant1 when they draw nigh to   
death4  7#b47 ,it is a regular and      
orderly peace that they have1           
accompanied with grace1 so that         
conscience is most quiet when the soul  
is most holy2 which shews that there is 
a hand of ,god in working or speaking   
this peace1 as designing thereby to     
encourage and own that grace which he   
has wrought in them3 ,rom4 x4 #ac4 thus 
the ,god of hope is said to fill us with
 all joy and peace in believing4  7#c47 
,let them labour never so much after it1
 they can never attain this peace1      
without a divine intimation1 or ,god's  
speaking peace to their souls2 therefore
 when he is pleased1 for wise ends1 to  
withdraw from them1 they are destitute  
of it2 so that ,god is hereby known by  

his works1 or by those influences of his
 grace1 whereby he gives peace to       
conscience4  ,v4 ,the being of a ,god   
appears from those vast and boundless   
desires1 which are implanted in the     
soul2 so that it can take up its rest1  
and meet with full satisfaction1 in     
nothing short of a being of infinite    
perfection3 therefore there is such an  
one1 which is ,god4 ,this will farther  
appear if we consider1  #a4 ,we find1 by
 experience1 that though the soul1 at   
present1 be entertained1 and meets with 
some satisfaction in                    
creature-enjoyments1 yet it still craves
 and desires more1 of what kind soever  
they be2 and the reason is1 because they
 are not commensurate to its desires2   
,the eye is not satisfied with seeing1  
nor the ear with hearing1 ,eccles4 i4   
#h4 ,that which is wanting cannot be    
numbered1 ver4 #ae4  #b4 ,we cannot     
rationally suppose that such boundless  
desires should be implanted in the soul1
 and yet that there should be nothing   

sufficient to satisfy them2 for then the
 most excellent creature in this lower  
world would be1 in some respects1 more  
miserable than other creatures of a     
lower order1 which obtain their ultimate
 desire4 ,thus the ,psalmist1 speaking  
of the brute creatures1 says1 ,psal4    
civ4 #bh4 ,they are filled with good2   
that is1 they have all that they crave4 
,therefore1  #c4 ,there must be one that
 is infinitely good1 who can satisfy    
these desires1 considered in their      
utmost extent2 and that is ,god1 the    
fountain of all blessedness4  ,,vi4 ,the
 being of a ,god may be farther evinced1
 from the consent of all nations to this
 truth4 ,now that which all mankind     
agrees in1 must be founded in the nature
 of man1 and that which is so1 is       
evident from the light of nature4 ,it is
 true1 there are many who have thus     
known ,god1 who have not worshipped and 
glorified him as ,god2 but have been    
vain in their imaginations1 and have    
changed the truth of ,god into a lie1   

and worshipped and served the creature  
more than the ,creator1 as the apostle  
says1 ,rom4 i4 #ba1 #be4 ,but it doth   
not follow from hence1 that the heathen1
 who were guilty of idolatry1 had no    
notion of a ,god in general1 but rather 
the contrary2 that there is something in
 the nature of man1 which suggests1 that
 they ought to worship some divine      
being1 whom they could not1 by the light
 of nature1 sufficiently know1 and      
therefore they did service to those who 
were by nature no gods2 however1 this   
proves that they were not wholly        
destitute of some ideas of a ,god1 which
 therefore are common to all mankind4   
,now that all nations have had some     
discerning that there is a ,god1        
appears1  #a4 ,from the credit that is  
to be given to all ancient history2     
which sufficiently discovers that men1  
in all ages1 have owned and worshipped  
something that they called a ,god1      
though they knew not the true ,god4  #b4
 ,the heathen themselves1 as may easily 

be understood from their own writings1  
reckoned atheism a detestable crime1 for
 this reason1 because contrary to the   
light of nature2 and therefore some of  
them have asserted1 that there is no    
nation in the world so barbarous1 and   
void of reason1 as to have no notion of 
a ,god4  #c4 ,we may consider also1 that
 no changes in the world1 or in the     
circumstances of men1 have wholly erased
 this principle3 whatever changes there 
have been in the external modes of      
worship1 or in those things which have  
been received by tradition1 still this  
principle has remained unalterable1 that
 there is a ,god4 ,therefore the being  
of a ,god may be proved by the consent  
of all nations4  ,object4 #a4 ,but it is
 objected to this1 that there have been 
some speculative atheists in the world4 
,history gives us an account of this2   
and we are informed1 that there are some
 whole countries in ,africa and         
,america1 where there is no worship1    
and1 as to what appears to us1 no notion

 of a ,god4 ,therefore the being of a   
,god cannot be proved by the consent of 
all nations4  ,answ4 #a4 ,as to the     
first branch of this objection1 that    
there have been some speculative        
atheists in the world2 it is true1      
history furnishes us with instances of  
persons who have been deemed so1 yet    
their number has been very              
inconsiderable2 so that it will not     
follow from hence1 that the idea of a   
,god is not some way or other1 impressed
 upon the heart of man4 ,might it not as
 well be said1 that1 because some few   
are born idiots1 therefore reason is not
 natural to man1 or universal8 ,and it  
may be farther observed1 that they who  
are branded with the character of       
atheists in ancient history1 or such as 
appear to be atheists in our day by     
their conversation1 are rather practical
 atheists than speculative4 ,we do not  
deny1 that many in all ages have1 and   
now do1 assert1 and pretend to prove1   
that there is no ,god2 but it is plain  

that they discover1 at some times1 such 
fear and distress of conscience1 as is  
sufficient to disprove what they pretend
 to defend by arguments4  #b4 ,as to the
 second branch of the objection1 that   
there are some parts of the world1 where
 the people seem to be so stupid1 as not
 to own or worship a ,god2 this is hard 
to be proved2 neither have any1 that    
have asserted it1 had that familiarity  
with them1 as to be able to determine   
what their sentiments are about this    
matter4  ,but suppose it were true in   
fact1 that some nations have no notion  
of a ,god or religion1 nothing could be 
argued from it1 but that such nations   
are barbarous and brutish1 and though   
they have the principle of reason1 do   
not act like reasonable creatures2 and  
it is sufficient to our purpose to      
assert1 that all men1 acting like       
reasonable creatures1 or who argue from 
those principles of reason1 that they   
are born with1 may from thence conclude 
that there is a ,god4  ,object4 #b4 ,it 

is farther objected by atheists against 
the being of ,god1 and indeed against   
all religion1 which is founded thereon1 
that both one and the other took its    
rise from human policy1 that hereby the 
world1 being amused with such-like      
speculations1 might be restrained from  
those irregularities1 which were        
inconsistent with the well-being of     
civil government2 and that this was     
readily received1 and propagated by     
tradition1 and so by an implicit faith  
transmitted from one generation to      
another1 among those who enquired not   
into the reason of what they believed2  
and that all this was supported by fear1
 which fixed their belief in this       
matter3 so that human policy invented1  
tradition propagated1 and fear rooted in
 the minds of men1 what we call the     
natural ideas of ,god and religion4     
,answ4 ,this is a vile insinuation1 but 
much in the mouths of atheists1 without 
any shadow of reason1 or attempt to     
prove it2 and indeed it may be easily   

disproved4 ,therefore1  #a4 ,it appears 
that the notices we have of the being of
 a ,god1 are not in the least founded in
 state policy1 as a trick of men1 to    
keep up some religion in the world1 as  
necessary for the support of civil      
government4 ,for1  ,if the notion of a  
,god1 and religion consequential hereon1
 were a contrivance of human policy1 it 
would follow1  7#a47 ,that it must be   
either the invention of one single man1 
or else it was the result of the        
contrivance of many convened together in
 a joint assembly of men1 in            
confederacy1 to impose on the world4    
,if it was the invention of one man1 who
 was he8 when and where did he live8    
,what history gives the least account of
 him8 or when was the world without all 
knowledge of a deity1 and some religion1
 that we may know1 at least1 in what age
 this notion first sprang up1 or was    
contrived8 ,or could the contrivance of 
one man be so universally complied with1
 and yet none pretend to know who he    

was1 or when he lived8 ,and if it was   
the contrivance of a number of men      
convened together1 how was this         
possible1 and yet the thing not be      
discovered8 or how could the princes of 
the earth1 who were at the head of this 
contrivance1 have mutual intelligence1  
or be convened together8 ,by whose      
authority did they meet8 or what was the
 occasion thereof8  7#b47 ,it is morally
 impossible1 that such a piece of state 
policy should be made use of to deceive 
the world1 and universally take place1  
and yet none in any age ever discover   
the imposture4 ,the world could never be
 so imposed on1 and yet not know by     
whom2 the plot would certainly have been
 confessed by some who were in the      
secret4  7#c47 ,if human policy had     
first invented this notion1 certainly   
the princes and great men of the world1 
who had a hand in it1 would have        
exempted themselves from any obligation 
to own a ,god1 or any form of worship1  
whereby they acknowledge him their      

superior2 for impostors generally design
 to beguile others1 but to exempt       
themselves from what they bind them to4 
,if any of the princes1 or great men of 
the world1 had invented this opinion1   
that there is a ,god1 and that he is to 
be worshipped1 their pride would have   
led them to persuade the world that they
 were gods themselves1 and ought to be  
worshipped2 they would never have       
included themselves in the obligation to
 own a subjection to ,god1 if the notion
 of a ,god had1 for political ends1 been
 invented by them4  7#d47 ,if the belief
 of a ,god was invented by human policy1
 how came it to be universally received 
by the world8 ,it is certain1 that it   
was not propagated by persecution2 for  
though there has been persecution to    
inforce particular modes of worship1 yet
 there never was any such method used to
 inforce the belief of a ,god1 for that 
took place without any need thereof1 it 
being instamped on the nature of man4   
,if therefore it was not propagated by  

force1 neither was the belief of a ,god 
spread through the world by fraud1 what 
are those arts which are pretended to   
have been used to propagate it8 ,it took
 its rise1 say they1 from human policy2 
but the politicians not known1 nor the  
arts they used to persuade the world    
that there is a ,god found out4 ,how    
unreasonable therefore is this          
objection1 or rather cavil1 against a   
deity1 when the atheists pretend that it
 was the result of human policy6  #b4   
,it appears that the belief of a ,god   
was not propagated in the world merely  
by tradition1 and so received by        
implicit faith4 ,for1  7#a47 ,those     
notions that have been received with    
implicit faith by tradition1 from       
generation to generation1 are not       
pretended to be proved by reason2 but   
the belief of a ,god is founded on the  
highest reason2 so that if no one in the
 world believed it besides myself1 ,i am
 bound to believe it1 or else must no   
longer lay claim to that reason which is

 natural to mankind1 and should rather  
shew myself a brute than a man4  7#b47  
,no schemes of religion1 that were      
propagated merely by tradition1 have    
been universally received2 for tradition
 respects particular nations1 or a      
particular set of men1 who have         
propagated them4 ,but as has been before
 considered the belief of a ,god has    
universally prevailed4 ,moreover1 if the
 belief of a ,god was thus spread by    
tradition through the world1 why was not
 the mode of worship settled1 that so   
there might be but one religion in the  
world8 ,the reason is1 because their    
respective modes of worship were        
received1 by the heathen1 by tradition3 
whereas the belief of a ,god was not so1
 but is rooted in the nature of man4    
7#c47 ,whatever has been received only  
by tradition1 has not continued in the  
world in all the turns1 changes1 and    
overthrow of particular nations1 that   
received it2 but the belief of a ,god   
has continued in the world throughout   

all the ages and changes thereof3       
therefore it is not founded in          
tradition1 but by the light of nature4  
#c4 ,it appears1 moreover1 that the     
belief of a ,god could not take its     
first rise merely from fear of          
punishment1 which men expected would be 
inflicted by him1 though that be a      
strong argument to establish us in the  
belief thereof4 ,for1  7#a47 ,a         
liableness to punishment for crimes     
committed1 supposes that there is a     
,god1 who is offended by sin1 and from  
whom punishment is expected4 ,therefore 
as the effect cannot give being to the  
cause1 so fear could not be the first   
ground and reason of the belief of a    
,god4 ,but1  7#b47 ,the principal idea  
which mankind has of ,god1 and that     
which is most natural to us1 is1 that of
 an infinitely amiable object1 and so we
 conceive of him1 as a being of infinite
 goodness1 #a ,john iv4 #h4 ,god is     
love4 ,thus we conceive of him1 as the  
spring of all we enjoy and hope for2 and

 as for fear1 that is only what arises  
in the breasts of wicked men1 and is    
founded in the secondary ideas we have  
of him2 to wit1 as taking vengeance1    
supposing he is offended4 ,but they who 
do not offend him are not afraid of his 
vengeance2 and the sentiments of the    
worst of men are not to be our rule in  
judging concerning the being of a ,god4 
,if these believe that there is a ,god1 
only because they fear him1 others      
believe him to be the fountain of all   
blessedness1 and as such they love him3 
therefore the ideas that men have of the
 being of a ,god1 did not arise from    
fear4  ,,vii4 ,the being of a ,god1 may 
be proved from the works of providence1 
whereby the world is governed1 as well  
as preserved from returning to its first
 nothing4 ,it is that which supplies all
 creatures with those things that their 
respective natures or necessities       
require3 creatures could no more provide
 for themselves than they could make    
themselves2 therefore he that provides  

all things for them is ,god4 ,all finite
 beings have their respective wants1    
whether they are sensible thereof or no2
 and he must be all-sufficient that can 
fill or supply the necessities of all   
things1 and such an one is ,god4  ,thus 
the ,psalmist speaks of this ,god1 as   
supplying the necessities of beasts and 
creeping things2 who are said1 to wait  
upon him1 that he may give them their   
meat in due season1 ,psal4 civ4 #be1    
#bg4 ,psal4 cxlv4 #ae1af4  ,in          
considering the providence of ,god1     
whereby his being is evinced1 we may    
observe1  #a4 ,the extraordinary        
dispensations thereof1 when things      
happen contrary to the common course1   
and fixed laws of nature1 as when       
miracles have been wrought4 ,these are  
undeniable proofs of the being of a     
,god2 for herein a check or stop is put 
to the course of nature1 the fixed order
 or laws thereof controuled or inverted2
 and this none can do but he who is the 
,god and author thereof4 ,to deny that  

miracles have been wrought1 is little   
better than scepticism2 since it hath   
been proved1 by the most unquestionable 
testimony1 contained not only in        
scripture1 but in other writings1 and is
 confessed1 even by those who deny the  
principal things designed to be         
confirmed thereby4 ,it is true1 they    
were never wrought with an immediate    
design to prove that there is a ,god1   
since that is sufficiently demonstrated 
without them2 but in as much as they    
have been wrought with other views1 the 
being of a ,god1 whose immediate power  
has been exerted therein1 appears beyond
 all contradiction4  #b4 ,this may be   
proved from the common dispensations of 
providence1 which we daily behold and   
experience in the world4  ,these we call
 common1 because they contain nothing   
miraculous1 or contrary to the laws of  
nature3 they are indeed wonderful1 and  
have in them the traces and footsteps of
 infinite wisdom and sovereignty1 and   
therefore prove that there is a ,god4   

,for1  7#a47 ,it cannot otherwise be    
accounted for1 that so many things      
should befal us1 or others in the world1
 that are altogether unlooked for4 ,thus
 one is cast down1 and a blast thrown on
 all his endeavours1 and another raised 
beyond his expectation1 ,psal4 lxxv4 #f1
 #g4 ,promotion cometh neither from the 
east1 nor from the west1 nor from the   
south4 ,but ,god is the judge2 he       
putteth down one1 and setteth up        
another4  7#b47 ,the wisest and best    
concerted schemes of men are often      
baffled1 and brought to nought1 by some 
unexpected occurrence of providence1    
which argues a divine controul1 as ,god 
says1 #a ,cor4 i4 #ai4 ,i will destroy  
the wisdom of the wise1 and will bring  
to nothing the understanding of the     
prudent4 ,and who is it that can turn   
the counsels of men into foolishness2   
but an infinitely wise ,god8  ,,viii4   
,the being of a ,god may be proved by   
the foretelling future events1 which    
have come to pass accordingly4 ,for1    

#a4 ,no creature can1 by his own wisdom 
or sagacity1 foretel future contingent  
events with a certain peremptory and    
infallible knowledge1 and not by mere   
conjecture1 ,isa4 xli4 #bd4 ,shew the   
things that are to come hereafter1 that 
we may know that ye are gods4 ,and the  
reason is plain1 because our knowledge  
reaches no farther than to see effects1 
and judge of them in and by their       
causes4 ,thus we may easily foretel that
 necessary causes will produce those    
effects that are agreeable to their     
nature3 but when the effect is not      
necessary1 but contingent1 or purely    
arbitrary1 then we have nothing to judge
 by1 and therefore cannot come to the   
knowledge of things future1 without an  
intimation given us thereof1 by him who 
orders and disposes of all things1 and  
that is ,god3 and therefore to foretel  
things to come in this sense1 is an     
evident proof of the being of ,god4  #b4
 ,that there have been such predictions1
 and that the things foretold have come 

to pass accordingly1 is very obvious    
from scripture3 and if it be highly     
reasonable to believe that which is so  
well attested1 as scripture is1 we are  
bound from hence to conclude that there 
is a ,god4  ,but since we are arguing1  
at present1 with those who deny a ,god1 
and consequently all                    
scripture-revelation1 we will only      
suppose that they whom we contend with  
will allow that some contingent events  
have been foretold2 and then it will    
follow1 that this could be done no other
 way1 but by some intimation from one   
that is omniscient1 and that is ,god4   
,,ix4 ,the being of a ,god appears from 
his providing for the necessities of all
 living4 ,here let us consider1  #a4    
,that there is a natural instinct in all
 creatures1 to take care of and provide 
for their young1 before they are capable
 of providing for themselves4 ,this is  
not only observable in mankind1 as the  
prophet says1 ,isa4 xlix4 #ae4 ,can a   
woman forget her sucking child8 but also

 in the lower sort of creatures2 and    
among them in those who are naturally   
most fierce and savage1 even they       
provide for their young with            
extraordinary diligence1 and sometimes  
neglect1 and almost starve1 themselves  
to provide for them1 and sometimes      
endanger their own lives to defend them4
  #b4 ,they bring forth their young at  
the most convenient season of the year1 
when the grass begins to spring to      
supply them with food1 and when the     
fowls of the air may get a livelihood by
 picking up the seed that is sown1 and  
not covered by the earth1 and when the  
trees begin to put forth their fruits to
 supply and feed them4  #c4 ,when they  
bring forth their young1 there is a     
providence that provides the breast1 the
 paps1 the udder replenished with1 milk 
to feed them2 and there is a natural    
instinct in their young1 without        
instruction1 to desire to receive their 
nourishment that way4  #d4 ,providence  
has furnished many of the beasts of the 

fields with weapons for their defence1  
and has given others a natural swiftness
 to fly from danger1 and has provided   
holes and caverns in the earth to secure
 them from those that pursue them4 ,and 
this cannot be the effect of mere       
chance1 but it is an evident proof of   
the being of a ,god4  #e4 ,providence   
is1 in a peculiar manner1 concerned for 
the supply of man1 the noblest of all   
creatures in the world2 ,he giveth food 
to all flesh1 ,psal4 cxxxvi4 #be4 ,thou 
preservest man and beast1 ,psal4 xxxvi4 
#f4 ,the earth is stored with variety of
 food2 and whereas the poor1 which is   
the greater part of mankind1 cannot     
purchase those far-fetched1 or costly   
dainties1 which are the support of      
luxury1 these may1 by their industry1   
provide that food which is most common1 
and with which the earth is plentifully 
stored1 whereby their lives and health  
are as well maintained1 as the rich1 who
 fare deliciously every day2 and if     
their families increase1 and a greater  

number is to be provided for1 they      
generally have a supply in proportion to
 their increasing number4  #f4          
,providence has stored the earth with   
various medicines1 and given skill to   
men to use them as a relief against the 
many sicknesses that we are exposed to4 
,all these things1 and innumerable other
 instances that might be given1 argue   
the care and bounty1 and consequently   
prove the being of ,god1 whose tender   
mercies are over all his works4  ,here  
let us consider how the providence of   
,god provides for the safety of man     
against those things that threaten his  
ruin4  ,the contrariety and opposition  
of things one to another would bring    
with them inevitable destruction1 did   
not providence prevent it4 ,as1  7#a47  
,those things1 which are the greatest   
blessings of nature1 would be           
destructive1 were there not a           
providence3 as the sun that enlightens  
and cherishes the world by its heat and 
influence1 would be of no advantage1    

were it situate at too great a distance1
 and would burn it up if it were too    
near4 ,so the sea would swallow up1 and 
bring a deluge on the earth1 if ,god had
 not1 by his decree1 fixed it within    
certain bounds1 and made the shore an   
inclosure to it1 and said hitherto shalt
 thou go and no farther4  7#b47 ,the    
elements are advantageous to us1 by     
their due temperature and mixture2 but1 
were it otherwise1 they would be        
destructive4 ,so the various humours and
 jarring principles in our bodies would 
tend to destroy us1 but that they are so
 mixed1 as the ,god of nature1 has      
tempered and disposed them1 for the     
preservation of life and health4  7#c47 
,the wild beasts would destroy us1 had  
not ,god put the fear and dread of man  
into them1 or1 at least1 caused them not
 to desire to be where men live2 the    
forests and desert places1 remote from  
cities1 being allotted for them2 and    
some creatures would be destructive to  
men1 by the increase of their number1   

did they not devour one another4 ,and   
insects would destroy the fruits of the 
earth1 did not one season of the year   
help forward their destruction1 as      
another tends to breed them4  7#d47 ,men
 by reason of their contrary tempers and
 interests1 and that malice and envy1   
which is the consequence of our first   
apostacy1 would destroy one another1 if 
there were not a providence that        
restrains them1 and gives a check to    
that wickedness that is natural to them1
 whereby the world is kept in a greater 
measure of peace than otherwise it would
 be2 hence1 the ,psalmist says1 ,psal4  
lxxvi4 #aj4 ,surely the wrath of man    
shall praise thee2 the remainder of     
wrath shalt thou restrain4  ,object4 ,it
 is objected1 by atheists1 against the  
being of a ,god1 that the wicked are    
observed to prosper1 in the world1 and  
the righteous are oppressed4 ,this      
temptation the ,psalmist was almost     
overcome by2 as he says1 my feet were   
almost gone2 my steps had well nigh     

slipt4 ,for ,i was envious at the       
foolish1 when ,i saw the prosperity of  
the wicked1 ,psal4 lxxiii4 #b1 #c4      
,answ4 ,to this it may be answered1  #a4
 ,that the idea of infinite sovereignty 
is included in that of a ,god2 and this 
distribution of good and evil1 if made  
at any time1 without regard to the      
deserts of men1 argues the sovereignty  
of providence2 and therefore proves that
 there is a ,god1 who gives no account  
of his matters1 but has an absolute     
right to do what he will with his own4  
#b4 ,there is a display of infinite     
wisdom in these dispensations of        
providence1 in that the good man is made
 better by affliction1 as hereby the    
kindness and care of providence appears2
 and the wicked man is forced to own1 by
 his daily experience1 that all the     
outward blessings he enjoys in this     
world1 cannot make him easy or happy1 or
 be a sufficient portion for him4  #c4  
,outward prosperity doth not prevent or 
remove inward remorse1 or terror of     

conscience1 which embitters the joys of 
the wicked2 ,a dreadful sound is in his 
ears2 in prosperity the destroyer shall 
come upon him1 ,job xv4 #ba4 ,even in   
laughter the heart is sorrowful2 and the
 end of that mirth is heaviness1 ,prov4 
xiv4 #ac4 ,and1 on the other hand1      
outward trouble in the godly is not     
inconsistent with spiritual joy and     
inward peace1 which is more than a      
balance for all the distresses they     
labour under2 it is said1 ,the heart    
knoweth his own bitterness1 and a       
stranger doth not intermeddle with his  
joy1 ,prov4 xiv4 #aj4 ,he shall be      
satisfied from himself1 ver4 #ad4  #d4  
,we are not to judge of things according
 to their present appearance1 when we   
determine a person happy or miserable1  
but are to consider the end thereof1    
since every thing is well that ends     
well4 ,thus the ,psalmist1 who1 as was  
before observed1 was staggered at the   
prosperity of the wicked1 had his faith 
established1 by considering the         

different events of things4 ,concerning 
the wicked he says ,psal4 lxxiii4 #ah1  
#ai1 #bj4 ,thou didst set them in       
slippery places2 thou castedst them down
 to destruction4 ,how are they brought  
into desolation1 as in a moment6 they   
are utterly consumed with terrors4 ,as a
 dream when one awaketh3 so1 ,o ,lord1  
when thou awakest1 thou shalt despise   
their image2 which is a very beautiful  
expression1 representing all their      
happiness as imaginary1 a vain dream1   
and such as is worthy to be contemned3  
but as for the righteous1 he represents 
them as under the special protection and
 guidance of ,god here1 and at last     
received to glory1 and there enjoying   
him as their everlasting portion4       
,having considered how the light of     
nature1 and the works of ,god prove his 
being1 we shall proceed to shew how this
 appears from scripture1 as it is       
observed in this answer1 that the word  
and ,spirit only do sufficiently and    
effectually reveal him unto men for     

their salvation4 ,the arguments hitherto
 laid down are directed more especially 
to those who are not convinced that     
there is a ,god1 and consequently deny  
the divine original of scripture3 but   
this argument supposes a conviction of  
both2 but yet it must not be supposed   
unnecessary1 in as much as we are       
oftentimes exposed to many temptations1 
which tend to stagger our faith2 so that
 though we may not peremptorily deny    
that there is a ,god1 yet we may desire 
some additional evidence of his being   
and perfections1 beyond what the light  
of nature affords2 and this we have in  
scripture4 ,herein the glory of ,god    
shines forth with the greatest lustre1  
and we have an account of works more    
glorious than those of nature1 included 
in the way of salvation by a ,mediator4 
,the light of nature1 indeed1 proves    
that there is a ,god2 but the word of   
,god discovers him to us as a reconciled
 ,god and ,father to all who believe1   
and is also attended with those internal

 convictions and evidences of this      
truth1 which are the peculiar gifts and 
graces of the ,holy ,spirit2 and        
therefore it is well observed1 that this
 knowledge only is sufficient and       
effectual to salvation2 which leads us  
to consider the insufficiency of the    
light of nature to answer this end4 ,the
 knowledge of ,god1 that may be attained
 thereby1 is sufficient1 indeed1 in some
 measure1 to restrain our corrupt       
passions1 and it is conducive to the    
peace and welfare of civil societies3 it
 affords some conviction of sin1 and1 in
 some respects1 leaves men without      
excuse1 and renders their condemnation  
less aggravated than that of those who  
sin against gospel light2 but yet it is 
insufficient to salvation1 since it is a
 truth of universal extent1 that there  
is salvation in no other1 but in        
,christ1 ,acts iv4 #ab4 and that it is  
life eternal to know not only the true  
,god1 but ,jesus ,christ1 whom he hath  
sent1 ,john xvii4 #c4 and this cannot be

 known by the light of nature1 but by   
divine revelation2 which leads us to    
consider in what respect the knowledge  
of ,god1 as it is contained in and      
derived from scripture1 is sufficient to
 salvation4  ,here we do not assert the 
sufficiency thereof1 exclusive of the   
aids of divine grace1 so as to oppose   
the word to the ,spirit3 therefore it is
 said1 in this answer1 that the word and
 ,spirit of ,god alone can reveal him to
 men sufficiently to their salvation4   
,the word is a sufficient rule1 so that 
we need no other to be a standard of our
 faith1 and to direct us in the way to  
eternal life2 but it is the ,spirit that
 enables us to regard1 understand1 and  
apply this rule1 and to walk according  
to it3 these two are not to be          
separated2 the ,spirit doth not save any
 without the word1#ad and the word is   
not effectual to salvation1 unless made 
so by the ,spirit4  ,that nothing short 
of scripture-revelation is sufficient to
 salvation1 will appear1 if we compare  

it with the natural knowledge we have of
 ,god4 ,for1  #a4 ,though the light of  
nature shews us that there is a ,god1 it
 doth not fully display his perfections1
 so as they are manifested in scripture1
 wherein ,god is beheld in the face of  
,christ4  #b4 ,neither doth it discover 
any thing of the doctrine of a ,trinity 
of persons in the divine essence1 who   
are equally the object of faith3 nor    
doth it give us any intimation of       
,christ1 as the ,lord our righteousness1
 in whom we obtain forgiveness of sins3 
this is known only by                   
scripture-revelation2 therefore1 since  
this is necessary to salvation1 we are  
bound to conclude that the scripture    
alone is sufficient to lead to it4  #c4 
,the light of nature suggests1 it is    
true1 that ,god is to be worshipped2 but
 there is an instituted way of          
worshipping him1 which depends wholly on
 divine revelation2 and since this is   
necessary1 it proves the necessity of   
scripture4  #d4 ,there is no salvation  

without communion with ,god2 or he that 
does not enjoy him here1 shall not enjoy
 him for ever hereafter4 ,now the       
enjoyment of ,god is what we attain by  
faith1 which is founded on scripture4   
,thus the apostle says1 #a ,john i4 #c4 
,that which we have seen and heard1     
declare we unto you1 that ye also may   
have fellowship with us2 and truly our  
fellowship is with the ,father1 and with
 his son ,jesus ,christ4  ,but since it 
is one thing to say1 that the knowledge 
of ,god1 which is derived from          
scripture1 is sufficient to salvation in
 an objective way2 that is1 that it is a
 sufficient rule to lead us to          
salvation1 and another thing to say1    
that it is made effectual thereunto3 we 
are now to inquire when it is made so4  
,in answer to which1 let us consider1   
that the doctrines contained in         
scripture are made effectual to         
salvation2 not by all the skill or      
wisdom of men representing them in their
 truest light1 nor by all the power of  

reasoning1 which we are capable of1     
without the aids of divine grace1 but   
they are made effectual by the ,spirit2 
and this he does1  7#a47 ,by the        
internal illumination of the mind1      
giving a spiritual discerning of divine 
truth1 which the natural man receiveth  
not1 as the apostle says1 #a ,cor4 ii4  
#ad4 and it is called1 #b ,cor4 iv4 #f4 
a shining into our hearts1 to give the  
light of the knowledge of the glory of  
,god1 in the face of ,jesus ,christ4    
7#b47 ,by subduing the obstinate will of
 man1 and so enabling it to yield to a  
ready1 chearful1 and universal obedience
 to the divine commands contained in    
scripture2 and1 in particular1 inclining
 it to own ,christ's authority1 as king 
of saints2 and to say1 as converted     
,paul did1 ,lord1 what wilt thou have me
 to do8 ,acts ix4 #f4  7#c47 ,he works  
upon our affections1 exciting in us holy
 desires after ,god and ,christ1 and a  
very high esteem and value for divine   
truth1 and removes all those prejudices 

which are in our minds against it1 opens
 and enlarges our hearts to receive the 
word1 and comply with all the commands  
thereof1 thus1 ,acts xvi4 #ad4 ,the     
,lord opened the heart of ,lydia1 that  
she attended to the things that were    
spoken of ,paul4 ,so ,david prays1      
,psal4 cxix4 #ah4 compared with v4 #e4  
,open thou mine eyes1 that ,i may behold
 wondrous things out of thy law4 ,o that
 my ways were directed to keep thy      
statutes6  ,footnote #i3    8,as for our
 own existence1 we perceive it so       
plainly1 and so   certainly1 that it    
neither needs1 nor is capable of any    
proof4 ,for   nothing can be more       
evident to us than our own existence2 ,i
 think1 ,i   reason1 ,i feel pleasure   
and pain3 can any of these be more      
evident to   me1 than my own existence8 
,if ,i doubt of all other things1 that  
very   doubt makes me perceive my own   
existence1 and will not suffer me to    
doubt of that4 ,for if ,i know ,i feel  
pain1 it is evident ,i have as   certain

 perception of my own existence1 as of  
the existence of the   pain ,i feel3 or1
 if ,i know ,i doubt1 ,i have as certain
 perception of   the existence of the   
thing doubting1 as of that thought which
 ,i call   doubt4 ,experience then      
convinces us1 that we have an intuitive 
knowledge of our own existence1 and an  
internal infallible perception   that we
 are4 ,in every act of sensation1       
reasoning or thinking1 we are           
conscious to ourselves of our own being1
 and1 in this matter1 come not   short  
of the highest degree of certainty40----
    8,in the next place1 man knows by an
 intuitive certainty1 that bare         
nothing can no more produce any real    
being1 than it can be equal to   two    
right angles4 ,if a man knows not that  
non-entity1 or the absence   of all     
being1 cannot be equal to two right     
angles1 it is impossible he   should    
know any demonstration in ,euclid4 ,if1 
therefore1 we know there   is some real 
being1 and that non-entity cannot       

produce any real being1   it is an      
evident demonstration1 that from        
eternity there has been   something2    
since what was not from eternity1 had a 
beginning1 and what   had a beginning1  
must be produced by something else4     
8,next1 it is evident1 that what had its
 being and beginning from   another1    
must also have all that which is in1 and
 belongs to its being   from another    
too4 ,all the powers it has must be     
owing to1 and received   from the same  
source4 ,this eternal source1 then1 of  
all being1 must   also be the source and
 original of all power2 and so this     
eternal   ,being must be also the most  
powerful4    8,again1 a man finds in    
himself perception and knowledge4 ,we   
have   then got one step farther2 and we
 are certain now1 that there is not     
only some being1 but some knowing       
intelligent being in the world4         
8,there was a time1 then1 when there was
 no knowing being1 and when   knowledge 
began to be2 or else there has been also

 a knowing being   from eternity4 ,if it
 be said1 there was a time when no being
 had any   knowledge1 when that eternal 
,being was void of all understanding3 ,i
   reply1 that then it was impossible   
there should ever have been any         
knowledge2 it being as impossible that  
things wholly void of   knowledge1 and  
operating blindly1 and without any      
perception1 should   produce a knowing  
being1 as it is impossible that a       
triangle should   make itself three     
angles bigger than two right ones4 ,for 
it is as   repugnant to the idea of     
senseless matter1 that it should put    
into   itself sense1 perception and     
knowledge1 as it is repugnant to the    
idea of a triangle1 that it should put  
into itself greater angles   than two   
right ones4    8,thus1 from the         
consideration of ourselves1 and what we 
infallibly   find in our own            
constitutions1 our reason leads us to   
the knowledge of   this certain and     
evident truth1 that there is an eternal1

 most   powerful1 and most knowing      
being2 which whether any one will please
   to call ,god1 it matters not4 ,the   
thing is evident1 and from this   idea  
duly considered1 will easily be deduced 
all those other   attributes1 which we  
ought to ascribe to this eternal ,being4
 ,if1   nevertheless1 any one should be 
found so senselessly arrogant1 as to    
suppose man alone knowing and wise1 but 
yet the product of mere   ignorance and 
chance2 and that all the rest of the    
universe acted only   by that blind     
hap-hazard3 ,i shall leave with him that
 very rational   and emphatical rebuke  
of ,tully1 l4 #b4 de leg4 to be         
considered at   his leisure4    8,what  
can be more sillily arrogant and        
misbecoming than for a man to   think   
that he has a mind and understanding in 
him1 but yet in all the   universe      
beside there is no such thing8 ,or that 
those things1 which   with the utmost   
stretch of his reason he can scarce     
comprehend1 should   be moved and       

managed without any reason at all80     
,quid est enim   verius1 quam neminem   
esse oportere tam stulte arrogantem1 ut 
in se   mentem et rationem putet inesse1
 in clo mundoque non putet8 ,aut ea   qu
 vix summa ingenii ratione comprehendat1
 nulla ratione moveri   putet8    8,from
 what has been said1 it is plain to me1 
we have a more certain   knowledge of   
the existence of a ,god1 than of any    
thing our senses have   not immediately 
discovered to us4 ,nay1 ,i presume ,i   
may say1 that we   more certainly know  
that there is a ,god than that there is 
any thing   else without us4 ,when ,i   
say we know1 ,i mean there is such a    
knowledge within our reach1 which we    
cannot miss1 if we will but apply   our 
minds to that1 as we do to several other
 inquiries40    ,,locke4  ,footnote #aj3
    8,in crossing a heath1 suppose ,i   
pitched my foot against a stone1 and    
were asked how the stone came to be     
there1 ,i might possibly answer1   that1
 for any thing ,i knew to the contrary1 

it had lain there for   ever2 nor would 
it1 perhaps1 be very easy to shew the   
absurdity of   this answer4 ,but suppose
 ,i had found a watch upon the ground1  
and it   should be enquired how the     
watch happened to be in that place1 ,i  
should hardly think of the answer which 
,i had before given1 that1 for   any    
thing ,i knew1 the watch might have     
always been there4 ,yet1 why   should   
not this answer serve for the watch1 as 
well as for the stone8   ,why is it not 
as admissible in the second case1 as in 
the first8 ,for   this reason1 and for  
no other1 viz4 that1 when we come to    
inspect   the watch1 we perceive 7what  
we could not discover in the stone7 that
   its several parts are framed1 and put
 together for a purpose1 e4 g4   that   
they are so formed and adjusted as to   
produce motion1 and that   motion so    
regulated as to point out the hour of   
the day2 that1 if the   several parts   
had been differently shaped from what   
they are1 of a   different size from    

what they are1 or placed after any other
 manner1   or in any other order1 than  
that in which they are placed1 either no
   motion at all would have been carried
 on in the machine1 or none which       
would have answered the use1 that is now
 served by it4 ,to reckon up a   few of 
the plainest of these parts1 and of     
their offices1 all tending   to one     
result3 ,we see a cylindrical box1      
containing a coiled elastic   spring1   
which1 by its endeavour to relax itself1
 turns round the box4   ,we next observe
 a flexible chain 7artificially wrought 
for the sake of   flexure7 communicating
 the action of the spring from the box  
to the   fusee4 ,we then find a series  
of wheels1 the teeth of which catch in1 
and apply to1 each other1 conducting the
 motion from the fusee to the   balance1
 and from the balance to the pointer2   
and at the same time1 by   the size and 
shape of those wheels1 so regulating    
that motion1 as to   terminate in       
causing an index1 by an equable and     

measured progression1   to pass over a  
given space in a given time4 ,we take   
notice that the   wheels are made of    
brass1 in order to keep them from rust2 
the springs   of steel1 no other metal  
being so elastic2 that over the face of 
the   watch there is placed a glass1 a  
material employed in no other part of   
the work1 but1 in the room of which1 if 
there had been any other than   a       
transparent substance1 the hour could   
not be seen without opening   the case4 
,this mechanism being observed 7it      
requires indeed an   examination of the 
instrument1 and perhaps some previous   
knowledge of   the subject1 to perceive 
and understand it2 but being once1 as we
 have   said1 observed and understood17 
the inference1 we think1 is             
inevitable2 that the watch must have had
 a maker2 that there must have          
existed1 at some time1 and at some place
 or other1 an artificer1 or   artificers
 who formed it for the purpose which we 
find it actually to   answer2 who       

comprehended its construction1 and      
designed its use4    8,i4 ,nor would it1
 ,i apprehend1 weaken the conclusion    
that we had never   seen a watch made2  
that we had never known an artist       
capable of making   one2 that we were   
altogether incapable of executing such a
 piece of   workmanship ourselves1 or of
 understanding in what manner it was    
performed3 all this being no more than  
what is true of some exquisite   remains
 of some ancient art1 of some lost arts1
 and1 to the generality   of mankind1 of
 the more curious productions of modern 
manufacture4   ,does one man in a       
million know how oval frames are turned8
 ,ignorance   of this kind exalts our   
opinion of the unseen and unknown       
artist's   skill1 if he be unseen and   
unknown1 but raises no doubts in our    
minds   of the existence and agency of  
such an artist1 at some former time1    
and in some place or other4 ,nor can ,i 
perceive that it varies at all1   the   
inference1 whether the question arise   

concerning a human agent1 or            
concerning an agent of a different      
species1 or an agent possessing1 in     
some respects1 a different nature4      
8,,ii4 ,neither1 secondly1 would it     
invalidate our conclusion1 that the     
watch sometimes went wrong1 or that it  
seldom went exactly right4 ,the         
purpose of the machinery1 the design1   
and the designer1 might be   evident1   
and in the case supposed would be       
evident1 in whatever way we   accounted 
for the irregularity of the movement1 or
 whether we could   account for it or   
not4 ,it is not necessary that a machine
 be perfect1   in order to shew with    
what design it was made3 still less     
necessary1   where the only question is1
 whether it were made with any design at
   all4    8,,iii4 ,nor1 thirdly1 would 
it bring any uncertainty into the       
argument1   if there were a few parts of
 the watch1 concerning which we could   
not   discover1 or had not yet          
discovered1 in what manner they conduced

 to   the general effect2 or even some  
parts1 concerning which we could not    
ascertain1 whether they conduced to that
 effect in any manner   whatever4 ,for1 
as to the first branch of the case2 if1 
by the loss1 or   disorder1 or decay of 
the parts in question1 the movement of  
the watch   were found in fact to be    
stopped1 or disturbed or retarded1 no   
doubt   would remain in our minds as to 
the utility or intention of these       
parts1 although we should be unable to  
investigate the manner   according to   
which1 or the connection by which1 the  
ultimate effect   depended upon their   
action or assistance3 and the more      
complex is the   machine1 the more      
likely is this obscurity to arise4      
,then1 as to the   second thing         
supposed1 namely1 that there were parts 
which might be   spared without         
prejudice to the movement of the watch1 
and that we had   proved this by        
experiment2 these superfluous parts1    
even if we were   completely assured    

that they were such1 would not vacate   
the reasoning   which we had instituted 
concerning other parts4 ,the indication 
of   contrivance remained1 with respect 
to them1 nearly as it was before4       
8,,iv4 ,nor1 fourthly1 would any man in 
his senses think the existence of   the 
watch1 with its various machinery1      
accounted for1 by being told   that it  
was one out of possible combinations of 
material forms2 that   whatever he had  
found in the place where he found the   
watch1 must have   contained some       
internal configuration or other2 and    
that this   configuration might be the  
structure now exhibited1 viz4 of the    
works of a watch1 as well as of a       
different structure4    8,v4 ,nor1      
fifthly1 would it yield his enquiry more
 satisfaction to be   answered1 that    
there existed in things a principle of  
order1 which had   disposed the parts of
 the watch into their present form and  
situation4   ,he never knew a watch made
 by the principle of order2 nor can he  

even   form to himself an idea of what  
is meant by a principle of order1       
distinct from the intelligence of the   
watch-maker4    8,,vi4 ,sixthly1 he     
would be surprised to hear1 that the    
mechanism of the   watch was no proof of
 contrivance1 only a motive to induce   
the mind to   think so4    8,,vii4 ,and 
not less surprised to be informed1 that 
the watch in his   hand was nothing more
 than the result of the laws of metallic
   nature4 ,it is a perversion of       
language to assign any law1 as the      
efficient1 operative1 cause of any      
thing4 ,a law presupposes an agent2     
for it is only the mode1 according to   
which an agent proceeds3 it   implies a 
power2 for it is the order1 according to
 which that power   acts4 ,without this 
agent1 without this power1 which are    
both distinct   from itself1 the law    
does nothing2 is nothing4 ,the          
expression1 #8the   law of metallic     
nature1' may sound strange and harsh to 
a philosophic   ear2 but it seems quite 

as justifiable as some others which are 
more   familiar to him1 such as #8the   
law of vegetable nature1' #8the law of  
animal nature1' or indeed as #8the law  
of nature'1 in general1 when   assigned 
as the cause of phnomena1 in exclusion  
of agency and power2   or when it is    
substituted into the place of these4    
8,,viii4 ,neither1 lastly1 would our    
observer be driven out of his           
conclusion1 or from his confidence in   
its truth1 by being told that he   knew 
nothing at all about the matter4 ,he    
knows enough for his   argument4 ,he    
knows the utility of the end3 he knows  
the subserviency   and adaptation of the
 means to the end4 ,these points being  
known1 his   ignorance of other points1 
his doubts concerning other points1     
affect   not the certainty of his       
reasoning4 ,the consciousness of knowing
   little1 need not beget a distrust of 
that which he does know40----           
8,suppose1 in the next place1 that the  
person who found the watch1   should1   

after some time1 discover1 that1 in     
addition to all the   properties which  
he had hitherto observed in it1 it      
possessed the   unexpected property of  
producing1 in the course of its         
movement1   another watch like itself2  
7the thing is conceivable27 that it     
contained within it a mechanism1 a      
system of parts1 a mould for   instance1
 or a complex adjustment of laths1      
files1 and other tools1   evidently and 
separately calculated for this purpose2 
let us enquire1   what effect ought such
 a discovery to have upon his former    
conclusion6    8,i4 ,the first effect   
would be to increase his admiration of  
the   contrivance1 and his conviction of
 the consummate skill of the            
contriver4 ,whether he regarded the     
object of the contrivance1 the          
distinct apparatus1 the intricate1 yet  
in many parts intelligible1   mechanism 
by which it was carried on1 he would    
perceive1 in this new   observation1    
nothing but an additional reason for    

doing what he had   already done2 for   
referring the construction of the watch 
to design1   and to supreme art4 ,if    
that construction without this property1
 or1   which is the same thing1 before  
this property had been noticed1 proved  
intention and art to have been employed 
about it2 still more strong   would the 
proof appear1 when he came to the       
knowledge of this further   property1   
the crown and perfection of all the     
rest4    8,,ii4 ,he would reflect1 that 
though the watch before him were1 in    
some   sense1 the maker of the watch1   
which was fabricated in the course of   
its movements1 yet it was in a very     
different sense from that1 in   which a 
carpenter1 for instance1 is the maker of
 a chair2 the author   of its           
contrivance1 the cause of the relation  
of its parts to their   use4 ,with      
respect to these1 the first watch was no
 cause at all to the   second3 in no    
such sense as this was it the author of 
the constitution   and order1 either of 

the parts which the new watch contained1
 or of   the parts by the aid and       
instrumentality of which it was         
produced4 ,we   might possibly say1 but 
with great latitude of expression1 that 
a   stream of water ground corn3 but no 
latitude of expression would allow   us 
to say1 no stretch of conjecture could  
lead us to think1 that the   stream of  
water built the mill1 though it were too
 ancient for us to   know who the       
builder was4 ,what the stream of water  
does in the affair1   is neither more   
nor less than this3 by the application  
of an   unintelligent impulse to a      
mechanism previously arranged1 arranged 
independently of it1 and arranged by    
intelligence1 an effect is   produced1  
viz4 the corn is ground4 ,but the effect
 results from the   arrangement4 ,the   
force of the stream cannot be said to be
 the cause or   author of the effect1   
still less of the arrangement4          
,understanding and   plan in the        
formation of the mill were not the less 

necessary1 for any   share which the    
water has in grinding the corn3 yet is  
this share the   same1 as that which the
 watch would have contributed to the    
production   of the new watch1 upon the 
supposition assumed in the last section4
   ,therefore1    8,,iii4 ,though it be 
now no longer probable1 that the        
individual watch   which our observer   
had found1 was made immediately by the  
hand of an   artificer1 yet doth not    
this alteration in any wise affect the  
inference that an artificer had been    
originally employed and concerned   in  
the production4 ,the argument from      
design remains as it was4 ,marks   of   
design and contrivance are no more      
accounted for now1 than they   were     
before4 ,in the same thing1 we may ask  
for the cause of different   properties4
 ,we may ask for the cause of the colour
 of a body1 of its   hardness1 of its   
heat2 and these causes may be all       
different4 ,we are   now asking for the 
cause of that subserviency to an use1   

that relation   to an end1 which we have
 remarked in the watch before us4 ,no   
answer is   given to this question by   
telling us that a preceding watch       
produced   it4 ,there cannot be design  
without a designer2 contrivance without 
a   contriver2 order without choice2    
arrangement1 without any thing   capable
 of arranging2 subserviency and relation
 to a purpose1 without   that which     
could intend a purpose2 means suitable  
to an end1 and   executing their office 
in accomplishing that end1 without the  
end ever   having been contemplated1 or 
the means accommodated to it4           
,arrangement1 disposition of parts1     
subserviency of means to an end1        
relation of instruments to an use1 imply
 the presence of intelligence   and     
mind4 ,no one1 therefore1 can rationally
 believe1 that the   insensible1        
inanimate watch1 from which the watch   
before us issued1   was the proper cause
 of the mechanism we so much admire in  
it2 could   be truly said to have       

constructed the instrument1 disposed its
 parts1   assigned their office1        
determined their order1 action1 and     
mutual   dependency1 combined their     
several motions into one result1 and    
that   also a result connected with the 
utilities of other beings4 ,all these   
properties therefore1 are as much       
unaccounted for as they were before4    
8,,iv4 ,nor is any thing gained by      
running the difficulty further back1    
i4 e4 by supposing the watch before us  
to have been produced by   another      
watch1 that from a former1 and so on    
indefinitely4 ,our going   back ever so 
far brings us no nearer to the least    
degree of   satisfaction upon the       
subject4 ,contrivance is still          
unaccounted for4   ,we still want a     
contriver4 ,a designing mind is neither 
supplied by   this supposition1 nor     
dispensed with4 ,if the difficulty were 
diminished the further we went back1 by 
going back indefinitely we   might      
exhaust it4 ,and this is the only case  

to which this sort of   reasoning       
applies4 ,where there is a tendency1 or1
 as we increase the   number of terms1 a
 continual approach towards a limit1    
there1 by   supposing the number of     
terms to be what is called infinite1 we 
may   conceive the limit to be attained3
 but where there is no such tendency    
or approach1 nothing is effected by     
lengthening the series4 ,there is   no  
difference as to the point in question1 
7whatever there may be as   to many     
points7 between one series and another2 
between a series which   is finite1 and 
a series which is infinite4 ,a chain    
composed of an   infinite number of     
links1 can no more support itself1 than 
a chain   composed of a finite number of
 links4 ,and of this we are assured1    
7though we never can have tried the     
experiment7 because1 by   increasing the
 number of links1 from ten for instance 
to a hundred1   from a hundred to a     
thousand1 c4 we make not the smallest   
approach1   we observe not the smallest 

tendency1 towards self-support4 ,there  
is   no difference in this respect 7yet 
there may be a great difference in      
several respects7 between a chain of a  
greater or less length1 between   one   
chain and another1 between one that is  
finite and one that is   indefinite4    
,this very much resembles the case      
before us4 ,the machine1   which we are 
inspecting1 demonstrates1 by its        
construction1   contrivance and design4 
,contrivance must have had a contriver2 
design1   a designer2 whether the       
machine immediately proceeded from      
another   machine1 or not4 ,that        
circumstance alters not the case4 ,that 
other   machine may1 in like manner1    
have proceeded from a former machine3   
nor   does that alter the case3         
contrivance must have had a contriver4  
,that   former one from one preceding   
it3 no alteration still3 a contriver is 
still necessary4 ,no tendency is        
perceived1 no approach towards a        
diminution of this necessity4 ,it is the

 same with any and every   succession of
 these machines2 a succession of ten1 of
 a hundred1 of a   thousand2 with one   
series as with another2 a series which  
is finite1   as with a series which is  
infinite4 ,in whatever other respects   
they   may differ1 in this they do not4 
,in all equally1 contrivance and        
design are unaccounted for4    8,the    
question is not simply1 ,how came the   
first watch into existence8   which     
question1 it may be pretended1 is done  
away by supposing the   series of       
watches thus produced from one another  
to have been   infinite1 and            
consequently to have had no such first1 
for which it   was necessary to provide 
a cause4 ,this1 perhaps1 would have been
   nearly the state of the question1 if 
nothing had been before us but an       
unorganized unmechanised substance1     
without mark or indication of           
contrivance4 ,it might be difficult to  
shew that such substance could   not    
have existed from eternity1 either in   

succession 7if it were   possible1 which
 ,i think it is not1 for unorganized    
bodies to spring   from one another17 or
 by individual perpetuity4 ,but that is 
not the   question now4 ,to suppose it  
to be so1 is to suppose that it made no 
difference whether we had found a watch 
or a stone4 ,as it is1 the   metaphysics
 of that question have no place2 for1 in
 the watch which we   are examining1 are
 seen contrivance1 design2 an end1 a    
purpose2 means   for the end1 adaptation
 to the purpose4 ,and the question1     
which   irresistibly presses upon our   
thoughts1 is1 whence this contrivance   
and design8 ,the thing required is the  
intending mind1 the adapting   hand1 the
 intelligence by which that hand was    
directed4 ,this question1   this demand1
 is not shaken off1 by increasing a     
number or succession   of substances1   
destitute of these properties2 nor the  
more1 by   increasing that number to    
infinity4 ,if it be said1 that1 upon the
   supposition of one watch being       

produced from another in the course of  
that other's movements1 and by means of 
the mechanism within it1 we   have a    
cause for the watch in my hand1 viz4 the
 watch from which it   proceeded1 ,i    
deny1 that for the design1 the          
contrivance1 the   suitableness of means
 to an end1 the adaptation of           
instruments to an   use 7all which we   
discover in the watch17 we have any     
cause whatever4   ,it is in vain1       
therefore to assign a series of such    
causes1 or to   allege that a series may
 be carried back to infinity2 for ,i do 
not   admit that we have yet any cause  
at all of the phnomena1 still less   any
 series of causes either finite or      
infinite4 ,here is contrivance1   but no
 contriver2 proofs of design1 but no    
designer4    8,v4 ,our observer would   
further also reflect1 that the maker of 
the   watch before him1 was1 in truth   
and reality1 the maker of every watch   
produced from it2 there being no        
difference 7except that the latter      

manifests a more exquisite skill7       
between the making of another watch     
with his own hands by the mediation of  
files1 laths1 chisels1 c4 and   the     
disposing1 fixing1 and inserting1 of    
these instruments1 or of   others       
equivalent to them1 in the body of the  
watch already made1 in   such a manner1 
as to form a new watch in the course of 
the movements   which he had given to   
the old one4 ,it is only working by one 
set of   tools1 instead of another4     
8,the conclusion which the first        
examination of the watch1 of its        
works1 construction1 and movement       
suggested1 was1 that it must have   had1
 for the cause and author of that       
construction1 an artificer1 who         
understood its mechanism1 and designed  
its use4 ,this conclusion is            
invincible4 ,a second examination       
presents us with a new discovery4   ,the
 watch is found in the course of its    
movement to produce another   watch     
similar to itself3 and not only so1 but 

we perceive in it a   system of         
organization1 separately calculated for 
that purpose4 ,what   effect would this 
discovery have1 or ought it to have1    
upon our former   inference8 ,what1 as  
hath already been said1 but to increase1
 beyond   measure1 our admiration of the
 skill1 which had been employed in the  
formation of such a machine8 ,or shall  
it1 instead of this1 all at once   turn 
us round to an opposite conclusion1 viz4
 that no art or skill   whatever has    
been concerned in the business1 although
 all other   evidences of art and skill 
remain as they were1 and this last and  
supreme piece of art be now added to the
 rest8 ,can this be maintained   without
 absurdity8 ,yet this is atheism40      
,,paley4  ,footnote #aa3    8,the works 
of nature want only to be contemplated4 
,when contemplated1   they have every   
thing in them which can astonish by     
their greatness2   for1 of the vast     
scale of operation1 through which our   
discoveries   carry us1 at one end we   

see an intelligent ,power arranging     
planetary   systems1 fixing1 for        
instance1 the trajectory of ,saturn1 or 
constructing a ring of a hundred        
thousand miles diameter1 to surround    
his body1 and be suspended like a       
magnificent arch over the heads of   his
 inhabitants2 and1 at the other1 bending
 a hooked tooth1 concerting   and       
providing an appropriate mechanism1 for 
the clasping and   reclasping of the    
filaments of the feather of a           
humming-bird4 ,we have   proof1 not only
 of both these works proceeding from an 
intelligent   agent1 but of their       
proceeding from the same agent3 for1 in 
the first   place1 we can trace an      
identity of plan1 a connexion of system1
 from   ,saturn to our own globe2 and   
when arrived upon our own globe1 we can1
   in the second place1 pursue the      
connexion through all the organized1    
especially the animated1 bodies1 which  
it supports4 ,we can observe   marks of 
a common relation1 as well to one       

another1 as to the elements   of which  
their habitation is composed4 ,therefore
 one mind hath   planned1 or at least   
hath prescribed a general plan for1 all 
these   productions4 ,one being has been
 concerned in all4    8,under this      
stupendous ,being we live4 ,our         
happiness1 our existence1 is   in his   
hands4 ,all we expect must come from    
him4 ,nor ought we to feel   our        
situation insecure4 ,in every nature1   
and in every portion of   nature1 which 
we can descry1 we find attention        
bestowed upon even the   minutest parts4
 ,the hinges in the wings of an earwig1 
and the joints   of its antenn1 are as  
highly wrought1 as if the ,creator had  
had   nothing else to finish4 ,we see no
 signs of diminution of care by         
multiplicity of objects1 or of          
distraction of thought by variety4 ,we  
have no reason to fear therefore1 our   
being forgotten1 or overlooked1   or    
neglected4    8,the existence and       
character of the ,deity1 is1 in every   

view1 the most   interesting of all     
human speculations4 ,in none1 however1  
is it more   so1 than as it facilitates 
the belief of the fundamental articles  
of   ,revelation4 ,it is a step to have 
it proved1 that there must be           
something in the world more than what we
 see4 ,it is a further step to   know1  
that1 amongst the invisible things of   
nature1 there must be an   intelligent  
mind1 concerned in its production1      
order1 and support4   ,these points     
being assured to us by ,natural         
,theology1 we may well   leave to       
,revelation the disclosure of many      
particulars1 which our   researches     
cannot reach1 respecting either the     
nature of this ,being as   the original 
cause of all things1 or his character   
and designs as a   moral governor2 and  
not only so1 but the more full          
confirmation of   other particulars1 of 
which1 though they do not lie altogether
 beyond   our reasonings and our        
probabilities1 the certainty is by no   

means   equal to the importance4 ,the   
true ,theist will be the first to listen
   to any credible communication of     
divine knowledge4 ,nothing which he     
has learnt from ,natural ,theology1 will
 diminish his desire of further         
instruction1 or his disposition to      
receive it with humility and            
thankfulness4 ,he wishes for light3 he  
rejoices in light4 ,his inward          
veneration of this great ,being1 will   
incline him to attend with the   utmost 
seriousness1 not only to all that can be
 discovered concerning   him by         
researches into nature1 but to all that 
is taught by a   revelation1 which gives
 reasonable proof of having proceeded   
from him4    8,but1 above every other   
article of revealed religion1 does the  
anterior belief of a ,deity1 bear with  
the strongest force1 upon that   grand  
point1 which gives indeed interest and  
importance to all the   rest--the       
resurrection of the human dead4 ,the    
thing might appear   hopeless1 did we   

not see a power under the guidance of an
 intelligent   will1 and a power        
penetrating the inmost recesses of all  
substance4 ,i   am far from justifying  
the opinion of those1 who #8thought it a
 thing   incredible that ,god should    
raise the dead2' but ,i admit that it is
   first necessary to be persuaded1 that
 there is a ,god to do so4 ,this   being
 thoroughly settled in our minds1 there 
seems to be nothing in   this process   
7concealed and mysterious as we confess 
it to be17 which   need to shock our    
belief4 ,they who have taken up the     
opinion1 that the   acts of the human   
mind depend upon organization1 that the 
mind   itself indeed consists in        
organization1 are supposed to find a    
greater   difficulty than others do1 in 
admitting a transition by death to a new
   state of sentient existence1 because 
the old organization is   apparently    
dissolved4 ,but ,i do not see that any  
impracticability need   be apprehended  
even by these2 or that the change1 even 

upon their   hypothesis1 is far removed 
from the analogy of some other          
operations1   which we know with        
certainty that the deity is carrying on4
 ,in the   ordinary derivation of plants
 and animals from one another1 a        
particle1 in many cases1 minuter than   
all assignable1 all conceivable         
dimension2 an aura1 an effluvium1 an    
infinitesimal2 determines the           
organization of a future body3 does no  
less than fix1 whether that   which is  
about to be produced1 shall be a        
vegetable1 a merely   sentient1 or a    
rational being2 an oak1 a frog1 or a    
philosopher2 makes   all these          
differences2 gives to the future body   
its qualities1 and   nature1 and        
species4 ,and this particle1 from which 
springs1 and by   which is determined a 
whole future nature1 itself proceeds    
from1 and   owes its constitution to1 a 
prior body3 nevertheless1 which is seen 
in   plants most decisively1 the        
incepted organization1 though formed    

within1 and through1 and by a preceding 
organization1 is not corrupted   by its 
corruption1 or destroyed by its         
dissolution2 but1 on the   contrary1 is 
sometimes extricated and developed by   
those very causes2   survives and comes 
into action1 when the purpose1 for which
 it was   prepared1 requires its        
use4--,now an conomy which nature has   
adopted1   when the purpose was to      
transfer an organization from one       
individual   to another1 may have       
something analogous to it1 when the     
purpose is to   transmit an organization
 from one state of being to another     
state3 and   they who found thought in  
organization1 may see something in this 
analogy applicable to their             
difficulties2 for1 whatever can transmit
 a   similarity of organization will    
answer their purpose1 because1          
according even to their own theory1 it  
may be the vehicle of   consciousness1  
and because consciousness1 without      
doubt1 carries   identity and           

individuality along with it through all 
changes of form   or of visible         
qualities4 ,in the most general case1   
that1 as we have   said1 of the         
derivation of plants and animals from   
one another1 the   latent organization  
is either itself similar to the old     
organization1   or has the power of     
communicating to new matter the old     
organic form4   ,but it is not          
restricted to this rule4 ,there are     
other cases1   especially in the        
progress of insect life1 in which the   
dormant   organization does not much    
resemble that which incloses it1 and    
still   less suits with the situation in
 which the inclosing body is placed1    
but suits with a different situation to 
which it is destined4 ,in the   larva of
 the libellula1 which lives constantly1 
and has still long to   live1 under     
water1 are descried the wings of a fly1 
which two years   afterwards is to mount
 into the air4 ,is there nothing in this
 analogy8   ,it serves at least to shew1

 that1 even in the observable course of 
nature1 organizations are formed one    
beneath another2 and1 amongst a         
thousand other instances1 it shews      
completely1 that the ,deity can   mould 
and fashion the parts of material       
nature1 so as to fulfil any   purpose   
whatever which he is pleased to appoint4
    8,they who refer the operations of  
mind to a substance totally and         
essentially different from matter1 as1  
most certainly1 these   operations1     
though affected by material causes1 hold
 very little   affinity to any          
properties of matter with which we are  
acquainted1   adopt1 perhaps1 a juster  
reasoning and a better philosophy2 and  
by   these the considerations above     
suggested are not wanted1 at least in   
the same degree4 ,but to such as find1  
which some persons do find1 an          
insuperable difficulty in shaking off an
 adherence to those analogies1   which  
the corporeal world is continually      
suggesting to their thoughts2   to such1

 ,i say1 every consideration will be a  
relief1 which manifests   the extent of 
that intelligent power which is acting  
in nature1 the   fruitfulness of its    
resources1 the variety1 and aptness1 and
 success   of its means2 most especially
 every consideration1 which tends to    
shew1 that1 in the translation of a     
conscious existence1 there is not1      
even in their own way of regarding it1  
any thing greatly beyond1 or   totally  
unlike1 what takes place in such parts  
7probably small parts7   of the order of
 nature1 as are accessible to our       
observation4    8,again2 if there be    
those who think1 that the contractedness
 and   debility of the human faculties  
in our present state1 seem ill to       
accord with the high destinies which the
 expectations of religion   point out to
 us1 ,i would only ask them1 whether any
 one1 who saw a   child two hours after 
its birth1 could suppose that it would  
ever come   to understand fluxions2#ab  
or who then shall say1 what further     

amplification of intellectual powers1   
what accession of knowledge1   what     
advance and improvement1 the rational   
faculty1 be its   constitution what it  
will1 may not admit of1 when placed     
amidst new   objects1 and endowed with a
 sensorium1 adapted1 as it undoubtedly  
will   be1 and as our present senses    
are1 to the perception of those         
substances1 and of those properties of  
things1 with which our concern   may    
lie4    8,upon the whole2 in every thing
 which respects this awful1 but1 as we  
trust1 glorious change1 we have a wise  
and powerful ,being1 7the   author1 in  
nature1 of infinitely various expedients
 for infinitely   various ends17 upon   
whom to rely for the choice and         
appointment of   means1 adequate to the 
execution of any plan which his goodness
 or his   justice may have formed1 for  
the moral and accountable part of his   
terrestrial creation4 ,that great office
 rests with him3 be it ours to   hope   
and prepare2 under a firm and settled   

persuasion1 that1 living   and dying1 we
 are his2 that life is passed in his    
constant presence1   that death resigns 
us to his merciful disposal40           
,,paley4  ,footnote #ab3    ,see        
,search's ,light of ,nature1 passim4    
,footnote #ac3    ,the theory of a      
nervous fluid1 or animal spirits1 is    
generally   abandoned4  ,footnote #ad3  
,see this doubtful doctrine discussed   
post ,quest4 #fj4                       
,quest4 ,,iii4       ,,quest4 ,,iii4    
,what is the ,word of ,god8      ,,answ4
 ,the holy scriptures of the ,old and   
,new ,testament are the word     of     
,god1 the only rule of faith and        
obedience4   ,in speaking to this       
answer1 we shall consider the several   
names by which the scripture is set     
forth with the import thereof1 and more 
particularly that by which it is most   
known2 to wit1 the ,old and ,new        
,testament1 and then speak of it as a   
rule of faith and obedience4  ,i4 ,there
 are several names given to the word of 

,god1 in ,psalm cxix4 one of which is   
found in almost every verse thereof4    
,it is sometimes called his law1        
statutes1 precepts1 commandments1 or    
ordinances1#ae to signify his authority 
and power to demand obedience of his    
creatures which he does therein1 and    
shews us in what particular instances1  
and how we are to yield obedience to it4
  ,it is also called his judgments1     
implying that he is the great ,judge of 
the world1 and that he will deal with   
men in a judicial way1 according to     
their works1 as agreeable or            
disagreeable to this law of his1        
contained in his word2 and1 for this    
reason1 it is also called his           
righteousness1 because all that he      
commands in his word is holy and just1  
and his service highly reasonable4  ,it 
is also called ,god's testimonies1 as   
containing the witness1 evidence1 or    
record1 that he has given to his own    
perfections1 whereby he has demonstrated
 them to the world4 ,thus we are said1  

#b ,cor4 iii4 #ah4 ,to behold1 as in a  
glass1 the glory of the ,lord4  ,it is  
also called his way1 as containing a    
declaration of the glorious works that  
he has done1 both of nature and grace2  
the various methods of his dealing with 
men1 or the way that they should walk   
in1 which leads to eternal life4        
,moreover1 it is called1 ,rom4 iii4 #b4 
,the oracles of ,god1 to denote that    
many things contained in it could not   
have been known by us till he was       
pleased to reveal them therein4         
,agreeably hereto1 the apostle speaks of
 the great things contained in the      
gospel1 as being hid in ,god2 hid from  
ages and generations past1 but now made 
manifest to the saints1 ,eph4 iii4 #i1  
,col4 i4 #bf4  ,again it is sometimes   
called the gospel1 especially those     
parts of scripture which contain the    
glad tidings of salvation by ,christ1 or
 the method which ,god ordained for the 
taking away the guilt1 and subduing the 
power of sin2 and particularly the      

apostle calls it1 ,the glorious gospel  
of the blessed ,god2 #a ,tim4 i4 #aa4   
and the gospel of our salvation4 ,eph4  
i4 #ac4  ,and1 in this answer1 it is    
called the ,old and ,new ,testament2    
that part of it which was written before
 our ,saviour's incarnation1 which      
contains a relation of ,god's dealings  
with his church1 from the beginning of  
the world to that time1 or a prediction 
of what should be fulfilled in following
 ages1 is called the ,old ,testament4   
,the other which contains an account of 
,god's dispensation of grace1 from      
,christ's first to his second coming is 
called the ,new4  ,a testament is the   
declared or written will of a person1 in
 which some things are given to those   
who are concerned or described therein4 
,thus the scripture is ,god's written   
will or testament1 containing an account
 of what he has freely given in his     
covenant of grace to fallen man2 and    
this is the principal subject matter of 
scripture1 as a testament2 therefore it 

contains an account1  #a4 ,of many      
valuable legacies given to the heirs of 
salvation2 the blessings of both worlds1
 all the privileges contained in those  
great and precious promises1 with which 
the scripture so abounds4 ,thus it is   
said1 ,thou shalt guide me with thy     
counsel1 and afterward receive me to    
glory2 ,psal4 lxiii4 #bd4 and the ,lord 
will give grace and glory1 ,psal4       
lxxxiv4 #aa4  #b4 ,it describes the     
testator ,christ1 who gives eternal life
 to his people1 and confirms all the    
promises which are made in him2 as they 
are said1 #b ,cor4 i4 #bj4 ,to be in him
 yea and amen1 to the glory of ,god2 and
 more especially he ratified this       
testament by his death as the same      
apostle observes1 which is a known maxim
 of the civil law1 that where a         
testament is1 there must of necessity be
 the death of the testator1#af ,heb4 ix4
 #af1 #ag4 upon which the force or      
validity thereof depends4 ,and the word 
of ,god gives us a large account how all

 the blessings1 which ,god bestowed upon
 his people1 receive their validity from
 the death of ,christ4  #c4 ,it also    
discovers to us who are the heirs1 or   
legatees1 to whom these blessings are   
given1 who are described therein1 as    
repenting1 believing1 returning sinners1
 who may lay claim to the blessings of  
the covenant of grace4  #d4 ,it has     
several seals annexed to it1 viz4 the   
sacraments under the ,old and ,new      
,testament1 of which we have a          
particular account in scripture4  ,this 
leads us to consider how the scripture  
is otherwise divided or distinguished4  
7#a47 ,as to the ,old ,testament1 it is 
sometimes distinguished or divided into 
,moses and the prophets1 ,luke xvi4 #bi4
 or ,moses1 the prophets1 and the       
psalms1 ,luke xxiv4 #dd4 ,and it may be 
considered also as containing historical
 and prophetic writings1 and others that
 are more especially doctrinal or       
poetical2 and the prophets may be       
considered as to the time when they     

wrote1 some before and others after the 
captivity4 ,they may also be            
distinguished as to the subject matter  
of them3 some contain a very clear and  
particular account of the person and    
kingdom of ,christ1 e4 g4 ,isaiah who   
is1 for this reason1 by some1 called the
 evangelical prophet4 ,others contain   
reproofs1 and denounce and lament       
approaching judgments1 as the prophet   
,jeremiah4 ,others encourage the        
building of the temple1 the setting up  
the worship of ,god1 and the reformation
 of the people upon their return from   
captivity3 thus ,zechariah and ,haggai4 
,as for the historical parts of         
scripture1 these either contain an      
account of ,god's dealings with his     
people before the captivity2 as ,joshua1
 ,judges1 ,samuel1 ,kings1 c4 or after  
it1 as ,ezra and ,nehemiah4  7#b47 ,the 
books of the ,new ,testament maybe thus 
divided4 ,some of them are historical1  
viz4 such as contain the life and death 
of our ,saviour1 as the four gospels1 or

 the ministry of the apostles1 and the  
first planting and spreading of the     
gospel1 as the ,acts of the ,apostles4  
,others are more especially doctrinal1  
and are wrote in the form of an epistle 
by the apostle ,paul1 and some other of 
the apostles4  ,one book is prophetical1
 as the ,revelations1 wherein is        
foretold the different state and        
condition of the church1 the            
persecutions it should meet with from   
its ,anti-christian enemies1 its final  
victory over them1 and its triumphs1 as 
reigning with ,christ in his kingdom4   
,this leads us to consider1 when ,god   
first revealed his will to man in       
scripture1 and how this revelation was  
gradually enlarged1 and transmitted down
 to the church in succeeding ages4      
,there was no written word1 from the    
beginning of the world1 till ,moses's   
time1 which was between two and three   
thousand years2 and it was almost a     
thousand years longer before the canon  
of the ,old ,testament was completed by 

,malachi the last prophet1 and some     
hundred years after that before the     
canon of the ,new ,testament was given2 
so that ,god revealed his will1 as the  
apostle says1 in the beginning of the   
epistle to the ,hebrews1 at sundry      
times1 as well as in divers manners1 and
 by divers inspired writers4            
,notwithstanding the church1 before it  
had a written word1 was not destitute of
 a rule of faith and obedience1 neither 
were they unacquainted with the way of  
salvation2 for to suppose this1 would be
 greatly to detract from the glory of   
the divine government1 and reflect on   
,god's goodness2 therefore he took other
 ways to supply the want of a written   
word1 and hereby shewed his sovereignty1
 in that he can make known his will what
 way he pleases1 and his wisdom and     
goodness1 in giving his written word at 
such a time when the necessities of men 
most required it4 ,this will appear1 if 
we consider1  #a4 ,that when there was  
no written word1 the ,son of ,god       

frequently condescended to appear       
himself1 and converse with man1 and so  
revealed his mind and will to him4  #b4 
,there was the ministry of angels       
subservient to this end1 in which       
respect the word was often spoken by    
angels1 sent to instruct men in the mind
 and will of ,god4  #c4 ,the church had 
among them all this while1 more or less1
 the spirit of prophecy1 whereby many   
were instructed in the mind of ,god2 and
 though they were not commanded to      
commit what they received by inspiration
 to writing1 yet they were hereby       
furnished to instruct others in the way 
of salvation4 ,thus ,enoch is said to   
have prophesied in his day2 ,jude ver4  
#ad1 #ae4 and ,noah is called1 a        
preacher of righteousness1 #b ,pet4 ii4 
#e4 ,heb4 xi4 #g4  #d4 ,great part of   
this time the lives of men were very    
long1 7viz47 eight or nine hundred      
years1 and so the same persons might    
transmit the word of ,god by their own  
living testimony4  #e4 ,afterwards in   

the latter part of this interval of     
time1 when there was no written word1   
the world apostatised from ,god1 and    
almost all flesh corrupted their way2   
not for want of a sufficient rule of    
obedience1 but through the perverseness 
and depravity of their nature2 and      
afterwards the world was almost wholly  
sunk into idolatry1 and so were         
judicially excluded from ,god's special 
care2 and since ,abraham's family was   
the only church that remained in the    
world1 ,god continued to communicate to 
them the knowledge of his will in those 
extraordinary ways1 as he had done to   
the faithful in former ages4  #f4 ,when 
man's life was shortened1 and reduced to
 the same standard1 as now it is1 of    
threescore and ten years1 and the church
 was very numerous1 increased to a great
 nation1 and ,god had promised that he  
would increase them yet more1 then they 
stood in greater need of a written word 
to prevent the inconveniences that might
 have arisen from their continuing any  

longer without one1 and ,god thought    
fit1 as a great instance of favour to   
man1 to command ,moses to write his law1
 as a standing rule of faith and        
obedience to his church4  ,this leads us
 to consider a very important question1 
viz4 whether the church1 under the ,old 
,testament dispensation1 understood this
 written word1 or the spiritual meaning 
of those laws that are contained        
therein8 ,some1 indeed1 have thought    
that the state of the church1 before    
,christ came in the flesh1 was attended 
with so much darkness1 that they did not
 know the way of salvation1 though they 
had1 in whole or in part1 the scriptures
 of the ,old ,testament4 ,the ,papists  
generally assert1 that they did not2 and
 therefore they fancy1 that all who     
lived before ,christ's time1 were shut  
up in a prison1 where they remained till
 he went from the cross to reveal       
himself to them1 and so1 as their       
leader1 to conduct them in triumph to   
heaven4 ,and some ,protestants think the

 state of all who lived in those times1 
to have been attended with so much      
darkness1 that they knew but little of  
,christ and his gospel1 though shadowed 
forth1 or typified by the ceremonial    
law2 which they found on suchlike places
 of scripture as that1 where ,moses is  
said to have put a vail over his face1  
that the children of ,israel could not  
stedfastly look to the end of that which
 is abolished2 and that this vail is    
done away in ,christ1 #b ,cor4 iii4 #ac1
 #ad4 and those scriptures that speak of
 the ,jewish dispensation1 as a night of
 darkness1 compared with that of the    
gospel1 which is represented as a       
perfect day1 or the rising of the sun1  
,isa4 xxi4 #aa4 ,cant4 ii4 #ag4 ,malachi
 iv4 #b4 ,and as these extend the       
darkness of that dispensation farther   
than1 as ,i humbly conceive1 they ought 
to do1 so they speak more of the wrath1 
bondage1 and terror that attend it1 than
 they have ground to do1 especially when
 they make it universal2 since there are

 several reasons1 which may induce us to
 believe that the church1 at that time1 
understood a great deal more of the     
gospel1 shadowed forth in the ceremonial
 law1 and had more communion with ,god1 
and less wrath1 terror1 or bondage1 than
 these suppose they had2 for which ,i   
would offer the following reasons1  #a4 
,some of the ,old ,testament saints have
 expressed a great degree of faith in   
,christ1 and love to him1 whom they     
expected to come in our nature2 and many
 of the prophets1 in their inspired     
writings1 have discovered that they were
 not strangers to the way of redemption 
and reconciliation to ,god by him1 as   
the ,lord our righteousness4 ,a         
multitude of scriptures might be cited1 
that speak of ,christ1 and salvation by 
him in the ,old ,testament1 ,jer4 xxiii4
 #e1 #f4 ,zech4 xiii4 #g4 ,psal4 xxxiii4
 #a1 #b4 compared with ,rom4 iv4 #f4    
,thus ,abraham is described1 as         
rejoicing to see his day1 ,john viii4   
#ef4 and the prophet ,isaiah is so very 

particular and express in the account he
 gives of his person and offices1 that  
,i cannot see how any one can reasonably
 conclude him to have been wholly a     
stranger to the gospel himself1 ,isa4   
xxii4 #be4 ch4 lii4 #ac1 #ad1 #ae4 ,can 
any one think this1 who reads his #ec;d 
chapter1 where he treats of his life1   
death1 sufferings1 and offices1 and of  
the way of salvation by him8  ,object4  
,it is objected hereunto that the       
prophets who delivered these evangelical
 truths1 understood but little of them  
themselves1 because of the darkness of  
the dispensation they were under4 ,thus 
it is said1 #a ,pet4 i4 #aj1 #aa1 #ab4  
that the prophets1 indeed1 searched into
 the meaning of their own predictions1  
but to no purpose2 for it was revealed  
to them1 that not unto themselves1 but  
unto us1 they ministered2 that is1 the  
account they gave of our ,saviour was   
not designed to be understood by them1  
but us in this present                  
gospel-dispensation4  ,answ4 ,the answer

 that may be given to this objection is1
 that though the prophets are           
represented as enquiring into the       
meaning of their own prophecies1 yet it 
doth not follow from thence that they   
had but little or no understanding of   
them3 all that can be gathered from it  
is1 that they studied them1 as their own
 salvation was concerned therein2 but we
 must not suppose that they did this to 
no purpose1 as what they were not able  
to understand2 and when it is farther   
said in this scripture1 that not unto   
themselves1 but unto us1 they did       
minister the things that are now        
reported2 the meaning is1 not that they 
did not understand those things1 or had 
not much concern in them1 but that the  
glory of the gospel state1 that was     
foretold in their prophecies1 was what  
we should behold with our eyes1 and not 
they themselves1 in which sense they are
 said not to minister to themselves1 but
 to us2 so that this objection hath no  
force in it to overthrow the argument we

 are maintaining2 we therefore proceed  
to consider1  #b4 ,that it is certain1  
that the whole ceremonial law had a     
spiritual meaning annexed to it2 for it 
is said1 ,that the law was a shadow of  
good things to come1 ,heb4 x4 #a4 and   
that all those things happened to them  
for ensamples1 or types and they are    
written for our admonition1 #a ,cor4 x4 
#aa4  #c4 ,it is unreasonable to suppose
 that the spiritual meaning of the      
ceremonial law should not be known by   
those to whom it was principally given2 
or that the gospel1 wrapt up therein1   
should not be seen through this shadow  
till the dispensation was abolished1 the
 ceremonial law abrogated1 and the      
nation cast off to whom it was given4   
#d4 ,if the knowledge of the gospel1 or 
faith in ,christ1 which is founded upon 
it1 be necessary for our salvation1 it  
was necessary for the salvation of those
 who lived in former ages2 for it was as
 much a truth then as it is now1 that   
there is salvation in no other2         

therefore the church of old were obliged
 to believe in him to come1 as much as  
we are to believe in him as already     
come2 but it is inconsistent with the   
divine goodness to require this         
knowledge1 and not to give them any     
expedient to attain it2 therefore we    
must either suppose this knowledge      
attainable by them1 and consequently    
that he was revealed to them1 or else   
they must be excluded from a possibility
 of salvation1 when1 at the same time1  
they were obliged to believe in ,christ1
 which they could not do1 because they  
did not understand the meaning of that  
law1 which was the only means of        
revealing him to them2 or if ,christ was
 revealed in the ceremonial law1 and    
they had no way to understand it1 it is 
all one as though he had not been       
revealed therein4  #e4 ,they had        
sufficient helps for the understanding  
the spiritual meaning thereof1 viz4 not 
only some hints of explication1 given in
 the ,old ,testament1 but1 besides      

these1 there was1  7#a47 ,extraordinary 
revelation and inspiration1 with which  
the ,jewish church more or less1 was    
favoured1 almost throughout all the ages
 thereof2 and hereby it is more than    
probable that1 together with the canon  
of the ,old ,testament1 they received   
the spiritual sense and meaning of those
 things which were contained therein4   
7#b47 ,there was one whole tribe1 viz4  
that of ,levi1 that was almost wholly   
employed in studying and explaining the 
law of ,god2 therefore it is said1 ,they
 shall teach ,jacob thy judgments1 and  
,israel thy law1 ,deut4 xxxiii4 #aj4 and
 that the priest's lips should keep     
knowledge1 and they should seek the law 
at his mouth2 ,mal4 ii4 #g4 that is1 the
 priests should1 by all proper methods1 
understand the meaning of the law1 that 
they might be able to teach the people1 
when coming to be instructed by them4   
7#c47 ,there were among them several    
schools of the prophets 7in some ages at
 least of the ,jewish church7 in which  

some had extraordinary revelations2 and 
they that had them not1 made the        
scriptures their study1 that they might 
be able to instruct others2 so that1    
from all this1 it appears that they had 
a great deal of knowledge of divine     
truths1 and the spiritual meaning of the
 ,old ,testament2 though yet we will not
 deny that the gospel dispensation hath 
a clearer light1 and excels in glory4#ag
  ,we shall now proceed to consider1 how
 far the ,old ,testament is a rule of   
faith and obedience to us1 though that  
dispensation be abolished2 for we are   
not to reckon it an useless part of     
scripture1 or that it does not at all   
concern us4 ,since1  7#a47 ,the greatest
 part of the doctrines contained therein
 are of perpetual obligation to the     
church1 in all the dispensations or     
changes thereof4  7#b47 ,as for the     
ceremonial law1 which is abolished1 with
 some other forensick1 or political     
laws1 by which the ,jews1 in particular1
 were governed1 these1 indeed1 are not  

so far a rule of obedience to us1 as    
that we should think ourselves obliged  
to observe them1 as the ,jews were of   
old3 notwithstanding1  7#c47 ,even these
 are of use to us1 as herein we see what
 was then the rule of faith and         
obedience to the church1 and how far it 
agrees as to the substance thereof1 or  
things signified thereby1 with the      
present dispensation2 so that it is of  
use to us1 as herein we see the wisdom1 
sovereignty1 and grace of ,god to his   
church in former ages1 and how what was 
then typified or prophesied1 is         
fulfilled to us4 ,thus it is said1 that 
whatsoever things were written          
afore-time1 were written for our        
learning1 that we1 through patience and 
comfort of the scriptures might have    
hope1 ,rom4 xv4 #d4  ,the scriptures of 
the ,old and ,new ,testament contain a  
revelation of the whole mind and will of
 ,god1 and therefore are very justly    
styled a perfect rule of faith and      
obedience4 ,nevertheless1  ,we do not   

hereby intend that they contain an      
account of every thing that ,god hath   
done1 or will do1 in his works of       
providence and grace1 from the beginning
 to the end of time2 for such a large   
knowledge of things is not necessary for
 us to attain4 ,thus it is said1 ,john  
xx4 #cj4 that ,christ did many other    
signs1 that are not written in the      
gospel2 but those things that are       
contained therein1 are written that we  
might believe2 therefore we have a      
sufficient account thereof to support   
our faith2 and that there were many     
other things which ,jesus did1 which1 if
 they should be written every one1 the  
world would not contain the books that  
should be written1 ,john xxi4 #be4ah    
,nor do we understand hereby1 that ,god 
has given us an account of all his      
secret counsels and purposes relating to
 the event of things1 or the final      
estate of particular persons1 abstracted
 from those marks on which our hope of  
salvation is founded1 or their outward  

condition1 or the good or bad success   
that shall attend their undertakings in 
the world1 or the time of their living  
therein3 these1 and many more events of 
the like nature1 are secrets which we   
are not to enquire into1 ,god having not
 thought fit to reveal them in his word1
 for wise ends best known to himself1   
which shews his sovereignty1 with       
respect to the matter of revelation2    
,secret things belong unto the ,lord our
 ,god2 but those things which are       
revealed belong unto us1 and to our     
children1 ,deut4 xxix4 #bi4 ,when ,peter
 was over-curious in enquiring          
concerning the future estate or         
condition of ,john1 our ,saviour gives  
him this tacit reproof1 ,what is that to
 thee8 ,john xxi4 #ba1 #bb4  ,nor are we
 to suppose that the divine perfections1
 which are infinite1 are fully and      
adequately revealed to man1 since it is 
impossible that they should1 from the   
nature of the thing2 for that which is  
in itself incomprehensible1 cannot be so

 revealed that we should be able fully  
to comprehend it1 though that which is  
possible1 or at least necessary1 to be  
known of ,god1 is clearly revealed to   
us4  ,again1 we do not suppose that     
every doctrine1 that is to be assented  
to as an article of faith1 is revealed  
in express words in scripture1 since    
many truths are to be deduced from it by
 just and necessary consequences1 which 
thereby become a rule of faith4  ,nor   
are we to suppose that every part of    
scripture fully and clearly discovers   
all those things which are contained in 
the whole of it1 since there was farther
 light given to the church1 by degrees1 
in succeeding ages1 as it grew up1 from 
its infant-state1 to a state of perfect 
manhood2 therefore there is a clearer   
and fuller revelation of the glorious   
mysteries of the gospel1 under the ,new 
,testament-dispensation1 than there was 
before it4 ,the apostle uses the same   
metaphorical way of speaking1 when he   
compares the state of the church1 under 

the ceremonial law1 to that of an heir  
under age1 or of children under the     
direction of tutors and governors1 whose
 instruction and advances in knowledge  
are proportioned to their age2 so ,god  
revealed his word at sundry times1 as   
well as in divers manners1 ,gal4 iv4 #a1
 #c4 ,heb4 i4 #a4  ,the word of ,god1   
accompanied with those additional helps 
before mentioned1 for the churches      
understanding the sense thereof1 was    
always1 indeed1 sufficient to lead men  
into the knowledge of divine truth2 but 
the canon being compleated1 it is so now
 in an eminent degree2 and it is        
agreeable to the divine perfections that
 such a rule should be given2 for since 
salvation could not be attained1 nor    
,god glorified1 without a discovery of  
those means1 which are conducive        
thereto1 it is not consistent with his  
wisdom and goodness that we should be   
left at the utmost uncertainty as to    
this matter1 and1 at the same time1     
rendered incapable of the highest       

privileges which attend instituted      
worship4 ,can we suppose that1 when all 
other things necessary to salvation are 
adjusted1 and many insuperable          
difficulties surmounted1 and an         
invitation given to come and partake of 
it1 that ,god should lay such a bar in  
our way1 that it should be impossible   
for us to attain it1 as being without a 
sufficient rule8  ,and since none but   
,god can give us such an one1 it is     
inconsistent with his sovereignty to    
leave it to men1 to prescribe what is   
acceptable in his sight4 ,they may1     
indeed1 give laws1 and thereby oblige   
their subjects to obedience2 but these  
must be such as are within their own    
sphere2 their power does not extend     
itself to religious matters1 so that our
 faith and duty to ,god should depend   
upon their will2 for this would be a    
bold presumption1 and extending their   
authority and influence beyond due      
bounds2 therefore since a rule of faith 
is necessary1 we must conclude that ,god

 has given us such an one2 and it must  
certainly be worthy of himself1 and     
therefore perfect1 and every way        
sufficient to answer the end thereof4   
,that it is so1 farther appears from the
 event1 or from the happy consequences  
of our obedience to it2 from that peace1
 joy1 and holiness1 which believers are 
made partakers of1 while steadfastly    
adhering to this rule3 thus it is said1 
that through comfort of the scriptures  
they have hope1 ,rom4 xv4 #d4 and that  
hereby the man of ,god is made wise to  
salvation1 and perfect1 thoroughly      
furnished unto all good works1 #b ,tim4 
iii4 #ae1 #ag4 ,the perfection of the   
law is demonstrated1 by the ,psalmist1  
by its effects1 in that it converts the 
soul1 makes wise the simple1 rejoices   
the heart1 enlightens the eyes1 ,psal4  
xix4 #g1 #h4  ,we might farther argue1  
that the scripture is a perfect rule of 
faith1 from those threatnings which are 
denounced against them1 who pretend to  
add to1 or take from it2 this was       

strictly forbidden1 even when there was 
but a part of scripture committed to    
writing4 ,thus says ,god2 ,ye shall not 
add to the word which ,i command you2   
neither shall ye diminish ought from it1
 ,deut4 iv4 #b4 ,and the apostle        
denounces an anathema against any one   
who should pretend to preach any other  
gospel1 than that which he had received 
from ,god1 ,gal4 i4 #h1 #i4 ,and1 in the
 close of the scripture1 our ,saviour   
testifies1 to every man1 that if any    
should add to these things1 ,god would  
add to him the plagues written in this  
book4 ,and if any should take away from 
this book1 ,god would take away his part
 out of the book of life1 ,rev4 xxii4   
#ah1 #ai4  ,thus having considered the  
scripture as a rule of faith1 we proceed
 to shew what are the properties which  
belong to it as such4  #a4 ,a rule1 when
 it is designed for general use1 must   
have the sanction of public authority3  
thus human laws1 by which a nation is to
 be governed1 which are a rule to       

determine the goodness or badness of    
men's actions1 and their desert of      
rewards or punishments accordingly1 must
 be established by public authority4    
,even so the scripture is a rule of     
faith1 as it contains the divine laws1  
by which the actions of men are to be   
tried1 together with the ground which   
some have to expect future blessedness1 
and others to fear punishments          
threatened to those who walk not        
according to this rule4  #b4 ,a rule by 
which we are to judge of the nature1    
truth1 excellency1 perfection1 or       
imperfection of any thing1 must be      
infallible1 or else it is of no use2    
and1 as such1 nothing must be added to1 
or taken from it1 for then it would     
cease to be a perfect rule3 thus it must
 be a certain and impartial standard1 by
 which things are to be tried3 ,such a  
rule as this is scripture1 as was but   
now observed4 ,and it is an impartial   
rule1 to which1 as a standard1 all truth
 and goodness is to be reduced and      

measured by it2 ,to the law1 and to the 
testimony2 if they speak not according  
to this word1 it is because there is no 
light in them1 ,isa4 viii4 #bj4  #c4    
,all appeals are to be made to a rule1  
and controversies to be tried and       
determined by it4 ,thus the scripture1  
as it is a rule of faith1 is a judge of 
controversies2 so that whatever         
different sentiments men have about     
religion1 all must be reduced to1 and   
the warrantableness thereof tried       
hereby1 and a stop put to growing errors
 by an appeal to this rule1 rather than 
to coercive power1 or the carnal weapons
 of violence and persecution4           
,moreover1 the judgment we pass on      
ourselves1 as being sincere or          
hypocrites1 accepted or rejected of     
,god1 is to be formed by comparing our  
conduct with scripture1 as the rule by  
which we are to try the goodness or     
badness of our state1 and of our        
actions4  #d4 ,a rule must have nothing 
of a different nature set up in         

competition with1 or opposition to it2  
for that would be to render it useless1 
and unfit to be the standard of truth3  
thus scripture is the only rule of      
faith1 and therefore no human traditions
 are to be set up as standards of faith 
in competition with it1 for that would  
be to suppose it not to be a perfect    
rule4 ,this the ,papists do1 and        
therefore may be charged1 as the        
,pharisees were of old by our ,saviour1 
with transgressing and making the       
commandment of none effect by their     
tradition1 ,mat4 xv4 #c1 #f4 concerning 
whom he also says1 that in vain they    
worship him1 teaching for doctrines the 
commandments of men1 ver4 #i4 ,what is  
this but to reflect on the wisdom1 and  
affront the authority and sovereignty of
 ,god1 by casting this contempt on that 
rule of faith which he hath given8      
,having considered scripture as a rule  
of faith and obedience1 it is farther   
observed1 that it is the only rule      
thereof1 in opposition to the ,popish   

doctrine of human traditions1 as        
pretended to be of equal authority with 
it2 by which means the law of ,god is   
made void at this day1 as it was by the 
,jews in our ,saviour's time1 and the   
scripture supposed to be an imperfect   
rule2 the defect whereof they take this 
method to supply2 and to give           
countenance thereto1  #a4 ,they refer to
 those ,scriptures1 in which1 it is     
said1 our ,saviour did many other signs 
in the presence of his disciples1 which 
are not written1 ,john xx4 #cj4 and his 
own words1 wherein he tells them1 that  
he had many things to say unto them1    
which they could not then bear1 ,john   
xvi4 #ab4 as also to the words of the   
apostle ,paul1 ,acts xx4 #ce4 in which  
he puts the church in mind of a saying  
of our ,saviour1 received by tradition1 
because not contained in any of the     
evangels1 viz4 it is more blessed to    
give than to receive4  ,to which it may 
be replied1  ,answ4 7#a47 ,that though  
it is true there were many things done1 

and words spoken by our ,saviour1 which 
are not recorded in ,scripture1 and     
therefore we must be content not to know
 them1 being satisfied with this1 that  
nothing is omitted therein which is     
necessary to salvation1 yet to pretend  
to recover1 or transmit them to us by   
tradition1 is to assert and not to      
prove1 what they impose on us as matters
 of faith4  7#b47 ,those things which   
our ,saviour had to say1 which he did   
not then impart to his disciples1       
because they were not able to bear them1
 respected1 as is more than probable1   
what he designed to discover to them    
after his resurrection1 during his forty
 days abode here on earth1 or by his    
,spirit1 after his ascension into       
heaven1 concerning the change of the    
,sabbath1 from the seventh1 to the first
 day of the week1 the abolition of the  
ceremonial law1 the ,spirituality of his
 kingdom1 which they were at that time  
less able to bear than they were        
afterwards1 and other things relating to

 the success of their ministry1 the     
gathering and governing of those        
churches1 which should be planted by    
them2 these seem to be intended by that 
expression1 and not those doctrines     
which the ,papists transmit by oral     
traditions2 such as the use of oil and  
spittle1 together with water in baptism1
 and the sign of the cross therein2 the 
baptism of bells1 the lighting up of    
candles in churches at noon-day3 nor    
that of purgatory1 or praying for the   
dead1 or giving divine adoration to     
images or relics1 which are altogether  
unscriptural1 and such as he would not  
have1 at any time1 communicated unto    
them4  7#c47 ,those words of our        
,saviour1 ,it is more blessed to give   
than to receive1 though they are not    
contained in one distinct proposition1  
or in express words in the gospels1 yet 
he therein exhorts his people to give to
 him that asketh2 and speaks of the     
blessing that attends this duty1 that   
they might be1 that is1 approve         

themselves to be the children of their  
,father1 ,mat4 v4 #db4 compared with    
#de4 and exhorts them to hospitality to 
the poor1 and adds a blessing to it1    
,luke xiv4 #ab1 #ac1 #ad4 ,or1 suppose  
the apostle refers to a saying          
frequently used by our ,saviour1 which  
might then be remembered by some who had
 conversed with him2 this is no         
sufficient warrant for any one to       
advance doctrines contrary to those our 
,saviour delivered1 under a pretence of 
having received them by unwritten       
tradition4  #b4 ,this doctrine is       
farther defended from the words of the  
apostle1 in #a ,tim4 vi4 #bj4 where he  
advises ,timothy to keep that which was 
committed to his trust1 viz4 those      
traditions which he was to remember and 
communicate to others3 and also the     
advice which he gives to the church1 ,to
 hold the traditions which they had been
 taught1 either by word or by his       
epistle1 #b ,thess4 ii4 #ae4 the former 
respects1 say they1 unwritten           

traditions1 the latter is inspired      
writings4  ,answ4 ,that which was       
committed to ,timothy to keep1 was      
either the form of sound words1 or the  
gospel1 which he was to hold fast1 #b   
,tim4 i4 #ac4 or the ministry which he  
had received of the ,lord1 or those     
gifts and graces which were communicated
 to him1 to fit him for public service4 
,and as for those traditions which he   
speaks of in the other scripture1 the   
meaning is only this3 that they should  
remember not only the doctrines they had
 received from him1 which were contained
 in his inspired epistles1 but those    
which were agreeable to scripture1 that 
he had imparted in the exercise of his  
public ministry2 the former were to be  
depended upon as an infallible rule of  
faith1 the latter to be retained and    
improved as agreeable thereunto1 and    
#c4 ,they farther add1 that it was by   
this means that ,god instructed his     
church for above two thousand years     
before the scripture was committed to   

writing4  ,answ4 ,to this it may be     
replied1 that ,god communicated his mind
 and will to them1 during that interval1
 in an extraordinary manner1 as has been
 before observed1 page #eb1 #ec1 which  
cannot be said of any of those          
traditions which are pleaded for by     
them4  #d4 ,it is farther argued1 that  
the book of the law was formerly lost in
 ,josiah's time2 for it is said1 that   
when it was found1 and a part of it read
 to him1 he rent his clothes1 and was   
astonished1 as though he had never read 
it before1 #b ,kings xxii4 #h4 to #aa1  
yet he being a good man1 was well       
instructed in the doctrines of religion2
 therefore this must have been by       
tradition4  ,answ4 ,to this it may be   
answered1 that the book1 which was then 
found1 was doubtless1 an original       
manuscript of ,scripture1 either of all 
the books of ,moses or ,deuteronomy in  
particular1 but it is not to be supposed
 that he had never read it before2 for a
 person may be affected at one time in  

reading that portion of scripture1 which
 he has often read without its having   
the like effect upon him2 and doubtless1
 there were many copies of scripture    
transcribed1 by which he was made       
acquainted with the doctrines of        
religion1 without learning them from    
uncertain traditions4  #e4 ,they farther
 allege1 that some books of scripture   
are lost1 and therefore it is necessary 
that they should be supplied this way2  
the instances they give of this are some
 books referred to in scripture1 viz4   
the book of the wars of the ,lord1      
,numb4 xxi4 #ad4 and another going under
 the name of ,jasher1 #b ,sam4 i4 #ah4  
compared with ,josh4 x4 #ac4 and another
 called the book of the acts of         
,solomon1 #a ,kings xi4 #da4 and also   
his ,songs and ,proverbs1 and the       
account he gives of trees1 plants1      
beasts1 fowls1 creeping things1 and     
fishes1 #a ,kings1 iv4 #cb1 #cc4 ,there 
are also other books said to be written 
by ,samuel1 ,nathan1 and ,gad1 #a       

,chron4 xxix4 #bi4 the prophecy of      
,ahijah the ,shilonite1 and the visions 
of ,iddo the seer1 #b ,chron4 ix4 #bi4  
and ,jeremiah's lamentation for ,josiah1
 is said to be written in the books of  
the ,lamentations1 #b ,chron4 xxxv4 #be4
 whereas there is no mention of ,josiah 
in the book of scripture1 which goes    
under that name2 therefore they suppose 
that there was some other book so called
 which was written by that prophet1 but 
is now lost4  ,answ4 #a4 ,as to the     
argument in general1 that some books of 
scripture are lost1 suppose we should   
take it for granted that they are so1   
must this loss be supplied by           
traditions1 pretended to be divine1     
though without sufficient proof3        
however1 ,i am not willing to make this 
concession1 though1 indeed1 some        
,protestant divines have done it1 as    
thinking it equally supposable1 that    
some books1 written by divine           
inspiration1 might be lost1 as well as  
many words spoke by the same            

inspiration3 but even these constantly  
maintain that whatever inspired writings
 may have been lost1 yet there is no    
doctrine necessary to the edification of
 the church1 in what immediately relates
 to salvation1 but what is contained in 
those writings1 which are preserved1 by 
the care and goodness of providence1 to 
this day2 but1 without giving into this 
concession1 ,i would rather adhere to   
the more commonly received opinion1 that
 no book designed to be a part of the   
canon of scripture is lost1 though many 
uninspired writings have perished2 and  
therefore as to those books but now     
mentioned1 they refer to some books of  
scripture1 in which we have no mention  
of the inspired writers thereof1 which1 
as is more than probable1 were wrote by 
some noted prophet that flourished in   
the church at that time1 which their    
respective histories refer to2 therefore
 some suppose that the books of ,nathan 
and ,gad1 or ,iddo1 refer to those of   
,kings or ,chronicles1 which are not    

lost4 ,but since this is only a probable
 conjecture1 we pass it over1 and add1  
that it is not unreasonable to suppose  
that the books said to be written by    
them1 as also those of ,solomon1 that   
are not contained in scripture1 were not
 written by divine inspiration1 which is
 not only a safe but sufficient answer  
to the objection4 ,as for ,jeremiah's   
lamentation for ,josiah1 it is probable 
that the book of scripture1 which goes  
under that name1 was written on the     
occasion of ,josiah's death1 in which1  
though he doth not mention the name of  
that good king1 yet he laments the      
desolating judgments which were to      
follow soon after it4  ,moreover1 the   
,papists pretend1 that some part of the 
,new ,testament is lost2 particularly   
the epistle from ,laodicea1 mentioned in
 ,col4 iv4 #af4 and one written to the  
,corinthians1 not to company with       
fornicators1 #a ,cor4 v4 #i4 and another
 mentioned1 #b ,cor4 vii4 #h4 by which  
he made them sorry4  ,answ4 #a4 ,as to  

the epistle from ,laodicea that was     
probably one of his inspired epistles1  
written by him when at ,laodicea1 and   
not directed1 as is pretended1 to the   
,laodiceans4  #b4 ,as to that epistle1  
which he is supposed to have written to 
the ,corinthians1 it is not expressly   
said that it was another epistle he had 
wrote to them2 but it is plainly        
intimated1 ver4 #ab4 that he refers to  
the epistle1 which he was then writing  
to them2 a part of which related to that
 subject1 as this chapter1 in particular
 does1  #c4 ,as to the letter1 which he 
wrote to them1 which made them sorry1 it
 is not necessary to suppose that it was
 written by divine inspiration2 for as  
every thing he delivered by word of     
mouth1 was not by the extraordinary     
afflatus of the ,holy ,ghost1 why may we
 not suppose that there were several    
epistles written by him to the churches1
 some to comfort1 others to admonish1   
reprove1 or make them sorry1 besides    
those that he was inspired to write8    

,having considered the arguments brought
 to prove that some books of scripture  
are lost1 we shall now prove1 on the    
other hand1 that we have the canon      
thereof compleat and entire4 ,some think
 this is sufficiently evident from what 
our ,saviour says1 ,till heaven and     
earth pass away1 one jot1 or tittle     
shall not pass from the law1 ,mat4 v4   
#ah4 and it is easier for heaven and    
earth to pass1 than for one tittle of   
the law to fail1 ,luke xvi4 #ag4 ,if    
,god will take care of every jot and    
tittle of scripture1 will he not take   
care that no whole book1 designed to be 
a part of the rule of faith1 should be  
entirely lost8 ,it is objected1 indeed1 
to this1 that our ,saviour hereby       
intends principally the doctrines or    
precepts contained in the law2 but if   
the subject matter thereof shall not be 
lost1 surely the scripture that contains
 it shall be preserved entire4  ,but    
this will more evidently appear1 if we  
consider that the books of the ,old     

,testament were compleat in our         
,saviour's time2 for it is said1 ,that  
beginning at ,moses1 and all the        
prophets1 he expounded to them in all   
the scriptures1 the things concerning   
himself1 ,luke xxiv4 #bg4 and this may  
also be proved from what the apostle    
says1 ,whatsoever things were written   
aforetime1 were written for our         
learning1 ,rom4 xv4 #d4 now it is       
impossible that they should be written  
for our learning if they are lost4  ,to 
this it may be added1 that the goodness 
of ,god1 and the care of his providence1
 with respect to this church1 farther   
evinces this truth2 for if he gave them 
ground to conclude that he would be with
 them always1 even to the end of the    
world1 ,matth4 xxviii4 #bj4 surely this 
argues1 that he would preserve the rule 
he had given them to walk by1 from all  
the injuries of time1 so that it should 
not be lost to the end of the world4    
,again1 the ,jews were the keepers of   
the oracles of ,god1 ,rom4 iii4 #b4 now 

they are not reproved by our ,saviour1  
or the apostle ,paul1 for any           
unfaithfulness in not preserving them   
entire2 and certainly our ,saviour1 when
 he reproves them for making void the   
law by their traditions1 and threatens  
those that should add to or take from   
it1 if he had found them faulty1 in not 
having faithfully preserved all the     
scriptures committed to them1 he would  
have severely reproved them for this    
great breach of trust4  ,object4 ,it is 
objected against the scriptures being a 
perfect rule of faith1 that they are in 
several places corrupted1 viz4 that the 
,old ,testament was so by the ,jews1 out
 of malice against our ,saviour1 and the
 ,christian religion1 that they might   
conceal1 or pervert to another sense1   
some prophecies relating to the         
,messiah1 and the gospel-state4 ,and as 
for the ,new ,testament1 they pretend   
that it was corrupted by some heretics1 
in defence of their perverse doctrines4 
,answ4 #a4 ,as to the ,old ,testament1  

it is very improbable and unreasonable  
to suppose that it was corrupted by the 
,jews4 ,for1  7#a47 ,before our         
,saviour's time1 no valuable end could  
be answered thereby2 for then they      
expected the ,messiah to come1 according
 to what was foretold by the prophets1  
and understood their predictions in a   
true sense4  7#b47 ,after he was come1  
and ,christianity took place in the     
world1 though malice might have prompted
 them to it1 yet they would not do it1  
because they had always been trained up 
in this notion1 that it was the vilest  
crime to add to1 take from1 or alter it3
 so that one of their own writers#ai    
says concerning them1 that they would   
rather die an hundred deaths1 than      
suffer the law to be changed in any     
instance2 yea1 they have such a         
veneration for the law1 that if1 by any 
accident1 part of it should fall to the 
ground1 they would proclaim a fast as   
fearing lest1 for this1 ,god would      
destroy the whole world1 and reduce it  

to its first chaos3 and can any one     
think1 that1 under any pretence         
whatever1 they would designedly corrupt 
the ,old ,testament8 ,yea1 they were so 
far from doing it1 that they took the   
greatest care1 even to superstition1 to 
prevent its being corrupted1 through    
inadvertency1 and accordingly numbered  
not only the books and sections1 but    
even the words and letters1 that not a  
single letter might be added to1 or     
taken from it4  7#c47 ,if they had any  
inclination to do this1 out of malice   
against ,christianity1 it would have    
been to no purpose1 after our ,saviour's
 time2 for it was then translated into  
,greek1 and this translation was in the 
hands of almost all ,christians2 so that
 the fallacy would soon have been       
detected4 ,and if they had corrupted    
some copies of the ,hebrew ,bible1 they 
could not have corrupted or altered them
 all2 therefore to attempt any thing of 
this kind1 would have been to expose    
themselves to no purpose4  7#d47 ,it    

would not have been for their own       
advantage to pervert it2 for1 in        
altering the texts that make for        
,christianity1 they would 7especially if
 the fraud should have been detected7   
have weakened their own cause so far1   
that the reputation of scripture being  
hereby lost1 they could not have made   
use of it to that advantage1 to prove   
their own religion from it4  ,but1      
notwithstanding all this out-cry of the 
scriptures being perverted1 they pretend
 to give no proof hereof1 except in two 
or three words1 which do not much affect
 the cause of ,christianity2 whereas1 if
 the ,jews had designed to pervert it1  
why did they not alter the fifty-third  
of ,isaiah1 and many other scriptures1  
which so plainly speak of the person and
 offices of the ,messiah8  #b4 ,as to   
the other part of the objection1 that   
the ,new ,testament hath been corrupted 
by heretics since our ,saviour's time1  
whatever charge hath been brought       
against the ,arians1 and some others1 of

 having out some words1 or verses1 which
 tend to overthrow their scheme1 they   
have not been able1 even when the empire
 was most favourable to their cause1 to 
alter all the copies2 so that their     
fallacy has been detected1 and the      
corruption amended4  ,as for those      
various readings that there are of the  
same text1 these consist principally in 
literal alterations1 which do not much  
tend to pervert the sense thereof4 ,it  
was next to impossible for so many      
copies of scripture to be transcribed   
without some mistakes1 since they who   
were employed in this work were not     
under the infallible direction of the   
,spirit of ,god1 as the first penmen    
were2 yet the providence of ,god hath   
not suffered them to make notorious     
mistakes2 and whatever mistakes there   
may be in one copy1 they may be         
corrected by another2 so that the       
scripture is not1 for this reason1      
chargeable with the reproach cast upon  
it1 as though it were not a perfect rule

 of faith4  ,footnote #ae3    ,he who   
has created all things1 with all their  
relations1 and who is   the universal   
,sovereign1 has a right to the          
allegiance of his rational   creatures1 
and they are under obligation to obey   
his laws1 because it   is his will that 
they should do so4 ,he has connected our
 interest   with our duty1 as a motive  
to obedience1 and because he is good2   
but   if we should substitute utility   
for his authority1 and conform to his   
laws1 merely because they are           
advantageous1 we rebel against our      
,sovereign1 and renounce his authority1 
that we may pursue our own   advantage4 
,virtue is amiable for its intrinsic    
rectitude4 ,if we choose   to practice  
it merely because beautiful1 we please  
ourselves2 and   though the excellency  
of virtue is intended as a motive1 and  
it is   well for the man who is charmed 
by it1 yet1 if this be the only         
inducement1 he has lost sight of the    
,divine authority1 and his virtue   is  

no obedience to the laws of ,god4 ,if   
the obligation of virtue be   founded   
solely on its utility1 or beauty1 we are
 at liberty to forego   our advantage1  
or pleasure without guilt1 and remorse  
of conscience   will be unaccountable4  
,it is also fit and proper1 that we     
should   practice virtue1 but this is no
 more to be substituted for the ,divine 
authority1 than the other motives of    
advantage or pleasure4 ,if it be        
objected1 that the fitness of moral good
 is eternal1 and a rule even   to       
,deity1 and so may be deemed a          
foundation of the obligation of human   
virtue4 ,it is conceded that the fitness
 of virtue is eternal1 for ,god   is    
eternal1 and has been always holy1 and  
just2 in the same manner   also the     
beauty of virtue is eternal2 but to     
suppose these to have   existed anterior
 to thought and action1 and to be       
independent of an   eternally and       
immutably holy ,god is to indulge the   
mind in   speculations1 which1 to say   

the least of them1 are groundless4 ,we  
may   as well assign a cause to eternal 
existence1 as to eternal holiness4      
,when the ,creator formed the ,universe 
of intelligent creatures1 he gave       
them1 with their existence1 the various 
relations and circumstances   which     
sprang up with them3 and their          
obligations with respect to him   and   
his works originated at the same time1  
and from the same source2   which could 
be no other than the ,divine pleasure2  
and the positive   express appointments1
 which have been since super-added1 rest
 upon the   same basis1 the will of     
,god4    ,that we might discern his will
 and conform to it1 he has set before us
   his own character1 which in all      
things is good4 ,he has given us        
reason1 or active intellectual powers   
capable of pursuing the truth1   and    
discovering his character1 as a rule of 
our conduct4 ,and because   reason is   
matured by slow degrees1 and the        
advantages for its   improvement are    

unequal1 he has given us a sense        
susceptible of the   impressions of good
 and evil1 by which we can distinguish  
between   moral good and evil almost as 
easily1 as by our natural senses we     
discern the differences between light   
and darkness1 sweetness and             
bitterness2 and thus has he rendered the
 judgment upon our own actions   almost 
always unavoidable4 ,the light of nature
 has been confirmed by   express        
revelation2 and because the law of      
nature identifies itself   with the     
written law of ,god1 the obligation of  
both rests upon the   same foundation1  
the ,sovereign will4  ,footnote #af3    
,where a covenant is1 there should be   
the death of the devoted   victim4      
,footnote #ag3    ,,prophets ,,before   
,,the ,,captivity4    ,with the order   
and times of their ,prophecies4         
,years   before  ,christ4       #hab    
,amaziah king of ,judah1         ,jonah 
sent with a message4 #b                 
,jeroboam ,,ii4 king of ,israel         

,kings xiii4 #bj4 xiv4 #be4       #hjj  
,uzziah king of ,judah4 ,jeroboam ,joel 
i4 ii4 iii4          ,,ii4       #hjj   
,jeroboam ,,ii4 king of ,israel4   ,amos
 i4----ix4          ,uzziah king of     
,judah       #hjj ,jeroboam ,,ii4       
,uzziah            ,hosea i4 ii4 iii4   
#ggb ,menahem ,i4                       
,hosea iv4       #ggj ,menahem ,,ii4    
,jonah i4 ii4 iii4 iv4       #gei       
,uzziah #eb4 ,pekah #a4                 
,isaiah vi4 ii4 iii4 iv4 v4       #gec  
,jotham #e4 ,pekah #g4                  
,micah i4 ii4       #gdb ,ahaz #a4      
,pekah #ah4              ,isaiah vii4   
,in the same year               ,isaiah 
viii4 ix4 x4           ,in the same year
               ,isaiah xvii4       #gdj 
,ahaz #c4 ,pekah #bj4                   
,isaiah i4           ,in the same year  
,isaiah xxviii4       #gci ,aphaz #d4   
,hosea v4 vi4       #gbf ,hezekiah #b4  
,isaiah xiv4 ver4 #bh1 c4           ,in 
the same year               ,isaiah xv4 
xvi4       #gbe ,hezekiah #c4 ,hoshea   

#f4          ,hosea vii4-xiv4 ,micah    
iii4 iv4                                
v4 vi4 vii4       #gbj ,hezekiah #g4    
,nahum i4 ii4 iii4       #gae ,hezekiah 
#ac4                   ,isaiah          
xxiii4-xxvii4       #gad ,hezekiah #ad4 
,isaiah xxxviii4 xxxix4       #gad      
,hezekiah #ad4                   ,isaiah
 xxix4 xxx4-xxxv4           ,in the same
 year               ,isaiah xxii4 ver4  
#a-ae4           ,in the same year      
,isaiah xxi4       #gac ,hezekiah #ae4  
,isaiah xx4           ,in the same year 
,isaiah xviii4 xix4       #gaj ,hezekiah
 #ah4                   ,isaiah x4 ver4 
#e1 c4 xi4 xii4                         
xiii4 xiv4 ver4 #bh1 c4           ,in   
the same year               ,isaiah     
xxxvi4 xxxvii4           ,in the same   
year               ,isaiah xl4-xliii4 c4
       #fih ,manasseh #a4               
,isaiah xxii4 ver4 #ae4       #fbh      
,josiah #ac4                            
,jeremiah i4 ii4       #fbc ,josiah #ah4
                     ,jeremiah xi4 ver4 

#a-ah4                                  
,jeremiah iii4-x4 xii4-xxi4             
,jeremiah xi4 ver4 #ah1 c4       #faa   
,josiah #ca4                            
,habbakkuk i4 ii4 iii4                  
,zephaniah i4 ii4 iii4       #faj       
,jehoiakim #a4                          
,jeremiah xii4 ver4 #a-bd4           ,in
 the same year               ,jeremiah  
xxvi4       #fjf ,jehoiakim #d4         
,jeremiah xxv4           ,in the same   
year               ,jeremiah xxxv4      
,in the same year                       
,jeremiah xlvi4           ,in the same  
year               ,jeremiah xxxvi4 ver4
 #a-i4           ,in the same year      
,jeremiah xlv4           ,in the same   
year               ,daniel i4       #fje
 ,jehoiakim #e4                         
,jeremiah xxxvi4 ver4 #i1 c4       #fjc 
,jehoiakim #g4                   ,daniel
 ii4       #eii ,zedekiah #a4           
,jeremiah xxii4 ver4 #bd1 c4            
,in the same year                       
,jeremiah xxiii           ,in the same  

year               ,jeremiah xiii4 ver4 
#ac1 c4           ,in the same year     
,jeremiah xxiv4           ,in the same  
year               ,jeremiah xlix4 ver4 
#cd1 c4       #eih ,zedekiah #b4        
,jeremiah xxix4           ,in the same  
year               ,jeremiah xxx4 xxxi4 
,in the same year                       
,jeremiah xxvii4       #eif ,zedekiah   
#d4                    ,jeremiah xxviii4
           ,in the same year            
,jeremiah l4 li4       #eie ,zedekiah   
#e4 ,jehoiachin's capt4 ,ezekiel i4-vii4
          #e       #eid ,zedekiah #f4   
,jehoiachin's capt4 ,ezekiel viii4-xi4  
#f       #eic ,zedekiah #g4             
,jehoiachin's capt4 ,ezekiel xii4-xix4  
#g           ,in the same year1 fifth   
month  ,ezekiel xx4-xxiii4       #eia   
,zedekiah #i4 ,jehoiachin's capt4       
,jeremiah xxi4 xxxiv ver4 #a-h4         
#i           ,in the same year          
,jeremiah xlvii4           ,in the same 
year               ,jeremiah xlviii4    
xlix4 ver4                              

#a-cd4           ,in the same year      
,ezekiel xxiv4 xxv4       #eij ,zedekiah
 #aj4 ,jehoiachin's      ,jeremiah      
xxxvii4 ver4 #a-aa4          capt4 #aj  
,in the same year                       
,jeremiah xxxiv4 ver4 #h1 c4            
,in the same year                       
,jeremiah xxxvii4 ver4 #aa-af           
,in the same year                       
,jeremiah xxxii4 xxiii4           ,in   
the same year               ,ezekiel    
xxix4 ver4 #a-ag4 xxx4           ,in the
 same year               ,jeremiah      
xxxvii4 ver4 #ag1 c4           ,in the  
same year               ,jeremiah       
xxxviii4 ver4 #a-ad4           ,in the  
same year               ,jeremiah xxxix4
 ver4 #ae1 c4           ,in the same    
year               ,jeremiah xxxviii4   
ver4 #ad1 c4       #ehi ,zedekiah #aa4  
,jehoiachin's capt ,ezekiel xxxvi4      
xxxvii4          #aa4 first month       
xxxviii4           ,in the same year1   
third month  ,ezekiel xxxi4             
,in the same year1 fourth month         

,jeremiah xxxix4 ver4 #a-aa4            
lii4 ver4 #a-cj4           ,in the same 
year1 fifth or     ,jeremiah xxxix4 ver4
 #aa-ae4          sixth month           
xl4 ver4   #a-g4           ,in the same 
year               ,jeremiah xl4 ver4   
#g4 xli4                                
xlii4 xliii4 xliv4 ver4 #a-h4           
,,prophets ,,after ,,the ,,destruction  
,,of ,,the ,,temple1 ,,during ,,the     
,,captivity4       #ehh ,jehoiachin's   
captivity #ab4     ,ezekiel xxxiii4     
tenth month           ,in the same year1
 twelfth      ,ezekiel xxxii4           
month           ,between the #ab and #be
          ,ezekiel xxxiv4 xxxvi4 xxxvii4
          captivity                     
xxxviii4 xxxix4           ,in the same  
year               ,obadiah             
,in the same year               ,ezekiel
 xxxv4           ,in this year          
,nebuchadnezzar    ,daniel iii4         
set up his golden image       #egd      
,jehoiachin's captivity #be4            
,ezekiel xl4 xli4 c4       #efi         

,jehoiachin's captivity #cj4            
,ezekiel xxxi4 ver4 #ag1 c4             
,in the same year               ,daniel 
iv4       #efb ,jehoiachin's captivity  
#cg4     ,jeremiah lii4 ver4 #ca1 c4    
#eee ,belshazzar #a4                    
,daniel vii4       #eec ,belshazzar #c4 
,daniel viii4       #eci ,belshazzar    
#ag4                 ,daniel v4         
#ech ,darius the ,mede #a4              
,daniel vi4           ,in the same year 
,daniel ix4       #ecf ,cyrus #a4       
,ezra i4 ii4       #ece ,cyrus #b4      
,ezra iii4    ,,prophets ,,after ,,the  
,,captivity ,,under ,,the ,,second      
,,temple4       #ece ,cyrus #b4         
,ezra iv4           ,in the third year  
of ,cyrus1    ,daniel x4 xi4 xii        
and third after the captivity       #ebj
 ,darius ,hystaspis #b4 sixth           
,haggai i4 ver4 #a-ab4          month   
,in the same year and month     ,haggai 
i4 ver4 #ab1 c4 ,ezra v4           ,in  
the same year1 seventh      ,haggai ii4 
ver4 #a-aj4          month           ,in

 the same year1 eighth month ,zechariah 
i4 ver4 #a-g4           ,in the same    
year1 ninth month  ,haggai ii4 ver4 #aj1
 c4           ,in the same year1        
eleventh     ,zechariah i4 ver4 #g1 c4  
month                          ii4-vi4  
#eaf ,darius #c4                        
,ezra v4 ver4 #c1 c4       #eah ,darius 
#d4                      ,ezra vi4 ver4 
#a-ae4           ,in the same year1     
ninth month  ,zech4 vii4 viii4          
,subsequent to the fourth year          
,zechariah ix4-xiv4          of ,darius 
,hystaspes       #eae ,darius #f4       
,ezra vi4 ver4 #ae1 c4       #dfb       
,ahasuerus #c4                   ,esther
 i4       #dfa ,ahasuerus #d4           
,esther ii4 ver4 #a-af4       #deh      
,ahasuerus #g4                   ,ezra  
vii4-x4           ,in the same year     
,esther ii4 ver4 #af-ba4       #deg     
,ahasuerus #h4                   ,esther
 ii4 ver4 #ba1 c4       #dec ,ahasuerus 
#ab4                  ,esther iii4 iv4  
v4 c4       #dde ,ahasuerus #bj4        

,nehemiah i4-iii4 c4       #dcc         
,ahasuerus #cb4                         
,nehemiah xiii4 ver4 #f4       #dbi     
,ahasuerus #cf4                         
,malachi i4-iv4       #dbh ,ahasuerus   
#cg4                  ,nehemiah xiii4   
ver4 #f1 c4       #bif ,ptolemy ,soter  
#i4               ,the ,canon of the    
,old ,testament                         
completed1 by adding two books          
of ,chronicles1 ,ezra1 ,nehemiah1       
,esther1 and ,malachi2 by ,simon        
the ,just4    ,,dr4 ,,taylor4  ,footnote
 #ah3     is the unregenerate world1    
,john vii4 #g4 and 1 is to   receive    
kindly1 #b ,cor4 vii4 #b4  ,footnote    
#ai3    ,vid4 ,philo4 ,jud4 de ,vit4    
,mosis2  eund4 citat4 ab ,euseb4 in     
,prp4   ,evang4 l4 viii4 c4 #f4         
,joseph1 contr4 ,app4 l4 ii4            
,quest4 ,,iv4       ,,quest4 ,,iv4 ,how 
doth it appear that the scriptures are  
the word of     ,god8      ,answ4 ,the  
scriptures manifest themselves to be the
 word of ,god by     their majesty and  

purity2 by the consent of all the parts1
 and the     scope of the whole1 which  
is to give all glory to ,god2 by their  
light and power to convince and convert 
sinners1 to comfort and     build up    
believers to salvation3 but the ,spirit 
of ,god bearing     witness by and with 
the scriptures in the heart of man1 is  
alone     able fully to persuade it1    
that they are the word of ,god4         
,before we proceed to consider the      
arguments here brought to prove the     
scriptures to be the word of ,god1 some 
things may be premised4#bj  #a4 ,when we
 speak of the scriptures as divine1 we  
do not only mean that they treat of ,god
 and divine things2 to wit1 his nature  
and works1 as referring principally to  
the subject matter thereof2 for this may
 be said of many human uninspired       
writings1 which1 in proportion to the   
wisdom of their authors1 tend to set    
forth the divine perfections4 ,and when1
 as the consequence hereof1 we assert   
that every thing contained therein is   

infallibly true1 we do not deny but that
 there are many things1 which we receive
 from human testimony1 of which it would
 be scepticism to entertain the least   
doubt of the truth2 notwithstanding1    
when we receive a truth from human      
testimony1 we judge of the certainty    
thereof1 by the credibility of the      
evidence1 and1 in proportion thereunto1 
there is a degree of certainty arising  
from it3 but when we suppose a truth to 
be divine1 we have the highest degree of
 certainty equally applicable to every  
thing that is so1 and that for this     
reason1 because it is the word of him   
that cannot lie4 ,thus we consider the  
holy scriptures1 as being of a divine   
original1 or given by the inspiration of
 ,god1 or as his revealed will1 designed
 to bind the consciences of men2 and    
that the penmen were not the inventers  
of them1 but only the instruments made  
use of to convey these divine oracles to
 us1 as the apostle says1 #b ,pet4 i4   
#ba4 ,prophecy came not in old time by  

the will of man2 but holy men of ,god   
spake1 as they were moved by the ,holy  
,ghost3 and the apostle ,paul says1     
,gal4 i4 #aa1 #ab4 ,i certify unto you1 
that the gospel1 which was preached of  
me1 is not after man2 neither received  
,i it of man2 neither was ,i taught it1 
but by the revelation of ,jesus ,christ3
 the former asserts this concerning     
scripture in general1 and the latter    
concerning that part thereof which was  
transmitted to us by him3 this is what  
we mean when we say the scripture is the
 word of ,god4  #b4 ,it is necessary for
 us to know and believe the scriptures  
to be the word of ,god1 because they are
 to be received by us as a rule of faith
 and obedience1 in whatever respects    
divine things1 otherwise we are         
destitute of a rule1 and consequently   
our religion would be a matter of the   
greatest uncertainty2 and as this faith 
and obedience is divine1 it is a branch 
of religious worship1 and as such1      
contains an entire subjection to ,god1 a

 firm and unshaken assent to whatever he
 reveals as true1 and a readiness to    
obey whatever he commands1 as being     
influenced by his authority2 which is   
inconsistent with any hesitation or     
doubt concerning this matter4 ,moreover1
 it is only therein that we have an     
account of the way in which sinners may 
have access to ,god2 the terms of their 
finding acceptance in his sight1 and all
 the promises of eternal blessedness1 on
 which their hope is founded1 are       
contained therein2 if therefore we are  
not certain that the scriptures are the 
word of ,god1 our faith and hope are    
vain2 it is herein that life and        
immortality is brought to light1 and1 by
 searching them1 we think that we have  
eternal life4  #c4 ,as divine revelation
 is necessary1 so it is not impossible1 
contrary to reason or the divine        
perfections1 for ,god to impart his mind
 and will to men in such a way as we    
call inspiration3 these things must be  
made appear1 otherwise it is a vain     

thing to attempt to give arguments to   
prove the scriptures to be the word of  
,god2 and1 in order hereto1 let it be   
considered1  7#a47 ,that divine         
revelation is necessary2 this appears   
because as religion is necessary1 so    
there are some things contained in it   
which cannot be known by the light of   
nature1 to wit1 all those divine laws   
and institutions1 which are the result  
of ,god's expressed will2 and these     
could not be known by the light of      
nature1 or in a way of reasoning derived
 from it1 therefore they must be known  
by special revelation4 ,positive laws1  
as opposed to those that are moral1     
depend upon a different foundation2 the 
glory of ,god's sovereignty eminently   
appears in the one1 as that of his      
holiness doth in the other3 now his     
sovereign pleasure relating thereto     
could never have been known without     
divine revelation1 and then all that    
revenue of glory1 which is brought to   
him thereby1 would have been entirely   

lost1 and there would have been no      
instituted worship in the world2 and the
 gospel1 which is called the            
unsearchable riches of ,christ1 ,eph4   
iii4 #h4 must have been for ever a      
hidden thing1 and the condition of those
 who bear the ,christian name would have
 been no better than that of the        
heathen1 concerning whose devotion1 the 
apostle ,paul1 though speaking of the   
wisest and best of them says1 ,acts     
xvii4 #bc4 that they ignorantly         
worshipped an unknown ,god3 and         
elsewhere1 #a ,cor4 i4 #bd4 that the    
world by wisdom knew not ,god2 and the  
reason is1 because they were destitute  
of divine revelation4  7#b47 ,it is not 
impossible1 contrary to reason or the   
divine perfections1 that ,god should    
reveal his mind and will to man1 which  
may be argued from hence2 it contains no
 impossibility1 for if it be possible   
for one creature to impart his mind and 
will to another1 then certainly ,god can
 do this1 for there is no excellency or 

perfection in the creature but what is  
eminently in him2 and if it be not      
unworthy of the divine majesty to be    
omnipresent1 and uphold all things by   
the word of his power1 it is not        
unbecoming his perfections to manifest  
himself to intelligent creatures1 who1  
as such1 are fit to receive the         
discoveries of his mind and will2 and   
his endowing them with faculties capable
 of receiving these manifestations1     
argues1 that he designed that they      
should be favoured with them2 and       
therefore whatever displays there may be
 of infinite condescension therein1 yet 
it is not unbecoming his perfections so 
to do4  7#c47 ,as ,god cannot be at a   
loss for an expedient how to discover   
his mind and will to man1 and is not    
confined to one certain way1 so he may1 
if he pleases1 make it known by         
inspiration2 it is not impossible1      
neither is there any thing in the       
subjects that should hinder him from    
impressing whatever ideas he designs to 

impart1 on the minds of men4 ,this a    
finite spirit may do2 and that there is 
such a thing as this1 will hardly be    
denied by any1 but those who1 with the  
,sadducees1 deny the nature and power of
 spirits3 it hence follows1 that ,god   
can much more impress the souls of men1 
or immediately communicate his mind to  
them in such a way1 as we call          
inspiration2 and to deny that there is  
such a thing as inspiration1 is not only
 to deny the credibility of scripture   
history1 as well as its divine          
authority1 but it is to deny that which 
the heathen1 by the light of nature1    
have universally believed to be         
consonant to reason1 and therefore they 
often represent their gods as conversing
 with men2 and they appear1 in many of  
their writings1 not to have the least   
doubt whether there has been such a     
thing as inspiration in the world4      
,these things being premised1 we are now
 more particularly to consider those    
arguments which are brought to prove the

 scriptures to be the word of ,god1 or  
that they were given by divine          
inspiration3 these are taken either from
 the internal evidence we have hereof1  
viz4 the subject matter of scripture1   
from the majesty of the style1 the      
purity of the doctrines1 the harmony or 
consent of all its parts1 and the scope 
or tendency of the whole to give all    
glory to ,god2 or else external1 taken  
from the testimony which ,god himself   
gave to it1 at first by miracles1       
whereby the mission of the prophets1 and
 consequently what they were sent to    
deliver1 was confirmed1 and afterwards1 
in succeeding ages1 by the use which he 
hath made of it in convincing and       
converting sinners1 and building up     
believers to salvation4 ,these are the  
arguments mentioned in this answer1     
which will be distinctly considered1 and
 some others added1 as a farther proof  
of this matter1 to wit1 those taken from
 the character of the inspired writers1 
particularly as they were holy men1 and 

so they would not impose on the world1  
or pretend themselves to have been      
inspired1 if they were not2 and also1 as
 they were plain and honest men1 void of
 all craft and subtilty1 and so could   
not impose on the world2 and1 had they  
attempted to do so1 they had a great    
many subtle and malicious enemies1 who  
would soon have detected the fallacy4   
,to this we shall also add an argument  
taken from the sublimity of the         
doctrine1 in which respect it is too    
great1 and has too much wisdom in it for
 men to have invented2 and others taken 
from the antiquity thereof1 together    
with its wonderful preservation1        
notwithstanding all the endeavours of   
its enemies to root it out of the world2
 and then we shall consider how far the 
testimony of the church is to be        
regarded1 not as though it contained the
 principal foundation of our faith1 as  
the ,papists suppose2 but yet this may  
be1 if duly considered1 an additional   
evidence to those that have been before 

given2 and then we shall speak something
 concerning the witness of the ,spirit  
with the scripture in the heart of man1 
which inclines him to be persuaded by1  
and rest in the other arguments brought 
to support this truth3 and if all these 
be taken together1 they will1 we hope1  
beget a full conviction in the minds of 
men1 that the scriptures are the word of
 ,god2 which leads us to consider the   
arguments in particular4  ,i4 ,from the 
majesty of the style in which it is     
written4 ,this argument does not equally
 hold good with respect to all the parts
 of scripture2 for there is1 in many    
places thereof1 a great plainness of    
speech and familiarity of expression    
adapted to the meanest capacity1 and    
sometimes a bare relation of things1    
without that majesty of expression1     
which we find in other places3 thus in  
the historical books we do not observe  
such a loftiness of style1 as there is  
in ,job1 ,psalms1 ,isaiah1 and some     
other of the prophets2 so that there are

 arguments of another nature to prove   
them to be of divine authority4         
,however1 we may observe such           
expressions interspersed throughout     
almost the whole scripture1 which set   
forth the sovereignty and greatness of  
,god2 as when he is represented speaking
 immediately himself in a majestic way1 
tending not only to bespeak attention1  
but to strike those that hear or read   
with a reverential fear of his divine   
perfections2 thus1 when he gives a      
summons to the whole creation to give   
ear to his words1 ,hear1 ,o heavens2 and
 give ear1 ,o earth1 for the ,lord hath 
spoken1 ,isa4 i4 #b4 or1 swears by      
himself1 that unto him every knee shall 
bow1 and every tongue shall swear1 chap4
 xlv4 #bc4 or when it is said1 ,thus    
saith the ,lord1 the heaven is my       
throne1 and the earth is my footstool1  
chap4 lxvi4 #a4 and elsewhere1 ,the     
,lord reigneth1 let the earth rejoice2  
let the multitude of the isles be glad  
thereof4 ,clouds and darkness are round 

about him2 righteousness and judgment   
are the habitation of his throne4 ,a    
fire goeth before him2 his lightnings   
enlightened the world4 ,the hills melted
 like wax at the presence of the ,lord2 
at the presence of the ,lord of the     
whole earth1 ,psal4 xcvii4 #a-e4 ,and   
when he is represented as casting       
contempt on all the great men of this   
world1 thus he is said to cut off the   
spirit of princes1 and to be terrible to
 the kings of the earth1 ,psal4 lxxvi4  
#ab4 and to charge even his angels with 
folly1 ,job iv4 #ah4 or when the prophet
 speaks of him1 as one who had measured 
the waters in the hollow of his hand1   
and meted the heavens with a span1 and  
comprehended the dust of the earth in a 
measure1 and weighed the mountains in   
scales1 and the hills in a balance2 and 
that the nations of the earth are as a  
drop of the bucket1 and are counted as  
the small dust of the balance2 yea1 as  
nothing1 less than nothing and vanity1  
when compared with him1 ,isa4 xl4 #ab1  

#ae1 #ag4 ,it would be almost endless to
 refer to the many places of scripture1 
in which ,god speaks in such a style1 as
 is inimitable by any creature2 of this 
we have several instances in the book of
 ,job1 especially in those chapters     
where he is represented as answering    
,job out of the whirlwind1 and speaking 
with such a loftiness of style1 as1 it  
may be1 the like cannot be found in any 
human composure1 ,job1 chap4 xxxviii4 to
 xli4 where such expressions are used1  
which argue the style to be divine1     
great and magnificent2 so that if it was
 not immediately from ,god1 it would be 
the most bold presumption for any       
creature to speak in such a way3        
therefore this argument1 taken from the 
majestic style of scripture1 is not     
without its proper weight2 however1 it  
may serve to prepare us to receive those
 other arguments1 which1 together with  
this1 evince its divine original4  ,,ii4
 ,from the purity and holiness of its   
doctrines1 and that either1 if we       

consider it absolutely1 or compare it   
with all other writings1 whereby it will
 appear not only to have the preference 
to them1 but to be truly divine1 and so 
is deservedly styled the holy scripture1
 ,rom4 i4 #b4 and the words thereof pure
 as silver tried in a furnace1 purified 
seven times1 ,psal4 xii4 #f4 and to     
speak of right things1 in which there is
 nothing froward or perverse1 ,prov4    
viii4 #f1 #g1 #h4 ,thus every one that  
duly weighs the subject matter thereof1 
may behold therein the displays of the  
glory of the holiness of ,god3 here let 
us consider1 that the word of ,god      
appears to be divine from its purity and
 holiness1  #a4 ,as considered          
absolutely1 or in itself4 ,for1  7#a47  
,it lays open the vile and detestable   
nature of sin1 to render it abhorred by 
us4 ,thus the apostle says1 ,rom4 vii4  
#g4 ,i had not known sin2 that is1 ,i   
had not so fully understood the         
abominable nature thereof as ,i do1 but 
by the law3 for ,i had not known lust1  

except the law had said1 thou shalt not 
covet2 and hereupon he concludes1 that  
the law is holy1 and the commandment    
holy1 and just1 and good4  7#b47 ,it    
presents to our view the various        
instances of the divine vengeance1 and  
shews us how the wrath of ,god is       
revealed against the unrighteousness of 
sinners to make them afraid of rebelling
 against him4 ,thus it gives us an      
account how the angels hereby fell from 
and lost their first habitation1 and are
 thrust down to hell1 being reserved in 
chains under darkness1 unto the judgment
 of the great day1 ,jude #f4 ,and also  
how man hereby lost his primitive       
integrity and glory1 and exposed himself
 to the wrath and curse of ,god due to  
sin1 and all the miseries of this life  
consequent thereon2 and how it has      
destroyed flourishing nations1 and      
rendered them desolate4 ,thus it gives  
us an account how the ,jews were first  
carried into ,babylon for their         
idolatry1 and other abominations1 and   

afterwards cast off and made the sad    
monument of the divine wrath1 as at this
 day1 for crucifying ,christ1           
persecuting his followers1 and opposing 
the ,gospel4 ,it also gives an account  
of the distress and terror of           
conscience1 which wilful and            
presumptuous sins have exposed          
particular persons to2 such as ,cain1   
,judas and others2 this is described in 
a very pathetic manner1 when it is said 
of the wicked man1 who has his portion  
of the good things of this life1 that   
when he comes to die1 ,terrors take hold
 of him as waters1 a tempest stealeth   
him away in the night4 ,the east wind   
carrieth him away1 and he departeth1 and
 as a storm hurleth him out of his      
place4 ,for ,god shall cast upon him1   
and not spare2 he would fain flee out of
 his hand1 ,job xxvii4 #bj1 #ba1 #bb4   
,moreover1 the purity of the ,scripture 
farther appears1 in that it warns       
sinners of that eternal ruin1 which they
 expose themselves to in the other      

world2 ,who shall be punished with      
everlasting destruction from the        
presence of the ,lord1 and from the     
glory of his power1 #b ,thess4 i4 #i4   
,all these things discover the purity   
and holiness of the word of ,god4  7#c47
 ,it never gives the least indulgence or
 dispensation to sin1 nor in any of its 
doctrines1 which are pure and holy1 doth
 it lead to licentiousness2 it not only 
reproves sin in the lives and outward   
conversations of men1 but also discovers
 its secret recesses in the heart1 where
 its chief seat is2 obviates and guards 
against its first motions1 tending      
thereby to regulate the secret thoughts 
of men1 and the principle of all their  
actions1 which it requires to be pure   
and holy4 ,in this the ,scripture excels
 all other writings with respect to its 
holiness4  7#d47 ,all the blessings and 
benefits which it holds forth1 or puts  
us in mind of1 as the peculiar instances
 of divine favour and love to man1 are  
urged and insisted on as motives to     

holiness2 thus it is said1 ,the goodness
 of ,god leadeth thee to repentance1    
,rom4 ii4 #d4 and when ,moses had been  
putting the ,israelites in mind of      
,god's increasing them1 as the stars of 
heaven for multitude1 ,deut4 x4 #bb4    
compared with chap4 xi4 #a4 he adds1    
therefore thou shalt love the ,lord thy 
,god1 and keep his charge and statutes1 
his judgments and commandments alway4   
,and when the loving kindness of ,god   
has been abused by men1 it severely     
reproves them for their vile            
ingratitude2 as when it is said1 ,deut4 
xxxii4 #f4 ,do ye thus requite the      
,lord1 oh foolish people and unwise8 ,is
 not he thy ,father that bought thee8   
,hath not he made thee1 and established 
thee8  7#e47 ,all the examples proposed 
to our imitation therein1 are such as   
savour of1 and lead to1 holiness2 and   
when it recommends the actions or       
conversation of men1 it is more         
especially for that holiness which is   
discovered therein3 and1 on the other   

hand1 when it gives us the character of 
wicked men1 together with the dreadful  
consequences thereof1 it is that we may 
avoid and be deterred from committing   
the same sins that will be their ruin in
 the end4  7#f47 ,the rules laid down   
relating to civil affairs in the ,old   
,testament dispensation1 and the        
behaviour of one man towards another1   
have a vein of holiness running through 
them all4 ,thus the government of the   
,jewish state1 as described in the books
 of ,moses1 and elsewhere1 discovers it 
to be an holy commonwealth2 and they are
 often called an holy nation1 as        
governed by those laws which ,god gave  
them2 so the government of the church in
 the ,gospel-dispensation1 is a holy    
government3 visible holiness is a term  
of church-communion1 and apostacy and   
revolt from ,god excludes from it4      
7#g47 ,all the promises contained in    
,scripture1 are1 or will be certainly   
fulfilled1 and the blessings it gives us
 ground to expect1 conferred2 and       

therefore it is a faithful word1 and    
consequently pure and holy4  #b4 ,if we 
compare the ,scripture with other       
writings1 which are of a human          
composure1 it plainly excels in         
holiness4 ,for1  7#a47 ,if we compare it
 with the writings of heathen moralists1
 such as ,plato1 ,seneca1 and others1   
though they contain a great many good   
directions for the ordering the         
conversations of men agreeably to the   
dictates of nature and right reason1 yet
 most of them allow of1 or plead for    
some sins1 which the ,scripture mentions
 with abhorrence1 such as revenging     
injuries1 and self-murder2 several other
 instances of moral impurity1 were not  
only practised by those who laid down   
the best rules to inforce moral virtue1 
but either countenanced1 or1 at least1  
not sufficiently fenced against1 by what
 is contained in their writings2 and    
even their strongest motives to virtue  
or the government of the passions1 or a 
generous contempt of the world1 are     

taken principally from the tendency     
which such a course of life will have to
 free us from those things that tend to 
debase and afflict the mind1 and fill it
 with uneasiness1 when we consider      
ourselves as acting contrary to the     
dictates of nature1 which we have as    
intelligent creatures2 whereas1 on the  
other hand1 the ,scripture leads us to  
the practice of ,christian virtues from 
better motives1 and considers us not    
barely as men1 but ,christians1 under   
the highest obligations to the blessed  
,jesus1 and constrained hereunto by his 
condescending love expressed in all that
 he has done and suffered for our       
redemption and salvation2 and it puts us
 upon desiring and hoping for communion 
with ,god1 through him1 in the          
performance of those evangelical duties1
 which the light of nature knows nothing
 of1 and so discovers a solid foundation
 for our hope of forgiveness of sin1    
through his blood1 together with peace  
of conscience and joy resulting from it2

 it also directs us to look for that    
life and immortality1 which is brought  
to light through the ,gospel2 in which  
respects1 it far exceeds the writing of 
the best heathen moralists1 and so      
contains in it the visible marks and    
characters of its divine original4      
7#b47 ,if we compare the scriptures with
 other writings among ,christians1 which
 pretend not to inspiration1 we shall   
find in these writings a great number of
 impure and false doctrines1 derogatory 
to the glory of ,god1 in many of the    
pretended expositions of ,scripture4 ,if
 therefore men1 who have the ,scripture 
in their hands1 propagate unholy        
doctrines1 they would do so much more   
were there no ,scripture to guide them3 
thus the doctrine that grace is not     
necessary to what is spiritually good3  
the merit of good works1 human          
satisfactions1 penances1 indulgences1   
and dispensations for sin1 are all      
impure doctrines1 which are directly    
contrary to ,scripture2 and1 as         

contraries illustrate each other1 so    
hereby the holiness and purity of       
,scripture1 which maintains the contrary
 doctrines1 will appear to those who    
impartially study it and understand the 
sense thereof4  7#c47 ,if we compare the
 ,scriptures with the imposture of      
,mahomet1 in the book called the        
,alcoran1 which the ,turks make use of  
as a rule of faith1 and prefer it to    
,scripture1 and reckon it truly divine1 
that contains a system not only of      
fabulous1 but corrupt and impure        
notions1 accommodated to men's sensual  
inclinations4 ,thus it allows of        
polygamy1 and many impurities in this   
world1 and promises to its votaries a   
sensual paradise in the next1 all which 
is contrary to ,scripture2 so that      
composures merely human1 whether they   
pretend to divine inspiration or not1   
discover themselves not to be the word  
of ,god1 by their unholiness2 as the    
,scripture manifests itself to be       
divine1 by the purity of its doctrine2  

and indeed1 it cannot be otherwise1     
considering the corruption of man's     
nature1 as well as the darkness and     
blindness of his mind1 which1 if it     
pretends to frame a rule of faith1 it   
will be like himself1 impure and unholy2
 but that which has such marks of       
holiness1 as the ,scripture has1 appears
 to be inspired by a holy ,god4  ,having
 considered the holiness of ,scripture  
doctrines1 we proceed to shew the weight
 of this argument1 or how far it may be 
insisted on to prove its divine         
authority4 ,it is to be confessed1 that 
a book's containing holy things or rules
 for a holy life1 doth not of itself    
prove its divine original2 for then     
other books might be called the word of 
,god besides the ,scripture1 which is so
 called1 not only as containing some    
rules that promote holiness1 but as     
being the fountain of all true religion2
 and its being adapted above any book of
 human composure1 to answer this end1   
affords an argument of some weight to   

prove it to be of ,god4 ,for1  #a4 ,man1
 who is prone to sin1 naturally blinded 
and prejudiced against divine truth and 
holiness1 could never compose a book    
that is so consonant to the divine      
perfections1 and contains such a display
 of ,god's glory1 and is so adapted to  
make us holy4  #b4 ,if we suppose that  
man could invent a collection of        
doctrines1 that tended to promote       
holiness1 could he invent doctrines so  
glorious1 and so much adapted to this   
end1 as these are8 ,if he could1 he that
 does this must either be a good or a   
bad man3 if we suppose the former1 he   
would never pretend the ,scripture to be
 of divine authority1 when it was his   
own composure2 and if the latter1 it is 
contrary to his character1 as such1 to  
endeavour to promote holiness2 for then 
,satan's kingdom must be divided against
 itself3 but of this1 more in its proper
 place1 when we come to consider the    
character of the penmen of ,scripture1  
to give a further proof of its divine   

authority4  #c4 ,it is plain1 that the  
world without ,scripture could not      
arrive to holiness2 for the apostle     
says1 #a ,cor4 i4 #ba4 ,that the world  
by wisdom knew not ,god2 and certainly  
where there is no saving knowledge of   
,god1 there is no holiness2 and the same
 apostle1 ,rom4 i4 #bi1 #cj1 #ca4 gives 
an account of the great abominations    
that were committed by the heathen2     
being destitute of ,scripture light1    
they were filled with all               
unrighteousness1 fornication1           
wickedness1 covetousness1 maliciousness1
 full of envy1 murder1 debate1 deceit1  
malignity1 c4  ,if therefore the        
doctrines contained in ,scriptures are  
not only pure and holy themselves1 but  
tend to promote holiness in us1 this is 
not without its proper weight to prove  
their divine original4  ,,iii4 ,the     
scriptures farther manifest themselves  
to be the word of ,god from the consent 
or harmony of all the parts thereof4#bb 
,this argument will appear more strong  

and conclusive1 if we compare them with 
other writings1 in which there is but   
little harmony4 ,thus1 if we consult the
 writings of most men uninspired1 we    
shall find that their sentiments        
contained therein often times very      
widely differ2 and if1 as historians1   
they pretend to report matters of fact1 
their evidence1 or report1 does not1 in 
all respects1 agree together1 which     
shews that they are fallible2 but the   
exact and harmonious agreement of       
scripture proves it divine4 ,that other 
writings of human composure agree not   
among themselves1 is very evident2 and  
it is less to be wondered at if we      
consider1  7#a47 ,that men are naturally
 blind and unacquainted with the things 
of ,god2 and therefore their writings   
will hardly be consistent with          
themselves1 much less with one another1 
as they are oftentimes inconsistent with
 the standard of truth1 by which they   
are to be tried2 nothing is more common 
than for men to betray their weakness1  

and cast a blemish on their composures1 
by contradicting themselves1 especially 
if they are long1 and consist of various
 subjects4  7#b47 ,men are much more    
liable to contradict one another when   
any scheme of doctrine is pretended to  
be laid down by different persons2 for  
when they attempt to represent matters  
of fact1 they often do it in a very     
different light3 this may be more       
especially observed in those accounts   
that are given of doctrines that are    
new1 or not well known by the world1 or 
in historical accounts1 not only of     
general occurrences1 but of particular  
circumstances attending them1 where     
trusting to their memory and judgment1  
they often impose on themselves and     
others4  7#c47 ,this disagreement of    
human writings will more evidently      
appear1 when their authors were men of  
no great natural wisdom1 especially if  
they lived in different ages1 or places 
remote from one another1 and so could   
have no opportunity to consult one      

another1 or compare their writings      
together2 we shall scarce ever find a   
perfect harmony or agreement in such    
writings2 neither should we in          
scripture1 were it not written by divine
 inspiration4  ,this will appear1 if we 
consider that the penmen thereof were in
 themselves as liable to mistake as     
other men2 and had they been left to    
themselves herein1 they would have      
betrayed as much weakness1 confusion1   
and self-contradiction1 as any other    
writers have done2 and it may be more1  
inasmuch as many of them had not the    
advantage of a liberal education1 nor   
were conversant in human learning1 but  
were taken from mean employments1 and   
made use of by ,god in this work1 that  
so we may herein see more of the        
divinity of the writings they were      
employed to transmit to us3 besides1    
they lived in different ages and places1
 and so could not consult together what 
to impart1 and yet we find1 as we shall 
endeavour to prove1 that they all agree 

together3 therefore the harmony of their
 writings is an evident proof that they 
were inspired by the same spirit1 and   
consequently that they are the word of  
,god4  ,we might here consider the      
historical parts of scripture1 and the  
account which one inspired writer gives 
of matters of facts as agreeing with    
what is related by another2 and also the
 harmony of all the doctrines contained 
therein1 as not only agreeing in the    
general scope and design thereof1 but in
 the way and manner in which they are   
laid down or explained3 but we shall    
more particularly consider the harmony  
of scripture1 as what is foretold in one
 part thereof1 is related as            
accomplished in another4 ,and1  #a4     
,there are various predictions relating 
to the providential dealings of ,god    
with his people1 which had their        
accomplishment in an age or two after4  
,thus the prophets ,isaiah1 ,jeremiah1  
and others1 foretold the captivity and  
the number of years they should be      

detained in ,babylon1 and their         
deliverance by ,cyrus1 who is expressly 
mentioned by name4 ,these prophecies1   
and the accomplishment thereof are so   
obvious1 that there is no one who reads 
the ,old ,testament but will see an     
harmony between them2 so that what in   
one place is represented as foretold1 in
 another place1 is spoken of as         
accomplished in its proper time1 ,isa4  
xliv4 #bh4 and ,chap4 xlv4 #a1 #d4      
compared with ,ezra i4 #b1 #c4  ,and the
 revolt and apostacy of ,israel1 their  
turning aside from ,god1 to idolatry1   
which was the occasion of their         
desolation1 was foretold by ,moses1     
,deut4 xxxi4 #bi4 and by ,joshua1 ,chap4
 xxiii4 #ae1 #af4 and ,chap4 xxiv4 #ai4 
,and every one that reads the book of   
,judges1 will see that this was         
accomplished2 for when ,moses and       
,joshua were dead1 and that generation  
who lived with them1 they revolted to   
idolatry and were punished for the same 
in various instances1 ,judg4 ii4 #h1    

#aj1 #aa1 #ad4  ,and the prophecy of the
 great reformation which ,josiah should 
make1 and in particular1 that he should 
burn the bones of the idolatrous priests
 on the altar at ,bethel1 #a ,kings     
xiii4 #b4 was exactly accomplished above
 three hundred years after1 #b ,kings   
xxii4 #ae1 #af4  #b4 ,there are various 
predictions under the ,old ,testament   
relating to our ,saviour1 and the ,new  
,testament church1 many of which have   
had their accomplishment1 and others are
 daily accomplishing4 ,it is said1 ,acts
 x4 #dc4 ,to him gave all the prophets  
witness1 that through his name whosoever
 believeth in him1 shall receive        
remission of sins2 and we shall find1   
that what is foretold concerning him in 
the ,old ,testament1 is related as      
accomplished in the ,new2 particularly1 
7#a47 ,that he should come in the flesh1
 was foretold in the ,old ,testament1   
,hag4 ii4 #g4 ,mal4 iii4 #a4 ,isa4 ix4  
#f4 and is mentioned as accomplished in 
the ,new1 ,john i4 #ad4 ,gal4 iv4 #d4   

7#b47 ,that he should work miracles for 
the good of mankind1 and to confirm his 
mission1 was foretold1 ,isa4 xxxv4 #e1  
#f4 and accomplished1 ,matth4 xi4 #d1   
#e4  7#c47 ,that he should live in this 
world in a low and humbled state1 was   
foretold1 ,isa4 lii4 #ad4 and chap4     
liii4 #c4 and the whole account of his  
life in the gospels bears witness that  
those predictions were fully            
accomplished4  7#d47 ,that he should be 
cut off1 and die a violent death1 was   
typified by the brazen serpent in the   
wilderness1 viz4 that he should be      
lifted up upon the cross1 ,numb4 xxi4   
#i4 compared with ,john iii4 #ad4 and   
foretold in several other scriptures1   
,isa4 liii4 #g4 and ,dan4 ix4 #bf4 and  
this is largely insisted on1 as         
fulfilled in the ,new ,testament4  7#e47
 ,that after he had continued some time 
in a state of humiliation1 he should be 
exalted1 was foretold1 ,isa4 lii4 #ac4  
chap4 liii4 #aa1 #ab4 ,psal4 lxviii4    
#ah4 and fulfilled1 ,acts i4 #i4 ,phil4 

ii4 #i4  7#f47 ,that his glory should be
 proclaimed and published in the        
preaching of the gospel1 was foretold1  
,isa4 xi4 #aj4 ,psal4 cx4 #b4 ,isa4 lx4 
#a1 #b1 #c4 and fulfilled1 #a ,tim4 iii4
 #af4 ,mark xvi4 #ae4 as appears from   
many scriptures4  7#g47 ,that he should 
be the spring and fountain of all       
blessedness to his people1 was foretold1
 ,gen4 xxii4 #ah4 ,psal4 lxxii4 #ag4    
,isa4 xlix4 #h1 #i4 and fulfilled1 #b   
,cor4 vi4 #b4 ,acts iii4 #bf4 ,in these1
 and many other instances1 we may       
observe such a beautiful consent of all 
the parts of scripture1 as proves it to 
be the very word of ,god4  ,but since it
 will not be sufficient1 to support the 
divine authority of scripture1 to assert
 that there is such a harmony1 as we    
have observed1 unless we can prove that 
it doth not contradict itself in any    
instances2 therefore the next thing we  
are to consider1 is the reproach cast   
upon it by those who would bring all    
divine revelation into contempt1 as     

though it contradicted itself in several
 instances1 and contained various       
absurdities2 which1 were they able to   
make appear1 would enervate the force of
 the argument we are maintaining1 to    
prove the scripture to be the word of   
,god from the consent of the parts      
thereof3 therefore we shall consider    
some of those contradictions1 which     
many1 who pretend to criticise on the   
words of scripture1 charge it with1 as  
so many objections against the          
harmonious consent1 and consequently the
 divine authority thereof1 together with
 the answers1 which may be given to each
 of them4  ,object4 #a4 ,if we compare  
our ,saviour's genealogy1 as related in 
the first of ,matthew and the third of  
,luke1 they allege that there is a very 
great inconsistency between them1 for   
one mentions different persons1 as his  
progenitors1 from what the other does2  
as1 for instance1 in ,matth4 i4 he is   
said to be the son of ,joseph1 and      
,joseph the son of ,jacob1 and he the   

son of ,matthan2 but the other          
evangelist1 viz4 ,luke1 says that he was
 the son of ,joseph1 which was the son  
of ,heli1 which was the son of ,matthat3
 and so we find the names of each       
genealogy very differing1 till we come  
to ,david2 therefore they suppose both  
those genealogies cannot be true1       
inasmuch as the one contradicts the     
other4  ,answ4 ,it evidently appears1   
that there is no contradiction between  
these two genealogies1 since ,matthew   
gives an account of ,joseph's ancestors1
 and ,luke of ,mary's1 and so1 both     
together1 prove that he was the son of  
,david1 by his reputed father's1 as well
 as his mother's side4  ,and if it be   
replied1 that ,luke1 as well as         
,matthew1 gives an account of ,joseph's 
genealogy1 and therefore this answer is 
not sufficient3 we may observe1 that it 
is said1 ,luke iii1 #bc1 #bd4 that      
,jesus was1 as it is supposed1 the son  
of ,joseph1 which was the son of ,heli1 
c4 the meaning is1 he was1 indeed1 the  

supposed son of ,joseph1 but he really  
descended from ,heli1 the father of the 
virgin ,mary2 and nothing is more common
 in scripture than for grandsons to be  
called sons2 and if we observe the      
meaning of the ,greek words1 which we   
render1 which was the son1 c4 it may    
better be rendered1 who descended from  
,heli1 and then there is not the least  
absurdity in it1 supposing ,heli to be  
his grandfather2 and therefore there is 
no appearance of contradiction between  
these two scriptures4  ,object4 #b4 ,it 
is pretended1 that there is a plain     
contradiction between these two places1 
#b ,sam4 xxiv4 #bd4 and #a ,chron4 xxi4 
#be4 in the former whereof it is said1  
that ,david bought the threshing-floor  
of ,araunah the ,jebusite1 to build an  
altar on1 and the oxen for              
burnt-offerings1 that the plague might  
be stayed1 for fifty shekels of silver2 
but in the other1 viz4 in ,chronicles1  
it is said1 that he gave him for the    
place six hundred shekels of gold2      

therefore they pretend that one of these
 places must be wrong1 inasmuch as they 
plainly contradict one another4  ,answ4 
,the answer that may be given to this   
objection1 is1 that ,david paid ,araunah
 7who is otherwise called ,ornan7 for   
his threshing-floor1 where he built an  
altar1 and for the oxen1 which he bought
 for sacrifice1 fifty shekels of silver1
 as it is expressed in ,samuel4 ,but1   
beside this threshing-floor1 he bought  
the whole place1 as it is said in       
,chronicles1 i4 e4 the whole tract of   
ground1 or mountain1 on which it stood1 
whereon he designed that the temple     
should be built2 and therefore he saith 
concerning it1 #a ,chron4 xxii4 #a4     
,this is the house of the ,lord ,god1 i4
 e4 this place1 or tract of land1 which 
,i have bought round about the          
threshing-floor1 is the place where the 
house of ,god shall stand2 and this is  
the altar of burnt-offering for ,israel1
 which was to be built in that          
particular place1 where the             

threshing-floor was3 now1 though he gave
 for the threshing-floor but fifty      
shekels of silver1 7which probably was  
as much as it was worth7 yet the whole  
place1 containing ground enough for the 
temple1 with all its courts1 and the    
places leading to it1 was worth a great 
deal more2 or1 if there were any houses 
in the place1 these were also purchased 
to be pulled down1 to make room for the 
building of the temple2 and1 for all    
this1 he gave six hundred shekels of    
gold1 and we can hardly suppose it to be
 worth less2 so that there is no real   
contradiction between these two places1 
,object4 #c4 ,it is pretended1 that     
there is a contradiction between #b     
,sam4 xxiv4 #ac4 and #a ,chron4 xxi4    
#ab4 in the former of which ,gad came to
 ,david1 being sent to reprove him for  
his numbering the people1 and said1     
,shall seven years of famine come unto  
thee in thy land8 ,but1 in ,chronicles1 
he speaks of but three years of famine4 
,answ4 ,to reconcile this seeming       

contradiction1  #a4 ,some think1 that in
 some ancient copies1 it is not seven1  
but three1#cg years of famine1 in       
,samuel1 as it is in ,chronicles2 the   
reason of this conjecture is1 because   
the ,,lxx1 or ,greek translation1 have  
it so2 and they think that these        
translators would hardly have made so   
bold with scripture1 as to put three for
 seven1 if they had not found it so in  
the copies that they made use of1 when  
they compiled this translation3 but     
probably this answer will not give      
satisfaction to the objectors2          
therefore1  #b4 ,the best way to account
 for this seeming contradiction1 is     
this3 in ,chronicles1 ,gad bids him     
chuse if he would have three years of   
famine1 viz4 from that time2 but in     
,samuel he saith1 shall seven years of  
famine come unto thee1 that is1 as      
though he should say there hath been    
three years of famine already1 for ,saul
 and his bloody house1 because he slew  
the ,gibeonites1 #b ,sam4 xxi4 #a4 ,now1

 that famine ceased but the year before1
 and the ground being so chaped and hard
 for want of rain this year1 which was  
the fourth1 it was little better than a 
year of famine4 ,now1 said ,gad1 wilt   
thou have this famine continued three   
years more 7which1 in all1 makes up     
seven years7 unto thee in the land8     
,and1 if we take it in this sense1 there
 is no contradiction between these two  
scriptures1 though one speaks of three  
years1 and the other of seven4  ,object4
 #d4 ,they pretend to find an           
inconsistency1 or absurdity1 little     
better than a contradiction1 by         
comparing #a ,sam4 xvi4 #ba1 #bb4 and   
chap4 xvii4 #ee4 ,in the former it is   
said1 ,david came to ,saul1 and stood   
before him1 and he loved him greatly2   
and he sent to ,jesse1 with the intent  
that he might give him leave to stand   
before him1 inasmuch as he had found    
favour in his sight4 ,now1 say they1 how
 can this be consistent with the other  
scripture2 where ,saul seeing ,david    

going forth against ,goliath the        
,philistine1 asked ,abner1 ,whose son is
 this youth8 ,and ,abner replied1 ,he   
could not tell2 and1 in the next verse1 
he is ordered to enquire who he was4    
,now how could this be1 when he had been
 his armour-bearer1 stood before him1   
and found favour in his sight2 and he   
had sent to ,jesse1 to desire that he   
might live with him8  ,answ4 ,i can see 
no appearance of absurdity1 or defect of
 harmony1 between these two scriptures2 
for supposing ,saul's memory had failed 
him1 and he had forgot that ,david had  
stood before him as a servant1 shall the
 scripture1 that gives an account of    
this1 be reflected on1 as containing an 
inconsistency8 ,it is true1 ,david had  
stood before ,saul1 as his              
armour-bearer2 yet he had1 for some     
time1 been sent home and dismissed from 
his service1 during which time he kept  
his father's sheep2 and probably he     
lived not long in ,saul's family2       
therefore it is no wonder if ,saul had  

now forgot him4 ,there is no master of a
 family but may forget what servants    
have formerly lived with him1 and much  
more a king1 who hardly knows the names 
of the greatest part of the servants    
that are about him3 besides1 at this    
time1 ,david appeared in the habit of a 
shepherd1 and therefore ,saul might well
 say1 whose son is this youth8 ,this    
sufficiently accounts for the           
difficulty1 and vindicates this         
scripture from the charge of            
inconsistency2 though some account for  
it thus1 by supposing that ,saul knew   
,david1 7as having been his             
armour-bearer7 but did not know his     
father1 and therefore asks1 whose son is
 this8 or who is he that hath so bold   
and daring a son1 as this youth appears 
to be8 ,if these things be considered1  
there appears not the least absurdity in
 this scripture4  ,object4 #e4 ,another 
contradiction1 which some charge the    
scripture with1 is1 that when ,israel1  
pursuant to the advice of ,balaam1      

committed idolatry1 and went a-whoring  
after the daughters of ,moab1 and ,god  
consumed them for it by the plague1 it  
is said1 ,numb4 xxv4 #i4 ,those that    
died in the plague were twenty-four     
thousand2 but the apostle ,paul1        
referring to the same thing1 says1 #a   
,cor4 x4 #h4 ,neither let us commit     
fornication1 as some of them committed1 
and fell in one day three and twenty    
thousand4  ,answ4 #a4 ,the answer that  
may be given to this objection1 that the
 apostle ,paul1 when he says1 three and 
twenty thousand died1 or fell1 in one   
day1 speaks of those who died by the    
immediate hand of ,god1 by the          
pestilential distemper that was sent    
among them2 but1 besides these1 there   
were many more that died by the hand of 
public justice for this sin2 for in that
 chapter in ,numbers1 verse #d and #e4  
we read of the heads of the people being
 hanged up before the ,lord1 and the    
judges being ordered to slay every man  
his men that were joined unto           

,baal-peor4 ,these died by the sword of 
justice1 and it is no great impropriety 
to say1 that such died in a mediate way1
 by the plague1 or sword of ,god2 the   
sword is one of his plagues1 as well as 
pestilential diseases1 and is frequently
 so styled in scripture3 now we cannot  
suppose that fewer died of this latter  
plague1 if that be the import of the    
word1 than a thousand2 so that ,moses   
gives the number of all that died1      
whether by ,god's immediate hand1 or by 
the sword of the magistrate1 pursuant to
 his command3 but if it be reckoned too 
great a strain upon the sense of the    
word plague1 to admit of this solution1 
let it be farther observed1 that1 in the
 #ith verse1 where ,moses gives the sum 
total of those that died1 it is not said
 that they were such who died of the    
plague1 but in the plague2 that is1     
those that died in or soon after the    
time that the plague raged among them1  
whose death was occasioned by this sin1 
were four and twenty thousand2 so that  

these two places of scripture are so far
 from contradicting1 that they rather   
illustrate one another4  ,object4 #f4   
,another contradiction is pretended to  
be between ,gal4 i4 #h4 where the       
apostle says1 ,though we1 or an angel   
from heaven1 preach any other gospel    
unto you1 than that which we have       
preached unto you1 let him be accursed2 
#b ,cor4 xi4 #d4 ,if he that cometh1    
preacheth another ,jesus whom we have   
not preached1 or if ye receive another  
spirit1 which ye have not received1 or  
another gospel1 which ye have not       
accepted1 ye might well bear with him4  
,in one place he speaks against those   
who preach another gospel2 in the other 
he says1 they may be borne with2 which  
seems to be a contradiction4  ,answ4    
,for the reconciling and accounting for 
the sense of these two scriptures1 let  
us consider1 that in the former of them 
the apostle pronounces them that        
preached another gospel accursed1 and   
therefore1 doubtless1 they were not to  

be borne with1 or allowed of2 therefore 
it must be enquired what he means when  
he says1 in the other scripture1 that   
such may be well borne with2 now this   
scripture will1 without the least strain
 or force upon the words1 admit of one  
of these two senses4  #a4 ,it may be    
considered as containing a sarcasm1 by  
which the apostle reproves their being  
too much inclined to adhere to false    
teachers3 if1 says he1 these bring you  
tidings of a better ,spirit1 a better   
gospel1 then bear with them2 but this   
they cannot do1 therefore reject them2  
or1  #b4 ,the words may be rendered1    
instead of ye might well bear with him1 
ye might well bear with me1 as is       
observed in the marginal reference2 the 
word him being in an ,italic character1 
as will be elsewhere observed1#ch is not
 in the original1 and therefore me may  
as well be supplied as him1 and so the  
meaning is this2 ye bear with false     
preachers1 are very favourable to them1 
and seem a little cold to us the        

apostles2 so that ,i am afraid1 as is   
observed in the foregoing verse1 lest   
your minds should be corrupted from the 
simplicity that is in ,christ2 you can  
bear with these false teachers1 and will
 you not bear with me8 as he says1 ver4 
#a4 ,would to ,god you could bear with  
me a little in my folly1 and indeed bear
 with me4 ,it is a sign religion is at a
 low ebb1 when it is with some          
difficulty that professors are persuaded
 to bear with those that preach the pure
 gospel of ,christ1 who are too prone to
 turn aside to another gospel4 ,take the
 words in either of these senses1 and   
they exactly harmonize with that text in
 ,galatians1 and not1 as the objectors  
pretend1 contradict it4  ,object4 #g4   
,another charge of contradiction1 which 
is brought against scripture1 is1 that  
our ,saviour saith1 ,matth1 x4 #cd4     
,think not that ,i am come to send peace
 on the earth2 ,i came not to send      
peace1 but a sword3 this is contrary to 
,christ's general character1 as a prince

 of peace1 ,isa4 ix4 #f4 and to the     
advice he gives his disciples1 not to   
use the sword1 because such shall perish
 by it1 ,mat4 xxvi4 #eb4 and what be    
saith else1 ,my kingdom is not of this  
world1 ,john xviii4 #cf4 and therefore  
not to be propagated by might or power1 
by force or civil policy1 or those other
 carnal methods1 by which the kingdoms  
of this world are advanced and promoted4
  ,answ4 ,for the reconciling this      
seeming contradiction1 let it be        
considered1 that ,christ did not come to
 put a sword into his followers hands1  
or to put them upon making war with the 
powers among whom they dwell1 for the   
propagating the ,christian religion2 his
 gospel was to be advanced by spiritual 
methods3 in this sense1 the design of   
his coming was not to send a sword1 but 
to bring spiritual peace to his people2 
but when he saith1 ,i came to send a    
sword1 it implies that his coming1 his  
kingdom and gospel1 should occasion     
persecution and war1 by reason of the   

corruption of men2 this the gospel may  
do1 and yet not put men upon disturbing 
their neighbours1 or making war with    
them2 and this is not contrary to       
,christ's general character of coming to
 be the author of spiritual peace to his
 people4  ,object4 #h4 ,another         
contradiction is pretended to be between
 #a ,kings viii4 #i4 and ,heb4 ix4 #d4  
in the former it is said1 ,there was    
nothing in the ark but the two tables1  
which ,moses put there2 in the latter1  
that there was the golden pot1 that had 
manna1 ,aaron's rod that budded1 and the
 tables of the covenant4  ,answ4 ,this  
seeming contradiction may easily be     
reconciled3 for we suppose it true that 
there was nothing in the ark but the two
 tables1 as it is said in the former of 
these scriptures2 therefore to explain  
the latter agreeably to it1 two senses  
may be given of it4  #a4 ,it is not     
necessary to suppose1 that the apostle  
means1 in the ark was the golden pot1 c4
 but in the holiest of all1 which he    

mentions in the foregoing verse2        
therefore the meaning is1 as in the     
holiest of all1 there was the golden    
censer1 and the ark of the covenant1 so 
in it was the golden pot and ,aaron's   
rod3 but because there may be an        
objection against this sense1 from its  
being said in the words immediately     
following1 that over it were the        
cherubims of glory shadowing the        
mercy-seat1 where it refers to the ark1 
and not to the tabernacle1 or holiest of
 all2 if therefore the cherubims were   
over the ark1 then the other things must
 be supposed to be in it1 which         
objection1 indeed1 is not without its   
force1 unless we suppose that the       
words#ci may be rendered in the higher  
parts of it1 to wit1 of the holiest of  
all1 were the cherubims of glory above  
the mercy seat1 and accordingly the     
meaning is this2 that within this second
 vail was not only the ark1 the golden  
pot of manna1 ,aaron's rod1 c4 but also 
the cherubims of glory1 which were above

 them all3 but since the grammatical    
construction1 seems rather to favour the
 objection1 there is another sense given
 of the words1 which sufficiently       
reconciles the seeming contradiction1   
viz4  #b4 ,when it is said1#dj that     
therein1 or in it1 to wit1 the ark1 was 
the golden pot that had manna1 and      
,aaron's rod that budded1 the meaning   
is1 they were near it1 or beside it1 or 
some way or other fastened1 or adjoining
 to it1 in some inclosure1 in the       
outside of the ark1 whereas nothing was 
in it but the two tables2 so that there 
is no real contradiction between these  
two scriptures4  ,many more instances of
 the like nature might have been given1 
but1 instead thereof1 we shall rather   
chuse to lay down some general rules for
 the reconciling seeming contradictions 
in scripture1 which may be applied by us
 in other cases1 where we meet with the 
like difficulties4 ,as1  #a4 ,when two  
scriptures seem to contradict each      
other1 we sometimes find that this      

arises from the inadvertency of some who
 have transcribed the copies of         
scripture1 putting one word for another2
 though it may be observed1  7#a47 ,that
 this is not often found2 for as great  
care has been taken in transcribing the 
manuscripts of scripture1 as in any     
manuscripts whatever1 if not greater4   
7#b47 ,if there have been mistakes in   
transcribing1 it is only in a few       
instances1 where there is a likeness    
between two words1 so that one might    
easily be mistaken for the other2 and   
this ought not to prejudice any against 
the scripture1 for it only argues1 that 
though the inspired penmen were         
infallible1 the scribes that took copies
 of scripture for common use were not   
so4  7#c47 ,when there is any such      
mistake1 it may generally be rectified  
by some other copy1 that has the word as
 it really should be3 it is so in our   
printed ,bibles1 in some editions of    
them we find mistakes1 as to some words1
 that may be rectified by others1 which 

are more correct2 and if so1 why may not
 this be supposed to be in some written 
copies thereof1 that were used before   
printing1 which is but a late invention1
 was known in the world1 from which all 
our printed copies are taken8  #b4 ,when
 the same action in scripture seems to  
be ascribed to different persons1 or the
 same thing said to be done in different
 places1 there is no contradiction1 for 
the same person1 or place1 is sometimes 
called by various names3 thus ,moses's  
father-in-law1 who met him in the       
wilderness1 and advised him in the      
settling the government of the people1  
is called1 in one place1 ,jethro1 ,exod4
 xviii4 #a4 and in another ,hobab1      
,numb4 x4 #bi4 ,so the mountain1 from   
which ,god gave the law to ,israel1 is  
sometimes called mount ,sinai1 ,exod4   
xix4 #bj4 and at other times ,horeb1    
,deut4 i4 #f4  #c4 ,chronological       
difficulties1 or seeming contradictions1
 arising from a differing number of     
years1 in which the same thing is said  

to be done1 may be reconciled1 by       
computing them from the different       
epocha's1 or beginnings of computation3 
as it is said1 ,exod4 xii4 #dj4 ,the    
sojourning of the children of ,israel1  
who dwelt in ,egypt1 was four hundred   
and thirty years2 but1 when ,god        
foretels this sojourning1 it is said1   
,gen4 xv4 #ac4 ,thy seed shall be       
strangers in a land that is not theirs1 
and shall serve them1 and they shall    
afflict them four hundred years3 now the
 four hundred and thirty years takes its
 beginning of computation from          
,abraham's being called to leave his    
country1 and sojourn in the land of     
promise1 as in a strange land2 this was 
four hundred and thirty years before    
,israel went out of ,egypt2 but the four
 hundred years mentioned in ,genesis1   
during which time his seed should       
sojourn1 takes its beginning of         
computation from his having the promised
 seed1 or from the birth of ,isaac1     
which was twenty-five years after his   

leaving his country2 from that time to  
the children of ,israel's going out of  
,egypt was four hundred and five years2 
and the five years above four hundred   
are left out1 as being an inconsiderable
 number1 which is very agreeable to our 
common way of computing time1 when a    
large even number is mentioned1 to leave
 out a small one of four or five years1 
more or less1 as in the instance here   
mentioned1 especially when time is      
expressed by centuries1 as it is here2  
for it is said1 in ver4 #af4 in the     
fourth generation1 that is1 after the   
fourth century of years1 they shall come
 hither again4  #d4 ,when1 by comparing 
the years of the reign of several of the
 kings of ,judah and ,israel1 mentioned 
in the books of ,kings and ,chronicles1 
we find that some are said1 in one of   
them1 to have reigned three or four     
years longer than the account of the    
years of their reign1 mentioned by the  
other1 the seeming contradiction may be 
reconciled1 by considering him as       

beginning to reign before his father's  
death1 as ,solomon did before ,david    
died2 or from his being nominated as his
 father's successor1 and owned as such  
by the people1 which was sometimes done 
to prevent disputes that might arise    
about the matter afterwards2 and        
sometimes1 when a king was engaged in   
foreign wars1 in which he was obliged to
 be absent from his people1 and the     
event hereof was uncertain1 he appointed
 his son to reign in his absence1 from  
which time he had the title of a king1  
though his father was living3 or when a 
king was superannuated1 or unfit to     
reign1 as ,uzziah was when smote with   
leprosy2 or when he was weary of the    
fatigue and burden of government1 he    
would settle his son1 as his viceroy1 in
 his life-time1 on which account the son
 is sometimes said to reign with his    
father3 thus many account for that      
difficulty1 in #b ,chron4 xxxvi4 #i4    
where it is said1 ,jehoiachin was eight 
years old when he began to reign2 but in

 #b ,kings xxiv4 #h4 he is said to have 
been eighteen years old when he began to
 reign3 the meaning is1 that when he was
 eight years old1 he was nominated as   
his father's successor2 but when he was 
eighteen years old1 he began to reign   
alone1 his father being then dead4  #e4 
,scriptures that seem to contradict one 
another may not treat of the same1 but  
different subjects1 as to the general   
design thereof3 thus1 that seeming      
contradiction between the apostles ,paul
 and ,james is to be accounted for2 the 
former says1 ,gal4 ii4 #af4 ,knowing    
that a man is not justified by the works
 of the law1 but by the faith of ,jesus 
,christ2 but the other says1 ,jam4 ii4  
#bd4 ,that by works a man is justified1 
and not by faith only4 ,the apostle     
,paul speaks of a sinner's              
justification1 or freedom from the      
condemning sentence of the law in the   
sight of ,god1 which gives him a right  
to eternal life1 in which respect he    
looks for it out of himself1 and1 by    

faith1 depends alone on ,christ's       
righteousness2 in this sense1 works do  
not justify3 whereas the apostle ,james1
 when he asserts1 that a man is         
justified by works1 and not by faith    
only1 intends that our profession and   
sincerity therein is justified2 that is 
evidenced1 not by our having just       
notions of things1 or an historical     
faith1 such as the devils themselves    
have1 but by those works of holiness1   
which are the fruits of it2 this is the 
only justification he treats of1 and    
therefore doth not in the least         
contradict the apostle ,paul1 who treats
 of another kind of justification1 in   
which works are excluded4  #f4 ,when two
 scriptures seem to contradict one      
another1 they may sometimes be          
reconciled1 by considering the same     
thing absolutely in one place1 and      
comparatively in the other3 thus1 in    
many scriptures1 we are commanded to    
extend that love to every one in their  
several relations1 which is due2 and yet

 our ,saviour says1 ,luke xiv4 #bf4 ,if 
any man come to me1 and hate not his    
father and mother1 and wife1 and        
children1 and brethren and sisters1 he  
cannot be my disciple3 this is to be    
understood comparatively1 that is1 our  
love to the creature ought to bear no   
proportion to that which is due to ,god4
  #g4 ,scriptures that seem to          
contradict one another1 often speak of  
different persons1 or persons of        
different characters3 thus it is said1  
,luke vi4 #cf4 ,be ye merciful1 as your 
,father also is merciful2 or1 ,judge    
not1 that ye be not judged1 ,matt4 vii4 
#b4 ,this respects persons in a private 
capacity1 and therefore doth not        
contradict those other scriptures that  
are applied to magistrates in the       
execution of public justice2 to such it 
is said1 ,deut4 xix4 #ba4 ,thine eye    
shall not pity1 but life shall go for   
life1 eye for eye1 tooth for tooth1 hand
 for hand1 foot for foot4  #h4 ,two     
contrary assertions may be both true in 

differing respects2 thus our ,saviour   
says in one place1 ,the poor ye have    
always with you1 but me ye have not     
always1 ,matt4 xxvi4 #aa4 and in        
another1 ,lo1 ,i am with you always1    
even to the end of the world1 chap4     
xxviii4 #bj4 these are both true1 one   
respecting ,christ's bodily presence1 as
 man1 in which respect he is not now    
with us2 the other his spiritual and    
powerful influences1 whereby he is      
always present with his people as ,god4 
#i4 ,we must take notice of different   
times or dispensations1 in which respect
 those laws or ordinances1 which were to
 be received and observed as a rule of  
faith and duty at one time1 may not be  
so at another2 thus circumcision is     
recommended as a duty1 and a privilege  
to the ,jews before ,christ's time1 in  
which respect the apostle reckons it    
among the advantages which they formerly
 had above all other nations1 ,rom4 iii4
 #a1 #b4 but when the gospel            
dispensation was erected1 and the       

,jewish conomy abolished1 it was so far 
from being an advantage1 that the       
observance of it was deemed no less than
 a subversion of the gospel1 as the     
apostle says1 ,gal4 v4 #b4 ,if ye be    
circumcised1 ,christ shall profit you   
nothing2 and the same apostle gives a   
very diminutive character of those      
institutes of the ceremonial law1 which 
he calls1 in his time1 weak and beggarly
 elements1 such as had a tendency to    
bring them again into bondage1 and      
blames them for observing the ,jewish   
festivals1 such as days1 months1 times1 
and years2 to wit1 the new moons1 feasts
 of weeks1 or of years1 such as the     
seventh year1 or the jubilees1 and tells
 them1 on this occasion1 ,i am afraid of
 you1 lest ,i have bestowed on you      
labour in vain1 chap4 iv4 #i1 #aj1 #aa4 
so that what was a duty and a privilege 
in one age of the church1 and enjoined  
with the greatest strictness1 and       
severest punishments on those that      
neglected it1 is forbid1 as a sin in    

another age thereof1 without the least  
shadow of contradiction between those   
scriptures1 which either enjoin or      
forbid it3 thus1 when our ,saviour first
 sent his twelve disciples to preach the
 gospel1 he commanded them1 ,not to go  
in the way of the ,gentiles1 ,matt4 x4  
#e4 to wit1 so long as he was here upon 
earth1 or till they had finished their  
ministry among the ,jews1 to whom the   
word was first to be preached2 but      
afterwards1 when the gospel was to be   
spread throughout the world1 he gave    
them a commission to preach the gospel  
to all nations1 chap4 xxviii4 #ai4 which
 accordingly they did1 as apprehending  
there was no contradiction between the  
former prohibition and the present      
command4#da  ,,iv4 ,the divine authority
 of scripture may be further proved from
 the scope and design of the whole1     
which is to give all glory to ,god4  ,it
 may be observed1 concerning the        
scripture1 that the advancing the divine
 perfections1 and debasing the creature1

 is the great end designed by ,god in   
giving it2 and we find that whatever    
doctrine is laid down therein1 this end 
is still pursued4 ,now                  
scripture-doctrines are designed to     
advance the glory of ,god1 either       
directly or by consequence4  #a4 ,as to 
the former of these1 the scripture      
abounds with instances1 in which ,god is
 adored or set forth1 as the object of  
adoration1 that is1 as having all divine
 perfections1 and as doing every thing  
becoming himself as a ,god of glory3    
thus he is described herein1 as the     
,lord most high and terrible1 a great   
,king over all the earth1 ,psal4 xlvii4 
#b4 and glorious in holiness1 fearful in
 praises1 doing wonders1 ,exod4 xv4 #aa4
 and as the true ,god1 the living ,god1 
and an everlasting ,king1 ,jer4 x4 #aj4 
and as the great and dreadful ,god1     
keeping the covenant and mercy to them  
that love him1 and to them that keep his
 commandments1 ,dan4 ix4 #d4 and it is  
also said1 ,thine1 ,o ,lord1 is the     

greatness1 and the power1 and the glory1
 and the victory1 and the majesty2 for  
all that is in the heaven1 and in the   
earth is thine3 thine is the kingdom1 ,o
 ,lord1 and thou art exalted as ,head   
over all1 #a ,chron4 xxix4 #aa4 ,these1 
and such-like adorable perfections1 are 
not only occasionally ascribed to ,god  
in scripture1 but every part thereof    
displays his glory in a manner so       
illustrious1 as gives ground to         
conclude1 that the great design of it is
 to raise in us becoming apprehensions  
of him1 and to put us upon adoring and  
worshipping him as ,god4  #b4 ,it may1  
by a just consequence1 be said to give  
all the glory to him1 as it represents  
the emptiness1 and even nothingness of  
all creatures1 when compared with him1  
and hereby recommends him1 as all in    
all3 when it speaks of the best of      
creatures1 as veiling their faces before
 him1 as acknowledging themselves       
unworthy to behold his glory1 and as    
deriving all their happiness from him2  

and when it speaks of man as a sinful   
guilty creature1 expecting all from him1
 and depending upon him for grace       
sufficient for him2 and when it speaks  
of ,god1 as the author and finisher of  
faith1 in whom alone there is hope of   
obtaining mercy and forgiveness1 grace  
here1 and glory hereafter1 and lays down
 this as the sum of all religion2 we    
must certainly conclude that its design 
is to give all glory to ,god4  ,now let 
us consider the force of this argument1 
or how the general scope and design of  
scripture1 to give all glory to ,god1   
proves its divine authority4 ,had it    
been the invention and contrivance of   
men1 or if the writers thereof had      
pretended they had received it by       
inspiration from ,god1 and it had not   
been so1 then the great design thereof  
would have been to advance themselves2  
and they would certainly have laid down 
such a scheme of religion therein1 as is
 agreeable to the corrupt appetites and 
inclinations of men1 or would tend to   

indulge and dispense with sin1 and not  
such an one as sets forth the holiness  
of ,god1 and his infinite displeasure   
against it4  ,and as for salvation1 the 
penmen of scripture1 had they not been  
inspired1 would certainly have          
represented it as very easy to be       
attained1 and not as a work of such     
difficulty as it really is2 and they    
would also have propagated such a       
religion1 as supposes the creature not  
dependent on1 or beholden to ,god for   
this salvation1 and then the scripture  
would have detracted from his glory2 but
 since1 on the other hand1 its general  
design is to give him the glory due to  
his name1 this is a convincing evidence 
of its divine original4  ,from the      
general design of scripture1 as being to
 give all glory to ,god1 we may infer1  
7#a47 ,that whenever we read the word of
 ,god1 we ought to have this great      
design in view1 and so not consider it  
barely as an historical narrative of    
things done1 but should observe how the 

glory of the divine perfections is set  
forth1 that hereby we may be induced to 
ascribe greatness to ,god1 and admire   
him for all the discoveries which he    
makes of himself therein4  7#b47 ,the   
scriptures' general design should be a  
rule to us in the whole of our          
conversation1 wherein we ought to give  
all glory to ,god3 whatever we receive  
or expect from him1 or whatever duty we 
engage in1 let us act as those1 that not
 only take the scripture for our rule1  
but its general scope and design for our
 example4  7#c47 ,whatsoever doctrines  
are pretended to be deduced from1 or to 
contain the sense of scripture1 which1  
notwithstanding1 tend to depreciate the 
divine perfections1 these are to be     
rejected1 as contrary to its general    
scope and design4  ,v4 ,another argument
 may be taken from the character of the 
penmen of scripture2 and here let them  
be supposed to be either good men1 or   
bad3 if good men1 then they could not   
give themselves such a liberty to impose

 upon the world1 and pretend that they  
received that from ,god1 which they did 
not2 and if they were bad men1 they     
neither could nor would have laid down  
such doctrines1 as centre in1 lead the  
soul to ,god1 and tend to promote       
self-denial1 and advance his glory in   
all things2 since this is to suppose the
 worst of men to have the best ends1    
which we can never do2 for1 as our      
,saviour says1 ,matt4 vii4 #af4 ,do men 
gather grapes of thorns1 or figs of     
thistles8 ,he is speaking of false      
prophets1 who were to be known by their 
fruits2 wicked men will have bad        
designs1 or are like the corrupt tree1  
which bringeth forth evil fruit4 ,but1  
on the other hand1 if persons deliver   
that which carries in it such internal  
evidence of divine truth1 and have such 
a noble design in view1 as the securing 
the honour of ,god1 and promoting his   
interest in the world1 these must       
certainly be approved of by him1 and    
concluded to be good men2 and if so1    

then they would not impose a fallacy on 
the world1 or say that the scripture was
 given by divine inspiration1 when they 
knew it to be otherwise4  ,if the       
scriptures are not the word of ,god1    
then the penmen thereof have miserably  
deceived1 not a small number of         
credulous people1 but the whole         
,christian world1 among whom we must    
allow that many were judicious1 and such
 as would not easily suffer themselves  
to be imposed on2 to which we may add1  
that others to whom the gospel was      
preached1 were exasperated enemies to   
those that preached it1 and particularly
 to these inspired penmen of scripture1 
and greatly prejudiced against their    
doctrine1 and therefore would use all   
possible endeavours to detect the       
fallacy1 if there had been any2 so that 
it was morally impossible for them to   
deceive the world in this instance1 or  
make them believe that the scriptures   
were the word of ,god1 if there had not 
been the strongest evidence to convince 

them of it1 which they could not        
withstand or gainsay4  ,but1 that we may
 enter a little further into the        
character of the penmen of scripture1   
let it be observed1  #a4 ,that they     
could not be charged by their enemies   
with immoral practices1 or notorious    
crimes1 which might weaken the credit of
 the truths they delivered3 they were1  
indeed1 compassed about with like       
infirmities with other men2 for it is   
not to be supposed1 that1 because they  
were inspired1 therefore they were      
perfectly free from sin2 since that does
 not necessarily follow from their      
having this privilege conferred upon    
them2 yet their enemies themselves could
 find no great blemishes in their       
character1 which might justly prejudice 
them against their writings1 or that    
might render them unfit to be employed  
in this great work of transmitting the  
mind of ,god to the world4  #b4 ,they   
appear to be men of great integrity1 not
 declining to discover and aggravate    

their own faults1 as well as the sins of
 others4 ,thus ,moses1 though a man of  
great meekness1 as to his general       
character1 discovers his own failing1 in
 repining1 and being uneasy1 because of 
the untoward and turbulent spirit of the
 people1 over whom he was appointed a   
governor1 when he represents himself as 
complaining to ,god2 ,wherefore hast    
thou afflicted thy servant8 and         
wherefore have ,i not found favour in   
thy sight1 that thou layest the burden  
of all this people upon me8 ,have ,i    
conceived all this people8 ,have ,i     
begotten them1 that thou shouldest say  
unto me1 ,carry them in thy bosom8      
,whence should ,i have flesh to give    
unto all this people8 ,i am not able to 
bear this people alone1 because it is   
too heavy for me4 ,and if thou deal thus
 with me1 kill me1 ,i pray thee1 out of 
hand1 if ,i have found favour in thy    
sight2 and let me not see mine own      
wretchedness1 ,numb4 xi4 #aa-ae4 ,this  
was certainly a very great blemish in   

the character of this excellent man2 but
 he does not attempt to conceal it2 nor 
does he omit to mention his backwardness
 to comply with the call of ,god1 to    
deliver his brethren out of their       
bondage in ,egypt1 but tells us what    
poor trifling excuses he made2 as when  
he says1 ,exod4 iv4 #aj1 #ac1 #ai4 ,o   
,lord1 ,i am not eloquent2 and when ,god
 answers him1 by promising to supply    
this defect1 he obstinately persists in 
declining this service1 and says1 ,o my 
,lord1 send1 ,i pray thee1 by the hand  
of him whom thou wilt send2 that is1 by 
any one but myself2 so that he who      
expressed such courage and resolution   
forty years before in defending the     
oppressed ,israelites1 and supposed that
 his brethren would have understood that
 ,god1 by his hand1 would deliver them1 
but they understood it not1 ,acts vii4  
#bd1 #be4 when ,god really called him to
 deliver them1 he obstinately refused to
 obey2 and1 indeed1 whatever excuses he 
might make1 the main thing that lay at  

the bottom was fear1 and therefore1 as a
 further inducement to it1 ,god tells   
him1 ,the men were dead that sought his 
life4 ,all this he says concerning      
himself2 and elsewhere he tells us1     
,deut4 xxxii4 #ea1 #eb4 compared with   
,numb4 xx4 #aj1 #aa1 #ab4 and ,deut4    
iii4 #be-bg4 that he did not sanctify   
the name of ,god in the eyes of the     
people1 but spake unadvisedly with his  
lips2 and that1 for this1 ,god would not
 let him go into the land of ,canaan1   
though he earnestly desired it4  ,and   
the prophet ,jeremiah tells us1 how he  
was ready to faint1 and1 in a murmuring 
way1 curses the day of his birth1 ,jer4 
xx4 #g1 #h1 #ad1 #ae1 #af4 and seems    
almost determined not to make mention of
 ,god1 nor speak any more in his name1  
because he had been put in the stocks by
 ,pashur1 and was derided and mocked by 
others1 who were1 indeed1 below his     
notice4  ,and ,david discovered his own 
sin1 though it was a very scandalous    
one1 in the matter of ,uriah1 ,psal4 li4

 the title1 compared with ver4 #ad4 and 
prays1 ,deliver me from blood           
guiltiness2 which is a confession of his
 being guilty of murder4  ,the apostles 
also discover their infirmities4 ,thus  
,paul discovers his furious temper1 in  
persecuting the church1 before his      
conversion1 and ranks himself amongst   
the chief of sinners1 #a ,tim4 i4 #ac1  
#ae4 ,and how willing is ,matthew to let
 the world know1 that1 before his       
conversion1 he was a publican3 thus he  
characterises himself1 ,matt4 x4 #c4 and
 says1 chap4 ix4 #i4 that when ,christ  
called him1 he sat at the receipt of    
custom1 though the publicans were       
reckoned among the vilest of men for    
extortion1 and other crimes1 and were   
universally hated by the ,jews4         
,moreover as the penmen of scripture    
expose their own crimes1 so they do     
those of their nearest and dearest      
friends and relatives1 which carnal     
policy would have inclined them to      
conceal4 ,thus ,moses tells us how      

,aaron his brother made the golden calf1
 and so was the encourager and promoter 
of the people's idolatry2 that it was he
 that bid them break off the golden     
ear-rings1 which he received at their   
hand1 whereof he made a molten calf1 and
 then built an altar before it1 ,exod4  
xxxii4 #b-e4 ,though the ,jewish        
historian#db was so politic1 as to      
conceal this thing1 for the honour of   
his own nation2 and therefore when he   
tells us1 that ,moses went up into the  
mount to receive the law1 he says       
nothing of the scandalous crime1 which  
the people were guilty of at the foot of
 the mountain at the same time4         
,moreover1 as they do not conceal their 
sins1 so they sometimes declare the     
meanness of their extraction1 which     
shewed that they did not design to have 
honour from men4 ,thus ,amos tells us1  
,amos i4 #a4 ,he was among the herdmen  
of ,tekoa3 and that he was not bred up  
in the schools of the prophets1 which he
 intends1 when he styles himself1 no    

prophet1 neither a prophet's son1 chap4 
vii4 #ad4  ,and the evangelists         
occasionally tell the world how they    
were fisher-men1 when called to be      
,christ's disciples1 and so not bred up 
in the schools of learning among the    
,jews4#dc  #c4 ,they were very far from 
being crafty or designing men2 neither  
did they appear to be men that were able
 to manage an imposture of this nature1 
or frame a new scheme of religion1 and1 
at the same time1 make the world believe
 that it was from ,god4 ,for1  7#a47    
,none that read the scriptures can find 
any appearance of design in the penmen  
thereof1 to advance themselves or       
families4 ,moses1 indeed1 had the burden
 of government1 but he did not affect   
the pomp and splendor of a king2 neither
 did he make any provision for his      
family1 so as to advance them to great  
honours in the world1 which it was in   
his power to have done3 the laws he     
gave1 rendered those of his own tribe1  
to wit1 that of ,levi1 incapable of1 and

 not designed for kingly government2 and
 the highest honour of the priesthood1  
which was fixed in that tribe1 was      
conferred on his brother's children1 not
 his own4  7#b47 ,the prophets were very
 few of them great men in the world1 not
 advanced to great places in the        
government2 the esteem and reputation   
they had among the people at any time1  
was only for their integrity1 and the   
honour conferred on them by ,god2 and   
the apostles were plain men1 who drove  
on no design to gain riches and honours 
from those to whom they preached the    
gospel2 but1 on the other hand1 they    
expected nothing but poverty1 reproach1 
imprisonment1 and1 at last1 to die a    
violent death3 therefore1 how can it be 
supposed that they were subtle designing
 men1 who had some worldly advantage in 
view8 ,it is plain that they had no     
design but to do what ,god commanded1   
and to communicate what they had        
received from him1 and shunned not to   
declare the whole counsel of ,god1      

whatever it cost them4 ,the apostle     
,paul was so far from endeavouring to   
enrich himself by preaching the gospel1 
that he tells the church1 ,i seek not   
your's1 but you1 #b ,cor4 xii4 #ad4 and 
how he was fortified against the        
afflictions1 which he foresaw would     
attend his ministry1 when he says1      
,philip1 iv4 #aa1 #ab4 ,i have learned  
in whatsoever state ,i am1 therewith to 
be content4 ,i know how to be abased1   
and ,i know how to abound1 to be full1  
and to be hungry1 to abound and to      
suffer want3 and he was not only content
 to bear afflictions1 but1 when called  
to it1 he professes himself to take     
pleasure in reproach1 in necessities1 in
 persecutions1 in distresses1 for       
,christ's sake1 #b ,cor4 xii4 #aj4      
,hitherto we have proved1 that the      
penmen of scripture were men of such a  
character1 that they would not          
designedly impose on mankind4 ,but some 
will say1 might they not be imposed on  
themselves1 and think they were divinely

 inspired1 when they were not8  ,to this
 it may be answered1 that if they were  
deceived or imposed on themselves1 when 
they thought they received the scripture
 by divine inspiration1 this must       
proceed from one of these two causes3   
either1  #a4 ,they took what was the    
result of a heated fancy1 a strong      
imagination1 or raised affections for   
inspiration1 as some of our modern      
enthusiasts have done1 who have prefaced
 their warnings1 as they call them1     
with1 ,thus saith the ,lord1 c4 when the
 ,lord did not speak by them4 ,and the  
deists have the same notion of the      
prophets and inspired penmen of         
scripture1 and esteem their writings no 
farther than as they contain the law of 
nature1 or those doctrines that are     
self-evident1 or might have been        
invented by the reason of man2 and as   
such they receive them1 without any     
regard to divine inspiration4 ,or1  #b4 
,if the inspired penmen of scripture    
were otherwise imposed on1 it must be by

 a diabolic inspiration1 of which1 in   
other cases1 the world has had various  
instances1 when ,satan is said 7to use  
the apostle's words7 to transform       
himself into an angel of light1 #b ,cor4
 xi4 #ad4 or has been suffered to       
deceive his followers1 not only by      
putting forth signs and lying wonders1  
but impressing their minds with strong  
delusions1 whereby they have believed a 
lie1 #b ,thess4 ii4 #i1 #aa4 as         
supposing it to proceed from divine     
inspiration2 and1 to give countenance   
thereto1 has produced such violent      
agitations1 tremblings1 or distortions  
in their bodies1 as have seemed         
preternatural1 not much unlike those    
with which the heathen oracles were     
delivered of old1 which were called by  
some1 a divine fury2 but this cannot1   
with any shadow of reason1 be applied to
 the inspired writers1 therefore they   
were not imposed on4  #a4 ,they did not 
mistake their own fancies for divine    
revelation4  ,to suppose that they did  

so1 is not only to conclude that all    
revealed religion is a delusion2 but    
that the church in all ages1 and amongst
 them the wisest and best of men1 have  
been enthusiasts1 and all their hope1   
founded on this revelation1 has been no 
better than a vain dream4 ,but it is one
 thing to assert1 and another thing to  
prove2 and because they who take this   
liberty to reproach the scriptures1     
pretend not to support their charge by  
argument1 it might seem less necessary  
to make a reply3 however1 that our faith
 may be established1 we shall briefly   
consider this objection4 ,therefore1    
7#a47 ,this charge is either brought    
against all that ever spake or wrote by 
divine inspiration1 or only against some
 of them2 if only some of them have been
 thus deluded1 we might demand          
particular instances of any of the      
inspired writers1 who are liable to this
 charge1 together with the reasons      
thereof4 ,if it be said that some of    
them were men of less wisdom1 or had not

 those advantages to improve their      
natural abilities1 as others have had2  
this will not be sufficient to support  
their cause1 since ,god can make use of 
what instruments he pleases1 and endow  
them with wisdom in an extraordinary    
way1 to qualify them for the service he 
calls them to1 whereby the glory of his 
sovereignty more appears4 ,if he pleases
 to chuse the foolish things of the     
world1 to confound the wise1 that no    
flesh shall glory in his presence1 #a   
,cor4 i4 #bg1 #bi4 shall he for this be 
called to an account by vain man8 ,and  
it is certain1 that some who have had   
this gift1 have1 as the consequence     
thereof1 been endowed with such wisdom1 
as has tended to confound their most    
malicious enemies4 ,but we will suppose 
that they1 who bring this charge against
 the inspired writers1 will not pretend 
to single out any among them1 but accuse
 them all in general of enthusiasm2 and 
if this charge be grounded on the vain  
pretensions of some to inspiration in   

this age1 in which we have no ground to 
expect this divine gift1 will it follow1
 that1 because some are deluded1        
therefore divine revelation1 supported  
by incontestable evidence1 was a        
delusion8 ,or if it be said1 that some  
of old1 whom we conclude to have been   
inspired1 were called enthusiasts1 as   
,jehu1 and his fellow-soldiers concluded
 the prophet to be1 who was sent to     
anoint him king1 #b ,kings ix4 #aa4     
nothing can be inferred from thence1 but
 that there were1 in all ages1 some     
,deists1 who have treated things sacred 
with reproach and ridicule4  7#b47 ,but 
if this charge be pretended to be       
supported by any thing that has the     
least appearance of an argument1 it will
 be alleged1 in defence thereof1 that it
 is impossible for a person certainly to
 know himself to be inspired at any     
time2 if that could be proved indeed1 it
 would be something to the purpose3 and 
inasmuch as we are obliged to assert the
 contrary1 it will be demanded1 how it  

might be known that a person was under  
inspiration1 or what are the certain    
marks by which we may conclude that the 
inspired writers were not mistaken in   
this matter8 ,i confess1 it is somewhat 
difficult to determine this question1   
especially since inspiration has so long
 ceased in the world2 but we shall      
endeavour to answer it1 by laying down  
the following propositions4  #a4 ,if    
some powerful and impressive influences 
of the ,spirit of ,god on the souls of  
men1 in the more common and ordinary    
methods of divine providence and grace1 
have been not only experienced1 but     
their truth and reality discerned by    
them1 who have been favoured therewith1 
so that without pretending to           
inspiration1 they had sufficient reason 
to conclude that they were divine2      
certainly when ,god was pleased to      
converse with men in such a way1 as that
 which we call inspiration1 it was not  
impossible for them to conclude that    
they were inspired2 which is an argument

 taken from the less to the greater4    
#b4 ,there were some particular         
instances1 in which it seemed absolutely
 necessary1 that they who received      
intimations from ,god in such a way1    
should have infallible evidence that    
they were not mistaken1 especially when 
some great duty was to be performed by  
them1 pursuant to a divine command1 in  
which it would be a dangerous thing for 
them to be deceived2 as in the case of  
,abraham's offering up his son2 and     
,jacob's going with his family into     
,egypt1 which was a forsaking the       
promised land1 an exposing them to the  
loss of their religion1 through the     
influence or example of those with whom 
they went to sojourn2 and it might be   
uncertain whether they should ever      
return or no2 therefore he needed a     
divine warrant1 enquired of ,god with   
respect to this matter1 and doubtless   
had some way to be infallibly assured   
concerning the divine will relating     
hereunto1 ,gen4 xlvi4 #b1 #c1 #d4       

,moreover1 our ,saviour's disciples1    
leaving their families1 going into the  
most remote parts of the world to       
propagate the gospel1 which they had    
received in this way1 evinces the       
necessity of their knowing themselves to
 be under a divine inspiration3 and if  
they had been deceived in this matter1  
would they not have been reproved for it
 by him1 whose intimations they are     
supposed to have followed in the        
simplicity of their hearts8  #c4 ,as to 
the way by which ,god might convince    
them1 beyond all manner of doubt1 that  
he spake to them who were under divine  
inspiration1 there are various ways1    
that might have been taken1 and probably
 were4 ,as1  7#a47 ,sometimes           
extraordinary impressions were made on  
the soul of the prophet1 arising from   
the immediate access of ,god to it3 of  
this we have frequent instances in      
scripture2 as in that particular vision 
which ,daniel saw1 which occasioned his 
comeliness to be turned into corruption1

 and his having no strength1 ,dan4 x4   
#h4 and the vision of our ,saviour1     
which ,john saw1 the effect whereof was 
his falling at his feet as dead1 ,rev4  
i4 #ag4 and many other instances of the 
like nature might be referred to1 which 
were1 at least1 antecedent to           
inspiration1 and the result of the      
access of ,god to the soul1 which       
occasioned such a change in nature1 as  
could not but be discerned after the    
person had a little recovered himself4  
,but if it be said1 that such an effect 
as this might be produced by an infernal
 spirit1 the answer ,i would give to    
that is1 that supposing this possible1  
yet it must be proved that ,god would   
suffer it1 especially in such an        
instance1 in which his own cause was so 
much concerned2 and besides1 it is not  
improbable that the soul of the prophet 
was sometimes brought into such a frame 
of spirit1 as resembled the heavenly    
state1 as much as it is possible for any
 one to attain to in this world2 such an

 intercourse as this made ,jacob say1   
,this is no other but the house of ,god1
 and this the gate of heaven4 ,gen4     
xxviii4 #ag4  7#b47 ,as this converse   
with ,god contained in it something     
supernatural and very extraordinary in  
the effects thereof1 so it is not       
improbable that ,god might work         
miracles1 of various kinds1 to confirm  
the prophet's belief as to this matter1 
though they are not particularly        
recorded in all the instances in which  
we read of inspiration2 and this would  
be as full an evidence as could be      
desired4  ,if it be objected1 that it is
 not probable that miracles were always 
wrought to give this conviction3 ,i     
would not be too peremptory in          
pretending to determine this matter1 it 
is sufficient to say they were sometimes
 wrought2 but1 however1 there were1     
doubtless1 some other concurring        
circumstances1 which put the thing out  
of all dispute2 for not to suppose this1
 is to reflect on the wisdom and        

goodness of ,god1 as well as to         
depreciate one of the greatest honours  
which he has been pleased to confer upon
 men4 ,thus we have considered the      
unreasonableness of the charge brought  
against the inspired penmen of          
scripture1 as though they were imposed  
on1 by mistaking their enthusiastic     
fancies for divine revelation4 ,we      
proceed to consider1  #b4 ,that they    
were not imposed upon by the devil1 as  
mistaking some impressions made by him  
on their minds1 for divine revelation3  
this is evident2 for  #a4 ,divine       
inspiration was not only occasional1 or 
conferred in some particular instances1 
with a design to amuse the world1 or    
confirm some doctrines which were       
altogether new1 impure1 and subversive  
of the divine glory in some ages        
thereof1 when men were universally      
degenerate1 and had cast off ,god and   
religion2 but it was continued in the   
church for many ages1 when they         
evidently appeared to be the peculiar   

objects of the divine regard2 and       
therefore1  #b4 ,god would never have   
suffered the devil1 in such             
circumstances of time and things1 to    
have deluded the world1 and that in such
 a degree1 as that he should be the     
author of that rule of faith1 which he  
designed to make use of to propagate his
 interest therein2 so that his people   
should be beholden to their grand enemy 
for those doctrines which were          
transmitted by inspiration4  #c4 ,satan 
would have acted against his own        
interest1 should he have inspired men to
 propagate a religion1 which has a      
direct tendency to overthrow his own    
kingdom2 in which instance1 as our      
,saviour observes1 ,his kingdom would be
 divided against itself1 ,matth4 xii4   
#be1 #bf4 ,as it is contrary to the     
wisdom and holiness of ,god to suffer   
it1 so ,satan could never have done it  
out of choice1 and he has too much      
subtilty to do it through mistake2      
therefore the inspired writers could not

 be imposed on by any infernal spirit4  
,and to this we may add1 that this could
 not be done by a good angel2 for if    
such a one had pretended herein to have 
imitated1 or as it were1 usurped the    
throne of ,god1 he would not have       
deserved the character of a good angel2 
therefore it follows1 that they could   
not have been inspired by any but ,god  
himself4  ,having considered that the   
penmen of scripture have faithfully     
transmitted to us what they received by 
divine inspiration1 we must now take    
notice of some things which are alleged 
by those who endeavour not only to      
depreciate1 but overthrow the divine    
authority of the sacred writings1 when  
they allege that they were only         
inspired1 as to the substance or general
 idea of what they committed to writing1
 and were left to express the things    
contained therein in their own words1   
which1 as they suppose1 hath occasioned 
some contradictions1 which they pretend 
to be found therein1 arising from the   

treachery of their memories1 or the     
unfitness of their style1 to express    
what had been communicated to them4     
,this they found on the difference of   
style observed in the various books     
thereof2 as some are written in an      
elegant and lofty style1 others clouded 
with mystical and dark expressions2 some
 are more plain1 others are laid down in
 an argumentative way2 all which        
differing ways of speaking they suppose 
agreeable to the character of the       
inspired writers thereof3 so that1      
though the matter contains in it        
something divine1 the words and phrases1
 in which it is delivered can hardly be 
reckoned so4  ,and as for some books of 
scripture1 especially those that are    
historical1 they suppose that these     
might be written without inspiration1   
and that some of them were taken from   
the histories which were then in being1 
or some occurrences which were observed 
in the days in which the writers lived1 
and were generally known and believed in

 those times1 to which they more        
immediately relate4  ,and as for those  
books of scripture1 which are more      
especially doctrinal1 they suppose that 
there are many mistakes in them1 but    
that these respect only doctrines of    
less importance2 whereas the providence 
of ,god has prevented them from making  
any gross or notorious blunders1        
subversive of natural religion2 so that 
the scripture may be deemed sufficient  
to answer the general design thereof1 in
 propagating religion in the world1     
though we are not obliged to conclude   
that it is altogether free from those   
imperfections that will necessarily     
attend such a kind of inspiration4      
,answ4 ,if this account of scripture be 
true1 it would hardly deserve to be     
called the word of ,god2 therefore1 that
 we may vindicate it from this          
aspersion1 let it be considered1  #a4   
,as to the different styles observed in 
the various books thereof1 it does not  
follow from hence1 that the penmen were 

left to deliver what they received1 in  
their own words2 for certainly it was no
 difficult matter for the ,spirit of    
,god to furnish the writers thereof with
 words1 as well as matter1 and to       
inspire them to write in a style        
agreeable to what they used in other    
cases1 whereby they might better        
understand and communicate the sense    
thereof to those to whom it was first   
given2 as if a person should send a     
message by a child1 it is an easy matter
 to put such words into his mouth as are
 agreeable to his common way of         
speaking1 without leaving the matter to 
him to express it in his own words3 thus
 the inspired writers might be furnished
 with words by the ,holy ,ghost1 adapted
 to that style which they commonly used1
 without supposing they were left to    
themselves to clothe the general ideas  
with their own words4#dd  #b4 ,as to    
what is said concerning the historical  
parts of scripture1 that it is not      
necessary for them to have been         

transmitted to us by divine inspiration1
 it may be replied1 that these1 as well 
as other parts thereof1 were written for
 our learning1 ,rom4 xv4 #d4 so that    
what is excellent in the character of   
persons1 is designed for our imitation2 
their blemishes and defects1 to humble  
us under a sense of the universal       
corruption of human nature2 and the evil
 consequences thereof1 to awaken our    
fears1 and dehort us from exposing      
ourselves to the same judgments which   
were inflicted as the punishment of sin3
 and the account we have of the         
providential dealing of ,god with his   
church1 in the various ages thereof1 is 
of use to put us upon admiring and      
adoring the divine perfections1 as much 
as the doctrinal parts of scripture2 and
 therefore it is necessary that we have 
the greatest certainty that the inspired
 writers have given us a true narration 
of things1 and consequently that the    
words1 as well as the matter1 are truly 
divine4  #c4 ,when1 that they may a     

little palliate the matter1 they allow  
that the inspired writers1 though left  
to the weakness of their memory1 and the
 impropriety of their style1 were1      
notwithstanding1 preserved1 by the      
interposure of divine providence1 from  
committing mistakes in matters of the   
highest importance2 it may be replied1  
,that it will be very difficult for them
 to assign what doctrines are of        
greater1 and what of less importance1 in
 all the instances thereof1 or wherein  
providence has interposed1 to prevent   
their running into mistakes1 and when it
 has not2 so that we are still in an    
uncertainty what doctrines are delivered
 to us1 as they were received by        
inspiration1 and what are misrepresented
 by the penmen of scripture2 and we     
shall be ready to conclude1 that in     
every section or paragraph thereof1 some
 things may be true1 and others false2  
some doctrines divine and others human1 
while we are left without any certain   
rule to distinguish one from the other1 

and accordingly we cannot be sure that  
any part of it is the word of ,god2 so  
that such a revelation as this would be 
of no real service to the church1 and   
our faith would be founded in the       
wisdom1 or rather weakness of men1 and  
our religion1 depending on it1 could not
 be truly divine2 so that this method of
 reasoning is1 to use the word          
inspiration1 but to destroy all the     
valuable ends thereof4  ,,vi4 ,another  
argument1 to prove the scriptures to be 
the word of ,god1 may be taken from     
their antiquity and wonderful           
preservation for so many ages2 this     
appears more remarkable1 if we consider1
  #a4 ,that many other writings1 of much
 later date1 have been lost1 and nothing
 more is known of them1 but that there  
were once such books in the world2 and  
books might more easily be lost1 when   
there were no other but written copies  
of them1 and these procured with much   
expense and difficulty1 and consequently
 their number proportionably small4  #b4

 ,that the scripture should be          
preserved1 notwithstanding all the      
malice of its avowed enemies1 as        
prompted hereunto by ,satan1 whose      
kingdom is overthrown by it4 ,had it    
been in his power1 he would certainly   
have utterly abolished and destroyed it2
 but yet it has been preserved unto this
 day1 which discovers a wonderful hand  
of providence2 and would ,god so        
remarkably have taken care of a book1   
that pretends to advance itself by      
bearing the character of a divinely     
inspired writing1 if it had not been    
really so8 ,which leads us to the next  
argument1 containing an advice1 which is
 more convincing than any other2 or1 at 
least1 if this be added to those        
arguments which have been already given1
 ,i hope it will more abundantly appear 
that the scriptures are the word of     
,god2 since1  ,,vii4 ,the divine        
authority thereof is attested by ,god   
himself2 and if1 in other cases1 we     
receive the witness of men1 surely1 as  

the apostle observes1 the witness of    
,god is greater1 #a ,john v4 #i4  ,now  
the testimony of ,god to the authority  
of scripture is twofold2 ,first1        
,extraordinary2 ,secondly1 ,ordinary2   
the extraordinary testimony of ,god is  
that of miracles2 the ordinary is taken 
from the use which he makes of it1 in   
convincing and converting sinners1 and  
building up in holiness and comfort1    
through faith1 unto salvation4  #a4 ,as 
to the former of these1 ,god has        
attested the truth hereof by miracles4  
,a miracle is an extraordinary divine   
work1 whereby something is produced1    
contrary to the common course and laws  
of nature3 thus the magicians confessed1
 that one of the miracles which ,moses  
wrought was the finger of ,god1 ,exod4  
viii4 #ai4 ,of these there are many     
undeniable instances recorded in        
scripture1 both in the ,old and ,new    
,testament2 and these being above the   
power of a creature1 and works peculiar 
to ,god1 they contain a divine testimony

 to the truth that is confirmed thereby1
 for the confirmation whereof an appeal 
was made to them4 ,now when we say that 
the divine authority of scripture was   
confirmed by miracles1 we mean1  7#a47  
,that ,god has wrought miracles to      
testify his approbation of most of the  
prophets and apostles1 who were the     
inspired writers thereof1 whereby their 
mission was declared to be divine2 and  
we cannot think that ,god1 who knows the
 hearts and secret designs of men1 would
 employ or send any to perform so great 
and important a work1 if he knew them to
 be disposed to deceive and impose on   
the world2 or that they would in any    
instance1 call that his word which they 
did not receive from him4 ,the reason   
why men sometimes employ unfaithful     
servants about their work is1 because   
they do not know them2 they never do it 
out of choice2 and therefore we cannot  
suppose that ,god1 who perfectly knows  
the hearts of men1 would do so2         
therefore1 having not only employed the 

penmen of scripture as his servants1 but
 confirmed their mission1 and testified 
his approbation of them1 by miracles1   
this is a ground of conviction to us    
that they would not have pretended the  
scriptures to be the word of ,god1 if   
they were not so4  ,now that miracles   
have been wrought for this end1 ,i      
think1 needs no proof2 for we are       
assured hereof1 not barely by the report
 of those prophets1 whose mission is    
supposed to have been confirmed thereby1
 but it was universally known and       
received in the church1 in those times1 
in which they were wrought1 and it is   
not pretended to be denied1 by its most 
inveterate enemies2 the truth hereof1   
viz4 that ,moses1 and several other of  
the prophets1 and our ,saviour1 and his 
apostles1 wrought miracles1 can hardly  
be reckoned a matter in controversy2 for
 it is a kind of scepticism to deny it3 
and it is certain1 that herein they     
appealed to ,god for the confirmation of
 their mission2 as ,elijah is said      

explicitly to have done1 when he prays  
to this effect2 ,lord ,god of ,abraham1 
,isaac1 and of ,israel1 let it be known 
this day that thou art ,god in ,israel1 
and that ,i am thy servant2 and that ,i 
have done all these things at thy word1 
#a ,kings xviii4 #cf4 and we read1 that 
,god answered him accordingly1 ,by the  
fire from heaven consuming the          
burnt-sacrifice1 c4 ver4 #ch4  7#b47    
,such appeals to ,god1 and answers from 
him1 have attained their end1 by giving 
conviction to those who were more       
immediately concerned2 this is evident  
from what is said2 in that the same     
prophet1 having had his request granted 
him1 when ,god wrought a miracle1 in    
raising the dead child to life1 the     
woman of ,zarephath confessed1 that by  
this she knew that he was a man of ,god1
 and that the word of the ,lord1 in his 
mouth1 was truth1 #a ,kings xvii4       
#ba-bd4 ,and it is not denied by the    
,jews1 the most irreconcileable enemies 
to ,christianity1 that what is related  

in the ,new ,testament1 concerning our  
,saviour's1 and his apostles1 working   
miracles1 was true in fact2 but the only
 thing denied by them is1 that this was 
a divine testimony1 or that they were   
wrought by the hand of ,god2 and        
therefore the common reproach which is  
cast on them is1 that they were wrought 
by magic art1 as the ,jews of old       
objected to our ,saviour1 that he cast  
out devils by ,beelzebub1 the prince of 
the devils1 ,matth4 xii4 #bd4 and his   
reply to them was unanswerable1 when he 
said1 that this objection would argue   
,satan divided against himself2         
intimating1 that he would never take    
such a method as this to overthrow the  
,christian religion1 which he could not 
but know was more conducive to the      
establishment of it1 than any other that
 could be used4  ,object4 #a4 ,but if it
 be objected1 that though miracles were 
wrought to confirm the mission of       
several of the prophets1 yet none were  
wrought to confirm the divine authority 

of the subject matter of the scriptures3
  ,answ4 ,to this it may be easily      
answered2 that it is sufficient1 if we  
can prove that ,god has given his       
testimony1 that he made choice of those 
prophets to declare his mind and will to
 the world2 and that he has accordingly 
deemed them fit to be credited1 and that
 they were not men liable to any        
suspicion of carrying on a design to    
deceive the world2 so that if ,god      
himself not only styles them holy men1  
as he does all the inspired writers in  
general1 when he says1 #b ,pet4 i4 #ba4 
,holy men of ,god spake as they were    
moved by the ,holy ,ghost1 but also     
wrought miracles to prove that they were
 his servants and messengers1 employed  
in this work2 this is as convincing a   
testimony1 as though every part of      
scripture wrote by them had been        
confirmed by a miracle4 ,besides1 it is 
not unreasonable to suppose1 that the   
church lived in those ages1 in which the
 various parts of scripture were        

written1 had some extraordinary proofs  
of their divine authority2 since1 in    
many of them1 miracles were very common1
 and1 at the same time that the penmen  
of scripture had the gift of            
inspiration1 others had1 what the       
apostle calls1 a discerning of spirits1 
#a ,cor4 xii4 #aj4 so that they were    
enabled1 by this means1 to know whether 
the prophet1 that pretended to          
inspiration1 was really inspired3 this1 
to me seems very probably1 the sense of 
the apostle1 when he says1 #a ,cor4 xiv4
 #cb4 ,the spirits of the prophets are  
subject to the prophets1 for he is      
discoursing before of prophets speaking 
by divine revelation1 and others judging
 thereof3 now if there was this         
extraordinary gift of discerning of     
spirits in the ages1 in which particular
 books of scripture were written1 they  
who were favoured herewith1 had a       
convincing testimony of the inspiration 
of the prophets and apostles1 from the  
same ,spirit by whom they were inspired1

 by which means the divine authority of 
scripture was infallibly known to them1 
and so imparted to others for their     
farther confirmation as to this matter4 
,object4 #b4 ,we are not now to expect  
miracles to confirm our faith1 as to the
 divine original of scripture2 therefore
 how can we be said to have a divine    
testimony4  ,answ4 ,as miracles are now 
ceased1 so such a method of confirming  
divine revelation is not necessary in   
all succeeding ages3 ,god did not design
 to make that dispensation too common1  
nor to continue the evidence it affords1
 when there was no necessity thereof4   
,thus when the scribes and ,pharisees   
came to our ,saviour1 desiring to see a 
sign from him1 ,matt1 xii4 #ch4 he would
 not comply with their unreasonable     
demand2 and the apostle ,paul takes     
notice of humour prevailing among the   
,jews in his time1 who then required a  
sign1 #a ,cor1 i1 #bb4 but1 instead of  
complying with them herein1 he refers   
them to the success of the gospel1 which

 is the power of ,god to salvation1 as  
the only testimony to the truth thereof 
that was then needful2 and our ,saviour1
 in the parable1 intimates1 that the    
truth of divine revelation has been so  
well attested1 that they who believe not
 ,moses and the prophets1 would not be  
persuaded1 though one rose from the     
dead1 ,luke xvi1 #ca4 ,therefore1 since 
we have such a convincing evidence      
hereof1 it is an unreasonable degree of 
obstinacy to refuse to believe the      
divine authority of scripture1 merely   
because miracles are not now wrought2   
since1 to demand a farther proof of it1 
is no other than a tempting ,god1 or    
disowning that what he has done is      
sufficient for our conviction2 and to   
say1 that for want of this evidence1 our
 faith is not founded on a divine       
testimony1 is nothing to the purpose1   
unless it could be proved that it is not
 founded on such a testimony formerly   
given1 the contrary to which is         
undeniably evident1 since we have this  

truth confirmed by the confession of the
 church in all the ages thereof1 and    
therefore we have as much ground to     
believe this matter1 as though miracles 
were wrought every day for its          
confirmation4 ,this will farther appear1
 if we consider the abundant ground we  
have to conclude that ,god has formerly 
given such a testimony to his word2     
which leads us to enquire how far the   
testimony of the church1 in all the ages
 thereof1 is to be regarded4  ,the      
church has given its suffrage1          
throughout all the ages thereof1 to the 
divine original of scripture1 how much  
soever it has perverted the sense of it4
 ,that this argument may be set in a    
true light1 let us consider what the    
,papists say to this matter1 when they  
appeal to the church1 to establish the  
divine authority of scripture2 and      
wherein we differ from them2 and how far
 its testimony is to be regarded1 as a  
means for our farther conviction4 ,we   
are far from asserting1 with them1 that 

the church's testimony alone is to be   
regarded1 without the internal evidence 
of the divine authority of scripture1 as
 though that were the principal1 if not 
the only foundation on which our faith  
is built4 ,if1 indeed1 they could prove 
the infallibility of the church1 we     
should more readily conclude the        
infallibility of its testimony2 but all 
their attempts of this nature are vain  
and trifling4  ,moreover1 we do not mean
 altogether the same thing by the church
 as they do1 when they intend by it a   
council convened together1 to decree and
 establish matters of faith1 by him whom
 they pretend to be the visible head    
thereof2 and so a majority of votes of a
 body of men1 every one of whom are     
liable to error1 must determine1 and1   
according to them1 give a divine        
sanction to our faith4 ,nor do we think 
that those1 whom they call the fathers  
of the church1 are to be any farther    
regarded1 than as they prove what they  
assert1 since there is scarce any error 

or absurdity1 but what some or other of 
them have given into4 ,we also          
distinguish between the churches        
testimony1 that the scripture was given 
by divine inspiration1 and the sense    
they give of many of its doctrines2 as  
to the latter of these1 it has given us 
ground enough to conclude1 that its     
judgment is not much to be depended     
upon2 however1 we find that1 in all     
ages1 it has given sufficient testimony 
to this truth1 that the scriptures are  
the word of ,god1 and that they have    
been proved to be so1 by the seal which 
,god has set thereunto1 to wit1 by the  
miracles that have been wrought to      
confirm it4 ,if therefore ,god has had a
 church in the world1 or a remnant whom 
he has preserved faithful2 and if their 
faith1 and all their religion1 and hope 
of salvation1 has been founded1 without 
the least exception1 on this truth1 that
 the scriptures are the word of ,god1 we
 cannot altogether set aside this       
argument4 ,but there is yet another1    

which we lay more stress on1 namely1 the
 use which ,god has made of it1 which is
 the second thing to be considered1 viz4
  #b4 ,his ordinary method of attesting 
this truth2 it appears therefore1 as is 
farther observed in this answer1 that   
the scriptures are the word of ,god1    
from their light and power to convince  
and convert sinners1 and to comfort and 
build up believers to salvation4 ,here  
let us consider1  #a4 ,that the work of 
conviction and conversion is1 and has   
been at all times1 experienced by those 
who have had any right or claim to      
salvation2 of which there have not only 
been various instances1 in all ages1 but
 the very being of the church1 which    
supposes and depends thereon1 is an     
undeniable proof of it4  #b4 ,as this   
work is truly divine1 so the scriptures 
have been the principal1 if not the only
 direct means1 by which it has been     
brought about2 so that we have never had
 any other rule1 or standard of faith1  
or revealed religion2 nor has the work  

of grace been ever begun1 or carried on1
 in the souls of any1 without it2 from  
whence it evidently appears1 that ,god  
makes use of it to propagate and advance
 his interest in the world1 and has     
given his church ground to expect his   
presence with it1 in all his ordinances1
 in which they are obliged to pay a due 
regard to scripture2 and1 in so doing1  
they have found that their expectation  
has not been in vain1 since ,god has1 by
 this means1 manifested himself to them1
 and made them partakers of spiritual   
privileges1 which have been the         
beginning of their salvation4  #c4 ,it  
cannot be supposed that ,god would make 
this use of his word1 and thereby put   
such an honour upon it1 had it been an  
imposture1 or borne the specious        
pretence of being instamped with his    
authority1 if it had not been so2 for   
that would be to give countenance to a  
lie1 which is contrary to the holiness  
of his nature4  ,thus we have considered
 the several arguments1 whereby the     

scripture appears to be the word of     
,god2 but since multitudes are not      
convinced hereby1 we have1 in the close 
of this answer1 an account of the means 
whereby ,christians come to a full      
persuasion as to this matter1 and that  
is the testimony of the ,spirit in the  
heart of man1 which is the next thing to
 be considered4 ,by this we do not      
understand that extraordinary impression
 which some of old have been favoured   
with1 who are said to have been moved by
 the ,holy ,ghost1 or to have had an    
extraordinary unction from the ,holy    
,one1 whereby they were led into the    
knowledge of divine truths1 in a way of 
supernatural illumination4 ,this we     
pretend not to1 since extraordinary     
gifts are ceased2 yet it does not follow
 from hence1 that the ,spirit does not  
now influence the minds of believers in 
an ordinary way1 whereby they are led   
into1 and their faith confirmed in all  
necessary truths1 and this in           
particular1 that the scriptures are the 

word of ,god2 for we may observe1 that  
no privilege referring to salvation1 was
 ever taken away1 but some other1       
subservient to the same end1 has been   
substituted in the room thereof2        
especially1 unless a notorious          
forfeiture has been made of it1 and the 
church1 by apostacy1 has excluded itself
 from an interest in the divine regard2 
but this cannot be said of the          
gospel-church in all the ages thereof1  
since extraordinary gifts have ceased2  
therefore we must conclude1 that being  
destitute of that way1 by which this    
truth was once confirmed1 believers     
have1 instead of it1 an inward          
conviction wrought by the ,spirit of    
,god1 agreeable to his present method of
 acting2 otherwise this present         
gospel-dispensation is1 in a very       
material circumstance1 much inferior to 
that in which ,god discovered his mind  
and will to man in an extraordinary way4
  ,but that we may explain what we mean 
by this inward testimony of the ,spirit 

in the hearts of men1 whereby they are  
fully persuaded that the scriptures are 
the word of ,god1 let it be considered1 
7#a47 ,that it is something more than   
barely a power1 or faculty of reasoning1
 to prove the scriptures to be divine1  
since that is common to all2 but this is
 a special privilege1 given to those who
 are hereby fully persuaded of this     
truth4 ,moreover1 there may be a power  
of reasoning1 and yet we may be mistaken
 in the exercise thereof2 and therefore 
this is not sufficient1 fully to        
persuade us that they are the word of   
,god1 and consequently something more   
than this is intended in this answer4   
7#b47 ,it is something short of         
inspiration2 therefore1 though the      
scripture was known to be the word of   
,god1 by the ,spirit of inspiration1 so 
long as that dispensation continued in  
the church1 yet that privilege being now
 ceased1 the internal testimony of the  
,spirit contains a lower degree of      
illumination1 which has nothing         

miraculous attending it1 and therefore  
falls short of inspiration4  7#c47 ,it  
is not an enthusiastic impulse1 or      
strong impression upon our minds1       
whereby we conclude a thing to be true1 
because we think it is so2 this we by no
 means allow of1 since our own fancies  
are not the standard of truth1 how      
strong soever our ideas of things may   
be2 therefore1  7#d47 ,this inward      
testimony of the ,spirit contains in it 
a satisfying and establishing           
persuasion1 that the scriptures are the 
word of ,god1 not altogether destitute  
of other evidences1 or convincing       
arguments3 and that which is more       
especially convincing to weak           
,christians1 is taken from the use which
 ,god makes of the scripture1 in        
beginning and carrying on the work of   
grace in their souls1 who are thus      
convinced2 and this firm persuasion we  
find sometimes so deeply rooted in their
 hearts1 that they would sooner die ten 
thousand deaths than part with          

scripture1 or entertain the least slight
 thought of it1 as though it were not   
divine2 and certainly there is a special
 hand of ,god in this persuasion1 which 
we can call no other than the inward    
testimony of the ,spirit1 whereby they  
are established in this important       
truth4#de  ,footnote #bj3    8,since    
,god has been pleased to leave us the   
,records of the ,jewish   ,religion1    
which was of old the true religion1 and 
affords no small   testimony to the     
,christian religion1 it is not foreign  
to our purpose1   to see upon what      
foundation the credibility of these is  
built4 ,that   these books are theirs1  
to whom they are ascribed1 appears in   
the same   manner as we have proved of  
our books4 ,and they1 whose names they  
bear1 were either ,prophets1 or men     
worthy to be credited2 such as          
,esdras1 who is supposed to have        
collected them into one volume1 at      
that time1 when the ,prophets ,haggai1  
,malachi1 and ,zacharias1   were yet    

alive4 ,i will not here repeat what was 
said before1 in   commendation of       
,moses4 ,and not only that first part1  
delivered by   ,moses1 as we have shewn 
in the first book1 but the latter       
history is   confirmed by many ,pagans4 
#ba,thus the ,phnician annals mention   
the names of ,david and ,solomon1 and   
the league they made with the           
,tyrians4 ,and ,berosus1 as well as the 
,hebrew books1 mention                  
,nabuchadonosor1 and other ,chaldans4   
,vaphres1 the king of   ,egypt in       
,jeremiah is the same with ,apries in   
,herodotus4 ,and   the ,greek books are 
filled with ,cyrus and his successors   
down to   ,darius2 and ,josephus in his 
book against ,appion1 quotes many       
other things relating to the ,jewish    
nation3 ,to which may be added1   that  
we above took out of ,strabo and        
,trogus4 ,but there is no   reason for  
us ,christians to doubt of the          
credibility of these books1   because   
there are testimonies in our books1 out 

of almost every one of   them1 the same 
as they are found in the ,hebrew4 ,nor  
did ,christ when   he blamed many things
 in the teachers of the law1 and in the 
,pharisees of his time1 ever accuse them
 of falsifying the books of   ,moses and
 the ,prophets1 or of using             
supposititious or altered books4   ,and 
it can never be proved or made credible1
 that after ,christ's time1   the       
scripture should be corrupted in any    
thing of moment2 if we do but   consider
 how far and wide the ,jewish nation1   
who every where kept   those books1 was 
dispersed over the whole world4 ,for    
first1 the ten   tribes were carried    
into ,media by the ,assyrians1 and      
afterwards   the other two4 ,and many of
 these fixed themselves in foreign      
countries1 after they had a permission  
from ,cyrus to return3 the              
,macedonians invited them into          
,alexandria with great advantages2   the
 cruelty of ,antiochus1 the civil war of
 the ,asmoni1 and the   foreign wars of 

,pompey and ,sossius1 scattered a great 
many2 the   country of ,cyrene was      
filled with ,jews2 the cities of ,asia1 
,macedonia1 ,lycaonia1 and the ,isles of
 ,cyprus1 and ,crete1 and   others1 were
 full of them2 and that there was a vast
 number of them in   ,rome1 we learn    
from ,horace1 ,juvenal1 and ,martial4   
,it is   impossible that such distant   
bodies of men should be imposed upon by 
any art whatsoever1 or that they should 
agree in a falsity4 ,we may add         
further that almost three hundred years 
before ,christ1 by the care of   the    
,egyptian kings1 the ,hebrew books were 
translated into ,greek by   those who   
are called the ,seventy2 that the       
,greeks might have them in   another    
language1 but the sense the same in the 
main2 upon which   account they were the
 less liable to be altered3 ,and the    
same books   were translated into       
,chaldee1 and into the ,jerusalem       
language2   that is1 half ,syriac2      
partly a little before1 and partly a    

little   after ,christ's time4 ,after   
which followed other ,greek versions1   
that   of ,aquila1 ,symmachus1 and      
,theodotion2 which ,origen1 and others  
after him1 compared with the seventy    
,interpreters1 and found no   difference
 in the history2 or in any weighty      
matters4 ,philo   flourished in         
,caligula's time1 and ,josephus lived   
till   ,vespasian's4 ,each of them quote
 out of the ,hebrew books the same      
things that we find at this day4 ,by    
this time the ,christian religion       
began to be more and more spread1 and   
many of its professors were   ,hebrews3 
,many had studied the ,hebrew learning1 
who could very   easily have perceived  
and discovered it1 if the ,jews had     
received   any thing that was false1 in 
any remarkable subject1 ,i mean1 by     
comparing it with more ancient books4   
,but they not only do this1 but   they  
bring very many testimonies out of the  
,old ,testament1 plainly in   that sense
 in which they are received amongst the 

,hebrews1 which   ,hebrews may be       
convicted of any crime1 sooner than 7,i 
will not say   of falsity1 but7 of      
negligence1 in relation to these books2 
because   they used to transcribe and   
compare them so very scrupulously1 that 
they could tell how often every letter  
came over4 ,we may add1 in the   first  
place1 an argument1 and that no mean    
one1 why the ,jews did not   alter the  
scripture designedly2 because the       
,christians prove1 and as   they think  
very strongly1 that their ,master ,jesus
 was that very   ,messiah who was of old
 promised to the forefathers of the     
,jews2 and   this from those very books1
 which were read by the ,jews4 ,which   
the   ,jews would have taken the        
greatest care should never have been1   
after there arose a controversy between 
them and the ,christians2 if it   had   
ever been in their power to have altered
 what they would40    ,,grotius4        
,footnote #ba3    7,thus the ,phoenician
 ,annals1 c47 ,see what ,josephus cites 

out of   them1 ,book ,,viii4 ,chap4 #b4 
of his ,ancient ,history2 where he adds1
 8that   if any one would see the       
,copies of those ,epistles which        
,solomon and   ,hirom wrote to each     
other1 they may be procured of the      
public   ,keepers of the ,records at    
,tyrus40 7,we must be cautions how we   
believe this2 however1 see what ,i have 
said upon #a ,kings v4 #c47   ,there is 
a remarkable place concerning ,david1   
quoted by ,josephus1   ,book ,,vii4 ,ch4
 #f4 of his ,ancient ,history1 out of   
the ,i,vth of   ,damascenus's ,history4 
,footnote #bb3    8,the enquiries of    
learned men1 and1 above all of the      
excellent   ,lardner1 who never         
overstates a point of evidence1 and     
whose fidelity   in citing his          
authorities has in no one instance been 
impeached1 have   established1          
concerning these writings1 the following
 propositions3    8,i4 ,that in the age 
immediately posterior to that in which  
,st4 ,paul   lived1 his letters were    

publicly read and acknowledged4         
8,some of them are quoted or alluded to 
by almost every ,christian   writer that
 followed1 by ,clement of ,rome1 by     
,hermas1 by ,ignatius1 by   ,polycarp1  
disciples or cotemporaries of the       
apostles2 by ,justin   ,martyr1 by the  
churches of ,gaul1 by ,irenus1 by       
,athenagoras1 by   ,theophilus1 by      
,clement of ,alexandria1 by ,hermias1 by
 ,tertullian1 who   occupied the        
succeeding age4 ,now when we find a book
 quoted or   referred to by an ancient  
author1 we are entitled to conclude1    
that it   was read and received in the  
age and country in which that author    
lived4 ,and this conclusion does not1 in
 any degree1 rest upon the   judgment or
 character of the author making such    
reference4 ,proceeding   by this rule1  
we have1 concerning the ,first ,epistle 
to the ,corinthians   in particular1    
within forty years after the epistle was
 written1   evidence1 not only of its   
being extant at ,corinth1 but of its    

being   known and read at ,rome4        
,clement1 bishop of that city1 writing  
to the   church of ,corinth1 uses these 
words3 #8,take into your hands the      
,epistle   of the blessed ,paul the     
apostle4 ,what did he at first write    
unto you   in the beginning of the      
gospel8 ,verily he did by the ,spirit   
admonish   you concerning himself and   
,cephas1 and ,apollos1 because that even
 then   you did form parties#bc4' ,this 
was written at a time when probably     
some must have been living at ,corinth1 
who remembered ,st4 ,paul's   ministry  
there and the receipt of the epistle4   
,the testimony is still   more valuable1
 as it shows that the epistles were     
preserved in the   churches to which    
they were sent1 and that they were      
spread and   propagated from them to the
 rest of the ,christian community4      
,agreeably   to which natural mode and  
order of their publication1 ,tertullian1
 a   century afterwards1 for proof of   
the integrity and genuineness of the    

apostolic writings1 bids #8any one1 who 
is willing to exercise his   curiosity  
profitably in the business of their     
salvation1 to visit the   apostolical   
churches1 in which their very authentic 
letters are   recited1 ips authentic    
liter eorum recitantur4' ,then he goes  
on3   #8,is ,achaia near you8 ,you have 
,corinth4 ,if you are not far from      
,macedonia1 you have ,philippi1 you have
 ,thessalonica4 ,if you can go to       
,asia1 you have ,ephesus2 but if you are
 near to ,italy1 you have   ,rome#bd4'  
,i adduce this passage to show1 that the
 distinct churches   or ,christian      
societies1 to which ,st4 ,paul's        
,epistles were sent1   subsisted for    
some ages afterwards2 that his several  
epistles were all   along respectively  
read in those churches2 that ,christians
 at large   received them from those    
churches1 and appealed to those churches
 for   their originality and            
authenticity4    8,arguing in like      
manner from citations and allusions1 we 

have1 within   the space of a hundred   
and fifty years from the time that the  
first of   ,st4 ,paul's ,epistles was   
written1 proofs of almost all of them   
being   read1 in ,palestine1 ,syria1 the
 countries of ,asia ,minor1 in ,egypt1  
in   that part of ,africa which used the
 ,latin tongue1 in ,greece1 ,italy1 and 
,gaul#be4 ,i do not mean simply to      
assert1 that1 within the space of a     
hundred and fifty years1 ,st4 ,paul's   
,epistles were read in those            
countries1 for ,i believe that they were
 read and circulated from the           
beginning2 but that proofs of their     
being so read occur within that         
period4 ,and when it is considered how  
few of the primitive ,christians        
wrote1 and of what was written how much 
is lost1 we are to account it           
extraordinary1 or rather as a sure proof
 of the extensiveness of the            
reputation of these writings1 and of the
 general respect in which they   were   
held1 that so many testimonies1 and of  

such antiquity1 are still   extant4     
#8,in the remaining works of ,irenus1   
,clement of ,alexandria1 and            
,tertullian1 there are perhaps more and 
larger quotations of the small   volume 
of the ,new ,testament1 than of all the 
works of ,cicero1 in the   writings of  
all characters for several ages#bf4' ,we
 must add1 that   the ,epistles of ,paul
 come in for their full share of this   
observation2   and that all the thirteen
 epistles1 except that to ,philemon1    
which is   not quoted by ,irenus or     
,clement1 and which probably escaped    
notice   merely by its brevity1 are     
severally cited1 and expressly          
recognized   as ,st4 ,paul's by each of 
these ,christian writers4 ,the          
,ebionites1 an   early1 though          
inconsiderable ,christian sect1 rejected
 ,st4 ,paul and his   epistles#bg2 that 
is1 they rejected these epistles1 not   
because they   were not1 but because    
they were ,st4 ,paul's2 and because1    
adhering to   the obligation of the     

,jewish law1 they chose to dispute his  
doctrine   and authority4 ,their        
suffrage as to the genuineness of the   
epistles   does not contradict that of  
other ,christians4 ,marcion1 an         
heretical   writer in the former part of
 the second century1 is said by         
,tertullian   to have rejected three of 
the epistles which we now receive1 viz4 
the two ,epistles to ,timothy and the   
,epistle to ,titus4 ,it appears to me   
not improbable1 that ,marcion might make
 some such distinction as this1   that  
no apostolic epistle was to be admitted 
which was not read or   attested by the 
church to which it was sent2 for it is  
remarkable   that1 together with these  
epistles to private persons1 he rejected
   also the catholic epistles4 ,now the 
catholic epistles and the epistles   to 
private persons agree in the            
circumstance of wanting this            
particular species of attestation4      
,marcion1 it seems1 acknowledged the    
,epistle to ,philemon1 and is upbraided 

for his inconsistency in doing   so by  
,tertullian#bh1 who asks #8why1 when he 
received a letter written   to a single 
person1 he should refuse two to ,timothy
 and one to ,titus   composed upon the  
affairs of the church8' ,this passage so
 far favours   our account of ,marcion's
 objection1 as it shows that the        
objection was   supposed by ,tertullian 
to have been founded in something1 which
   belonged to the nature of a private  
letter4    8,nothing of the works of    
,marcion remains4 ,probably he was1     
after all1   a rash1 arbitrary1         
licentious critic 7if he deserved indeed
 the name   of critic17 and who offered 
no reason for his determination4 ,what  
,st4   ,jerome says of him intimates    
this1 and is beside founded in good     
sense3 speaking of him and ,basilides1  
#8,if they had assigned any   reasons1' 
says he1 #8why they did not reckon these
 epistles1' viz4   the first and second 
to ,timothy and the ,epistle to ,titus1 
#8to be the   apostle's1 we would have  

endeavoured to have answered them1 and  
perhaps might have satisfied the reader3
 but when they take upon them1   by     
their own authority1 to pronounce one   
epistle to be ,paul's1 and   another    
not1 they can only be replied to in the 
same manner#bi4' ,let   it be           
remembered1 however1 that ,marcion      
received ten of these   epistles4 ,his  
authority therefore1 even if his credit 
had been better   than it is1 forms a   
very small exception to the uniformity  
of the   evidence4 ,of ,basilides we    
know still less than we do of ,marcion4 
,the   same observation however belongs 
to him1 viz4 that his objection1 as     
far as appears from this passage of ,st4
 ,jerome1 was confined to the   three   
private epistles4 ,yet is this the only 
opinion which can be said   to disturb  
the consent of the two first centuries  
of the ,christian   ra2 for as to       
,tatian1 who is reported by ,jerome     
alone to have   rejected some of ,st4   
,paul's ,epistles1 the extravagant or   

rather   delirious notions into which he
 fell1 take away all weight and credit  
from his judgment4 ,if1 indeed1         
,jerome's account of this circumstance  
be correct2 for it appears from much    
older writers than ,jerome1 that        
,tatian owned and used many of these    
epistles#cj4    8,,ii4 ,they1 who in    
those ages disputed about so many other 
points1   agreed in acknowledging the   
,scriptures now before us4 ,contending  
sects   appealed to them in their       
controversies with equal and unreserved 
submission4 ,when they were urged by one
 side1 however they might be            
interpreted or misinterpreted by the    
other1 their authority was not          
questioned4 #8,reliqui omnes1' says     
,irenus1 speaking of ,marcion1 #8falso  
scienti nomine inflati1 scripturas      
quidem confitentur1   interpretationes  
vero convertunt#ca4'    8,,iii4 ,when   
the genuineness of some other writings  
which were in   circulation1 and even of
 a few which are now received into the  

canon1   was contested1 these were never
 called into dispute4 ,whatever was the 
objection1 or whether1 in truth1 there  
ever was any real objection to   the    
authenticity of the ,second ,epistle of 
,peter1 the ,second and ,third   of     
,john1 the ,epistle of ,james1 or that  
of ,jude1 or to the book of the         
,revelations of ,st4 ,john1 the doubts  
that appear to have been   entertained  
concerning them1 exceedingly strengthen 
the force of the   testimony as to those
 writings1 about which there was no     
doubt2   because it shows1 that the     
matter was a subject1 amongst the early 
,christians1 of examination and         
discussion2 and that1 where there was   
any room to doubt1 they did doubt4      
8,what ,eusebius hath left upon the     
subject is directly to the purpose   of 
this observation4 ,eusebius1 it is well 
known1 divided the   ecclesiastical     
writings which were extant in his time  
into three   classes2 the #81           
uncontradicted1' as he calls them in one

   chapter2 or #8scriptures universally 
acknowledged1' as he calls them in      
another2 the #8controverted1 yet well   
known and approved by many2' and   #8the
 spurious4' ,what were the shades of    
difference in the books of the   second1
 or in those of the third class2 or what
 it was precisely that   he meant by the
 term spurious1 it is not necessary in  
this place to   enquire4 ,it is         
sufficient for us to find1 that the     
thirteen epistles   of ,st4 ,paul are   
placed by him in the first class without
 any sort of   hesitation or doubt4     
8,it is further also to be collected    
from the chapter in which this          
distinction is laid down1 that the      
method made use of by ,eusebius1 and    
by the ,christians of his time1 viz4 the
 close of the third century1   in       
judging concerning the sacred authority 
of any books1 was to   enquire after and
 consider the testimony of those who    
lived near the   age of the apostles#cb4
    8,,iv4 ,that no ancient writing1    

which is attested as these epistles are1
   hath had its authenticity disproved1 
or is in fact questioned4 ,the          
controversies which have been moved     
concerning suspected writings1 as   the 
epistles1 for instance1 of ,phalaris1 or
 the eighteen epistles of   ,cicero1    
begin by showing that this attestation  
is wanting4 ,that being   proved1 the   
question is thrown back upon internal   
marks of   spuriousness or authenticity2
 and in these the dispute is occupied4  
,in   which disputes it is to be        
observed1 that the contested writings   
are   commonly attacked by arguments    
drawn from some opposition which they   
betray to #8authentic history1' to      
#8true epistles1' to #8the real         
sentiments or circumstances of the      
author whom they personate#cc2'   which 
authentic history1 which true epistles1 
which real sentiments   themselves1 are 
no other than ancient documents1 whose  
early existence   and reception can be  
proved1 in the manner in which the      

writings   before us are traced up to   
the age of their reputed author1 or to  
ages   near to his4 ,a modern who sits  
down to compose the history of some     
ancient period1 has no stronger evidence
 to appeal to for the most   confident  
assertion1 or the most undisputed fact1 
that he delivers1   than writings1 whose
 genuineness is proved by the same      
medium through   which we evince the    
authenticity of ours4 ,nor1 whilst he   
can have   recourse to such authorities 
as these1 does he apprehend any         
uncertainty in his accounts1 from the   
suspicion of spuriousness or   imposture
 in his materials4    8,v4 ,it cannot be
 shown that any forgeries1 properly so  
called#cd1   that is1 writings published
 under the name of the person who did   
not   compose them1 made their          
appearance in the first century of the  
,christian ra1 in which century these   
epistles undoubtedly existed4 ,i   shall
 set down under this proposition the    
guarded words of ,lardner   himself3    

#8,there are no quotations of any books 
of them 7spurious and   apocryphal      
books7 in the apostolical fathers1 by   
whom ,i mean ,barnabas1   ,clement of   
,rome1 ,hermas1 ,ignatius1 and          
,polycarp1 whose writings reach   from  
the year of our ,lord #gj to the year   
#ajh4 ,i say this confidently1   because
 ,i think it has been proved4' ,lardner1
 vol4 xii4 p4 #aeh4    8,nor when they  
did appear were they much used by the   
primitive   ,christians4 #8,irenus      
quotes not any of these books4 ,he      
mentions some   of them1 but he never   
quotes them4 ,the same may be said of   
,tertullian3   he has mentioned a book  
called 8,acts of ,paul and ,thecla30 but
 it is   only to condemn it4 ,clement of
 ,alexandria and ,origen have mentioned 
and quoted several such books1 but never
 as authority1 and sometimes   with     
express marks of dislike4 ,eusebius     
quotes no such books in any of   his    
works4 ,he has mentioned them indeed1   
but how8 ,not by way of   approbation1  

but to show that they were of little or 
no value2 and   that they never were    
received by the sounder part of         
,christians4' ,now1   if with this1     
which is advanced after the most minute 
and diligent   examination1 we compare  
what the same cautious writer had before
 said   of our received scriptures1     
#8that in the works of three only of the
   above-mentioned fathers1 there are   
more and larger quotations of the       
small volume of the ,new ,testament1    
than of all the works of ,cicero in     
the writers of all characters for       
several ages2' and if1 with the   marks 
of obscurity or condemnation1 which     
accompanied the mention of   the several
 apocryphal ,christian writings1 when   
they happened to be   mentioned at all1 
we contrast what ,dr4 ,lardner's work   
completely and   in detail makes out    
concerning the writings which we defend1
 and what1   having so made out1 he     
thought himself authorized in his       
conclusion to   assert1 that these books

 were not only received from the        
beginning1   but received with the      
greatest respect2 have been publicly and
   solemnly read in the assemblies of   
,christians throughout the world1 in    
every age from that time to this2 early 
translated into the languages   of      
divers countries and people2            
commentaries writ to explain and        
illustrate them2 quoted by way of proof 
in all arguments of a   religious       
nature2 recommended to the perusal of   
unbelievers1 as   containing the        
authentic account of the ,christian     
doctrine2 when we   attend1 ,i say1 to  
this representation1 we perceive in it1 
not only   full proof of the early      
notoriety of these books1 but a clear   
and   sensible line of discrimination1  
which separates these from the          
pretensions of any others4    8,the     
,epistles of ,st4 ,paul stand           
particularly free of any doubt or       
confusion that might arise from this    
source4 ,until the conclusion of   the  

fourth century1 no intimation appears of
 any attempt whatever   being made to   
counterfeit these writings2 and then it 
appears only of   a single and obscure  
instance4 ,jerome1 who flourished in the
 year #cib1   has this expression3      
#8,legunt quidam et ad ,laodicenses2 sed
 ab omnibus   exploditur2' there is also
 an ,epistle to the ,laodiceans1 but it 
is   rejected by every body#ce4         
,theodoret1 who wrote in the year #dbc1 
speaks of this epistle in the same      
terms#cf4 ,beside these1 ,i know not    
whether any ancient writer mentions it4 
,it was certainly unnoticed   during the
 three first centuries of the ,church2  
and when it came   afterwards to be     
mentioned1 it was mentioned only to     
show1 that1   though such a writing did 
exist1 it obtained no credit4 ,it is    
probable   that the forgery to which    
,jerome alludes1 is the epistle which we
 now   have under that title4 ,if so1 as
 hath been already observed1 it is      
nothing more than a collection of       

sentences from the genuine ,epistles2   
and was perhaps1 at first1 rather the   
exercise of some idle pen1 than   any   
serious attempt to impose a forgery upon
 the public4 ,of an ,epistle   to the   
,corinthians under ,st4 ,paul's name1   
which was brought into   ,europe in the 
present century1 antiquity is entirely  
silent4 ,it was   unheard of for sixteen
 centuries2 and at this day1 though it  
be   extant1 and was first found in the 
,armenian language1 it is not1 by   the 
,christians of that country1 received   
into their scriptures4 ,i   hope1 after 
this1 that there is no reader who will  
think there is any   competition of     
credit1 or of external proof1 between   
these and the   received ,epistles3 or  
rather1 who will not acknowledge the    
evidence of   authenticity to be        
confirmed by the want of success which  
attended   imposture4    8,when we take 
into our hands the letters which the    
suffrage and   consent of antiquity hath
 thus transmitted to us1 the first thing

 that   strikes our attention is the air
 of reality and business1 as well as    
of seriousness and conviction1 which    
pervades the whole4 ,let the   sceptic  
read them4 ,if he be not sensible of    
these qualities in them1   the argument 
can have no weight with him4 ,if he be2 
if he perceive in   almost every page   
the language of a mind actuated by real 
occasions1   and operating upon real    
circumstances1 ,i would wish it to be   
observed1   that the proof which arises 
from this perception is not to be deemed
   occult or imaginary1 because it is   
incapable of being drawn out in   words1
 or of being conveyed to the            
apprehension of the reader in any       
other way1 than by sending him to the   
books themselves40----    8,if it be    
true that we are in possession of the   
very letters which ,st4   ,paul wrote1  
let us consider what confirmation they  
afford to the   ,christian history4 ,in 
my opinion they substantiate the whole  
transaction4 ,the great object of modern

 research is to come at the   epistolary
 correspondence of the times4 ,amidst   
the obscurities1 the   silence1 or the  
contradictions of history1 if a letter  
can be found1   we regard it as the     
discovery of a land mark2 as that by    
which we can   correct1 adjust1 or      
supply the imperfections and            
uncertainties of   other accounts4 ,one 
cause of the superior credit which is   
attributed   to letters is this1 that   
the facts which they disclose generally 
come   out incidentally1 and therefore  
without design to mislead the public    
by false or exaggerated accounts4 ,this 
reason may be applied to ,st4   ,paul's 
,epistles with as much justice as to any
 letters whatever4   ,nothing could be  
further from the intention of the writer
 than to   record any part of his       
history4 ,that his history was in fact  
made   public by these letters1 and has 
by the same means been transmitted to   
future ages1 is a secondary and         
unthought-of effect4 ,the sincerity     

therefore of the apostle's declarations 
cannot reasonably be disputed2   at     
least we are sure that it was not       
vitiated by any desire of setting       
himself off to the public at large4 ,but
 these letters form a part of   the     
muniments of ,christianity1 as much to  
be valued for their   contents1 as for  
their originality4 ,a more inestimable  
treasure the   care of antiquity could  
not have sent down to us4 ,beside the   
proof   they afford of the general      
reality of ,st4 ,paul's history1 of the 
knowledge which the author of the ,acts 
of the ,apostles had obtained of   that 
history1 and the consequent probability 
that he was1 what he   professes himself
 to have been1 a companion of the       
apostle's2 beside   the support they    
lend to these important inferences1 they
 meet   specifically some of the        
principal objections upon which the     
adversaries of ,christianity have       
thought proper to rely4 ,in particular  
they show1    8,i4 ,that ,christianity  

was not a story set on foot amidst the  
confusions which attended and           
immediately preceded the destruction of 
,jerusalem2 when many extravagant       
reports were circulated1 when men's     
minds were broken by terror and         
distress1 when amidst the tumults that  
surrounded them enquiry was             
impracticable4 ,these letters show      
incontestably that the religion had     
fixed and established itself   before   
this state of things took place4        
8,,ii4 ,whereas it hath been insinuated1
 that our gospels may have been   made  
up of reports and stories1 which were   
current at the time1 we may   observe   
that1 with respect to the ,epistles1    
this is impossible4 ,a man   cannot     
write the history of his own life from  
reports2 nor1 what is   the same thing1 
be led by reports to refer to passages  
and   transactions in which he states   
himself to have been immediately        
present and active4 ,i do not allow that
 this insinuation is applied to   the   

historical part of the ,new ,testament  
with any colour of justice or           
probability2 but ,i say1 that to the    
,epistles it is not applicable at   all4
    8,,iii4 ,these letters prove that   
the converts to ,christianity were not  
drawn from the barbarous1 the mean1 or  
the ignorant set of men1 which   the    
representations of infidelity would     
sometimes make them4 ,we learn   from   
letters the character not only of the   
writer1 but1 in some   measure1 of the  
persons to whom they are written4 ,to   
suppose that   these letters were       
addressed to a rude tribe1 incapable of 
thought or   reflection1 is just as     
reasonable as to suppose ,locke's ,essay
 on the   ,human ,understanding to have 
been written for the instruction of     
savages4 ,whatever may be thought of    
these letters in other respects1        
either of diction or argument1 they are 
certainly removed as far as   possible  
from the habits and comprehension of a  
barbarous people4    8,,iv4 ,st4 ,paul's

 history1 ,i mean so much of it as may  
be collected from   his letters1 is so  
implicated with that of the other       
apostles1 and   with the substance      
indeed of the ,christian history itself1
 that ,i   apprehend it will be found   
impossible to admit ,st4 ,paul's story  
7,i do   not speak of the miraculous    
part of it7 to be true1 and yet to      
reject   the rest as fabulous4 ,for     
instance1 can any one believe that there
 was   such a man as ,paul1 a preacher  
of ,christianity in the age which we    
assign to him1 and not believe that     
there were also at the same   time1 such
 men as ,peter and ,james1 and other    
apostles1 who had been   companions of  
,christ during his life1 and who after  
his death   published and avowed the    
same things concerning him which ,paul  
taught8   ,judea1 and especially        
,jerusalem1 was the scene of ,christ's  
ministry4   ,the witnesses of his       
miracles lived there4 ,st4 ,paul1 by his
 own   account1 as well as that of his  

historian1 appears to have frequently   
visited that city2 to have carried on a 
communication with the church   there2  
to have associated with the rulers and  
elders of that church1   who were some  
of them apostles2 to have acted1 as     
occasions offered1   in correspondence1 
and sometimes in conjunction with them4 
,can it1   after this1 be doubted1 but  
that the religion and the general facts 
relating to it1 which ,st4 ,paul appears
 by his letters to have   delivered to  
the several churches which he           
established at a distance1   were at the
 same time taught and published at      
,jerusalem itself1 the   place where the
 business was transacted2 and taught and
 published by   those who had attended  
the founder of the institution in his   
miraculous1 or pretendedly miraculous1  
ministry8    8,it is observable1 for so 
it appears both in the ,epistles and    
from the   ,acts of the ,apostles1 that 
,jerusalem1 and the society of believers
 in   that city1 long continued the     

centre from which the missionaries of   
the religion issued with which all other
 churches maintained a   correspondence 
and connexion1 to which they referred   
their doubts1 and   to whose relief1 in 
times of public distress1 they remitted 
their   charitable assistance4 ,this    
observation ,i think material1 because  
it   proves that this was not the case  
of giving our accounts in one   country 
of what is transacted in another1       
without affording the   hearers an      
opportunity of knowing whether the      
things related were   credited by any1  
or even published1 in the place where   
they are   reported to have passed4     
8,v4 ,st4 ,paul's letters furnish       
evidence 7and what better evidence than 
a man's own letters can be desired87 of 
the soundness and sobriety of   his     
judgment4 ,his caution in distinguishing
 between the occasional   suggestions of
 inspiration1 and the ordinary exercise 
of his natural   understanding1 is      
without example in the history of       

enthusiasm4 ,his   morality is every    
where calm1 pure1 and rational3 adapted 
to the   condition1 the activity1 and   
the business of social life1 and of its 
various relations2 free from the        
over-scrupulousness and austerities   of
 superstition1 and from1 what was more  
perhaps to be apprehended1   the        
abstractions of quietism1 and the       
soarings and extravagancies of          
fanaticism4 ,his judgment concerning a  
hesitating conscience2 his   opinion of 
the moral indifferency of many actions1 
yet of the prudence   and even the duty 
of compliance1 where non-compliance     
would produce   evil effects upon the   
minds of the persons who observed it1 is
 as   correct and just as the most      
liberal and enlightened moralist could  
form at this day4 ,the accuracy of      
modern ethics has found nothing to      
amend in these determinations40         
99       99       99       99       99  
8,broad1 obvious1 and explicit          
agreements prove little2 because it may 

be suggested1 that the insertion of such
 is the ordinary expedient of   every   
forgery2 and though they may occur1 and 
probably will occur1 in   genuine       
writings1 yet it cannot be proved that  
they are peculiar to   these4 ,thus what
 ,st4 ,paul declares in chap4 xi4 of #a 
,cor4 concerning   the institution of   
the eucharist1 #8,for ,i have received  
of the ,lord   that which ,i also       
delivered unto you1 that the ,lord      
,jesus1 the same   night in which he was
 betrayed1 took bread2 and when he had  
given   thanks1 he brake it1 and said1  
,take1 eat2 this is my body1 which is   
broken for you2 this do in remembrance  
of me1' though it be in close   and     
verbal conformity with the account of   
the same transaction   preserved by ,st4
 ,luke1 is yet a conformity of which no 
use can be made   in our argument2 for  
if it should be objected that this was a
 mere   recital from the ,gospel1       
borrowed by the author of the epistle1  
for   the purpose of setting off his    

composition by an appearance of         
agreement with the received account of  
the ,lord's supper1 ,i should not   know
 how to repel the insinuation4 ,in like 
manner1 the description   which ,st4    
,paul gives of himself in his epistle to
 the ,philippians   7iii4               
#e47--#8;,circumcised the eighth day1 of
 the stock of ,israel1 of the   tribe of
 ,benjamin1 an ,hebrew of the ,hebrews2 
as touching the law1 a   ,pharisee2     
concerning zeal1 persecuting the church2
 touching the   righteousness which is  
in the law1 blameless'--is made up of   
particulars so plainly delivered        
concerning him1 in the ,acts of the     
,apostles1 the ,epistle to the ,romans1 
and the ,epistle to the ,galatians1     
that ,i cannot deny but that it would be
 easy for an impostor1 who was          
fabricating a letter in the name of ,st4
 ,paul1 to collect these   articles into
 one view4 ,this1 therefore1 is a       
conformity which we do   not adduce4    
,but when ,i read1 in the ,acts of the  

,apostles1 that #8when   ,paul came to  
,derbe and ,lystra1 behold a certain    
disciple was there1   named ,timotheus1 
the son of a certain woman which was a  
,jewess2' and   when1 in an epistle     
addressed to ,timothy1 ,i find him      
reminded of his   #8having known the    
,holy ,scriptures from a child1' which  
implies that   he must1 on one side or  
both1 have been brought up by ,jewish   
parents3   ,i conceive that ,i remark a 
coincidence which shews1 by its very    
obliquity1 that scheme was not employed 
in its formation40                    99
       99       99       99       99    
8,an assertion in the ,epistle to the   
,colossians1 viz4 that #8,onesimus   was
 one of them1' is verified by the       
,epistle to ,philemon2 and is           
verified1 not by any mention of         
,colosse1 any the most distant          
intimation concerning the place of      
,philemon's abode1 but singly by        
stating ,onesimus to be ,philemon's     
servant1 and by joining in the          

salutation ,philemon with ,archippus1   
for this ,archippus1 when we go   back  
to the ,epistle to the ,colossians1     
appears to have been an   inhabitant of 
that city1 and1 as it should seem1 to   
have held an   office of authority in   
that church4 ,the case stands thus4     
,take the   ,epistle to the ,colossians 
alone1 and no circumstance is           
discoverable   which makes out the      
assertion1 that ,onesimus was #8one of  
them4' ,take   the ,epistle to ,philemon
 alone1 and nothing at all appears      
concerning   the place to which         
,philemon or his servant ,onesimus      
belonged4 ,for any   thing that is said 
in the epistle1 ,philemon might have    
been a   ,thessalonian1 a ,philippian1  
or an ,ephesian1 as well as a           
,colossian4   ,put the two epistles     
together and the matter is clear4 ,the  
reader   perceives a junction of        
circumstances1 which ascertains the     
conclusion at once4 ,now1 all that is   
necessary to be added in this   place   

is1 that this correspondency evinces the
 genuineness of one   epistle1 as well  
as of the other4 ,it is like comparing  
the two parts   of a cloven tally4      
,coincidence proves the authenticity of 
both40    ,,paley4  ,footnote #bc3      
,see ,lardner1 vol4 xii4 p4 #bb4        
,footnote #bd3    ,lardner1 vol4 ii4 p4 
#eih4  ,footnote #be3    ,see ,lardner's
 ,recapitulation1 vol4 xii1 p4 #ec4     
,footnote #bf3    ,see ,lardner's       
,recapitulation1 vol4 xii4 p4 #ec4      
,footnote #bg3    ,lardner1 vol4 ii4 p4 
#hjh4  ,footnote #bh3    ,lardner1 vol4 
xiv4 p4 #dee4  ,footnote #bi3           
,lardner1 vol4 xiv4 p4 #deh4  ,footnote 
#cj3    ,lardner1 vol4 i4 p4 #cac4      
,footnote #ca3    ,iren4 advers4 ,haer4 
quoted by ,lardner1 vol4 xv4 p4 #dbe4   
,footnote #cb3    ,lardner1 vol4 viii4  
p4 #ajf4  ,footnote #cc3    ,see the    
tracts written in the controversy       
between ,tunstal and   ,middleton upon  
certain suspected epistles ascribed to  
,cicero4  ,footnote #cd3    ,i believe  

that there is a great deal of truth in  
,dr4 ,lardner's   observations1 that    
comparatively few of those books1 which 
we call   apocryphal1 were strictly and 
originally forgeries4 ,see ,lardner1    
vol4   xii4 p4 #afg4  ,footnote #ce3    
,lardner1 vol4 x4 p4 #ajc4  ,footnote   
#cf3    ,lardner1 vol4 xi4 p4 #hh4      
,footnote #cg3       are wanting only in
 #he and #aab of ,kennicott4  ,footnote 
#ch3    ,see ,ques4 #aed4  ,footnote    
#ci3     4  ,footnote #dj3              
oftentimes signifies1 ,cum1 ad1 prope1  
juxta1 as well as   in4  ,footnote #da3 
8,the most ancient tradition among all  
nations1 is exactly agreeable to   the  
relation of ,moses4 ,for his description
 of the original of the   world is      
almost the very same as in the ancient  
,phnician histories1   which are        
translated by ,philo ,biblius from      
,sanchoniathon's   ,collection2 and a   
good part of it is to be found among the
 ,indians   and ,egyptians2 whence it is
 that in ,linus1 ,hesiod1 and many      

other ,greek writers1 mention is made of
 a ,chaos1 7signified by   some under   
the name of an ,egg7 and of the framing 
of animals1 and also   of man's         
formation after the divine image1 and   
the dominion given him   over all living
 creatures2 which are to be seen in many
 writers1   particularly in ,ovid1 who  
transcribed them from the ,greek4 ,that 
all things were made by the ,word of    
,god1 is asserted by ,epicharmus1   and 
the ,platonists2 and before them1 by the
 most ancient writer 7,i   do not mean  
of those ,hymns which go under his name1
 but7 of those   ,verses which were of  
old called ,orpheus's2 not because      
,orpheus   composed them1 but because   
they contained his doctrines4 ,and      
,empedocles acknowledged1 that the sun  
was not the original light1   but the   
receptacle of light1 7the storehouse and
 vehicle of fire1 as   the ancient      
,christians express it47 ,aratus1 and   
,catullus1 thought   the divine         
residence was above the starry orb2 in  

which ,homer says1   there is a         
continual light4 ,thales taught from the
 ancient schools1   that ,god was the   
oldest of beings1 because not begotten2 
that the   world was most beautiful1    
because the workmanship of ,god2 that   
darkness was before light1 which latter 
we find in ,orpheus's ,verses1   and    
,hesiod1 whence it was1 that the        
nations1 who were most tenacious   of   
ancient customs1 reckoned the time by   
nights4 ,anaxagoras   affirmed1 that all
 things were regulated by the supreme   
mind3   ,aratus1 that the stars were    
made by ,god2 ,virgil1 from the         
,greeks1 that ,life was infused into    
things by the ,spirit of ,god2          
,hesiod1 ,homer1 and ,callimachus1 that 
man was formed of clay2   lastly1       
,maximus ,tyrius asserts1 that it was a 
constant tradition   received by all    
nations1 that there was one supreme     
,god1 the cause of   all things4 ,and we
 learn from ,josephus1 ,philo1          
,tibullus1   ,clemens ,alexandrinus1 and

 ,lucian1 7for ,i need not mention the  
,hebrews7 that the memory of the seven  
days' work was preserved1 not   only    
among the ,greeks and ,italians1 by     
honouring the seventh day2   but also   
amongst the ,celt and ,indians1 who all 
measured the time   by weeks2 as we     
learn from ,philostratus1 ,dion         
,cassius1 and ,justin   ,martyr1 and    
also the most ancient names of the day4 
,the ,egyptians   tell us1 that at first
 men led their lives in great           
simplicity1 their   bodies being naked1 
whence arose the poet's fiction of the  
,golden ,age1   famous among the        
,indians1 as ,strabo remarks1           
,maimonides takes   notice1 that the    
history of ,adam1 of ,eve1 of the tree1 
and of the   serpent1 was extant among  
the idolatrous ,indians in his time3 and
   there are many witnesses in our age1 
who testify that the same is   still to 
be found amongst the heathen dwelling in
 ,peru1 and the   ,philippine islands1  
people belonging to the same ,india2 the

 name   of ,adam amongst the ,brachmans2
 and that it was reckoned six   thousand
 years since the creation of the world1 
by those of ,siam4   ,berosus in his    
history of ,chaldea1 ,manethos in his of
 ,egypt1   ,hierom in his of ,phnicia1  
,histus1 ,hecatus1 ,hillanicus in       
theirs of ,greece1 and ,hesiod among the
 ,poets2 all assert that the   lives of 
those who descended from the first men1 
were almost a   thousand years in       
length2 which is the less incredible1   
because the   historians of many nations
 7particularly ,pausanias and           
,philostratus amongst the ,greeks1 and  
,pliny amongst the ,romans7   relate1   
that men's bodies1 upon opening their   
sepulchres1 were found   to be much     
larger in old time4 ,and ,catullus1     
after many of the   ,greeks1 relates1   
that divine visions were made to men    
before their   great and manifold crimes
 did1 as it were1 hinder ,god1 and those
   ,spirits that attend him1 from       
holding any correspondence with men4 ,we

   almost every where1 in the ,greek and
 ,latin historians1 meet with   the     
savage life of the ,giants1 mentioned by
 ,moses4 ,and it is very   remarkable   
concerning the deluge1 that the memory  
of almost all   nations ends in the     
history of it1 even those nations which 
were   unknown till our forefathers     
discovered them3 so that ,varro calls   
all that the unknown time4 ,and all     
those things which we read in the       
poets1 wrapped up in fables 7a ,liberty 
they allow themselves7 are   delivered  
by the ancient writers according to     
truth and reality2 that   is1 agreeable 
to ,moses2 as you may see in ,berosus's 
,history of   ,chaldea1 ,abydenus's of  
,assyria1 who mentions the dove that was
   sent out of the ark2 and in ,plutarch
 from the ,greeks2 and in   ,lucian1 who
 says1 that in ,hierapolis of ,syria1   
there was   remaining a most ancient    
history of the ark1 and of the          
preserving a   few not only of mankind1 
but also of other living creatures4 ,the

 same   history was extant also in ,molo
 and in ,nicolaus ,damascenus2 which    
latter names the ark1 which we also find
 in the history of ,deucalion   in      
,apollodorus2 and many ,spaniards       
affirm1 that in several parts   of      
,america1 as ,cuba1 ,mechoacana1        
,nicaraga1 is preserved the   memory of 
the deluge1 the saving alive of animals1
 especially the   raven and dove2 and   
the deluge itself in that part called   
,golden   ,castile4 ,that remark of     
,pliny's1 that ,joppa was built before  
the   ,flood1 discovers what part of the
 earth men inhabited before the         
,flood4 ,the place where the ark rested 
after the deluge on the   ,gordyan      
mountains1 is evident from the constant 
tradition of the   ,armenians from all  
past ages1 down to this very day4       
,japhet1 the   father of the ,europeans1
 and from him ,jon1 or1 as they formerly
   pronounced it1 ,javon of the ,greeks1
 and ,hammon of the   ,africans1 are    
names to be seen in ,moses1 and         

,josephus and others   observe the like 
footsteps in the names of other places  
and nations4   ,and which of the poets  
is it1 in which we do not find mention  
made of   the attempt to climb the      
heavens8 ,diodoris ,siculus1 ,strabo1   
,tacitus1 ,pliny1 ,solinus1 speak of the
 burning of ,sodom4   ,herodotus1       
,diodorus1 ,strabo1 ,philo ,biblius1    
testify the   ancient custom of         
,circumcision1 which is confirmed by    
those nations   descended from ,abraham1
 not only ,hebrews1 but also ,idumans1  
,ismaelites1 and others4 ,the history of
 ,abraham1 ,isaac1 ,jacob1   and        
,joseph1 agreeable with ,moses1 was     
extant of old in ,philo   ,biblius out  
of ,sanchoniathon1 in ,berosus1         
,hecatus1   ,damascenus1 ,artapanus1    
,eupolemus1 ,demetrius1 and partly in   
the   ancient writers of the ,orphic    
,verses2 and something of it is still   
extant in ,justin1 out of ,trogus       
,pompeius4 ,by almost all which1 is     
related also the history of ,moses1 and 

his principal acts4 ,the   ,orphic      
,verses expressly mention his being     
taken out of the water1 and   the two   
tables that were given him by ,god4 ,to 
these we may add   ,polemon2 and several
 things about his coming out of ,egypt1 
from   the ,egyptian writers1 ,menetho1 
,lysimachus1 ,chremon4 ,neither   can   
any prudent man think it at all         
credible1 that ,moses1 who had so   many
 enemies1 not only of the ,egyptians1   
but also of many other   nations1 as the
 ,idumans1 ,arabians1 and ,phnicians1   
would   venture to relate any thing     
concerning the creation of the world1 or
   the original of things1 which could  
be confuted by more ancient   writings1 
or was contradictory to the ancient and 
received opinions3   or that he would   
relate any thing of matters in his own  
time1 that   could be confuted by the   
testimony of many persons then alive1   
,diodorus ,siculus1 ,strabo1 and ,pliny1
 ,tacitus1 and after them   ,dionysius  
,longinus 7concerning loftiness of      

,speech7 make mention of   ,moses4      
,besides the ,talmudists1 ,pliny and    
,apuleius1 speak of   ,jamnes and       
,mambres1 who resisted ,moses in ,egypt4
 ,some things   there are in other      
writings1 and many things amongst the   
,pythagoreans1 about the ,law and ,rites
 given by ,moses1 ,strabo and   ,justin1
 out of ,trogus1 remarkably testify     
concerning the religion   and           
righteousness of the ancient ,jews2 so  
that there seems to be no   need of     
mentioning what is found1 or has        
formerly been found of   ,joshua and    
others1 agreeable to the ,hebrew books2 
seeing1 that   whoever gives credit to  
,moses 7which it is a shame for any one 
to   refuse7 cannot but believe those   
famous miracles done by the hand of     
,god2 which is the principal thing here 
aimed at4 ,now that the miracles   of   
late date1 such as those of ,elija1     
,elisha1 and others1 should   not be    
counterfeit1 there is this further      
argument2 that in those   times ,juda   

was become more known1 and because of   
the difference of   religion was hated  
by the neighbours1 who could very easily
 confute   the first rise of a lie4 ,the
 history of ,jonah's being three days in
   the whale's belly is in ,lycophron   
and neus ,gazeus1 only under the   name 
of ,herculus2 to advance whose fame1    
every thing that was great   and noble  
used to be related of him1 as ,tacitus  
observes4 ,certainly   nothing but the  
manifest evidence of the history could  
compel ,julian   7who was as great an   
enemy to the ,jews as to the            
,christians7 to   confess that there    
were some men inspired by the divine    
,spirit amongst   the ,jews1 and that   
fire descended from heaven1 and consumed
 the   sacrifices of ,moses and ,elias4 
,and here it is worthy of   observation1
 that there was not only very severe    
punishments   threatened amongst the    
,hebrews1 to any who should falsely     
assume the   gift of prophecy1 but very 
many kings1 who by that means might have

   procured great authority to          
themselves1 and many learned men1 such  
as   ,esdras and others1 dared not to   
assume this honour to themselves2   nay1
 some ages before ,christ's time1 nobody
 dared to do it4 ,much less   could so  
many thousand people be imposed upon1 in
 avouching a constant   and public      
miracle1 ,i mean that of the oracle1    
which shined on the   ,high ,priest's   
breast1 which is so firmly believed by  
all the ,jews1   to have remained till  
the destruction of the first temple1    
that their   ancestors must of necessity
 be well assured of the truth of it40   
,,grotius4  ,footnote #db3    ,vid4     
,joseph ,antiq4  ,footnote #dc3         
,reason will affirm that every effect   
speaks a cause2 then we ask how   it    
should happen that a dozen illiterate   
fishermen and mechanicks of   ,galilee1 
after the wisdom of the philosophers had
 left the world in   darkness1 should   
have introduced so much light of        
knowledge1 that our   children and      

servants are wiser than the ancient     
philosophers8 ,let no   one say1 that   
they only began1 what the wisdom of     
after ages have   carried on towards    
perfection4 ,the writings of the        
apostles are the   same to this day2 as 
is proved by the earliest versions1     
quotations1   and manuscripts4 ,so      
perfect was the system of morals they   
left1 that   no error has been detected 
in it1 and all attempts to build upon or
   add to it1 have only exposed the     
ignorance of the individuals who have   
essayed to do so4    ,how has it        
happened that whilst learned men have   
ever been at discord   about the nature1
 and true foundation of the obligation  
of virtue1   these despised fishermen1  
have shown the true foundation and      
nature of   duty1 and have erred in no  
particular8 ,is it not strange that     
whilst   the wisdom of the philosophers 
made their purest virtue but a more     
refined pride1 these poor men laid the  
ax to the root of that pride1   and     

taught the world that even their virtues
 brought them under   additional        
obligations to ,divine grace8 ,is it not
 remarkable that the   system taught by 
these unlearned men should so perfectly 
coincide with   what is discovered in   
the works of ,god1 that whilst it aims  
to   eradicate sin1 it represents it as 
in every instance eventually            
productive of the glory of that ,god1   
who brings good out of the evil1   and  
light out of the darkness8    ,how is it
 to be accounted for1 that when the most
 learned rabbies   perverted the law1   
and knew not its meaning1 that a few    
crude and   uninstructed fishermen      
should remove their false constructions 
of that   law1 explain the types1       
shadows1 promises and prophecies1 show  
how the   truth and justice of ,god     
might be clear in the pardon of sin1 and
 set   the labouring conscience at rest8
 ,how came the fishermen of ,galilee to 
discover to the wise and learned what   
they had never conjectured1 and         

truths1 which only attentive minds at   
the present time can acquiesce   in1    
that all things are certain1 because    
foreknown1 and foreknown   because      
,divine knowledge must be infinite and  
eternal1 and yet that   rational        
creatures may be capable of choosing and
 refusing1 though   they must be wholly 
dependent8 ,is it not passing strange   
that the   wisdom of ,philosophers1 the 
learning of ,rabbies1 the power of      
,kings   and ,emperors1 the influence of
 thousands of priests1 the prejudices of
   the world1 and the malice of the     
wicked should be overcome by twelve     
poor fishermen8 ,how is it to be        
accounted for that these twelve poor    
illiterate men should have effected such
 surprising changes1 that   modern      
infidels are ashamed of the evidence of 
their ancient   predecessors1 and are   
obliged to borrow from the fishermen of 
,galilee   a portion of the knowledge   
they have introduced1 without which the 
opposers of the ,gospel must fall into  

contempt8 ,is any man so   credulous as 
to imagine men of no better education   
and opportunities1   possessed of       
themselves all this knowledge8 when or  
where has the   natural world produced  
such a phnomenon8 they declared that it 
was   not of themselves1 but1 that such 
feeble instruments were chosen1 that    
the power might appear to be what it    
really was1 from ,god4 ,this   testimony
 they confirmed by miracles1 and sealed 
with their blood4  ,footnote #dd3       
,vide ,dodd4 ,expos4 #c vol4 app4--,dick
 on ,insp4--,parry's ,enq4--,hawker1 c4 
,footnote #de3    ,this description of  
the ,spirit's witness resembles sensible
 assurance2   that there may be such an 
immediate suggestion1 or impression is  
possible2 but the ,spirit's witness is  
the image of ,god1 and is of            
adoption4--,vide ,edwards's works1 vol4 
#d4 p4 #afa4                            
,quest4 ,v4       ,,quest4 ,v4 ,what do 
the scriptures principally teach8       
,,answ4 ,the scriptures principally     

teach1 what man is to believe           
concerning ,god1 and what duty ,god     
requires of man4#df   ,having1 in the   
foregoing answer1 proved the scriptures 
to be the word of ,god1 there is in this
 a general account of the contents      
thereof2 there are many great doctrines 
contained therein1 all which may be     
reduced to two heads1 to wit1 what we   
are to believe1 and what we are to do4  
,all religion is contained in these two 
things1 and so we may apply the words of
 the apostle to this case1 ,now of the  
things which we have spoken this is the 
sum1 ,heb4 viii4 #a4 and accordingly1 as
 this ,catechism is deduced from        
scripture1 it contains two parts1 viz4  
what we are to believe1 and in what     
instances we are to yield obedience to  
the law of ,god4 ,and that the          
scriptures principally teach these two  
things1 appears from the apostle's      
advice to ,timothy1 ,hold fast the form 
of sound words1 which thou hast heard of
 me in faith and love1 #b ,tim4 i4 #ac4 

,from the scriptures' principally       
teaching us matters of faith and        
practice1 we infer1 that faith without  
works is dead2 or that he is not a true 
,christian who yields an assent to      
divine revelation1 without a practical  
subjection to ,god1 in all ways of holy 
obedience1 as the apostle observes1 and 
gives a challenge1 to this effect1 to   
those who separate faith from works2    
,shew me thy faith without thy works1   
and ,i will shew thee my faith by my    
works1 ,james ii4 #ag1 #ah4 and1 on the 
other hand1 works without faith are     
unacceptable4 ,a blind obedience1 or    
ignorant performance of some of the     
external parts of religion1 without the 
knowledge of divine truth1 is no better 
than what the apostle calls bodily      
exercise which profiteth little1 #a     
,tim4 iv4 #ah4 therefore we ought to    
examine ourselves1 whether our faith be 
founded on1 or truly deduced from       
scripture8 and whether it be a practical
 faith1 or1 as the apostle says1 such as

 worketh by love8 ,gal4 v4 #f4 whether  
we grow in knowledge1 as well as in zeal
 and diligence1 in performing many      
duties of religion1 if we would approve 
ourselves sincere ,christians8          
,footnote #df3    ,what we are to       
believe reaches to ,qu4 #ia4 the rest is
 of practice4                           
,quest4 ,,vi4       ,,quest4 ,,vi4 ,what
 do the scriptures make known of ,god8  
,,answ4 ,the scriptures make known what 
,god is1 the persons in the             
,godhead1 the decrees1 and the execution
 of his decrees4  ,it is an amazing     
instance of condescension1 and an       
inexpressible favour which ,god bestows 
on man1 that he should manifest himself 
to him1 and that not only in such a way 
as he does to all mankind1 by the light 
of nature1 which discovers that he is2  
but that he should1 in so glorious a    
way1 declare what he is1 as he does in  
his word3 this is a distinguishing      
privilege1 as the ,psalmist observes1   
when speaking of ,god's shewing his word

 unto ,jacob1 his statutes and his      
judgments unto ,israel1 ,psal4 cxlvii4  
he mentions it1 as an instance of       
discriminating grace1 in that he has not
 dealt so with any other nation4 ,this  
raised the admiration of one of         
,christ's disciples1 when he said1 ,lord
 how is it that thou wilt manifest      
thyself to us1 and not unto the world6  
,john xiv4 #bb4 ,and it is still more   
wonderful1 that he should discover to   
man what he does1 or rather what he has 
decreed or purposed to do1 and so should
 impart his secrets to him2 how         
familiarly does ,god herein deal with   
man6 ,thus he says concerning the holy  
patriarch of old1 ,shall ,i hide from   
,abraham the thing which ,i do8 ,gen4   
xvi4 #ag4 ,however1 it is one thing to  
know the secret purposes of ,god1 and   
another thing to know the various       
properties thereof2 the former of these1
 however known of old1 by extraordinary 
intimation1 are now known to us only by 
the execution of them2 the latter is    

what we may attain to the knowledge of1 
by studying the scriptures4  ,now as the
 scriptures make known1 ,first1 ,what   
,god is2 ,secondly1 ,the persons in the 
,godhead2 ,thirdly1 ,his decrees2 ,and  
,fourthly1 ,the execution thereof2 so we
 are directed hereby in the method to be
 observed in treating of the great      
doctrines of our religion2 and          
accordingly the first part of this      
,catechism1#dg which treats of doctrinal
 subjects1 contains an enlargement on   
these four general heads2 the first     
whereof we proceed to consider4         
,footnote #dg3    ,that is unto the     
#iast ,quest4                           
,quest4 ,,vii4       ,,quest4 ,,vii4    
,what is ,god8      ,,answ4 ,god is a   
,spirit1 in and of himself1 infinite in 
being1 glory1     blessedness1 and      
perfection1 all-sufficient1 eternal1    
unchangeable1     incomprehensible1     
every where present1 almighty1 knowing  
all things1     most wise1 most holy1   
most just1 most merciful1 and gracious1 

long-suffering1 and abundant in goodness
 and truth4  ,before we proceed to      
consider the divine perfections1 as     
contained in this answer1 let it be     
premised1  #a4 ,that it is impossible   
for any one to give a perfect           
description of ,god1 since he is        
incomprehensible1 therefore no words can
 fully express1 or set forth1 his       
perfections2 when the wisest men on     
earth speak of him1 they soon betray    
their own weakness1 or discover1 as     
,elihu says1 that they cannot order     
their speech by reason of darkness1 ,job
 xxxviii4 #ai4 or1 that they are but of 
yesterday1 and know1 comparatively1     
nothing1 chap4 viii4 #i4 ,we are but    
like children1 talking of matters above 
them1 which their tender age can take in
 but little of1 when we speak of the    
infinite perfections of the divine      
nature2 ,this knowledge is too wonderful
 for us2 it is high1 we cannot attain to
 it1 ,psal4 cxxxix4 #f4 ,how little a   
portion is heard of him8 ,job4 xxvi4    

#ad4  #b4 ,though ,god cannot be        
perfectly described2 yet there is       
something of him that we may know1 and  
ought to make the matter of our study   
and diligent enquiries4 ,when his glory 
is set forth in scripture1 we are not to
 look upon the expressions there made   
use of1 as words without any manner of  
ideas affixed to them2 for it is one    
thing to have adequate ideas of an      
infinitely perfect being1 and another   
thing to have no ideas at all of him2   
neither are our ideas of ,god to be     
reckoned1 for this reason1 altogether   
false1 though they are imperfect2 for it
 is one thing to think of him in an     
unbecoming way1 not agreeable to his    
perfections1 or to attribute the        
weakness and imperfection to him which  
do not belong to his nature1 and another
 thing to think of him1 with the highest
 and best conceptions we are able to    
entertain of his infinite perfections1  
while1 at the same time1 we have a due  
sense of our own weakness1 and the      

shallowness of our capacities4 ,when we 
thus order our thoughts concerning the  
great ,god1 though we are far from      
comprehending his infinite perfections1 
yet our conceptions are not to be       
concluded erroneous1 when directed by   
his word2 which leads us to consider how
 we may conceive aright of the divine   
perfections1 that we may not think or   
speak of ,god1 that which is not right1 
though at best we know but little of his
 glory2 and in order thereunto1  7#a47  
,we must first take an estimate of      
finite perfections1 which we have some  
ideas of1 though not perfect ones in all
 respects2 such as power1 wisdom1       
goodness1 faithfulness1 c4  7#b47 ,then 
we must conceive that these are         
eminently1 though not formally in ,god2 
that is1 there is no perfection in the  
creature1 but we must ascribe the same  
to ,god1 though not in the same way2 or 
thus1 whatever perfection is in the     
creature1 the same is in ,god1 and      
infinitely more2 or it is in ,god1 but  

not in such a finite1 limited1 or       
imperfect way1 as it is in the creature2
 ,he that planted the ear1 shall he not 
hear8 ,he that formed the eye1 shall not
 he see8 ,he that teacheth man          
knowledge1 shall he not know8 ,psal4    
xciv4 #i1 #aj4 ,therefore1  7#c47 ,when 
the same words are used that import a   
perfection in ,god1 and in the creature1
 viz4 wisdom1 power1 c4 we must not     
suppose that these words import the same
 thing in their different application2  
for when they are applied to the        
creature1 though we call them           
perfections1 yet they are1 at best1 but 
finite1 and have many imperfections     
attending them1 all which we must       
separate or abstract in our thoughts1   
when the same words are used to set     
forth any divine perfection3 thus       
knowledge is a perfection of the human  
nature1 and the same word is used to    
denote a divine perfection2 yet we must 
consider1 at the same time1 that the    
,lord seeth not as man seeth1 #a ,sam4  

xvi4 #g4 ,the same may be said of all   
his other perfections2 he worketh not as
 man worketh2 whatever perfections are  
ascribed to the creature1 they are to be
 considered as agreeable to the subject 
in which they are2 so when the same     
words are used to set forth any of the  
divine perfections1 they are to be      
understood in a way becoming a ,god of  
infinite perfection4  ,this has given   
occasion to divines to distinguish the  
perfections of ,god1 into those that are
 communicable1 and incommunicable4  #a4 
,the communicable perfections of ,god   
are such1 whereof we find some faint    
resemblance in intelligent creatures1   
though1 at the same time1 there is an   
infinite disproportion2 as when we speak
 of ,god as holy1 wise1 just1 powerful1 
or faithful1 we find something like     
these perfections in the creature1      
though we are not to suppose them1 in   
all respects1 the same as they are in   
,god2 they are in him1 in his own1 that 
is1 an infinite way2 they are in us1 in 

our own1 that is1 a finite and limited  
way4  #b4 ,the incommunicable           
perfections of ,god are such1 of which  
there is not the least shadow1 or       
similitude in creatures1 but they rather
 represent him as opposed to them4 ,thus
 when we speak of him as infinite1      
incomprehensible1 unchangeable1 without 
beginning1 independent1 c4 these        
perfections contain in them an account  
of the vast distance that there is      
between ,god and the creature1 or how   
infinitely he exceeds all other beings1 
and is opposed to every thing that      
argues imperfection in them4  ,from this
 general account we have given of the   
divine perfections1 we may infer1  #a4  
,that there is nothing common between   
,god and the creature2 that is1 there is
 nothing which belongs to the divine    
nature that can be attributed to the    
creature2 and nothing proper to the     
creature is to be applied to ,god3 yet  
there are some rays of the divine glory1
 which may be beheld as shining forth1  

or displayed in the creature1 especially
 in the intelligent part of the         
creation1 angels and men1 who are1 for  
that reason1 represented as made after  
the divine image4  #b4 ,let us never    
think or speak of the divine perfections
 but with the highest reverence1 lest we
 take his name in vain1 or debase him in
 our thoughts2 ,shall not his excellency
 make you afraid1 and his dread fall    
upon you8 ,job xiii4 #aa4 ,and whenever 
we compare ,god with the creatures1 viz4
 angels and men1 that bear somewhat of  
his image1 let us1 at the same time1    
abstract in our thoughts1 all their     
imperfections1 whether natural or moral1
 from him1 and consider the infinite    
disproportion that there is between him 
and them4 ,we now come to consider the  
perfections of the divine nature1 in the
 order in which they are laid down in   
this answer4  ,i4 ,god is a ,spirit2    
that is1 an immaterial substance1       
without body or bodily parts2 this he is
 said to be in ,john iv4 #bd4 ,but if it

 be enquired what we mean by a ,spirit1 
let it be premised1 that we cannot fully
 understand what our own spirits1 or    
souls are2 we know less of the nature of
 angels1 a higher kind of spirits1 and  
least of all of the spirituality of the 
divine nature2 however1 our ideas first 
begin at what is finite1 in considering 
the nature and properties of spirits2   
and from thence we are led to conceive  
of ,god as infinitely more perfect than 
any finite spirit4 ,here we shall       
consider the word spirit1 as applied    
more especially to angels1 and the souls
 of men2 and let it be observed1  #a4   
,that a spirit is the most perfect and  
excellent being2 the soul is more       
excellent than the body1 or indeed than 
any thing that is purely material2 so   
angels are the most perfect and glorious
 part of the creation1 as they are      
spiritual beings1 in some things        
excelling the souls of men4  #b4 ,a     
spirit is1 in its own nature1 immortal2 
it has nothing in its frame and         

constitution that tends to corruption1  
as there is in material things1 which   
consist of various parts1 that may be   
dissolved or separated1 and their form  
altered1 which is what we call          
corruption2 but this belongs not to     
spirits1 which are liable to no change  
in their nature1 but by the immediate   
hand of ,god1 who can1 if he pleases1   
reduce them again to their first        
nothing4  #c4 ,a spirit is capable of   
understanding1 and willing1 and putting 
forth actions agreeable thereunto1 which
 no other being can do3 thus1 though the
 sun is a glorious and useful being2    
yet1 because it is material1 it is not  
capable of thought1 or any moral action1
 such as angels1 and the souls of men1  
can put forth4  ,now these conceptions  
of the nature and properties of finite  
spirits1 lead us to conceive of ,god as 
a spirit4 ,and1  7#a47 ,as spirits excel
 all other creatures1 we must conclude  
,god to be the most excellent and       
perfect of all beings1 and also that he 

is incorruptible1 immortal1 and         
invisible1 as he is said to be in       
scripture1 ,rom4 i4 #bc4 and #a ,tim4 i4
 #ag4  ,moreover1 it follows from hence1
 that he has an understanding and will1 
and so we may conceive of him as the    
,creator and governor of all things2    
this he could not be1 if he were not an 
intelligent and sovereign being1 and    
particularly a spirit4#dh  7#b47 ,the   
difference between other spiritual      
substances and ,god1 is1 that all their 
excellency is only comparative1 viz4 as 
they excel the best of all material     
beings in their nature and properties2  
but ,god1 as a spirit1 is infinitely    
more excellent1 not only than all       
material beings1 but than all created   
spirits4 ,their perfections are derived 
from him1 and therefore he is called1   
,the ,father of spirits1 ,heb4 xii4 #i4 
and the ,god of the spirits of all      
flesh1 ,numb4 xvi4 #bb4 and his         
perfections are underived3 other spirits
 are1 as we have observed1 in their own 

nature1 immortal1 yet ,god can reduce   
them to nothing2 but ,god is            
independently immortal1 and therefore it
 is said of him1 that he only hath      
immortality1 #a ,tim4 vi4 #af4  ,finite 
spirits1 indeed1 have understanding and 
will1 but these powers are contained    
within certain limits whereas ,god is an
 infinite spirit1 and therefore it can  
be said of none but him1 that his       
understanding is infinite1 ,psal4       
cxlvii4 #e4  ,from ,god's being a       
spirit1 we may infer1  #a4 ,that he is  
the most suitable good to the nature of 
our souls1 which are spirits2 he can    
communicate himself1 and apply those    
things to them1 which tend to make them 
happy1 as the ,god and ,father of       
spirits4  #b4 ,he is to be worshipped in
 a spiritual manner1 ,john iv4 #bd4 that
 is1 with our whole souls1 and in a way 
becoming his spiritual nature2          
therefore1  #c4 ,we are to frame no     
similitude or resemblance of him in our 
thoughts1 as though he were a corporeal 

or material being2 neither are we to    
make any pictures of him4 ,this ,god    
forbids ,israel to do1 ,deut4 iv4 #ab1  
#ae1 #af4 and tells them1 that they had 
not the least pretence for so doing1    
inasmuch as they saw no similitude of   
him1 when he spake to them in ,horeb2   
and to make an image of him would be to 
corrupt themselves4  ,,ii4 ,god is said 
to be in1 and of1 himself1 not as though
 he gave being to1 or was the cause of  
himself1 for that implies a             
contradiction2 therefore divines        
generally say1 that ,god is in1 and of  
himself1 not positively1 but negatively1
 that is1 his being and perfections are 
underived1 and not communicated to him1 
as all finite perfections are1 by him1  
to the creature2 therefore he is        
self-existent1 or independent1 which is 
one of the highest glories of the divine
 nature1 by which he is distinguished   
from all creatures1 who live1 move1 and 
have their being in and from him4  ,this
 attribute of independency belongs to   

all his perfections2 thus his wisdom1   
power1 goodness1 holiness1 c4 are all   
independent4 ,and1  #a4 ,with respect to
 his knowledge or wisdom1 he doth not   
receive ideas from any object out of    
himself1 as all intelligent creatures   
do1 and1 in that respect1 are said to   
depend on the object2 so that if there  
were not such objects1 they could not   
have the knowledge or idea of them in   
their minds2 therefore the object known 
must first exist1 before we can         
apprehend what it is4 ,but this must not
 be said of ,god's knowledge1 for that  
would be to suppose the things that he  
knows antecedent to his knowing them4   
,the independency of his knowledge is   
elegantly described in scripture2 ,who  
hath directed the ,spirit of the ,lord1 
or1 being his counsellor1 has taught    
him8 ,with whom took he counsel1 and who
 instructed him1 and taught him in the  
path of judgment1 and taught him        
knowledge1 and shewed to him the way of 
understanding8 ,isa4 xl4 #ac1 #ad4  #b4 

,he is independent in power1 therefore  
as he receives strength from no one1 so 
he doth not act dependently on the will 
of the creature2 ,who hath enjoined him 
his way2 ,job xxxvi4 #bc4 and           
accordingly1 as he received the power of
 acting from no one1 so none can hinder1
 turn aside1 or controul his power1 or  
put a stop to his methods of acting4    
#c4 ,he is independent as to his        
holiness1 hating sin necessarily1 and   
not barely depending on some reasons out
 of himself1 which induce him thereunto2
 for it is essential to the divine      
nature to be infinitely opposite to all 
sin1 and therefore to be independently  
holy4  #d4 ,he is independent as to his 
bounty and goodness1 and so he          
communicates blessings not by           
constraint1 but according to his        
sovereign will4 ,thus he gave being to  
the world1 and all things therein1 which
 was the first instance of bounty and   
goodness1 and a very great one it was1  
not by constraint1 but by his free will1

 for his pleasure they are and were     
created4 ,in like manner1 whatever      
instances of mercy he extends to        
miserable creatures1 he still acts      
independently1 in the display thereof2  
nothing out of himself moves or lays a  
constraint upon him1 but he shews mercy 
because it is his pleasure so to do4    
,but1 to evince the truth of this       
doctrine1 that ,god is independent as to
 his being1 and all his perfections1 let
 it be farther considered1  7#a47 ,that 
all things depend on his power1 which   
brought them into1 and preserves them in
 being2 therefore they exist by his     
will1 as their creator and preserver1   
and consequently are not necessary1 but 
dependent beings4 ,if therefore all     
things depend on ,god1 it is the        
greatest absurdity to say that ,god     
depends on any thing1 for this would be 
to suppose the cause and the effect to  
be mutually dependent on1 and derived   
from each other1 which infers a         
contradiction4  7#b47 ,if ,god be       

infinitely above the highest creatures1 
he cannot depend on any of them2 for    
dependence argues inferiority4 ,now that
 ,god is above all things is certain3   
this is represented in a very beautiful 
manner by the prophet1 when he says1    
,isa4 xl4 #ae1 #ag4 ,behold the nations 
are as the drop of the bucket1 and are  
counted as the small dust of the        
balance2 all nations before him are as  
nothing1 and they are counted to him    
less than nothing and vanity2 therefore 
he cannot be said to be inferior to     
them1 and1 by consequence1 to depend on 
them4  7#c47 ,if ,god depends on any    
creature1 he does not exist necessarily3
 and if so1 then he might not have been2
 for the same will1 by which he is      
supposed to exist1 might have determined
 that he should not have existed4 ,if   
therefore ,god be not independent1 he   
might not have been1 and1 according to  
the same method of reasoning1 he might  
cease to be2 for the same will1 that    
gave being to him1 might take it away at

 pleasure1 which is altogether          
inconsistent with the idea of a ,god4   
,from ,god's being independent1 or in   
and of himself1 we infer1  #a4 ,that we 
ought to conclude that the creature     
cannot lay any obligation on him1 or do 
any thing that may tend to make him more
 happy than he is in himself2 the       
apostle gives a challenge to this       
effect1 ,who hath first given to him1   
and it shall be recompensed unto him    
again1 ,rom4 xi4 #ce4 and ,eliphaz says 
to ,job1 ,job xxii4 #b1 #c4 ,can a man  
be profitable to ,god1 as he that is    
wise may be profitable unto himself8 ,is
 it any pleasure to the ,almighty1 that 
thou art righteous8 or is it gain to    
him1 that thou makest thy ways perfect8 
#b4 ,if independency be a divine        
perfection1 then let it not1 in any     
instance1 or by any consequence1 be     
attributed to the creature2 let us      
conclude1 that all our springs are in   
him1 and that all we enjoy and hope for 
is from him1 who is the author and      

finisher of our faith1 and the fountain 
of all our blessedness4  ,,iii4 ,god is 
infinite in being1 glory1 blessedness1  
and perfection4 ,to be infinite1 is to  
be without all bounds or limits1 either 
actual or possible3 now that ,god is so1
 is evident1 from his being independent 
and uncreated2 and because his will     
fixes the bounds of all the             
excellencies1 perfections1 and powers of
 the creature4 ,if therefore he doth not
 exist by the will of another1 he is    
infinite in being1 and consequently in  
all perfection3 thus it is said1 ,psal4 
cxlvii4 #e4 his understanding is        
infinite1 which will farther appear1    
when we consider him as omniscient2 his 
will determines what shall come to pass1
 with an infinite sovereignty1 that     
cannot be controuled1 or rendered       
ineffectual2 his power is infinite1 and 
therefore all things are equally        
possible1 and easy to it1 nor can it be 
resisted by any contrary force or power2
 and he is infinite in blessedness1 as  

being self-sufficient1 or not standing  
in need of any thing to make him more   
happy than he was in himself1 from all  
eternity4 ,the ,psalmist is supposed by 
many1 to speak in the person of ,christ1
 when he says1 ,psal4 xvi4 #b4 ,my      
goodness extendeth not to thee1 q4 d4   
8,how much soever thy relative glory may
 be illustrated1 by what ,i have engaged
 to perform in the covenant of          
redemption1 yet this can make no        
addition to thine essential glory40 ,and
 if so1 then certainly nothing can be   
done by us which may in the least       
contribute thereunto4  ,,iv4 ,god is    
all-sufficient1 by which we understand  
that he hath enough in himself to       
satisfy the most enlarged desires of his
 creatures1 and to make them completely 
blessed4 ,as his self-sufficiency is    
that whereby he has enough in himself to
 denominate him completely blessed1 as a
 ,god of infinite perfection2 so his    
all-sufficiency is that1 whereby he is  
able to communicate as much blessedness 

to his creatures1 as he is pleased to   
make them capable of receiving2 and     
therefore he is able not only to supply 
all their wants1 but to do exceedingly  
above all that they ask or think1 ,phil4
 iv4 #ai4 and ,eph4 iii4 #bj4 ,this he  
can do1 either in an immediate way2 or1 
if he thinks fit to make use of         
creatures as instruments1 to fulfil his 
pleasure1 and communicate what he       
designs to impart to us1 he is never at 
a loss2 for as they are the work of his 
hands1 so he has a right to use them at 
his will2 upon which account1 they are  
said1 all of them to be his servants1   
,psal4 cxix4 #ia4  ,this doctrine of    
,god's all-sufficiency should be        
improved by us1  #a4 ,to induce us to   
seek happiness in him alone3 creatures  
are no more than the stream1 but he is  
the fountain2 we may1 in a mediate way1 
receive some small drops from them1 but 
he is the ocean of all blessedness4  #b4
 ,let us take heed that we do not       
reflect on1 or in effect1 deny this     

perfection2 which we may be said to do  
in various instances4 ,as1  7#a47 ,when 
we are discontented with our present    
condition1 and desire more than ,god has
 allotted for us4 ,this seems to have   
been the sin of the angels1 who left    
their first habitation through pride1   
seeking more than ,god designed they    
should have2 and this was the sin by    
which our first parents fell1 desiring a
 greater degree of knowledge than what  
they thought themselves possessed of3   
thus they fancied1 that by eating the   
forbidden fruit1 they should be as gods1
 knowing good and evil1 ,gen4 iii4 #e4  
7#b47 ,we practically deny the          
all-sufficiency of ,god1 when we seek   
blessings of what kind soever they are1 
in an indirect way1 as though ,god were 
not able to bestow them upon us in his  
own way1 or in the use of lawful means3 
thus ,rebecca and ,jacob did1 when they 
contrived a lie to obtain the blessing1 
chap4 xxvii4 as though there had not    
been an all-sufficiency in providence to

 bring it about1 without their having   
recourse to those methods that were in  
themselves sinful4  7#c47 ,when we use  
unlawful means to escape imminent       
dangers4 ,thus ,david did when he       
feigned himself mad1 supposing1 without 
ground1 that he should have been slain  
by ,achish1 king of ,gath2 and that     
there was no other way to escape but    
this1 #a ,sam4 xxi4 #ac4 and ,abraham   
and ,isaac1 ,gen4 chapters xx4 and xxvi4
 when they denied their wives1          
concluding this to have been an         
expedient to save their lives1 as though
 ,god were not able to save them in a   
better and more honourable way4  7#d47  
,when we distrust his providence1 though
 we have had large experience of its    
appearing for us in various instances3  
thus ,david did1 when he said1 in his   
heart1 ,i shall one day perish by the   
hand of ,saul1 #a ,sam4 xxvii4 #a4 and  
the ,israelites1 when they said1 ,can   
,god furnish a table in the wilderness8 
,psal4 lxxviii4 #ai4 though he had      

provided for them in an extraordinary   
way ever since they had been there3 yea1
 ,moses himself was faulty in this      
matter1 when he said1 ,whence should ,i 
have flesh to give unto all this people8
 ,i am not able to bear all this people 
alone1 because it is too heavy for me1  
,numb4 xi4 #ac1 #ad4 and ,asa1 when he  
tempted ,benhadad to break his league   
with ,baasha1 who made war against him2 
as though ,god were not able to deliver 
him without this indirect practice1     
though he had in an eminent manner1     
appeared for him1 in giving him a signal
 victory over ,zerah the ,ethiopian1    
when he came against him with an army of
 a million of men1 #b ,chron4 xvi4 #c4  
compared with chap4 xiv4 #i1 #ac4 and   
likewise ,joshua1 when ,israel had      
suffered a small defeat1 occasioned by  
,achan's sin1 when they fled before the 
men of ,ai1 though there were but       
thirty-six of them slain2 yet1 on that  
occasion1 he is ready to wish that ,god 
had not brought them over ,jordan1 and  

meditates nothing but ruin and          
destruction from the ,amorites1         
forgetting ,god's former deliverances1  
and distrusting his faithfulness1 and   
care of his people1 and1 as it were1    
calling in question his all-sufficiency1
 as though he were not able to          
accomplish the promises he had made to  
them1 ,josh4 vii4 #g1 #h1 #i4  7#e47    
,when we doubt of the truth1 or certain 
accomplishment of his promises1 and so  
are ready to say1 ,hath ,god forgotten  
to be gracious8 ,doth his truth fail for
 ever8 ,this we are apt to do1 when     
there are great difficulties in the way 
of the accomplishment thereof3 thus     
,sarah1 when it was told her that she   
should have a child1 in her old age1    
laughed1 through unbelief1 ,gen4 xviii4 
#ab4 and ,god intimates1 that this was  
an affront to his all-sufficiency1 when 
he says1 ,is any thing too hard for the 
,lord8 ver4 #ad4 and ,gideon1 though he 
was told that ,god was with him1 and had
 an express command to go in his might1 

with a promise that he should deliver   
,israel from the ,midianites1 yet he    
says1 ,o ,lord wherewith shall ,i save  
them8 for my family is poor in          
,manasseh1 and ,i am the least in my    
father's house1 ,judg4 vi4 #ae4 ,god    
tells him again1 ,i will be with thee1  
and smite the ,midianites1 ver4 #af4    
yet1 afterwards1 he desires that he     
would give him a sign in the wet and dry
 fleece4 ,what is this but questioning  
his all-sufficiency8  7#f47 ,when we    
decline great services1 though called to
 them by ,god1 under pretence of our    
unfitness for them3 thus when the       
prophet ,jeremiah was called to deliver 
the ,lord's message to the rebellious   
house of ,israel1 he desires to be      
excused1 and says1 ,behold ,i cannot    
speak1 for ,i am a child2 whereas the   
main discouragement was the difficulty  
of the work1 and the hazards he was like
 to run2 but ,god encourages him to it1 
by putting him in mind of his           
all-sufficiency1 when he tells him1 that

 he would be with him1 and deliver him1 
,jer4 i4 #f4 compared with ver4 #h4     
,this divine perfection affords matter  
of support and encouragement to         
believers1 under the greatest straits   
and difficulties they are exposed to in 
this world2 and we have many instances  
in scripture of those who have had      
recourse to it in the like cases4 ,thus1
 when ,david was in the greatest straits
 that ever he met with1 upon the        
,amalekites' spoiling of ,ziklag1 and   
carrying away the women captives1 the   
people talked of stoning him1 and all   
things seemed to make against him2 yet  
it is said1 that he encouraged himself  
in the ,lord his ,god1 #a ,sam4 xxx4 #f4
 so ,mordecai was confident that the    
enlargement and deliverance of the ,jews
 should come some other way1 if not by  
,esther's intercession for them1 when   
she was afraid to go in to the king1    
,esth4 iv4 #ad4 and this confidence he  
could never have obtained1 considering  
the present posture of their affairs1   

without a due regard to ,god's          
all-sufficiency4 ,moreover1 it was this 
divine perfection that encouraged       
,abraham to obey the difficult command  
of offering his son3 as the apostle     
observes1 he did this as knowing that   
,god was able to raise him from the     
dead1 ,heb4 xi4 #ai4 and when believers 
are under the greatest distress1 from   
the assaults of their spiritual enemies1
 they have a warrant from ,god1 as the  
apostle had1 to encourage themselves1   
that they shall come off victorious1    
because his grace is sufficient for     
them1 #b ,cor4 xii4 #h1 #i4  ,v4 ,god is
 eternal3 this respects his duration1 to
 wit1 as he was without beginning1 as   
well as shall be without end2 or as his 
duration is unchangeable1 or without    
succession1 the same from everlasting to
 everlasting3 thus the ,psalmist says1  
,before the mountains were brought      
forth1 or ever thou hadst formed the    
earth and the world2 even from          
everlasting to everlasting thou art     

,god1 ,psal4 xc4 #b4  #a4 ,that ,god is 
from everlasting1 appears1  7#a47 ,from 
his being a necessary1 self-existent    
being1 or1 as was before observed1 in   
and of himself1 therefore he must be    
from everlasting2 for whatever is not   
produced is from eternity4 ,now that    
,god did not derive his being from any  
one1 is evident1 because he gave being  
to all things1 which is implied in their
 being creatures2 therefore nothing gave
 being to him1 and consequently he was  
from eternity4  7#b47 ,if he is an      
infinitely perfect being1 as has been   
observed before1 then his duration is   
infinitely perfect1 and consequently it 
is boundless1 that is to say1 eternal3  
it is an imperfection1 in all created   
beings1 that they began to exist1 and   
therefore they are said1 in a           
comparative sense1 to be but of         
yesterday2 we must therefore1 when we   
conceive of ,god1 separate this         
imperfection from him1 and so conclude  
that he was from all eternity4  7#c47   

,if he created all things in the        
beginning1 then he was before the       
beginning of time1 that is1 from        
eternity3 thus it is said1 ,in the      
beginning ,god created the heaven and   
the earth1 ,gen4 i4 #a4 this is very    
evident1 for time is a successive       
duration1 taking its rise from a certain
 point1 or moment1 which we call the    
beginning3 now that duration1 which was 
before this1 must be from eternity1     
unless we suppose time before time      
began1 or1 which is all one1 that there 
was a successive duration before        
successive duration began1 which is a   
contradiction4 ,therefore1 if ,god fixed
 that beginning to all things1 as their 
,creator1 and particularly to time1     
which is the measure of the duration of 
all created beings1 then it is evident  
that he was before time1 and            
consequently from eternity4  7#d47 ,this
 also appears from scripture2 as when it
 is said1 ,the eternal ,god is thy      
refuge1 and underneath are the          

everlasting arms1 ,deut4 xxxiii4 #bg4   
and when we read of his eternal power   
and ,godhead1 ,rom4 i4 #bj4 and         
elsewhere1 ,art not thou from           
everlasting ,o ,lord1 my ,god8 ,hab4 i4 
#ab4 ,thy throne is established of old2 
thou art from everlasting1 ,psal4 xciii4
 #b4 so his attributes and perfections  
are said to have been from everlasting1 
,the mercy of the ,lord is from         
everlasting to everlasting1 ,psal4 ciii4
 #ag4  ,and this may be argued from many
 scripture-consequences3 thus1 there was
 an election of persons to holiness and 
happiness1 before the foundation of the 
world1 ,eph4 i4 #d4 and ,christ1 in     
particular1 was fore-ordained to be our 
,mediator1 before the foundation of the 
world1 #a ,pet4 i4 #bj4 and set up from 
everlasting1 from the beginning1 or ever
 the earth was1 ,prov4 viii4 #bc4 ,from 
hence it follows1 that there was a      
sovereign will that fore-ordained it1   
and therefore ,god1 whose decree or     
purpose it was1 existed before the      

foundation of the world1 that is1 from  
everlasting4  ,moreover1 there were     
grants of grace given in ,christ1 or put
 into his hand1 from all eternity3 thus 
we read of eternal life1 which ,god     
promised before the world began1 ,tit4  
i4 #b4 and of our being saved1 according
 to his purpose and grace1 given us in  
,christ ,jesus1 before the world began1 
#b ,tim4 i4 #i4 ,it hence follows1 that 
there was an eternal giver1 and         
consequently that ,god was from         
everlasting4  #b4 ,god shall be to      
everlasting2 thus it is said1 ,the ,lord
 shall endure forever1 ,psal4 ix4 #g4   
and that he liveth for ever and ever1   
,rev4 iv4 #i1 #aj4 and that his years   
shall have no end1 ,psal4 cii4 #bg4 and 
the ,lord shall reign for ever1 ,psal4  
cxlvi4 #aj4 therefore he must endure for
 ever4 ,again1 it is said1 that the     
,lord keepeth covenant and mercy with   
them that love him1 to a thousand       
generations1 ,deut4 vii4 #i4 and he will
 ever be mindful of his covenant1 ,psal4

 cxi4 #e4 that is1 will fulfil what he  
has promised therein3 if his truth shall
 not fail for ever1 then he1 who will   
accomplish what he has spoken1 must     
endure to everlasting4  ,but this may be
 farther evinced from the perfections of
 his nature4  7#a47 ,from his necessary 
existence1 which not only argues1 as has
 been before observed1 that he could not
 begin to be1 but equally proves1 that  
he cannot cease to be1 or that he shall 
be to everlasting4  7#b47 ,he is void of
 all composition1 and therefore must be 
to everlasting2 none but compounded     
beings1 viz4 such as have parts1 are    
subject to dissolution1 which arises    
from1 the contrariety of these parts1   
and their tendency to destroy one       
another1 which occasions the dissolution
 of the whole2 but ,god having no parts1
 as he is the most simple uncompounded  
being1 there can be nothing in him that 
tends to dissolution1 therefore he can  
never have an end from any necessity of 
nature4 ,and1  7#c47 ,he must be to     

eternity1 because there is no one       
superior to him1 at whose will he       
exists1 that can deprive him of his     
being and glory4  7#d47 ,he cannot will 
his own destruction1 or non-existence1  
for that is contrary to the universal   
nature of things2 since no being can    
desire to be less perfect than it is1   
much less can any one will or desire his
 own annihilation2 especially no one1   
who is possessed of blessedness1 can    
will the loss thereof1 for that is      
incongruous with the nature of it1 as   
being a desirable good1 therefore ,god  
cannot will the loss of his own         
blessedness2 and since his blessedness  
is inseparably connected with his being1
 he cannot cease to be1 from an act of  
his own will3 if therefore he cannot    
cease to be1 from any necessity of      
nature1 or from the will of another1 or 
from an act of his own will1 he must be 
to eternity4  ,moreover1 the eternity of
 ,god may be proved from his other      
perfections1 since one of the divine    

perfections infers the other4 ,as1  #a4 
,from his immutability2 he is           
unchangeable in his being1 therefore he 
is so in all his perfections1 and       
consequently must be always the same1   
from everlasting to everlasting1 and not
 proceed from a state of non-existence  
to that of being1 which he would have   
done1 had he not been from everlasting1 
nor decline from a state of being to    
that of non-existence1 which he would be
 supposed to do1 were he not to         
everlasting3 either of these is the     
greatest change that can be supposed1   
and therefore inconsistent with the     
divine immutability4  #b4 ,he is the    
first cause1 and the ultimate end of all
 things1 therefore he must be from      
eternity1 and remain the fountain of all
 blessedness to eternity4  #c4 ,he could
 not be almighty1 or infinite in power1 
if he were not eternal2 for that being1 
which did not always exist1 once could  
not act1 to wit1 when it did not exist2 
or he that may cease to be1 may1 for the

 same reason1 be disabled from acting2  
both which are inconsistent with        
,almighty power4  #d4 ,if he were not   
eternal1 he could not1 by way of        
eminency be called the living ,god1 as  
he is1 ,jer4 x4 #aj4 or said to have    
life in himself1 ,john v4 #bf4 for both 
these expressions imply his necessary   
existence1 and that argues his eternity4
  #c4 ,god's eternal duration is without
 succession1 as well as without         
beginning and end1 that it is so1       
appears1  7#a47 ,because1 as was hinted 
but now1 it is unchangeable1 since all  
successive duration infers a change4    
,thus the duration of creatures1 which  
is successive1 is not the same one      
moment as it will be the next2 every    
moment adds something to it2 now this   
cannot be said of ,god's duration4      
,besides1 successive duration implies a 
being1 what we were not1 in all respects
 before1 and a ceasing to be what we    
were1 and so it is a kind of continual  
passing from not being to being1 which  

is inconsistent with the divine         
perfections1 and1 in particular1 with   
his unchangeable duration4 ,the         
,psalmist1 speaking of ,god's eternal   
duration1 expresses it by the           
immutability thereof1 ,thou art the     
same1 and thy years shall have no end1  
,psal4 cii4 #bg42 and the apostle1      
speaking concerning this matter1 says1  
,he is the same yesterday1 to day1 and  
forever1 ,heb4 xiii4 #h4  7#b47         
,successive duration is applicable to   
time2 and the duration of all creatures 
is measured1 and therefore cannot be    
termed infinite2 it is measured by its  
successive parts3 thus a day1 a year1 an
 age1 a million of ages1 are measured by
 the number of moments1 of which they   
consist2 but ,god's duration is         
unmeasured1 that is1 infinite1 therefore
 it is without succession1 or without   
those parts of which time consists4#di  
#d4 ,eternity is an attribute peculiar  
to ,god1 and therefore we call it an    
incommunicable perfection4 ,there are1  

indeed1 other things that shall endure  
to everlasting1 as angels1 and the souls
 of men2 as also those heavenly bodies  
that shall remain after the creature is 
delivered from the bondage of           
corruption1 to which it is now subject3 
the heavenly places1 designed for the   
seat of the blessed1 as well as their   
happy inhabitants1 shall be everlasting2
 but yet the everlasting duration of    
these things infinitely differs from the
 eternity of ,god2 for as all finite    
things began to be1 and their duration  
is successive1 so their everlasting     
existence depends entirely on the power 
and will of ,god1 and therefore cannot  
be called necessary1 or independent1 as 
his eternal existence is4  ,object4     
,since the various parts of time1 as    
days1 years1 c4 and the various changes1
 or flux of time2 such as past1 present1
 and to come1 are sometimes attributed  
to ,god2 this seems inconsistent with   
the account that has been given of his  
eternity4  ,answ4 ,it is true1 we often 

find such expressions used in scripture3
 thus he is called1 the ancient of days1
 ,dan4 vii4 #i4 and his eternity is     
expressed1 by his years having no end1  
,psal4 cii4 #bg4 and it is said1 ,he    
was1 is1 and is to come1 ,rev4 i4 #d4   
and chap4 iv4 #h4 ,but1 for the         
understanding of such-like expressions1 
we must consider1 that herein ,god is   
pleased to speak according to our weak  
capacity1 who cannot comprehend the     
manner of his infinite duration2 we     
cannot conceive of any duration but that
 which is successive2 therefore ,god    
speaks to us1 as he does in many other  
instances1 in condescension to our      
capacities2 but yet we may observe1 that
 though he thus condescends to speak    
concerning himself1 yet there is        
oftentimes something added1 which       
distinguishes his duration from that of 
creatures2 as when it is said1 ,behold  
,god is great1 and we know him not2     
neither can the number of his years be  
searched out1 ,job xxxvi4 #bf4 so that  

though we read of the years of his      
duration1 yet they are such as are      
unsearchable1 or incomprehensible years1
 infinitely different from years1 as    
applied to created beings2 and it is    
said1 ,a thousand years in thy sight1   
are but as yesterday1 when it is past1  
,psal4 xc4 #d4 ,one day is with the     
,lord as a thousand years1 and a        
thousand years as one day1 #b ,pet4 iii4
 #h4 and1 by the same method of         
reasoning1 it may be said1 one moment is
 with the ,lord as a thousand millions  
of ages1 or a thousand millions of ages 
as one moment2 such is his duration1 and
 therefore not properly successive1 like
 that of creatures4  #b4 ,when any thing
 past1 present1 or to come1 is          
attributed to ,god1 it either signifies 
that he is so1 as to his works1 which   
are finite1 and measured by successive  
duration2 or else it signifies1 that he1
 whose duration is not measured by      
succession1 notwithstanding1 exists     
unchangeably1 through all the various   

ages of time4 ,as he is omnipresent with
 all the parts of matter1 yet has no    
parts himself1 so he exists in all the  
successive ages of time1 but without    
that succession1 which is peculiar to   
time and creatures4  ,several things may
 be inferred1 of a practical nature1    
from the eternity of ,god4 ,as1  #a4    
,since ,god's duration is eternal1 that 
is1 without succession1 so that there is
 no such thing as past1 or to come1 with
 him2 or if ten thousand millions of    
ages are but like a moment to him2 then 
it follows1 that those sins which we    
have committed long ago1 and perhaps are
 forgotten by us1 are present to his    
view2 he knows what we have done against
 him ever since we had a being in this  
world1 as much as though we were at     
present committing them4  #b4 ,if ,god  
was from eternity1 then how contemptible
 is all created glory1 when compared    
with his2 look but a few ages backward1 
and it was nothing3 this should humble  
the pride of the creature1 who is but of

 yesterday1 and whose duration is       
nothing1 and less than nothing1 if      
compared with ,god's4  #c4 ,the eternity
 of ,god1 as being to everlasting1      
affords matter of terror to his enemies1
 and comfort to his people1 and1 as     
such1 should be improved for the        
preventing of sin4  7#a47 ,it affords   
matter of terror to his enemies4 ,for1  
#ast4 ,he ever lives to see his         
threatenings executed1 and to pour forth
 the vials of his fury on them3 thus the
 prophet speaking of ,god1 as the       
everlasting ,king1 adds1 that at his    
wrath the earth shall tremble1 and the  
nations shall not be able to abide his  
indignation1 ,jer4 x4 #aj4 ,therefore   
the eternity of ,god argues the eternity
 of the punishment of sin1 since this   
great ,judge1 who is a consuming fire to
 impenitent sinners1 will live for ever 
to see his threatenings executed upon   
them4 ,this appears1 if we consider1    
#b;dly1 ,that since he is eternal in his
 being1 he must be so in his power1     

holiness1 justice1 and all his other    
perfections1 which are terrible to his  
enemies3 thus the ,psalmist says1 ,who  
knoweth the power of thine anger8 even  
according to thy fear1 so is thy wrath1 
,psal4 xc4 #aa4 and the apostle says1   
,it is a fearful thing to fall into the 
hands of the living ,god1 ,heb4 x4 #ca4 
7#b47 ,it affords matter of comfort to  
believers1 as opposed to the fluctuating
 and uncertain state of all             
creature-enjoyments2 it is an           
encouragement to them in the loss of    
friends and relations1 or under all the 
other losses or disappointments they    
meet with as to their outward estate in 
this world4 ,these are1 at best1 but    
short-lived comforts1 but ,god is the   
eternal portion and happiness of his    
people1 ,psal4 lxxiii4 #bf4 and1 from   
his eternity1 they may certainly        
conclude1 that the happiness of the     
heavenly state will be eternal1 for it  
consists in the enjoyment of him1 who is
 so2 which is a very delightful thought 

to all who are enabled by faith to lay  
claim to it4  ,,vi4 ,god is immutable3  
thus it is said1 that with him is no    
variableness1 neither shadow of turning1
 ,james i4 #ag4 ,this is sometimes set  
forth in a metaphorical way1 in which   
respect he is compared to a rock1 ,deut4
 xxxii4 #d4 which remains immoveable1   
when the whole ocean1 that surrounds it1
 is continually in a fluctuating state2 
even so1 though all creatures are       
subject to change1 ,god alone is        
unchangeable in his being1 and all his  
perfections4  ,here we shall consider1  
#a4 ,how immutability is a perfection2  
and how it is a divine perfection       
peculiar to ,god4  7#a47 ,it must be    
allowed that immutability cannot be said
 to be an excellency or perfection1     
unless it be applied to1 or spoken of   
what is good2 an immutable state of sin1
 or misery1 is far from being an        
excellency1 when it is applied to fallen
 angels1 or wicked men3 but unchangeable
 holiness and happiness1 as applied to  

holy angels1 or saints in heaven1 is a  
perfection conferred upon them2 and when
 we speak of ,god's immutability1 we    
suppose him infinitely blessed1 which is
 included in the notion of a ,god2 and  
so we farther say1 that he is           
unchangeable in all those perfections in
 which it consists4  7#b47 ,immutability
 belongs1 in the most proper sense1 to  
,god alone2 so that as he only is said  
to have immortality1 #a ,tim4 vi4 #af4  
that is1 such as is underived and       
independent1 he alone is unchangeable2  
other things are rendered immutable by  
an act of his will and power1 but       
immutability is an essential perfection 
of the divine nature2 creatures are     
dependently immutable1 ,god is          
independently so4  7#c47 ,the most      
perfect creatures1 such as angels and   
glorified saints1 are capable of new    
additions to their blessedness2 new     
objects may be presented as occasions of
 praise1 which tend perpetually to      
increase their happiness3 the angels    

know more than they did before ,christ's
 incarnation2 for they are said to know 
by the church1 that is1 by the dealings 
of ,god with his church1 the manifold   
wisdom of ,god1 ,eph4 iii4 #aj4 and to  
desire to look into the account the     
gospel gives of the sufferings of       
,christ1 and the glory that should      
follow1 #a ,pet4 i4 #aa1 #ab4 and they  
shall have farther additions to their   
blessedness1 when all the elect are     
joined to their assembly in the great   
day2 so that the happiness of the best  
creatures is communicated in various    
degrees2 but ,god's perfections and     
blessedness can have no additions made  
to them1 therefore he is immutable in a 
sense as no creature is4  #b4 ,we shall 
now prove that ,god is immutable in his 
being and all his perfections4  7#a47   
,that he is immutable in his being2 this
 belongs to him as ,god1 and1           
consequently to him alone4 ,all other   
beings once were not2 there has been1 if
 ,i may so express it1 a change from a  

state of non-existence1 to that of      
being2 and the same power that brought  
them into being1 could reduce them again
 to their first nothing4 ,to be         
dependent1 is to be subject to change at
 the will of another2 this is applicable
 to all finite things2 for it is said1  
,as a vesture thou shalt change them1   
and they shall be changed3 but ,god     
being opposed to them as independent1 is
 said to be the same1 ,psal4 cii4 #bf1  
#bg4  #ast1 ,he did not change from a   
state of non-existence to being1        
inasmuch as he was from everlasting1 and
 therefore necessarily existent2 and    
consequently he cannot change from a    
state of being to that of non-existence1
 or cease to be2 and because his        
perfections are essential to him1 and   
underived1 in the same sense as his     
being is1 therefore there can be no     
change therein4  #b;dly4 ,he cannot     
change from a state of greater to a     
state of less perfection1 or be subject 
to the least diminution of his divine   

perfections4 ,to suppose this possible1 
is to suppose he may cease to be        
infinitely perfect2 that is1 to be ,god3
 nor can he change from a state of less 
perfection to a state of greater2 for   
that is to suppose him not to be        
infinitely perfect before this change1  
or that there are degrees of infinite   
perfection4 ,nor1  #c;dly1 ,can he pass 
from that state1 in which he is1 to     
another of equal perfection2 for1 as    
such a change implies an equal          
proportion of loss and gain1 so it would
 argue a plurality of infinite beings2  
or since he1 who was ,god before this   
change1 was distinct from what he       
arrives to after it1 this would be      
contrary to the unity of the divine     
essence4  ,moreover1 this may be farther
 proved from hence1 that if there be any
 change in ,god1 this must arise either 
from himself1 or some other3 it cannot  
be from himself1 inasmuch as he exists  
necessarily1 and not as the result of   
his own will3 therefore he cannot will  

any alteration1 or change in himself2   
this is also contrary to the nature of  
infinite blessedness1 which cannot      
desire the least diminution1 as it      
cannot apprehend any necessity thereof3 
and then he cannot be changed by any    
other3 for he that changes any other1   
must be greater than him whom he        
changes2 nor can he be subject to the   
will of another1 who is superior to him2
 since there is none equal1 much less   
superior1 to ,god3 therefore there is no
 being that can add to1 or take from1   
his perfections2 which leads us1  7#b47 
,to consider the immutability of ,god's 
perfections4 ,and1  ,first1 ,of his     
knowledge2 he seeth not as man seeth2   
this is obvious4 ,for1  #ast1 ,his      
knowledge is independent upon the       
objects known2 therefore whatever       
changes there are in them1 there is none
 in him4 ,things known1 are considered  
either as past1 present1 or to come2 and
 these are not known by us in the same  
way2 for concerning things past1 it must

 be said1 that we shall know them       
hereafter2 whereas ,god1 with one view1 
comprehends all things1 past and future1
 as though they were present4  #b;dly1  
,if ,god's knowledge were not           
unchangeable1 he might be said to have  
different thoughts1 or apprehensions of 
things at one time1 from what he has at 
another1 which would argue a defect of  
wisdom4 ,and indeed a change of         
sentiments implies ignorance1 or        
weakness of understanding2 for to make  
advances in knowledge1 supposes a degree
 of ignorance2 and to decline therein1  
is to be reduced to a state of          
ignorance3 now it is certain1 that both 
these are inconsistent with the infinite
 perfection of the divine mind2 nor can 
any such defect be applied to him1 who  
is called1 ,the only wise ,god1 #a ,tim4
 i4 #ag4  #c;dly1 ,if it were possible  
for ,god's knowledge to be changed1 this
 would infer a change of his will1 since
 having changed his sentiments1 he must 
be supposed to alter his resolutions and

 purposes2 but his will is unchangeable1
 therefore his understanding or         
knowledge is so2 which leads us to      
prove1  ,secondly1 ,that ,god is        
unchangeable in his will3 thus it is    
said of him1 ,he is of one mind1 and who
 can turn him8 ,job xxiii4 #ac4 ,this is
 agreeable to his infinite perfection1  
and therefore he does not purpose to do 
a thing at one time1 and determine not  
to do it at another2 though it is true1 
the revelation of his will may be       
changed1 whereby that may be rendered a 
duty at one time1 which was not at      
another3 thus the ordinances of the     
ceremonial law were prescribed1 from    
,moses's time to ,christ2 but after that
 were abolished1 and ceased to be       
ordinances2 so that there may be a      
change in the things willed1 or in      
external revelation of ,god's will1 and 
in our duty founded thereon1 when there 
is1 at the same time1 no change in his  
purpose2 for he determines all changes  
in the external dispensation of his     

providence and grace1 without the least 
shadow of change in his own will3 this  
may farther appear1 if we consider1     
#ast1 ,that if the will of ,god were not
 unchangeable1 he could not be the      
object of trust2 for how could we depend
 on his promises1 were it possible for  
him to change his purpose8 ,neither     
would his threatenings be so much       
regarded1 if there were any ground to   
expect1 from the mutability of his      
nature1 that he would not execute them2 
and by this means1 all religion would be
 banished out of the world4  #b;dly1    
,this would render the condition of the 
best men1 in some respects1 very        
uncomfortable2 for they might be one day
 the object of his love1 and the next1  
of his hatred1 and those blessings which
 accompany salvation might be bestowed  
at one time1 and taken away at another1 
which is directly contrary to scripture1
 which asserts1 that the gifts and      
calling of ,god are without repentance1 
,rom4 xi4 #bi4  #c;dly1 ,none of those  

things that occasion a change in the    
purposes of men1 can be applied to ,god2
 and therefore there is nothing in him1 
that in the least degree can lead him to
 change his will1 or determination1 with
 respect to the event of things4 ,for1  
#ast1 ,men change their purpose1 from a 
natural fickleness and inconstancy1 as  
there is mutability in their very       
nature2 but ,god being unchangeable in  
his nature1 he must be so in his purpose
 or will4  #b;dly1 ,men change their    
purposes in promising1 and not          
fulfilling their promise1 or1 as we say1
 in being worse than their word1        
oftentimes from the viciousness and     
depravity of their nature2 but ,god is  
infinitely holy1 and therefore1 in this 
respect1 cannot change4  #c;dly1 ,men   
change their mind or purposes1 for want 
of power1 to bring about what they      
designed2 this has hindered many well   
concerted projects from taking effect in
 some1 and many threatenings from being 
executed in others2 but ,god's will     

cannot be frustrated for want of power1 
to do what he designed1 inasmuch as he  
is ,almighty4  #dthly1 ,men change their
 minds many times1 for want of          
foresight2 something unexpected occurs  
that renders it expedient for them to   
alter their purpose1 which argues a     
defect of wisdom3 but ,god is infinitely
 wise2 therefore nothing unforeseen can 
intervene to induce him to change his   
purpose4  #ethly1 ,men are sometimes    
obliged to change their purpose by the  
influence1 threatenings1 or other       
methods1 used by some superior2 but     
there is none equal1 much less superior1
 to ,god2 and consequently none can lay 
any obligation on him to change his     
purpose4  ,,vii4 ,god is                
incomprehensible3 this implies that his 
perfections cannot be fully known by any
 creature2 thus it is said1 ,canst thou 
by searching1 find out ,god8 ,canst thou
 find out the ,almighty unto perfection8
 ,job xi4 #g4  ,when we consider ,god as
 incomprehensible1 we do not only mean  

that man in this imperfect state1 cannot
 fully comprehend his glory2 for it is  
but very little1 comparatively1 that we 
can comprehend of finite things1 and we 
know much less of that which is         
infinite2 but when we say that ,god is  
incomprehensible1 we mean that the best 
of creatures1 in the most perfect state1
 cannot fully conceive of1 or describe  
his glory2 and the reason is1 because   
they are finite1 and his perfections are
 infinite2 and there is no proportion   
between an infinite ,god1 and a finite  
mind3 the water of the ocean might as   
well be contained in the hollow of the  
hand1 or the dust of the earth weighed  
in a balance1 as that the best of       
creatures should have a perfect and     
adequate idea of the divine perfections4
 ,in this case1 we generally distinguish
 between apprehending1 and              
comprehending2 the former denotes our   
having some imperfect1 or inadequate    
ideas of what surpasses our             
understanding2 the latter1 our knowing  

every thing that is contained in it1    
which is called our having an adequate  
idea thereof3 now we apprehend something
 of the divine perfections1 in          
proportion to the limits of our         
capacities1 and our present state2 but  
we cannot1 nor ever shall1 be able to   
comprehend the divine glory1 since ,god 
is incomprehensible to every one but    
himself4 ,again1 we farther distinguish 
between our having a full conviction    
that ,god hath those infinite           
perfections1 which no creature can      
comprehend1 and our being able fully to 
describe them3 thus we firmly believe   
that ,god exists throughout all the     
changes of time1 and yet that his       
duration is not measured thereby1 or    
that he fills all places without being  
co-extended with matter2 we apprehend1  
as having an undeniable demonstration   
thereof1 that he does so1 though we     
cannot comprehend how he does it4       
,,viii4 ,god is omnipresent3 this is    
elegantly set forth by the ,psalmist1   

,whither shall ,i go from thy ,spirit8  
,or whither shall ,i flee from thy      
presence8 ,if ,i ascend into heaven1    
thou art there2 if ,i make my bed in    
hell1 behold1 thou art there2 if ,i take
 the wings of the morning1 and dwell in 
the uttermost parts of the sea2 even    
there shall thy hand lead me1 and thy   
right-hand shall hold me1 ,psal4 cxxxix4
 #g-aj4 ,this perfection of the ,godhead
 doth not consist merely1 as some       
suppose1 in his knowing what is done in 
heaven and earth1 which is only a       
metaphorical sense of omnipresence2 as  
when ,elisha tells ,gehazi1 ,went not my
 heart with thee1 when the man turned   
again from his chariot to meet thee8 #b 
,kings v4 #f4 ,or1 as the apostle says  
to the church at ,corinth1 that though  
he was absent in body1 yet he was       
present with them in spirit1 #a ,cor4 v4
 #c4 or1 as we say1 that our souls are  
with our friends in distant places1 as  
often as we think of them3 nor doth it  
consist in ,god's being omnipresent by  

his authority1 as a king is said1 by a  
figurative way of speaking1 to be       
present in all parts of his dominions1  
where persons are deputed to act under  
him1 or by his authority3 but we must   
take it in a proper sense1 as he fills  
all places with his presence1 ,jer4     
xxiii4 #bd4 so that he is not confined  
to1 or excluded from any place2 and this
 he does1 not by parts1 as the world or 
the universe is said to be omnipresent1 
for that is only agreeable to things    
corporeal1 and compounded of parts1 and 
therefore by no means applicable to the 
divine omnipresence4 ,this is a doctrine
 which it is impossible for us to       
comprehend1 yet we are bound to believe 
it1 because the contrary hereunto is    
inconsistent with infinite perfection2  
and it is sometimes called his essential
 presence1#ej to distinguish it from his
 influential presence1 whereby he is    
said to be where he acts in the method  
of his providence1 which is either      
common or special2 by the former of     

these he upholds and governs all things2
 by the latter he exerts his power in a 
way of grace1 which is called his       
special presence with his people3 and as
 his omnipresence1 or immensity1 is     
necessary1 and not the result of his    
will1 so his influential presence is    
arbitrary1 and an instance of infinite  
condescension1 in which respect he is   
said to be1 or not to be1 in particular 
places2 to come to1 or depart from his  
people2 sometimes to dwell in heaven1 as
 he displays his glory there agreeably  
to the heavenly state2 at other times to
 dwell with his church on earth1 when he
 communicates to them those blessings   
which they stand in need of2 which leads
 us to consider the next divine         
perfection mentioned in this answer4    
,,ix4 ,god is almighty1 ,rev4 i4 #ah4   
ch4 iv4 #h4 this will evidently appear1 
in that if he be infinite in all his    
other perfections1 he must be so in     
power3 thus if he be omniscient1 he     
knows what is possible or expedient to  

be done2 and1 if he be an infinite      
sovereign1 he wills whatever shall come 
to pass3 now this knowledge would be    
insignificant1 and his will             
inefficacious1 were he not infinite in  
power1 or almighty4 ,again1 this might  
be argued from his justice1 either in   
rewarding or punishing2 for if he were  
not infinite in power1 he could do      
neither of these1 at least so far as to 
render him the object of that desire1 or
 fear1 which is agreeable to the nature 
of these perfections2 neither could     
infinite faithfulness accomplish all the
 promises which he hath made1 so as to  
excite that trust and dependence1 which 
is a part of religious worship2 nor     
could he say1 without limitation1 as he 
does1 ,i have spoken it1 ,i will also   
bring it to pass2 ,i have purposed it1  
,i will also do it1 ,isa4 xlvi4 #aa4    
,but since power is visible in1 and     
demonstrated by its effects1 and        
infinite power1 by those effects which  
cannot be produced by a creature1 we may

 observe the almighty power of ,god in  
all his works1 both of nature and grace3
 thus his eternal power is understood1  
as the apostle says1 ,by the things that
 are made1 ,rom4 i4 #bj4 not that there 
was an eternal production of things1 but
 the exerting this power in time proves 
it to be infinite and truly divine2 for 
no creature can produce the smallest    
particle of matter out of nothing1 much 
less furnish the various species of     
creatures with those endowments1 in     
which they excel one another1 and set   
forth their ,creator's glory4 ,and the  
glory of his power is no less visible in
 the works of providence1 whereby he    
upholds all things1 disposes of them    
according to his pleasure1 and brings   
about events1 which only he who has an  
almighty arm can effect4 ,these things  
might have been enlarged on1 as evident 
proofs of this divine perfection2 but   
since the works of creation and         
providence will be particularly         
considered in their proper place1#ea we 

shall proceed to consider the power of  
,god1 as appearing in his works of      
grace2 particularly1  #a4 ,in some      
things subservient to our redemption1 as
 in the formation of the human nature of
 ,christ1 which is ascribed to the power
 of the ,highest1 ,luke i4 #ce4 and in  
preserving it from being crushed1       
overcome1 and trampled on1 by all the   
united powers of hell1 and earth3 it is 
said1 the arm of ,god strengthened him1 
so that the enemy should not exact upon 
him1 nor the son of wickedness afflict  
him1 ,psal4 lxxxix1 #ba1 #bb4 ,it was   
the power of ,god that bore him up under
 all the terrible views he had of       
sufferings and death1 which had many    
ingredients in it1 that rendered it1    
beyond expression1 formidable1 and would
 have sunk a mere creature1 unassisted  
thereby1 into destruction4 ,it was by   
the divine power1 which he calls the    
finger of ,god1 ,luke ix4 #bj4 that he  
cast out devils1 and wrought many other 
miracles1 to confirm his mission3 so1   

when he rebuked the unclean spirit1 and 
healed the child1 it is said1 they were 
all amazed at the mighty power of ,god1 
chap4 ix4 #db1 #dc4 and it was hereby   
that he was raised from the dead1 which 
the apostle calls the exceeding         
greatness of the power of ,god1 ,eph4 i4
 #ai4 and accordingly he was declared to
 be the ,son of ,god1 with power1 by    
this extraordinary event1 ,rom4 i4 #d4  
,moreover1 the power of ,god will be    
glorified1 in the highest degree1 in his
 second coming1 when1 as he says1 he    
will appear in the clouds of heaven1    
with power and great glory4 ,matt4 xxiv4
 #cj4  #b4 ,the power of ,god eminently 
appears in the propagation and success  
of the gospel4  7#a47 ,in the           
propagation thereof2 that a doctrine1 so
 contrary to the corrupt inclinations of
 mankind1 which had so little to        
recommend it1 but what was divine1      
should be spread throughout the greatest
 part of the known world1 by a small    
number of men1 raised up and spirited to

 that end2 and1 in order thereunto1     
acted above themselves1 and furnished   
with extraordinary qualifications1 such 
as the gift of tongues1 and a power to  
work miracles1 is a convincing proof1   
that the power by which all this was    
done1 is infinite4 ,it was hereby that  
they were not only inspired with wisdom1
 by which they silenced and confounded  
their malicious enemies1 but persuaded  
others to believe what they were sent to
 impart to them4 ,it was hereby that    
they were inflamed with zeal1 in        
proportion to the greatness of the      
occasion1 fortified with courage to     
despise the threats1 and patiently to   
bear the persecuting rage of those who  
pursued them unto bonds and death4 ,it  
was hereby that they were enabled to    
finish their course with joy1 and seal  
the doctrines they delivered with their 
blood4 ,and the power of ,god was herein
 the more remarkable1 inasmuch as they  
were not men of the greatest natural    
sagacity1 or resolution2 and they always

 confessed whatever there was           
extraordinary in the course of their    
ministry1 was from the hand of ,god4    
7#b47 ,the power of ,god appears in the 
success of the gospel1 the report       
whereof would never have been believed1 
had not the arm of the ,lord been       
revealed1 ,isa4 liii4 #a4 ,the great    
multitude that was converted to         
,christianity in one age1 is an eminent 
instance hereof3 and the rather1 because
 the profession they made was contrary  
to their secular interests1 and exposed 
them to the same persecution1 though in 
a less degree1 which the apostles       
themselves met with2 notwithstanding    
which1 they willingly parted with their 
worldly substance1 when the necessity of
 affairs required it1 and were content  
to have all things common1 that so the  
work might proceed with more success4   
,it was the power of ,god that touched  
their hearts2 so that this internal     
influence contributed more to the work  
of grace1 than all the rhetorick of man 

could have done4 ,it was this that      
carried them through all the opposition 
of cruel mocking1 bonds1 and            
imprisonment1 and at the same time      
compensated all their losses and        
sufferings1 by those extraordinary joys 
and supports which they had1 both in    
life and death4  ,and to this we may    
add1 that the daily success of the      
gospel1 in all the instances of         
converting grace1 is an evident effect  
and proof of the divine power1 as will  
farther appear1 when1 under a following 
head1 we consider effectual calling1 as 
being the work of ,god's almighty power 
and grace4#eb  ,object4 ,it will be     
objected1 that there are some things    
which ,god cannot do1 and therefore he  
is not almighty4  ,answ4 ,it is true1   
there are some things that ,god cannot  
do2 but the reason is1 either because it
 would be contrary to his divine        
perfections to do them1 or they are not 
the objects of power2 therefore it is   
not an imperfection in him that he      

cannot do them1 but rather a branch of  
his glory4 ,as1  #a4 ,there are some    
things which he cannot do1 not because  
he has not power to do them1 had he     
pleased2 but the only reason is1 because
 he has willed or determined not to do  
them4 ,thus if we should say1 that he   
cannot make more worlds1 it is not for  
want of infinite power1 but because we  
suppose he has determined not to make   
them2 he cannot save the reprobate1 or  
fallen angels1 not through a defect of  
power1 but because he has willed not to 
do it4 ,in this the power of ,god is    
distinguished from that of the creature2
 for we never say that a person cannot  
do a thing1 merely because he will not1 
but because he wants power1 if he       
would3#ec but this is by no means to be 
said of ,god in any instance4 ,therefore
 we must distinguish between his        
absolute and ordinate power2 by the     
former he could do many things1 which by
 the latter he will not2 and            
consequently1 to say he cannot do those 

things1 which he has determined not to  
do1 does not in the least overthrow this
 attribute of almighty power4  #b4 ,he  
cannot do that which is contrary to the 
nature of things1 where there is an     
impossibility in the things themselves  
to be done3 thus he cannot make a       
creature to be independent1 for that is 
contrary to the idea of a creature2 nor 
can he make a creature equal to himself1
 for then it would not be a creature2 it
 is also impossible that he should make 
a creature to be1 and not to be1 at the 
same time2 or render that not done1     
which is done1 since that is contrary to
 the nature and truth of things2 to     
which we may add1 that he cannot make a 
creature the object of religious        
worship2 or1 by his power1 advance him  
to such a dignity1 as shall warrant any 
one's ascribing divine perfections to   
him4  #c4 ,he cannot deny himself1 ,it  
is impossible for ,god to lie1 ,heb4 vi4
 #ah4 and it is equally impossible for  
him to act contrary to any of his       

perfections2 for which reason he cannot 
do anything that argues weakness3 as1   
for instance1 he cannot repent1 or      
change his mind1 or eternal purpose2 nor
 can he do any thing that would argue   
him1 not to be a holy ,god3 now1 though 
it may be truly said that ,god can do   
none of these things1 this is no defect 
in him1 but rather a glory1 since they  
are not the objects of power1 but would 
argue weakness and imperfection in him1 
should he do them4  ,we shall now       
consider1 what practical improvement we 
ought to make of this divine attribute4 
7#a47 ,the almighty power of ,god       
affords great support and relief to     
believers1 when they are assaulted1 and 
afraid of being overcome1 by their      
spiritual enemies3 thus when they       
wrestle1 as the apostle says1 not only  
against flesh and blood1 but against    
principalities1 against powers1 against 
the rulers of the darkness of this      
world1 and against spiritual wickedness 
in high places1 ,eph4 vi4 #ab4 and when 

they consider what numbers have been    
overcome and ruined by them1 and are    
discouraged very much1 under a sense of 
their own weakness or inability to      
maintain their ground against them2 let 
them consider that ,god is able to      
bruise ,satan under their feet1 and to  
make them more than conquerors1 and to  
cause all grace to abound in them1 and  
to work in them that which is pleasing  
in his sight4  7#b47 ,the consideration 
of ,god's almighty power gives us the   
greatest ground to conclude1 that       
whatever difficulties seem to lie in the
 way of the accomplishment of his       
promises1 relating to our future        
blessedness1 shall be removed or        
surmounted2 so that those things which  
seem impossible1 if we look no farther  
than second causes1 or the little       
appearance there is1 at present1 of     
their being brought about1 are not only 
possible1 but very easy for the power of
 ,god to effect4  ,thus1 with respect to
 what concerns the case of those who are

 sinking into despair1 under a sense of 
the guilt or power of sin1 by reason    
whereof they are ready to conclude that 
this burden is so great1 that no finite 
power can remove it2 let such consider1 
that to ,god all things are possible2 he
 can1 by his powerful word1 raise the   
most dejected spirits1 and turn the     
shadow of death into a bright morning of
 peace and joy4  ,moreover1 if we       
consider the declining state of religion
 in the world1 the apostacy of some     
professors1 the degeneracy of others1   
and what reason the best of them have to
 say1 that it is not with them as in    
times past2 or when we consider what    
little hope there is1 from the present  
view we have of things1 that the work of
 ,god will be revived in his church2    
yea1 if the state thereof were1 in all  
appearance1 as hopeless as it was when  
,god1 in a vision1 represented it to the
 prophet ,ezekiel1 when he shewed him   
the valley full of dry bones1 and asked 
him1 ,can these bones live8 ,ezek4      

xxxvii4 #c4 or if the question be put1  
can the despised1 declining1 sinking1   
and dying interest of ,christ be        
revived8 or how can those prophecies1   
that relate to the church's future      
happiness and glory1 ever have their    
accomplishment in this world1 when all  
things seem to make against it8 this    
difficulty will be removed1 and our hope
 encouraged1 when we consider the power 
of ,god1 to which nothing is difficult1 
much less insuperable4  ,and to this we 
may add1 that the power of ,god will    
remove all the difficulties that lie in 
our way1 with respect to the            
resurrection of the dead3 this is a     
doctrine which seems contrary to the    
course of nature2 and1 if we look no    
farther than the power of the creature1 
we should be inclined to say1 ,how can  
this be8 ,but when we consider the      
almighty power of ,god1 that will       
sufficiently remove all objections that 
can be brought against it3 thus1 when   
our ,saviour proves this doctrine1 he   

opposes the absurd notions which some   
had relating thereunto1 by saying1 ,ye  
do err1 not knowing the scriptures1 nor 
the power of ,god1 ,matth4 xxii4 #ai4   
7#c47 ,let us have a due regard to this 
attribute1 and take encouragement from  
it1 when we are engaging in holy duties1
 and are sensible of our inability to   
perform them in a right manner1 and have
 too much reason to complain of an      
unbecoming frame of spirit therein1 of  
the hardness and impenitency of our     
hearts1 the obstinacy and perverseness  
of our wills1 the earthliness and       
carnality of our affections1 and that   
all the endeavours we can use to bring  
ourselves into a better frame1 have not 
their desired success2 let us encourage 
ourselves with this consideration1 that 
,god can make us willing in the day of  
his power1 ,psal4 cx4 #c4 and do        
exceeding abundantly above all that we  
can ask or think1 ,eph4 iii4 #bj4  7#d47
 ,let us take heed that we do not abuse1
 or practically deny1 or cast contempt  

on this divine perfection1 by presuming 
that we may obtain spiritual blessings1 
without dependence on him for them1 or  
expecting divine influences1 while we   
continue in the neglect of his          
instituted means of grace3 it is true1  
,god can work without means1 but he has 
not given us ground to expect that he   
will do so2 therefore when we seek help 
from him1 it must be in his own way4    
,again1 let us take heed that we do not 
abuse this divine perfection1 by a      
distrust of ,god1 or by dependence on an
 arm of flesh2 let us not1 on the one   
hand1 limit the ,holy ,one of ,israel1  
by saying1 ,can ,god do this or that for
 me1 either with respect to spiritual or
 temporal concerns8 nor1 on the other   
hand1 rest in any thing short of him1 as
 though omnipotency were not an         
attribute peculiar to himself4 ,as he is
 able to do great things for us that we 
looked not for2 so he is much displeased
 when we expect these blessings from any
 one short of himself2 ,who art thou1   

that thou shouldst be afraid of a man1  
that shall die1 and forgettest the ,lord
 thy ,maker1 that hath stretched forth  
the heavens1 and laid the foundation of 
the earth8 ,isa4 li4 #ab4  ,x4 ,god     
knows all things3 it has been before    
considered1 that his being a ,spirit1   
implies his having an understanding1 as 
a spirit is an intelligent being2       
therefore his being an infinite ,spirit1
 must argue that his understanding is   
infinite1 ,psal4 cxlvii4 #e4  ,this may 
be farther proved1  #a4 ,from his having
 given being to all things at first1 and
 continually upholding them2 he must    
necessarily know his own workmanship1   
the effects of his power2 and this is   
yet more evident1 if we consider the    
creation of all things1 as a work of    
infinite wisdom1 which is plainly       
discernible therein1 as well as almighty
 power2 therefore he must know all      
things1 for wisdom supposes knowledge4  
,moreover1 his being the proprietor of  
all things1 results from his having     

created them1 and certainly he must know
 his own4  #b4 ,this farther appears1   
from his governing all things1 or his   
ordering the subserviency thereof1 to   
answer some valuable ends1 and that all 
should redound to his glory2 therefore  
both the ends and means must be known by
 him4 ,and as for the governing of      
intelligent creatures1 this supposes    
knowledge3 as the ,judge of all1 he must
 be able to discern the cause1 or else  
he cannot determine it1 and perfectly to
 know the rules of justice1 or else he  
cannot exercise it in the government of 
the world4  #c4 ,if ,god knows himself1 
he must know all other things1 for he   
that knows the greatest object1 must    
know things of a lesser nature2 besides1
 if he knows himself1 he knows what he  
can do1 will do1 or has done1 which is  
as much as to say that he knows all     
things4 ,and that ,god knows himself1   
must be granted for if it be the        
privilege of an intelligent creature to 
know himself1 though this knowledge in  

him be but imperfect1 surely ,god must  
know himself2 and because his knowledge 
cannot have any defect1 which would be  
inconsistent with infinite perfection1  
therefore he must have a perfect1 that  
is to say1 an infinite knowledge of     
himself1 and consequently of all other  
things4  ,this knowledge of ,god1 which 
has the creature for its object1 is     
distinguished1 in scripture1 into his   
comprehending1 seeing1 or having a      
perfect intuition of all things1 and his
 approving of things1 or it is either   
intuitive or approbative2 the former of 
these is what we principally understand 
by this attribute2 as when it is said1  
,known unto ,god are all his works1 from
 the beginning of the world1 ,acts xv4  
#ah4 and1 thou knowest my down-sitting  
and up-rising1 and art acquainted with  
all my ways2 for there is not a word in 
my tongue1 but lo1 ,o ,lord1 thou       
knowest it altogether1 ,psal4 cxxxix4   
#b1 #c1 #d4 and1 the ,lord searcheth all
 hearts1 and understandeth all the      

imaginations of the thoughts1 #a ,chron4
 xxviii4 #i4 ,and as for the other sense
 of ,god's knowledge1 to wit1 of        
approbation1 which is less properly     
called knowledge1 because it is rather  
seated in the will than in the          
understanding2 of this we read in       
several scriptures2 as when ,god tells  
,moses1 ,i know thee by name1 ,exod4    
xxxiii4 #ab4 which is explained by the  
following words1 ,and thou hast found   
grace in my sight2 so when our ,saviour 
says1 concerning his enemies1 ,i will   
profess unto you ,i never knew you1     
,matth4 vii4 #bc4 it is not meant of a  
knowledge of intuition1 but approbation4
 ,in the former sense1 he knows all     
things1 bad as well as good1 that which 
he hates and will punish1 as well as    
what he delights in2 in the latter1 he  
only knows that which is good1 or       
agreeable to his will4  ,moreover1 ,god 
is said to know what he can do1 and what
 he has done1 or will do4  7#a47 ,god   
knows what he can do1 even many things  

that he will not do2 for as his power is
 unlimited1 so that he can do infinitely
 more than he will1 so he knows more    
than he will do4 ,this is very obvious2 
for we ourselves1 as free agents1 can do
 more than we will1 and1 as intelligent1
 we know in many instances1 what we can 
do1 though we will never do them3 much  
more must this be said of the great     
,god1 who calleth things that be not as 
though they were1 ,rom4 iv4 #ag4 so     
,david enquires of ,god1 ,will ,saul    
come down8 and will the men of ,keilah  
deliver me up into has hand8 ,and ,god  
answers him1 ,he will come down1 and the
 men of ,keilah will deliver thee up1 #a
 ,sam4 xxiii4 #ab4 which implies1 that  
,god knew what they would have done1 had
 not his providence prevented it4 ,in   
this respect1 things known by him are   
said to be possible1 by reason of his   
power1 whereas the future existence     
thereof depends on his will4  7#b47 ,god
 knows whatever he has done1 does1 or   
will do1 viz4 things past1 present1 or  

to come4 ,that he knows all things      
present1 has been proved1 from the      
dependence of things on his providence2 
and his knowledge being inseparably     
connected with his power3 and that he   
knows all things that are past1 is no   
less evident1 for they were once        
present1 and consequently known by him2 
and to suppose that he does not know    
them1 is to charge him with             
forgetfulness1 or to suppose that his   
knowledge at present is less perfect    
than it was1 which is inconsistent with 
infinite perfection4 ,moreover1 if ,god 
did not know all things past1 he could  
not be the ,judge of the world2 and     
particularly1 he could neither reward   
nor punish2 both which acts respect only
 things that are past2 therefore such   
things are perfectly known by him4      
,thus1 when ,job considered his present 
afflictions1 as the punishment of past  
sins1 he says1 ,job xiv4 #ag4 ,my       
transgression is sealed up in a bag2    
thou sewest up mine iniquity2 which     

metaphorical way of speaking1 implies   
his remembering it3 so when ,god        
threatens to punish his adversaries for 
their iniquity1 he speaks of it1 as     
remembered by him1 laid up in store with
 him1 and sealed up among his treasures1
 ,deut4 xxxii4 #cd1 #ce4 ,so1 on the    
other hand1 when he designed to reward1 
or encourage1 the religious duties1     
performed by his people1 who feared his 
name1 it is said1 a book of remembrance 
was written before him1 for them1 ,mal4 
iii4 #af4  ,but that which we shall     
principally consider1 is1 ,god's knowing
 all things future1 viz4 not only such  
as are the effects of necessary causes1 
where the effect is known in or by the  
cause1 but such as are contingent1 with 
respect to us2 which is the most        
difficult of all knowledge whatsoever1  
and argues it to be truly divine4  ,by  
future contingences1 we understand      
things that are accidental1 or1 as we   
commonly say1 happen by chance1 without 
any fore-thought1 or design of men4 ,now

 that many things happen so1 with       
respect to us1 and therefore we cannot  
certainly foreknow them1 is very        
obvious2 but even these are foreknown by
 ,god#ed ,for1  #a4 ,things that happen 
without our design1 or fore-thought1 and
 therefore are not certainly foreknown  
by us1 are the objects of his           
providence1 and therefore known unto him
 from the beginning3 thus the fall of a 
sparrow to the ground is a casual thing1
 yet our ,saviour says1 that this is not
 without his providence1 ,matth4 x4 #bi4
 ,therefore1  #b4 ,that which is casual1
 or accidental to us1 is not so to him2 
so that though we cannot have a certain 
or determinate foreknowledge thereof1 it
 does not follow that he has not2 since1
  #c4 ,he has foretold many such future 
events1 as appears by the following     
instances4  7#a47 ,ahab's death by an   
arrow1 shot at random1 may be reckoned a
 contingent event2 yet this was foretold
 before he went into the battle1 #a     
,kings xxii4 #ag1 #ah1 #cd4 and         

accomplished accordingly4  7#b47 ,that  
,israel should be afflicted and         
oppressed in ,egypt1 and afterwards     
should be delivered1 was foretold four  
hundred years before it came to pass1   
,gen4 xv4 #ac1 #ad4 ,and when ,moses was
 sent to deliver them out of the        
,egyptian bondage1 ,god tells him1      
before-hand1 how obstinate ,pharaoh     
would be1 and with how much difficulty  
he would be brought to let them go1     
,exod4 iii4 #ai1 #bj4  7#c47 ,joseph's  
advancement in ,egypt was a contingent  
and very unlikely event1 yet it was made
 known several years before1 by his     
prophetic dream1 ,gen4 xxxvii4 #e1 c4   
and afterwards1 that which tended more  
immediately to it1 was his foretelling  
what happened to the chief butler and   
baker1 and the seven years of plenty and
 famine in ,egypt1 signified by         
,pharaoh's dream2 all which were        
contingent events1 and were foretold by 
divine inspiration1 and therefore       
foreknown by ,god4  7#d47 ,hazael's     

coming to the crown of ,syria1 and the  
cruelty that he would exercise1 was     
foretold to him1 when he thought he     
could never be such a monster of a man1 
as he afterwards appeared to be1 #b     
,kings viii4 #ab1 #ac4  7#e47 ,judas's  
betraying our ,lord was foretold by him1
 ,john vi4 #gj1 #ga4 though1 at that    
time1 he seemed as little disposed to   
commit so vile a crime as any of his    
disciples4  ,thus having considered     
,god's knowledge1 with respect to the   
object1 either as past1 or future1 we   
shall conclude this head1 by observing  
some properties1 whereby it appears to  
be superior to all finite knowledge1 and
 truly divine1 viz4  #a4 ,it is perfect1
 intimate1 and distinct1 and not        
superficial1 or confused1 or only       
respecting things in general1 as ours   
often is3 thus it is said concerning    
him1 that he bringeth out his host by   
number1 and calleth them all by names1  
,isa4 xl4 #bf4 which denotes his        
exquisite knowledge of all things1 as   

well as propriety in1 and using them at 
his pleasure4 ,and since all creatures  
live and move1 or act1 in him1 ,acts    
xvii4 #bh4 or by his powerful influence1
 it follows from hence1 that his        
knowledge is as distinct and particular1
 as the actions themselves1 yea1 the    
most indifferent actions1 that are      
hardly taken notice of by ourselves1    
such as our down-sitting and up-rising1 
,psal4 cxxxix4 #b4 and every transient  
thought that is no sooner formed in our 
minds1 but forgotten by us1 is known by 
him afar off1 at the greatest distance  
of time1 when it is irrecoverably lost  
with respect to us4 ,that ,god knows all
 things thus distinctly1 is evident not 
only from their dependence upon him2 but
 it is said1 that when he had brought   
his whole work of creation to           
perfection1 ,he saw every thing that he 
had made1 and behold it was very good1  
that is1 agreeable to his eternal       
design1 or1 if we may so express it1 to 
the idea1 or plat-form1 laid in his own 

mind2 and this he pronounced concerning 
every individual thing1 which is as much
 the object of his omniscience1 as the  
effect of his power3 what can be more   
expressive of the perfection and        
distinctness of his knowledge than this8
 ,therefore the apostle might well say1 
that there is not any creature that is  
not manifest in his sight2 but all      
things are naked1 and opened unto the   
eyes of him with whom we have to do1    
,heb4 iv4 #ac4  #b4 ,he knows every     
thing1 even future contingencies1 with a
 certain and infallible knowledge1      
without the least hesitation1 or        
possibility of mistake2 and therefore1  
as opinion1 or conjecture1 is opposed to
 certainty1 it is not in the least      
applicable to him4 ,in this his         
knowledge differs from that of the best 
of creatures1 who can only guess at some
 things that may happen1 according to   
the probable fore-views they have       
thereof4  #c4 ,as to the manner of his  
knowing all things1 it is not in a      

discursive way1 agreeable to our common 
method of reasoning1 by inferring one   
thing from another1 or by comparing     
things together1 and observing their    
connexion1 dependence1 and various      
powers and manner of acting1 and thereby
 discerning what will follow2 for such a
 knowledge as this is acquired1 and     
presupposes a degree of ignorance3      
conclusions can hardly be said to be    
known1 till the premises1 from whence   
they are deduced1 be duly weighed2 but  
this is inconsistent with the knowledge 
of ,god1 who sees all things in himself2
 things possible in his own power1 and  
things future in his will1 without      
inferring1 abstracting1 or deducing     
conclusions from premises1 which to do  
is unbecoming him1 who is perfect in    
knowledge4  #d4 ,he knows all things at 
once1 not successively1 as we do2 for if
 successive duration be an imperfection1
 7as was before observed1 when we       
considered the eternity of ,god7 his    
knowing all things after this manner1 is

 equally so2 and1 indeed1 this would    
argue an increase of the divine         
knowledge1 or a making advances in      
wisdom1 by experience1 and daily        
observation of things1 which1 though    
applicable to all intelligent creatures1
 can1 by no means1 be said of him1 whose
 understanding is infinite1 ,psal4      
cxlvii4 #e4  ,we shall now consider what
 improvement we ought to make of ,god's 
omniscience1 as to what respects our    
conduct in this world4  ,first1 ,let us 
take heed that we do not practically    
deny this attribute4  #a4 ,by acting as 
though we thought that we could hide    
ourselves from the all-seeing eye of    
,god2 let us not say1 to use the words  
of ,eliphaz1 ,how doth ,god know8 ,can  
he judge through the dark cloud8 ,thick 
clouds are a covering to him1 that he   
seeth not1 and he walketh in the circuit
 of heaven1 ,job xxii4 #ac1 #ad4 ,how   
vain a supposition is this6 since there 
is no darkness1 or shadow of death1     
where the workers of iniquity may hide  

themselves1 chap4 xxxiv4 #bb4 ,hypocrisy
 is1 as it were1 an attempt to hide     
ourselves from ,god1 an acting as though
 we thought that we could deceive or    
impose on him1 which is called1 in      
scripture1 a lying to him1 ,psal4       
lxxviii4 #cf4 or1 a compassing him about
 with lies and deceit1 ,hos4 xi4 #ab4   
,this all are chargeable with1 who rest 
in a form of godliness1 as though ,god  
saw only the outward actions1 but not   
the heart4  #b4 ,by being more afraid of
 man than ,god1 and venturing to commit 
the vilest abominations1 without        
considering his all-seeing eye1 which we
 would be afraid and ashamed to do1 were
 we under the eye of man1 as the apostle
 saith1 ,it is a shame even to speak of 
those things which are done of them in  
secret1 ,eph4 v4 #ab4 ,thus ,god says1  
concerning an apostatizing people of    
old1 speaking to the prophet ,ezekiel1  
,son of man1 hast thou seen what the    
ancients of the house of ,israel do in  
the dark1 every man in the chambers of  

his imagery8 for they say1 ,the ,lord   
seeth us not1 the ,lord hath forsaken   
the earth1 ,ezek4 viii4 #ab4  ,secondly1
 ,the consideration of ,god's           
omniscience should be improved1 to      
humble us under a sense of sin1 but     
especially of secret sins1 which are all
 known to him3 thus it is said1 ,thou   
hast set our iniquities before thee2 our
 secret sins in the light of thy        
countenance1 ,psal4 xc4 #h4 and his eyes
 are upon the ways of man1 and he seeth 
all his goings1 ,job xxxiv4 #ba4 ,there 
are many things which we know concerning
 ourselves1 that no creature is privy   
to1 which occasions self-conviction1 and
 might fill us with shame and confusion 
of face4 ,but this falls infinitely     
short of ,god's omniscience2 for if our 
heart condemn us1 ,god is greater than  
our heart1 and knoweth all things1 #a   
,john iii4 #bj4 ,and this should make   
sinners tremble at the thoughts of a    
future judgment2 for if sins be not     
pardoned1 he is able to bring them to   

remembrance1 and1 as he threatens he    
will do1 set them in order before their 
eyes1 ,psal4 l4 #ba4  ,thirdly1 ,the due
 consideration of this divine           
perfection1 will1 on the other hand1    
tend very much to the comfort of        
believers3 he seeth their secret wants1 
the breathings of their souls after him1
 and as our ,saviour saith1 ,their      
,father1 which seeth in secret1 shall   
reward them openly1 ,matt4 vi4 #d4 ,with
 what pleasure may they appeal to ,god1 
as the searcher of hearts1 concerning   
their sincerity1 when it is called in   
question by men4 ,and when they are     
afraid of contracting guilt and         
defilement1 by secret faults1 which they
 earnestly desire1 with the ,psalmist1  
to be cleansed from1 ,psal4 xix4 #ab4 it
 is some relief to them to consider that
 ,god knows them1 and therefore is able 
to give them repentance for them2 so    
that they may pray with ,david2 ,search 
me1 ,o ,god1 and know my heart2 try me1 
and know my thoughts2 and see if there  

be any wicked way in me1 and lead me in 
the way everlasting1 ,psal4 cxxxix4 #bc1
 #bd4 ,moreover1 it is a quieting       
thought1 to all who are affected with   
the church's troubles1 and the deep laid
 designs of its enemies against it1 to  
consider that ,god knows them1 and      
therefore can easily defeat1 and turn   
them into foolishness4  ,fourthly1 ,the 
due consideration of ,god's omniscience 
will be of great use to all ,christians1
 to promote a right frame of spirit in  
holy duties2 it will make them careful  
how they behave themselves as being in  
his sight2 and tend to fill them with a 
holy reverence1 as those that are under 
his immediate inspection1 that they may 
approve themselves to him4  ,,xi4 ,god  
is most wise1 or infinite in wisdom2 or1
 as the apostle expresses it1 he is the 
only wise ,god1 ,rom4 xvi4 #bg4 ,this   
perfection considered as absolute1      
underived1 and truly divine1 belongs    
only to him2 so that the angels         
themselves1 the most excellent order of 

created beings1 are said to be destitute
 of it1 or charged with folly1 ,job iv4 
#ah4 ,for our understanding what this   
divine perfection is1 let us consider2  
that wisdom contains in it more than    
knowledge1 for there may be a great     
degree of knowledge1 where there is but 
little wisdom1 though there can be no   
wisdom without knowledge3 knowledge is1 
as it were1 the eye of the soul1 whereby
 it apprehends1 or sees1 things in a    
true light1 and so it is opposed to     
ignorance1 or not knowing things2 but   
wisdom is that whereby the soul is      
directed in the skilful management of   
things1 or in ordering them for the     
best2 and this is opposed1 not so much  
to ignorance1 or error of judgment1 as  
to folly1 or error in conduct1 which is 
a defect of wisdom2 and it consists more
 especially in designing the best and   
most valuable end in what we are about  
to do1 in using the most proper means to
 effect it1 and in observing the fittest
 season to act1 and every circumstance  

attending it1 that is most expedient and
 conducive thereunto2 also in foreseeing
 and guarding against every occurrence  
that may frustrate our design1 or give  
us an occasion to blame ourselves for   
doing what we have done1 or repent of   
it1 or to wish we had taken other       
measures4 ,now1 that we may from hence  
take an estimate of the wisdom of ,god1 
it appears1  #a4 ,in the reference1 or  
tendency of all things to his own glory1
 which is the highest and most excellent
 end that can be proposed2 as he is the 
highest and best of beings1 and his     
glory1 to which all things are referred1
 is infinitely excellent4  ,here let us 
consider1  7#a47 ,that ,god is1 by      
reason of his infinite perfection1      
naturally and necessarily the object of 
adoration4  7#b47 ,he cannot be adored1 
unless his glory be set forth and       
demonstrated1 or made visible4  7#c47   
,there must be an intelligent creature  
to behold his glory1 and adore his      
perfections1 that are thus demonstrated 

and displayed4  7#d47 ,every thing that 
he does is fit and designed to lead this
 creature into the knowledge of his     
glory2 and that it is so ordered1 is an 
eminent instance of divine wisdom4 ,we  
need not travel far to know this1 for   
wherever we look1 we may behold how     
excellent his name is in all the earth3 
and because some are so stupid1 that    
they cannot1 or will not1 in a way of   
reasoning1 infer his divine perfections 
from things that are without us1        
therefore he has instamped the knowledge
 thereof on the souls and consciences of
 men2 so that1 at sometimes1 they are   
obliged1 whether they will or no1 to    
acknowledge them4 ,there is something   
which may be known of ,god1 that is said
 to be manifest in1 and shewn to all2 so
 that the ,gentiles who have not the    
law1 that is1 the written word of ,god1 
do1 by nature the things1 that is1 some 
things1 contained therein1 and so are a 
law unto themselves1 and shew the work  
of the law written in their hearts1     

,rom4 i4 #ai4 chap4 ii4 #ad1 #ae4 ,and1 
besides this1 he has led us farther into
 the knowledge of his divine perfections
 by his word1 which he is said to have  
magnified above all his name1 ,psal4    
cxxxvii4 #b4 therefore having thus      
adapted his works and word1 to set forth
 his glory1 he discovers himself to be  
infinite in wisdom4#ee  #b4 ,the wisdom 
of ,god appears1 in that whatever he    
does1 is in the fittest season1 and all 
the circumstances thereof tend to set   
forth his own honour1 and argue his     
foresight to be infinitely perfect2 so  
that he can see no reason to wish it had
 been otherwise ordered1 or to repent   
thereof4 ,for all his ways are judgment1
 ,deut4 xxxii4 #d4 to every thing there 
is a season and a time1 to every purpose
 under the heaven2 and he hath made     
every thing beautiful in his time1      
,eccl4 iii4 #a1 #aa4  ,for the farther  
illustrating of this1 since wisdom is   
known by its effects1 we shall observe  
some of the traces1 or footsteps thereof

 in his works4 ,and1  7#a47 ,in the work
 of creation4 ,as it requires infinite  
power to produce something out of       
nothing2 so the wisdom of ,god appears  
in that excellent order1 beauty1 and    
harmony1 that we observe in all the     
parts of the creation2 and in the       
subserviency of one thing to another1   
and the tendency thereof to promote the 
moral government of ,god in the world1  
and the good of man1 for whose sake this
 lower world was formed1 that so it     
might be a convenient habitation for    
him1 and a glorious object1 in which he 
might contemplate1 and thereby be led to
 advance the divine perfections1 which  
shine forth therein1 as in a glass2 so  
that we have the highest reason to say1 
,lord1 how manifold are thy works2 in   
wisdom hast thou made them all1 ,psal4  
civ4 #bd4 ,he hath made the earth by his
 power2 he hath established the world by
 his wisdom1 and hath stretched out the 
heavens by his discretion1 ,jer4 x4 #ab4
 ,but since this argument hath been     

insisted on1 with great ingenuity1 and  
strength of reason by others1#ef we     
shall add no more on that subject1 but  
proceed to consider1  7#b47 ,the wisdom 
of ,god1 as appearing in the works of   
providence1 in bringing about unexpected
 events for the good of mankind1 and    
that1 by means that seem to have no     
tendency thereto1 but rather the        
contrary2 this will appear in the       
following instances4 ,as1  #ast1        
,jacob's flying from his father's house1
 was wisely ordered1 as a means not only
 for his escaping the fury of his       
brother1 and the trial of his faith1 and
 to humble him for the sinful method he 
took to obtain the blessing2 but also   
for the building up his family1 and     
encreasing his substance in the world1  
under a very unjust father-in-law and   
master1 such as ,laban was4  #b;dly1    
,joseph's being sold into ,egypt1 was   
ordered1 as a means of his preserving   
not only that land1 but his father's    
house1 from perishing by famine2 his    

imprisonment was the occasion of his    
advancement4 ,and all this led the way  
to the accomplishment of what ,god had  
foretold relating to his people's       
dwelling in ,egypt1 and their wonderful 
deliverance from the bondage they were  
to endure therein4  #c;dly1 ,the wisdom 
of ,god was seen in the manner of       
,israel's deliverance out of ,egypt1 in 
that he first laid them under the       
greatest discouragements1 by suffering  
the ,egyptians to increase their tasks  
and burdens2 hardening ,pharaoh's heart1
 that he might try his people's faith1  
and make their deliverance appear more  
remarkable2 and then plaguing the       
,egyptians1 that he might punish their  
pride1 injustice1 and cruelty2 and1 at  
last1 giving them up to such an         
infatuation1 as effectually procured    
their final overthrow1 and his people's 
safety4  #dthly1 ,in leading ,israel    
forty years in the wilderness1 before he
 brought them into the promised land1   
that he might give them statutes and    

ordinances1 and that they might         
experience various instances of his     
presence among them1 by judgments and   
mercies1 and so be prepared for all the 
privileges he designed for them1 as his 
peculiar people1 in the land of ,canaan4
  #ethly1 ,we have a very wonderful     
instance of the wisdom of providence in 
the book of ,esther2 when ,haman1 the   
enemy of the ,jews1 had obtained a      
decree for their destruction1 and       
,mordecai was first to be sacrificed to 
his pride and revenge1 providence turned
 whatever he intended against him1 upon 
himself4 ,there was something very      
remarkable in all the circumstances that
 led to it1 by which the church's       
deliverance and advancement was brought 
about2 when1 to an eye of reason1 it    
seemed almost impossible1  7#c47 ,the   
wisdom of ,god appears yet more         
eminently1 in the work of our           
redemption2 this is that which the      
angels desire to look into1 and cannot  
behold without the greatest admiration2 

for herein ,god's manifold wisdom is    
displayed1 #a ,pet4 i4 #ab4 ,eph4 iii4  
#aj4 ,this solves the difficulty1       
contained in a former dispensation of   
providence1 respecting ,god's suffering 
sin to enter into the world1 which he   
could have prevented1 and probably would
 have done1 had he not designed to      
over-rule it1 for the bringing about the
 work of our redemption by ,christ2 so  
that what we lost in our first head1    
should be recovered with great advantage
 in our second1 the ,lord from heaven4  
,but though this matter was determined  
in the eternal covenant1 between the    
,father and the ,son1 and the necessity 
of man seemed to require that ,christ   
should be immediately incarnate1 as soon
 as man fell1 yet it was deferred till  
many ages after2 and herein the wisdom  
of ,god eminently appeared4 ,for1  #ast1
 ,god hereby tried the faith and        
patience of his church1 and put them    
upon waiting for1 and depending on him1 
who was to come2 so that though they had

 not received this promised blessing1   
yet they saw it afar off2 were persuaded
 of1 and embraced it1 and1 with         
,abraham1 rejoiced to see his day1      
though at a great distance1 ,heb4 xi4   
#ac4 ,john viii4 #ef4 and hereby they   
glorified the faithfulness of ,god1 and 
depended on his word1 that the work of  
redemption should be brought about1 as  
certainly1 as though it had been        
actually accomplished4  #b;dly1 ,our    
,saviour1 in the mean time took occasion
 to display his own glory1 as the ,lord1
 and ,governor of his church1 even      
before his incarnation1 to whom he often
 appeared in a human form1 assumed for  
that purpose1 as a prelibation thereof2 
so that they had the greatest reason1   
from hence1 to expect his coming in our 
nature4  #crdly1 ,the time of ,christ's 
coming in the flesh1 was such as        
appeared most seasonable2 when the state
 of the church was very low1 religion   
almost lost among them1 and the darkness
 they were under1 exceeding great2 which

 made it very necessary that the        
,messiah should come3 when iniquity     
almost universally prevailed among them1
 then the deliverer must come out of    
,sion1 and turn away ungodliness from   
,jacob1 ,rom4 xi4 #bf4 and when the     
darkness of the night was greatest1 it  
was the most proper time for the ,sun of
 ,righteousness to arise with healing in
 his wings1 ,mal4 iv4 #b4 compared with 
,matt4 iv4 #af4  7#d47 ,the wisdom of   
,god farther appears in the various     
methods he has taken in the government  
of his church1 before and since the     
coming of ,christ4 ,for1  #ast1 ,god at 
first1 as has been before observed1#eg  
left his church without a written word1 
till ,moses's time1 that he might take  
occasion to converse with them more     
immediately1 as an instance of infinite 
condescension2 and to shew them1 that   
though they had no such method of       
knowing his revealed will as we have1   
yet that he could communicate his mind  
to them another way2 and1 when the      

necessity of affairs required it1 then  
his wisdom was seen in taking this      
method to propagate religion in the     
world4  #b;dly1 ,when ,god designed to  
govern his church by those rules1 which 
he hath laid down in scripture1 he      
revealed the great doctrines contained  
therein1 in a gradual way2 so that the  
dispensation of his providence towards  
them1 was like the light of the morning1
 increasing to a perfect day3 he first  
instructed them by various types and    
shadows1 leading them into the knowledge
 of the gospel1 which was afterwards to 
be more clearly revealed3 he taught     
them1 as they were able to bear it1 like
 children growing in knowledge1 till    
they arrive to a perfect manhood3 he    
first gave them grounds to expect the   
blessings which he would bestow in      
after-ages1 by the manifold predictions 
thereof2 and afterwards glorified his   
faithfulness in their accomplishment4   
#c;dly1 ,he sometimes governed them in a
 more immediate way1 and confirmed their

 faith1 as was then necessary1 by       
miracles2 and also raised up prophets1  
as occasion served1 whom he furnished1  
in an extraordinary way1 for the service
 to which he called them1 to lead his   
church into the knowledge of those      
truths1 on which their faith was built4 
,and1 to this we may add1 that he gave  
them various other helps for their      
faith1 by those common and ordinary     
means of grace1 which they were favoured
 with1 and which the gospel church now  
enjoys1 and has ground to conclude that 
they will be continued until ,christ's  
second coming4 ,here we might take      
occasion to consider how the wisdom of  
,god appears in furnishing his church   
with a gospel-ministry1 and how the     
management thereof is adapted to the    
necessities of his people2 in employing 
such about this work1 who are duly      
qualified for it1 assisting them in the 
discharge thereof1 and succeeding their 
humble endeavours2 and all this in such 
a way1 as that the praise shall redound 

to himself1 who builds his house1 and   
bears the glory2 but this we may have   
occasion to insist on in a following    
part of this work4#eh  7#e47 ,the wisdom
 of ,god appears in the method he takes 
to preserve1 propagate1 and build up his
 church in the world4 ,therefore1  #ast1
 ,as his kingdom is not of this world1  
but of a spiritual1 nature1 so he hath  
ordered that it shall not be promoted by
 those methods of violence1 or carnal   
policy1 by which the secular interests  
of men are oft-times advanced4 ,he has  
no where appointed that wars should be  
proclaimed to propagate the faith1 or   
that persons should be forced to embrace
 it against their wills1 or be listed   
under ,christ's banner1 by bribery1 or a
 prospect of worldly advantage2         
therefore all the success the gospel has
 had1 which is worthy to be called      
success1 has been such as is agreeable  
to the spirituality of ,christ's        
kingdom2 thus his house is to be built1 
not by might1 nor by power1 but by his  

,spirit1 ,zech4 iv4 #f4  #b;dly1 ,that  
the church should flourish under        
persecution1 and those methods which its
 enemies take to ruin it1 should be     
over-ruled1 to its greater advantage2   
and that hereby shame and disappointment
 should attend every weapon that is     
formed against ,sion1 as being without  
success2 and that the church should     
appear more eminently to be the care of 
,god1 when it meets with the most       
injurious treatment from men1 is a plain
 proof of the glory of this attribute3  
and1 on the other hand1 that its        
flourishing state1 as to outward1       
things1 should not be always attended   
with the like marks or evidences of the 
divine favour1 in what more immediately 
respects salvation1 is an instance of   
the divine wisdom1 as ,god hereby puts  
his people on setting the highest value 
on those things that are most excellent2
 and not to reckon themselves most happy
 in the enjoyment of the good things of 
this life1 when they are destitute of   

his special presence with them4  #c;dly1
 ,the preserving the rising generation  
from the vile abominations that there   
are in the world1 especially the seed of
 believers1 and calling many of them by 
his grace1 that so there may be a       
constant reserve of those1 who may be   
added to his church1 as others1 who have
 served their generation1 are called out
 of it1 which is a necessary expedient  
for the preserving his interest in the  
world3 in this the wisdom of ,god is    
eminently glorified1 as well as his     
other perfections4  ,from what has been 
said concerning the wisdom of ,god1 we  
may infer1  #a4 ,that none can be said  
to meditate aright on the works of ,god1
 such as creation1 providence1 or       
redemption1 who do not behold and admire
 his manifold wisdom displayed therein1 
as well as his other perfections4 ,as we
 conclude him a very unskilful observer 
of a curious picture or statue1 who only
 takes notice of its dimensions in      
general1 or the matter of which it is   

composed1 without considering the       
symmetry and proportion of all the parts
 thereof1 and those other excellencies1 
by which the artist has signalized his  
skill2 so it is below a ,christian to be
 able only to say1 that there are such  
works done in the world1 or to have a   
general idea of its being governed by   
providence1 without having his thoughts 
suitably affected with the harmonious   
subserviency of things1 and the design  
of all to set forth the glory of him1   
who is a ,god of infinite wisdom4  #b4  
,if we cannot understand the meaning of 
some particular dispensations of        
providence1 so as to admire the wisdom  
of ,god therein1 let us compare all the 
parts of providence together1 and one   
will illustrate and add a beauty to     
another1 as our ,saviour says to ,peter1
 ,what ,i do thou knowest not now1 but  
thou shalt know hereafter1 ,john xiii4  
#g4 therefore let us compare the various
 dark dispensations1 which the church of
 ,god is under at one time1 with the    

glory that shall be put upon it at      
another4  #c4 ,from the displays of the 
wisdom of ,god in all his works1 let us 
learn humility1 under a sense of our own
 folly3 thus the ,psalmist takes        
occasion to express his low thoughts of 
mankind in general1 and says1 ,what is  
man1 that thou art mindful of him8 when 
he had been meditating on the glory of  
some other parts of his creation1 which 
he calls1 ,the work of his fingers1     
,psal4 viii4 #c1 #d4 that is1 creatures1
 in which his wisdom is displayed in a  
very eminent degree4 ,but1 besides this1
 we may take occasion to have a humble  
sense of our own folly2 that is1 our    
defect of wisdom2 since it is but a     
little of ,god that is known by us1 and 
the wonderful effects of divine wisdom  
are known but in part by us1 who dwell  
in houses of clay4  #d4 ,let us subject 
our understandings to ,god1 and have a  
high veneration for his word1 in which  
his wisdom is displayed1 which he has   
ordained1 as the means whereby we may be

 made wise unto salvation2 and whatever 
incomprehensible mysteries we find      
contained therein1 let us not reject or 
despise them because we cannot          
comprehend them4  #e4 ,since ,god is    
infinite in wisdom1 let us seek wisdom  
of him1 according to the apostle's      
advice1 ,if any of you lack wisdom1 let 
him ask it of ,god1 that giveth to all  
men liberally1 and upbraideth not2 and  
it shall be given him1 ,james i4 #e4    
,,xii4 ,god is most holy1 or infinite in
 holiness1 which is essential to him3   
thus he is often styled1 ,the ,holy ,one
 of ,israel1 ,isa4 i4 #d4 and this      
attribute is thrice repeated by the     
seraphim1 who1 with the utmost reverence
 and adoration1 cried1 one unto another1
 ,holy1 holy1 holy1 is the ,lord of     
hosts1 chap4 vi4 #c4 ,and he is said to 
be holy1 exclusively of all others1 as  
this is a divine perfection1 and as he  
is infinitely and independently so1 ,o  
,lord1 thou only art holy1 ,rev4 xv4 #d4
 and the reason of this is assigned1 to 

wit1 because he is the only ,god2       
holiness is his very nature and essence2
 ,there is none holy as the ,lord1 for  
there is none besides him1 #a ,sam4 ii4 
#b4 ,in considering this divine         
perfection1 we shall enquire1  #a4 ,what
 we are to understand by it4 ,holiness  
is that whereby he is infinitely        
opposite to every thing that tends to   
reflect dishonour1 or reproach1 on his  
divine perfections2 and especially as he
 is infinitely opposite in his nature1  
will1 and works1 to all moral impurity2 
as his power is opposed to all natural  
weakness1 his wisdom to the least defect
 of understanding or folly1 so his      
holiness is opposed to all moral        
blemishes1 or imperfections1 which we   
call sin2 so that it is not so much one 
single perfection1 as the harmony of all
 his perfections1 as they are opposed to
 sin2 and therefore it is called1 ,the  
beauty of the ,lord1 ,psal4 xxvii4 #d4  
and when the ,psalmist prays that the   
church may be made and dealt with as an 

holy people1 he says1 ,let the beauty of
 the ,lord our ,god be upon us1 ,psal4  
xc4 #ag4 ,it is that which1 if we may so
 express it1 adds a lustre to all his   
other perfections2 so that if he were   
not glorious in holiness1 whatever else 
might be said of him1 would tend rather 
to his dishonour than his glory1 and the
 beauty of his perfections would be so  
sullied that they could not be called   
divine3 as holiness is the brightest    
part of the image of ,god in man1       
without which nothing could be mentioned
 concerning him1 but what turns to his  
reproach1 his wisdom would deserve no   
better a name than that of subtilty1 his
 power destructive and injurious1 his   
zeal furious madness2 so if we separate 
holiness from the divine nature1 all    
other excellencies would be inglorious1 
because impure4  #b4 ,we proceed to     
consider the holiness of ,god1 as       
glorified or demonstrated in various    
instances4  7#a47 ,in his works4 ,this  
perfection was as eminently displayed in

 the work of creation1 especially that  
of angels and men1 as his power1 wisdom1
 and goodness2 for he made them with a  
perfect rectitude of nature1 without the
 least spot or propensity to sin1 and   
with a power to retain it2 so that there
 was no natural necessity laid on them  
to sin1 which might infer ,god to be the
 author of it3 and furthermore1 as a    
moral expedient to prevent it1 as well  
as to assert his own sovereignty1 he    
gave them a law1 which was holy1 as well
 as just and good1 and warned them of   
those dreadful consequences that would  
ensue on the violation thereof2 as it   
would render them unholy1 deprive them  
of his image1 and consequently separate 
them from him1 and render them the      
objects of his abhorrence2 and1 to this 
we may add1 that his end in making all  
other things was1 that his intelligent  
creatures might actively glorify him1   
and be induced to holiness4  7#b47 ,this
 divine perfection appears likewise in  
the government of the world1 and of the 

church1 in all the dispensations of his 
providence1 either in a way of judgment1
 or of mercy2 therefore he shews his    
displeasure against nothing but sin1    
which is the only thing that renders    
creatures the objects of punishment1 and
 all the blessings he bestows are a     
motive to holiness4 ,as for his people1 
whom he hath the greatest regard to1    
they are described1 as called to be     
saints1 #a ,cor4 i4 #b4 and it is said  
of the church of ,israel1 that it was   
holiness unto the ,lord1 ,jer4 ii4 #c4  
and all his ordinances are holy1 and to 
be engaged in with such a frame of      
spirit1 as is agreeable thereunto3 thus 
he says1 ,i will be sanctified in them  
that come nigh me1 ,lev4 x4 #c4 and     
holiness becometh his house for ever1   
,psal4 xciii4 #e4 ,in like manner1 we   
are to take an estimate of the success  
thereof1 when1 through the divine       
blessing accompanying them1 they tend to
 promote internal holiness in those who 
are engaged therein1 whereby they are   

distinguished from the rest of the      
world1 and sanctified by his truth1     
,john xvii4 #ag4  ,object4 ,it may be   
objected by some1 that ,god's suffering 
sin to enter into the world1 which he   
might have prevented1 was a reflection  
cast on his holiness4  ,answ4 ,it must  
be allowed1 that ,god might have        
prevented the first entrance of sin into
 the world1 by his immediate            
interposure1 and so have kept man       
upright1 as well as made him so2 yet let
 it be considered1 that he was not      
obliged to do this2 and therefore might1
 without any reflection on his holiness1
 leave an innocent creature to the      
conduct of his own free-will1 which     
might be tempted1 but not forced1 to    
sin1 especially since he designed to    
over-rule the event hereof1 for the     
setting forth the glory of all his      
perfections1 and1 in an eminent degree1 
that of his holiness2 but this will more
 particularly be considered under some  
following answers4#ei  ,from what has   

been said concerning the holiness of    
,god1 let us take occasion to behold and
 admire the beauty and glory thereof1 in
 all the divine dispensations1 as he can
 neither do1 nor enjoin any thing but   
what sets forth his infinite purity2    
therefore1  #a4 ,as he cannot be the    
author of sin1 so we must take heed that
 we do not advance any doctrines from   
whence this consequence may be inferred2
 this ought to be the standard by which 
they are to be tried1 as we shall take  
occasion to observe in several          
instances1 and think ourselves as much  
concerned to advance the glory of this  
perfection1 as of any other3            
notwithstanding it is one thing for     
persons to militate against what appears
 to be a truth1 by alleging this popular
 objection1 that it is contrary to the  
holiness of ,god1 and another thing to  
support the charge2 this will be        
particularly considered1 when such-like 
objections1 brought against the doctrine
 of predestination1 and several other   

doctrines1 are answered in their proper 
place4  #b4 ,it is an excellency1       
beauty1 and glory1 in the ,christian    
religion1 which should make us more in  
love with it1 that it leads to holiness1
 which was the image of ,god in man4    
,all other religions have indulged1 led 
to1 or dispensed with many impurities1  
as may be observed in those of the      
,mahometans and ,pagans2 and the        
different religions1 professed by them  
who are called ,christians1 are to be   
judged more or less valuable1 and       
accordingly to be embraced or rejected1 
as they tend more or less to promote    
holiness4 ,and here ,i cannot but       
observe1 that it is a singular          
excellency of the ,protestant religion  
above the ,popish1 that all its         
doctrines and precepts have a tendency  
thereunto2 whereas the other admits of1 
dispenses with1 and gives countenance to
 manifold impurities2 as will appear1 if
 we consider some of the doctrines held 
by them1 which lead to licentiousness4  

,as1  7#a47 ,that some sins are1 in     
their own nature1 so small1 that they do
 not deserve eternal punishment1 and    
therefore that satisfaction is to be    
made for them1 by undergoing some       
penances enjoined them by the priest2   
upon which condition1 he gives them     
absolution1 and so discharges them from 
any farther concern about them2 which is
 certainly subversive of holiness1 as   
well as contrary to scripture1 which    
says1 ,the wages of sin is death1 ,rom4 
vi4 #bc4 the word of ,god knows no      
distinction between mortal and venial   
sins1 especially in the sense which they
 give thereof4  7#b47 ,the doctrine of  
indulgences and dispensations to sin1   
given forth at a certain rate4 ,this was
 a great matter of offence to those who 
took occasion1 for it1 among other      
reasons1 to separate from them in the   
beginning of the reformation1 whereby   
they gave glory to the holiness of ,god1
 in expressing a just indignation       
against such vile practices4 ,it is true

 the ,papists allege1 in defence        
thereof1 that it is done in compassion  
to those1 whose natural temper leads    
them1 with impetuous violence1 to those 
sins1 which they dispense with2 and that
 this is1 in some respects1 necessary1  
in as much as the temptations of some1  
arising from their condition in the     
world1 are greater than what others are 
liable to4 ,but none of these things    
will exempt a person from the guilt of  
sin1 much less warrant the practice of  
those1 who hereby encourage them to     
commit it4  7#c47 ,another doctrine     
maintained by them is1 that the law of  
,god1 as conformed to human laws1       
respects only outward1 or overt-acts1 as
 they are generally called1 and not the 
heart1 or principle1 from whence they   
proceed2 and therefore that             
concupiscence1 or the corruption of     
nature1 which is the impure fountain1   
from whence all sins proceed1 comes not 
under the cognisance of the divine law1 
nor exposes us to any degree of         

punishment2 and that either because they
 suppose it unavoidable1 or else because
 every sin is an act1 and not a habit1  
the off-spring1 or effect of lust1      
which1 when 7as they pervert the words  
of the apostle7 it has conceived1 brings
 forth sin2 and sin1 when it is         
finished1 bringeth forth death1 ,james  
i4 #ae4 whereas the spring of defiled   
actions is1 in reality1 more corrupt and
 abominable than the actions themselves1
 how much soever actual sins may be     
supposed to be more scandalous and      
pernicious to the world1 as they are    
more visible2 if the fruit be corrupt1  
the tree that brings forth must be much 
more so2 and though this is not so      
discernible by others1 yet it is        
abhorred and punished by a jealous ,god1
 who searches the heart and the reins2  
therefore this doctrine is contrary to  
his holiness4  7#d47 ,the merit of good 
works1 and our justification thereby1 is
 a reflection on this divine perfection2
 as it makes way for boasting1 and is   

inconsistent with that humility1 which  
is the main ingredient in holiness2 and 
casts the highest reflection on         
,christ's satisfaction1 which is the    
greatest expedient for the setting forth
 the holiness of ,god1 as it argues it  
not to have been absolutely necessary1  
and substitutes our imperfect works in  
the room thereof4  7#e47 ,another       
doctrine1 which is contrary to the      
holiness of ,god1 is that of purgatory1 
and prayers for the dead1 which they are
 as tenacious of1 as ,demetrius1 and his
 fellow-craftsmen1 were of the image of 
,diana1 at ,ephesus1 the destruction    
whereof would endanger their craft1     
,acts xix4 #be1 #bg4 so1 if this        
doctrine should be disregarded1 it would
 bring no small detriment to them4 ,but 
that which renders it most abominable1  
is1 that it extenuates the demerit of   
sin1 and supposes it possible for others
 to do that for them by their prayers1  
which they neglected to do whilst they  
were alive1 who1 from this presumptuous 

supposition1 did not see an absolute    
necessity of holiness to salvation4     
,these1 and many other doctrines1 which 
might have been mentioned1 cast the     
highest reflection on the holiness of   
,god1 and not only evince the justice   
and necessity of the reformation1 but   
oblige1 us to maintain the contrary     
doctrines4  ,if it be objected1 by way  
of reprisal1 that there are many        
doctrines1 which we maintain1 that lead 
to licentiousness1 ,i hope we shall be  
able to exculpate ourselves2 but this we
 reserve for its proper place1 that we  
may avoid the repetition of things1     
which we shall be obliged to insist on  
elsewhere4  #c4 ,let us not practically 
deny1 or cast contempt on this divine   
perfection2 which we may be said to do4 
7#a47 ,when we live without ,god in the 
world1 as though we were under no       
obligation to holiness4 ,the purity of  
the divine nature is proposed in        
scripture1 not only as a motive1 but1 so
 far as conformity to it is possible1 as

 an exemplar of holiness3 and therefore 
we are exhorted to be holy1 not only    
because he is holy1 but as he is holy1  
#a ,pet4 i4 #ae1 #af4 or so far as the  
image of ,god in man consists therein2  
therefore they who live without ,god in 
the world1 being alienated from his     
life1 viz4 his holiness1 and giving     
themselves over unto lasciviousness1 to 
work all uncleanness with greediness1   
regard not the holiness of his nature or
 law4 ,these sin presumptuously1 and    
accordingly1 are said to reproach the   
,lord1 ,numb4 xv4 #cj4 as though he was 
a ,god that had pleasure in wickedness2 
or if they conclude him to be infinitely
 offended with it1 they regard not the  
consequence of being the objects of his 
displeasure1 and fiery indignation4     
7#b47 ,men reflect on the holiness of   
,god when they complain of religion1 as 
though it were too strict and severe a  
thing2 a yoke that sits very uneasy upon
 them1 which they resolve to keep at the
 greatest distance from1 especially     

unless they may have some abatements    
made1 or indulgence given1 to live in   
the commission of some beloved lusts4   
,these cannot bear a faithful reprover3 
thus ,ahab hated ,micaiah1 because he   
did not prophesy good concerning him1   
but evil2 and the people did not like to
 hear of the holiness of ,god2 therefore
 they desire that the prophets would    
cause the ,holy ,one of ,israel to cease
 before them1 ,isa4 xxx4 #aa4 and to    
this we may add1  7#c47 ,they do1 in    
effect1 deny or despise this attribute1 
who entertain an enmity or prejudice    
against holiness in others1 whose       
conversation is not only blameless1 but 
exemplary2 such make use of the word    
saint1 as a term of reproach1 as though 
holiness were not only a worthless      
thing1 but a blemish or disparagement to
 the nature of man1 a stain on his      
character1 and to be avoided by all who 
have any regard to their reputation1 or1
 at least as though religion were no    
other than hypocrisy1 and much more so1 

when it shines brightest in the         
conversation of those who esteem it     
their greatest ornament4 ,what is this1 
but to spurn at the holiness of ,god1 by
 endeavouring to bring that into        
contempt1 which is his image and        
delight8  ,,xiii4 ,god is most just4    
,this attribute differs but little from 
that of holiness1 though sometimes they 
are thus distinguished2 as holiness is  
the contrariety1 or opposition of his   
nature to sin1 justice is an eternal and
 visible display thereof2 and1 in       
particular1 when ,god is said to be     
just1 he is considered as the governor  
of the world2 and therefore when he     
appears in the glory of his justice1 he 
bears the character of a judge2         
accordingly it is said concerning him1  
,shall not the ,judge of all the earth  
do right8 ,gen4 xviii4 #be4 and he is   
said1 without respect of persons1 to    
judge according to every man's work1 #a 
,pet4 i4 #ag4 ,now the justice of ,god  
is sometimes taken for his faithfulness1

 which is a doing justice to his word2  
but this will be more particularly      
considered1 when we speak of him as     
abundant in truth4 ,but1 according to   
the most common and known sense of the  
word1 it is taken either for his        
disposing1 or his distributive justice2 
the former is that whereby his holiness 
shines forth in all the dispensations of
 his providence1 as all his ways are    
equal1 of what kind soever they be2 the 
latter1 to wit1 his distributive        
justice1 consists either in rewarding or
 punishing1 and so is styled either     
remunerative or vindictive2 in these two
 respects1 we shall more particularly   
consider this attribute4  #a4 ,the      
justice of ,god1 as giving rewards to   
his creatures2 this he may be said to   
do1 without supposing the persons1 who  
are the subjects thereof1 to have done  
any thing by which they have merited    
them3 we often find1 in scripture1 that 
the heavenly glory is set forth as a    
reward1 ,mat4 x4 #da1 #db4 and #a ,cor4 

iii4 #ad4 and it is called1 a crown of  
righteousness1 which the ,lord1 the     
righteous judge1 shall give at that day1
 #b ,tim4 iv4 #h4 to wit1 when he       
appears1 in the glory of his justice1 to
 judge the world in righteousness2 and  
it is also said1 that it is a righteous 
thing with ,god to recompense to his    
people who are troubled1 rest1 when the 
,lord shall be revealed from heaven1 #b 
,thess4 i4 #f4 #g4 ,but1 for the        
understanding such like expressions1 ,i 
humbly conceive1 that they import the   
necessary and inseparable connexion that
 there is between grace wrought in us1  
and glory conferred upon us3 it is      
called1 indeed1 a reward1 or a crown of 
righteousness1 to encourage us to duty2 
but1 without supposing that1 what we do 
has any thing meritorious in it4 ,if we 
ourselves are less than the least of all
 ,god's mercies1 then the best actions  
put forth by us must be so1 for the     
action cannot have more honour ascribed 
to it than the agent2 or if1 as our     

,saviour says1 when we have done all1 we
 must say1 we are unprofitable servants1
 ,luke xvii4 #aj4 and that sincerely1   
and not in a way of compliment1 as some 
,popish writers understand it1          
consistently with their doctrine of the 
merit of good works1 we must conclude   
that it is a reward not of debt1 but of 
grace2 and therefore the word is taken  
in a less proper sense4 ,it is not a    
bestowing a blessing purchased by us1   
but for us2 ,christ is the purchaser1 we
 are the receivers2 it is strictly and  
properly the reward of his merit1 but1  
in its application1 the gift of his     
grace4  #b4 ,there is his vindictive    
justice1 whereby he punishes sin1 as an 
injury offered to his divine            
perfections1 an affront to his          
sovereignty1 a reflection on his        
holiness1 and a violation of his law1   
for which he demands satisfaction1 and  
inflicts punishment1 proportioned to the
 nature of the crime1 which he continues
 to do1 till satisfaction be given3 this

 is called1 his visiting iniquity1      
,deut4 v4 #i4 or visiting for it1 ,jer4 
v4 #i4 and it is also called1 his       
setting his face against a person1 and  
cutting him off from amongst his people1
 ,lev4 xvii4 #aj4 and when he does this1
 his wrath is compared to flames of     
fire2 it is called1 ,the fire of his    
jealousy1 ,zeph4 i4 #ah4 and they1 who  
are the objects hereof1 are said to fall
 into the hands of the living ,god1 who 
is a consuming fire1 ,heb4 x4 #ca4      
compared with chap4 xii4 #bi4  ,but that
 we may farther consider how ,god       
glorifies this perfection1 and thereby  
shews his infinite hatred of sin1 we may
 observe1  7#a47 ,an eminent instance   
thereof in his inflicting that          
punishment that was due to our sins1 on 
the person of ,christ our ,surety4 ,it  
was1 indeed1 the highest act of         
condescending grace that he was willing 
to be charged with1 or to have the      
iniquity of his people laid upon him2   
but it was the greatest display of      

vindictive justice1 that he was         
accordingly punished for it1 as he is   
said to be made sin for us1 who knew no 
sin1 #b ,cor4 v4 #ba4 and accordingly   
,god gives a commission to the sword of 
his justice1 to awake and exert itself1 
in an uncommon manner1 against him1 the 
man his fellow1 ,zech4 xiii4 #g4 ,in    
this instance1 satisfaction is not only 
demanded1 but fully given1 in which it  
differs from all the other displays of  
vindictive justice2 but of this1 more   
will be considered under some following 
answers4#fj  7#b47 ,the vindictive      
justice of ,god punishes sin in the     
persons of finally impenitent sinners in
 hell1 where a demand of satisfaction is
 perpetually made1 but can never be     
given1 which is the reason of the       
eternity of the punishment inflicted1   
which is called1 everlasting            
destruction1 from the presence of the   
,lord1 and from the glory of his power1 
#b ,thes4 i4 #i4 this we shall also have
 occasion to insist on more largely1    

under a following an answer4#fa  ,in    
these two instances1 punishment is taken
 in a strict and proper sense3 but there
 is1 indeed1 another sense1 in which    
many evils are inflicted for sins       
committed1 which1 though frequently     
called punishments1 yet the word is     
taken in a less proper sense1 to wit1   
when believers1 who are justified upon  
the account of the satisfaction which   
,christ has given for their sins1 are   
said to be punished for them2 as when it
 is said1 ,thou1 our ,god1 hast punished
 us less than our iniquities deserve1   
,ezra ix4 #ac4 and if his children      
forsake my law1 and keep not my         
commandments1 then will ,i visit their  
transgression with the rod1 and their   
iniquity with stripes2 nevertheless1 my 
loving kindness will ,i not utterly take
 from him1 ,psal4 lxxxix4 #cj-ca4 and   
the prophet1 speaking of some1 for whom 
,god would execute judgment1 and be     
favourable to them in the end1 so that  
they should behold his righteousness2   

yet he represents them1 as bearing the  
indignation of the ,lord1 because they  
had sinned against him1 ,micah vii4 #i4 
,and1 as these evils are exceedingly    
afflictive1 being oftentimes attended   
with a sad apprehension and fear of the 
wrath of ,god2 so they are called       
punishments1 because sin is the cause of
 them3 yet they differ from punishment  
in its most proper sense1 as but now    
mentioned1 in that1 though justice      
inflicts evils on them for sin1 yet it  
doth not herein demand satisfaction1 for
 that is supposed to have been given1   
inasmuch as they are considered as      
justified2 and1 to speak with reverence1
 it is not agreeable to the nature of   
justice to demand satisfaction twice4   
,nevertheless1 it is one thing for ,god 
really to demand it1 and another thing  
for believers to apprehend or conclude  
that such a demand is made2 this they   
may often do1 as questioning whether    
they are believers1 or in a justified   
state3 however1 ,god's design1 in these 

afflictive dispensations1 is to humble  
them greatly1 and shew them the demerit 
of sin1 whatever he determines shall be 
the consequence thereof4  ,moreover1 the
 persons1 who are the subjects of this  
punishment1 are considered not as       
enemies1 but as children1 and therefore 
the objects of his love1 at the same    
time that his hand is heavy upon them2  
for which reason some have called them  
castigatory punishments1 agreeably to   
what the apostle saith1 ,whom the ,lord 
loveth he chasteneth2 and that herein he
 dealeth with them as with sons1 ,heb4  
xii4 #f1 #g4  ,from what has been said1 
concerning the justice of ,god in       
rewarding or punishing1 we may infer1   
#a4 ,since the heavenly blessedness is  
called a reward1 to denote its connexion
 with grace and duty1 let no one        
presumptuously expect one without the   
other3 the crown is not to be put upon  
the head of any one1 but him that runs  
the ,christian race2 and it is a certain
 truth1 that without holiness no man    

shall see the ,lord1 chap4 xii4 #ad4    
,and1 on the other hand1 as this is a   
reward of grace1 founded on ,christ's   
purchase1 let us take heed that we do   
not ascribe that to our performances1   
which is wholly founded on ,christ's    
merit4 ,let every thing that may be     
reckoned a spur to diligence1 in the    
idea of a reward1 be apprehended and    
improved by us1 to quicken and excite us
 to duty2 but whatever there is of      
praise and glory therein1 let that be   
ascribed to ,christ2 so that when we    
consider the heavenly blessedness in    
this view1 let us say1 as the angels1   
together with that blessed company who  
are joined with them1 are represented1  
speaking1 ,worthy is the ,lamb that was 
slain1 to receive power1 riches1 wisdom1
 and strength1 and honour1 and glory1   
and blessing1 ,rev4 v4 #ab4 ,it is the  
price that he paid which gives it the   
character of a reward and therefore the 
glory of it is to be ascribed to him4   
#b4 ,from what has been said concerning 

the vindictive justice of ,god          
inflicting punishments on his enemies1  
let us learn the evil and heinous nature
 of sin1 and so take warning thereby1   
that we may not expose ourselves to the 
same or like judgments4 ,how deplorable 
is the condition of those1 who have     
contracted a debt for which they can    
never satisfy6 who are said1 to drink of
 the wrath of the ,almighty1 which is   
poured out1 without mixture1 into the   
cup of his indignation1 ,job xxi4 #bj4  
compared with ,rev4 xiv4 #aj4 ,this     
should induce us to fly from the wrath  
to come1 and to make a right improvement
 of the price of redemption which was   
given by ,christ1 to deliver his people 
from it4  #c4 ,believers1 who are       
delivered from the vindictive justice of
 ,god1 have the highest reason for      
thankfulness2 and it is a very great    
encouragement to them1 under all the    
afflictive evils1 which they endure1    
that the most bitter ingredients are    
taken out of them4 ,it is true1 they are

 not in themselves joyous1 but grievous2
 nevertheless1 afterwards they yield the
 peaceable fruit of righteousness to    
them1 who are exercised thereby1 ,heb4  
xii4 #aa4 and let us not presume without
 ground1 but give diligence1 that we may
 conclude that these are the            
dispensations of a reconciled ,father1  
who corrects with judgment not in anger1
 lest he should bring us to nothing1    
,jer4 x4 #bd4 ,it will afford great     
matter of comfort1 if we can say1 that  
he is1 at the same time1 a just ,god1   
and a ,saviour1 ,isa4 xlv4 #ba4 and1 as 
one observes1 though he punishes for    
sin1 yet it is not with the punishment  
of sin4  ,,xiv4 ,god is most merciful   
and gracious1 long-suffering1 and       
abundant in goodness1 all which         
perfections are mentioned together in   
,exod4 xxxiv4 #g4 and we shall first    
consider his goodness1 which1 in some   
respects1 includes the other1 though in 
others it is distinguished from them1 as
 will be more particularly observed4    

,this being one of his communicable     
perfections1 we may conceive of it1 by  
comparing it with that goodness which is
 in the creature1 while we separate from
 it all the imperfections thereof1 by   
which means we may arrive to some idea  
of it4  ,therefore persons are          
denominated good1 as having all those   
perfections that belong to their nature1
 which is the most large and extensive  
sense of goodness2 or else it is taken  
in a moral sense1 and so it consists in 
the rectitude of their nature1 as we    
call a holy man a good man2 or lastly1  
it is taken for one who is beneficent1  
or communicatively good1 and so it is   
the same with benignity4 ,now to apply  
this to the goodness of ,god1 it either 
includes in it all his perfections1 or  
his holiness in particular1 or else his 
being disposed to impart or communicate 
those blessings to his creatures1 that  
they stand in need of1 in which sense we
 are here to understand it as           
distinguished from his other            

perfections4  ,this goodness of ,god    
supposes that he has1 in himself1 an    
infinite and inexhaustible treasure of  
all blessedness1 enough to fill all     
things1 and to make his creatures       
completely happy4 ,this he had from all 
eternity1 before there was any object in
 which it might be displayed1 or any act
 of power put forth to produce one4 ,it 
is this the ,psalmist intends1 when he  
says1 ,psal4 cxix4 #fh4 ,thou art good1 
and when he adds1 thou doest good2 as   
the former implies his being good in    
himself1 the latter denotes his being so
 to his creatures4  ,before we treat of 
this perfection in particular1 we shall 
observe the difference that there is    
between goodness1 mercy1 grace1 and     
patience1 which1 though they all are    
included in the divine benignity1 and   
imply in them the communication of some 
favours that tend to the creatures      
advantage1 as well as the glory of ,god1
 yet they may be distinguished with     
respect to the objects thereof3 thus    

goodness considers its object1 as       
indigent and destitute of all things1   
and so it communicates those blessings  
that it stands in need of4 ,mercy       
considers its object as miserable1      
therefore1 though an innocent creature  
be the object of the divine bounty and  
goodness1 it is only a fallen1          
miserable1 and undone creature1 that is 
an object of compassion4 ,and grace is  
mercy displayed freely1 therefore its   
object is considered not only as        
miserable1 but unworthy2 however1 though
 the sinner's misery1 and worthiness of 
pity1 may be distinguished1 these two   
ideas cannot be separated1 inasmuch as  
that which renders him miserable1       
denominates him at the same time guilty1
 since misery is inseparably connected  
with guilt1 and no one is miserable as a
 creature1 but as a sinner2 therefore we
 are considered as unworthy of mercy1   
and so the objects of divine grace1     
which is mercy extended freely1 to those
 who have rendered themselves unworthy  

of it4 ,and patience1 or long-suffering1
 is the suspending deserved fury1 or the
 continuing to bestow undeserved        
favours1 a lengthening out of our       
tranquillity2 these attributes are to be
 considered in particular4 ,and1  #a4   
,of the goodness of ,god4 ,as ,god was  
infinite in power from all eternity1    
before there was any display thereof1 or
 act of omnipotency put forth2 he was   
eternally good1 before there was any    
communication of his bounty1 or any     
creature1 to which it might be imparted2
 so that the first display of this      
perfection was in giving being to all   
things1 which were the objects of his   
bounty and goodness1 as well as the     
effects of his power2 and all the       
excellencies1 or advantages1 which one  
creature hath above another1 are as so  
many streams flowing from this fountain1
 ,he giveth to all1 life and breath1 and
 all things1 ,acts xvii4 #be4fb  #b4    
,the mercy of ,god1 which considers its 
object as miserable1 is illustrated by  

all those distressing circumstances1    
that render sinners the objects of      
compassion4 ,are all1 by nature1        
bond-slaves to sin and ,satan8 ,it is   
mercy that sets them free1 delivers     
them1 who1 through fear of death1 were  
all their life-time subject to bondage1 
,heb4 ii4 #ae4 ,are we all1 by nature1  
dead in sin1 unable to do what is       
spiritually good1 alienated from the    
life of ,god8 ,was our condition        
miserable1 as being without ,god in the 
world1 and without hope3 like the poor  
infant1 mentioned by the prophet1 cast  
out in the open field1 to the loathing  
of our persons1 whom no eye pitied8 it  
was mercy that said to us1 live1 ,ezek4 
xvi4 #d1 #e1 #f4 accordingly ,god is    
said to have remembered us in our low   
estate1 for his mercy endureth for ever1
 ,psal4 cxxxvi4 #bc4  ,the mercy of ,god
 is either common or special2 common    
mercy gives all the outward             
conveniencies of this life1 which are   
bestowed without distinction2 as he     

causes his sun to rise on the evil and  
the good1 and sendeth rain on the just  
and on the unjust1 ,matth4 v4 #de4 so it
 is said1 his tender mercies are over   
all his works1 ,psal4 cxlv4 #i4 but his 
special mercy is that which he bestows  
on1 or has reserved for the heirs of    
salvation1 which he communicates to them
 in a covenant way1 in and through a    
,mediator2 so the apostle speaks of     
,god1 as the ,father of our ,lord ,jesus
 ,christ1 the ,father of mercies1 and   
the ,god of all comfort1 #b ,cor4 i4 #c4
  #c4 ,as ,god is said to be merciful1  
or to extend compassion to the          
miserable1 so he doth this freely1 and  
accordingly is said to be gracious2 and 
as grace is free1 so it is sovereign1   
and bestowed in a discriminating way2   
that is given to one which he denies to 
another1 and only because it is his     
pleasure3 thus says one of ,christ's    
disciples1 ,lord1 how is it that thou   
wilt manifest thyself unto us1 and not  
unto the world8 ,john xiv4 #bb4 ,and our

 ,saviour himself glorifies ,god for the
 display of his grace1 in such a way1   
when he says1 ,i thank thee1 ,o ,father1
 ,lord of heaven and earth1 because thou
 hast hid these things from the wise and
 prudent1 and hast revealed them unto   
babes2 and considers this as the result 
of his sovereign will1 when he adds1    
even so ,father1 for so it seemed good  
in thy sight1 ,matth4 xi4 #be1 #bf4 ,now
 the discriminating grace of ,god       
appears in several instances2 as1  7#a47
 ,in that he should extend salvation to 
men1 rather than to fallen angels2 so   
our ,saviour took not on him the nature 
of angels1 but the seed of ,abraham1    
because he designed to save the one1 and
 to reserve the other1 in chains1 under 
darkness1 unto the judgment of the great
 day1 ,heb4 ii4 #af4 compared with ,jude
 ver4 #f4 ,and among men1 only some are 
made partakers of this invaluable       
blessing1 which all were equally        
unworthy of2 and their number is        
comparatively very small1 therefore they

 are called a little flock1 and the     
gate1 through which they enter1 is      
strait1 and the way narrow that leads to
 life1 and few there be that find it1   
,luke xii4 #cb4 compared with ,matth4   
vii4 #ac1 #ad4 ,and there are many who  
make a considerable figure in the world1
 for riches1 honours1 great natural     
abilities1 bestowed by common           
providence1 that are destitute of       
special grace1 while others1 who are    
poor1 and despised in the world1 are    
called1 and saved2 the apostle observed 
it to be so in his day1 when he says1   
not many mighty1 not many noble1 are    
called2 but ,god hath chosen the foolish
 things of the world to confound the    
wise1 and the weak things of the world  
to confound the things that are mighty1 
and base things of the world1 and things
 which are despised hath ,god chosen1   
yea1 things that are not1 to bring to   
nought things that are1 #a ,cor4 i4 #bf1
 #bg1 #bh4  7#b47 ,in several things    
relating to the internal means1 whereby 

he fits and disposes men for salvation3 
thus the work of conversion is an       
eminent instance of discriminating      
grace1 for herein he breaks through1 and
 overcomes1 that reluctancy and         
opposition1 which corrupt nature makes  
against it2 subdues the enmity and      
rebellion that was in the heart of man1 
works a powerful change in the will1    
whereby he subjects it to himself1 which
 work is contrary to the natural biass  
and inclination thereof2 and that which 
renders this grace more illustrious1 is1
 that many of those who are thus        
converted1 were1 before this1 notorious 
sinners2 some have been blasphemers1    
persecutors1 and injurious1 as the      
apostle says concerning himself before  
his conversion1 and concludes himself to
 have been the chief of sinners2 and    
tells us1 how he shut up many of the    
saints in prison1 and1 when they were   
put to death1 he gave his voice against 
them2 punished them often in every      
synagogue1 and compelled them to        

blaspheme1 and1 being exceedingly       
against them1 persecuted them unto      
strange cities1 #a ,tim4 i4 #ac1 #ae4   
compared with ,acts xxvi4 #aj1 #aa4 ,but
 you will say1 he was1 in other         
respects1 a moral man2 therefore he     
gives an instance elsewhere of some who 
were far otherwise1 whom he puts in mind
 of their having been fornicators1      
idolaters1 adulterers1 effeminate1      
abusers of themselves with mankind1     
thieves1 covetous1 drunkards1 revilers1 
extortioners2 such1 says he1 were some  
of you2 but ye are washed1 but ye are   
sanctified1 but ye are justified4       
,moreover1 the change wrought in the    
soul is unasked for1 and so it may truly
 be said1 ,god is found of them that    
sought him not2 and undesired2 for      
though unregenerate sinners desire to be
 delivered from misery1 they are far    
from desiring to be delivered from sin1 
or to have repentance1 faith1 and       
holiness3 if they pray for these        
blessings1 it is in such a manner1 that 

the ,spirit of ,god hardly calls it     
prayer2 for the ,spirit of grace1 and of
 supplications1 by which alone we are   
enabled to pray in a right manner1 is   
what accompanies or flows from          
conversion2 if therefore ,god bestows   
this privilege on persons so unworthy of
 it1 and so averse to it1 it must       
certainly be an instance of sovereign   
and discriminating grace4  7#c47 ,this  
will farther appear1 if we consider how 
much they1 who are the objects thereof1 
differ from what they were2 or if we    
compare their present1 with their former
 state4 ,once they were blind and       
ignorant of the ways of ,god1 and going 
astray in crooked paths2 the apostle    
speaks of this in the abstract1 ,ye were
 sometimes darkness1 ,eph4 v4 #h4 and   
that the god of this world1 had blinded 
the minds of some1 lest the light of the
 glorious gospel of ,christ should shine
 unto them1 #b ,cor4 iv4 #d4 but now    
they are made light in the ,lord1 and   
brought into the way of truth and peace4

 ,their hearts were once impenitent1    
unrelenting1 and inclined to sin1       
without remorse1 or self-reflection2    
nothing could make an impression on     
them1 as being past feeling1 and giving 
themselves over to lasciviousness1 to   
work all uncleanness with greediness1   
,eph4 iv4 #ai4 but now they are         
penitent1 humble1 relenting1 and broken 
under a sense of sin1 afraid of every   
thing that may be an occasion thereof1  
willing to be reproved for it1 and      
desirous to be set at a greater distance
 from it4 ,once they were destitute of  
hope1 or solid peace of conscience2 but 
now they have hope and joy in believing1
 and are delivered from that bondage1   
which they were1 before this1 exposed   
to2 such a happy turn is given to the   
frame of their spirits3 and as to the   
external and relative change which is   
made in their state1 there is no        
condemnation to them1 as justified      
persons2 and therefore they who1 before 
this1 were in the utmost distress1      

expecting nothing but hell and          
destruction1 are enabled to lift up     
their heads with joy1 experiencing the  
blessed fruits and effects of this grace
 in their own souls4  7#d47 ,the        
discriminating grace of ,god farther    
appears1 in that he bestows these saving
 blessings on his people1 at such       
seasons1 when they appear most suitable1
 and adapted to their condition2 as he  
is a very present help in a time of     
trouble1 when their straits and         
difficulties are greatest1 then is his  
time to send relief2 when sinners       
sometimes have wearied themselves in the
 greatness of their way1 while seeking  
rest and happiness in other things below
 himself1 and have met with nothing but 
disappointment therein2 when they are   
brought to the utmost extremity1 then he
 appears in their behalf4 ,and so with  
respect to believers1 when their        
comforts are at the lowest ebb1 their   
hope almost degenerated into despair1   
their temptations most prevalent and    

afflicting1 and they ready to sink under
 the weight that lies on their spirits1 
when1 as the ,psalmist says1 their      
hearts are overwhelmed within them2 then
 he leads them to the rock that is      
higher than they1 ,psal4 lxi4 #b4 when  
they are even desolate and afflicted1   
and the troubles of their hearts are    
enlarged1 then he brings them out of    
their distresses1 ,psal4 xxv4 #af1 #ag4 
,thus the grace of ,god eminently       
appears1 in what he bestows on his      
people2 but if we look forward1 and     
consider what he has prepared for them1 
or the hope that is laid up in heaven1  
then we may behold the most amazing     
displays of grace1 in which they who    
shall be the happy objects thereof1 will
 be a wonder to themselves1 and will see
 more of the glory of it than can be now
 expressed in words2 as the ,psalmist   
says1 in a way of admiration1 ,oh1 how  
great is thy goodness1 which thou hast  
laid up for them that fear thee2 which  
thou hast wrought for them that trust in

 thee before the sons of men6 ,psal4    
xxx4 #ai4  ,object4 #a4 ,if it be       
objected1 that the afflictions1 which   
,god's people are exposed to in this    
life1 are inconsistent with the glory of
 his grace and mercy4  ,answ4 ,to this  
it may be replied1 that afflictive      
providences are so far from being       
inconsistent with the glory of these    
perfections1 that they tend to          
illustrate them the more4 ,for since sin
 has rendered afflictions needful1 as an
 expedient1 to humble us for it1 and    
also to prevent it for the future1 so   
,god designs our advantage thereby2 and 
however grievous they are1 yet since    
they are so over-ruled by him1 as the   
apostle says1 that they yield the       
peaceable fruit of righteousness unto   
them1 who are exercised thereby1 ,heb4  
xii4 #aa4 they are far from being       
inconsistent with the mercy and grace of
 ,god4  ,and this will farther appear1  
if we consider that these outward       
afflictions are often attended with     

inward supports1 and spiritual comforts2
 so that1 as the apostle says concerning
 himself1 as the sufferings of ,christ  
abound in them1 their consolations      
abound by him1 #b ,cor4 i4 #e4 or as the
 outward man perishes1 the inward man is
 renewed day by day1 chap4 iv4 #af4 it  
was nothing but this could make him say1
 ,i take pleasure in infirmities1 in    
reproaches1 in necessities1 in          
persecutions1 in distresses for         
,christ's sake1 for when ,i am weak1    
then am ,i strong1 chap4 xii4 #aj4      
,object4 #b4 ,it is farther objected1   
that the doctrine of free grace leads   
men to licentiousness2 and therefore    
that what we have said concerning it1 is
 either not true and warrantable1 or1 at
 least1 should not be much insisted on1 
for fear this consequence should ensue4 
,answ4 ,the grace of ,god doth not lead 
to licentiousness1 though it be often   
abused1 and presumptuous sinners take   
occasion from thence to go on1 as they  
apprehend1 securely therein1 because    

,god is merciful and gracious1 and ready
 to forgive1 which vile and disingenuous
 temper the apostle observed in some    
that lived in his days1 and expresses   
himself with the greatest abhorrence    
thereof1 ,shall we continue in sin1 that
 grace may abound8 ,god forbid1 ,rom4   
vi4 #a1 #b4 ,but does it follow1 that   
because it is abused by some1 as an     
occasion of licentiousness1 through the 
corruption of their natures1 that       
therefore it leads to it8 ,the greatest 
blessings may be the occasion of the    
greatest evils2 but yet they do not lead
 to them4 ,that which leads to          
licentiousness1 must have some motive or
 inducement in it1 which will warrant an
 ingenuous mind1 acting according to the
 rules of equity and justice1 to take   
those liberties2 but this nothing can   
do1 much less the grace of ,god4 ,his   
great clemency1 indeed1 may sometimes   
give occasion to those who hate him1 and
 have ingratitude and rebellion rooted  
in their nature1 to take up arms against

 him2 and an act of grace may be abused1
 so as to make the worst of criminals   
more bold in their wickedness1 who      
presume that they may commit it with    
impunity3 but this is not the natural   
tendency1 or genuine effect thereof2 nor
 will it be thus abused by any1 but     
those who are abandoned to every thing  
that is vile and ungrateful4 ,as the law
 of ,god prohibits all sin1 and his     
holiness is opposite to it1 so his grace
 affords the strongest motive to        
holiness2 it is therefore the neglect or
 contempt of this grace1 and a corrupt  
disposition to act contrary to the      
design thereof1 that leads to           
licentiousness4 ,grace and duty are     
inseparably connected1 so that where    
,god bestows the one1 he expects the    
other2 yea1 duty1 which is our act1 is  
,god's gift1 as the power to perform it 
is from him3 thus when he promises to   
give his people a new heart1 and put his
 ,spirit within them1 and cause them to 
walk in his statutes1 he tells them1    

that they should remember their evil    
ways and doings1 and loathe themselves  
in their own sight for their iniquities2
 which is not only a prediction1        
respecting the event1 but a promise of  
what he would incline them to do2 and   
when he adds1 that for this he would be 
enquired of by them1 ,ezek4 xxxvi4 #bf1 
#bg1 #ca1 #cg4 or that they should seek 
them by fervent prayer1 he secures to   
them1 by promise1 a disposition and     
grace to perform this great duty1 which 
is inseparably connected with expected  
blessings4 ,god himself therefore will  
take care that1 however others abuse his
 grace1 it shall not lead those who are 
in a distinguishing way1 the objects    
thereof1 to licentiousness4  ,and to    
this we may add1 that it is a           
disparagement to this divine perfection 
to say1 that1 because some take occasion
 from it to continue in sin1 therefore  
its glory is to be1 as it were1         
concealed1 and not published to the     
world4 ,as some of old did not care to  

hear of the holiness of ,god1 and       
therefore1 if the prophets would render 
their doctrine acceptable to them1 they 
must not insist on that perfection1 but 
cause the ,holy ,one of ,israel to cease
 from before them1 ,isa4 xxx4 #aa4 so   
there are many who are as little        
desirous to hear of the free and        
discriminating grace of ,god1 which     
contains the very sum and substance of  
the gospel1 lest it should be abused1   
whereas the glory thereof cannot be     
enough admired2 and therefore it ought  
often to be recommended1 as what leads  
to holiness1 and lies at the very root  
of all religion4  ,and that it may be so
 improved1 let it be farther considered1
 that it is the greatest inducement to  
humility1 as well as one of the greatest
 ornaments and evidences of a true      
,christian4 ,this appears from the      
nature of the thing1 for grace supposes 
its object unworthy1 as has been but now
 observed2 and it argues him a debtor to
 ,god for all that he enjoys or expects1

 which1 if it be duly considered1 will  
make him appear vile and worthless in   
his own eyes1 and excite in him a degree
 of thankfulness in proportion to the   
ground he has to claim an interest      
therein1 and the extensiveness of the   
blessed fruits and effects thereof4  #d4
 ,we proceed to speak of ,god as        
long-suffering1 or as he is styled by   
the apostle1 ,the ,god of patience1     
,rom4 xv4 #e4 sometimes this attribute  
is set forth in a metaphorical way1 and 
called a restraining his wrath1 ,psal4  
lxxvi4 #aj4 and a refraining himself1   
and holding his peace1 or keeping       
silence1 ,isa4 xlii4 #ad4 and ,psal4 l4 
#ba4 and1 while he does this1 he is     
represented1 speaking after the manner  
of men1 as one that is weary with       
forbearing1 ,isa4 i4 #ac4 chap4 vii4    
#ac4 ,mal4 ii4 #ag4 and he is said to be
 pressed1 under a provoking people1 as a
 cart is pressed that is full of        
sheaves1 ,amos ii4 #ac4 ,by all which   
expressions1 this perfection is set     

forth in a familiar style1 according to 
our common way of speaking3 but that we 
may briefly explain the nature thereof1 
let us consider1 in general2 that it is 
a branch of his goodness and mercy1     
manifested in suspending the exercise of
 his vindictive justice1 and in his not 
punishing in such a degree as sin       
deserves4 ,but that we may consider this
 more particularly1 we shall observe    
something concerning the objects        
thereof1 and the various instances in   
which it is displayed2 how it is        
glorified2 and how the glory thereof is 
consistent with that of vindictive      
justice2 and lastly1 how it is to be    
improved by us4  7#a47 ,concerning the  
objects of ,god's patience4 ,since it is
 the deferring of deserved wrath1 it    
follows from hence1 that an innocent    
creature cannot be the object of it1    
inasmuch as vindictive justice makes no 
demand upon him2 nor has it any reserves
 of punishment laid up in store for him2
 such an one is1 indeed the object of   

goodness1 but not of forbearance2 for   
punishment cannot be said to be deferred
 where it is not due3 and1 on the other 
hand1 they cannot be said to be the     
objects thereof1 in whom the vindictive 
justice of ,god is displayed to the     
utmost1 when all the vials of his wrath 
are poured forth4 ,whether the devils   
are1 in some sense1 the objects of      
,god's forbearance1 as having ground to 
expect a greater degree of punishment   
after the final judgment1 is disputed by
 some1 who contend about the sense of   
the word forbearance2 they are said1    
indeed1 to be reserved in chains1 under 
darkness1 unto the judgment of the great
 day1 ,jude1 ver4 #f4 that is1 though   
their state be hopeless1 and their      
misery great1 beyond expression1 yet    
there is a greater degree of punishment1
 which they bring upon themselves1 by   
all the hostilities they commit against 
,god in this world3 this farther        
appears1 from what they are represented1
 as saying to our ,saviour1 ,art thou   

come to torment us before the time8     
,matth4 viii4 #bi4fc ,by which it is    
sufficiently evident that their misery  
shall be greater than now it is4        
,however1 this less degree of           
punishment1 inflicted on them1 is never 
called in scripture1 an instance of     
,god's patience1 or long-suffering1     
towards them2 therefore we must conclude
 that they are not1 properly speaking1  
the objects of the glory of this        
attribute4 ,patience then is only       
extended to sinful men1 while in this   
world3 for it is called1 in scripture1  
,the riches of his goodness1 and        
forbearance1 and long-suffering1 ,rom4  
ii4 #d4 and it is said to lead those1   
who are the objects of it1 to           
repentance2 therefore there must be1    
together with the exercise of this      
perfection1 a day or season of grace    
granted1 which is called1 in scripture1 
with a peculiar emphasis1 the sinner's  
day1 or the time of his visitation1 in  
which it ought to be his highest concern

 to know the things of his peace1 ,luke 
xix4 #db1 #dd4 and the gospel that is   
preached1 in this season of ,god's      
forbearance1 is called1 ,the word of his
 patience1 ,rev4 iii4 #aj4 so that there
 is something more in this attribute    
than barely a deferring of punishment4  
,accordingly ,god is said1 to wait that 
he may be gracious1 ,isa4 xxx4 #ah4 and 
the effects and consequences thereof are
 various1 7as may be said of all the    
other means of grace7 so that sinners1  
who neglect to improve it1 have not only
 thereby a reprieve from deserved       
punishment1 but all those advantages of 
common grace1 which attend it3 but1 with
 respect to believers1 it may be said1  
as the apostle expresses it1 ,the       
long-suffering of our ,lord is          
salvation1 #b ,pet4 iii4 #ae4 ,it is    
evidently so to them1 and therefore ,god
 doth not spare them1 that he may take a
 more fit opportunity to punish them2   
but he waits till the set time to favour
 them is come1 that he may extend       

salvation to them2 and1 in this respect 
more especially1 the exercise of this   
perfection is founded in the death of   
,christ4 ,and inasmuch as the elect1 who
 are purchased thereby1 were1 by the    
divine appointment1 to live throughout  
all the ages of time1 and to have the   
saving effects of his redemption applied
 to them1 one after another1 it was     
necessary that the patience of ,god     
should be so long continued1 which is   
therefore glorified more immediately    
with respect to them1 as the result     
thereof2 and1 in subserviency thereunto1
 it is extended to all the world4  7#b47
 ,the patience of ,god has been         
displayed in various instances4  #ast1  
,it was owing hereto that ,god did not  
immediately destroy our first parents as
 soon as they fell2 he might then1      
without the least impeachment of his    
justice1 have banished them for ever    
from his presence1 and left their whole 
posterity destitute of the means of     
grace1 and have punished them all in    

proportion to the guilt contracted2     
therefore that the world is continued to
 this day1 is a very great instance of  
,god's long-suffering4  #b;dly1 ,when   
mankind was universally degenerate1 and 
all flesh had corrupted their way1      
before the flood1 and ,god determined to
 destroy them1 yet he would not do this1
 till his patience had spared them1     
after he had given an intimation of this
 desolating judgment1 an hundred and    
twenty years before it came1 ,gen4 vi4  
#b1 #c4 and ,noah was1 during this time1
 a preacher of righteousness1 while the 
long-suffering of ,god is said to have  
waited on them1 #b ,pet4 ii4 #e4        
compared with #a ,pet4 iii4 #bj4        
#c;dly1 ,the ,gentiles1 who not only    
worshipped and served the creature more 
than the ,creator1 but committed other  
vile abominations1 contrary to the      
dictates of nature1 and thereby filled  
up the measure of their iniquity1 are1  
notwithstanding1 said to be the objects 
of ,god's patience1 though in a lower   

sense1 than that in which believers are 
said to be so2 accordingly the apostle  
observes1 that in times past1 ,god      
suffered all nations to walk in their   
own ways1 that is1 ,god did not draw    
forth his sword out of its sheath1 by   
which metaphor the prophet sets forth   
the patience of ,god2 he did not stir up
 all his wrath1 but gave them rain from 
heaven and fruitful seasons1 filling    
their hearts with food and gladness1    
,acts xiv4 #af1 #ag4 ,ezek4 xxi4 #c4    
#dthly1 ,the church of the ,jews1 before
 the coming of ,christ1 had long        
experience of the forbearance of ,god4  
,it is said1 that he suffered their     
manners forty years in the wilderness1  
,acts xiii4 #ah4 and afterwards1 when   
they often revolted to idolatry1        
following the customs of the nations    
round about them1 yet he did not utterly
 destroy them1 but1 in their distress1  
raised them up deliverers2 and when     
their iniquity was grown to such a      
height that none but a ,god of infinite 

patience1 could have borne with them1   
he1 notwithstanding1 spared them many   
years before he suffered them to be     
carried away captive into ,babylon2 and 
afterwards1 when their rebellion against
 him was arrived to the highest pitch1  
when they had crucified the ,lord of    
glory1 yet he spared them some time1    
till the gospel was first preached to   
them1 and they had rejected it1 and     
thereby judged themselves unworthy of   
eternal life1 ,acts xiii4 #df4  #ethly1 
,after this1 the patience of ,god was   
extended to those who endeavoured to    
pervert the gospel of ,christ1 namely1  
to false teachers and backsliding       
churches1 to whom he gave space to      
repent1 but repented not1 ,rev4 ii4 #ba4
 ,and to this we may add1 that he has   
not yet poured forth the vials of his   
wrath on the ,antichristian powers1     
though he has threatened1 that their    
plagues shall come in one day1 chap4    
xviii4 #a4  7#c47 ,we are next to       
consider the method which ,god takes in 

glorifying this attribute4 ,we have     
already observed that1 with respect to  
believers1 the patience of ,god is      
glorified in subserviency to their      
salvation2 but1 with respect to others1 
by whom it is abused1 the patience of   
,god discovers itself1  #ast1 ,in giving
 them warning of his judgments before he
 sends them4 ,he speaketh once1 yea     
twice1 but man perceiveth it not1 that  
he may withdraw man from his purpose1   
and hide pride from man1 ,job xxxiii4   
#ad1 #ag4 and1 indeed1 all the prophets 
were sent to the church of the ,jews1   
not only to instruct them1 but to warn  
them of approaching judgments1 and they 
were faithful in the delivery of their  
message4 ,in what moving terms doth the 
prophet ,jeremiah lament the miseries1  
which were ready to befal them6 ,and    
with what zeal doth he endeavour1 in the
 whole course of his ministry1 to bring 
them to repentance1 that so the storm   
might blow over1 or1 if not1 that their 
ruin might not come upon them altogether

 unexpected6  #b;dly1 ,when the divine  
warnings are not regarded1 but wrath    
must be poured forth on an obstinate and
 impenitent people1 this is done by     
degrees4 ,god first sends lesser        
judgments before greater1 or inflicts   
his plagues1 as he did upon ,egypt1 one 
after another1 not all at once2 and so  
he did upon ,israel of old1 as the      
prophet ,joel observes1 first the       
palmer-worm1 then the locust2 after     
that1 the canker-worm1 and then the     
caterpillar1 devoured the fruits of the 
earth1 one after another1 ,joel i4 #d4  
,so the prophet ,amos observes1 that    
,god first sent a famine among them1    
which he calls cleanness of teeth in all
 their cities1 and afterwards some of   
them were overthrown1 as ,god overthrew 
,sodom and ,gomorrah1 ,amos iv4 #h1 #ah4
 ,some think1 that the gradual approach 
of divine judgments is intended by what 
the prophet ,hosea says1 when the       
judgments of ,god are compared to the   
light that goeth forth1 ,hos4 vi4 #e4   

which implies more than is generally    
understood by it1 as though the         
judgments of ,god should be rendered    
visible1 as the light of the sun is2    
whereas the prophet seems hereby to     
intimate1 that the judgments of ,god    
should proceed1 like the light of the   
morning1 that still increases unto a    
perfect day4 ,and it is more than       
probable that this is intended by the   
same prophet1 when he represents ,god as
 speaking concerning ,ephraim1 that he  
would be to them as a moth1 which doth  
not consume the garment all at once1 as 
when it is cast into the fire1 but frets
 it by degrees1 or like rottenness1     
which is of a spreading nature1 chap4 v4
 #ab4 ,thus the judgments of ,god are   
poured forth by degrees1 that1 at the   
same time1 there may be comparatively1  
at least1 a display of divine patience4 
#c;dly1 ,when ,god sends his judgments  
abroad in the world1 he often moderates 
them2 none are proportionate to the     
demerit of sin2 as it is said of him1   

that being full of compassion1 he       
forgave the iniquity of a very          
rebellious people1 that is1 he did not  
punish them as their iniquity deserved1 
and therefore he destroyed them not1 and
 did not stir up all his wrath1 ,psal4  
lxxviii4 #ch4 so the prophet ,isaiah    
says concerning ,israel1 that ,god hath 
not smitten him1 as he had smote those  
that smote him2 nor is he slain         
according to the slaughter of them that 
are slain by him2 but that he would     
debate with them in measure1 who stayeth
 his rough wind in the day of his east  
wind1 ,isa4 xxvii4 #g1 #h4  #dthly1     
,when ,god cannot1 in honour1 defer his 
judgments any longer1 he pours them     
forth1 as it were1 with reluctancy2 as a
 judge1 when he passeth sentence on a   
criminal1 doth it with a kind of regret1
 not insulting1 but rather pitying his  
misery1 which is unavoidable1 because   
the course of justice must not be       
stopped4 ,thus the prophet says1 that   
,god doth not afflict willingly1 that   

is1 with delight or pleasure1 nor grieve
 the children of men1 ,lam4 iii4 #ce4   
that is1 he doth not punish them1       
because he delights to see them         
miserable2 but to secure the rights of  
his own justice in the government of the
 world3 so when ,israel had been guilty 
of vile ingratitude and rebellion       
against him1 and he threatens to turn   
his hand upon them1 and destroy them1 he
 expresseth himself in such terms1      
speaking after the manner of men1 as    
imply a kind of uneasiness1 when he     
says1 ,ah6 ,i will ease me of mine      
adversaries1 and avenge me of mine      
enemies1 ,isa4 i4 #bd4 and before ,god  
gave up ,israel into the hands of the   
,assyrians1 he seems1 again speaking    
after the manner of men1 to have an     
hesitation or debate in his own mind1   
whether he should do this or no1 when he
 says1 ,how shall ,i give thee up1      
,ephraim8 ,how shall ,i deliver thee1   
,israel8 ,how shall ,i make thee as     
,admah8 ,how shall ,i set thee as       

,zeboim8 ,mine heart is turned within   
me1 my repentings are kindled together1 
,hos4 xi4 #h4 and when our ,saviour     
could not prevail upon ,jerusalem to    
repent of their sins1 and embrace his   
doctrine1 when he was obliged to pass a 
sentence upon them1 and to tell them1   
that the things of their peace were hid 
from their eyes1 and that their enemies 
should cast a trench about the city1 and
 should lay it even with the ground1 he 
could not speak of it without tears2    
when he beheld the city1 he wept over   
it1 ,luke xix4 #da1 c4  7#d47 ,the next 
thing to be considered1 concerning the  
patience of ,god1 is1 that the glory of 
it is consistent with that of his       
vindictive justice2 or how he may be    
said to defer the punishment of sin1 and
 yet appear to be a sin-hating ,god4    
,it is certain that the glory of one    
divine perfection cannot interfere with 
that of another2 as justice and mercy   
meet together in the work of redemption1
 so justice and patience do not oppose  

each other1 in any of the divine        
dispensations4 ,it is true1 their       
demands seem to be various2 justice     
requires that the stroke should be      
immediately given2 but patience insists 
on a delay hereof1 inasmuch as without  
this it does not appear to be a divine  
perfection2 if therefore patience be a  
divine attribute1 and its glory as      
necessary to be displayed1 as that of   
any of his other perfections1 it must be
 glorified in this world1 and that by   
delaying the present exercise of        
vindictive justice in the highest       
degree1 or it cannot be glorified at    
all3 justice will be glorified1         
throughout all the ages of eternity1 in 
those who are the objects thereof2 but  
patience can then have no glory1 since  
7as has been observed7 the greatest     
degree1 either of happiness or misery1  
is inconsistent with the exercise       
thereof2 therefore this being a         
perfection1 which redounds so much to   
the divine honour1 we must not suppose  

that there is no expedient for its being
 glorified1 or that the glory of        
vindictive justice is inconsistent with 
it4  ,now this harmony of these two     
perfections must be a little considered4
 ,justice1 it is true1 obliges ,god to  
punish sin1 yet it does not oblige him  
to do it immediately2 but the time1 as  
well as the way1 is to be resolved into 
his sovereign will4 ,in order to make   
this appear1 let us consider1 that the  
design of vindictive justice1 in all the
 punishment it inflicts1 is either to   
secure the glory of the holiness of     
,god2 or to assert his rights1 as the   
governor of the world2 now if the       
deferring of punishment doth not        
interfere with either of these1 then the
 glory of ,god's patience is not        
inconsistent with that of his vindictive
 justice4 ,but more particularly1       
,first1 ,the glory of his holiness is1  
notwithstanding this1 sufficiently      
secured2 for though he delays to punish 
sin1 in the highest degree1 yet1 at the 

same time1 he appears to hate it1 by the
 threatenings which he hath denounced   
against sinners1 which shall certainly  
have their accomplishment1 if he says1  
that he is angry with the wicked every  
day1 and that his soul hateth them1 is  
there any reason to suppose the         
contrary8 or if he has threatened that  
he will rain upon them snares1 fire and 
brimstone1 and an horrible tempest1     
which shall be the portion of their cup1
 and that because1 as the righteous     
,lord1 he loveth righteousness1 ,psal4  
vii4 #aa4 and xi4 #f1 #g4 is not this a 
sufficient security1 for the glory of   
his holiness1 to fence against any thing
 that might be alleged to detract from  
it8 ,if threatened judgments be not     
sufficient1 for the present1 to evince  
the glory of this divine perfection2    
then it will follow1 on the other hand1 
that the promises he has made of        
blessings not yet bestowed1 are to be as
 little regarded for the encouraging our
 hope1 and securing the glory of his    

other perfections2 and then his holiness
 would be as much blemished in delaying 
to reward1 as it can be supposed to be  
in delaying to punish4  ,if therefore   
the truth of ,god1 which will certainly 
accomplish his threatenings1 be a       
present security for the glory of his   
holiness1 it is not absolutely necessary
 that vindictive justice should be      
immediately exercised in the destruction
 of sinners1 and so exclude the exercise
 of ,god's forbearance and              
long-suffering4  ,and to this it may be 
added1 that there are many terrible     
displays of ,god's vindictive justice in
 his present dealing with sinners2 as it
 is said1 ,the ,lord is known by the    
judgments which he executes1 as well as 
by those he designs to pour forth on his
 enemies2 the wicked are now snared in  
the work of their own hands1 but in the 
end they shall be turned into hell1 and 
all the nations that forget ,god1 ,psal4
 ix4 #af1 #ag4 ,if vindictive justice   
takes occasion to inflict many temporal 

and spiritual judgments upon sinners in 
this world1 then the glory of ,god's    
holiness is illustrated at the same time
 that his patience is prolonged4 ,this  
may be observed in ,god's dealing with  
his murmuring and rebellious people in  
the wilderness which gave him occasion  
to take notice of the abuse of his      
patience1 and to say1 ,numb4 xiv4 #aa1  
#ah-ba4 ,how long will this people      
provoke me8 and how long will it be ere 
they believe me1 for all the signs which
 ,i have shewed among them8 ,upon this1 
justice is ready to strike the fatal    
blow2 ,i will1 says ,god1 smite them    
with the pestilence1 and disinherit     
them2 which gives ,moses occasion to    
intercede for them1 and plead the glory 
of ,god's patience1 ,the ,lord is       
long-suffering1 and of great mercy2     
,pardon1 says he1 ,i beseech thee1 the  
iniquity of this people1 as thou hast   
forgiven them from ,egypt1 even until   
now2 by which he means1 as ,i humbly    
conceive1 spare thy people1 as thou hast

 often done1 when1 by reason of their   
provocations1 thou mightest justly have 
destroyed them2 and ,god answers him in 
the following words1 ,i have pardoned1  
according to thy word2 but he adds1 ,as 
truly as ,i live1 all the earth shall be
 filled with the glory of the ,lord1    
that is1 with the report of the glory of
 his vindictive justice1 which should be
 spread far and near2 and then he       
threatens them that they should not see 
the land of ,canaan1 viz4 those who     
murmured against him2 so that vindictive
 justice had its demands fulfilled in   
one respect1 while patience was         
glorified in the other2 on which        
occasion the ,psalmist says1 ,psal4     
xcix4 #h4 ,thou answeredst them1 ,o     
,lord1 namely1 ,moses's prayer for them1
 but now mentioned1 ,thou wast a ,god   
that forgavest them1 though thou tookest
 vengeance of their inventions4         
,secondly1 ,consider the vindictive     
justice of ,god1 as tending to secure   
his rights1 as the governor of the      

world1 and being ready to take vengeance
 for sin1 which attempts to control his 
sovereign authority1 and disturb the    
order of his government3 now the stroke 
of justice may be suspended for a time1 
that it may make way for the exercise of
 patience1 provided there be no just    
occasion given hereby for men to trample
 on the sovereignty of ,god1 despise his
 authority1 or rebel against him1       
without fear3 but these consequences    
will not necessarily result from his    
extending forbearance to sinners2 for we
 do not find that the delaying to       
inflict punishment among men is any     
prejudice to their government1 therefore
 why should we suppose that the divine  
government should suffer any injury     
thereby2 when a prince1 for some reasons
 of state1 puts off the trial of a      
malefactor for a time1 to the end that  
the indictment may be more fully proved1
 and the equity of his proceedings more 
evidently appear1 this is always        
reckoned a greater excellency in his    

administration1 than if he should       
proceed too hastily therein2 and we     
never find that it tends to embolden the
 criminal to that degree as impunity    
would do2 for he is punished1 in part1  
by the loss of his liberty1 and if he be
 convicted1 then he loses the privilege 
of an innocent subject2 his life is     
forfeited1 and he is in daily           
expectation of having it taken away4 ,if
 such a method as this tends to secure  
the rights of a government1 when a      
prince thinks fit to allow a reprieve to
 some for a time2 may not ,god stop the 
immediate proceedings of vindictive     
justice for a time1 without the least   
infringement made1 either on his        
holiness1 or his rectoral justice8      
,which leads us to consider1  7#e47 ,how
 the patience of ,god is to be improved 
by us2 and1  #ast1 ,since it is a divine
 perfection1 and there is a revenue of  
glory due to ,god for the display       
thereof1 this should put us upon the    
exercise of those graces1 which it      

engages us to4 ,some of the divine      
attributes tend to excite our fear1 but 
this should draw forth our admiration   
and praise3 and we have more reason to  
adore and admire the divine forbearance1
 when we consider1  ,first1 ,how justly 
he might destroy us4 ,the best man on   
earth may say1 with the ,psalmist1 ,if  
thou1 ,lord1 shouldst mark iniquities1  
,o lord1 who shall stand8 ,psal4 cxxx4  
#c4 ,he need not watch for occasions1 or
 diligently search out some of the      
inadvertencies of life1 to find matter  
for our conviction and condemnation1    
since the multitude and heinous         
aggravation of our sins1 proclaim our   
desert of punishment1 which might       
provoke1 and immediately draw down1 his 
vengeance upon us2 and that which       
farther enhances our guilt is1 that we  
provoke him1 though laid under the      
highest obligations to the contrary4    
,secondly1 ,how easily might he bring   
ruin and destruction upon us8 ,he does  
not forbear to punish us for want of    

power1 as earthly kings often do2 or    
because the exercise of justice may be  
apprehended1 as a means to weaken their 
government1 or occasion some rebellions1
 which they could not easily put a stop 
to4 ,thus ,david says concerning        
himself1 that he was weak1 though       
anointed king1 and that the sons of     
,zeruiah were too hard for him1 on the  
occasion of ,joab's having forfeited his
 life1 when the necessity of affairs    
required the suspending his punishment1 
#b ,sam4 iii4 #ci4 but this cannot be   
said of ,god1 who is represented as slow
 to anger1 and great in power1 ,nah4 i4 
#c4 that is1 he does not punish1 though 
he easily could3 it would be no         
difficulty for him immediately to       
destroy an ungodly world1 any more than 
it is for us to crush a moth or a worm1 
or break a leaf3 finite power can make  
no resistance against that which is     
infinite3 what are briars and thorns    
before the consuming fire8  #b;dly1 ,let
 us take heed that we do not abuse this 

divine perfection2 it is a crime to     
abuse the mercy of ,god in the smallest 
instances thereof1 but much more to     
slight and contemn the riches of his    
forbearance1 or mercy1 extended to so   
great a length1 as it has been to most  
of us2 and this is done1  #a4 ,by those 
who infer1 from his forbearing to pour  
forth his fury on sinners1 that he      
neglects the government of the world2 or
 take occasion from thence to deny a    
providence1 and because his threatenings
 are not executed at present1 therefore 
they do1 as it were1 defy him to do his 
worst against them2 this some are       
represented as doing1 with an uncommon  
degree of presumption1 and that with a  
scoff2 for they are termed scoffers1    
walking after their own lusts2 saying1  
,where is the promise of his coming8 for
 since the fathers fell asleep1 all     
things continue as they were from the   
beginning of the creation1 #b ,pet4 iii4
 #c1 #d4  #b4 ,by those who take        
occasion from hence to sin              

presumptuously2 and because he not only 
delays to punish1 but1 at the same time1
 expresses his willingness to receive   
returning sinners1 at what time soever  
they truly repent1 take occasion to     
persist in their rebellion1 concluding  
that it is time enough to submit to him2
 which is not only to abuse1 but1 as it 
were1 to wear out his patience1 and     
provoke his indignation1 like them1 of  
whom it is said1 that because sentence  
against an evil work is not executed    
speedily1 therefore the heart of the    
sons of men is fully set in them to do  
evil1 ,eccl4 viii4 #aa4 ,but you will   
say1 these are uncommon degrees of      
wickedness1 which only the vilest part  
of mankind are chargeable with2         
therefore let us add1  #c4 ,that a bare 
neglect to improve our present season1  
and day of grace1 or to embrace the     
great salvation offered in the gospel1  
is an abuse of ,god's patience2 and this
 will certainly affect the greatest     
number of those who are favoured with   

the gospel dispensation2 and1 indeed1   
who are there that improve it as they   
ought8 and therefore all are said more  
or less1 to abuse the patience of ,god1 
which affords matter of great           
humiliation in his sight4  ,now that we 
may be duly sensible of this sin1       
together with the consequences thereof1 
let us consider2 that this argues the   
highest ingratitude1 and that more      
especially1 in a professing people2     
therefore the apostle1 reproving the    
,jews for this sin1 puts a very great   
emphasis on every word1 when he says1   
,or despisest thou the riches of his    
goodness1 and forbearance1 and          
long-suffering8 ,rom4 ii4 #d4 ,let us   
also consider1 that the consequence     
thereof is very destructive1 inasmuch as
 this is the only opportunity that will 
be afforded to seek after those things  
that relate to our eternal welfare4     
,what stress does the apostle lay on the
 word now1 which is twice repeated1 as  
well as the word behold1 which is a note

 of attention1 implying1 that he had    
something remarkable to communicate1    
when he says1 ,behold1 now is the       
accepted time2 behold1 now is the day of
 salvation1 #b ,cor4 vi4 #b4 ,and to    
this we may add1 which is a very        
awakening consideration1 that the abuse 
of ,god's patience will expose finally  
impenitent sinners to a greater degree  
of his vengeance4 ,thus when the        
forbearance of ,god had been extended to
 ,israel for many years1 from his       
bringing them up out of the land of     
,egypt2 and this had been attended all  
that time with the means of grace1 and  
many warnings of approaching judgments1 
he tells them2 ,you only have ,i known1 
of all the families of the earth1       
therefore will ,i punish you1 that is1  
my wrath shall fall more heavily upon   
you1 for all your iniquities1 ,amos iii4
 #b4 and when ,god is represented1 as   
coming to reckon with ,babylon1 the cup 
of his wrath must be filled double2 how 
much she hath glorified herself1 saith  

,god1 and lived deliciously1 so much    
sorrow and torment give her2 for she    
saith in her heart1 ,i sit as a queen1  
and am no widow1 and shall see no       
sorrow1 ,rev4 xviii4 #f1 #g4  #c;dly1   
,let us1 on the other hand1 improve     
,god's patience1 by duly considering the
 great end and design thereof1 and what 
encouragement it affords to universal   
holiness3 it is a great relief to those 
who are at the very brink of despair2   
for if they cannot say that it has      
hitherto led them to repentance1 as     
apprehending themselves to be yet in a  
state of unregeneracy1 let us consider1 
that1 notwithstanding this1 a door of   
hope is still opened1 the golden sceptre
 held forth1 and the invitation given to
 come to ,christ2 therefore let this    
excite us to a diligent attendance on   
the means of grace1 for though          
forbearance is not to be mistaken1 as it
 is by many1 for forgiveness1 yet we are
 encouraged to wait and hope for it1 in 
all ,god's holy institutions1 according 

to the tenor of the gospel4  ,and they  
who are not only spared1 but pardoned1  
to whom grace has not only been offered1
 but savingly applied1 may be encouraged
 to hope for farther displays thereof1  
as well as to improve what they have    
received1 with the greatest diligence   
and thankfulness4  #dthly1 ,let us      
consider the great obligation we are    
laid under1 by the patience of ,god1 to 
a constant exercise of the grace of     
patience1 in our behaviour towards ,god 
and man4  #a4 ,in our behaviour towards 
,god2 we are hereby laid under the      
highest engagements to submit to his    
disposing will1 and1 in whatever state  
we are1 therewith to be content1 without
 murmuring1 or repining1 when under     
afflictive providences1 ,shall we       
receive good at his hand1 and shall we  
not receive evil8 ,job ii4 #aj4 ,has he 
exercised so long forbearance towards   
us1 not only before we were converted1  
when our life was a constant course of  
rebellion1 against him2 but he has      

since1 not only passed by1 but forgiven 
innumerable offences8 ,and shall we     
think it strange when he testifies his  
displeasure against us in any instances8
 ,shall we be froward and uneasy1       
because he does not immediately give us 
what we desire1 or deliver us from those
 evils we groan under8  #b4 ,let us     
exercise patience1 in our behaviour     
towards men4 ,shall we give way to1 or  
express1 unbecoming resentment against  
those whom we converse with1 for        
injuries done us1 which are often rather
 imaginary than real8 ,or if they are   
very great1 as well as undeserved1 let  
not our passions exceed their due       
bounds2 especially let us not meditate  
revenge1 but consider how many injuries 
the great ,god has passed over in us1   
and how long his patience has been      
extended towards us4  ,,xv4 ,god is     
abundant in truth4 ,that we may         
understand what is meant by this        
perfection1 we may observe the          
difference between his being called a   

true ,god1 and a ,god of truth2 though  
they seem to import the same thing1 and 
are not always distinguished in         
scripture3 thus he that receiveth       
,christ's testimony1 is said to set to  
his seal that ,god is true1 that is1 in 
accomplishing what he has promised1     
respecting the salvation of his people1 
or that he is a ,god of truth2 and      
elsewhere it is said1 ,let ,god be true1
 but every man a liar1 that is1 a ,god  
of truth3 yet they are1 for the most    
part1 distinguished2 so that when he is 
called the true ,god1 or the only true  
,god1 it does not denote one distinct   
perfection of the divine nature1 but the
 ,godhead1 in which respect it includes 
all his divine perfections1 and is      
opposed to all others1 who are called   
gods1 but are not so by nature3 but this
 will be more particularly considered in
 the next answer4  ,but when1 on the    
other hand1 we speak of him1 as the ,god
 of truth1 we intend hereby that he is  
true to his word1 or a ,god that cannot 

lie1 whose faithfulness is unblemished1 
because he is a ,god of infinite        
holiness2 and therefore whatever he has 
spoken1 he will certainly bring it to   
pass4 ,this respects either his         
threatenings1 or his promises3 as1 to   
the former of these1 it is said1 that   
the judgments of ,god1 that is1 the     
sentence he has passed against sinners1 
is according to truth1 ,rom4 ii4 #b4 and
 the display of his vindictive justice  
is called1 his accomplishing his fury1  
,ezek4 vi4 #ab4 ,this renders him the   
object of fear1 and it is1 as it were1 a
 wall of fire round about his law1 to   
secure the glory thereof from the       
insults of his enemies4  ,there is also 
his faithfulness to his promises1 in    
which respect he is said to be the      
faithful ,god1 who keepeth covenant and 
mercy with them that love him1 and keep 
his commandments1 unto a thousand       
generations1 ,deut4 vii4 #i4 ,this is   
that which encourages his people to hope
 and trust in him1 and to expect that   

blessedness1 which none of his          
perfections would give them a sufficient
 ground to lay claim to1 were it not    
promised1 and this promise secured by   
his infinite faithfulness4 ,almighty    
power is able to make us1 happy1 and    
mercy and goodness can communicate every
 thing that may contribute thereunto2   
but it does not from hence follow that  
they will1 since ,god is under no       
natural obligation to glorify these     
perfections3 but when he is pleased to  
give forth a promise relating hereunto1 
and the accomplishment thereof          
ascertained to us by his infinite       
faithfulness2 this renders these        
blessings not only possible1 but        
certain1 and so affords1 to the heirs of
 salvation1 strong consolation4 ,it is  
this that renders things future as      
certain as though they were present1 and
 so lays a foundation for our rejoicing 
in hope of eternal life1 whatever       
difficulties may seem to lie in the way 
of it4  ,here we may take occasion to   

consider the blessings which are secured
 by the faithfulness of ,god1 of which  
some respect mankind in general1 and the
 blessings of common providence1 viz4   
that the world should be preserved1 and 
all flesh not perish out of it1 from the
 deluge to ,christ's second coming2 and 
that1 during this time1 the regular     
course of nature should not be altered1 
but that seed-time and harvest1 cold and
 heat1 summer and winter1 day and night1
 should not cease1 ,gen4 ix4 #aa4       
compared with chap4 viii4 #bb4  ,there  
are also promises made to the church in 
general1 that it should have a being in 
the world1 notwithstanding all the      
shocks of persecution1 which it is      
exposed to2 and1 together with these1   
,god has given the greatest security1   
that the ordinances of divine worship   
should be continued1 and that1 in all   
places where he records his name1 he    
will come to his people and bless them1 
,exod4 xx4 #bd4 ,and to this we may add1
 that he has promised to increase and   

build up his church2 and that to        
,shiloh1 the great ,redeemer1 should the
 gathering of the people be1 and that he
 would multiply them1 that they should  
not be few1 and also1 glorify them1 that
 they should not be small1 ,gen4 xlix4  
#aj4 compared with ,jer4 xxx4 #ai4 and  
that the glory should be of an          
increasing nature1 especially that which
 it should arrive to in the latter ages 
of time1 immediately before its         
exchanging this militant for a          
triumphant state in heaven4  ,moreover1 
there are many great and precious       
promises made to particular believers1  
which every one of them have a right to 
lay claim to1 and are oftentimes enabled
 so to do1 by faith1 which depends      
entirely on this perfection3 and these  
promises are such as respect the        
increase of grace2 that they shall go   
from strength to strength1 or that they 
who wait on the ,lord shall renew their 
strength1 ,psal4 lxxxiv4 #g4 and ,isa4  
xl4 #ca4 and that they shall be         

recovered1 after great backslidings1    
,psal4 xxxvii4 #ad4 ,psal4 lxxxix4      
#cj-cc4 and be enabled to persevere in  
that grace1 which is begun in them1 till
 it is crowned with compleat victory1 #b
 ,cor4 xii4 #i4 ,rom4 xvi4 #bj4 ,job    
xvii4 #i4 #a ,cor4 xv4 #eg4 and also    
that they shall be made partakers of    
that inward peace and joy1 which        
accompanies or flows from the truth of  
grace1 ,isa4 xi4 #a4 chap4 lvii4 #ai4   
chap4 xxxii4 #ag4 and that all this     
shall be attended with perfect          
blessedness in heaven at last1 ,psal4   
lxxiii4 #bd4 #b ,tim4 iv4 #h4 ,the      
scripture abounds with promises of the  
like nature1 which are suited to every  
condition1 and afford relief to ,god's  
people1 under all the difficulties they 
meet with in the world2 the             
accomplishment whereof is made sure to  
them by this divine perfection4         
,object4 #a4 ,it is objected against    
this divine attribute2 that ,god has    
not1 in some instances1 fulfilled his   

threatenings1 which has tended to       
embolden some in a course of obstinacy  
and rebellion against him2 particularly 
that the first threatening was not      
executed as soon as man fell2 for though
 ,god told our first parents1 that in   
the very day they should eat of the     
forbidden fruit1 they should surely die3
 yet ,adam lived after this1 nine       
hundred and thirty years1 ,gen4 ii4 #ag4
 compared with chap4 v4 #e4  ,it is also
 objected1 that ,god threatened to      
destroy ,nineveh1 within forty days     
after ,jonah was sent to publish this   
message to them1 ,jonah iii4 #d4        
nevertheless they continued in a        
flourishing state many years after4     
,answ4 #a4 ,as to what respects the     
first threatening1 that death should    
immediately ensue upon sin's being      
committed1 we shall have occasion to    
speak to this in its proper place1#fd   
and therefore all that need be replied  
to it at present is1 that the           
threatening was in some respect1        

executed the day1 yea1 the moment in    
which our first parents sinned3 ,if we  
take it in a legal sense1 they were     
immediately brought into a state of     
condemnation1 which1 in a forensic      
sense1 is often called death2 they were 
immediately separated from ,god1 the    
fountain of blessedness1 and plunged    
into all those depths of misery1 which  
were the consequence of their fall2 or  
if we take death1 the punishment        
threatened1 for that which is1 indeed1  
one ingredient in it1 to wit1 the       
separation of soul and body2 or for the 
greatest degree of punishment1          
consisting in everlasting destruction1  
from the presence of the ,lord1 and the 
glory of his power2 then it is          
sufficient to say1 that man's being     
liable hereunto was the principal thing 
intended in the threatening4 ,certainly 
,god did not hereby design to tie up his
 own hands1 so as to render it          
impossible for him to remit the offence1
 or to recover the fallen creature out  

of this deplorable state2 and therefore 
if you take death for that which is     
natural1 which was not inflicted till   
nine hundred and thirty years after1    
then we may say1 that his being exposed 
to1 or brought under an unavoidable     
necessity of dying the very day that he 
sinned1 might be called his dying from  
that time2 and the scripture will       
warrant our using the word in that      
sense1 since the apostle1 speaking to   
those who were1 by sin1 liable to death1
 says1 ,the body is dead1 because of    
sin1 ,rom4 viii4 #aj4 that is1 it is    
exposed to death1 as the consequence    
thereof1 though it was not actually     
dead2 and if we take death for a        
liability to eternal death1 then the    
threatening must be supposed to contain 
a tacit condition1 which implies1 that  
man was to expect nothing but eternal   
death1 unless some expedient were found 
out1 which the miserable creature then  
knew nothing of1 to recover him out of  
that state into which he was fallen4    

#b4 ,as to what concerns the sparing of 
,nineveh2 we have sufficient ground to  
conclude that there was a condition     
annexed to this threatening1 and so the 
meaning is2 that they should be         
destroyed in forty days1 if they did not
 repent3 this condition was designed to 
be made known to them1 otherwise        
,jonah's preaching would have been to no
 purpose1 and the warning given would   
have answered no valuable end2 and it is
 plain1 that the ,ninevites understood  
it in this sense1 otherwise there would 
have been no room for repentance2 so    
that ,god connected the condition with  
the threatening3 and as1 on the one     
hand1 he designed to give them          
repentance1 so that the event was not   
dubious and undetermined by him1 as     
depending on their conduct1 abstracted  
from his providence2 so1 on the other   
hand1 there was no reflection cast on   
his truth1 because this provisionary    
expedient1 for their deliverance1 was as
 much known by them as the threatening  

itself4  ,object4 #b4 ,it is objected   
that several promises have not had their
 accomplishment4 ,thus there are several
 promises of spiritual blessings1 which 
many believers do not experience the    
accomplishment of in this life2 which   
has given occasion to some to say1 with 
the ,psalmist1 ,doth his promise fail   
for evermore8 ,psal4 lxxvii4 #h4  ,answ4
 ,it is true1 that all the promises of  
,god are not literally fulfilled in this
 world to every particular believer2 the
 promise of increase of grace is not    
actually fulfilled1 while ,god suffers  
his people to backslide from him1 and   
the work of grace is rather declining   
than sensibly advancing2 neither are the
 promises1 respecting the assurance and 
joy of faith1 fulfilled unto one that is
 sinking into the depths of despair2 nor
 those that respect the presence of ,god
 in ordinances1 to such as are destitute
 of the influences of his grace therein2
 nor are the promises of victory over   
temptation fulfilled1 to those who are  

not only assaulted1 but frequently      
overcome by ,satan1 when it is as much  
as they can do to stand their ground    
against him2 and there are many other   
instances of the like nature3           
notwithstanding1 the truth of ,god may  
be vindicated1 if we consider1  #a4     
,that there is no promise made1 whereof 
there are not some instances of their   
accomplishment in kind2 this therefore  
is a sufficient conviction to the world1
 that there are such blessings bestowed 
as ,god has promised4  #b4 ,those who   
are denied these blessings1 may possibly
 be mistaken when they conclude         
themselves to be believers2 and then it 
is no wonder that they are destitute of 
them1 for ,god has promised to give joy 
and peace only in a way of believing2 or
 first to give the truth of grace1 and  
then the comfortable fruits and effects 
thereof4 ,but we will suppose that they 
are not mistaken1 but have experienced  
the grace of ,god in truth2 yet their   
graces are so defective1 that they know 

but little of their own imperfections1  
if they do not take occasion from       
thence1 to justify ,god1 who            
with-holdeth those blessings from them1 
and to adore1 rather than call in       
question1 the equity of his proceeding  
therein4 ,and if remunerative justice be
 not laid under obligations to bestow   
these blessings by any thing performed  
by us1 then certainly the faithfulness  
of ,god is not to be impeached1 because 
he is pleased to deny them4  #c4 ,in    
denying these blessings1 he oftentimes  
takes occasion to advance his own glory 
some other way1 by trying the faith and 
patience of his people1 correcting them 
for their miscarriages1 humbling them by
 his dealings with them1 and over-ruling
 all for their good in the end2 which is
 an equivalent for those joys and       
comforts which they are deprived of4    
,and1 indeed1 ,god has never promised   
these blessings to any1 but with this   
reserve1 that if he thinks it necessary1
 for his own glory1 and their good1 to  

bring about their salvation some other  
way1 he will do it1 without the least   
occasion given hereby to detract from   
the glory of his faithfulness4  #d4 ,all
 these promises1 which have not had     
their accomplishment in kind1 in this   
world1 shall be accomplished in the     
next1 with the greatest advantage2 so   
that then they will have no reason to   
complain of the least unfaithfulness in 
the divine administration4 ,if rivers of
 pleasures at ,god's right hand for     
ever1 will not compensate for the want  
of some comforts1 while we are in this  
world1 or silence all objections against
 his present dealings with men1 nothing 
can do it2 or if the full accomplishment
 of all the promises hereafter1 will not
 secure the glory of this perfection1 it
 is a sign that men are disposed to     
contend with the ,almighty1 who deny it2
 therefore to such we may justly apply  
,god's own words to ,job1 ,he that      
reproveth ,god1 let him answer it2 or1  
as he farther says1 ,wilt thou disannul 

my judgment8 ,wilt thou condemn me1 that
 thou mayest be righteous8 ,job xl4 #b4 
compared with ver4 #h4  ,we shall now   
consider how the faithfulness of ,god   
ought to be improved by us4 ,and1  7#a47
 ,the consideration thereof may be a    
preservative against presumption on the 
one hand1 or despair on the other4 ,let 
no one harden himself in his iniquity2  
or think that because the threatnings   
are not yet fully accomplished1         
therefore they never shall2 it is one   
thing for ,god to delay to execute them1
 and another thing to resolve not to do 
it4 ,we may vainly conclude1 that the   
bitterness of death is past1 because our
 houses are safe from fear1 neither is  
the rod of ,god upon them2 but let it be
 considered1 that the wicked are        
reserved for the day of destruction2    
they shall be brought forth to the day  
of wrath1 ,job xxi4 #i4 compared with   
ver4 #cj4 the zeal of the ,lord of hosts
 will do this4 ,his threatenings lay him
 under an obligation to punish finally  

impenitent sinners1 because he is a ,god
 of truth2 therefore let none harden    
themselves against him1 or expect       
impunity in a course of open rebellion  
against him4 ,and1 on the other hand1   
let not believers give way to despair of
 obtaining mercy1 or conclude1 that1    
because ,god is withdrawn1 and hides his
 face from them1 therefore he will never
 return2 or1 because his promises are   
not immediately fulfilled1 therefore    
they never shall1 since his faithfulness
 is their great security2 he will ever  
be mindful of his covenant1 ,psal4 cxi4 
#e4  7#b47 ,let us compare the          
providences of ,god with his word1 and  
see how every thing tends to set forth  
his faithfulness4 ,we are very stupid1  
if we take notice of the great things   
that are doing in the world2 and we     
behold them to little purpose1 if we do 
not observe how this divine perfection  
is glorified therein4 ,the world        
continues to this day1 because ,god has 
several things yet to do in it1 in      

pursuance of his promises2 the whole    
number of the elect are to be gathered1 
and brought in to ,christ2 their graces 
must be tried1 and their faith built up 
in the same way1 as it has been in      
former ages2 therefore the church is    
preserved1 and the gates of hell have   
not prevailed against it1 according to  
his word1 ,matth4 xvi4 #ah4 and as it   
was of old1 so we now observe that the  
various changes which are made in civil 
affairs1 are all rendered subservient to
 its welfare2 the earth helps the woman1
 ,rev4 xii4 #af4 not so much from its   
own design1 as by the appointment of    
providence2 and why does ,god order it  
so1 but that his promises might be      
fulfilled8 ,and that the same ordinances
 should be continued1 and that believers
 should have the same experience of the 
efficacy and success thereof1 as the    
consequence of his presence with them1  
which he has given them ground to expect
 unto the end of the world1 ,matth4     
xxviii4 #bj4 are blessings in which his 

faithfulness is eminently glorified4    
7#c47 ,this divine perfection is a sure 
foundation for our faith4 ,as his truth1
 with respect to what he has revealed1  
is an infallible ground for our faith of
 assent1 so his faithfulness1 in        
fulfilling his promises1 affords the    
highest encouragement for our trust and 
dependence on him3 thus we are said to  
commit the keeping of our souls to him  
in well-doing1 as unto a faithful       
,creator1 #a ,pet4 iv4 #ai4 and1 when we
 lay the whole stress of our salvation  
upon him1 we have no reason to entertain
 any doubt about the issue thereof4     
,moreover1 are we exposed to evils in   
this world8 we may conclude1 that as he 
has delivered1 and does deliver1 so we  
have reason to trust in him1 that he    
will deliver us1 #b ,cor4 i4 #aj4 and is
 there much to be done for us1 to make  
us meet for heaven8 we may be confident 
of this very thing1 that he that has    
begun a good work in us1 will perform it
 until the day of ,jesus ,christ1 ,phil4

 i4 #f4  7#d47 ,the faithfulness of ,god
 should be improved by us1 as a remedy  
against that uneasiness and anxiety of  
mind1 which we often have about the     
event of things1 especially when they   
seem to run counter to our expectation4 
,thus when there is but a very          
melancholy prospect before us1 as to    
what concerns the glory of ,god in the  
world1 and the flourishing state of his 
church in it1 upon which we are ready to
 say with ,joshua1 ,lord1 what wilt thou
 do unto thy great name8 ,josh4 vii4 #i4
 or when we have many sad thoughts of   
heart about the rising generation1 and  
are in doubt whether they will adhere   
to1 or abandon1 the interest of ,christ2
 when we are ready to fear whether there
 will be a reserve of faithful men1 who 
will stand up for his gospel1 and fill  
the places of those who are called off  
the stage1 after having served their    
generation by the will of ,god2 or when 
we are too much oppressed with carking  
cares about our outward condition in the

 world1 when1 like ,christ's disciples1 
we are immoderately thoughtful what we  
shall eat1 what we shall drink1 or      
wherewithal we shall be clothed1 ,matth4
 vi4 #ca4 or how we shall be able to    
conflict with the difficulties that lie 
before us3 our great relief against all 
this solicitude is to be derived from   
the faithfulness of ,god2 for since     
godliness has the promise annexed to it1
 of the life that now is1 as well as of 
that which is to come1 #a ,tim4 iv4 #ah4
 this promise shall have its            
accomplishment1 so far as shall most    
redound to ,god's glory1 and our real   
advantage4  7#e47 ,the consideration of 
the faithfulness of ,god should be      
improved1 to humble1 and fill us with   
shame and confusion of face1 when we    
consider how treacherously we have dealt
 with him1 how unsteadfast we have been 
in his covenant1 how often we have broke
 our own promises and resolutions that  
we would walk more closely with him1 how
 frequently we have backslidden from    

him1 contrary to all the engagements    
which we have been laid under4 ,have we 
found any unfaithfulness in him8 ,has   
he1 in the least instance1 been worse   
than his word8 as ,god says1 when he    
reproves his people1 ,what iniquity have
 your fathers found in me1 that they are
 gone far from me1 and have walked after
 vanity1 and are become vain8 ,jer4 ii4 
#e4  ,footnote #dh3    ,his ideas are   
not the effects1 but causes of things4  
,vide post p4 #abd1   #abe4  ,footnote  
#di3    ,there is not succession in ,his
 ideas1 but he exists in every point of 
time4  ,footnote #ej3    ,effects spring
 from power1 not laws1 and prove a      
virtual1 or   influential1 revelation1  
an essential ubiquity4  ,footnote #ea3  
,quest4 xv4 and xviii4  ,footnote #eb3  
,quest4 lxvii4  ,footnote #ec3    ,vide 
,edwards on ,free-will1 part ,i4 sect4  
,,iv4  ,footnote #ed3    ,the ,divine   
knowledge is as undeniable as the       
,divine existence1 and as   certain as  
human knowledge4 8,he that formed the   

eye doth he not see8   ,he that planted 
the ear doth he not hear8 ,he that      
teacheth man   knowledge doth he not    
know80 ,but though human knowledge      
proves the   ,divine1 as the effect does
 its cause1 it by no means follows1 that
   they are similar4 ,our knowledge     
principally consists of the images of   
things in the mind1 or springs from     
them2 but if the ,divine knowledge      
were such1 it would result that things  
were prior to his knowledge1   and so   
that he is not the ,creator of them2 all
 things must therefore   be the         
representations of his ideas1 as an     
edifice represents the plan   of the    
skilful architect4 ,on this account our 
knowledge is   superficial1 extending   
only to the external appearances of     
things2 but   their intimate natures are
 known to him1 who made them conformed  
to   his original ideas4 ,our knowledge 
is circumscribed1 extending only to     
the things which are the objects of our 
senses1 or which have been   described  

to us2 but the universe1 with all its   
parts1 the greatest   and the smallest  
things1 are all known to him1 who called
 them into   existence1 and moulded them
 according to his own plan4 ,our        
knowledge   embraces only the things    
which are1 or have been2 with respect to
 the   future1 we can know nothing1     
except as he1 upon whom it depends1     
shall   reveal it to us2 or as we may   
draw inferences from his course of      
action in former instances4 ,but the    
,creator knows not only the past   and  
the present1 but the future4 ,he knows  
the future1 because it   wholly depends 
on him2 and nothing can take place      
without him1   otherwise it is          
independent of ,god1 but this is        
incompatible with his   supremacy4 ,if  
he know not the future1 his knowledge is
 imperfect2 if   he is to know hereafter
 what he does not now know1 he is       
increasing in   knowledge1 this would   
argue imperfection2 if his knowledge be 
imperfect1 he is imperfect2 and if he be

 imperfect1 he is not ,god4--,but   all 
things to come are to be what he designs
 they shall be2 there   accompanies his 
knowledge of the future1 also a purpose1
 that the   thing designed shall be     
effectuated2 and his wisdom and power   
being   infinite guarantee the          
accomplishment of his purposes4    ,to  
be the subjects of foreknowledge1 such  
as has been mentioned1   implies the    
absolute certainty of the things1 or    
occurrences1 thus   foreknown4 ,a       
failure in their production1 would not  
less prove   imperfection1 than a defect
 of the foreknowledge of them4          
,contingency   belongs not to the things
 in futurity1 but to the defective      
knowledge   of imperfect beings1 and is 
always proportional to our ignorance4   
,that the future is categorically       
certain with ,god1 appears by the       
invariable succession of effects to     
their causes in the natural world2      
miracles themselves may not be          
exceptions2 but would always1 it is     

probable1 flow from the same causes1    
which are occult from us4 ,the          
voluntary actions of moral agents1 how  
uncertain soever to themselves1   are   
also not exceptions from the ,divine    
knowledge and purposes2 8,he   doth his 
will in the army of ,heaven1 and among  
the inhabitants of the   earth02 8,the  
wrath of man praises him1 and the       
remainder he doth   restrain40 ,every   
prophecy1 which has been fulfilled1 so  
far as it was   accomplished by the     
voluntary actions of men1 proves the    
certainty of   the divine foreknowledge1
 the absolute certainty of the then     
future   event1 and that the will of man
 is among the various means1 which ,god 
is pleased to make use of to accomplish 
his purposes4    ,if there be such      
certainty in ,god's foreknowledge1 and  
in the events   themselves in the       
,kingdom of ,providence1 we may         
reasonably expect his   conduct will be 
similar in the ,kingdom of ,grace2 and  
the more   especially if man's salvation

 from first to last springs from1 and is
   carried on1 and accomplished by him4 
,footnote #ee3    ,as knowledge is a    
faculty of which wisdom is the due      
exercise1 the   proofs of divine wisdom 
are so many evidences of the knowledge  
of ,god4   ,wisdom consists in the      
choice of the best ends1 and the        
selection of   means most suitable to   
attain them4 ,the testimonies of the    
wisdom of   ,god must therefore be as   
numerous and various1 as the works of   
his   creation4 ,the mutual relations   
and subserviency of one thing to        
another2 as the heat of the sun1 to     
produce rain2 both1 to produce          
vegetation2 and all1 to sustain life2   
ensation1 digestion1 muscular   motion1 
the circulation of the fluids1 and1     
still more1 intelligence1   and above   
all1 the moral faculty1 or power of     
distinguishing good and   evil1 are     
unequivocal proofs of the wisdom1 and   
consequently of the   knowledge1 of     
,god4--,he that formed the eye1 doth he 

not see3 he that   planted the ear1 c4  
,mortal artificers are deemed to        
understand their own work1 though       
ignorant of the formation of the        
materials and instruments they use3     
but the ,creator uses no mean or        
material which he has not formed4 ,he   
therefore knows1 from the globe to the  
particle of dust or fluid1 and   from   
the largest living creature to the      
smallest insect4 ,he has   knowledge    
equally of the other worlds of this     
system1 and every   system2 of all      
things in heaven1 earth1 and hell4      
,our knowledge is conversant about his  
works2 he knows all things which   are  
known to us1 and those things which have
 not come to our   knowledge4    ,he    
formed and sustains the human mind1 and 
knows the thoughts3 this is   necessary 
to him as our ,judge4 ,he knows equally 
all spiritual   creatures1 and sustains 
his holy spirits in holiness4    ,our   
knowledge springs from things2 but      
things spring from his   purposes3 they 

are1 because he knows them2 otherwise   
they existed   before his knowledge1 and
 so independently of him4    ,we know   
but the external appearances1 he the    
intimate nature of   things4 ,we inquire
 into the properties of things by our   
senses1 by   comparing them1 by         
analizing1 c3 but nothing possesses a   
property   which he did not purpose and 
give2 otherwise his hands have wrought  
more than he intended4 ,we look up      
through effects unto their causes3   he 
looks down through intermediate causes1 
and sees them all to be   effects from  
him4    ,we are furnished with memories 
to bring up ideas1 being only able to   
contemplate a part at a time2 but his   
comprehension embraces all   things4    
,he never changes2 his purposes of the  
future embrace eternity3 all   things   
that are really future are certain1     
because his purposes cannot   fail of   
accomplishment4 ,but all future things  
to us are contingent1   except as he has
 revealed their certainty4 ,that the    

future is known to   him1 also appears  
by the accomplishment of every prophecy4
    ,but man's sin receives hereby no   
apology4 ,he gives the brutal creation  
the capacity of deriving pleasure from  
gratification of sense1 and   provides  
for such appetites4 ,he offers to man1  
pleasures which are   intellectual3 he  
has tendered him the means1 and requires
 man to seek   his spiritual happiness  
in ,god4 ,when he refuses and withholds 
his   return of service from ,god1 man  
is alone to blame4 ,and the more        
numerous and powerful the motives which 
he resists1 the guilt is the   greater4 
,the divine foreknowledge of this is no 
excuse for man4 ,when   the ,lord       
overpowers man's evil with good1 the    
glory of man's salvation   belongs to   
,god4  ,footnote #ef3    ,see ,ray's    
,wisdom of ,god in the ,works of        
,creation1 and ,derham's                
,physico-,theology4 ,see also ,fenelon1 
,newenlyle1 ,paley1 and ,adams's        
,philosophy4  ,footnote #eg3    ,see    

,page #df4  ,footnote #eh3    ,see      
,quest4 clvi4 and clvii4  ,footnote #ei3
    ,quest4 xvi4 xvii4 xxi4 and xxx4    
,footnote #fj3    ,the ,quest4 xliv4 and
 lxxi4  ,footnote #fa3    ,quest4 xxix4 
and lxxix4  ,footnote #fb3    ,all the  
good which we behold in ,creation1      
,providence1 and redemption1   flows    
from goodness in ,god1 and are the      
proofs of this attribute4 ,if   all the 
evil1 which we discover1 springs from   
the liberty given to   creatures to     
conform1 or not1 to the revealed will2  
or if all moral   evil be productive of 
good1 the remainder being restrained2   
then the   evil1 which exists1 is no    
exception to the proofs of ,divine      
goodness4   ,what ,deity now is1 he     
always was2 he has not derived his      
goodness2 he   is not a compounded      
being2 his goodness therefore belongs to
 his   essence4 ,his goodness has been  
distinguished into immanent and         
communicative4 ,the latter discovers to 
us the former1 but his   communicative  

goodness1 though flowing in ten thousand
 streams1 and   incalculable1 is less   
than his immanent1 which is an eternal  
fountain   of excellency4    ,infinite  
knowledge discerns things as they are1  
and a perfect being   will esteem that  
to be best1 which is so2 ,god therefore 
discerns1 and   esteems his own immanent
 goodness as infinitely exceeding all   
the   good1 which appears in his works1 
for the excellency in these is but   an 
imperfect representation of himself4    
,the happiness of ,deity must   consist 
consequently in his own                 
self-complacency2 he made all things    
for his pleasure1 or glory1 but they are
 only so far pleasing1 as   they reflect
 his own picture to himself4 ,yet when  
we suppose ,deity to   be the subject of
 motives1 we are ever in danger of      
erring4    ,divine communicative        
goodness has been termed benevolence    
when in   intention1 beneficence when   
carried into effect4 ,this is nearly the
   same as moral rectitude1 because the 

government of the ,universe   must1 that
 it may produce the good of the whole1  
be administered in   righteousness4 ,the
 correct administration of justice in   
rewarding   every good1 if there be     
merit in a creature1 and punishing every
 evil   is no less an effect of         
benevolence1 than the conferring of     
benefits1   which are purely gratuitous4
 ,in like manner the punishment of      
offenders in civil society has for its  
object general utility1 whether   we    
imagine the power which judges and      
inflicts1 to spring from the   social   
compact1 or to have been ordained of    
,god4    ,the cutting off of flagrant   
offenders1 as by the deluge1 the        
destruction of ,sodom1 c4 has been      
obviously designed to prevent the       
spreading contagion of sin4 ,but there  
is a time appointed1 unto which   all   
things are tending1 and unto which men  
generally refer the wrongs   they       
sustain1 in which perfect justice shall 
be administered4 ,some   attributes of  

,deity seem to be ground of terror1 and 
others of love2   but ,god is one2 he is
 subject to no perturbation of mind2 his
 wrath   and indignation are but other  
terms for his steady and unchangeable   
goodness1 bearing down the evil1 which  
sinful creatures oppose to his          
purposes of general advantage4 ,those   
acts of justice which are   accounted by
 the guilty to be unnecessary severity1 
are deemed1 by   glorified saints and   
angels1 the effects of that goodness1   
which they   make the subject of their  
,hallelujahs4 ,thus the highest proof of
 ,god's   goodness consisted in his not 
sparing his own ,son1 nor abating any   
thing from the demands of his law4      
,after this all hopes that ,divine      
goodness shall favour the finally       
impenitent must be utterly vain4        
,footnote #fc3    8,mark iii4 #aa1 v4   
#g2 ,luke viii4 #bh2 and ,mat4 viii4    
#bi4 ,these   extraordinary personages  
in the ,new ,testament1 are not called  
devils1 1 in the original2 that word    

never occurring in the   ,christian     
scriptures1 but in the singular number1 
and as applied to   one ,being alone4   
,they are called dmons1  or 4 ,yet      
they are plainly devils in fact2 being  
called ,unclean ,spirits1 though        
sometimes only ,spirits 7,mark ix4 #bj2 
and ,luke x4 #bj27 and showing          
themselves to be devils1 by their whole 
history4 ,in ,mat4 xii4 #bd and   #bf   
particularly1 the ,pharisees say #8our  
,saviour casts out devils1   7dmons7 by 
,beelzebub the prince of the devils     
7dmons72' and our   ,saviour replies1   
that then #8,satan casts out ,satan4'   
,see also ,luke x4   #ag-ah2 where the  
apostles rejoicing declare1 #8even the  
devils 7dmons7   are subject unto us2'  
and our ,saviour says unto them1 #8,i   
beheld ,satan   as lightning fall from  
heaven4' ,so very false in itself1 and  
directly   contradicted by the very     
words of our ,saviour1 is that          
hypothesis of   ,dr4 ,campbell's in his 
new translation of the ,gospels2 which  

asserts   these possessions of the ,new 
,testament to be nowhere attributed to  
the   devil1 and which avers the        
dominion or authority of the devil to be
   nowhere ascribed to the dmons6       
,beelzebub is expressly called the      
prince of the dmons1 the dmons are      
expressly denominated ,satan   with him1
 and these are only inferior devils     
subordinate to the great   one4 ,and    
though the word dmons 7as ,dr4 ,campbell
 urges7 might   critically be more exact
 in a translation2 yet the word devils  
better accords1 with the usages of our  
language and the course of our   ideas4 
,exactness therefore has been properly  
sacrificed to utility40    ,,whitaker4  
,footnote #fd3    ,see ,quest4 xx4      
,quest4 ,,viii4       ,,quest4 ,,viii4  
,are there more ,gods than one8         
,,answ4 ,there is but one only1 the     
living and true ,god4   ,i4 ,in this    
answer1 ,god is described as the living 
and true ,god4 ,as life is the greatest 
excellency belonging to the nature of   

any finite being1 upon which account    
some have concluded that the lowest     
degree thereof renders a creature more  
excellent in itself1 than the most      
glorious creatures that are without it2 
and inasmuch as intelligent creatures   
have a superior excellency to all       
others1 because that which gives life to
 them1 or the principle by which they   
act as such1 is most excellent2 so the  
life of ,god is that whereby he         
infinitely excels all finite beings2    
therefore1 when he is called the living 
,god1 this is not one single perfection 
of the divine nature1 but it is         
expressive of all his divine            
perfections4 ,thus when ,god represents 
himself1 in scripture1 as giving his    
people the highest assurance of any     
thing which he designs to do1 he useth  
the form of an oath1 and sweareth by his
 life1 ,as ,i live2 or1 as truly as ,i  
live1 ,isa4 xlix4 #ah4 and ,numb4 xiv4  
#ba4 which imports the same thing1 as   
when he says1 ,i have sworn by myself1  

,gen4 xxii4 #af4 so that when he is     
called the living ,god1 his glory is set
 forth1 as a ,god of infinite           
perfection3 but this has been considered
 under the last answer4  ,therefore we  
may farther observe1 that when ,god is  
styled the living ,god1 it connotes the 
display of all his perfections1 as life 
is a principle of action2 and hereby he 
is distinguished from lifeless idols1   
who were reputed gods by their stupid   
and profane worshippers4 ,thus the      
apostle lays down both the terms of     
opposition1 when he speaks to some1 as  
having turned from idols1 or false gods1
 to serve the living and true ,god1 #a  
,thess4 i4 #i4 ,here we might consider  
the origin and progress of idolatry1 as 
men were inclined to worship the        
creature more than the ,creator1 ,rom4  
i4 #be4 or to do service to them1 who1  
by nature1 are no gods1 ,gal4 iv4 #h4   
and shew how some seemed to have been   
destitute of common sense1 as they were 
of true religion1 when they not only    

worshipped ,god by idols1 of their own  
making1 but prayed to them1 and said1   
,deliver us1 for ye are our gods2 this  
the prophet takes notice of1 ,isa4 xliv4
 #ag4 and exposes their unaccountable   
stupidity1 by observing to them that    
these gods were first growing among the 
trees of the forest1 then cut down with 
their own hands1 and fashioned into     
their designed form1 and part thereof   
cast into the fire1 as destined for     
common uses4 ,these were lifeless gods1 
without a metaphor1 and their senseless 
worshippers but one remove from them1 as
 the ,psalmist says1 ,they that make    
them are like unto them1 and so is every
 one that trusteth in them1 ,psal4 cxv4 
#h4 ,but this we shall have occasion to 
insist on in a following part of this   
work#fe1 and therefore shall pass it    
over at present1 and consider1  ,,ii4   
,the unity of the ,godhead4 ,scripture  
is very express in asserting this3 thus 
it is said1 ,the ,lord our ,god is one  
,lord1 ,deut4 vi4 #d4 and1 ,i1 even ,i1 

am he2 and there is no ,god with me1    
chap4 xxxii4 #ci4 and1 ,the ,lord he is 
,god2 there is none else besides him1   
chap4 iv4 #ce4 and elsewhere1 ,thou art 
,god alone1 ,psal4 lxxxvi4 #aj4 ,and    
this is a truth1 not barely founded on a
 few places of scripture that expressly 
assert it1 but it may be deduced from   
every part thereof2 yea1 it is instamped
 on the very nature of man1 and may be  
as plainly proved1 from the light of    
nature1 as that there is a ,god2 and    
every one of the divine perfections1    
which were particularly considered under
 the last answer1 will supply us with   
arguments to confirm our faith therein3 
but that this may farther appear1 let it
 be considered1  #a4 ,that the idea of a
 ,god implies that he is the first cause
 of all things1 in which respect he is  
opposed to the creature2 it follows1    
therefore1 that he was from all         
eternity4 ,now there can be no more than
 one being1 who is without beginning1   
and who gave being to all other things1 

which appears from the very nature of   
the thing2 for if there are more ,gods1 
then they must derive their being from  
him1 and then they are a part of his    
creation1 and consequently not gods1 for
 ,god and the creature are infinitely   
opposed to each other3 and since there  
is but one independent being1 who is in 
and of himself1 and derives his         
perfections from no other1 therefore    
there can be but one ,god4  #b4 ,there  
is but one being1 who is the ultimate   
end of all things1 which necessarily    
follows from his being their ,creator2  
for he that produced them out of nothing
 must be supposed to have designed some 
valuable end hereby1 which1 ultimately  
considered1 cannot be any thing short of
 himself1 for that is inconsistent with 
the wisdom and sovereignty that is      
contained in the idea of a ,creator2    
therefore he is said to have made all   
things for himself1 ,prov4 xvi4 #d4 and 
consequently the glory that results from
 thence is unalienable1 and so cannot be

 ascribed to any other ,god2 therefore  
to suppose that there are other gods1 is
 to ascribe a divine nature to them1    
divested of that glory which is         
essential to it4 ,and to this we may    
add1 that if ,god be the ultimate end of
 all things1 he is to be glorified as   
such1 and all worship is to terminate in
 him2 and we must proclaim him to be our
 chief good1 and only portion and       
happiness1 which is plainly inconsistent
 with a plurality of gods4 ,besides1 he 
that is the object of adoration must be 
worshipped1 and loved with all our      
heart1 soul1 strength1 and mind1 ,luke  
x4 #bg4 our affections must not be      
divided between him and any other4      
,therefore since man is under a natural 
obligation to give supreme worship to   
him1 it follows that there is no other  
,god that has a right to it1 and        
therefore that he is the only true ,god4
  #c4 ,infinite perfection being implied
 in the idea of a ,god1 as has been     
proved under the last answer1 it is     

certain that it cannot belong to more   
than one2 for as it implies that this   
perfection is boundless1 so it denotes  
that he sets bounds to the perfections  
of all others2 therefore1 if there are  
more ,gods than one1 their perfections  
must be limited1 and consequently that  
which is not infinite is not ,god4 ,and 
as infinite perfection implies in it all
 perfection1 so it cannot be divided    
among many1 for then no being1 that has 
only a part thereof1 could be said to be
 thus perfect2 therefore1 since there is
 but one that is so1 it follows that    
there is no other ,god besides him4  #d4
 ,since omnipotency is a divine         
attribute1 there can be but one almighty
 being1 and therefore but one ,god2     
which will farther appear1 if we        
consider1 that if there were more ,gods 
than one1 all of them must be said to be
 able to do all things1 and then the    
same individual power1 that is exerted  
by one1 must be exerted by another1 than
 which nothing is more absurd4 ,and it  

will also follow1 that he1 who cannot do
 that which is said to be done by       
another1 is not almighty1 or able to do 
all things1 and consequently that he is 
not ,god4  #e4 ,there is but one being1 
who has an absolute sovereign will1 who1
 though he can controul all others1 is  
himself subject to no controul2 who has 
a natural right to give laws to all who 
are his subjects1 but is subject to none
 himself2 for absolute dominion and     
subjection are as opposite as light and 
darkness4 ,two persons may as well be   
said to give being to each other1 as to 
have a right to give laws to each other4
 ,moreover1 if there were more ,gods    
than one1 then there would be a         
confusion in the government of the      
world2 for whatever one decrees1 another
 may reverse2 or whatever is done by    
one1 the contrary might be done by the  
other1 for that is the consequence from 
a sovereignty of will4 ,and as there    
might be opposite things commanded1 or  
forbidden1 pursuant to the different    

wills of a plurality of gods1 so the    
same thing1 with respect to those who   
are under an obligation to yield        
obedience1 would be both a sin and a    
duty1 and the same persons would be both
 condemned and justified for the same   
action4  #f4 ,there is but one being1   
who is1 as ,god is often said to be1 the
 best and the greatest2 therefore1 if   
there were more ,gods than one1 either  
one must be supposed to be more         
excellent than another1 or both equally 
excellent4 ,if we suppose the former of 
these1 then he1 who is not the most     
excellent1 is not ,god2 and if the      
latter1 that their excellencies are     
equal1 then infinite perfection would be
 divided1 which is contrary to the idea 
thereof1 as was before hinted2 as well  
as to what is expressly said by ,god1   
,to whom will ye liken me1 or shall ,i  
be equal8 saith the ,holy ,one1 ,isa4   
xl4 #be4 ,from these1 and several other 
arguments to the same purpose1 which    
might have been taken from every one of 

the divine attributes1 and from all     
essential and relative glory which      
belongs to him1 the unity of the divine 
essence appears1 even to a              
demonstration4 ,and indeed to assert    
that there are more ,gods than one is1  
in effect1 to say that there is no ,god2
 so the apostle deems it1 when he tells 
the church at ,ephesus1 that1 before    
their conversion1 when they worshipped  
other gods1 they were without ,god in   
the world1 which implies as much as that
 they were atheists therein1 as the     
words     may1 with equal propriety1 be 
rendered4#ff  ,having considered the    
unity of the ,godhead1 not only as      
evinced from scripture1 but as it may be
 demonstrated by the light of nature1 it
 will be necessary that we obviate an   
objection that may be brought against   
this latter method of proving it1 viz4  
,object4 ,if the unity of the ,godhead  
might be known by the dictates of       
nature1 or demonstrated by other        
arguments1 besides those which are      

matter of pure revelation1 how comes it 
to pass that the heathen owned1 and     
worshipped1 a plurality of gods8 and as 
it was not one particular sect among    
them that did so1 but this abominable   
practice universally obtained1 where    
revealed religion was not known1        
therefore1 though this be an undoubted  
truth1 yet it is not founded in the     
light of nature4  ,answ4 ,that they did 
so is beyond dispute1 especially after  
idolatry had continued a few ages in the
 world1 and so had extinguished those   
principles of revealed religion1 which  
mankind1 before this1 were favoured     
with2 yet it must be considered1 that   
though the ignorant and unthinking      
multitude1 among them1 believed every   
thing to be a ,god1 which the custom of 
the countries where they lived had      
induced them to pay divine adoration to1
 yet the wiser sort of them1 however    
guilty of idolatry1 by paying a lower   
kind of worship to them1 have1          
notwithstanding1 maintained the unity of

 the ,godhead1 or that there is one ,god
 superior to them all1 whom they often  
call the father of gods and men2 to whom
 probably the ,athenians erected that   
altar1 as the apostle ,paul observes1   
with this inscription1 ,to ,,the        
,,unknown ,,god2 because he says1 in the
 words immediately following1 ,whom     
therefore ye ignorantly worship1 him    
declare ,i unto you1 ,acts xvii4 #bc4   
,this appears from what they assert to  
the same purpose1 whereby they plainly  
discover their belief of but one supreme
 ,god1 who has all the incommunicable   
perfections of the divine nature1       
however1 in other instances1 their      
conduct seemed to run counter to their  
method of reasoning3 thus it appears1 by
 their writings1 that many of them      
assert that there is a ,god1 who is the 
first cause1 or beginning1 of all       
things2 and that he was from eternity1  
or in the beginning1 and that time took 
its rise from him2 that he is the living
 ,god1 the fountain of life1 and the    

best of all beings#fg3 ,also1 that this 
,god is self-sufficient1 and therefore  
it is absurd to suppose that he stands  
in need of1 or can receive advantage    
from1 any one#fh2 and that he is the    
chief good1 or contains in himself      
whatever is good1 and that by him all   
things consist2 and that no one hath    
enough in himself to secure his own     
safety and happiness1 which is to be    
derived from him#fi4  ,and there are    
others also1 who plainly assert the     
unity of ,god in as strong terms1 as    
though they had learned it from divine  
revelation1 calling him1 the beginning1 
the end1 and author of all things2 who  
was before1 and is above all things1 the
 ,lord of all1 the fountain of life1    
light1 and all good1 yea1 goodness      
itself2 the most excellent being2 and   
many other expressions to the like      
purpose4 ,i could multiply quotations   
for the proof of this1 from ,proclus1   
,porphyry1 ,iamblicus1 ,plotinus1       
,plutarch1 ,epictetus1 and several      

others2 but this has been already done  
by other hands#gj2 by which it appears1 
that though they mention other gods1    
they suppose them to be little more than
 titular or honorary gods2 or at least  
persons1 who were the peculiar          
favourites of ,god1 and admitted to the 
participation of divine honours1 as well
 as employed in some part of the        
government of the world4 ,they          
frequently speak of them as having      
derived their being from ,god1 whom they
 call the cause of causes1 the ,god of  
gods4 ,some of them speak of ,god in the
 singular number1 throughout the        
greatest part of their writings1 and    
only make mention of the gods           
occasionally1 especially when they treat
 of those works that become a ,god1 or  
the greatest honours that are due to    
him2 thus ,seneca and ,plato1 and1 in   
particular1 the latter of them says1    
concerning himself#ga1 that when he     
wrote any thing in a grave and serious  
manner1 his custom was1 to preface his  

epistles with the mention of one ,god2  
though1 it is true1 when he wrote       
otherwise1 he used the common mode of   
speaking1 and talked of other gods2 and 
it is observed1 in his writings1 that he
 sometimes uses this phrase2 ,if it     
please ,god1 or by the help of ,god1 not
 the gods4  ,but1 notwithstanding this1 
they were all idolaters1 for they joined
 in the rites of worship performed to   
the false gods of their respective      
countries2 yea1 ,socrates himself1 who  
fell under the displeasure of the       
,athenians1 for asserting the unity of  
the ,godhead1 which cost him his life1  
did not refuse to pay some religious    
honour to the heathen gods4 ,so that it 
is plain they paid some religious       
worship to them1 but it was of an       
inferior and subordinate nature1 not    
much unlike to that which the ,papists  
give to saints and angels3 but they are 
far from setting them upon a level with 
,god2 for they confess they were but    
men1 who formerly lived in this world2  

they give an account of their birth and 
parentage2 where they lived and died2   
write the history of their lives1 and   
what procured them the honour they      
suppose them after death advanced to#gb2
 how some of them obtained it1 as the   
reward of virtue1 or in commemoration of
 the good they had done to the world in 
their life3 as some were advanced to    
this honour1 who were the inventors of  
arts1 beneficial to mankind1 or were    
successful in wars1 or a public blessing
 to the country where they lived1 others
 had this honour conferred upon them1   
especially among the ,romans1 at the    
request of their surviving friends2 and 
this was done after ,julius ,csar's     
time1 by the decree of the senate1 who1 
at the same time1 when they ranked them 
among the number of their gods1         
appointed also the rites of worship that
 should be paid to them2 and some of the
 ,roman emperors obliged the senate to  
deify them while they were alive4 ,these
 things are very largely insisted on1 by

 many ancient and modern writers#gc2 so 
that1 upon the whole1 it plainly        
appears1 that1 whatever they say of a   
plurality of gods1 the wiser sort among 
the heathen did not deny the unity of   
the divine essence1 in the highest and  
most proper sense2 and1 inasmuch as they
 received the knowledge hereof from the 
light of nature1 we may from hence      
conclude that this truth might be known 
that way1 as well as by divine          
revelation4  ,we shall conclude with    
some practical inferences from the      
doctrine contained in this answer4  #a4 
,since he1 who is the object of our     
worship1 is the living ,god2 this       
reproves that lifeless formal way1 in   
which many address themselves to him1 in
 the performance of religious duties1   
without that reverence and due regard to
 the divine perfections1 which are      
contained in this character of the      
,godhead4 ,it is also a very great      
aggravation1 not only of apostacy1 but  
of any degree of backsliding1 in those  

who have made a profession of religion2 
that it is a departure from the living  
,god1 ,heb4 iii4 #ab4 ,is he the ,god   
and giver of life1 and shall we forsake 
him1 who has the words of eternal life1 
,john vi4 #fh4 whose sovereign will has 
the sole disposal thereof8  ,again1 this
 consideration1 of his being the living 
,god1 renders his judgments most        
terrible1 and his wrath insupportable2  
as the apostle says1 ,it is a fearful   
thing to fall into the hands of the     
living ,god1 ,heb4 x4 #ca4  #b4 ,from   
his being the true ,god1 we infer1 that 
all hypocrisy1 both in heart and life1  
is to be avoided2 and we should draw    
nigh to him with a true heart and faith 
unfeigned2 and not like those whom the  
prophet reproves1 when he says1 ,god was
 near in their mouth1 and far from their
 reins1 ,jer4 xii4 #b4  ,moreover1 let  
us take heed that we do not set up an   
idol in our hearts1 in opposition to him
 as the true ,god3 whatever has a       
greater share in our affections than    

,god1 or is set up in competition with  
him1 that is1 to us1 a god1 and is      
therefore inconsistent with our paying  
that regard which is due to him2 as our 
,saviour says1 ,ye cannot serve ,god and
 mammon1 ,mat4 vi4 #bd4 and1 upon this  
account1 covetousness is styled         
idolatry1 ,col4 iii4 #e4 as the world is
 loved more than him2 and we read of    
some whose ,god is their belly1 ,phil4  
iii4 #ai4 who make provision for the    
flesh1 to fulfil the lusts thereof1 as  
though this was their chief good4 ,and  
when we confide in any thing below him1 
in a religious way1 or expect that from 
the creature which is only to be found  
in him2 or when we esteem men as lords  
of our faith2 or when his sovereignty1  
or right to govern us1 is called in     
question1 while we presumptuously1 or   
wilfully1 rebel against him2 this is1 in
 effect1 a dethroning1 or denying him to
 be the true ,god3 but more of this when
 we consider the sins forbidden in the  
first commandment#gd4  #c4 ,from the    

unity of the ,godhead1 we may infer1    
that we ought to take heed that we do   
not entertain any conceptions of the    
divine ,being1 which are inconsistent   
herewith2 therefore1 as we are not to   
assert a plurality of gods1 so we are   
not to think or speak of ,god in such a 
way as tends to overthrow the simplicity
 of the divine nature2 therefore we must
 not conceive that it is compounded of  
various parts1 all which1 being taken   
together1 tend to constitute the divine 
essence2 which gives occasion to that   
known aphorism1 generally laid down by  
those who treat of this subject1 that   
whatever is in ,god1 is ,god2 which we  
must reckon as one of the               
incomprehensibles of the divine ,being1 
which when we attempt to speak of1 we   
only give an evident proof of the       
imperfection of our finite              
understandings1 and that we cannot order
 our words1 by reason of darkness3      
however1 it is necessary1 when we lay   
down this proposition1 that we signify  

what we intend hereby1 that so we may   
not be supposed to use words without    
ideas2 and especially that we may1 in   
some measure1 account for those modes of
 speaking1 which are agreeable to       
scripture1 which so often describes ,god
 as having a plurality of perfections1  
and those1 in some respects1 distinct2  
and yet1 at the same time1 that we may  
not hereby be led to infer a plurality  
of gods4 ,here let it be considered1    
7#a47 ,that we have not the least       
similitude1 or resemblance1 of this in  
any finite being4 ,every thing below    
,god is composed of parts1 some of which
 we call integral1 as all the parts of  
matter taken together constitute the    
whole2 others are called essential1 as  
when we say an intelligent being has    
various powers or properties which are  
essential to it2 so that it would not be
 complete without every one of them2 and
 that these are all of them distinct1 so
 that we cannot say whatever is in the  
soul of man is the soul1 but every one  

of those powers1 or properties1 taken   
together1 constitute the man2 but this  
is by no means to be applied to the     
divine ,being2 therefore1  7#b47 ,when  
we conceive of ,god1 as holy1 powerful1 
just1 good1 c4 we must not suppose that 
these perfections are so many           
ingredients in the divine ,being1 or    
that1 when taken together1 they         
constitute it1 as the whole is          
constituted of its parts2 for then every
 one of them would have no other than a 
partial perfection1 and consequently the
 essential glory of one of those        
attributes would not be equal to the    
glory of the divine ,being1 which is    
supposed to consist of them all2 and    
therefore there would be something in   
,god less than ,god1 or a divine        
perfection less than all the divine     
perfections taken together1 which we are
 not to suppose4 ,these are the         
properties of composition2 and          
therefore1 when we speak of ,god as a   
simple or uncompounded ,being1 we cannot

 forbear to mention them as what are    
inconsistent with his perfection as     
such4  ,neither are the divine          
perfections distinct or different from  
one another1 as the various parts of    
which the whole is constituted are said 
to be distinct2 which follows from the  
former1 since the divine essence has no 
parts2 therefore we are not to suppose1 
that the divine attributes1 considered  
as they are in ,god1 are so             
distinguished1 as one thing1 or being1  
is from another2 or as wisdom1 power1   
justice1 mercy1 c4 are in men2 for that 
would be to suppose the divine ,being as
 having several distinct1 infinitely    
perfect beings contained in it1 which is
 contrary to its simplicity or unity2   
or1 at least1 if we call it one1 it     
would be only so by participation and   
dependence1 as a general or complex idea
 is said to be one1 which partakes of1  
and depends on1 all those particular or 
simple ideas that are contained in it2  
or1 to illustrate it by numbers1 as one 

hundred is one1 as it contains such a   
number of units in it1 as are1 all taken
 together1 equal to a hundred2 this is  
not what we mean1 when we say ,god is   
one4  ,moreover1 when we speak of the   
divine perfections1 as being in ,god1 we
 suppose them all essential to him1 as  
opposed to what is accidental4 ,now an  
accident is generally described1 as what
 belongs1 or is superadded1 to a being  
or subject1 which it might have existed 
without1 or have been destitute of1 and 
yet sustained no loss of that           
perfection1 which is essential to it3   
thus1 wisdom1 holiness1 justice1        
faithfulness1 are accidents in men2 so  
that they who have them not1 do not     
cease to be men1 or to have the         
essential perfection of the human       
nature3 but this is by no means to be   
applied to the divine ,being and        
attributes2 for to suppose ,god to be   
destitute of any of them1 is as much as 
to say that he is not infinitely        
perfect1 or that he is not ,god4 ,this1 

,i think1 is generally intended1 when it
 is said1 whatever is in ,god1 is ,god2 
which1 because it may be reckoned by    
some to be a metaphysical speculation1  
,i should have avoided to mention1 had  
it not been1 in some respects1          
necessary1 since the unity of ,god      
cannot well be conceived of1 unless his 
simplicity be defended2 and ,i do not   
see how that can be maintained1 if this 
proposition be not duly considered4 ,if 
,i have used more words than are        
needful1 or repeated the same ideas too 
often1 in attempting to explain it1 ,i  
have done it to avoid some scholastic   
modes of speaking1 or with a design to  
render what has been said more          
intelligible2 but to this we may add1   
7#c47 ,that when we speak of the divine 
perfections as many1 or distinct from   
one another1 as we often do1 and have   
scripture warrant to justify us therein1
 namely1 when we speak of the justice of
 ,god1 as different from his mercy1 or  
these1 from his power1 wisdom1          

faithfulness1 c4 this must not be deemed
 inconsistent with what has been said   
concerning the divine simplicity3 and   
therefore let it be considered1 that the
 nature and perfections of ,god are     
incomprehensible2 and therefore all the 
ideas which we have of them are taken   
from our comparing them with some small 
resemblance that there is thereof in    
intelligent creatures1 and1 at the same 
time1 separating from them whatever     
argues imperfection4  ,and from hence it
 follows1 that we are not supposed to   
know1 or be able to describe1 what ,god 
is in himself1 and1 as ,i humbly        
conceive1 never shall3 such knowledge as
 this is too great for any but a divine 
person2 therefore our conceptions of him
 are taken from and conformed to those  
various ways1 by which he condescends to
 make himself visible1 or known to us1  
namely1 by various acts conversant about
 certain objects1 in which he is said to
 manifest his perfections3 thus1 when an
 effect is produced1 we call that       

perfection that produces it his power2  
or as the divine acts are otherwise     
distinguished with respect to the       
objects1 or the manner of his glorifying
 himself therein1 these we call his     
wisdom1 justice1 goodness1 c4 ,and this 
is what we mean1 when we speak of       
various perfections in ,god2 though some
 suppose that they express themselves   
more agreeably to the nature of the     
subject1 or to the simplicity of ,god1  
in that1 whenever they speak of any of  
the divine perfections1 they speak of   
them in such a way1 as that they are    
denominated from the effect thereof2 as 
when they take occasion to mention the  
power of ,god1 they call it ,god acting 
powerfully2 or of his justice or        
faithfulness1 they express those        
perfections by1 ,god acting justly or   
faithfully#ge4 ,but however we express  
ourselves1 when we speak of the distinct
 perfections of the divine nature1 this 
is what we principally intend thereby3  
and here our thoughts must stop1 and    

make what is too great for a finite mind
 to conceive of the subject of our      
admiration1 and adore what we cannot    
comprehend3 such knowledge is too       
wonderful for us2 it is high1 we cannot 
attain to it4  ,footnote #fe3    ,see   
,quest4 cv4  ,footnote #ff3    8,as     
gravity is the common quality of all    
bodies1 arising not from the   nature   
and properties of matter1 nor to be     
explained without the   agency of a     
foreign cause1 yet producing numberless 
uniform effects in   the corporeal      
system1 it is in all reason to be       
attributed to one   contrivance1 rather 
than the different designs of two or    
more partial   independent causes4 ,what
 a vast variety of appearances in nature
   depend on this one8 ,the             
self-balanced earth hangs upon its      
centre2 the   mountains are set fast2   
there is a perpetual flux and reflux of 
the   sea2 vapours continually arise2   
the clouds are balanced till by their   
own weight they descend in rain2 animals

 breathe and move2 the   heavenly bodies
 hold their stations1 and go on in their
 constant   course1 by the force of     
gravity1 after the ordinance of that    
wisdom   which appointed them this law4 
,now when we see a multitude of effects 
proceeding from one ,cause1 effects so  
various in their kind and so            
important1 a ,cause simple and unvaried 
in all the diversity produced   by it1  
can we avoid ascribing this to an unity 
of intelligence1 if   there be          
intelligence in it all8 ,for could we   
suppose different   independent beings1 
acting with different designs1 and by   
distinct   operations to have formed the
 several parts of the world1 and the    
several species of creatures which are  
in it1 what reason can be   imagined why
 they should all be governed by1 and all
 necessarily   depend upon1 one law8    
,the ,maker of the sun1 or1 if a partial
 cause of   nature could be supposed to 
have an understanding large enough for  
it1   the ,contriver of the whole       

visible heavens1 must1 one would think1 
have finished his scheme independently  
on any other1 without borrowing   aid   
from the work of another ,god4 ,in like 
manner the ,gods of the seas   and of   
the dry land1 and the ,creator of       
animals1 would have completed   their   
several systems1 each by itself1 not    
depending on any other for   its order  
and preservation4 ,whereas1 on the      
contrary1 we see in fact   they are none
 of them independent1 but all held      
together by the common   bond of        
gravity4 ,the heavens and the earth     
continue in their   situations at a     
proper distance from each other by the  
force of this   law2 the sea keeps      
within its channels2 and animals live   
and move by   it4 ,all which lead us to 
acknowledge one directing ,counsel in   
the   whole frame4 ,for what but an     
understanding which comprehends the     
whole   extent of nature1 reaching from 
the utmost circuit of heaven to the     
centre of the earth1 could have fixed   

such a common law1 so necessary   to all
 its parts1 that without it not one of  
them could subsist1 nor   the harmony of
 the whole be preserved8 ,the strict    
cohesion of the   parts which constitute
 particular bodies requires a peculiar  
cement1   different from that of the    
gravitating force2 and as it can never  
be   explained by the nature and        
properties of matter itself1 and is     
absolutely necessary to the forms and   
the uses of bodies in the   several far 
distant regions of the world1 it must in
 like manner be   attributed to the     
contrivance of an understanding1 and the
 agency of a   power1 which takes in the
 whole corporeal system1 not to a       
partial   cause1 limited in its         
intelligence and operation4    8#b;dly1 
,the beautiful order and harmony of the 
universe1 since it   must be            
acknowledged to be the work of          
understanding1 has all the   appearance 
which is necessary to satisfy any fair  
inquirer1 of its   being formed under   

the direction of one governing wisdom4  
,disconcerted   counsels can never      
produce harmony4 ,if a plurality of     
intelligent   causes pursue each his    
separate design1 disunion will          
continually   cleave to their works2 but
 when we see an intire piece made up of 
many   parts1 all corresponding to each 
other1 and conspiring together so as    
to answer one common end1 we naturally  
conclude unity of design4 ,as a   work  
of art is formed according to the       
preconceived idea of a   designing      
artificer1 without which it has not its 
necessary intireness   and uniformity1  
the same may be observed in the works of
 nature4 ,a   tree is as much one as a  
house2 an animal as complete a system in
 it   self1 7only much more curiously   
framed17 as a clock4 ,if we carry our   
views farther into nature1 and take in  
whole regions of the universe1   with   
all their contents1 the same characters 
of unity are still   visible4 ,the earth
 itself is not a confused mass1 or a    

medley of   incoherent and unrelated    
parts1 but a well contrived fabric1     
fitted   and plainly designed for use4  
,if we consider what a multitude of     
living creatures are in it1 of different
 kinds and degrees of   perfection1 each
 sort having proper apartments assigned 
them1 where   they dwell conveniently   
together1 with suitable provision made  
for   them1 and instincts directing them
 to the use of it2 if we consider   the 
interests of the several kinds1 not     
interfering in the main1 but   rather   
serviceable to each other1 furnished    
with necessary defences   against the   
inconveniences to which they are liable1
 either by the   preventing care of     
nature1 which without any thought of    
their own has   provided for their      
safety1 by the appointed advantages of  
their   situation1 or by an implanted   
wisdom directing them to find out the   
means of it2 and if we consider the     
constant interposition of the same      
liberal intelligent nature1 appearing by

 the daily new productions   from the   
same fertile womb of the earth1 whereby 
the returning wants   of animals are    
relieved with fresh supplies1 all the   
species of living   things having the   
common benefit of the air1 without which
 they could   not subsist1 and the light
 of the sun1 which cannot at once       
illuminate   the whole globe1 being     
dispensed among them with so good       
conomy1 that   they have every one what 
is sufficient to guide them in the      
exercise   of their proper functions1   
that they may fulfil the purposes of    
their   beings2--when we consider all   
this1 can we doubt but the earth is     
disposed and governed by one intending  
,cause8 ,if in a large house1   wherein 
are many mansions1 and a vast variety of
 inhabitants1 there   appears exact     
order1 all from the highest to the      
lowest continually   attending their    
proper business1 and all lodged and     
constantly   provided for suitably to   
their several conditions1 we find       

ourselves   obliged to acknowledge one  
wise conomy4 ,and if in a great city or 
commonwealth there be a perfectly       
regular administration1 so that not     
only the whole society enjoys an        
undisturbed peace1 but every member     
has the station assigned him which he is
 best qualified to fill2 the   unenvied 
chiefs constantly attend their more     
important cares1 served   by the busy   
inferiors1 who have all a suitable      
accommodation1 and food   convenient for
 them1 the very meanest ministering to  
the public   utility and protected by   
the public care2 if1 ,i say1 in such a  
community we must conclude there is a   
ruling ,counsel1 which if not           
naturally1 yet is politically one1 and1 
unless united1 could not   produce such 
harmony and order1 much more have we    
reason to recognize   one governing     
,intelligence in the earth1 in which    
there are so many   ranks of beings     
disposed of in the most convenient      
manner1 having all   their several      

provinces appointed to them1 and their  
several kinds and   degrees of enjoyment
 liberally provided for1 without        
encroaching upon1   but rather being    
mutually useful to each other1 according
 to a settled   and obvious             
subordination4 ,what else can account   
for this but a   sovereign ,wisdom1 a   
common provident nature1 presiding over1
 and   caring for the whole8    8,but   
the earth1 as great as it appears to us1
 complicated in its   frame1 and having 
such a variety in its constitution1     
sustaining and   nourishing so many     
tribes of animals1 yet is not an intire 
system by   itself1 but has a relation  
to1 and dependence on1 other parts of   
the   universe1 as well as the beings it
 contains have upon it4 ,it owes its    
stability to the common law of          
gravitation2 it derives its light and   
its heat from the sun1 by which it is   
rendered fruitful and commodious   to   
its inhabitants4 ,in short1 a bond of   
union runs through the whole   circle of

 being1 as far as human knowledge       
reaches2 and we have reason   to make   
the same judgment concerning the parts  
of the world which we   do not know1 and
 to conclude that they all together     
compose one great   whole1 which        
naturally leads us to acknowledge one   
supreme uniting   ,intelligence4 ,to    
object against this the possibility of  
wild confusion   reigning in worlds     
unknown is to feign1 and not to argue2  
and to   suppose disorder prevalent in  
an infinity of being which we are       
unacquainted with1 which is the         
,atheistic hypothesis1 is to take   away
 all rational foundation for regularity 
any where1 though we see   it actually  
obtains every where1 as far as our      
observation can reach4   ,but confining 
our speculations on this subject within 
the compass of   known existence1 as we 
ought to do in a fair inquiry1 the      
apparent   order of the effects is a    
strong evidence of unity in the ,cause4 
,for   if different independent causes  

produced1 each1 a part1 why are there   
no footsteps of this in the whole extent
 of nature8 ,why does not so   much as  
one piece appear1 as the separate       
monument of its author's   power and    
wisdom8 ,from divided counsels one would
 naturally expect   interfering schemes2
 but1 on the contrary1 we see an        
universal   harmony4 ,men indeed from a 
sense of their indigence1 and by the    
direction of instincts1 which must be   
attributed to the designing   author of 
their constitution1 join in societies2  
which1 though   composed of many1 are   
governed by one counsel3 but that is    
only an   artificial union1 a submission
 to the majority1 or to those who have  
the supreme power delegated to them1    
rather than an agreement in   design4   
,but this cannot be the case of         
independent beings1   self-existent1 and
 each complete in itself1 without       
relation to any   other4 ,and yet we see
 in nature a perfect harmony1 from      
whence it is   plain there must be an   

agreement at least in counsel and       
design1 if we   could suppose a         
plurality of independent causes4 ,but   
whence comes this   agreement8 ,to say  
by chance1 is atheistically1 and very   
unreasonably1 to attribute the most     
perfect of all effects1 universal       
order1 to no cause at all4 ,if we say by
 design1 it must be one   comprehensive 
design forming the whole scheme of      
nature and   providence1 which directly 
brings us to what we are looking for1   
one   sovereign commanding ,intelligence
 in the universe1 or one ,god4 ,this    
was the argument by which some of the   
ancient philosophers proved that   there
 is one only eternal and independent    
,principle1 the ,fountain of   being and
 the ,author of all things4 ,pythagoras 
called it a ,monad2   and ,aristotle    
argued from the phnomena that all things
 are plainly   co-ordered1 to one1 the  
whole world conspiring into agreeing    
harmony3   ,whereas1 if there were many 
independent principles1 the system of   

the   world must needs have been        
incoherent and inconspiring2 like an    
ill-agreeing drama1 botched up of many  
impertinent intersertions4   ,and he    
concludes that things are well          
administered1 which they could   not be 
under the government of many1 alluding  
to the verse in ,homer1     1   4       
8#c;dly1 ,the condition and order of    
inferior1 derived1 and evidently        
dependent intelligent agents shew not   
only intelligence1 but unity of         
intelligence1 in the ,cause of them4    
,every man1 a single active   conscious 
self1 is the image of his ,maker4 ,there
 is in him one   undivided animating    
principle1 which in its perceptions and 
operations   runs through the whole     
system of matter that it inhabits2 it   
perceives   for all the most distant    
parts of the body2 it cares for all1 and
   governs all1 leading us1 as a        
resemblance1 to form an idea of the one 
great quickening ,spirit1 which presides
 over the whole frame of   nature1 the  

spring of motion and all operation in   
it1 understanding   and active in all   
the parts of the universe1 not as its   
soul indeed1   but as its ,lord1 by     
whose vital directing influence it is1  
though so   vast a bulk1 and consisting 
of so many parts1 united into one       
regular   fabric4 ,again1 the general   
apparent likeness which there is among  
all   the individuals of the human kind 
is a strong evidence of their being     
the children of one ,father4 ,i do not  
mean principally the similitude   of the
 exterior form1 7though even that1 in   
reason1 should be   attributed to the   
direction of one intelligent ,cause17   
but that   whereby we are especially    
,god's offspring1 our intellectual      
capacities1 which as far as we can judge
 are very nearly alike4 ,a   great      
difference there may be1 no doubt there 
is1 in the improvement   of them2 but   
the powers themselves1 and all the      
original modes of   perception1 in the  
different individuals of mankind1 seem  

to resemble   each other1 as much as any
 real distinct things in nature4 ,now   
from a   multitude1 or a constant series
 of similar effects which do not arise  
from necessity1 we infer unity of design
 in the ,cause4 ,so great a   number of 
rational beings as the whole human race1
 disposed of in the   same manner1      
endued with like faculties and          
affections1 having many1   and those    
principal things in their condition1    
common1 provided for   out of the same  
fund1 and made for the same purposes1   
may reasonably   be supposed to belong  
to one family1 to be derived from the   
same   origin1 and still under the same 
paternal care4    8,above all1 the moral
 capacity of mankind1 which is a most   
important   part of their constitution1 
tending to the highest perfection of    
their   nature1 and the principal bond  
of regular society among them1 as it    
proceeds from a wise intending ,cause1  
shews unity of wisdom in the   ,cause2  
and the government over the moral1 as   

well as the natural1   world evidently  
appears to be a monarchy40              
,,abernethy  ,footnote #fg3    ,see     
,arist4 ,metaphys4 ,lib4 ,i4 ,cap4 #b4  
,lib4 ,,xii4 ,cap4 #g4  ,footnote #fh3  
,vid4 ejus4 ,mag4 ,moral4 ,lib4 ,,ii4   
,cap4 #ae4  ,footnote #fi3    ,vid4     
ejus4 ,de ,moribus1 ,lib4 ,,ix4 ,cap4   
#d4  ,de ,mundo1 ,cap4 #f4  ,footnote   
#gj3    ,vid4 ,morni de ,verit4 ,relig4 
,christ4 cap4 #c4  ,footnote #ga3       
,epist4 ,,xiii4 ad ,dionys4  ,footnote  
#gb3    ,see ,cicero de ,natura ,deorum4
  ,footnote #gc3    ,see ,tertull4      
,apol4 ,lactant4 de falsa ,relig4       
,arnob4 contra ,gentes2   ,minut4 ,fel4 
,herodian4 ,hist4 ,lib4 ,,iv4 ,see also 
,mede's apostasy of the   latter times1 
chap4 #c1 #d4  ,footnote #gd3    ,quest4
 cv4  ,footnote #ge3    ,see de ,vries  
,exercitat4 ,rational4                  
,quest4 ,,ix41 ,x41 ,,xi4       ,,quest4
 ,,ix4 ,how many persons are there in   
the ,godhead8      ,,answ4 ,there be    
three ,persons in the ,godhead1 the     

,father1 the ,son1     and the ,holy    
,ghost2 and these three are one1 true1  
eternal ,god1 the     same in substance1
 equal in power and glory2 although     
distinguished     by their personal     
properties4      ,,quest4 ,x4 ,what are 
the personal properties of the three    
,persons in     the ,godhead8           
,,answ4 ,it is proper to the ,father to 
beget the ,son1 and to the ,son to      
be begotten of the ,father1 and to the  
,holy ,ghost to proceed from the        
,father and the ,son from all eternity4 
,,quest4 ,,xi4 ,how doth it appear that 
the ,son and the ,holy ,ghost are       
,god equal with the ,father8            
,,answ4 ,the scriptures manifest1 that  
the ,son and the ,holy ,ghost are       
,god equal with the ,father2 ascribing  
unto them such names1     attributes1   
works1 and worship1 as are proper to    
,god only4   ,in these three answers is 
contained the doctrine of the ever      
blessed ,trinity1 which is a subject of 
pure revelation2#gf and1 because it is  

so much contested in the age in which we
 live1 we are obliged to be more large  
and particular1 in laying down the      
reasons of our belief of it1 and in our 
defence thereof1 against those that deny
 it4 ,it is a doctrine that has been    
defended by some of the most judicious  
writers1 both in our own and other      
nations2 whereof some have proved that  
it was maintained by the church in the  
purest ages thereof1 which therefore    
renders it less necessary for us to     
enter into that part of the controversy2
 but we shall principally insist on it  
as founded on the sacred writings3 and  
whereas others have rendered some parts 
of this doctrine more obscure1 by       
confining themselves to the scholastic  
ways of speaking1 we shall endeavour to 
avoid them1 that so it may be better    
understood by private ,christians2 and  
the method we shall pursue in treating  
of it shall be1  ,i4 ,to premise some   
things which are necessary to be        
considered1 with relation to it in      

general4  ,,ii4 ,we shall consider in   
what sense we are to understand the     
words ,trinity1 and ,persons in the     
,godhead1 and in what respect the divine
 ,persons are said to be ,one4  ,,iii4  
,we shall prove that the ,father1 ,son1 
and ,holy ,ghost1 have distinct personal
 properties1 and therefore that we have 
sufficient reason to call them ,persons1
 in the ,godhead1 as they are in the    
first of these answers2 and under this  
head shall consider what is generally   
understood by what is contained in the  
second of them1 which respects the      
eternal generation of the ,son1 and the 
procession of the ,holy ,ghost2 and what
 cautions we are to use1 lest1 by       
mistaking the sense thereof1 we be led  
into any error1 derogatory to1 or       
subversive of the doctrine of the       
,trinity2 and also shall endeavour to   
explain those scriptures1 which are     
generally brought to establish that     
doctrine4  ,,iv4 ,we shall endeavour to 
prove that these three ,persons1        

especially the ,son and ,holy ,ghost1   
are truly divine1 or that they have all 
the perfections of the divine nature2   
and therefore that they are1 in the most
 proper sense1 the one only living and  
true ,god4#gg  ,i4 ,we shall premise    
some things which are necessary to be   
considered1 with relation to the        
doctrine of the ,trinity in general4    
,and1  #a4 ,it is a doctrine of the     
highest importance1 and necessary to be 
believed by all ,christians1 who pay a  
just deference to revealed religion4 ,it
 may probably be reckoned an error in   
method to speak of the importance of    
this doctrine1 before we attempt to     
prove the truth thereof3 however1 it is 
not altogether unjustifiable1 since we  
address ourselves to those who believe  
it1 hoping thereby to offer some farther
 conviction1 or establishment1 to their 
faith therein1 as well as to others who 
deny it2 we may therefore be allowed to 
consider it as an important doctrine1   
that we may be excited to a more        

diligent enquiry into the force of some 
of those arguments1 which are generally 
brought in its defence4  ,now to        
determine a doctrine to be of the       
highest importance1 we must consider the
 belief thereof as connected with       
salvation1 or subservient to that true  
religion1 which is ordained by ,god1 as 
a necessary means leading to it1 without
 which we have no warrant to expect it3 
and such doctrines are sometimes called 
fundamental1 as being the basis and     
foundation on which our hope is built4  
,here1 ,i think1 it will be allowed1 by 
all whose sentiments do not savour of   
scepticism1 that there are some         
doctrines of religion necessary to be   
believed to salvation4 ,there are some1 
it is true1 who plead for the innocency 
of error1 or1 at least1 of those who are
 sincere enquirers after truth1 who1 in 
the end1 will appear to have been very  
remote from it1 as though their         
endeavours would entitle them to        
salvation1 without the knowledge of     

those things1 which others conclude to  
be necessarily subservient to it4 ,all  
that we shall say concerning this is1   
that it is not the sincerity of our     
enquiries after important truths1 but   
the success thereof1 that is to be      
regarded in this1 as well as other      
means1 that are to be used to obtain so 
valuable an end4 ,we may as well suppose
 that our sincere endeavours to obtain  
many of those graces that accompany     
salvation1 such as faith1 love to ,god1 
and evangelical obedience1 will supply1 
or atone for1 the want of them2 as      
assert that our unsuccessful enquiries  
after the great doctrines of religion   
will excuse our ignorance thereof2      
especially when we consider1 that       
blindness of mind1 as well as hardness  
of heart2 is included among those       
spiritual judgments1 which are the      
consequence of our fallen state2 and    
also that ,god displays the sovereignty 
of his grace as much1 in leading the    
soul into all necessary truth1 as he    

does in any other things that relate to 
salvation4 ,however1 it is not our      
business to determine the final state of
 men2 or how far they make advances to1 
or recede from1 the knowledge of such   
important doctrines2 or what will be the
 issue thereof2 but rather to desire of 
,god1 that so far as we1 or others1 are 
destitute of this privilege1 he would   
grant us and them repentance1 to the    
acknowledgment of the truth1 #a ,tim4   
ii4 #be4 ,and here we cannot but        
observe1 that the question relating to  
important or fundamental articles of    
faith is not whether any doctrines may  
be so called8 but what those doctrines  
are3 in determining of which1 many make 
provision for their own particular      
scheme of doctrine3 and accordingly     
some1 as the ,papists in particular1    
assert several doctrines to be          
fundamental1 without scripture warrant2 
yea1 such as are directly contrary      
thereunto2 and others allow no doctrine 
to be so1 but what will1 if adhered to1 

open a door of salvation to all mankind1
 and these set aside the necessity of   
divine revelation2 and others1 who      
desire not to run such lengths1 will    
allow1 that some scripture-doctrines are
 necessary to be believed to salvation3 
but these are only such as may include  
those who are in their way of thinking2 
thus they who deny the doctrine of the  
,trinity1 are obliged in conformity to  
their own sentiments1 to deny also that 
it is an important article of faith4    
,these may justly demand a convincing   
proof of the truth thereof1 before they 
believe it to be of any importance1     
especially to themselves2 and therefore 
it would be a vain thing to tell them1  
that the belief thereof is connected    
with salvation2 or that it is necessary1
 inasmuch as divine worship is so1 which
 supposes the belief of the divinity of 
the ,persons1 whom we adore2 without    
first proving that the ,father1 ,son1   
and ,holy ,ghost1 are divine ,persons3  
and it would be as little to their      

edification to say that there are       
several doctrines necessary to be       
believed2 such as that of ,christ's     
satisfaction1 and our justification1    
depending thereon1 and that of          
regeneration and sanctification1 as the 
effects of the divine power of the ,holy
 ,ghost2 all which suppose the belief of
 their being divine ,persons2 unless we 
first give some convincing proof of the 
truth of these doctrines1 which are     
supposed to stand or fall with it2 for  
it would be immediately replied1 that   
one is false1 and consequently far from 
being of any importance2 therefore so is
 the other4  ,but inasmuch as we reserve
 the consideration of these things to   
their proper place2 we shall only       
observe at present1 that there are some 
who do not appear to deny the doctrine  
of the ,trinity1 but rather the         
importance of it2 and express themselves
 with very great indifference about it1 
and blame all attempts to defend it1 as 
needless1 or litigious1 as though it    

were only a contest about words3 thus   
they say1 though we hold it ourselves1  
others who deny it1 may have as much to 
say in defence of their own cause as we 
have1 and therefore that these disputes 
ought to be wholly laid aside4 ,now1    
with respect to these1 what we have     
hinted1 concerning the importance of    
this doctrine1 may not be altogether    
misapplied2 therefore we have taken     
occasion to mention it in this place1   
that we may not be supposed to plead a  
cause which is not worth defending1 as  
though the doctrine of the ,trinity were
 no other than an empty speculation2 but
 as that which we are bound to esteem a 
doctrine of the highest importance4  #b4
 ,we are next to consider what degree of
 knowledge of this doctrine is necessary
 to1 or connected with salvation4 ,it   
cannot be supposed that this includes in
 it the knowledge of every thing that is
 commonly laid down in those writings1  
wherein it is attempted to be explained2
 for when we speak of this1 as a        

doctrine of the highest importance1 we  
mean the scripture-doctrine of the      
,trinity4 ,this is what we are to assent
 to1 and to use our utmost endeavours to
 defend2 but as for those explications1 
which are merely human1 they are not to 
be reckoned of equal importance2        
especially every private ,christian is  
not to be censured as a stranger to this
 doctrine1 who cannot define personality
 in a scholastic way1 or understand all 
the terms used in explaining it1 or     
several modes of speaking1 which some   
writers tenaciously adhere to2 such as  
hypostasis1 subsistence1                
consubstantiality1 the modal distinction
 of the ,persons in the ,godhead1       
filiation1 or the communication of the  
divine essence by generation1 or its    
being farther communicated by           
procession2 some of which rather        
embarrass the minds of men1 than add any
 farther light to the sense of those    
scriptures1 in which this doctrine is   
contained4  ,but when we consider how   

far the doctrine of the ,trinity is to  
be known1 and believed to salvation1 we 
must not exclude the weakest ,christian 
from a possibility of knowing it1 by    
supposing it necessary for him to       
understand some hard words1 which he    
doth not find in his ,bible2 and if he  
meets with them elsewhere1 will not be  
much edified by them4 ,that knowledge1  
therefore1 which is necessary to        
salvation1 is more plain and easy1 and  
to be found in every part of scripture3 
accordingly1 every ,christian knows1    
that the word ,god signifies a being    
that has all those divine perfections1  
which are so frequently attributed to   
him therein1 and are displayed and      
glorified in all his works of common    
providence and grace2 and that this ,god
 is one4 ,to which we may also add1 that
 he learns from his ,bible1 and         
therefore firmly believes that the      
,father1 ,son1 and ,holy ,ghost1 are    
possessed of these divine perfections1  
and consequently that they are this one 

,god2 and that they are distinguished1  
as we often find in scripture1 by such  
characters and properties1 which we     
generally call personal1 and so apply   
the word ,person to each of them1 and   
conclude that the divine glory          
attributed to them is the same1 though  
their personal properties1 or           
characters1 are distinct2 which is the  
substance of what is contained in the   
first of those answers1 under our       
present consideration4 ,and he that     
believes this1 need not entertain any   
doubt as though he wanted some ideas of 
this sacred doctrine1 which are         
necessary to salvation2 since such a    
degree of knowledge1 attended with a    
firm belief thereof1 is sufficient to   
warrant all those acts of divine        
worship1 which we are obliged to ascribe
 to the ,father1 ,son1 and ,spirit1 and 
is consistent with all those other      
doctrines1 which are founded on1 or     
suppose the belief thereof1 as was      
before observed under our last head4    

#c4 ,we shall consider this doctrine as 
a great mystery1 such as cannot be      
comprehended by a finite mind2 and      
therefore we shall first enquire what we
 are to understand by the word ,mystery1
 as it is used in scripture4 ,this word 
sometimes denotes a doctrine's having   
been kept secret1 or1 at least1 revealed
 more obscurely1 upon which account it  
was not so clearly known before2 in     
which sense1 the gospel is called1 ,the 
mystery which hath been hid from ages1  
and from generations1 but now is made   
manifest to his saints ,col4 i4 #bf4 ,it
 was covered with the ceremonial law1 as
 with a vail1 which1 many of the people1
 through the blindness of their minds1  
did not so fully understand2 and        
accordingly1 when persons are led into a
 farther degree of knowledge thereof1 it
 is said1 as our ,saviour tells his     
disciples1 that to them it is given to  
know the mysteries of the kingdom of    
heaven1 ,matt4 xiii4 #aa4 or when       
something is revealed in scripture1     

which the world was not in the least    
apprised of before2 this is1 by way of  
eminence1 called a mystery1 as the      
apostle says1 speaking concerning the   
change that shall be passed on those    
that shall be found alive at the last   
day2 ,behold1 ,i shew you a mystery2 we 
shall not all sleep1 but we shall all be
 changed in a moment1 in the twinkling  
of an eye1 #a ,cor4 xv4 #ea1 #eb4  ,but 
to this we may add1 that there is also  
another idea affixed to the word        
,mystery1 namely1 that though it be     
revealed1 yet it cannot be fully        
comprehended2 and it is in this sense   
that we call the doctrine of the        
,trinity a ,mystery4 ,both these ideas  
seem to be contained in the word1 in    
some scriptures1 particularly where the 
apostle says1 ,unto me1 who am less than
 the least of all saints1 is this grace 
given1 that ,i should preach among the  
,gentiles the unsearchable riches of    
,christ1 and to make all men see what is
 the fellowship of the mystery1 which1  

from the beginning of the world1 hath   
been hid in ,god1 ,eph4 iii4 #h1 #i4    
where he speaks of the gospel1 not only 
as hid1 but unsearchable2 and he speaks 
of the mystery of ,god1 even the        
,father1 and of ,christ1 in whom are hid
 all the treasures of wisdom and        
knowledge1 ,col4 ii4 #c4 where the word 
mystery seems to contain both these     
ideas2 for few will deny1 that the glory
 of the ,father1 who is here spoken of1 
as well as ,christ1 is incomprehensible 
by a finite mind2 and if it be said1    
that the gospel is hereby intended1 and 
so that the words ought to be rendered1 
in which are hid all the treasures of   
wisdom and knowledge2 this must be      
supposed to be incomprehensible1 as well
 as formerly less known1 otherwise this 
character of it would be too great4     
,but suppose the word ,mystery were     
always used to signify a doctrine1 not  
before revealed1 without the other idea 
of its being incomprehensible contained 
in it2 this would not overthrow our     

argument in general1 since we can prove 
it to be incomprehensible from other    
arguments1 which we shall endeavour to  
do4  ,and that we may prepare our way   
for this1 let it be considered1 that    
there are some finite things1 which we  
cannot now comprehend1 by reason of the 
imperfection of our present state1 which
 are not incomprehensible in themselves4
 ,how little do we know of some things1 
which may be called mysteries in nature2
 such as the reason of the growth and   
variety of colours and shapes of plants2
 the various instinct of brute          
creatures2 yea1 how little do we know   
comparatively of ourselves1 the nature  
of our souls1 any otherwise1 than as it 
is observed by their actions1 and the   
effects they produce2 the reason of     
their union with our bodies1 or of their
 acting by them1 as the inspired writer 
observes2 so that it may well be said1  
,thou knowest not the way of the spirit1
 nor how the bones do grow in the womb  
of her that is with child2 even so thou 

knowest not the works of ,god1 who      
maketh all things1 ,eccles4 xi4 #e4 and 
,elihu1 together with some of the other 
wonderful works of nature1 which he     
challengeth ,job to give an account of1 
speaks of this in particular4 ,dost thou
 know how thy garments are warm1 when he
 quieteth the earth1 by the south wind8 
,job xxxvii4 #ag1 c4 which not only     
signifies that we cannot account for the
 winds producing heat or cold1 as       
blowing from various quarters of heaven2
 but that we know not the reason of the 
vital heat1 which is preserved for so   
many years1 in the bodies of men1 the   
inseparable concomitant and sign of     
life2 or what gives the first motion to 
the blood and spirits1 or fits the      
organized body to perform its various   
functions4 ,these things cannot be      
comprehended by us4  ,but if we speak of
 that which is infinite1 we must        
conclude it to be incomprehensible1 not 
only because of the imperfection of our 
present state1 but because1 as has been 

before observed1 of the infinite        
disproportion that there is between the 
object and our finite capacities4 ,in   
this respect we have before shewn that  
the perfections of the divine nature    
cannot be comprehended1 such as the     
immensity1 eternity1 omnipresence1 and  
simplicity of ,god2 yet we are to       
believe that he is thus infinitely      
perfect4 ,and it seems equally          
reasonable to suppose the doctrine of   
the ,trinity to be incomprehensible2 for
 the mutual relation of the ,father1    
,son1 and ,spirit1 to each other1 and   
their distinct personality1 are not the 
result of the divine will2 these are    
personal perfections1 and therefore they
 are necessary1 and their glory         
infinite1 as well as that of his        
essential perfections2 and if we are    
bound to believe one to be              
incomprehensible1 why should we not as  
well suppose the other to be so8 or if  
there are some things which the light of
 nature gives us some ideas of1         

concerning which we are notwithstanding 
bound to confess that we know but little
 of them1 for the reason but now        
mentioned1 why should it be thought     
strange1 that this doctrine1 though the 
subject of pure revelation1 should be   
equally incomprehensible8 ,this         
consequence appears so evident1 that    
some of them1 who deny the doctrine of  
the ,trinity to be incomprehensible1 do 
not stick to deny the perfections of the
 divine nature to be so1 when they      
maintain that there is nothing which is 
the object of faith but what may be     
comprehended by us1 which is to run such
 lengths in the defence of their cause1 
as no one who hath the least degree of  
that humility1 which becomes a finite   
creature1 should venture to do4 ,but    
they proceed yet farther1 as the cause  
they defend seems to require it1 and    
say1 that every doctrine which we cannot
 comprehend is to be rejected by us1 as 
though our understandings were to set   
bounds to the truth and credibility of  

all things4  ,this1 ,i think1 is the    
true state of the question about        
mysteries in ,christianity3 it is not   
whether the word ,mystery is never used 
in scripture to signify what is         
incomprehensible2 for if that could be  
sufficiently proved1 which ,i think hath
 not yet been done1 we would assert the 
doctrine of the ,trinity to be more than
 a mystery1 namely1 an incomprehensible 
doctrine2 and the proof thereof seems   
absolutely necessary1 since the         
,antitrinitarians1 and some of them with
 an air of insult1 conclude this to be  
our last resort1 which we betake        
ourselves to when they have beaten us   
out of all our other strong holds2 and  
therefore we may suppose1 that this     
would be opposed with the greatest      
warmth1 but ,i do not find that it has  
hitherto been overthrown3 and indeed    
when they call it one of our most       
plausible pretences1 as though we laid  
the whole stress of the controversy upon
 it1 it might be expected that it should

 be attacked with stronger arguments    
than it generally is4 ,sometimes they   
bend their force principally against the
 sense of the word ,mystery2 and here   
they talk not only with an air of       
insult1 but profaneness1 when they      
compare it with the abominable mysteries
 of the heathen1 which were not to be   
divulged to any but those of them who   
were in the secret2 and the doctrine of 
the ,trinity1 and that of               
transubstantiation1 are compared        
together1 so that they are to be        
reckoned equally mysterious1 that is1   
according to their application of the   
word1 absurd and nonsensical4 ,and this 
way of arguing has so far prevailed     
among them1 that no one must apply the  
word to any doctrines of religion       
without exposing himself to scorn and   
ridicule2 but this will do no service to
 their cause1 nor prejudice to our      
doctrine1 in the opinion of those who   
enquire into the truth thereof1 with    
that seriousness and impartiality1 that 

the importance of the doctrine calls    
for4#gh  ,the question therefore in     
controversy is2 whether any doctrines of
 religion may be deemed                 
incomprehensible1 that is1 such as we   
can have no adequate ideas of1 because  
of the disproportion between them and   
our finite minds8 and whether the       
incommunicable perfections of ,god are  
not to be reckoned among these          
incomprehensible doctrines8 if they are 
not1 then it will be reasonable to      
demand that every thing relating to them
 be particularly accounted for1 and     
reduced to the standard of a finite     
capacity2 and if this cannot be done1   
but some things must be allowed to be   
incomprehensible in religion1 then it   
will be farther enquired1 ,why should   
the doctrine of the ,trinity be         
rejected1 because we cannot account for 
every thing that relates to the personal
 glory of ,god1 any more than we can for
 those things that respect his essential
 glory8 or may not some things1 that are

 matter of pure revelation1 be supposed 
to exceed our capacities1 and yet we be 
bound to believe them1 as well as other 
things which appear to be true1 and at  
the same time1 incomprehensible1 by the 
light of nature8 ,but1 that we may enter
 a little more particularly into this   
argument1 we shall consider the most    
material objections that are brought    
against it1 and what may be replied to  
them4  ,object4 #a4 ,it is objected that
 we take up with the bare sound of      
words1 without any manner of ideas      
affixed to them4 ,and1  #b4 ,that it is 
unbecoming the divine wisdom and        
goodness to suppose that ,god should    
give a revelation1 and demand our belief
 thereof1 as necessary to salvation1    
when1 at the same time1 it is impossible
 for our understandings to yield an     
assent to it1 since nothing that is     
unintelligible can be the object of     
faith4  #c4 ,that practical religion is 
designed to be promoted in the world    
hereby1 and therefore the will of man   

must follow the dictates of the         
understanding1 and not blindly embrace1 
and be conversant about we know not     
what1 which is to act unbecoming our own
 character as intelligent creatures4    
#d4 ,that the design of divine          
revelation is to improve our            
understandings1 and render our ideas of 
things more clear1 and not to entangle  
and perplex them4  ,answ4 #a4 ,as to our
 using words without ideas1 there is no 
,christian1 that ,i know of1 who thinks 
there is any religion in the sound of   
words1 or that it is sufficient for us  
to take up with the word ,trinity1 or   
,persons in the ,godhead1 without       
determining1 in some measure1 what we   
understand thereby4 ,we will therefore  
allow that faith supposes some ideas of 
the object1 namely1 that we have some   
knowledge of what we believe it to be3  
now our knowledge of things admits of   
various degrees2 some of which we only  
know that they are what they are        
determined1 or proved to be2 if we      

proceed farther in our enquiries1 and   
would know how every thing is to be     
accounted for1 that may justly be       
affirmed concerning them1 here our ideas
 are at a stand2 yet this is not in the 
least inconsistent with the belief of   
what we conclude them to be4 ,for the   
illustrating of which1 let it be        
considered that we believe that ,god's  
eternity is without succession1 his     
immensity without extension2 this we    
know and believe1 because to assert the 
contrary would be to ascribe            
imperfection to him4 ,in this respect1  
our faith extends as far as our ideas3  
but as for what exceeds them1 we are    
bound to believe that there is something
 in ,god1 which exceeds the reach of a  
finite mind1 though we cannot           
comprehend1 or fully describe it1 as    
though it was not infinite4 ,and to     
apply this to the doctrine of the       
,trinity2 it is one thing1 to say that  
the ,father1 ,son1 and ,spirit1 have the
 perfections of the divine nature       

attributed to them in scripture1 as well
 as distinct personal characters and    
properties1 and because the ,godhead is 
but one1 that therefore these three are 
one1 which we firmly believe1 inasmuch  
as it is so clearly revealed in         
scripture2 and another thing1 to say1   
that we can fully describe all the      
properties of their divine personality1 
which1 though we cannot do1 yet we      
believe that they subsist in an         
incomprehensible manner4 ,and while we  
compare them with finite persons1 as we 
do the perfections of ,god with those of
 the creature1 we separate from the one1
 as well as the other1 whatever savours 
of imperfection4  #b4 ,as to the        
unintelligibleness of divine revelation1
 and its being unbecoming the wisdom and
 goodness of ,god to communicate those  
doctrines that are so1 it may be        
replied1 that we must distinguish       
between the rendering a doctrine1 which 
would be otherwise easy to be           
understood1 unintelligible1 by the      

perplexity or difficulty of the style in
 which it is delivered1 and the         
imparting a doctrine which none can     
comprehend2 the former of these cannot  
be charged on any part of scripture1 and
 it is only a revelation1 which is      
liable to such a charge1 that could be  
reckoned inconsistent with the wisdom   
and goodness of ,god4 ,as to the latter1
 the design of revelation is not to make
 us comprehend what is in itself        
incomprehensible3 as1 for instance1 ,god
 did not design1 when he made known his 
perfections in his word1 to give us such
 a perfect discovery of himself1 that we
 might be said hereby to find him out   
unto perfection1 or that we should know 
as much of his glory as is possible to  
be known1 or as much as he knows of it  
himself2 for that is to suppose the     
understanding of man infinitely more    
perfect than it is4 ,whatever is        
received1 is received in proportion to  
the measure of that which contains it2  
the whole ocean can communicate no more 

water than what will fill the vessel1   
that is to contain it4 ,thus the        
infinite perfections of ,god being such 
as cannot be contained in a finite mind1
 we are not to suppose that our         
comprehending them was the design of    
divine revelation2 ,god1 indeed1        
designed hereby that we should apprehend
 some things of himself1 namely1 as much
 as should be subservient to the great  
ends of religion2 but not so much as    
might be inconsistent with our humble   
confession1 that we are but of          
yesterday1 and know1 comparatively1     
nothing1 ,job viii4 #i4  ,and this is   
applicable1 not only to the essential1  
but the personal1 glory of ,god1 ,who   
hath ascended into heaven1 or descended8
 ,who hath gathered the wind in his     
fists8 ,who hath bound the waters in a  
garment8 ,who hath established all the  
ends of the earth8 ,what is his name1   
and what is his ,son's name1 if thou    
canst tell8 ,prov4 xxx4 #d4 ,our        
,saviour1 indeed1 speaks of his having  

ascended into heaven1 ,john iii4 #ac4 as
 having a comprehensive knowledge of all
 divine truths2 but this he affirms     
concerning himself as a divine person1  
exclusively of all creatures4           
,moreover1 when it is said1 in this     
objection1 that ,god makes the          
comprehensive knowledge of these things 
a term of salvation1 this we must take  
leave to deny2 and we need not add any  
more as to that head1 since we have     
already considered what degree of       
knowledge is necessary thereunto1       
namely1 such as is subservient to       
religion1 which teaches us to adore what
 we apprehend to be the object thereof1 
though we cannot comprehend it4  ,as to 
that part of the objection1 that which  
is unintelligible1 is not the object of 
faith1 we must distinguish before we    
grant or deny it2 therefore1 since the  
object of faith is some proposition laid
 down1 it is one thing to say that a    
proposition cannot be assented to1 when 
we have no ideas of what is affirmed or 

denied in it2 and another thing to say  
that it is not believed1 when we have   
ideas of several things contained       
therein1 of which some are affirmed1 and
 others denied2 as1 for instance1 when  
we say ,god is an infinite ,spirit1     
there is a positive idea contained in   
that proposition1 or some things        
affirmed therein1 viz4 that he is able  
to put forth actions suitable to an     
intelligent being2 and there is         
something denied concerning him1 to wit1
 his being corporeal2 and in concluding 
him to be an infinite ,spirit1 we deny  
that they are limits of his             
understanding2 all this we may truly be 
said to understand and believe3 but if  
we proceed farther1 and enquire what it 
is to have such an understanding1 or    
will8 this is not a proposition1 and    
consequently not the object of faith1 as
 well as exceeds the reach of our       
understanding4 ,so as to the doctrine of
 the ,trinity1 when we affirm that there
 is one ,god1 and that the ,father1     

,son1 and ,spirit1 have all the         
perfections of the ,godhead2 and that   
these perfections1 and the personality  
of each of them1 are infinitely greater 
than what can be found in the creature1 
this we yield our assent to2 but if it  
be enquired how far does ,god herein    
exceed all the ideas which we have of   
finite perfections1 or personality1 here
 our understandings are at a loss2 but  
so far as this does not contain the form
 of a proposition1 it cannot1 according 
to our common acceptation of the word1  
be said to be the object of faith4  #c4 
,as to what concerns practical religion1
 the ideas we have of things subservient
 to it are of two sorts2 either such as 
engage our obedience1 or excite our     
adoration and admiration3 as to the     
former of these1 we know what we are    
commanded to do2 what it is to act1 as  
becomes those who are subject to a      
divine person1 though we cannot         
comprehend those infinite perfections1  
which lay us under the highest          

obligation to obey him3 as to the       
latter1 the incomprehensibleness of the 
divine personality1 or perfections1 has 
a direct tendency to excite our         
admiration1 and the infiniteness thereof
 our adoration4 ,and1 since all religion
 may be reduced to these two heads1 the 
subject matter of divine revelation is  
so far from being inconsistent with it1 
that it tends to promote it4 ,things    
commanded are not1 as such1             
incomprehensible1 as was but now        
observed1 and therefore not inconsistent
 with that obedience1 or subjection1    
which is contained in one branch        
thereof2 and things incomprehensible do 
not contain the form of a command1 but  
rather excite our admiration1 and       
therefore they are not only consistent  
with1 but adapted to promote the other  
branch thereof4 ,is it not an instance  
of religion to adore and magnify ,god1  
when we behold the display of his       
perfections in his works8 ,and is he    
less to be adored1 or admired1 because  

we cannot comprehend them8 ,or should we
 not rather look upon them with a       
greater degree of astonishment1 than if 
they did not exceed the reach of a      
finite mind8 ,must a person be able to  
measure the water of the ocean1 or      
number all the particles of matter that 
are contained in the world2 or can our  
ideas be no ways directed to shew forth 
the ,creator's praise8 ,or must we be   
able to account for every thing that is 
a mystery in nature2 or can we not      
improve it to promote some of the ends  
of practical religion1 that we are      
engaged to thereby8 ,may we not say1    
with wonder1 ,o ,lord1 how manifold are 
thy works6 in wisdom hast thou made them
 all2 the earth is full of thy riches8  
,psal4 civ4 #bd4 ,so when we behold the 
personal glory of the ,father1 ,son1 and
 ,spirit1 as displayed in the work of   
redemption1 or as contained in          
scripture1 which is therein said to be  
an instance of his manifold wisdom1     
,eph4 iii4 #aj4 should we not admire it 

the more1 inasmuch as it is1 as the     
apostle calls it1 unsearchable8         
,therefore practical religion1 as       
founded on divine revelation1 is not1 in
 all the branches thereof1 inconsistent 
with the incomprehensibleness of those  
things1 which are1 some in one respect1 
and others in another1 the objects      
thereof4  ,and as to what is farther    
contained in this objection1 concerning 
the will's following the dictates of the
 understanding1 and practical religion's
 being seated therein1 ,i own1 that we  
must first know what we are to do in    
matters of religion1 before we can act2 
thus we must first know what it is to   
worship1 love1 and obey1 the ,father1   
,son1 and ,spirit1 as also that these   
three divine persons are the object of  
worship1 love1 and obedience1 and then  
the will follows the dictates of the    
understanding2 but it is one thing to   
know these things1 and another thing to 
be able to comprehend the divine1       
essential1 or personal glory1 which     

belongs to them1 and is the foundation  
of these acts of religious worship4  #d4
 ,as to what is farther objected1       
concerning the design of divine         
revelation's being to improve our       
understanding2 or1 as it is sometimes   
expressed1 that it is an improvement    
upon the light of nature2 this seems to 
have a double aspect1 or tendency1 viz4 
to advance1 or depreciate1 divine       
revelation4  #a4 ,if we take it in the  
former view1 we freely own1  7#a47 ,that
 it is a very great improvement upon the
 light of nature1 and that1 either as we
 are led hereby1 not only into the      
knowledge of many things which could not
 be discovered by it1 namely1 the       
doctrine of the ,trinity1 the           
incarnation of the ,son of ,god1 and    
that infinite satisfaction which was    
given by him to the justice of ,god1 in 
order to our discharge from             
condemnation1 as also that communion    
which believers have with the ,father1  
,son1 and ,spirit2 and therefore1 since 

the light of nature gives us no         
discovery of these doctrines1 divine    
revelation1 and particularly the gospel1
 makes a very great addition to those   
ideas which we are led into by the light
 of nature4 ,it is true1 they both take 
their rise from ,god1 yet one excels the
 other1 as much as the light of the sun 
does that of a star2 and is1 as the     
,psalmist says1 when comparing them     
together1 perfect1 converting the soul2 
and sure1 making wise the simple1 ,psal4
 xix4 #g4  7#b47 ,that when the same    
truths are discovered by the light of   
nature1 and by divine revelation1 the   
latter tends very much to improve our   
ideas3 thus when the light of nature    
leads us into the knowledge of the being
 and perfections of ,god1 his wisdom1   
power1 and goodness1 as illustrated in  
the works of nature and providence1 we  
have not so clear ideas thereof1 as we  
receive from the additional discoveries 
of them in divine revelation2 and in    
this respect one does not cloud or      

darken those ideas which the other      
gives4 ,but neither of these are        
designed by those who bring this        
objection against the doctrine of the   
,trinity3 therefore we must suppose1    
#b4 ,that they intend hereby to         
depreciate divine revelation1 and then  
the sense thereof is this2 that though  
the light of nature leads mankind into  
such a degree of the knowledge of divine
 truths1 as is sufficient1 in its kind  
to salvation2 so that they1 who are     
destitute of divine revelation1 may     
thereby understand the terms of         
acceptance with ,god1 and the way which1
 if duly improved1 would lead to heaven2
 yet ,god was pleased to give some      
farther discovery of the same things by 
his word1 and1 in this sense1 the one is
 only an improvement upon the other1 as 
it makes the same truths1 which were    
known1 in some degree1 without it more  
clear1 and frees them from those        
corruptions1 or false glosses1 which the
 perverse reasonings of men have set    

upon them2 whereas we1 by insisting on  
inexplicable mysteries1 which we pretend
 to be founded on divine revelation1    
though1 in reality1 they are not        
contained in it1 cloud and darken that  
light1 and so make the way of salvation 
more difficult1 than it would otherwise 
be2 and this certainly tends to         
depreciate divine revelation1 how       
plausible soever the words1 at first    
view1 may appear to be2 for it supposes 
those doctrines but now mentioned1 and  
many others of the like nature1 not     
necessary to salvation2 so that this    
objection takes its first rise from the 
,deists1 however it may be applied1 by  
the ,anti-trinitarians1 in militating   
against the doctrine of the ,trinity4   
,therefore1 since it is principally     
designed to overthrow this doctrine1 by 
supposing it to be unintelligible1 and  
consequently1 according to their method 
of reasoning1 in no sense the object of 
faith1 the only reply which need be made
 to it is1 that the discoveries of the  

glory of ,god1 by the light of nature1  
are1 in some respects1 as               
incomprehensible as the doctrine of the 
,trinity2 which we are not1 for that    
reason1 obliged to disbelieve1 or       
reject2 and therefore there is no       
advantage gained against our argument1  
by supposing that the light of nature   
contains a discovery of truths1 plain1  
easy1 and intelligible by all1 in the   
full extent thereof1 and that the       
doctrine of the ,trinity is otherwise1  
and consequently must not be contained  
in divine revelation1 and1 as such1     
cannot be defended by us4  #d4 ,another 
thing that may be premised1 before we   
enter on the proof of the doctrine of   
the ,trinity1 is1 that it is not        
contrary to reason1 though it be above  
it2 neither are our reasoning powers1   
when directed by scripture-revelation1  
altogether useless1 in order to our     
attaining such a degree of the knowledge
 thereof1 as is necessary1 and ought to 
be endeavoured after4 ,when a doctrine  

may be said to be above reason1 has been
 already considered1 as well as that the
 doctrine of the ,trinity is so2 and now
 we are obliged to obviate an objection1
 which is the most popular one of any   
that is brought against it1 namely1 that
 it is an absurd and irrational         
doctrine2 and that they who maintain it 
must first lay aside their reason1      
before they can be induced to believe   
it1 for it is as much as to say that    
three are equal to one2 which is        
contrary to the common sense of all     
mankind1 or else1 that we maintain a    
plurality of gods1 which is contrary to 
the very first principles of the light  
of nature4 ,and here we are reflected   
on1 as though we demanded that our      
antagonists should lay aside their      
reason1 before we argue with them1 and  
then it is easy to determine on which   
side the argument will turn2 therefore1 
to make way for what might be said in   
defence of the doctrine of the ,trinity1
 we shall1 under this head1 consider1   

7#a47 ,when a doctrine may be said to be
 contrary to reason4  7#b47 ,shew that  
the doctrine of the ,trinity is not so4 
7#c47 ,what is the use of reason1 in    
establishing it1 or any other doctrines1
 which are the subject of pure          
revelation4  7#a47 ,when we may         
conclude1 that a doctrine is contrary to
 reason4 ,this it may be said to be1    
when it is contrary to the methods of   
reasoning made use of by particular     
persons1 which are not always just1 and 
therefore it does not follow1 from      
hence1 that it is false or absurd1      
because our reasoning about it is so1   
but rather the contrary2 so that when   
they1 on the other side of the question1
 tell us1 with an air of boasting1 that 
if the doctrine we are maintaining could
 have been accounted for1 how comes it  
to pass that so many men of sense and   
learning1 as are to be found among the  
,anti-trinitarians1 have not been able  
to do it8 ,but this is nothing to our   
present argument2 therefore we suppose  

that a doctrine is contrary to reason1  
when it contradicts some of the first   
principles1 which the mind of man cannot
 but yield its assent to1 as soon as    
ever it takes in the sense of the words 
which contain them1 without demanding   
any proof thereof2 as that the whole is 
greater than the part2 and that a thing 
can be1 and not be1 at the same time2 or
 that two is more than one1 c4 or when  
we can prove a thing to be true to a    
demonstration1 and yet suppose that a   
contradictory proposition1 in which the 
words are taken in the same sense1 may  
be equally true4#hj  7#b47 ,that the    
doctrine of the ,trinity is not contrary
 to reason4 ,this appears1 inasmuch as  
we do not say that the three ,persons in
 the ,godhead are one ,person1 or that  
the one divine ,being is three divine   
,beings4  ,object4 ,but it is objected1 
that it is contrary to reason1 which    
establishes and proves the unity of the 
,godhead1 to say that the divine nature 
may be predicated of more than one1     

inasmuch as that infers a plurality of  
,gods1 and every distinct ,person must  
be concluded to be a distinct ,god2     
therefore the ,trinitarian doctrine is  
down-right ,tritheism1 and consequently 
contrary to reason2 and here those words
 of the ,athanasian ,creed are produced1
 as an instance hereof1 namely1 that the
 ,father is ,god1 the ,son is ,god1 and 
the ,holy ,ghost is ,god1 yet there are 
not three ,gods1 but one ,god2 so1 that 
the ,father is ,eternal1 the ,son is    
,eternal1 and the ,holy ,ghost ,eternal1
 yet there are not three ,eternals1 but 
one ,eternal2 and the ,father ,almighty1
 the ,son ,almighty1 and the ,holy      
,ghost ,almighty1 yet are there not     
three ,almighties1 but one ,almighty4   
,this they suppose1 though without      
ground1 to be a plain contradiction4    
,answ4 ,but to this it may be replied1  
that when we say the ,father1 ,son1 and 
,holy ,ghost1 are ,god1 we do not say   
they are distinct ,gods1 for the        
distinction between them respects their 

personality1 not their deity3 and when  
we assert that they are all ,eternal1 or
 ,almighty1 we do not suppose that their
 duration1 or power1 are distinct2 and  
the same may be said of all other divine
 perfections that are attributed to     
them1 the perfections are the same in   
all of them1 though the persons are     
distinct4 ,so that the charge of        
,tritheism lies in a narrow compass3    
they say that there is one divine       
,being1 so do we2 and to this they add1 
that this divine ,being is a divine     
person1 since existence and personality 
are the same2 therefore1 if there are   
more divine ,persons1 there must be more
 ,gods2 this consequence they maintain1 
but we deny4 ,but how do they prove it8 
,the proof amounts to no more than this2
 that there is no instance in finite    
things1 when we speak of angels or men1 
to whom alone personality can be        
applied1 of any distinct persons1 but at
 the same time their beings are         
distinct2 therefore it must be so with  

respect to the divine persons4 ,this we 
are bound to deny1 since our ideas of   
personality and existence are not the   
same2 therefore1 how inseparable soever 
they may be in what respects creatures1 
we may have distinct ideas of them1 when
 we speak of the divine being and       
personality of the ,father1 ,son1 and   
,spirit4 ,here it will1 doubtless1 be   
demanded1 that we determine wherein the 
difference consists2 or1 in particular1 
since every distinct finite person is a 
distinct being1 what there is in the    
divine personality1 that should exclude 
the ,father1 ,son1 and ,spirit1 from    
being distinct beings1 because distinct 
persons2 so that when we conclude that  
there is a small or faint resemblance   
between divine and human personality1 we
 must be able to comprehend1 and fully  
to describe1 that infinite disproportion
 that is between them1 or else must be  
charged with using words without any    
manner of ideas annexed to them1 and so 
our cause must fall to the ground4 ,if1 

indeed1 the divine personality were     
finite1 like that of the creature1 then 
it might be required that a finite mind 
should account for it3 but since it is  
not so1 but incomprehensible1 we are    
bound to believe what we cannot         
comprehend4  ,but have we no ideas at   
all of the distinct personality of the  
,father1 ,son1 and ,spirit8 ,to this we 
may answer2 that we have finite ideas   
thereof1 and more than these we have not
 of any of the divine perfections4 ,we  
are taught1 by scripture1 to say that   
they are distinct persons2 and we know  
what those personal characters1 or      
properties1 from whence our ideas take  
their rise1 signify1 when applied to    
men2 but1 at the same time1 abstract1 in
 our thoughts1 every thing from them    
that argues imperfection2 or1 in short1 
our conceptions hereof proceed in the   
same way1 as when we think of any of the
 perfections of the divine nature3      
these1 as well as the divine            
personality1 are equally                

incomprehensible2 yet1 while we say they
 are infinitely more than can be in any 
creature1 we1 notwithstanding1 retain   
such ideas of them1 as tend to answer   
those ends of religion1 which suppose   
that we apprehend something of them that
 is conducive hereunto4 ,we are now to  
consider1  7#c47 ,the use of reason in  
proving or defending the doctrine of the
 ,trinity1 or any other doctrines of    
pure revelation4 ,they could not1       
indeed1 have been at first discovered by
 reason1 nor can every thing that is    
revealed be comprehended by it1 yet our 
reason is not to be laid aside as       
useless2 therefore some call it a       
servant to faith4 ,thus revelation      
discovers what doctrines we are to      
believe1 demands our assent to them1 and
 reason offers a convincing proof that  
we are under an indispensable obligation
 to give it3 it proves the doctrine to  
be true1 and such as is worthy of ,god1 
as it is derived from him1 the fountain 
of truth and wisdom2 and this office of 

reason1 or the subserviency thereof to  
our faith1 is certainly necessary1 since
 what is false cannot be the object of  
faith in general2 and nothing unworthy  
of ,god can be the matter of divine     
revelation1 nor consequently the object 
of a divine faith4  ,now1 in order to   
reason's judging of the truth of things1
 it first considers the sense of words2 
what ideas are designed to be conveyed  
thereby1 and whether they are contrary  
to the common sense of mankind2 and if  
it appears that they are not1 it        
proceeds to enquire into those evidences
 that may give conviction1 and enforce  
our belief thereof2 and leads us into   
the nature of the truths revealed1      
receives them as instamped with the     
authority of ,god1 and considers them as
 agreeable to his perfections1 and      
farther leads us into his design of     
revealing them1 and what we are to infer
 from them2 and in doing this it        
connects things together1 observes the  
dependence of one thing on another1 what

 is the importance thereof1 and how they
 are to be improved to answer the best  
purposes4  ,now this may be applied     
particularly to the doctrine of the     
,trinity2 for it contains in it no      
absurdity contradictory to reason1 as   
has been already proved2 and the        
evidences on which our faith herein is  
founded will be farther considered1 when
 we prove it to be a scripture doctrine1
 by the express words thereof1 agreeable
 to the mind of the ,holy ,ghost1 or by 
just consequences deduced from it2 by   
which it will farther appear1 that it is
 necessary for us to use our reason in  
stating those doctrines1 which are      
neither founded on1 nor can be          
comprehended by it4  #e4 ,we are now to 
consider from whence the doctrine of the
 ,trinity is to be deduced1 or where we 
are to search for that knowledge        
thereof1 which we are to acquiesce in4  
,and here it must be observed1 that it  
cannot be learnt from the light of      
nature1 for then we should certainly be 

able to behold some traces or footsteps 
thereof in the works of creation and    
providence1 that so this might be       
understood thereby1 as well as the      
power1 wisdom1 and goodness of ,god1 as 
the cause is known by its effect2 but we
 should never have known that ,god made 
all things by his essential word1       
without whom nothing was made1 that was 
made1 as the evangelist speaks1 ,john i4
 #c4 had we not received this doctrine  
from divine revelation3 likewise1 we    
should never have known that the        
,spirit1 as a distinct ,person from the 
,father1 created all things1 and        
performed several other works1 by which 
his personal glory is demonstrated1 had 
we not received the account which we    
have thereof from scripture4 ,the light 
of nature could discover to us1 indeed1 
that ,god1 who is a ,spirit1 or         
incorporeal ,being1 has produced many   
effects worthy of himself2 but we could 
not have known hereby1 that the word    
,spirit signifies a distinct person1    

which we are beholden to divine         
revelation for4  ,and as for the work of
 our redemption1 in which1 more than in 
all the other divine works1 the personal
 glory of the ,father1 ,son1 and        
,spirit1 is demonstrated1 we could have 
known as little of that by the light of 
nature1 as we do the persons to whom it 
is attributed4 ,but ,i am sensible that 
it will be objected to this1  ,object4  
#a4 ,that our first parents knew the    
doctrine of the ,trinity as soon as they
 were created1 otherwise they could not 
have given that distinct glory to the   
,persons in the ,godhead that is due to 
them2 and if we are required1 not only  
to worship the divine ,being1 but to    
worship the ,father1 ,son1 and ,spirit2 
and1 if this worship is due from us1 as 
creatures1 and not merely as fallen and 
redeemed2 then it will follow from      
hence1 that our first parents must know 
the doctrine of the ,trinity3 but this  
they did not know by divine revelation2 
therefore they knew it by the light of  

nature4  ,answ4 ,we will allow every    
thing contained in this objection1      
excepting that they did not know this by
 divine revelation2 for certainly they  
had some ideas conveyed this way at     
first1 otherwise they could not have    
known any thing that related to         
instituted worship1 which1 it is plain1 
they did4 ,and shall it be reckoned any 
absurdity to suppose that they received 
this doctrine of the ,trinity by divine 
revelation1 though we have no particular
 account thereof1 in that short history 
which ,moses gives us of things relating
 to the state of innocency8 ,it is      
therefore sufficient to our purpose1 to 
suppose that it was agreeable to the    
wisdom and goodness of ,god to make     
known to them this important truth1 and 
consequently that he did so1 though not 
by the light of nature4  ,object4 #b4   
,it is farther objected1 that the       
heathen knew something of the doctrine  
of the ,trinity1 as appears by their    
writings1 though they were unacquainted 

with scripture4 ,to support this        
objection1 they refer to several        
mystical expressions in the works of    
,plato1 which seem to look that way1    
when he speaks of three principles2 one 
whereof he calls goodness1 or a being   
that is good2 the second he calls his   
word1 or reason2 and the third a spirit1
 which diffuses its influence throughout
 the whole system of beings1 and calls  
him sometimes the soul of the world2 and
 in other places1 he speaks of them as  
having a distinct sovereignty4#ha ,and  
he supposes the first of these to be the
 cause of things most great and         
excellent2 the second1 the cause of     
things of an inferior nature2 the third1
 of things yet more inferior2 and some  
of his followers plainly call them three
 hypostases2 and sometimes1 ,father1    
,word1 and ,spirit4  ,answ4 ,the account
 which ,plato and his followers seem to 
have given of the doctrine of the       
,trinity does not appear to have been   
taken from the light of nature1 and     

therefore this makes nothing to the     
objection4 ,we have sufficient ground to
 conclude that ,plato travelled into    
,egypt1 with a design to make           
improvements in knowledge2 and some     
suppose1 that there he saw some         
translation of a part of the ,bible into
 ,greek1#hb more ancient than that which
 is commonly attributed to the ,,lxx1   
which was not compiled till an hundred  
years after his time4 ,but whether he   
did this1 or no1 is uncertain3 it is    
true1 he used several expressions1 which
 are contained in the books of ,moses1  
and took the plan of his laws from      
thence2 upon which account some have    
called him a second ,moses1 speaking    
,greek3 but whether he received his     
notions more immediately from scripture1
 or by conversation with the ,jews1 of  
whom a great number settled in ,egypt1  
after ,gedaliah's death1 is not         
material2 however1 it is sufficiently   
evident1 that he had not all of them1 in
 a way of reasoning1 from the light of  

nature3 and as for his followers1 such  
as ,plotinus1 ,proclus1 ,porphyry1 and  
others1 they lived in those ages1 when  
,christianity prevailed in the world1   
though none of them pretended to be     
,christians2 and one of them was the    
most inveterate enemy to ,christianity  
that lived2 yet these might well be     
supposed to make their master ,plato    
speak several things1 as to this        
mystery1 which he never intended1 were  
it only to persuade the ,christians to  
believe that he was not inferior to     
,moses1 or any other recorded in        
scripture4  ,thus having answered the   
objections1 we shall take leave to      
consider how unwarily some divines1 who 
have defended the doctrine of the       
,trinity1 have not only asserted that   
,plato understood a great a deal of it1 
but have made use of this1 as an answer 
to the ,anti-trinitarian objection      
before mentioned1 that the doctrine of  
the ,trinity is unintelligible2 and they
 have taken a great deal of pleasure in 

accounting for this doctrine in such a  
way as these philosophers have done3#hc 
and some of them have taken notice of a 
few dark hints1 which they have met with
 in some of the poetical fictions1 and  
from thence concluded that there was    
something of the ,trinity known1 even by
 the ,heathen in general3 thus when the 
word three is mentioned by them1 and    
applied to some things1 which they      
relate concerning their gods2 or when   
they speak of gods delighting in an     
unequal number1 or in the number three4 
,but this is too gross to be            
particularly mentioned1 lest it should  
give us an unbecoming idea of this      
divine mystery1 or of those who have    
better arguments than these to defend   
it4  ,the reflection which ,i would make
 on this is1 that what they call an     
advantage to the doctrine has been      
certainly very detrimental to it2 and1  
as a late learned divine observes1 has  
tended only to pervert the simplicity of
 the ,christian faith with mixtures of  

philosophy and vain deceit4#hd ,and ,i  
doubt not but the apostle had an eye to 
this1 among other corruptions1 which    
they who were attached to the ,heathen  
philosophy began to bring into their    
scheme of divinity1 and would           
notoriously do in after ages1 which he  
purposely fences against1 when he says1 
,beware1 lest any man spoil you1 through
 philosophy and vain deceit1 after the  
tradition of men1 after the rudiments of
 the world1 and not after ,christ1 ,col4
 ii4 #h4 ,and this corruption so much   
prevailed1 that it has given occasion to
 some of the ,anti-trinitarians1 to     
reproach the doctrine of the ,trinity1  
as though it were a system of           
,platonism4 ,and it is their being too  
fond of using ,plato's words1 in        
explaining the doctrine of the ,trinity1
 that has given occasion to some of the 
fathers to be suspected1 as though they 
were less favourable to the scripture   
account thereof2 by which means the     
adversaries have laid claim to them as  

their own2 and produced some unwary     
expressions out of ,justin ,martyr1 and 
others1 supposing them to be in the     
,arian scheme1 who1 in other parts of   
their writings1 appear to be remote from
 it4#he  ,and this leads us to consider 
the method which some divines have      
taken1 in using similitudes to explain  
the doctrine of the ,trinity1 which1 at 
best1 tend only to illustrate1 and not  
to prove a doctrine3 and we can hardly  
make use of this method of illustrating 
this doctrine1 without conveying some   
ideas1 which are unbecoming1 if not     
subversive thereof2 and while we pretend
 to explain that which is in itself     
inexplicable1 we do no service to the   
truth4  ,i shall here give a short      
specimen of this matter1 that hereby we 
may see how some have unwarily weakened 
the cause which they have been          
maintaining4 ,some have taken a         
similitude from three of the divine     
perfections1 viz4 that there are three  
invisibles of ,god2 power1 wisdom1 and  

goodness4 ,power creates1 wisdom        
governs1 and goodness conserves2 and so 
they have gone on to explain this       
doctrine1 till they had almost given it 
into the hands of the ,sabellians3 and1 
indeed1 they might have instanced in    
more divine perfections than three1 had 
it been to their purpose4  ,again1      
others have explained this doctrine by  
some resemblance which they apprehend to
 be of it in man2 and so they speak of  
the soul as a principle of a threefold  
life1 rational1 sensitive1 and          
vegetative4 ,others speak of three      
causes concurring to produce the same   
effect2 such as the efficient1          
constitutive and final cause4 ,others   
have taken their similitude from        
inanimate things2 as the sun1 in which  
there is light1 heat1 and motion1 which 
are inseparably connected together1 and 
tend to produce the same effects4       
,moreover1 others illustrate it by a    
similitude1 taken from a fountain1 in   
which there is the spring in the bowels 

of the earth1 the water bubbling out of 
the earth1 and the stream diffusing     
itself in a perpetual course1 receiving 
all it communicates from the fountain4  
,i am sorry there is occasion to caution
 any against this method of explaining  
the doctrine of the ,trinity4 ,but      
these1 and many other similitudes of the
 like nature1 we find in the writings of
 some1 who consider not what a handle   
they give to the common enemy4 ,there   
are1 indeed1 in most of them1 three     
things1 which are said1 in different    
respects1 to be one2 but we may observe1
 that all these similitudes1 and others 
of the like nature1 brought to          
illustrate this doctrine1 lead us to    
think of the whole divided into those   
parts1 of which they consist1 whereof   
they take notice of the number three2 or
 they speak of three properties of the  
same thing2 and if their wit and fancy  
saw it needful to speak of more than    
three1 the same method of illustrating  
would serve their purpose1 as much as it

 does the end for which they bring it4  
,therefore ,i would conclude this head1 
by using the words of ,god to ,job1 ,who
 is this that darkeneth counsel by words
 without knowledge8 ,job xxxviii4 #b4   
,who are these1 that1 by pretending to  
illustrate the doctrine of the ,trinity 
by similitudes1 do that1 which1 though  
very foreign to their design1 tends to  
pervert it8  #f4 ,we shall now consider 
what general rules may be observed for  
our understanding those scriptures1 on  
which our faith1 with respect to the    
doctrine of the ,trinity1 is founded2   
and since it is a doctrine of pure      
revelation1 as has been before observed1
 we must keep close to scripture1 even  
to the words thereof1 where they are    
express and distinct1 as to this matter2
 and to consequences deduced from it1 so
 far as they are just1 and self-evident2
 and1 at the same time1 while we are    
sensible that we cannot comprehend this 
mystery1 we must take care that we      
pretend not to be wise above what is    

revealed4 ,now there are some rules1    
which may be of use to us1 in our       
enquiries into the sense of scripture   
concerning this doctrine2 as1  7#a47 ,we
 must not suppose that the words of     
scripture1 relating thereunto1 are to be
 taken in a sense1 which can be known by
 none but criticks1 as though it were   
designed only for them to understand2 or
 that the unlearned part of the world   
should be left in the dark1 or led      
astray1 as to several things contained  
in this important doctrine4 ,thus we are
 not to suppose that we are at a loss as
 to the proper sense of the word ,god2  
or could hardly know how to direct our  
faith and worship1 founded thereon1     
without the help of criticism2 or1 for  
want of being acquainted with some      
distinctions1 concerning one that may be
 called ,god by nature1 or the supreme  
,god1 and others who may be called gods 
by office1 or subordinate gods1 we      
should be led to ascribe divine honour  
where it is not due2 or else we must be 

able to distinguish also concerning     
worship1 and1 instead of honouring the  
,son as we honour the ,father1 must give
 him an inferior kind of divine worship1
 short of what is due to the ,father4   
,this we have no scripture warrant for2 
neither are we led by the scriptures to 
have any notion of a middle being       
between ,god and the creature1 or one   
that is not properly ,god1 so as the    
,father is1 and yet more than a         
creature1 as though there were a medium 
between finite and infinite2 neither are
 we led1 by scripture1 to conceive of   
any being1 that has an eternal duration1
 whose eternity is supposed to be before
 time1 and yet not the same with the    
eternal duration of the ,father4 ,these 
things we shall have occasion to mention
 in their proper place1 and therefore   
need make no farther use of them at     
present1 but only to observe1 from      
hence1 how intelligible the scripture   
would be in what relates to this        
doctrine1 if the words thereof had not a

 plain and determinate sense2 but we    
must make use of these methods of       
reasoning1 if we would arrive to the    
meaning thereof4  7#b47 ,if some divine 
perfections are attributed in scripture 
to the ,son and ,spirit1 all the        
perfections of the divine nature1 may1  
by a just consequence from thence1 be   
proved to belong to them1 by reason of  
the simplicity and unity thereof3       
therefore1 if we can prove1 from        
scripture1 that they have some          
perfections ascribed to them1 which1 ,i 
hope1 it will not be a difficult matter 
to do1 we are not to suppose that our   
argument is defective1 or that the      
doctrine of the ,trinity is not         
sufficiently maintained1 if we cannot   
produce a scripture to prove every      
perfection of the divine nature to be   
ascribed to them4  7#c47 ,when any thing
 is mentioned in scripture1 concerning  
our ,saviour1 or the ,holy ,spirit1     
which argues an inferiority to the      
,father1 this is to be understood       

consistently with other scriptures1     
which speak of their having the same    
divine nature2 since scripture does not1
 in the least1 contradict itself2 and   
how this may be done1 will be farther   
considered under a following head4      
7#d47 ,if we have sufficient arguments  
to convince us of the truth of this     
doctrine1 our faith ought not to be     
shaken1 though we cannot fully          
understand the sense of some scriptures1
 which are brought to support the       
contrary2 not that we are to suppose    
that the scripture gives countenance to 
two opposite doctrines3 but a person may
 be fully satisfied concerning the sense
 of those scriptures that contain the   
doctrine of the ,trinity1 and yet not be
 supposed perfectly to understand the   
meaning of every word or phrase used in 
scripture1 or of some particular texts1 
which are sometimes brought to support  
the contrary doctrine2 so that          
objections may be brought1 which he is  
not able readily to reply to4 ,shall he 

therefore deny the truth1 because he    
cannot remove all the difficulties that 
seem to lie in the way of it8 ,that     
would be to part with it at too easy a  
rate1 which1 when he has done1 he will  
find greater difficulties attending the 
contrary scheme of doctrine4 ,do they   
object1 that we believe things contrary 
to reason1 because we assert the        
incomprehensibleness of divine          
mysteries8 or that we are ,tritheists1  
because we believe that there are three 
,persons in the ,godhead1 and cannot    
exactly determine the difference between
 divine and human personality8 ,we      
could1 on the other hand1 point at some 
difficulties1 that they cannot easily   
surmount4 ,what shall we think of the   
head of giving divine worship to our    
,saviour1 when1 at the same time1 they  
deny him to have those perfections1 that
 denominate him ,god in the same sense  
as the ,father is so called8 ,the       
,socinians found it very difficult1 when
 the matter was disputed among          

themselves1 to reconcile their practice 
with their sentiments1 when they        
worshipped him1 whose ,deity they       
denied4 ,and the ,arians will find that 
this objection equally affects their    
scheme2 and it will be no less difficult
 for them to reconcile ,christ's        
character1 as ,redeemer1 ,governor of   
the world1 ,judge of quick and dead1    
with their low ideas of him1 when       
denying his proper ,deity4 ,these things
 we only mention occasionally at        
present1 that it may not be thought that
 the doctrine of the ,trinity is exposed
 to greater difficulties than the       
contrary doctrine1 to the end that they 
who are not furnished with all those    
qualifications1 which are necessary for 
its defence1 may not reckon those       
arguments1 by which they have been      
convinced of the truth thereof1 less    
valid1 because they are not able1 at    
present1 to answer all the objections   
that may be brought against them4  7#e47
 ,the weight of several arguments1 taken

 from scripture1 to prove this doctrine1
 is to be considered1 as well as the    
arguments themselves2 we do not pretend 
that every one of them is equally       
conclusive2 there are some1 which are   
oftentimes brought to support it1 which 
we can lay no great stress upon1 and    
therefore shall omit to mention them1   
among other arguments brought to that   
purpose1 lest we should give occasion to
 the adversary to insult1 or conclude   
that we take any thing for an argument  
that has been brought as such to prove  
this doctrine4 ,therefore we will not   
pretend to prove1 or peremptorily to    
determine1 that the doctrine of the     
,trinity is contained in those words of 
the ,psalmist1 ,psal4 xxxiii4 #f4 ,by   
the word of the ,lord were the heavens  
made1 and all the ,hosts of them by the 
breath of his mouth4 ,nor will we       
pretend to prove this doctrine from the 
threefold repetition of the word        
,jehovah1 in the form of benediction to 
be used by the high priest1 ,numb4 vi4  

#bd1 #be1 #bf4 ,the ,lord bless thee1   
and keep thee2 the ,lord make his face  
to shine upon thee1 and be gracious unto
 thee2 the ,lord lift up his countenance
 upon thee1 and give thee peace4 ,nor do
 we lay any stress on the three-fold    
repetition of the word ,holy1 holy1     
holy1 is the ,lord of ,hosts1 ,isa4 vi4 
#c4 though we shall shew1 in its proper 
place1 that there are several things in 
this chapter1 which prove this doctrine4
 ,however1 if at any time1 together with
 arguments that are more conclusive1 we 
bring some that are less so2 this use   
may be made of it1 to shew how the      
scripture way of speaking is consistent 
therewith in those places that do not so
 directly prove it4 ,this we thought    
proper to mention1 because it is a very 
common thing for those1 who cannot      
answer the most weighty arguments that  
are brought to support a doctrine1 to   
bend their greatest force against those 
which have the least strength2 and then 
to triumph1 as though they had gained   

the victory1 when they have only done it
 in what respects that which is less    
material4  ,,ii4 ,we shall now consider 
in what sense we are to understand the  
words ,trinity and ,persons in the      
,godhead2 and in what respect the       
,father1 ,son1 and ,holy ,ghost1 are    
said to be one4 ,it is true1 the word   
,trinity is not to be found in          
scripture1 but what we understand by it 
is plainly contained therein2 therefore 
we use the word1 as agreeable thereunto3
 thus we read of the three that bear    
record in heaven1 viz4 the ,father1 the 
,word1 and the ,holy ,ghost1 and that   
these three are one1 #a ,john v4 #g4    
,these three here mentioned are         
,persons1 because they are described by 
personal characters2 and we shall take  
occasion elsewhere1 when we prove the   
,deity of the ,son and ,spirit1 to      
consider their being one1 that is1      
having the same divine nature1 which we 
shall therefore wave at present1 being  
only considering the sense of words     

commonly used by us in treating of this 
doctrine4 ,all contending parties1      
however they have explained the word    
,trinity1 according to their different  
ways of thinking1 have notwithstanding1 
in compliance with custom1 used the     
word1 and so far explained it1 as that  
we might understand that they intend    
hereby three1 who are1 in some respect  
one1 though some have not cared to use  
the word ,person2 or if they have1 it is
 without the most known and proper idea 
contained in it4 ,thus the ,sabellians1 
whenever they use the word1 intend      
nothing by it1 but three relations1     
which may be attributed to the same     
,person2 as when the same ,person may be
 called a father1 a son1 and a brother1 
in different respects2 or as when he    
that1 at one time1 sustains the person  
of a judge1 may1 at another time1       
sustain that of an advocate3 this is    
what some call a ,trinity of names2 and 
they might as well have declined to use 
the words altogether1 as to explain them

 in this sense4  ,again1 the ,arians use
 the word ,person2 but these have run   
into another extreme1 inasmuch as that1 
whilst they avoid ,sabellianism1 they   
would lay themselves open to the charge 
of ,tritheism1 did they not deny the    
proper ,deity of the ,son and ,spirit2  
for they suppose that every distinct    
,person is a distinct being1 agreeable  
to the sense of personality1 when       
applied to men2 but this1 as has been   
before considered1 is to be abstracted  
from the idea of personality1 when      
applied to the ,persons in the ,godhead4
 ,these also understand the oneness of  
these divine ,persons1 in a sense       
agreeable to their own scheme1 and      
different from ours1 and therefore they 
speak of them as one in will1 consent1  
or design1 in which respect ,god and the
 creature may be said to be one3        
accordingly ,arius1 and his adherents1  
in the council at ,nice1 refused to     
allow that the divine persons were      
consubstantial1 and1 with a great many  

evasions and subterfuges1 attempted to  
conceal their sentiments3 all that they 
could be brought to own was1 that the   
,son was 1 or 1 which amounts to no more
 than this1 that whatever likeness there
 may be1 in some respects1 yet he has   
not the same proper divine nature with  
the ,father and ,holy ,ghost4  ,which   
leads us to consider the sense in which 
it is generally used by those who defend
 what we think to be the                
scripture-doctrine of the ,trinity4     
,there are some1 it is true1 both among 
ancient and modern writers1 that attempt
 to explain what they mean by the word  
,person1 who are so unhappy as to leave 
the sense thereof more dark than they   
found it1 when they have given a        
definition thereof1 agreeable to what is
 used by metaphysicians and schoolmen1  
to this effect1 that it is a suppositum1
 endowed with reason2 or that it is one 
entire1 individual1 incommunicable1     
rational subsistence3 and when they     
define ,personality1 some tell us1 that 

it is a positive mode of a being        
terminating and compleating its         
substantial nature1 and giving          
incommunicability to it1 which words    
need to be explained more than the thing
 defined thereby4 ,and here ,i cannot   
but take notice of that warm debate     
which there was between the ,greek and  
,latin church about the words           
,hypostasis and ,persona2 the ,latin1   
concluding that the word ,hypostasis    
signified substance or essence1 thought1
 that to assert that there were three   
divine ,hypostases1 was to say that     
there were three ,gods3 ,on the other   
hand1 the ,greek church thought that the
 word ,person did not sufficiently guard
 against the ,sabellian notion of the   
same individual being sustaining three  
relations2 whereupon each part of the   
church was ready to brand the other with
 heresy1 till by a free and mutual      
conference1 in a synod at ,alexandria1  
,a4 ,d4 #cfb4 they made it appear1 that 
it was but a mere contention about the  

grammatical sense of a word2 and then it
 was allowed1 by men of temper on both  
sides1 that either of the two words     
might be indifferently used4#hf ,but    
what signifies the use of them1 when    
perplexed with the scholastic           
explications thereof8 ,this has given   
occasion to some1 whose sentiments have 
been very remote as to the doctrine of  
the ,trinity1 to express themselves with
 some dislike2 on the one hand1 the     
,socinians1 and some among the          
,remonstrants1 who made very great      
advances toward their scheme1 viz4      
,curcellus1 ,episcopius1 and others1#hg 
have complained of clouding this        
doctrine with hard words2 and the       
complaint is not altogether groundless1 
though it may be their design herein was
 to substitute such words in the room of
 them1 as would make the remedy worse   
than the disease4 ,on the other hand1   
some1 who have embraced the doctrine of 
the ,trinity1 would not have liked its  
advocates the worse1 had they chose to  

have defended it in a more plain        
intelligible manner4 ,thus ,calvin      
himself wishes1 that some words1 which  
are so warmly opposed and defended on   
each side1 were altogether laid aside1  
and buried1 provided that such might be 
retained as express our faith in the    
doctrine of the ,father1 ,son1 and      
,spirit1 being the one ,god1 but        
distinguished by their personal         
properties4#hh ,and this is that plain  
sense of the word1 which ,i shall make  
use of1 in what ,i shall farther attempt
 to lay down in the defence thereof4    
,and accordingly1  #a4 ,we never call   
any thing a person that is not endowed  
with understanding and will2 and        
therefore the most glorious inanimate   
creatures1 either in heaven or earth1   
whatever excellencies they have1 or how 
useful soever they are to the world1    
they are not persons4 ,thus1 when the   
sun is described as though it were a    
person1 and is compared to a bridegroom 
coming out of his chamber1 and rejoicing

 as a strong man to run a race1 ,psal4  
xix4 #e4 the words are never understood 
in any other but a metaphorical sense2  
so ,behemoth and the ,leviathan1        
mentioned in ,job1 being no other than  
brute creatures1 are described with     
personal characters1 in the same        
figurative way of speaking2 therefore we
 suppose a person to have an            
understanding and will4  #b4 ,whenever  
,i1 thou1 or he1 are applied to such a  
subject1 they always connote a person2  
,i1 a person speaking2 thou1 a person   
spoken to2 and he1 or him1 a person     
spoken of2 and when such modes of       
speaking are sometimes applied to things
 that are destitute of reason1 or to any
 moral virtues or principles of acting1 
which1 from the nature of the thing1    
cannot be denominated persons1 such     
expressions are very easily understood  
in a figurative sense1 which may without
 any difficulty be distinguished from   
the proper one1 whereby those who are so
 described are denominated persons4     

,there are some characters which always 
denote persons1 and some works performed
 which are properly personal1 which can 
be performed by none but persons4 ,thus 
the character of a father1 or a son2 so 
a ,creator1 a ,redeemer1 a benefactor1 a
 ,mediator1 an advocate1 a surety1 a    
judge1 a lord1 a law-giver1 and many    
others of the like nature1 are all of   
them personal characters4 ,so that      
whoever acts with design1 and has       
such-like characters attributed to him1 
according to the proper acceptation of  
the word1 him we call a person2 and     
these characters we shall endeavour to  
apply to the ,persons in the ,godhead1  
to prove their distinct personality4    
,but since we are at present only       
considering the acceptation of words1 we
 shall briefly observe the difference   
between a divine and a human person1    
when some personal properties1          
characters1 or works1 are attributed to 
each of them4 ,and1  7#a47 ,human       
persons are separated one from the      

other3 thus1 for instance1 ,peter1      
,james1 and ,john1 were three persons1  
but they were separated one from the    
other2 whereas the ,persons in the      
,godhead1 however distinguished by their
 characters and properties1 are never   
separated1 as having the same divine    
essence or nature4 ,as for human        
persons1 one of them might have had a   
being and personality1 had the other    
never existed1 because it exists by the 
will of ,god2 but the divine persons    
have a necessary existence and          
personality1 as being1 in all respects1 
independent1 so that as they could not  
but be ,god1 they could not but be      
divine ,persons2 the personality of the 
,son and ,spirit are equally independent
 with that of the ,father1 and as much  
independent as their being and divine   
perfections4  7#b47 ,human persons have 
only the same kind of nature1 which is  
generally called a common specific      
nature1 but not the same individual     
nature with another person2 so that     

though every man has a nature like that 
of the rest of mankind1 yet the human   
nature1 as attributed to one person1 is 
not the same individual human nature    
that is attributed to another1 for then 
the power and understanding1 or the     
ideas that there are in one man1 would  
be the same individual power and ideas1 
that are in another1 which they are not4
 ,whereas1 when we speak of the ,persons
 in the ,godhead1 as having the divine  
nature and perfections1 we say that this
 nature is the same individual nature in
 all of them1 though the persons are    
distinct1 otherwise the ,father1 ,son1  
and ,holy ,ghost1 could not be said to  
be truly and properly ,god1 and to have 
the same understanding1 will1 and other 
perfections of the divine nature4  7#c47
 ,when we speak of human persons1 we    
say1 that as many persons as there are1 
so many beings there are2 every human   
person has its own proper being1        
distinct from all other persons or      
beings2 but we do not say so with       

respect to the divine ,persons1 for the 
divine ,being is but one1 and therefore 
the ,godhead of the ,father1 ,son1 and  
,holy ,ghost1 is the very same2 which is
 what we understand when we say1 that   
though there are three ,persons in the  
,godhead1 yet they are the same in      
substance1 or the one only living and   
true ,god4  ,this leads us to consider  
in what respect the ,father1 ,son1 and  
,holy ,ghost1 are said to be one2 by    
which we mean1 that the ,son and ,holy  
,ghost have all the perfections of the  
divine nature1 in the same sense as the 
,father has2 to say less than this1 is  
to assert no more than what our         
adversaries will allow2 for they will   
not deny them perfections1 nor would    
they be thought to deny them to have    
divine perfections2 yea1 many of them   
will not stick to say1 that they are    
truly and properly ,god2 by which they  
mean1 that whatever deity is attributed 
to them in scripture1 by the appointment
 of the ,father1 that is1 whatever      

divine authority they have1 this        
properly belongs to them3 but1 ,i think1
 they will none of them allow that they 
have the divine nature in the same sense
 in which the ,father is said to have   
it4 ,this is what we shall endeavour to 
prove2 and more need not be said        
concerning them1 in order to establish  
that supreme worship which is due to    
them1 as well as the ,father2 and1 in   
order hereto1 we shall consider the     
force of those arguments contained in   
one of these answers1 and1 together with
 them1 the sense of that scripture1     
,john x4 #cj4 in which our ,saviour     
says1 ,i and my ,father are one2 as also
 that other scripture1 #a ,john v4 #g4  
that the ,father1 the ,word1 and the    
,holy ,ghost1 who bear record in heaven1
 are one2 the consideration whereof we  
shall reserve to a following head4  ,and
 inasmuch as they are said to be equal  
in power and glory1 we may observe1 that
 there are two expressions1 which we    
often use1 to set forth the deity of the

 ,son and ,spirit2 sometimes we say they
 are ,god1 equal with the ,father2 at   
other times1 that they have the same    
essential perfections4 ,to which1 it may
 be1 some will reply1 that if they are  
equal1 they cannot be the same2 or1 on  
the other hand1 if they are the same1   
they cannot be equal4 ,for the          
understanding what we mean by such-like 
expressions1 let it be observed1 that   
when we consider them as having the     
divine essence1 or any of the           
perfections thereof1 we do not chuse to 
describe them as equal1 but the same2 we
 do not say that the wisdom1 power1     
holiness1 c4 of the ,son and ,spirit are
 equal to the same perfections1 as      
ascribed to the ,father3 but when we    
speak of them as distinct ,persons1 then
 we consider them as equal3 the         
essential glory of the ,father1 ,son1   
and ,spirit1 is the same2 but their     
personal glory is equal2 and in this    
sense we would be understood1 when we   
say the ,son and ,holy ,ghost are each  

of them ,god1 or divine ,persons1 equal 
with the ,father4#hi  ,,iii4 ,we shall  
prove that the ,father1 ,son1 and ,holy 
,ghost1 are distinct persons in the     
,godhead1 by applying what has been but 
now observed1 by which any one may1 by  
our common mode of speaking1 be         
denominated a person2 and to this we    
shall add something concerning those    
personal properties1 mentioned in one of
 the answers we are explaining1 with    
respect to the eternal generation of the
 ,son1 and the procession of the ,holy  
,ghost4 ,and1  #a4 ,to prove the        
personality of the ,son4 ,if this be    
reckoned needless1 inasmuch as the      
,arians and ,socinians never yet called 
it in question1 we own that it is not   
necessary1 when we dispute with them1 to
 prove it3 but inasmuch as the          
,sabellians deny it1 as a late writer#ij
 has done1 who plainly gives in to that 
scheme1 and concludes the ,son of ,god  
to be no other than the eternal reason  
of ,god2 and so he renders that text1   

,john i4 #a4 ,in the beginning was the  
word1 that is1 reason1 and by him1 that 
is1 by it1 were all things made2 and    
when it is objected1 that this mode of  
speaking signifies nothing more than a  
quality in ,god1 the only answer he     
gives to it1 is1 that it signifies no   
more a quality1 than if we should       
translate it1 ,the word1 as it is       
generally done3 ,i say1 if persons1     
whether they pretend to be ,sabellians  
or no1 express themselves in such a     
manner1 it is certainly necessary for us
 to prove the personality of the ,son4  
,it appears1 therefore1 that the ,son is
 a distinct ,person from the ,father1   
7#a47 ,inasmuch as we often read1 in    
scripture1 of two divine ,persons       
speaking to1 or of1 one another1 the    
distinguishing personal characters1 ,i1 
thou1 and he1 being applied to them3    
thus it is said1 ,psal4 cx4 #a4 ,the    
,lord1 that is the ,father1 said unto my
 ,lord1 namely the ,son1 sit thou at my 
right-hand1 till ,i make thine enemies  

thy footstool3 this may be observed     
throughout the whole ,psalm2 thus1 ver4 
#c4 ,thy people shall be willing2 and   
ver4 #f4 ,he1 meaning the ,son1 shall   
judge among the heathen2 and ver4 #g4   
,he shall drink of the brook in the way2
 so ,psal4 xlv4 #b4 speaking of the     
,son1 ,thou art fairer than the children
 of men2 and ver4 #f4 ,thy throne1 ,o   
,god1 is for ever and ever4 ,the places 
of scripture1 which have such modes of  
speaking concerning the ,son1 are almost
 innumerable2 and therefore we proceed  
to consider1  7#b47 ,other personal     
characters given him2 thus1 when he is  
called the ,son of ,god1 whatever we are
 to understand by that relation or      
character1 of which more under a        
following head1 it certainly denotes him
 a ,person distinct from the ,father2 so
 does his being sent into the world by  
the ,father1 which expression is        
frequently used in the ,new ,testament2 
now a quality1 relation or property1    
cannot be said to be sent as the ,son   

is4 ,so when he is described as a       
,redeemer1 a ,mediator1 a ,surety1 a    
,creator2 and when he is styled1 by the 
prophet1 the everlasting ,father2 and   
often described as a prophet1 priest1 or
 king2 or ,lord of all1 or the ,prince  
of peace1 or the ,prince of the kings of
 the earth2 all these characters        
sufficiently prove his personality2 and 
all those works which he performs1 as   
sustaining these relations or           
characters1 are properly personal2 and  
some of them are never ascribed to any  
other person4 ,thus the ,father1 or     
,holy ,ghost1 are never said to assume  
the human nature1 or to become sureties 
for the salvation of men1 or to execute 
mediatorial offices1 subservient        
thereunto2 from all which it evidently  
appears1 that the ,son is a distinct    
,person3 that he is a divine ,person1   
will be proved under a following head3  
we shall therefore proceed1  #b4 ,to    
prove the distinct personality of the   
,holy ,ghost4 ,this is denied1 not only 

by the ,sabellians1 but by some of the  
,socinians2 yea1 even by ,socinus       
himself2 who describes the ,holy ,ghost 
as the power of ,god1 intending hereby1 
as his mode of speaking seems to denote1
 the energy of the divine nature1 or    
that whereby the ,father1 who is the    
only one1 to whom1 according to him1 the
 divine nature is attributed1 produces  
those effects which require infinite    
power2 so that they call the ,spirit the
 power of ,god essentially considered2  
these set aside all those proofs1 that  
may be produced from scripture1 to      
evince his personality1 which are so    
plain and evident1 that many of them    
have dissented from ,socinus herein1 and
 owned the ,spirit to be a person4      
,accordingly some of them have described
 him as the chief of created spirits1 or
 the head of the angels1 because they   
deny his divine nature4 ,thus a bold    
writer expresses himself2 8,i believe   
that there is one principal minister of 
,god and ,christ1 peculiarly sent from  

heaven1 to sanctify the church1 who1 by 
reason of his eminency and intimacy with
 ,god1 is singled out of the number of  
other heavenly ministers1 or angels1 and
 comprised in the holy ,trinity1 being  
the third person thereof2 and that this 
minister of ,god and ,christ is the     
,holy ,spirit4#ia0  ,now we shall prove 
the personality of the ,holy ,ghost1 by 
considering some personal characters    
ascribed to1 and works performed by him4
 ,thus there are several such           
characters1 by which he is denominated a
 person2 particularly when he is called 
a ,sanctifier1 a ,reprover1 a ,witness1 
a ,comforter1 it evidently appears from 
hence that he is a person3 thus when it 
is said1 in ,john xvi4 #h4 that when he1
 to wit1 the ,comforter is come1 he will
 reprove the world of sin1 of           
righteousness and judgment2 and also1   
that he will guide you into all truth2  
he shall shew you things to come1 c4    
,and in ,john xiv4 #af1 #ag4 there is   
the distinct personality of the three   

persons1 and particularly of the ,holy  
,ghost1 asserted2 ,i will pray the      
,father1 and he shall give you another  
,comforter1 even the ,spirit of truth2  
and also in ver4 #bf4 ,the ,comforter1  
which is the ,holy ,ghost1 whom the     
,father will send in my name1 he shall  
teach you all things4#ib  ,it is        
certain1 that to be said to teach1 or to
 instruct1 is a personal character2 so  
it is to speak1 or to dictate1 to       
another what he should say2 but this he 
is said to do1 as our ,saviour says to  
his disciples1 ,whatever shall be given 
you in that hour1 that speak ye2 for it 
is not you that speak1 but the ,holy    
,ghost1 ,mark xiii4 #aa4  ,moreover1 to 
witness1 or testify1 is a personal      
character2 especially when the testimony
 is not merely objective1 as when ,job  
calls his wrinkles and his leanness a   
witness against him1 ,job xvi4 #h4 ,but 
when there is a formal testimony given1 
he that gives it is1 according to our   
common way of speaking1 generally       

considered as a person2 and thus the    
,holy ,ghost is described1 ,acts v4 #cb4
 ,we are his witnesses of these things1 
and so is the ,holy ,ghost1 whom ,god   
has given to them that obey him4 ,here  
the ,holy ,ghost's being a witness is as
 much a personal character1 as their    
being witnesses2 and1 ,acts xx4 #bc4 it 
is said1 ,the ,holy ,ghost witnesseth in
 every city1 that bonds and afflictions 
abide me4  ,again1 dwelling is a        
personal character2 no one ever supposes
 that any thing that is in a house      
dwells there1 excepting persons2 but the
 ,holy ,ghost is said to dwell in       
believers1 ,john xiv4 #ag4 and alluding 
hereto1 as also connoting his divine    
personality1 it is said1 #a ,cor4 vi4   
#ai4 ,your body is the temple of the    
,holy ,ghost2 as a house is the         
dwelling-place of a person1 so a temple 
is the dwelling-place of a divine       
person4  ,again1 to send any one is a   
personal character2 but this is         
attributed to the ,holy ,ghost1 ,acts   

xiii4 #d4 ,the apostles being sent forth
 by the ,holy ,ghost1 departed4  ,again1
 acting with a sovereign will and       
pleasure is what belongs only to a      
person2 but this is applied to the ,holy
 ,ghost1 ,acts xv4 #bh4 ,it seemed good 
to the ,holy ,ghost and to us4  ,again1 
prohibiting1 or forbidding1 a person to 
act1 is a personal character2 but this  
is applied to the ,holy ,ghost1 ,acts   
xvi4 #f4 ,the apostles were forbidden of
 the ,holy ,ghost to preach the word in 
,asia4  ,again1 to constitute1 or       
appoint1 any one to execute an office is
 a personal character2 but this the     
,holy ,ghost is said to do1 ,acts xx4   
#bh4 he is said to have made them       
overseers4 ,there are several other     
personal works and characters1 which    
might have been mentioned2 but these    
are1 ,i humbly conceive1 sufficient to  
prove the thing intended1 that the ,holy
 ,ghost is a person4 ,i have no more    
than mentioned the scriptures1 which    
contain these personal characters1      

because ,i shall have occasion under a  
following head1 to refer to some of them
 for the proof of his deity4#ic         
,object4 ,it will be objected1 by those 
who are favourers of the ,sabellian     
scheme1 that the characters which we    
have laid down1 to prove the personality
 of the ,son1 and ,holy ,ghost1 are not 
,sufficient to answer that end2 inasmuch
 as they are oftentimes applied1 in a   
metaphorical way1 to those things which 
no one supposes to be persons1 and      
therefore that they may be taken in this
 sense1 when applied to the ,son and    
,spirit4 ,to support this objection1    
they produce several instances out of   
the book of ,job1 and some other parts  
of scripture1 where things are described
 with personal characters1 which are not
 really persons4 ,thus ,job xxxix4 #aa1 
#ab4 speaking concerning the unicorn1 it
 is said2 ,wilt thou trust him8 ,wilt   
thou leave thy labour to him8 ,wilt thou
 believe him1 that he will bring home   
thy seed1 and gather it into thy barn8  

,so concerning the horse1 it is said1 as
 though he acted with design1 as an     
intelligent creature1 ver4 #ba4 c4 ,he  
goeth on to meet the armed men2 he      
mocketh at fear2 neither believeth he   
that it is the sound of the trumpet2 he 
saith among the trumpets1 ,ha1 ha6 ,and 
concerning the eagle1 ver4 #bh4 ,she    
dwelleth in the rock4 ,and concerning   
the leviathan1 chap4 xli4 #c4 c4 ,will  
he make many supplications to thee8     
,will he speak soft words unto thee8    
,will he make a covenant with thee8 ,he 
esteemeth iron as straw1 and brass as   
rotten wood4 ,darts are counted as      
stubble2 he laugheth at the shaking of  
the spear4 ,and ver4 #cd4 ,he beholdeth 
all high things2 he is a king over all  
the children of pride4 ,there are many  
other personal characters given to brute
 creatures1 which are taken in a        
metaphorical sense2 and sometimes they  
are applied to inanimate creatures4     
,thus ,job xxxviii4 #bh1 c4 ,hath the   
rain a father8 and who hath begotten the

 drops of dew8 ,out of whose womb came  
the ice8 and the hoary frost of heaven1 
who hath gendered it8 ,canst thou bind  
the sweet influences of ,pleiades1 or   
loose the bands of ,orion8 ,canst thou  
bring forth ,mazzaroth in his season1 or
 canst thou guide ,arcturus with his    
sons8 ,by which nothing is intended but 
the signs in the ,zodiack1 or some of   
the constellations1 together with the   
particular stars of which they consist2 
yet these are described1 as though they 
were persons4 ,so ver4 #ce4 ,canst thou 
send lightnings1 that they may go1 and  
say unto thee1 here we are8 ,again1 the 
powers and faculties of the soul of man 
have sometimes personal characters      
ascribed to them4 ,thus1 conscience is  
said to bear witness1 ,rom4 ix4 #a4 ,and
 some instances may be brought from     
scripture of a person's speaking to     
himself2 yet this doth not connote two  
persons in man1 one speaking1 and the   
other spoken to4 ,it is therefore       
inferred from hence1 that we cannot     

prove the personality of the ,son and   
,holy ,ghost from those personal        
characters ascribed to them1 which may  
be taken in a metaphorical sense1 as    
well as in the instances but now        
mentioned4  ,answ4 ,in answer to this   
objection1 several things may be        
considered4  #a4 ,though the scripture  
often uses figurative1 and particularly 
metaphorical1 ways of speaking1 yet     
these may be easily distinguished from  
the like phrases used elsewhere1        
concerning which we have sufficient     
ground to conclude that they are to be  
taken in a proper sense2 therefore1     
though it is true that there are        
personal characters given to things     
which are not persons1 yet we are not to
 conclude from hence1 that whenever the 
same modes of speaking are used1 and    
applied to those who are capable of     
performing personal actions1 that       
therefore these must be taken in a      
metaphorical sense2 which is a known    
exception from the common idea contained

 in the same words4  #b4 ,most of those 
passages of scripture1 where personal   
characters are attributed to things     
which are not persons1 in a metaphorical
 sense1 are in the poetical books       
thereof2 or in some particular places1  
where there is a peculiar beautiful mode
 of speaking taken from thence2 will it 
therefore follow1 that these personal   
characters are used in other parts of   
scripture1 in which the ,holy ,ghost    
does not think fit to express himself in
 such an elegancy of style8 ,now it is  
certain1 that the personal characters   
before mentioned are given to the ,son  
and ,holy ,ghost1 throughout the whole  
scripture1 without designing to use a   
lofty1 figurative1 or uncommon way of   
speaking1 as in the instances before    
mentioned4  #c4 ,we must not suppose    
that the ,holy ,ghost uses any          
figurative ways of speaking1 so as to   
cast a veil on plain truths1 or to      
endanger our being led hereby out of the
 way1 as we should certainly be1 if so  

many hundred places of scripture1 in    
which these personal characters are     
applied to the ,son and ,spirit1 were to
 be taken in a metaphorical sense1      
without any intimation given in the     
context that they are so to be          
understood4 ,and it will be certainly   
very difficult to find out any place in 
scripture1 that may serve to direct us  
in our application of these characters1 
viz4 when they are to be taken in a     
metaphorical sense1 when applied to the 
,persons in the ,godhead1 and when not4 
#d4 ,though we find many metaphors in   
scripture1 yet we observe that the most 
important truths are laid down in the   
plainest manner2 so that the injudicious
 and unlearned reader1 who understands  
nothing of the art of rhetoric1 or      
criticism1 may be instructed thereby2 at
 least they are not universally wrapt up
 in such figurative ways of speaking2   
and it would be strange1 if the account 
we have of the ,personality of the ,son 
and ,holy ,ghost1 which is a doctrine of

 the highest importance1 and such as    
renders them distinct objects of        
worship1 should be expressed in such a  
way1 as that we should be at the        
greatest uncertainty whether they are   
persons or not4  #e4 ,if these personal 
characters are not metaphorical1 when   
applied to men or angels1 who are       
subjects capable of having personality  
attributed to them1 why should they be  
reckoned metaphorical1 when applied to  
the ,son and ,spirit1 who1 though they  
are not distinct beings1 yet they have a
 divine understanding and will1 and     
therefore are not rendered incapable of 
having personality ascribed to them1 as 
signified by these characters4  #f4 ,the
 asserting that personal characters     
attributed to the ,son and ,spirit are  
always to be understood in a            
metaphorical sense1 would give equal    
ground to conclude that they are to be  
so taken1 when applied to the ,father2  
and accordingly1 while we militate      
against the ,personality of these1 we   

should1 at the same time1 overthrow his 
,personality3 and while we deny that    
there are three ,persons in the         
,godhead1 we should1 in effect1 suppose 
that there are no ,persons in the       
,godhead1 any otherwise than as the     
,godhead1 which is common to be ,father1
 ,son1 and ,spirit1 is often described  
as though it were a ,person2 and if ever
 ,personality is used or applied in a   
metaphorical sense1 it must be when the 
,godhead is described as though it were 
a ,person4  #g4 ,though some personal   
characters are occasionally applied1 in 
a metaphorical sense1 to things that are
 not persons1 yet it is not usual for   
them to be described as performing      
personal works1 and these not           
occasionally hinted at1 and joined with 
other metaphorical ways of speaking1 but
 a long series of action referred to1   
and variety of works performed1 which   
must certainly be taken in a most proper
 sense4 ,thus1 when the ,son and ,spirit
 are set forth in scripture as          

performing those works1 which are       
expressive of their personal glory2 the 
one in what respects the purchase of    
redemption2 and the other in the        
application thereof3 and when each of   
them is described as standing in those  
relations to men1 which are founded in  
the performance of these works for them2
 certainly this must be taken in a most 
proper sense2 and we must take heed1    
lest1 while we attempt to prove that the
 ,persons in the ,godhead are to be     
taken in a figurative sense1 we do not  
give occasion to any to think that the  
great benefits1 which we receive from   
them1 are to be understood in the same  
sense4  ,we shall now take notice of    
some other personal properties1 whereby 
the ,son and ,spirit are distinguished  
from one another1 and from the ,father2 
particularly1 as they are expressed in  
one of the answers under our present    
consideration2 it is proper to the      
,father to beget the ,son1 or1 as it is 
sometimes expressed1 to be unbegotten2  

and to the ,son1 to be begotten of the  
,father2 and to the ,holy ,ghost1 to    
proceed from the ,father and the ,son1  
from all eternity4 ,this is certainly   
one of the most difficult heads of      
divinity that can be insisted on2 and   
some have made it more so1 by their     
attempting to explain it4 ,i have       
sometimes thought that it would be the  
safest and most eligible way1 to pass it
 over1 as a doctrine less necessary to  
be understood2 but since there are      
several scripture-expressions1 on which 
it is founded1 which we ought to pay the
 greatest deference to1 much more than  
to those explications which are merely  
human2 and inasmuch as these properties 
plainly prove the ,father1 ,son1 and    
,holy ,ghost1 to be distinct ,persons1  
therefore we must humbly enquire into   
the meaning of those scriptures1 wherein
 they are contained2 and so to speak    
something as to what is generally called
 the eternal generation of the ,son1 and
 the procession of the ,holy ,ghost2 and

 ,i hope1 through divine assistance1 we 
shall advance no doctrine that is either
 subversive of our faith in the doctrine
 of the ,trinity1 which we are          
endeavouring to maintain1 derogatory to 
the essential or personal glory of the  
,father1 ,son1 and ,spirit1 or          
altogether contrary to the sense1 in    
which many ,christians1 who are         
unacquainted with those modes of        
speaking1 used by the fathers and       
schoolmen1 understand those scriptures  
upon which this doctrine is founded4    
,and here we shall give a brief account 
of what we apprehend to be the commonly 
received sentiments of divines1 who1 in 
their writings1 have strenuously        
maintained1 and judiciously defended1   
the doctrine of the ,trinity1 concerning
 the eternal generation of the ,son1 and
 the procession of the ,holy ,ghost2    
which ,i shall endeavour to do with the 
greatest deference to those who have    
treated of these subjects1 as well as   
with the greatest impartiality2 and     

shall take occasion to shew how far the 
,arians conclude that we give up the    
cause to them1 and yet how little reason
 they have to insult us upon this head4 
7#a47 ,as to the eternal generation of  
the ,son1 it is generally explained in  
this manner2 the ,father is called1 by  
some1 the fountain of the ,godhead1 an  
expression taken from some of the       
fathers1 who defended the ,nicene faith3
 but others of late1 have rather chose  
to call the ,father the fountain of the 
,trinity2 and he is said to be of       
himself2 or unbegotten2 which they lay  
down as his distinct ,personal          
character1 from that of the ,son4  ,on  
the other hand1 the ,son1 as to his     
,personality1 is generally described as 
being from the ,father1 and many chuse  
to express themselves about this mystery
 in these terms2 that the ,father       
communicated the divine essence to the  
,son1 which is the most common mode of  
speaking1 though others think it safer  
to say1 that he communicated the divine 

,personality to him2 though ,i cannot   
tell which is least exceptionable4  ,but
 when ,i find others calling it the     
,father's giving the divine essence to  
the ,son1 their mode of speaking being  
founded1 as they apprehend1 on that     
scripture1 ,john v4 #bf4 ,as the ,father
 hath life in himself so hath he given  
to the ,son to have life in himself1 ,i 
cannot but think it an unguarded        
expression1 and foreign to the design of
 the ,holy ,ghost in that scripture1 as 
will be hereafter considered4 ,the      
,arians are ready to insult us upon such
 modes of speaking1 and suppose that we 
conclude that the ,son receives his     
divine perfections1 and therefore cannot
 be ,god equal with the ,father3 but1   
however1 none of them1 who use this     
expression1 suppose that the ,son's     
,deity is founded on the arbitrary will 
of the ,father2 for they all assert that
 the divine nature is communicated      
necessarily1 and from all eternity1 as  
the sun communicates its rays           

necessarily1 which are of equal duration
 with it2 so that while they make use of
 a word1 which1 according to its most   
known acceptation1 seems subversive of  
the truth1 they happily1 for truth's    
sake1 explain away the proper sense     
thereof2 so that all they can be blamed 
for herein1 by the adversary1 is        
impropriety of expression4  ,again1     
others speak a little more              
exceptionally1 when1 explaining the     
eternal generation of the ,son1 they say
 that the ,father produced him3 but this
 idea they also happily explain away2   
and therefore say it is not such a      
production1 where the cause produces the
 effect1 though some of the fathers1 who
 have been in the ,trinitarian scheme1  
have unwarily called the ,father the    
cause of the ,son2 yet our modern       
divines seldom1 or never1 use that      
expression1 or if they speak of an      
eternal production1 they suppose it     
vastly differs from the production of   
all creatures1 or from that sense in    

which the ,arians suppose the ,son to be
 produced by him2 but certainly this    
expression had better be laid aside1    
lest it should be thought that we       
conclude the ,son not equally necessary1
 and1 from all eternity1 co-existent    
with the ,father1 which our divines1 how
 unwarily soever in other respects they 
may express themselves1 are very far    
from denying4  7#b47 ,we shall now      
proceed to consider how some divines    
express themselves1 concerning the      
procession of the ,holy ,ghost1 which   
they generally do in this manner1 as    
though the divine essence were          
communicated by the ,father and the ,son
 to the ,holy ,ghost2 and so they       
suppose that the ,holy ,ghost1 at least 
as he is a divine ,person1 or has the   
divine nature communicated to him1      
cannot be said to be1 any more than the 
,son1 of himself1 but from the ,father  
and the ,son1 from whom he proceeds1 or 
receives1 as some express it1 the divine
 nature1 and others the divine          

personality4  ,others speak of the      
,spiration of the ,holy ,ghost1 which   
they suppose to be the same with his    
procession2 but the world is much at a  
loss to understand what they mean by the
 word ,spiration3 it seems to be a mere 
metaphorical expression1 as when they   
call him the breath of the ,father and  
the ,son1 and1 if so1 then it will not  
prove his proper personality3 but since 
we are pretty much in the dark about the
 reason of this mode of speaking1 it    
would be much better to lay it aside1 as
 many modern writers have done4  ,as to 
the manner of the procession of the     
,holy ,ghost1 there was1 about the      
eighth and ninth centuries1 a very warm 
dispute between the ,greek and ,latin   
church2 whether the ,spirit proceeded   
from the ,father only1 or from the      
,father and the ,son2 and the           
controversy arose to such a height1 that
 they charged one another with heresy   
and schism1 when neither side well      
understood what they contended about2   

and if they had agreed to the healing   
expedient1 afterwards proposed1 that    
they should mutually acknowledge that   
the ,holy ,ghost was from the ,father by
 the ,son1 the matter would have been   
left as much in the dark as it was      
before4  ,some speak of the procession  
of the ,holy ,ghost1 as though he was   
produced by the ,father and the ,son1 as
 the ,son1 as was before observed1 is   
said1 in his eternal generation1 to have
 been produced by the ,father2 yet they 
suppose that neither of them were so    
produced1 as that they may be called    
effects2 and they term it the production
 of a person in1 and not out of1 the    
divine essence1 for that would be to    
give away the cause we contend for3 but 
which way soever we take it1 it contains
 such an impropriety of expression1 as  
can hardly be defended2 and it is much  
better to explain away the proper and   
grammatical sense of words1 than to     
corrupt the truth2 however1 ,i would not
 copy after them in this mode of        

speaking4  ,moreover1 some have         
pretended to determine the difference   
between the eternal generation of the   
,son and the ,spirit's procession2 to   
which they have1 with modesty1 premised1
 that it is not to be explained2 but1 as
 far as they enter into this matter1    
they suppose that they differ in this2  
that in the eternal generation of the   
,son1 the ,father communicated the      
divine essence1 or1 at least1           
personality to him1 which is his act    
alone1 and herewith he communicated a   
property1 or power1 to him1 to          
communicate the same divine essence to  
the ,holy ,ghost2 whereas1 when the     
,holy ,ghost is said to proceed from the
 ,father and the ,son1 there is no power
 therewith conveyed to him to           
communicate the divine essence to any   
other1 as a fourth person in the        
,godhead4 ,these things may be observed 
in the writings of those who treat of   
this subject2 but it is to be feared1   
they enter too far into the explication 

of this unsearchable mystery2 and some  
will be ready to conclude that they     
attempt to be wise above what is        
written4 ,and1  ,if ,i may be allowed to
 give my sense of the communication of  
the divine essence1 though it will      
probably be thought that ,i do not say  
enough concerning it1 yet ,i hope that1 
in other respects1 none will conclude   
that ,i advance any thing subversive of 
the doctrine of the ,trinity1 when ,i   
assert that the divine essence is       
communicated1 not by the ,father to the 
,son and ,holy ,ghost1 as imparting or  
conveying it to them2 but take the word 
communicate in another sense1 namely1   
that all the perfections of the divine  
nature are communicated1 that is1       
equally attributed to1 or predicated of1
 the ,father1 ,son1 and ,spirit2 this   
sense of the word is what some intend   
when they say the human nature is       
communicated to every individual1 upon  
which account they are denominated men2 
and1 as the word is used in this sense1 

sometimes1 by logicians and schoolmen1  
so it seems to be taken in the same     
sense1 in ,heb4 ii4 #ad4 where the      
,greek words1      1 which we render1   
the children were partakers of flesh and
 blood1 might be rendered1 as in the    
vulgar ,latin version1 ,communicaverunt 
carni  sanguini1 i4 e4 they have the    
human nature communicated to1 and       
predicated of1 them1 or they are truly  
and properly men4 ,and it is in this    
sense that we use the word1 when we say 
that the different properties of the    
divine and human nature are communicated
 to1 that is1 predicated of1 the ,person
 of ,christ1 which divines generally    
call a communication of properties4 ,in 
this sense ,i would be understood1 when 
,i say that the divine perfections are  
communicated to1 or predicated of1 the  
,father1 ,son1 and ,spirit2 and this all
 who maintain the doctrine of the       
,trinity will allow of4 ,the other sense
 of communication1 viz4 imparting1      
conveying1 or giving the divine essence1

 ,i shall be very ready to fall in with1
 when the apparent difficulties1 which1 
to me1 seem to lie in the way thereof1  
some of which have been already         
considered1 are removed4  ,as to what   
concerns the farther explication of this
 mystery1 we may observe1 that the more 
nice some have been in their            
speculations about it1 the more they    
have seemed bewildered3 thus1 when some 
have enquired whether the eternal       
generation is one single act1 or an act 
continued2 or whether1 when it is said1 
,this day have ,i begotten thee1 the    
meaning is1 that the divine nature was  
communicated at once1 or whether it is  
perpetually communicating4#ig ,and the  
difficulties that attend their asserting
 either the one or the other of them1   
which they1 who enquire into these      
matters1 take notice of1 ,i shall       
entirely pass over1 as apprehending that
 this doctrine receives no advantage by 
such disquisitions4  ,neither do ,i     
think it tends much to our edification  

to enquire1 as some have done1 whether1 
in the eternal generation1 the ,father  
is considered as acting1 and the ,son as
 him on whom the action terminates1 as  
the subject thereof2 which1 when they   
suppose it does1 they farther enquire1  
whether1 in this respect1 he is said to 
be passive1 which they are not willing  
to assert4  ,and ,i cannot but take     
notice of another nicety of inquiry1    
viz4 whether1 in the eternal generation1
 the ,son is considered as co-existent  
with the ,father1 or as having the      
divine essence1 and hereby only deriving
 his ,sonship from him1 from all        
eternity2 or whether he derives both his
 ,sonship and his essence2 the former of
 which is the most generally received   
opinion4 ,but ,i am not desirous to     
enter into this enquiry1 especially     
without first determining what we mean  
by ,sonship4  ,there is indeed one thing
 that must be enquired into1 and that   
is1 whatever be the explication given of
 the eternal generation of the ,son1 and

 procession of the ,holy ,ghost1 whether
 they are each of them self-existent1   
or1 as some call it1 2 and it is        
generally determined1 that the ,son and 
,holy ,ghost have the same self-existent
 divine nature3 but with respect to     
their manner of having it1 some say the 
,son has his divine nature from the     
,father1 and the ,holy ,ghost from the  
,father and ,son2 or that the ,father   
only is self-existent1 as some speak2   
or1 as most others say1 that he is      
self-subsistent2 and that this is his   
personal property1 as he is             
distinguished from the ,son and ,holy   
,ghost1 whom they conclude not to be    
self-subsistent1 but the one to subsist 
from the ,father1 and the other from the
 ,father and the ,son4 ,this is a       
generally received opinion2             
notwithstanding ,i must confess myself  
to be at a loss to account for it3 so   
that the principal thing1 in which ,i am
 obliged1 till ,i receive farther       
conviction1 to differ from many others1 

is1 whether the ,son and ,spirit have a 
communicated or derived ,personality3   
this many assert1 but1 ,i think1 without
 sufficient proof2 for ,i cannot but    
conclude that the divine ,personality1  
not only of the ,father1 but of the ,son
 and ,spirit1 is as much independent1   
and underived1 as the divine essence4   
,thus we have considered how some have  
embarrassed this doctrine1 by being too 
nice in their enquiries about it3 we    
shall proceed to consider how others    
have done prejudice to it1 by pretending
 to explain it2 and when they make use  
of similitudes to that purpose1 have    
rather prejudiced the enemies of this   
doctrine against it1 than given any     
conviction to them4 ,i shall only       
mention what ,i have found in some of   
their writings1 whom1 in other respects1
 ,i cannot but exceedingly value1 as    
having deserved well of the church of   
,god1 in defending this truth with good 
success1 yet1 when they take this method
 to explain this doctrine1 to say the   

best of it1 they have done but little   
service to the cause which they have    
maintained3 thus we find them expressing
 themselves to this purpose2 as the soul
 of man sometimes reflects on itself1   
and considers its own nature1 powers1   
and faculties1 or when it is conversant 
about itself1 as its object1 this       
produces an idea1 which contains the    
moral image of itself1 and is like as   
when he sees his face in a glass1 and   
beholds the image of himself2 this1 say 
they1 illustrates the eternal generation
 of the ,son1 as ,god beholding himself1
 or his divine perfections1 begets an   
image of himself1 or has an eternal idea
 of his own perfections in his mind1    
which is called his internal word1 as   
opposed to the word spoken1 which is    
external2 by this they express the      
generation of the ,son1 for which reason
 he is called1 in ,heb4 i4 #c4 ,the     
brightness of the ,father's glory1 and  
the express image of his person1 as the 
wax expresses the character or mark of  

the seal that is impressed on it4       
,again1 they farther add1 that there is 
a mutual love between the ,father and   
the ,son1 which brings forth a third    
,person1 or subsistence in the ,godhead1
 to wit1 the ,holy ,ghost2 so that as   
there is in the divine essence an       
infinite understanding reflecting on    
itself1 whereby it begets1 a ,son1 as   
was before observed1 and an infinite    
will1 which leads him to reflect on     
himself1 with love and delight1 as the  
chief good1 whereby he brings forth a   
third ,person in the ,godhead1 to wit1  
the ,holy ,ghost1 accordingly they      
describe this divine ,person as being   
the result of the mutual joy and delight
 that there is between the ,father and  
the ,son3 these explications many are at
 a loss to understand2 and we humbly    
conceive it would be much better to let 
them alone1 and confess this doctrine to
 be an inexplicable mystery1 or else    
some other way may be found out1 which  
is less liable to these exceptions1     

while we explain those scriptures1 which
 speak of the generation of the ,son1   
and the procession of the ,holy ,ghost4 
,the scriptures generally brought in    
defence of this doctrine are such as    
these4  #a4 ,to prove the eternal       
generation of the ,son1 there are       
several scriptures referred to1         
particularly that in which the ,father  
is represented as speaking to him1 in   
,psal4 ii4 #g4 ,thou art my ,son2 this  
day have ,i begotten thee2 that is1 say 
they1 ,i have1 in my eternal1           
unsuccessive duration1 communicated1 or 
imparted1 the divine essence1 or1 at    
least1 personality1 to thee4  ,another  
scripture brought to this purpose is    
that in ,prov4 viii4 #bb1 #bc1 #be4 ,the
 ,lord possessed me1 speaking of his    
eternal ,word1 or ,son1 in the beginning
 of his way1 before his works of old4 ,i
 was set up from everlasting1 from the  
beginning1 or ever the earth was2 before
 the mountains were settled2 before the 
hills was ,i brought forth4 ,where they 

suppose that ,god's possessing him1     
which is certainly to be taken in a     
different sense from his being the      
possessor of all creatures1 is to be    
understood of his being ,god's proper   
,son by nature2 and his being said to be
 brought forth1 they suppose1 proves his
 eternal generation4  ,another scripture
 brought to the same purpose is that in 
,micah v4 #b4 speaking of the ,son1 it  
is said1 ,his goings forth have been of 
old1 from everlasting2 by which they    
attempt to prove his being begotten in  
the divine essence3 but how that can be 
called his going forth1 ,i do not well  
understand4  ,moreover1 that scripture  
before mentioned1 in ,heb4 i4 #c4 ,who  
being the brightness of his glory1 and  
the express image of his person4 ,and   
another parallel scripture1 in ,col4 i4 
#ae4 ,who is the image of the invisible 
,god1 the first-born of every creature2 
where1 by first-born1 they understand1  
that he was begotten before all worlds3 
the divine essence1 or1 at least1       

personality1 being communicated to him  
from eternity4  ,another scripture1     
which we before referred to1 brought to 
prove this doctrine1 is ,john v4 #bf4   
,as the ,father hath life in himself1 so
 he hath given to the ,son to have life 
in himself2 that is1 say some1 as the   
,father hath all divine perfections in  
himself originally1 so the ,son hath    
these perfections1 by communication from
 him2 which they suppose not to be an   
arbitrary1 but a necessary1 donation4   
,again1 this is farther proved1 from    
,john i4 #ag4 where he is said to be the
 only begotten ,son of the ,father4 ,and
 ver4 #ah4 ,the only begotten ,son1 who 
is in the bosom of the ,father4 ,from   
the former of which scriptures they     
prove the eternal generation of the     
,son2 and from the latter1 his being    
begotten in the divine essence1 which   
distinguishes it from all finite        
productions1 which are out of himself4  
,moreover1 there are many other         
scriptures that speak of our ,saviour as

 the ,son of ,god2 and particularly in  
,matth4 xvi4 #af4 he is called1 ,the    
,son of the living ,god2 and in ,rom4   
viii4 #cb4 his own ,son1  1 which some  
render1 his proper ,son1 that is1 not   
only his ,son1 who has the same divine  
nature with himself1 but as implying    
also the manner of its communication2   
and in ,mat4 iii4 #ag4 he is called his 
beloved ,son4  #b4 ,we shall now        
consider the scriptures that are        
generally brought to prove the          
procession of the ,holy ,ghost1 in the  
sense before explained4 ,thus he is     
said1 in ,john xv4 #bf4 to be sent by   
the ,son from the ,father2 and to       
proceed from the ,father2 where they    
suppose that this proceeding from the   
,father signifies the communication of  
the divine essence1 or1 at least1 his   
personality2 and his being sent by the  
,son1 implies1 that this communication  
is from him1 as well as the ,father4 ,so
 in ,gal4 iv4 #f4 it is said1 ,god hath 
sent forth the ,spirit of his ,son2 and1

 in ,john xvi4 #g4 our ,saviour says1 ,i
 will send him unto you1 and ver4 #ad4  
,he shall receive of mine1 and shall    
shew it unto you2 these scriptures1 if  
not brought directly to prove this      
doctrine1 are1 notwithstanding1 supposed
 sufficient to evince the truth thereof1
 inasmuch as the ,son could not send    
him1 if he had not proceeded from him2  
nor could he have received that which he
 shews to his people1 if he had not1    
from all eternity1 received his divine  
essence1 or personality1 from him4      
,there is another scripture1 brought by 
some very valuable divines1 to prove the
 ,spiration of the ,holy ,ghost1 which  
is so termed1 either as supposed to be  
expressive of the manner of his having  
his personality as a ,spirit1 or else it
 is taken from those words of scripture1
 brought to prove this ,spiration1 ,john
 xx4 #bb4 in which our ,saviour is said 
to have breathed on his disciples1      
saying1 ,receive ye the ,holy ,ghost2   
which external sign1 or symbol1 used in 

the act of conferring him on them in    
time1 proves his procession from him    
from eternity2 as a temporal procession 
supposes an eternal one4  ,these are the
 scriptures which are generally brought 
to prove this doctrine4 ,but we shall   
take occasion to enquire1 whether there 
may not be another sense given thereof1 
which is less liable to exception1 as   
well as more intelligible4 ,it is to be 
owned1 that they contain some of the    
deep things of ,god2 and therefore it is
 no wonder1 if they are reckoned among  
those scriptures that are hard to be    
understood3 but so far as ,i have any   
light1 either from the context of the   
respective scriptures1 or the analogy of
 faith1 ,i cannot but conclude that     
these1 and all others of the like       
nature1 that are brought to prove the   
eternal generation1 or ,sonship of      
,christ1 respect him as ,god-man1       
,mediator2#ih and those other           
scriptures1 that speak of the procession
 of the ,holy ,ghost1 respect the       

subserviency of his acting as a divine  
,person to the ,mediator's glory1 in    
applying the work of redemption4  ,and  
here we shall consider these scriptures 
in particular2 and then answer some     
objections that may be brought against  
this sense thereof1 whereby1 ,i hope1 it
 will appear1 that we assert nothing but
 what tends to the glory of the ,son and
 ,spirit1 establisheth the doctrine of  
the ever-blessed ,trinity1 and agrees   
with the commonly received faith1 so far
 as it is founded on scripture1 without 
being tenacious of those modes of       
speaking1 which have the sanction of    
venerable antiquity1 and are supported  
by the reputation of those who have used
 them2 though it may be1 those          
scriptures will be otherwise understood 
by them1 who regard explications that   
are merely human1 no farther than they  
are defensible4  ,the first scripture   
before mentioned1 which was brought to  
prove the eternal generation of the     
,son1 was ,psal4 ii4 #g4 ,thou art my   

,son1 this day have ,i begotten thee4   
,this cannot1 ,i humbly conceive1       
respect the communication of the divine 
nature1 or personality to the ,son1 as  
appears from the words immediately      
foregoing1 in which it is said1 ,i will 
declare the decree1 or what ,i had      
before decreed1 or determined4 ,far be  
it from us to suppose that the divine   
nature1 or personality1 of the ,son was 
the result of an act of the divine will3
 and1 indeed1 the whole ,psalm plainly  
speaks of ,christ as ,mediator2 as such 
he is said1 ver4 #f4 ,to be set as      
,god's king1 on his holy hill of ,sion1 
and1 as such1 he is said to intercede   
with1 or ask of ,god2 and1 as the result
 hereof1 the ,father is said1 ver4 #h4  
to give him the heathen for his         
inheritance1 and the uttermost parts of 
the earth for his possession2 and all   
this is spoken of him1 as a farther     
explication of those words1 ,thou art my
 ,son1 this day have ,i begotten thee4  
,and the apostle1 in ,heb4 i4 #e4 refers

 to this scripture1 when speaking of him
 as ,mediator1 and as having1 by        
inheritance1 obtained a more excellent  
name than the angels2 which he has done1
 as he is constituted heir of all       
things3 and he subjoins that promise1 ,i
 will be to him a ,father1 and he shall 
be to me a ,son1 that is1 he shall      
perform that obedience that is due from 
him as a ,son2 and ,i will give unto him
 those rewards1 which are due from a    
,father1 who has committed this work to 
him1 with a promise of the conferring   
those revenues of ,mediatorial glory on 
him1 that should ensue on his fulfilling
 it4 ,moreover1 this scripture is       
referred to1 by the apostle1 in ,acts   
xiii4 #cb1 #cc4 when he says1 ,that the 
promise1 which was made to the fathers1 
,god hath fulfilled the same unto their 
children1 in that he hath raised up     
,jesus again1 as it is written in the   
second ,psalm1 ,thou art my ,son1 this  
day have ,i begotten thee4 ,so that it  
is plain the ,psalmist speaks of him as 

having finished his work of redemption1 
at which time he was raised from the    
dead2 and then1 in the fullest sense1 he
 had the heathen for his inheritance4   
,and1 upon this account1 he is also     
called1 in ,rev4 i4 #e4 ,the first      
begotten of the dead2 and1 in ,col4 i4  
#ah4 ,the first-born from the dead4     
,the next scripture brought to prove the
 eternal generation of the ,son1 in     
,prov4 viii4 #bb1 #bc1 #be4 refers to   
,christ1 as ,mediator2 when ,god is said
 to possess him in the beginning of his 
way1 the meaning is1 that in his eternal
 design oi grace relating to the        
redemption of man1 the ,father          
possessed1 or laid claim to him as his  
,son1 or servant1 appointed in the human
 nature1 to bring about that great work2
 and accordingly it follows1 ,i was set 
up from everlasting1 that is1           
fore-ordained of ,god1 to be the        
,mediator and head of his elect3 and    
this agrees very well with what follows1
 ver4 #cj1 #ca4 ,i was daily his        

delight1 that is1 ,god the ,father was  
well pleased with him1 when foreseeing  
from all eternity what he would do in   
time1 to secure the glory of his        
perfections in the redemption of man1 as
 ,god publicly testified his            
well-pleasedness in him1 when he was    
actually engaged in this work4 ,and it  
is farther added1 ,that he was always   
rejoicing before him2 rejoicing in the  
habitable part of his earth1 and his    
delights were with the sons of men2     
which signifies the great pleasure      
,christ had1 in his eternal fore-sight  
of what he would do for the sons of men1
 whom he is elsewhere said to have loved
 with an everlasting love4  ,the next   
scripture is in ,micah v4 #b4 where     
speaking of the ,son1 it is said1 ,whose
 goings forth have been of old1 from    
everlasting4 ,for the understanding of  
which scripture1 let us consider1 that  
,god's goings are sometimes taken in    
scripture for what he does1 whereby he  
renders himself the object of his       

people's astonishment and praise2 these 
are his visible goings4 ,thus1 ,psal4   
lxvi4 #bd4 ,they have seen thy goings1  
,o ,god1 even the goings of my ,god1 my 
,king1 in the sanctuary2 that is1 they  
shall see the great things which thou   
wilt do for man1 in the work of         
redemption3 so in this scripture1 the   
sense whereof we are considering1 we    
read of ,christ's goings forth1 his     
invisible goings1 as we may call them1  
or his secret purposes1 or designs of   
grace1 relating to the redemption of his
 people3 ,his goings forth were from    
everlasting2 that is1 he did1 from      
eternity1 design to save them2 the      
outgoings of his heart were towards     
them1 and1 as the result hereof1 he came
 into the world according to this       
prediction1 and was born in ,bethlehem1 
as in the foregoing words4  ,the next   
scripture is in ,heb4 i4 #c4 where he is
 said to be the brightness of his1 that 
is1 his ,father's glory1 and the express
 image of his person4 ,by the former    

expression1 ,i humbly conceive1 is      
meant1 that the glory of the divine     
perfections shines forth most           
illustriously in ,christ1 our great     
,mediator1 as the apostle expresses it  
elsewhere1 #b ,cor4 iv4 #f4 ,god hath   
shined in our hearts1 to give the       
knowledge of his glory1 in the face of  
,jesus ,christ4 ,by the latter          
expression1 in which ,christ is called  
the express image of his ,person1 ,i    
humbly conceive1 is meant1 that though  
his divine nature be the same with the  
,father's1 yet his ,personality is      
distinct2 and therefore it is not said  
to be the same1 but the image of his    
,father's2 and it also proves his proper
 divine ,personality1 as being1 in all  
respects1 like that of the ,father1     
though not the same4  ,the next         
scripture is in ,john v4 #bf4 ,as the   
,father hath life in himself2 so hath he
 given to the ,son to have life in      
himself4 ,we cannot think that the      
,father's having given to the ,son to   

have life in himself implies his giving 
him the divine perfections1 for the     
propriety of that mode of speaking      
cannot be defended consistently with his
 proper underived ,deity4 ,but ,i humbly
 conceive that the meaning of it is     
this2 that as the ,father hath life in  
himself1 that is1 as he has eternal     
life1 or that fulness of grace and      
glory1 which his people are to be made  
partakers of1 at his own disposal1 and  
has designed to give it1 in his eternal 
purpose2 so hath he given to the ,son1  
as ,mediator1 to have life in himself1  
that is1 that1 as such1 he should be the
 treasury of all this grace1 and that he
 should have life in himself to dispense
 to them4 ,this is very agreeable to his
 character and office1 as ,mediator1 and
 with what follows1 ver4 #bd4 where it  
is said2 ,verily1 verily1 ,i say unto   
you1 he that heareth my word1 and       
believeth on him that sent me1 hath     
everlasting life1 and shall not come    
into condemnation1 but is passed from   

death unto life2 and ver4 #bg4 it is    
farther added1 that ,he1 to wit1 the    
,father1 hath given him authority to    
execute judgment also1 because he is the
 ,son of man2 which plainly denotes1    
that this life1 which he has received   
from the ,father1 is that eternal life1 
which he is impowered or commissioned to
 bestow on his people1 as ,mediator2    
this he has in himself1 and accordingly 
he is said1 ,john i4 #ad4 to be full of 
grace and truth2 and ,col4 i4 #ai4 ,it  
pleased the ,father that in him should  
all fulness dwell4  ,the next thing to  
be considered1 is the sense of those    
many scriptures1 in which our ,saviour  
is described as the ,son of ,god1 or the
 ,son of the living ,god1 or his only   
begotten ,son1 or his own or proper     
,son1 as distinguished from all others1 
which1 ,i humbly conceive1 sets forth   
his glory1 as ,mediator1 which we shall 
endeavour to prove4 ,but1 to prepare our
 way for the prosecution of this        
argument1 as well as to prevent any     

misconstruction that might give         
prejudice thereunto1 we shall take leave
 to premise1  #a4 ,that when we read of 
the ,son of ,god1 as dependent on the   
,father1 inferior and obedient to him2  
and yet1 as being equal with him1 and   
having the same divine nature1 we cannot
 conceive of any character which answers
 to all these ideas of sonship1 unless  
that of a ,mediator4 ,if we consider the
 properties of sonship among men1 every 
one who stands in this relation to a    
,father is dependent on him4 ,in this   
respect1 the father is the cause of his 
son1 and it is not like other           
productions1 for no effect can1 properly
 speaking1 be called a son1 but that    
which hath the same kind of nature with 
his father2 and the relation of sonship 
always connotes inferiority1 and an     
obligation to yield obedience4 ,i do not
 apply this1 in every respect1 to the   
,sonship of ,christ1 which no           
similitude1 taken from mere creatures1  
can sufficiently illustrate2 but his    

character1 as ,mediator1 seems to answer
 to it1 more than any thing else that   
can be said of him1 since he has1 as    
such1 the same individual nature with   
the ,father1 and also is inferior to1   
and dependent on him4 ,as a son1 among  
men1 is inferior to1 and dependent on1  
his father1 and1 as the prophet speaks1 
,mal4 i4 #f4 ,honoureth his father2 so  
whatever ,christ is1 as ,mediator1 he   
receives it from the ,father1 and1 in   
all that he does1 he honoureth his      
,father1 as he says1 ,john viii4 #di4   
,as the whole work of redemption is     
referred to the ,father's glory1 and the
 commission1 by which he acts as        
,mediator1 is received from the ,father1
 so1 as a ,son1 he refers all the glory 
thereof to him4  #b4 ,this account of   
,christ's ,sonship does not take away   
any argument1 by which we prove his     
,deity2 for when we consider him as     
,mediator1 we always suppose him to be  
both ,god and man1 which is what we     
intend when we speak of the ,person of  

,christ in this respect2 so that1 as    
,god1 he is equal with the ,father1 and 
has an equal right to divine adoration4 
,this belongs to him as much1 when      
considered as ,mediator1 as it can be   
supposed to do1 if we consider his      
,sonship in any other respect4  #c4 ,it 
does not take away any argument to prove
 his distinct ,personality from the     
,father and ,holy ,ghost1 or1 at least1 
if it sets aside that which is taken    
from the dependence of his ,personality 
on the ,father1 as received from him by 
communication1 it substitutes another in
 the room of it1 inasmuch as to be a    
,mediator is1 without doubt1 a personal 
character2 and because neither the      
,father1 nor the ,holy ,ghost1 can be   
said to be ,mediators1 it implies1 that 
his ,personality is distinct from       
theirs2 likewise his acting as ,mediator
 from the ,father2 and the ,holy        
,spirit's securing the glory which      
arises to him from hence1 and applying  
the redemption purchased by him1 is a   

farther proof of this distinction of the
 ,persons in the ,godhead4  #d4 ,since  
we consider the ,mediator as both ,god  
and man1 in one ,person1 we do not      
suppose that this character respects    
either of his two natures1 considered   
separately4  7#a47 ,not his divine      
nature4 ,it is true1 that his having the
 same nature with the ,father might be  
reckoned1 by some1 a character of       
,sonship1 as it contains one ingredient 
in the common idea that we have among   
men4 ,they1 as sons1 are said to have   
the same kind of nature with their      
fathers2 so our ,saviour's having the   
same individual nature with the ,father 
might give occasion to some to          
denominate him1 for that reason1 his    
,son2 but though this may be the        
foundation of his being called ,god's   
proper ,son1  1 yet this is not his     
distinguishing character as a ,son3 for 
it would follow from hence1 that the    
,holy ,ghost1 who has the same nature   
with the ,father1 would1 for that       

reason1 be called his ,son1 which is    
contrary to the scripture-account given 
of him1 as proceeding from the ,father  
and the ,son4  7#b47 ,this character of 
,christ1 as ,god-man1 ,mediator1 does   
not respect his human nature1 considered
 separately from his divine1 nor any of 
those peculiar honours conferred upon   
it1 beyond what any mere creatures are  
made partakers of4  ,this leads us to   
consider the difference between this    
notion of his ,sonship1 and that which  
was generally assigned1 as the reason of
 his being so called1 by the ,socinians2
 these generally speak of ,christ1 as   
being denominated the ,son of ,god1     
because of the extraordinary and        
miraculous conception1 or formation1 of 
his human nature in the womb of the     
,virgin2 and for this they refer to that
 scripture in ,luke i4 #ce4aja ,the     
,holy ,ghost shall come upon thee1 and  
the power of the highest shall          
overshadow thee2 therefore also that    
,holy ,thing1 which shall be born of    

thee1 shall be called the ,son of ,god4 
,the sense1 in which they understand    
this text1 is1 that ,christ is called   
the ,son of ,god1 because of this       
extraordinary event3 ,but we cannot     
think that a miraculous production is a 
sufficient foundation to support this   
character1 and therefore must conclude1 
that the glory of ,christ's ,sonship is 
infinitely greater than what arises from
 thence3 therefore1 ,i humbly conceive  
that this scripture is to be understood1
 with a small variation of the          
translation1 in this sense1 ,the ,holy  
,ghost shall come upon thee1 c4 because 
that ,holy ,thing1 which shall be born  
of thee1 shall be called1 as he really  
is1 the ,son of ,god2 that is1 he is as 
,mediator1 an extraordinary ,person     
appointed to execute a glorious office1 
the ,godhead and the manhood being to be
 united together1 upon which account he 
is called the ,son of ,god3 and         
therefore it is expedient that the      
formation of his human nature should be 

in an extraordinary way1 to wit1 by the 
power of the ,holy ,ghost4  ,again1     
there is a very wide difference between 
our account of ,christ's ,sonship1 as   
,mediator1 and theirs1 as taken from    
this scripture1 in that they suppose    
that his being called the ,son of ,god1 
refers only to some dignities conferred 
upon him1 whom they suppose to be no    
more than a man4 ,this is infinitely    
below the glory1 which we ascribe to    
him1 as ,mediator1 since their idea of  
him1 as such1 how extraordinary soever  
his conception was1 argues him to be no 
more than a creature2 but ours1 as has  
been before observed1 proves him a      
divine ,person1 since we never speak of 
him1 as ,mediator1 without including    
both natures4  ,having premised these   
things1 to explain our sense of         
,christ's being called the ,son of ,god1
 as ,mediator1 we proceed to prove this 
from scripture4 ,and here we are not    
under a necessity of straining the sense
 of a few scriptures1 to make them speak

 agreeably to this notion of ,christ's  
,sonship2 but1 ,i think1 we have the    
whole scripture1 whenever it speaks of  
,christ1 as the ,son of ,god1 as giving 
countenance to this plain sense thereof2
 so that ,i cannot find one place1 in   
the whole ,new ,testament1 in which     
,christ is called the ,son of ,god1 but 
it is1 with sufficient evidence1 proved1
 from the context1 that it is applied to
 him1 as ,mediator4 ,here we shall refer
 to several scriptures1 in which he is  
so considered3 thus that scripture      
before-mentioned1 in ,matth4 xvi4 #af4  
where ,peter confesses1 ,thou art       
,christ1 the ,son of the living ,god2 in
 which1 speaking of him as ,christ1 or  
the ,mediator1 that is1 the ,person who 
was invested in the office1 and came to 
perform the work of a ,mediator1 he is1 
in this respect1 the ,son of the living 
,god2 so when the high priest asked our 
,saviour1 ,matth4 xxvi4 #fc4 ,art thou  
the ,christ1 the ,son of ,god8 that is1 
art thou the ,messiah1 as thou art      

supposed to be by thy followers8 ,our   
,saviour1 in ver4 #fd4 replied to him1  
,thou hast said1 that is1 it is as thou 
hast said2 and then he describes himself
 in another character1 by which he is   
often represented1 as ,mediator1 and    
speaks of the highest degree of his     
,mediatorial glory to which he shall be 
advanced at his second coming1 ver4 #fd4
 ,nevertheless1 ,i say unto you1        
,hereafter shall ye see the ,son of man 
sitting on the right hand of power1 and 
coming in the clouds of heaven4 ,and1   
doubtless1 the centurion1 and they who  
were with him1 when they confessed that 
he was the ,son of ,god1 in ,matth4     
xxvii4 #ed4 understood by it1 that he   
was the ,messiah1 or the ,christ1 which 
is a character by which he was most     
known1 and which had been supported by  
so many miracles1 and was now confirmed 
by this miracle of the earthquake1 which
 gave him this conviction2 also in ,luke
 iv4 #da4 when the devils are           
represented as crying out1 ,thou art    

,christ1 the ,son of ,god1 it follows1  
that they knew that he was ,christ2 so  
that the commonly received notion of our
 ,saviour's ,sonship was1 that he was   
the ,christ4 ,and in ,john xi4 #c4 when 
,jesus says concerning ,lazarus1 that   
his sickness was not unto death1 that   
is1 not such as that he should continue 
in the state of the dead1 but for the   
glory of ,god1 that the ,son of ,god    
might be glorified thereby1 the meaning 
is1 that he might give a proof of his   
being the ,christ1 by raising him from  
the dead2 therefore1 when he speaks to  
,martha1 with a design to try whether   
she believed he could raise her brother 
from the dead1 and represents himself to
 her as the object of faith1 she        
replies1 ver4 #bg4 ,i believe that thou 
art the ,christ the ,son of ,god1 which 
should come into the world4 ,again1 it  
is said1 in ,acts ix4 #bj4 that ,saul1  
when converted1 preached ,christ in the 
synagogues1 that he is the ,son of ,god1
 that is1 he proved him to be the       

,messiah2 and accordingly1 ver4 #bb4    
when he was establishing the same       
doctrine1 it is said1 that he proved    
that he was the very ,christ4           
,moreover1 our ,saviour is farther      
described1 in scripture1 as executing   
some of his mediatorial offices1 or as  
having received a commission to execute 
them from the ,father1 or as having some
 branches of mediatorial glory conferred
 upon him1 at the same time that he is  
called the ,son of ,god1 which gives us 
ground to conclude1 that this is the    
import of his ,sonship4 ,thus we read1  
,heb4 iv4 #ad4 that we have a great     
,high ,priest that is passed into the   
heavens1 ,jesus1 the ,son of ,god2 and  
in ,john i4 #bi4 ,john the ,baptist     
gives a public testimony to him1 as     
sustaining such a character1 which      
belongs to him1 as ,mediator1 when he   
says1 ,behold the ,lamb of ,god which   
taketh away the sins of the world2 and  
afterwards1 referring to the same       
character1 he says1 ver4 #cd4 ,i saw1   

and bare record1 that this is the ,son  
of ,god2 and at another time he gives a 
noble testimony to him1 as ,god-man1    
,mediator1 ,john iii4 #bi1 c4 when he   
calls him1 ,the ,bridegroom which hath  
the bride1 that is1 who is related to1  
and has a propriety1 in his church1 and 
that he testifies what he has seen and  
heard1 and that it is he whom ,god hath 
sent1 who speaks the words of ,god1 for 
,god giveth not the ,spirit by measure  
unto him2 and then1 as a farther        
explication hereof1 he says1 ver4 #ce4  
,the ,father loveth the ,son1 and hath  
given all things into his hand4 ,this   
is1 in effect1 the same1 as when he is  
called elsewhere1 his beloved ,son2 and1
 in ,heb4 iii4 #f4 ,christ is said to be
 a ,son over his own house1 whose house 
are we2 which denotes not only his      
propriety in his church1 but his being  
the ,head thereof1 as ,mediator2 and the
 apostle1 #a ,thess4 i4 #aj4 speaks of  
him1 as the ,son of ,god1 whom we are to
 wait for from heaven2 whom he has      

raised from the dead1 even ,jesus1 which
 delivered us from the wrath to come2   
and1 ,gal4 ii4 #bj4 he speaks of the    
,son of ,god1 as one who loved him1 and 
gave himself for him2 and ,col4 i4 #ac4 
he is spoken of as ,god's dear ,son1    
and1 at the same time1 as having a      
kingdom1 into which his people are      
translated2 and in the following verse1 
as the person in whom we have           
redemption1 through his blood1 who is   
the image of the invisible ,god1 the    
first-born of every creature2 which     
seems to be taken in the same sense as  
when he said1 ,heb4 i4 #b4 to have been 
appointed ,heir of all things1 and so   
referring to him as ,god-man1 ,mediator4
  ,moreover1 when he is considered as a 
,son related to his ,father2 this       
appears1 from the context1 to be a      
description of him as ,mediator4 ,thus1 
,john xx4 #ag4 he says1 ,i ascend unto  
my ,father1 and your ,father2 to my     
,god1 and your ,god2 that is1 my ,father
 by whom ,i am constituted ,mediator1   

and your ,father1 namely1 the ,god who  
loves you for my sake3 he is first my   
,god1 as he has honoured1 loved and     
glorified me2 and then your ,god1 as he 
is reconciled to you for my sake2 so the
 apostle says1 #b ,cor4 i4 #c4 ,blessed 
be ,god1 even the ,father of our ,lord  
,jesus ,christ2 the ,father of mercies1 
and the ,god of all comfort4  ,object4  
#a4 ,in these scriptures1 and others of 
the like nature1 there are two ideas    
contained2 namely1 one of our ,saviour1 
as the ,son of ,god1 by eternal         
generation2 the other of him1 as        
,mediator2 whereas we suppose that one  
contains only an explication of the     
other4  ,answ4 ,if ,christ's ,sonship1  
in the sense in which it is generally   
explained1 were sufficiently proved from
 other scriptures1 which take no notice 
of his mediatorial character1 or works1 
or could be accounted for1 without being
 liable to the difficulties             
before-mentioned1 and if his character1 
as ,mediator1 did not contain in it an  

idea of ,personality1 the objection     
would have more weight than otherwise it
 seems to have4  ,object4 #b4 ,it is    
said1 ,gal4 iv4 #d4 ,god sent forth his 
,son1 made of a woman1 made under the   
law2 therefore he was the ,son of ,god  
before he was sent into the world1 when 
made of a woman1 and under the law1 that
 is1 his ,son by eternal generation4    
,answ4 ,the answer ,i would give to this
 objection is1  #a4 ,it is not necessary
 to suppose that ,christ had the        
character of a ,son before he was sent1 
though he had that of a divine ,person2 
since the words may1 without any strain1
 or force1 upon the sense thereof1 be   
understood thus2 when the fulness of    
time was come1 in which the ,messiah was
 expected1 ,god sent him forth1 or sent 
him into the world1 with the character  
of a ,son1 at which time he was made of 
a woman1 made under the law2 the end    
whereof was1 that he might redeem them  
that were under the law4  #b4 ,if we    
suppose ,christ had the character of a  

,son before he was sent into the world1 
it will not overthrow our argument3     
since he was1 by the ,father's          
designation1 an eternal ,mediator1 and1 
in this respect1 ,god's eternal ,son2   
and therefore1 he who before was so by  
virtue of the eternal decree1 is now    
actually sent1 that he might be1 and do1
 what he was from all eternity designed 
to be1 and do3 he was set up from       
everlasting1 or appointed to be the ,son
 of ,god2 and now he is sent to perform 
the work which this character implies in
 it4  ,object4 #c4 ,it is farther       
objected1 that his ,sonship is distinct 
from his being ,mediator1 inasmuch as it
 is said1 ,heb4 v4 #h4 ,though he were a
 ,son1 yet learned he obedience by the  
things which he suffered4 ,now it       
cannot1 in propriety of speech1 be said1
 though he were ,mediator1 yet he       
learned obedience1 since he was under an
 obligation to obey1 and suffer as      
,mediator2 therefore the meaning must   
be1 though he were a ,son by eternal    

generation1 yet he condescended to put  
himself into such a capacity1 as that he
 was obliged to obey1 and suffer1 as    
,mediator4  ,answ4 ,the stress of the   
objection lies in the word which we     
render though1     c4 which may be      
rendered1 with a small variation1 though
 being a ,son1 he learned obedience by  
the things he suffered2 but being made  
perfect1 viz4 after his sufferings1 he  
became the author of eternal salvation1 
unto all them that obey him2 and then it
 takes away the force of the objection4 
,however1 ,i see no absurdity if it be  
rendered1 as it is in the vulgar ,latin 
version1 ,and1 indeed1 being a ,son1 he 
learned obedience#ajb1 and then it      
proves the argument we are endeavouring 
to defend1 q4 d4 it is agreeable to the 
character of a son to learn obedience2  
it was with this view that it was       
conferred upon him1 and in performing   
obedience1 and suffering as ,mediator1  
and thereby securing the glory of the   
divine perfections in bringing about the

 work of our redemption1 he acted in    
pursuance of that character4  ,object4  
#a4 ,it will be farther objected1 that  
what we have said concerning the        
,sonship of ,christ1 as referred to his 
being ,mediator1 has some consequences  
attending it1 which seem derogatory to  
his ,person2 particularly1 it will      
follow from hence1 that had not man     
fallen1 and stood in need of a          
,mediator1 our ,saviour would not have  
had that character1 and therefore never 
have been described as the ,son of ,god1
 or worshipped as such4 ,and our first  
parents1 while in the state of          
innocency1 knowing nothing of a         
,mediator1 knew nothing of the ,sonship 
of ,christ1 and therefore could not give
 him the glory1 which is the result     
thereof4 ,moreover1 as ,god might have  
prevented the fall of man1 or1 when     
fallen1 he might have refused to have   
recovered him by a ,mediator2 so our    
,saviour might not have been the ,son of
 ,god1 that is1 according to the        

foregoing explication thereof1 a        
,mediator between ,god and man4  ,answ4 
,this objection may be very easily      
answered1 and the charge1 of ,christ's  
mediatorial ,sonship being derogatory to
 his glory1 removed2 which that we may  
do1 let it be considered1  #a4 ,that we 
allow1 that had not man fallen1 our     
,saviour would not have been a ,mediator
 between ,god and man2 and the commonly 
received notion is true1 that his being 
a ,mediator is1 by divine ordination and
 appointment1 according to the tenor of 
several scriptures relating thereunto2  
and ,i see no absurdity in asserting1   
that his character1 as the ,son of ,god1
 or ,mediator1 is equally the result of 
the divine will1 or decree4 ,but this ,i
 hope1 if duly considered1 will not     
contain the least diminution of his     
glory1 when we farther assert1  #b4     
,that though our ,saviour had not       
sustained this character if man had not 
fallen1 or if ,god had not designed to  
bring about the work of redemption by   

him1 yet he would have been no less a   
distinct ,person in the ,godhead1 and1  
as such1 would have had a right to      
divine glory4 ,this appears from what   
hath been before said1 concerning his   
personality being equally necessary with
 his ,deity1 which1 if it be not        
communicated to him1 certainly it has   
not the least appearance of being the   
result of the divine will2 and1 indeed1 
his divine personality is the only      
foundation of his right to be adored1   
and not his being invested in an office1
 which only draws forth1 or occasions   
our adoration4 ,when we speak of        
,christ's being adored1 as ,mediator1 it
 is his divine personality1 which is    
included in that character1 that renders
 him the object of adoration1 and not   
his taking the human nature1 or being1  
or doing1 what he was1 or did1 by divine
 appointment2 and ,i question whether   
they1 who assert that he had the divine 
nature1 or personality1 communicated to 
him1 will lay the stress of his right to

 divine adoration1 on its being         
communicated1 but on his having it1     
abstracting from his manner of having   
it2 so when we speak of ,christ as      
,mediator1 it is his having the divine  
glory1 or personality1 which is included
 in that character1 that renders him the
 object of adoration2 therefore1 if man 
had not fallen1 and ,christ had not been
 ,mediator1 he would have had a right to
 divine glory1 as a ,person in the      
,godhead4 ,and ,i doubt not but that our
 first parents1 before they fell1 had an
 intimation hereof1 and adored him as   
such2 so that if ,christ had not been   
,mediator1 it would only follow from    
thence1 that he would not have had the  
character of a ,son1 but he would1      
notwithstanding1 have had the glory of a
 divine ,person2 for though his sonship 
be the result of the divine will1 his   
personality is not so4#ajc  ,having     
enquired into the sense of those        
scriptures which treat of the ,sonship  
of ,christ1 we shall next consider those

 that are generally brought to prove the
 procession of the ,holy ,ghost2 the    
principal of which1 as has been before  
observed1 are in ,john xiv4 #bf4 and    
chap4 xv4 #bf4 and xvi4 #g4 in which he 
is said to proceed from the ,father1 or 
to be sent by the ,father in ,christ's  
name1 or to be sent by the ,son4 ,we    
have already considered the most        
commonly received sense hereof1 as      
including in it an eternal procession1  
viz4 the communication of the divine    
essence1 or personality to him1 as      
distinguished from the eternal          
generation of the ,son2 but now we shall
 enquire whether there may not be       
another sense given of these scriptures1
 agreeable to the analogy of faith1 that
 may be acquiesced in by those1 who     
cannot so well understand1 or account   
for1 the common sense given thereof1    
which1 ,i humbly conceive1 is this3 that
 the ,spirit is considered not with     
respect to the manner of his subsisting1
 but with respect to the subserviency of

 his acting1 to set forth the           
,mediator's glory1 and that of the      
,father that sent him4 ,i chuse to call 
it a subserviency of acting1 without    
connoting any inferiority in the agent2 
or if we suppose that it argues any     
inferiority in the ,holy ,spirit1 this  
is only an inferiority in acting1 as the
 works that he does are subservient to  
the glory of the ,mediator1 and of the  
,father1 though his divine personality  
is1 in all respects1 equal with theirs4 
,this explication of these texts1 is    
allowed of by many1 if not by most1 of  
those who defend the doctrine of the    
,trinity1 notwithstanding their         
maintaining another notion of the       
,spirit's procession from the ,father   
and the ,son1 from all eternity1 in the 
sense before considered4 ,i need only   
refer to that explication which a great 
and learned divine gives of these1 and  
such like texts1 notwithstanding his    
adhering1 in other respects1 to the     
common mode of speaking1 relating to the

 eternal generation of the ,son1 and    
procession of the ,holy ,ghost4 ,his    
words are these#ajf3 8,all that         
discourse which we have of the mission1 
and sending of the ,holy ,ghost1 and his
 proceeding and coming forth from the   
,father and ,son1 for the ends          
specified1 ,john xiv4 #bf4 and xv4 #bf4 
and xvi4 #g1 #ac4 concerns not at all   
the eternal procession of the ,holy     
,ghost from the ,father and ,son1 as to 
his distinct personality and            
subsistance1 but belongs to that conomy1
 or dispensation of the ministry1 that  
the whole ,trinity proceedeth in1 for   
the accomplishment of the work of our   
salvation40  ,now if these scriptures1  
which are the chief in all the ,new     
,testament1 on which this doctrine is   
founded1 are to be taken in this sense1 
how shall we find a sufficient proof1   
from other scriptures1 of the procession
 of the ,holy ,ghost in any other sense8
 ,therefore1 that we may farther explain
 this doctrine1 let us consider1 that   

whatever the ,son1 as ,mediator1 has    
purchased1 as being sent by the ,father 
for that end1 is applied by the ,holy   
,ghost1 who therefore acts in           
subserviency to them4 ,this is generally
 called1 by divines1 the conomy of      
persons in the ,godhead1 which1 because 
it is a word that we often use1 when we 
consider the distinct works of the      
,father1 ,son1 and ,spirit1 in their    
respective subserviency to one another1 
we shall take occasion briefly to       
explain1 and shew how it may be applied 
to them in that respect without         
inferring any inferiority as to what    
concerns their ,personal glory4 ,we     
shall say nothing concerning the        
derivation1 or use1 of the word conomy1 
though we cannot forbear to mention1    
with indignation1 the sense which some  
of the opposers of the blessed ,trinity 
have given of it1 while laying aside all
 the rules of decency and reverence1    
which this sacred mystery calls for1    
they represent us1 as speaking of the   

family-government of the divine         
,persons1 which is the most invidious   
sense they could put upon the word1 and 
most remote from our design in the use  
of it4 ,now that we may explain and     
apply it to our present purpose1 let it 
be considered1  #a4 ,that all those     
works1 which are the effects of the     
divine power1 or sovereign will1 are    
performed by all the ,persons in the    
,godhead1 and attributed to them in     
scripture2 the reason whereof is very   
evident1 namely1 because the power and  
will of ,god1 and all other divine      
perfections1 belong equally1 and alike1 
to the ,father1 ,son1 and ,spirit3 if   
therefore that which produces these     
effects belongs to them1 then the       
effects produced must be equally        
ascribed to them2 so that the ,father is
 no more said to create and govern the  
world1 or to be the author of all grace1
 and the fountain of blessedness1 than  
the ,son and ,spirit4  #b4              
,nevertheless1 since the ,father1 ,son1 

and ,spirit1 are distinct ,persons1 and 
so have distinct personal considerations
 in acting1 it is necessary that their  
personal glory should be demonstrated1  
or made known to us1 that our faith and 
worship may be fixed on1 and directed to
 them1 in a distinct manner1 as founded 
thereon4  #c4 ,this distinction of the  
,persons in the ,godhead cannot be      
known1 as their eternal power or ,deity 
is said to be1 by the works of creation 
and providence1 it being a doctrine of  
pure revelation2 therefore1  #d4 ,we are
 given to understand1 in scripture1 when
 it treats of the great work of our     
salvation1 that it is attributed first  
to the ,father1 then to the ,son1 as    
,mediator1 receiving a commission from  
him to redeem and save his people1 and  
then to the ,holy ,ghost1 acting in     
subserviency thereunto2 this is what we 
are to understand when we speak of the  
distinct conomy of the ,father1 ,son1   
and ,spirit1 which ,i cannot better     
express than by considering of it as a  

divine determination1 that the personal 
glory of the ,father1 ,son1 and ,spirit1
 should be demonstrated in such a way4  
,now1 to instance in some particular    
acts1 or works2 when a divine ,person is
 represented in scripture as doing1 or  
determining to do1 any thing relating to
 the work of our redemption1 or         
salvation1 by another divine ,person1   
who must1 for that reason1 be considered
 herein1 as ,mediator1 it is to be      
understood of the ,father1 in this      
conomic sense1 inasmuch as1 by this     
means1 he demonstrates his personal     
glory3 thus it is said1 ,eph4 i4 #d1 #e4
 ,he1 i4 e4 the ,father1 hath chosen us 
in him1 namely1 the ,son2 and he is said
 to have predestinated us unto the      
adoption of children by ,jesus ,christ4 
,though election and predestination are 
also applied to the ,son and ,spirit1   
when they have another reference        
corresponding with the demonstration of 
their personal glory1 yet1 in this      
place1 they are only applied to the     

,father4 ,and there are several other   
scriptures1 in which things done are    
particularly applied to the ,father for 
the same reason4 ,thus1 #b ,cor4 v4 #ah1
 #ai4 it is said1 ,god hath reconciled  
us to himself by ,jesus ,christ1 and    
that he was in ,christ1 reconciling the 
world to himself2 and1 in #a ,cor4 i4   
#cj4 it is said1 ,of him1 namely the    
,father1 are ye in ,christ ,jesus1 who  
of ,god1 that is1 the ,father1 is made  
unto us wisdom1 c4 in which1 and several
 other scriptures to the same purpose1  
the ,father is1 in a peculiar manner1   
intended1 because considered1 as no     
other divine person is1 as acting by the
 ,mediator1 or as glorifying the        
perfections of the divine nature1 which 
belong to him1 by what this great       
,mediator did by his appointment4       
,moreover when a divine ,person is      
considered as acting in subserviency to 
the ,father's glory1 or executing a     
commission relating to the work of      
redemption1 which he had received from  

him1 and accordingly performing any act 
of obedience in an human nature assumed 
by him for that purpose1 this is        
peculiarly applied to1 and designed to  
demonstrate the ,son's ,personal        
character1 as belonging to no other     
,person in the ,godhead but him4 ,of    
this we have several instances in       
scripture2 thus though to judge the     
world be a branch of the divine glory1  
which is common to all the ,persons in  
the ,godhead2 yet there are some        
circumstances in the character of a     
divine ,person in particular1 who is    
denominated as ,judge of quick and dead1
 that are applicable to none but the    
,son2 and so we are to understand that  
scripture1 ,john v4 #bb4 ,the ,father   
judgeth no man1 but hath committed all  
judgment unto the ,son2 that is1 the    
,son is the only ,person in the ,godhead
 who displays his ,mediatorial character
 and glory1 as the ,judge of the whole  
world2 yet when there is another        
personal character ascribed to ,god1 as 

the ,judge of all2 or when he is said to
 judge the world in righteousness1 by   
that ,man1 to wit1 our ,lord ,jesus1    
whom he hath ordained1 as in ,acts xvii4
 #ca4 then this personal character      
determines it to belong to the ,father4 
,again1 to give eternal life is a divine
 prerogative1 and consequently belongs  
to all the ,persons in the ,godhead2 yet
 when a divine ,person is said to give  
eternal life to a people1 that were     
given to him for that purpose1 and to   
have received power1 or authority1 from 
another1 to confer this privilege as    
,mediator1 then it is peculiarly applied
 to the ,son3 thus ,john xvii4 #b4 ,thou
 hast given him power over all flesh1   
that he should give eternal life to as  
many as thou hast given him4  ,moreover1
 when a divine ,person is said to do any
 thing in subserviency to the ,mediator2
 or1 as it is said1 in ,john xvi4 #ad4  
,he shall glorify me2 for he shall      
receive of mine1 and shall shew it unto 
you1 this is peculiarly applied to the  

,spirit4 ,so when he is said to give his
 testimony to the mission1 or work of   
the ,mediator1 by any divine works      
performed by him1 this is peculiarly    
applied to him2 or when he is said to   
sanctify and comfort1 or to seal and    
confirm believers unto the day of       
redemption4 ,though these being divine  
works1 are1 for that reason1 applicable 
to all the ,persons in the ,godhead2 yet
 when he is said to perform them in a   
way of subserviency to ,christ1 as      
having purchased them1 then his distinct
 personal character1 taken from thence1 
is demonstrated1 and so these works are 
especially applied to him4 ,this is what
 we understand by that peculiar conomy1 
or dispensation1 which determines us to 
give distinct personal glory to each of 
the ,persons in the ,godhead4  ,and now 
we are speaking of the ,spirit1         
considered as acting1 whereby he sets   
forth his ,personal glory1 we may       
observe1 that1 in compliance with this  
way of speaking1 the gifts and graces of

 the ,spirit1 are1 by a metonymy1 called
 the ,spirit1 as in ,acts xix4 #b4 when 
it is said1 ,have ye received the ,holy 
,ghost8 ,they said unto him1 ,we have   
not so much as heard whether there be   
any ,holy ,ghost4 ,we are not to        
understand it as though they had not    
heard whether there were such a ,person 
as the ,holy ,ghost2 but they had not   
heard that there was such an            
extraordinary dispensation of the gifts 
of the ,holy ,ghost conferred on men2 so
 ,john vii4 #ci4 it is said1 ,the ,holy 
,ghost was not yet given1 because ,jesus
 was not yet glorified2 the word given  
being supplied in our translation1 and  
not in the original2 it ought rather to 
be rendered1 ,the ,holy ,ghost was not  
as yet2 by which we are to understand   
the gifts of the ,holy ,ghost1 and not  
his ,personality1 which was from all    
eternity4  ,and here we may farther     
observe1 that when the ,holy ,ghost is  
spoken of as a ,person1 that word which 
denotes his ,personality1 ought not to  

be rendered ,it1 but ,he1 as expressive 
of his ,personal character2 but when it 
is taken in a figurative sense1 for the 
gifts or graces of the ,spirit1 then it 
should be translated ,it4 ,this is      
sometimes observed in our translation of
 scripture2 as in ,john xvi4 #ac4 it is 
said of the ,spirit1 ,he will guide you 
into all truth1 where the ,personal     
character of the ,spirit is expressly   
mentioned1 as it ought to be3 but it is 
not duly observed by our translators in 
every scripture2 ,rom4 viii4 #af4 it is 
said1 ,the ,spirit itself beareth       
witness1 which ought to have been       
rendered ,himself2 as also in ver4 #bf4 
,the ,spirit itself maketh intercession 
for us4 ,the same ought to be observed  
in all other scriptures1 whereby we may 
be led to put a just difference between 
the ,spirit1 considered as a divine     
,person2 or as acting1 or producing     
those effects1 which are said to be     
wrought by him4  ,thus concerning the   
,sonship of ,christ1 and the procession 

of the ,holy ,ghost4 ,what ,i have said1
 in attempting to explain those         
scripture that treat of the ,person of  
,christ1 as ,god-man1 ,mediator1 and of 
his inferiority1 in that respect1 7or as
 he is said to sustain that character7  
to the ,father2 as also those which     
speak of the subserviency of the        
,spirit1 in acting1 to the ,father and  
the ,son1 does not1 as ,i apprehend1 run
 counter to the common faith of those   
who have defended the doctrine of the   
ever blessed ,trinity4 ,therefore ,i    
hope that when ,i call one the ,sonship 
of ,christ1 and the other the procession
 of the ,holy ,ghost1 this will not be  
deemed a new and strange doctrine4 ,and 
,i cannot but persuade myself1 that what
 ,i have said concerning the ,mediator1 
as acting in obedience to the ,father1  
and the ,spirit1 in subserviency to him1
 will not be contested by those who     
defend the doctrine of the ,trinity4    
,and1 if ,i have a little varied from   
the common way of speaking1 ,i hope none

 will be offended at the acceptation of 
a word1 especially since ,i have        
endeavoured to defend my sense thereof1 
by referring to many scriptures4 ,and1  
if ,i cannot give into the common       
explication of the eternal generation of
 the ,son1 and the procession of the    
,holy ,ghost1 ,i am well satisfied ,i do
 no more than what many ,christians do1 
who have received the doctrine of the   
,trinity from the scripture1 and are    
unacquainted with those modes of        
speaking which are used in the schools3 
these appear as much to dislike them1   
when used in public discourses about    
this doctrine1 as any other can do1 what
 has been attempted to explain it in a  
different way4  ,,iv4 ,we shall now     
proceed to consider the ,godhead of the 
,son1 and ,holy ,ghost1 as maintained in
 one of the answers we are explaining1  
by four general heads of argument4  ,i4 
,from those divine names which are given
 to them1 that are peculiar to ,god     
alone4  ,,ii4 ,from their having the    

divine attributes ascribed to them1 and 
consequently the divine nature4  ,,iii4 
,from their having manifested their     
divine glory1 by those works that none  
but ,god can perform4  ,,iv4 ,from their
 having a right to divine worship1 which
 none but ,god is worthy to receive4    
,if these things be made to appear1 we  
have all that we need contend for2 and  
it will be evident from thence1 that the
 ,son and ,holy ,ghost are ,god equal   
with the ,father4 ,these heads of       
argument we shall apply to them         
distinctly2 and1  ,first1 ,to the ,son1 
who appears to be ,god equal with the   
,father1  ,i4 ,from those divine names  
given to him1 that are peculiar to ,god 
alone4 ,and here we shall premise       
something concerning the use of names   
given to persons1 together with the     
design thereof4 ,names are given to     
persons1 as well as things1 with a      
twofold design4  #a4 ,sometimes nothing 
else is intended thereby1 but to        
distinguish one from another1 in which  

sense the names given are not in        
themselves significant1 or expressive of
 any property1 or quality1 in those that
 are so described4 ,thus most of those  
names we read of in scripture1 though   
not all of them1 are designed only to   
distinguish one man from another1 which 
is the most common use and design       
thereof2 notwithstanding1  #b4 ,they are
 sometimes given to signify some        
property in those to whom they are      
applied1 viz4 what they should be1 or   
do4 ,thus we have many instances1 in    
scripture1 of persons called by names1  
which have had some special             
signification annexed to them1 assigned 
as a reason of their being so called4   
,thus ,adam had that name given him1    
because made of earth2 and ,eve was so  
called1 because she was the mother of   
all living4 ,the same may be said       
concerning ,seth1 ,noah1 ,abraham1      
,isaac1 ,jacob1 ,moses1 ,joshua1        
,samuel1 and several others1 whose      
respective names have a signification   

annexed to them1 agreeable to the proper
 sense of the words1 and the design of  
their being so called4  ,and1 to apply  
this to our present purpose1 we may     
conclude1 that when names are given to  
any divine ,person1 they are designed to
 express some excellency and perfection 
belonging to him2 and therefore we shall
 have sufficient reason to conclude the 
,son to be a divine ,person1 if we can  
make it appear that he has those names  
given to him in scripture1 which are    
proper to ,god alone4 ,and1  #a4 ,the   
name ,jehovah is given to him1 which is 
peculiar to ,god4 ,here we shall prove1 
,first1 that the name ,jehovah is       
peculiar to ,god4 ,and1 ,secondly1 that 
it is ascribed to ,christ4  7#a47 ,that 
the name ,jehovah is peculiar to ,god1  
whereby he is distinguished from all    
creatures3 thus it is said1 ,isa4 xlii4 
#h4 ,i am the ,lord1 or ,jehovah1 that  
is my name1 and my glory will ,i not    
give to another2 or1 as the text may be 
rendered1 ,i am ,jehovah1 that name of  

mine1 and my glory1 which is signified  
thereby1 will ,i not give to another3   
therefore it follows1 that it is an     
incommunicable name of ,god3 and when he
 says1 ,i will not give it to another1  
it supposes that it necessarily belongs 
to him2 and therefore that he cannot    
give it to another1 since that would be 
unbecoming himself2 therefore this name1
 which is expressive of his glory in so 
peculiar a manner1 is never given to any
 creature4  ,there are other scriptures 
to this purpose1 in which the name      
,jehovah is represented1 as peculiar to 
,god4 ,thus when the prophet ,amos had  
been speaking of the glory of ,god1 as  
displayed in the works of creation and  
providence1 he adds1 that the ,lord1 or 
,jehovah1 is his name1 chap4 v4 #h4 ,so 
that those works1 which are peculiar to 
,god1 might as well be applied to       
creatures1 as that name ,jehovah1 which 
is agreeable thereunto4 ,and in chap4   
ix4 #f4 the prophet gives another       
magnificent description of ,god1 with   

respect to those works that are peculiar
 to him1 when he says1 ,it is he that   
buildeth his stories in the heaven1 and 
hath founded his troop in the earth2 he 
that calleth for the waters of the sea1 
and poureth them out upon the face of   
the earth2 and then he adds1 the ,lord1 
or ,jehovah1 is his name4  ,again1 it is
 said1 in ,psal4 lxxxiii4 #ah4 ,that men
 may know1 that thou1 whose name alone  
is ,jehovah1 art the most high over all 
the earth4 ,this is never said of any   
other divine names1 which are1 in a     
limited sense1 sometimes given to       
creatures2 and1 indeed1 all creatures   
are expressly excluded from having a    
right hereunto4  ,again1 there are other
 scriptures1 in which this name ,jehovah
 is applied to ,god1 and an explication 
thereof subjoined1 which argues that it 
is peculiar to him4 ,thus when ,moses   
desired of ,god1 that he would let him  
know what his name was for the          
encouragement of the faith of the       
,israelites1 to whom he sent him1 ,exod4

 iii4 #ac4 q4 d4 he desires to know what
 are those divine glories1 that would   
render him the object of faith and      
worship2 or how he might describe him in
 such a way to the children of ,israel1 
whereby they might express that         
reverence and regard to him1 that was   
due to the great ,god1 who sent him     
about so important an errand4 ,in answer
 to which ,god says1 ver4 #ad4 ,i ,,am  
,,that ,i ,,am4 ,thus shalt thou say    
unto the children of ,israel1 ,i ,,am   
hath sent me unto you2 which description
 of him doth not set forth one single   
perfection1 but all the perfections of  
the divine nature2 as though he should  
say1 ,i am a ,god of infinite           
perfection2 and then he adds1 in the    
following verse1 ,thou shalt say unto   
the children of ,israel1 ,the ,lord1 or 
,jehovah1 the ,god of your fathers hath 
sent me unto you2 where ,jehovah        
signifies the same with ,i ,,am ,,that  
,i ,,am4 ,and he adds1 ,this is my      
memorial unto all generations2 therefore

 this glorious name is certainly        
peculiar to ,god4  ,what has been       
already observed1 under this head1 is   
sufficient to prove that the name       
,jehovah is proper to ,god alone4 ,but  
we might hereunto add another argument1 
of less weight1 which1 though we do not 
lay that stress upon1 as though it was  
sufficient of itself to prove this      
matter2 yet1 being added to what has    
been already suggested1 it may not be   
improper to be mentioned1 viz4 that the 
word ,jehovah has no plural number1 as  
being never designed to signify any more
 than the one ,god2 neither has it any  
emphatical particle affixed to it1 as   
other words in the ,hebrew language     
have2 and particularly several of the   
other names of ,god1 which distinguishes
 him from others2 who have those names  
sometimes applied to them2 and the      
reason of this is1 because the name     
,jehovah is never given to any creature4
  ,and to this we might add1 that since 
the ,jews best understood their own     

language1 they may1 in some respects1 be
 depended on1 as to the sense they give 
of the word ,jehovah2 and it is certain 
they paid the greatest regard to this   
name1 even to superstition4             
,accordingly1 they would never pronounce
 it2 but1 instead thereof1 use some     
other expressions1 by which they        
describe it4 ,sometimes they call it1   
that name1 or that glorious name1 or    
that name that is not to be             
expressed2#ajg by which they mean1 as   
,josephus says1#ajh that it was not     
lawful for them to utter it1 or1 indeed1
 to write it1 which1 if any one presumed
 to do1 they reckoned him not only      
guilty of profaneness1 in an uncommon   
degree1 but even of blasphemy2 and      
therefore it is never found in any      
writings of human composure among them4 
,the modern ,jews1 indeed1 are not much 
to be regarded1 as retaining the same   
veneration for this name2 but ,onkelos1 
the author of the ,chaldee paraphrase on
 some parts of scripture1 who lived     

about fifty years after our ,saviour's  
time1 and ,jonathan ,ben-,uzziel1 who is
 supposed to have lived as many years   
before it1 never insert it in their     
writings2 and1 doubtless1 they were not 
the first that entertained these        
sentiments about it1 but had other      
writings then extant1 which gave        
occasion thereunto4 ,some critics       
conclude1 from ,jewish writers1 that it 
was never pronounced1 even in the       
earliest ages of the church1 except by  
the ,high ,priest2 and when he was      
obliged1 by the divine law1 to pronounce
 it1 in the form of benediction1 the    
people always expressed an uncommon     
degree of reverence1 either by bowing1  
or prostration2 but this is not         
supported by sufficient evidence4       
,others think it took its rise soon     
after their return from captivity1 which
 is more probable2 however1 the reason  
they assign for it is1 because they     
reckoned it ,god's incommunicable name4 
,and here ,i cannot but observe1 that   

the translators of the ,greek version of
 the ,old ,testament1 commonly called   
the ,,lxx4 which1 if it be not          
altogether the same with that mentioned 
by ,aristus1 which was compiled almost  
three hundred years before the          
,christian ra1 is1 without doubt1 of    
considerable antiquity2 these never     
translate the word ,,jehovah1 but1      
instead thereof1 put 1 ,lord2#aji and1  
even when it seems absurd not to do it1 
as in ,exod4 vi4 #c4 when it is said1 by
 my name1 ,,jehovah1 was ,i not known1  
they render it1 by my name1 the ,,lord1 
was ,i not known4#aaj  ,this we take    
occasion to observe1 not as supposing it
 is a sufficient proof of itself1 of the
 argument we are maintaining1 but as it 
corresponds with the sense of those     
scriptures before mentioned1 by which it
 appears that this is the proper1 or    
incommunicable1 name of ,god4  ,object4 
,it is objected1 by the                 
,anti-,trinitarians1 that the name      
,jehovah is sometimes given to          

creatures1 and consequently that it is  
not ,god's proper name2 nor does it     
evince our ,saviour's ,deity1 when given
 to him4 ,to prove that it is sometimes 
given to creatures1 they refer to       
several scriptures2 as ,exod4 xvii4 #ae4
 where the altar that ,moses erected is 
called ,jehovah ,nissi1 i4 e4 the ,lord 
is my banner2 and1 in ,judges vi4 #bb4  
another altar that ,gideon built1 is    
called ,jehovah ,shallom2 and ,gen4     
xxii4 #ad4 it is said1 that ,abraham    
called the name of the place1 in which  
he was ready to offer ,isaac1 ,jehovah  
,jireh2 and1 in ,ezek4 xlviii4 #ce4 it  
is said1 that ,jerusalem1 from that day1
 should be called ,jehovah ,shammah2    
they add also1 that the ,ark was called 
,jehovah1 upon the occasion of its being
 carried up into the city of ,david1    
when it is said1 ,psal4 xlvii4 #e4 ,the 
,lord1 i4 e4 ,jehovah is gone up with a 
shout1 even the ,lord with the sound of 
a trumpet1 and also on other occasions4 
,and the name ,jehovah is often1 in the 

,old ,testament1 given to angels1 and   
therefore not proper to ,god alone4     
,answ4 #a4 ,when they pretend that the  
name ,jehovah was given to inanimate    
things1 and in particular to altars1 as 
in the instance mentioned in the        
objection1 that one of the altars was   
indeed called ,jehovah ,nissi1 it is    
very unreasonable to suppose1 that the  
name and glory of ,god was put upon it2 
had it been a symbol of ,god's presence1
 it would not have been called by this  
name1 especially in the same sense in   
which our ,saviour and the ,holy ,spirit
 have it applied to them2 and therefore 
the meaning of this scripture1 as ,i    
apprehend1 is nothing but this1 that    
there was an inscription written on the 
altar1 containing these words1 ,jehovah 
,nissi1 the design whereof was to       
signify1 to the faith of those who came 
to worship there1 that the ,lord was    
their banner3 therefore this name1      
strictly speaking1 was not given to the 
altar1 but to ,god2 upon which some1 not

 without good reason1 render the word2  
he built an altar1 and called the name  
of it1 the altar of ,jehovah ,nissi4    
,the same may be said with respect to   
the altar erected by ,gideon1 which was 
called ,jehovah ,shalom1 or the altar of
 ,jehovah ,shalom1 to the end that all  
who came to offer sacrifice upon it1    
might hereby be put in mind that ,god   
was a ,god of peace1 or would give peace
 to them4  #b4 ,as for the place to     
which ,abraham went to offer ,isaac1    
which is called ,jehovah-,jireh1 it was 
the mount ,moriah2 and it is certain    
that this was not known by1 or whenever 
spoken of1 mentioned1 as having that    
name2 neither had ,abraham any right to 
apply to it any branch of the divine    
glory1 as signified thereby2 therefore  
when it is said1 he called the name of  
the place ,jehovah-,jireh1 it is as     
though he should have said1 let all that
 travel over this mountain know1 that   
the ,lord was seen1 or provided a ram   
instead of ,isaac1 who was ready to be  

offered up2 let this place be           
remarkable1 in future ages1 for this    
amazing dispensation of providence1 and 
let them glorify ,god for what was done 
here1 and let the memory hereof be an   
encouragement to their faith4 ,or else  
we may farther consider him speaking as 
a prophet1 and so the meaning is1 this  
place shall be very remarkable in future
 ages1 as it shall be the mount of      
vision2 here ,jehovah will eminently    
appear in his temple1 which shall be    
built in this place4 ,or if you take the
 words in another sense1 viz4 ,god will 
provide1 it is as though he should say1 
as ,god has provided a ram to be offered
 instead of ,isaac1 so he will provide  
the ,lamb of ,god1 who is to take away  
the sin of the world1 which was typified
 by ,isaac's being offered4 ,so that the
 place was not really called ,jehovah2  
but ,abraham takes occasion1 from what  
was done here1 to magnify him1 who      
appeared to him1 and held his hand1 whom
 alone he calls ,jehovah4  ,and to this 

we may add1 that when ,jerusalem is     
called ,jehovah ,shammah1 the ,lord is  
there1 the meaning hereof is only this1 
that it shall eminently be said in      
succeeding ages of the new ,jerusalem1  
that the ,lord is there2 the city1 which
 was commonly known by the name         
,jerusalem1 is not called ,jehovah1 as  
though it had any character of divine   
glory put upon it2 but it implies1 that 
the gospel church1 which is signified   
thereby1 should have the presence of    
,god in an eminent degree2 or1 as our   
,saviour promised to his disciples1     
,matth4 xxviii4 #bj4 that he would be   
with them always1 even unto the end of  
the world2 and1 as the result thereof1  
that the gates of hell should not       
prevail against it1 ,matth4 xvi4 #ah4   
#c4 ,as for the ark2 it was not called  
,jehovah1 though the ,psalmist takes    
occasion1 from its being carried up into
 the city of ,david1 with a joyful      
solemnity1 and an universal shout1 with 
the sound of a trumpet1 to foretel the  

triumphant and magnificent ascension of 
our ,saviour into heaven1 which was     
typified hereby2 concerning whom he     
says1 ,jehovah is gone up2 or1 speaking 
in a prophetic style1 the present1 or   
time past1 being put for the time to    
come1 it is as though he should say1 the
 ,lord1 when he has completed the work  
of redemption on earth1 will ascend into
 heaven1 which shall be the foundation  
of universal joy to the church2 and then
 he shall1 as the ,psalmist farther     
observes1 reign over the heathen1 and   
sit on the throne of his holiness4      
,again1 it does not appear that the ark 
was called ,jehovah1 in ,exod4 xvi4 #cc1
 #cd4 because1 when ,aaron is commanded 
to lay the pot full of manna before the 
testimony1 that is1 the ark1 this is    
called1 a laying it before ,jehovah3 but
 the reason of the expression is this2  
viz4 ,god hath ordained that the        
mercy-seat over the ark should be the   
immediate seat of his residence1 from   
whence he would condescend to converse  

with men1 and accordingly he is said1   
elsewhere1 to dwell between the         
cherubims2 and1 upon this account1 that 
which was laid up before the ark1 might 
be said to be laid up before the ,lord4 
,but since none are so stupid to suppose
 that inanimate things can have the     
divine perfections belonging to them1   
therefore the principal thing contended 
for in this argument1 is1 that the ark  
was called ,jehovah1 because it was a   
sign and symbol of the divine presence2 
and from thence they conclude1 that the 
name of ,god may be applied to a person 
that has no right to the divine glory1  
as the sign is called by the name of the
 thing signified thereby4  ,to which it 
maybe answered1 that the ark was not    
only a sacramental sign of ,god's       
presence1 for that many other things    
relating to ceremonial worship were2 but
 it was also the seat thereof3 it was   
therefore the divine ,majesty who was   
called ,jehovah1 and not the place of   
his residence2 and it was he alone to   

whom the glory was ascribed that is due 
to his name4  #d4 ,when it is farther   
objected1 that the name ,jehovah is     
often applied to angels1 the answer that
 may be given to this is2 that it is    
never ascribed to any but him1 who is   
called1 by way of eminence1 the angel1  
or ,messenger of the covenant1 viz4 our 
,saviour1 ,mal4 iii4 #a4 ,and whenever  
it is given to him1 such glorious things
 are spoken of him1 or such acts of     
divine worship demanded by and given to 
him1 as argue him to be a divine        
,person2 as will plainly appear1 if we  
consider what the angel that appeared1  
in ,exod4 iii4 says concerning himself1 
ver4 #f4 ,i am the ,god of thy fathers1 
the ,god of ,abraham1 the ,god of       
,isaac1 and the ,god of ,jacob2 and it  
is said1 ,moses hid his face1 for he was
 afraid to look upon ,god2 and in verses
 #g1 #h4 ,the ,lord1 or ,jehovah1 said1 
,i have surely seen the affliction of my
 people that are in ,egypt1 and ,i am   
come down to deliver them2 and ver4 #aj4

 ,i will send thee unto ,pharaoh2 and   
then1 in the following verses1 he makes 
mention of his name1 as of the great    
,jehovah1 the ,i ,,am1 who sent him4    
,and ,jacob gives divine worship to him1
 when he says1 ,gen4 xlviii4 #af4 ,the  
,angel1 that redeemed me from all evil1 
bless the lads4 ,i might refer to many  
other scriptures1 where the ,angel of   
the ,lord is said to appear1 in which   
from the context1 it is evident that it 
was a divine ,person1 and not a created 
angel4 ,the most ancient ,jewish writers
 generally call him the ,word#aaa of the
 ,lord4  ,but this will not properly be 
deemed a sufficient answer to the       
objection1 inasmuch as it is not denied1
 that the ,person1 who so frequently    
appeared in the form of an angel1 made  
use of such expressions1 as can be      
applied to none but ,god2 therefore they
 say that he personated ,god1 or spake  
after the manner of his representative1 
not designing that the glory of the     
divine perfections should be ascribed to

 him1 but to ,jehovah1 whom he          
represented4  ,to which it may be       
replied1 that the angel appearing to    
,moses1 in the scripture before         
mentioned1 and to several others1 doth  
not signify himself to personate ,god1  
as doubtless he ought to have done1 had 
he been only his representative1 and not
 a divine ,person2 as an embassador1    
when he speaks in the name of the king1 
whom he represents1 always uses such    
modes of speaking1 as that he may be    
understood to apply what he says when   
personating him1 not to himself1 but to 
him that sent him2 and it would be      
reckoned an affront to him1 whom he     
represents1 should he give occasion to  
any to ascribe the honour that belongs  
to his master to himself4 ,now there is 
nothing1 in those texts1 which speak of 
this angel's appearing1 that signifies  
his disclaiming divine honour1 as what  
did not belong to him1 but to ,god2     
therefore we must not suppose that he   
speaks in such a way as ,god doth1 only 

as representing him3 we read1 indeed1 in
 ,rev4 xxii4 #h1 #i4 of a created angel 
appearing to ,john1 who was supposed by 
him1 at the first1 to be the same that  
appeared to the church of old1 and      
accordingly ,john gave him divine       
honour2 but he refused to receive it1 as
 knowing that this character1 of being  
the divine representative1 would not be 
a sufficient warrant for him to assume  
it to himself2 we must therefore from   
hence conclude1 that the angel that     
appeared to the church of old1 and is   
called ,jehovah1 was a divine ,person4  
#b4 ,having considered that the name    
,jehovah is peculiarly applied to ,god1 
we now proceed to prove that it is given
 to the ,son1 whereby his ,deity will   
appear2 and the first scripture that we 
shall refer to is ,isa4 xl4 #c4 ,the    
voice of him that crieth in the         
wilderness1 prepare ye the way of the   
,lord1 or ,jehovah1 make ,straight in   
the desert a highway for our ,god4 ,now 
if we can prove that this is a prophecy 

of ,john's preparing the way of our     
,saviour1 then it will appear that our  
,saviour1 in this scripture1 is called  
,jehovah4 ,that it is a prediction of   
,john's being ,christ's fore-runner1    
appointed to prepare the ,jews for his  
reception1 and to give them an          
intimation1 that he1 whom they had long 
looked for1 would suddenly appear1 is   
plain from those scriptures in the ,new 
,testament1 which expressly refer to    
this prediction1 and explain it in this 
sense3 thus ,matth4 iii4 #c4 ,this is he
 that was spoken of by the prophet      
,esaias1 saying1 ,the voice of one      
crying in the wilderness1 ,prepare ye   
the way of the ,lord1 make his paths    
straight2 therefore he whose way ,john  
was to prepare1 whom the prophet ,isaias
 calls ,jehovah1 is our ,saviour4       
,again1 it is said1 in ,isa4 viii4 #ac4 
,sanctify the ,lord1 or ,jehovah1 of    
hosts himself1 and let him be your fear 
and your dread2 where he speaks of a    
person1 whom he not only calls ,jehovah1

 the ,lord of hosts1 which alone would  
prove him to be a divine ,person2 but he
 farther considers him as the object of 
divine worship1 ,sanctify him1 and let  
him be your fear and your dread4        
,certainly1 if we can prove this to be  
spoken of ,christ1 it will be a strong  
and convincing argument to evince his   
proper ,deity2 now that it is spoken of 
him1 is very evident1 if we compare it  
with the verse immediately following1   
,and he shall be for a sanctuary1 which 
,i would chuse to render1 ,for he shall 
be for a sanctuary1 as the ,hebrew      
particle ,vau1 which we render ,and1 is 
often rendered elsewhere1 and so it is  
assigned as a reason why we should      
sanctify him2 and then it follows1      
though we are obliged so to do1 yet the 
,jews will not give that glory to him1  
for he will be to them for a stone of   
stumbling1 and for a rock of offence1 as
 he shall be for a sanctuary to those   
that are faithful4 ,that this is spoken 
of ,christ1 not only appears from the   

subject matter hereof1 as it is only he 
that properly speaking1 is said to be a 
rock of offence1 or in whom the world   
was offended1 by reason of his appearing
 in a low condition therein2 but1 by    
comparing it with other scriptures1 and 
particularly ,isa4 xxviii4 #af4 ,behold1
 ,i lay in ,sion1 for a foundation1 a   
stone1 a tried stone1 a precious corner 
stone1 a sure foundation2 he that       
believeth shall not make haste1 this    
will more evidently appear4 ,in the     
latter of these scriptures1 he is       
styled1 a foundation stone1 the rock on 
which his church is built2 in the former
 a burthensome stone2 and both these    
scriptures are referred to1 and applied 
to him1 #a ,pet4 ii4 #f1 #h4 ,wherefore 
also it is contained in the scripture1  
,behold1 ,i lay in ,sion a chief corner 
stone1 elect1 precious2 and a stone of  
stumbling1 and a rock of offence to them
 that are disobedient2 where the apostle
 proves plainly1 that our ,saviour is   
the ,person who is spoken of1 in both   

these texts1 by the prophet ,isaiah1 and
 consequently that he is ,jehovah1 whom 
we are to sanctify1 and to make our fear
 and our dread4  ,again1 there is       
another scripture1 which plainly proves 
this1 viz4 ,numb4 xxi4 #e1 #f1 #g4 ,and 
the people spake against ,god1 and      
against ,moses2 and the ,lord sent fiery
 serpents among the people1 and they bit
 the people1 and much people of ,israel 
died2 therefore the people came to      
,moses1 and said1 ,we have sinned1 for  
we have spoken against the ,lord1 or    
,jehovah1 and against thee4 ,he1 who is 
called ,god1 in ver4 #e4 whom they spake
 against1 is called ,jehovah in ver4 #g4
 who sent fiery serpents among them1    
that destroyed them1 for their speaking 
against him2 now this is expressly      
applied to our ,saviour by the apostle1 
#a ,cor4 x4 #i4 ,neither let us tempt   
,christ1 as some of them also tempted1  
and were destroyed of serpents4  ,again1
 the prophet ,isaiah1 having had a      
vision of the angels1 adoring and       

ministering to that glorious ,person1   
who is represented1 as sitting on a     
throne1 in chap4 vi4 #a1 #b4 he reflects
 on what he had seen in ver4 #e4 and    
expresses himself in these words1 ,mine 
eyes have seen the ,king1 the ,lord1 or 
,jehovah1 of hosts4 ,now this is        
expressly applied to our ,saviour1 in   
,john xii4 #da4 ,these things said      
,esaias1 when he saw his glory1 and     
spake of him2 where it is plain that he 
intends this vision2 as appears from the
 foregoing verse1 which refers to a part
 thereof1 in which ,god foretels that he
 would blind the eyes1 and harden the   
hearts of the unbelieving ,jews2 from   
whence it is evident1 that the ,person  
who appeared to him1 sitting on a       
throne1 whom he calls ,jehovah1 was our 
,saviour4  ,again1 this may farther be  
argued1 from what is said in ,isa4 xlv4 
#ba4 to the end1 ,there is no ,god else 
besides me1 a just ,god1 and a ,saviour1
 there is none besides me4 ,look unto   
me1 and be ye saved1 all the ends of the

 earth2 for ,i am ,god1 and there is    
none else1 ,i have sworn by myself1 the 
word is gone out of my mouth in         
righteousness1 and shall not return1    
that unto me every knee shall bow1 every
 tongue shall swear4 ,surely1 shall one 
say1 ,in the lord have ,i righteousness 
and strength2 even to him shall men     
come1 and all that are incensed against 
him shall be ashamed4 ,in the ,lord     
shall all the seed of ,israel be        
justified1 and shall glory4 ,this is a  
glorious proof of our ,saviour's ,deity1
 not only from his being called         
,jehovah1 but from several other divine 
characters ascribed to him2 thus the    
,person whom the prophet speaks of1     
styles himself ,jehovah1 and adds1 that 
there is no ,god besides me2 and he is  
represented as swearing by himself1     
which none ought to do but a divine     
,person2 and he encourages all the ends 
of the earth to look to him for         
salvation2 so that if it can be made    
appear that this is spoken of our       

,saviour1 it will be an undeniable proof
 of his proper ,deity1 since nothing    
more can be said to express the glory of
 the ,father than this4 ,now that these 
words are spoken of our ,saviour1 must  
be allowed by every one1 who reads them 
impartially1 for there are several      
things that agree with his character as 
,mediator2 as when all the ends of the  
earth are invited to look to him for    
salvation4 ,we have a parallel          
scripture1 which is plainly applied to  
him1 in ,isa4 xi4 #aj4 ,and in that day 
there shall be a root of ,jesse1 that   
is1 the ,messiah1 who should spring from
 the root or stock of ,jesse2 which     
shall stand for an ensign to the people1
 to it1 or to him1 shall the ,gentiles  
seek1 which is the same thing as for the
 ends of the earth to look to him2 and  
besides1 the word looking to him is a   
metaphor1 taken from a very remarkable  
type of this matter1 to wit1 ,israel's  
looking to the brazen serpent for       
healing2 thus he1 who is here spoken of1

 is represented as a ,saviour1 and as   
the object of faith4  ,again1 he is     
represented as swearing by himself2 and 
the subject matter of this oath is1     
,that unto him every knee should bow1   
and every tongue should swear2 this is  
expressly applied to our ,saviour1 in   
the ,new ,testament1 as containing a    
prophecy of his being the judge of the  
world1 ,rom4 xiv4 #aj1 #aa1 #ab4 ,we    
shall all stand before the judgment seat
 of ,christ2 for it is written1 ,as ,i  
live1 saith the ,lord1 every knee shall 
bow to me1 and every tongue shall       
confess to ,god2 so then every one of us
 shall give an account of himself to    
,god4 ,and the same words are used1 with
 a little variation1 in ,phil4 ii4 #aj1 
#aa4 ,that at the name of ,jesus every  
knee should bow1 of things in heaven1   
and things in earth1 and things under   
the earth2 and that every tongue should 
confess1 that ,jesus ,christ is ,lord1  
to the ,glory of ,god the ,father4      
,again1 the person1 of whom the prophet 

speaks1 is one against whom the world   
was incensed1 which can be meant of none
 but ,christ1 as signifying the         
opposition that he should meet with1 and
 the rage and fury that should be       
directed against him1 when appearing in 
our nature4  ,again1 he is said to be   
one in whom we have righteousness1 and  
in whom the seed of ,israel shall be    
justified2 which very evidently agrees  
with the account we have of him in the  
,new ,testament1 as a person by whose   
righteousness we are justified1 or whose
 righteousness is imputed to us for that
 end4  ,and this leads us to consider   
another scripture1 ,jer4 xxiii4 #f4 in  
which it is said1 ,this is his name1    
whereby he shall be called1 ,the ,lord1 
or ,jehovah1 our righteousness4 ,his    
being called our righteousness1 as was  
but now observed1 implies1 that the     
,messiah1 our great ,mediator1 is the   
person spoken of1 who is called         
,jehovah4 ,but this is farther evinced  
from the context1 inasmuch as it is     

said1 ver4 #e4 ,behold the days come1   
viz4 the ,gospel day1 that ,i will raise
 unto ,david a righteous branch1 and a  
king shall reign and prosper2 and shall 
execute judgment and justice in the     
earth2 which any one1 who judges        
impartially of the sense of ,scripture1 
will conclude to be spoken concerning   
our ,saviour's erecting the             
gospel-dispensation1 and being the sole 
lord and governor of his church4 ,how   
the exercise of his dominion over it    
proves his ,deity1 will be considered   
under a following head4 ,all that we    
need to observe at present is1 that this
 description is very agreeable to his   
character in ,scripture1 as ,mediator2  
therefore he is called ,jehovah in this 
verse4  ,object4 #a4 ,it is objected1   
that the words may be otherwise         
translated1 viz4 ,this is the name1     
whereby the ,lord our righteousness1    
namely1 the ,father1 shall call him4    
,answ4 ,it may be replied1 that the     
,father is never called in ,scripture1  

our righteousness as was but now        
observed2 this being a character        
peculiar to the ,mediator1 as it is     
fully explained in several places in the
 ,new ,testament4 ,as to what may be    
farther said1 in answer to this         
objection1 it is well known that the    
,hebrew word  signifies either actively 
or passively1 as it is differently      
pointed1 the letters being the same2 and
 we shall not enter into a critical     
disquisition concerning the origin1 or  
authenticity of the ,hebrew points1 to  
prove that our translation is just1     
rather than that mentioned in the       
objection2 but shall have recourse to   
the context to prove it4 ,accordingly it
 appears from thence1 that if it were   
translated according to the sense of the
 objectors1 it would be little less than
 a tautology1 q4 d4 ,i will raise to    
,david a righteous branch2 and this is  
the name whereby ,jehovah1 our          
righteousness1 shall call him1 viz4 the 
,branch2 so that at least1 the sense of 

our translation of the text1 seems more 
natural1 as well as more agreeable to   
the grammatical construction observed in
 the ,hebrew language1 in which the     
words of a sentence are not so          
transposed as they are in the ,greek and
 ,latin1 which they are supposed to be1 
in the sense of the text contained in   
this objection4  ,object4 #b4 ,it is    
farther objected2 that though our       
translation of the text were just1 and  
,christ were called ,jehovah1 yet it    
will not prove his ,deity1 since it is  
said1 in ,jer4 xxxiii4 #af4 speaking    
concerning the church1 ,this is the name
 whereby she shall be called1 ,the      
,lord1 or ,jehovah1 our righteousness4  
,answ4 ,it is evident from the context1 
that this is a parallel scripture with  
that before mentioned2 the same person1 
to wit1 the ,branch1 is spoken of and   
the same things predicted concerning the
 gospel church1 that was to be governed 
by him4 ,therefore1 though it is plain  
that our translators understood this    

text1 as spoken of the church of the    
,jews or rather the ,gospel-,church1 as 
many others do1 yet1 if we consider the 
sense of the ,hebrew words here used  1 
it is very evident that they might1 with
 equal1 if not1 with greater propriety1 
have been rendered1 shall be called by  
her2 and so the sense is the same with  
that of the other but now mentioned2 the
 ,branch1 to wit1 our ,saviour1 is to be
 called1 ,the ,lord our righteousness1  
and adored as such by the church4       
,there is another scripture1 in which   
our ,saviour is called ,jehovah1 in     
,joel ii4 #bg4 ,and ye shall know that  
,i am the ,lord1 viz4 ,jehovah1 your    
,god1 and none else2 compared with ver4 
#cb4 ,and it shall come to pass1 that   
whosoever shall call on the name of the 
,lord1 viz4 ,jehovah1 shall be          
delivered4 ,in both these verses1 it is 
evident1 that our ,saviour is called    
,jehovah2 for the person1 who is so     
called1 in the former of them1 is said1 
ver4 #bh4 to ,pour out his ,spirit on   

all flesh2 c4 which ,scripture is       
expressly referred to him1 in ,acts ii4 
#af1 #ag4 and this pouring out of his   
,spirit on all flesh here predicted is  
also applied1 in ver4 #cc4 to him2      
,therefore being by the right hand of   
,god exalted1 and having received of the
 ,father1 the promise of the ,holy      
,ghost1 he hath shed forth this which ye
 now see and hear4 ,the argument is     
therefore this3 he who was1 according to
 this prophecy1 to pour out his ,spirit 
on all flesh1 is called ,jehovah1 your  
,god2 but this our ,saviour is said to  
have done1 therefore the name ,jehovah  
is justly applied to him4 ,as to the    
latter of these verses1 viz4 #cb4       
,whosoever shall call on the name of the
 ,lord shall be delivered2 this also is 
referred to1 and explained1 as spoken of
 ,christ1 in ,rom4 x4 #ac4 ,and that the
 apostle here speaks of calling on the  
name of ,christ1 is plain1 from the     
foregoing and following verses4 ,in ver4
 #i4 it is expressed1 by confessing the 

,lord ,jesus1 and it is there connected 
with salvation4 ,and the apostle        
proceeds to consider1 that1 in order to 
our confessing1 or calling on his name1 
it is necessary that ,christ should be  
preached1 ver4 #ad1 #ae4 and he farther 
adds1 in the following verses1 that     
though ,christ was preached1 and his    
glory proclaimed in the gospel1 yet the 
,jews believed not in him1 and          
consequently called not on his name2    
which was an accomplishment of what had 
been foretold by the prophet ,isaiah1   
chap4 liii4 #a4 ,who hath believed our  
report1 c4 intimating that it was       
predicted1 that our ,saviour should be  
rejected1 and not be believed in by the 
,jews3 so that it is very evident the   
apostle is speaking concerning him1 and 
applying to him what is mentioned in    
this scripture1 in the prophecy of      
,joel1 in which he is called ,jehovah2  
therefore this glorious name belongs to 
him4 ,several other scriptures might    
have been referred to1 to prove that    

,christ is called ,jehovah1 which are   
also applied to him in the              
,new-,testament1 some of which may be   
occasionally mentioned under some       
following arguments2 but1 ,i think1 what
 hath been already said is abundantly   
sufficient to prove his ,deity1 from his
 having this glorious name given to him2
 which leads us to consider some other  
names given to him for the proof        
thereof2 accordingly1  #b4 ,he is styled
 ,lord and ,god1 in such a sense1 as    
plainly proves his proper ,deity4 ,we   
will not1 indeed1 deny1 that the names  
,lord and ,god1 are sometimes given to  
creatures2 yet we are not left without  
sufficient light1 whereby we may plainly
 discern when they are applied to the   
one living and true ,god1 and when not4 
,to assert the contrary1 would be to    
reflect on the wisdom and goodness of   
,god2 and it would not only render those
 scriptures1 in which they are          
contained1 like the trumpet1 that gives 
an uncertain sound1 but we should be in 

the greatest danger of being led aside  
into a most destructive mistake1 in a   
matter of the highest importance1 and   
hereby be induced to give that glory to 
the creature1 which is due to ,god      
alone2 therefore we shall always find   
something1 either in the text1 or       
context1 that evidently determines the  
sense of these names1 whenever they are 
applied to ,god1 or the creature4  ,and 
here let it be observed1 that whenever  
the word ,god or ,lord is given to a    
creature1 there is some diminutive      
character annexed to it1 which plainly  
distinguishes it from the true ,god3    
thus when it is given to idols1 it is   
intimated1 that they are so called1 or  
falsely esteemed to be gods by their    
deceived worshippers2 and so they are   
called strange gods1 ,deut4 xxxii4 #af4 
and molten gods1 ,exod4 xxxiv4 #ag4 and 
new gods1 ,judges v4 #h4 and their      
worshippers are reproved as brutish and 
foolish1 ,jer4 x4 #h4  ,again1 when the 
word ,god1 is applied to men1 there is  

also something in the context1 which    
implies1 that whatever characters of    
honour are given to them1 yet they are  
subject to the divine controul2 as it is
 said1 ,psal4 lxxxii4 #a1 #f4 ,god      
standeth in the congregation of the     
mighty he judgeth among the gods2 and   
they are at best but mortal men2 ,i have
 said ye are gods1 and all of you are   
children of the most high1 but ye shall 
die like men2 they are1 indeed1         
described1 as being made partakers of   
the divine image1 consisting in some    
lesser branches of sovereignty and      
dominion2 but this is infinitely below  
the idea of sovereignty and dominion1   
which is contained in the word when     
applied to the great ,god4  ,it is true1
 ,god says to ,moses1 ,see1 ,i have made
 thee a god to ,pharaoh1 ,exod4 vii4 #a4
 by which we are not to understand that 
any of the divine perfections were      
communicated to1 or predicated of him2  
for ,god cannot give his glory to       
another3 but the sense is plainly this1 

that he was set in ,god's stead3 thus he
 is said to be instead of ,god to       
,aaron1 chap4 iv4 #af4 and the same     
expression is used by ,elihu to ,job1   
chap4 xxxiii4 #f4 ,i am according to thy
 wish in ,god's stead2 so that ,moses's 
being made a god to ,pharaoh1 implies   
nothing else but this1 that he should1  
by being ,god's minister1 in inflicting 
the plagues which he designed to bring  
on ,pharaoh and his servants1 be        
rendered formidable to them2 not that he
 should have a right to receive divine  
honour from them4  ,again1 when the word
 ,god is put absolutely1 without any    
additional character of glory1 or       
diminution annexed to it1 it must always
 be understood of the great ,god1 this  
being that name by which he is generally
 known in scripture1 and never otherwise
 applied1 without an intimation given   
that he is not intended thereby3 thus   
the ,father and the ,son are described  
in ,john i4 #a4 ,the ,word was with     
,god1 and the ,word was ,god1 and in    

many other places of scripture2         
therefore if we can prove that our      
,saviour is called ,god in scripture1   
without any thing in the context tending
 to detract from the most known sense of
 the word1 this will be sufficient to   
prove his proper ,deity2 but we shall   
not only find that he is called ,god    
therein2 but there are some additional  
glories annexed to that name1 whereby   
this will more abundantly appear4  ,as  
to the word ,lord1 though that is often 
applied to creatures1 and is given to   
superiors by their subjects or servants1
 yet this is also sufficiently          
distinguished1 when applied to a divine 
,person1 from any other sense thereof1  
as applied to creatures4 ,now1 if we can
 prove that our ,saviour is called ,lord
 and ,god in this sense1 it will        
sufficiently evince his proper ,deity2  
and1 in order hereto1 we shall consider 
several scriptures1 wherein he is not   
only so called1 but several characters  
of glory are annexed1 and divine honours

 given to him1 which are due to none but
 a divine ,person1 which abundantly     
determines the sense of these words1    
when applied to him4 ,and1  7#a47 ,we   
shall consider some scriptures in which 
he is called ,lord1 particularly1 ,psal4
 cx4 #a4 ,the ,lord said unto my ,lord1 
,sit thou at my right hand1 until ,i    
make thine enemies thy foot-stool2 that 
our ,saviour the ,messiah1 is the person
 whom ,david calls his ,lord1 is very   
evident1 from its being quoted and      
applied to him in the ,new ,testament1  
in ,mat4 xxii4 #dd4 c4 and that by      
calling him ,lord he ascribes divine    
honour to him1 appears from hence1 that 
when the question was put to the        
,pharisees1 ,if ,christ were ,david's   
,lord1 how could he be his ,son8 ,they  
might easily have replied to it1 had it 
been taken in a lower sense2 for it is  
not difficult to suppose that ,david    
might have a son descending from him1   
who might be advanced to the highest    
honours1 short of what are divine2 but  

they not understanding how two          
infinitely distant natures could be     
united in one person1 so that at the    
same time he should be called ,david's  
son1 and yet his ,lord1 in such a sense 
as proves his ,deity1 they were         
confounded1 and put to silence4  ,but   
whether they acknowledged him to be a   
divine ,person or no1 it is evident that
 ,david considers him as such2 or as the
 ,person who1 pursuant to ,god's        
covenant made with him1 was to sit and  
rule upon his throne1 in whom alone it  
could be said that it should be         
perpetual1 or that of his kingdom there 
should be no end2 and inasmuch as he    
says1 ver4 #c4 ,thy people shall be     
willing in the day of thy power1        
speaking of the ,person whom he calls   
his ,lord1 who was to be his ,son1 he   
plainly infers that he should exert     
divine power1 and consequently prove    
himself to be a divine ,person4  ,again1
 if the word ,lord be applied to him1 as
 denoting his sovereignty over the      

church1 and his being the ,governor of  
the world1 this will be considered under
 the next head1 when we speak concerning
 those glorious titles and attributes   
that are given to him1 which prove his  
,deity2 and therefore we shall waive it 
at present1 and only consider two or    
three scriptures1 in which he is called 
,lord1 in a more glorious sense than    
when it is applied to any creature3 thus
 in ,rev4 xvii4 #ad4 speaking of the    
,lamb1 which is a character that can be 
applied to none but him1 and that as    
,mediator1 he is called ,lord of lords1 
and the ,prince of the kings of the     
earth1 in ,rev4 i4 #e4 and the ,lord of 
glory1 in #a ,cor4 ii4 #h4 which will be
 more particularly considered1 when we  
speak concerning his glorious titles1 as
 an argument to prove it2 therefore all 
that we shall observe at present is1    
that this is the same character by which
 ,god is acknowledged by those that deny
 our ,saviour's ,deity to be described  
in ,deut4 x4 #ag4 ,the ,lord your ,god1 

is ,god of gods1 and ,lord of lords2 a  
great ,god and terrible2 so that we have
 as much ground to conclude1 when       
,christ is called ,lord1 with such      
additional marks of glory1 of which more
 in its proper place1 that this proves  
his ,deity1 as truly as the ,deity of   
the ,father is proved from this         
scripture4  7#b47 ,christ is often in   
scripture called ,god1 in such a sense1 
in which it is never applied to a       
creature3 thus he is called1 in ,psal4  
xlv4 #f4 ,thy throne ,o ,god1 is for    
ever1 and ever2 and there are many other
 glorious things spoken of him in that  
,psalm1 which is a farther confirmation 
that he1 who is here called ,god1 is a  
divine ,person1 in the same sense as    
,god the ,father is2 particularly he is 
said1 ver4 #b4 ,to be fairer than the   
children of men1 that is1 infinitely    
above them2 and1 ver4 #aa4 speaking to  
the church1 it is said1 ,he is thy      
,lord1 and worship thou him2 and1 in the
 following verses1 the church's compleat

 blessedness consists in its being      
brought into his palace1 who is the     
,king thereof1 and so denotes him to be 
the spring and fountain of compleat     
blessedness1 and his name1 or glory1 is 
to be remembered in all generations1 and
 the people shall praise him for ever   
and ever4 ,this glory is ascribed to    
him1 who is called ,god2 and many other 
things are said concerning him1 relating
 to his works1 his victories1 his       
trumphs1 which are very agreeable to    
that character2 so that it evidently    
appears that the ,person spoken of in   
this ,psalm1 is truly and properly ,god4
  ,i am sensible that the               
,anti-trinitarians will object to this1 
that several things are spoken          
concerning him in this ,psalm1 that     
argue his inferiority to the ,father2   
but this only proves that the ,person   
here spoken of is considered as         
,god-man1 ,mediator1 in which respect he
 is1 in one nature1 equal1 and1 in the  
other1 inferior to him2 were it         

otherwise1 one expression contained in  
this ,psalm would be inconsistent with1 
and contradictory to another4  ,to this 
we shall only add1 as an undeniable     
proof1 that it is ,christ that is here  
spoken of1 as also that he is considered
 as ,mediator1 as but now observed2 that
 the apostle1 speaking of him as        
,mediator1 and displaying his divine    
glory as such1 refers to these words of 
the ,psalmist1 ,heb4 i4 #h4 ,unto the   
,son he saith1 ,thy throne1 ,o ,god1 is 
for ever and ever2 a sceptre of         
righteousness is the sceptre of thy     
kingdom4  ,again1 another proof of our  
,saviour's ,deity may be taken from     
,matth4 i4 #bc4 ,behold a virgin shall  
be with child1 and shall call his name  
,emmanuel1 which being interpreted1 is1 
,god with us4 ,his incarnation is what  
gives occasion1 as is plain from the    
words1 for his being described by this  
name or character1 ,god with us1 which  
imports the same thing as when it is    
elsewhere said1 ,john i4 #ad4 ,the ,word

 was made flesh1 and dwelt among us4    
,this cannot be applied to any but      
,christ2 to say the ,father is called   
,emmanuel1 is such a strain upon the    
sense of the text1 as no impartial      
reader will allow of2 for it is plain   
that it is a name given to the ,son upon
 this great occasion2 and this is as    
glorious a display of his ,deity1 as    
when ,god the ,father says1 if we       
suppose that text to be spoken of him   
elsewhere1 in ,exod4 xxix4 #de4 ,i will 
dwell amongst the children of ,israel1  
and will be their ,god4  ,again1        
,christ's ,deity is proved1 in #a ,tim4 
iii4 #af4 from his being styled ,god1   
manifest in the flesh1 implying1 that   
the second ,person in the ,godhead was  
united to our nature2 for neither the   
,father nor the ,holy ,ghost were ever  
said to be manifested in the flesh2 and1
 besides1 he is distinguished from the  
,spirit1 as justified by him4 ,and he is
 not called ,god1 because of his        
incarnation1 as some ,socinian writers  

suppose2 for to be incarnate1 supposes  
the pre-existence of that nature1 to    
which the human nature was united1 since
 it is called elsewhere1 assuming1 or   
taking flesh1 as it is here1 being      
manifested therein1 and consequently    
that he was ,god before this act of     
incarnation2 and there is certainly     
nothing in the text which determines the
 word ,god to be taken in a less proper 
sense1 any more than when it is applied 
to the ,father4  ,object4 ,it is        
objected that the word ,god is not found
 in all the manuscripts of the ,greek   
text1 nor in some translations thereof1 
particularly the ,syriac1 ,arabic1 and  
vulgar ,latin1 which render it1 the     
mystery which was manifest in the flesh1
 c4  ,answ4 ,it is not pretended to be  
left out in above two ,greek copies1 and
 it is very unreasonable to oppose these
 to all the rest4 ,as for the ,syriac   
and ,arabic translations2 some suppose  
that it is not true in fact that the    
word ,god is left out in the ,arabic1   

and though it be left out in the        
,syriac1 yet it is contained in the     
sense there1 which is1 great is the     
mystery of godliness that he was        
manifested in the flesh2 and as for the 
vulgar ,latin version1 that has not     
credit enough1 especially among         
,protestants1 to support it1 when       
standing in competition with so many    
copies of scripture in which the word is
 found2 therefore we can by no means    
give up the argument which is taken from
 this text to prove our ,saviour's      
,deity4 ,besides as a farther           
confirmation hereof1 we might appeal to 
the very words of the text itself1      
whereby it will plainly appear1 that if 
the word ,god be left out of it1 the    
following part of the verse will not be 
so consistent with a mystery as it is   
with our ,saviour2 particularly it is a 
very great impropriety of expression to 
say that a mystery1 or as some ,socinian
 writers explain it1 the will of        
,god#aab1 was manifest in the flesh1 and

 received in a glorious manner2 for this
 is not agreeable to the sense of the   
,greek words1 since it is plain that   1
 which we render was manifest in the    
flesh1 is justly translated1 being never
 used in scripture to signify the       
preaching the gospel by weak mortal men1
 as they understand it3 but on the other
 hand it is often applied to the        
manifestation of our ,saviour in his    
incarnation1 and is explained when it is
 said1 ,john i4 #ad4 that he was made   
flesh1 and we beheld his glory#aac2 and 
as for the gospel1 though it met with   
reception when preached to the          
,gentiles1 and there were many          
circumstances of glory that attended    
this dispensation1 yet it could not be  
said for that reason to be received up  
into glory4 ,now since what is said in  
this verse agrees to our ,saviour1 and  
not to the mystery of godliness1 we are 
bound to conclude that he is ,god       
manifest in the flesh1 and therefore    
that this objection is of no force4     

,the next scripture which we shall      
consider1 is ,acts xx4 #bh4 ,feed the   
church of ,god1 which he hath purchased 
with his own blood1 where we observe1   
that he who is here spoken of is said to
 have a propriety in the church2 this no
 mere creature can be said to have1 but 
our ,saviour is not only here but       
elsewhere described as having a right to
 it2 thus it is said in ,hebrews iii4   
#c1 #d1 #f4 ,he was counted worthy of   
more glory than ,moses1 inasmuch as he  
who hath builded the house1 hath more   
honour than the house2 and he that hath 
built all things is ,god1 which is as   
though he should say1 our ,lord ,jesus  
,christ hath not only built his church  
but all things1 and therefore must be   
,god2 and ver4 #f4 he is called a ,son  
over his own house2 so that he is the   
purchaser1 the builder1 and the         
proprietor of his church1 and therefore 
must be a divine person2 and then it is 
observed1 that he that hath purchased   
this church is ,god1 and that ,god hath 

done this with his own blood2 this      
cannot be applied to any but the        
,mediator1 the ,son of ,god1 whose      
,deity it plainly proves4  ,object4 #a4 
,some object against this sense of the  
text1 that the word ,god here is        
referred to the ,father1 and so the     
sense is1 feed the church of ,god1 that 
is1 of the ,father1 which ,he1 that is1 
,christ1 hath purchased with his own    
blood4  ,answ4 ,to this it may be       
answered1 that this seems a very great  
strain and force upon the grammatical   
sense of the words1 for certainly ,he   
must refer to the immediate antecedent1 
and that is ,god1 to wit1 the ,son4 ,if 
such a method of expounding scripture   
were to be allowed1 it would be an easy 
matter to make the word of ,god speak   
what we please to have it2 therefore we 
must take it in the most plain and      
obvious sense1 as that is which we have 
given of this text1 whereby it appears  
that ,god the ,son has purchased the    
church with his own blood1 and that he  

has a right to it4  ,object4 #b4 ,god   
the ,father is said to have purchased   
the church by the blood of ,christ1     
which is called his blood1 as he is the 
,proprietor of all things4  ,answ4      
,though ,god be the ,proprietor of all  
things1 yet no one1 that does not labour
 very hard to maintain the cause he is  
defending1 would understand his blood in
 this sense4 ,according to this method  
of speaking1 ,god the ,father might be  
said to have done every thing that the  
,mediator did1 and so to have shed his  
blood upon the cross1 as well as to have
 purchased the church thereby1 as having
 a propriety in it4  ,the next          
scripture1 which proves our ,saviour's  
,deity1 is ,rom4 ix4 #e4 ,of whom1 as   
concerning the flesh1 ,christ came1 who 
is over all1 ,god blessed for ever2     
where he is not only called ,god1 but   
,god blessed for ever2 which is a       
character too high for any creature1 and
 is the very same that is given to the  
,father1 in #b ,cor4 xi4 #ca4 who is    

styled1 ,the ,god and ,father of our    
,lord ,jesus ,christ1 which is blessed  
for evermore1 that is1 not only the     
,object of worship1 but the ,fountain of
 blessedness4 ,now if ,christ be so     
called1 as it seems evident that he is1 
then the word ,god is1 in this text1    
applied to him in the highest sense1 so 
as to argue him a divine ,person4 ,now  
that this is spoken of our ,saviour1 is 
plain1 because he is the subject of the 
proposition therein contained1 and is   
considered1 as being of the fathers1    
concerning the flesh1 i4 e4 with respect
 to his human nature2 so that if we can 
prove that he is here called ,god1      
blessed for ever1 we shall have the     
argument we contend for1 this being the 
only thing contested by the             
,anti-trinitarians4  ,object4 ,it is    
objected1 that the words maybe otherwise
 rendered1 namely1 ,let ,god1 viz4 the  
,father1 who is over all1 be blessed for
 ever1 to wit1 for this great privilege1
 that ,christ should come in the flesh2 

therefore it does not prove that which  
we bring it for4  ,answ4 ,in defence of 
our translation of these words1 it may  
be replied1 that it is very agreeable to
 the grammatical construction thereof4  
,it is true1 ,erasmus defends the other 
sense of the text1 and thereby gives an 
handle to many after him1 to make use of
 it1 as an objection against this       
doctrine1 which1 he says1 may be plainly
 proved from many other scriptures2 it  
is very strange1 that1 with one hand1 he
 should build up1 and1 with the other1  
overthrow ,christ's proper ,deity1      
unless we attribute it to that          
affectation which he had in his temper  
to appear singular1 and1 in many things1
 run counter to the common sense of     
mankind2 or else to the favourable      
thoughts which he appears to have had1  
in some instances1 of the ,arian scheme4
 ,it may be observed1 that the most     
ancient versions render this text in the
 sense of our translation2 as do most of
 the ancient fathers in their defence of

 the doctrine of the ,trinity1 as a late
 writer observes4#aad ,and it is        
certain1 this sense given thereof by the
 ,anti-trinitarians1 is so apparently   
forced and strained1 that some of the   
,socinians themselves1 whose interest it
 was to have taken it therein1 have not 
thought fit to insist on it4 ,and a     
learned writer#aae1 who has appeared in 
the ,anti-trinitarian cause1 seems to   
argue below himself1 when he attempts to
 give a turn to this text1 agreeable to 
his own scheme2 for certainly he would  
have defended his sense of the text     
better than he does1 had it been        
defensible2 since we can receive very   
little conviction from his alleging1    
that 8,it is uncertain whether the word 
,god was originally in the text2 and if 
it was1 whether it be not spoken of the 
,father40 ,to say no more than this to  
it1 is not to defend this sense of the  
text2 for if there were any doubt       
whether the word ,god was left out of   
any ancient manuscripts1 he would have  

obliged the world1 had he referred to   
them1 which1 ,i think1 no one else has  
done3 and1 since he supposes it         
uncertain whether it be not there spoken
 of the ,father1 that ought to have been
 proved1 or not suggested4 ,we might    
observe1 in defence of our translation1 
that whenever the words are so used in  
the ,new ,testament1 that they may be   
translated1 ,blessed be ,god#aaf1 they  
are disposed in a different form1 or    
order1 and not exactly so as we read    
them therein3 but1 though this be a     
probable argument1 we will not insist on
 it1 but shall rather prove our         
translation to be just1 from the        
connexion of the words1 with what goes  
immediately before1 where the apostle   
had been speaking of our ,saviour1 as   
descending from the fathers1 according  
to the flesh1 or considering him as to  
his human nature2 therefore it is very  
reasonable to suppose he would speak of 
him as to his divine nature1 especially 
since both these natures are spoken of  

together1 in ,john i4 #ad4 and          
elsewhere2 and why they should not be   
intended here1 cannot well be accounted 
for2 so that if our translation be only 
supposed to be equally just with theirs1
 which1 ,i think1 none pretend to deny1 
the connexion of the parts of the       
proposition laid down therein1          
determines the sense thereof in our     
favour4  ,here ,i cannot pass over that 
proof which we have of our ,saviour's   
divinity1 in #a ,john v4 #bj4 ,this is  
the true ,god1 and eternal life2 where  
the true ,god is opposed1 not only to   
those idols1 which1 in the following    
verse1 he advises them to keep          
themselves from2 in which sense the     
,anti-trinitarians themselves sometimes 
call him the true ,god1 that is as much 
as to say1 he is not an idol2 upon which
 occasion a learned writer#aag observes1
 that they deal with him as ,judas did  
with our ,saviour1 cry1 ,hail ,master1  
and then betray him3 they would be      
thought to ascribe every thing to him   

but proper ,deity2 but that this belongs
 to him1 will evidently appear1 if we   
can prove that these words are spoken of
 him4 ,it is true1 the learned author of
 the scripture-doctrine of the          
,trinity#aah1 takes a great deal of     
pains to prove that it is the ,father   
who is here spoken of2 and his          
exposition of the former part of the    
text1 which does not immediately support
 his cause1 seems very just1 when he    
says1 ,the ,son of ,god is come1 and    
hath given us an understanding1 that we 
may know him that is true1 viz4 the     
,father1 and we are in him that is true1
 speaking still of the ,father1 by or   
through his ,son ,jesus ,christ2 but1 ,i
 humbly conceive1 he does not acquit    
himself so well in the sense he gives of
 the following words1 upon which the    
whole stress of the argument depends1   
not only in that he takes it for        
granted1 that the word 1 ,this1 refers  
back1 as is most natural and usual1 not 
to the last word in order1 but to the   

last and principal in sense1 namely1 the
 ,father1 which is1 at least1 doubtful1 
since any unprejudiced reader1 who hath 
not a cause to maintain1 which obliges  
him to understand it so1 would refer it 
to the immediate antecedent1 viz4 the   
,son1 by whom we have an interest in the
 ,father2 for when he had been speaking 
of him as ,mediator1 and1 as such1 as   
the author of this great privilege1     
namely1 our knowing the ,father1 and    
being in him1 it seems very agreeable to
 describe him as a ,person every way    
qualified for this work1 and            
consequently as being the true ,god2 and
 besides1 the apostle had spoken of the 
,father in the beginning of the verse1  
as him that is true1 or1 as some        
manuscripts have it1 him that is the    
true ,god1 as the same author observes2 
therefore what reason can be assigned   
why this should be again repeated1 and  
the apostle supposed to say we know the 
,father1 who is the true ,god1 which    
certainly doth not run so smooth1 to say

 the best of it1 as when we apply it to 
our ,saviour3 that author1 indeed1      
attempts to remove the impropriety of   
the expression1 by giving an uncommon   
sense of these words1 namely1 ,this     
knowledge of ,god is the true religion1 
and the way to eternal life2 or1 this is
 the true worship of ,god by his ,son   
unto eternal life1 which1 though it be a
 truth1 yet can hardly be supposed to   
comport with the grammatical sense of   
the words2 for why should the true ,god 
be taken in a proper sense in one part  
of the verse1 and a figurative in the   
other8 ,and if we take this liberty of  
supposing ellipses in texts1 and        
supplying them with words that make to  
our own purpose1 it would be no         
difficult matter to prove almost any    
doctrine from scripture2 therefore the  
plain sense of the text is1 that our    
,saviour is the true ,god intended in   
these words2 and it is as evident a     
proof of his ,deity1 as when the ,father
 is called1 the true ,god2 or the only  

true ,god1 as he is in ,john xvii4 #c4  
where1 though he be so called1          
nevertheless he is not to be considered 
as the only ,person who is ,god1 in the 
most proper sense1 but as having the one
 divine nature2 in which sense the word 
,god is always taken1 when ,god is said 
to be one4  ,moreover1 let it be        
observed1 that he who is here called the
 true ,god1 is styled1 life eternal1    
which1 ,i humbly conceive1 the ,father  
never is1 though he be said to give us  
eternal life1 in one of the foregoing   
verses2 whereas it is not only said     
concerning our ,saviour1 that in him was
 life1 ,john i4 #d4 but he says1 ,john  
xiv4 #f4 ,i am the life2 and it is said 
in #a ,john i4 #b4 ,the life was        
manifested1 and we have seen it1 or him1
 and shew unto you that eternal life1   
which was with the ,father1    which is 
an explication of his own words1 ,john  
i4 #a4    with ,god2 and then he        
explains what he had said in ver4 #ad4  
of the same chapter1 when he says1 the  

word of life1 or the ,person who calls  
himself the life was manifested unto us2
 which seems to be a peculiar phrase1   
used by this apostle1 whereby he sets   
forth our ,saviour's glory under this   
character1 whom he calls life1 or       
eternal life2 and he that is so1 is the 
same ,person1 who is called the true    
,god2 which character of being true1 is 
often used and applied to ,christ1 by   
the same inspired writer1 more than by  
any other1 as appears from several      
scriptures1 ,rev4 iii4 #ag1 #ad1 and    
chap4 xix4 #aa4 and though1 indeed1 it  
refers to him1 as ,mediator1 as does    
also his being called eternal life1 yet 
this agrees very well with his proper   
,deity1 which we cannot but think to be 
plainly evinced by this text4  ,there is
 another scripture1 which not only      
speaks of ,christ as ,god1 but with some
 other divine characters of glory added 
to his name1 which prove his proper     
,deity3 thus in ,isa4 ix4 #f4 he is     
styled1 the mighty ,god1 and several    

other glorious titles are given to him2 
as1 the wonderful ,counsellor1 the      
everlasting ,father1 the ,prince of     
peace2 these are all applied to him1 as 
one whose incarnation was foretold1 to  
us a ,child is born1 c4 ,and he is      
farther described as a ,person who was  
to be the ,governor of his church1 as it
 is said1 the government shall be upon  
his shoulders2 all which expressions so 
exactly agree with his character as     
,god-man1 ,mediator1 that they contain  
an evident proof of his proper ,deity4  
,object4 ,they who deny our ,saviour's  
,deity1 object1 that the words ought to 
be otherwise translated1 viz4 the       
wonderful ,counsellor1 the mighty ,god1 
the everlasting ,father1 shall call him1
 the ,prince of peace4  ,answ4 ,we have 
before observed1 in defence of our      
translation of another text1#aai that   
the ,hebrew word1 that we translate1 he 
shall be called1 7which is the same with
 that which is used in this text7 does  
not fully appear to signify actively2   

and also that such transpositions1 as   
are1 both there and here1 made use of1  
are not agreeable to that language2 and 
therefore our sense of the text is so   
plain and natural1 that any one1 who    
reads it impartially1 without forcing it
 to speak what they would have it1 would
 take it in the sense in which we       
translate it1 which contains a very     
evident proof of our ,saviour's         
divinity4  ,there is another scripture  
which speaks of ,christ1 not only as    
,god1 but as the great ,god1 in ,tit4   
ii4 #ac4 ,looking for that blessed hope1
 and the glorious appearing of the great
 ,god1 and our ,saviour ,jesus ,christ2 
none ever denied that he1 who is said to
 appear1 is true and proper ,god1 and   
therefore the principal thing we have to
 prove is1 that the text refers only to 
our ,saviour1 or that the apostle does  
not speak therein of two ,persons1 to   
wit1 the ,father and the ,son1 but of   
the ,son2 and accordingly1 though we    
oftentimes take occasion to vindicate   

our translation1 here we cannot but     
think it ought to be corrected2 and that
 the word and should be rendered        
even3#abj ,but1 because ,i would not lay
 too great a stress on a grammatical    
criticism1 how probable soever it may   
be2 we may consider some other things in
 the text1 whereby it appears that our  
,saviour is the only ,person spoken of  
therein1 from what is said of him1      
agreeable to his character as ,mediator3
 thus the apostle here speaks of his    
appearing2 as he also does elsewhere1 in
 ,heb4 ix4 #bh4 ,he shall appear the    
second time without sin unto salvation2 
and in #a ,john iii4 #b4 ,when he shall 
appear1 we shall be like him1 c4 and    
then he who1 in this text1 is said to   
appear1 is called the blessed hope1 that
 is1 the object of his people's         
expectation1 who shall be blessed by him
 when he appears3 thus he is called1 in 
#a ,tim4 i4 #a4 our hope1 and in        
,coloss4 i4 #bg4 ,the hope of glory2 now
 we do not find that the ,father is     

described in scripture as appearing1 or 
as the hope of his people4 ,it is true1 
a late writer#aba gives that turn to the
 text1 and supposes1 that as the ,father
 is said to judge the world by ,jesus   
,christ1 and as when the ,son shall come
 at last1 it will be in the glory of his
 ,father2 so1 in that sense1 the ,father
 may be said to appear by him1 as the   
brightness of his glory shines forth in 
his appearance4 ,but since this is no   
where applied to the sense of those     
other scriptures1 which speak of every  
eye's seeing him in his human nature1   
and plainly refer to some glories that  
shall be put upon that nature1 which    
shall be the object of sense2 why should
 we say that the text imports nothing   
else but that the ,father shall appear  
in his appearing1 which is such a strain
 upon the sense of the words1 that they 
who make use of it would not allow of1  
in other cases8 ,i might have added1 as 
a farther confirmation of the sense we  
have given of this text1 its            

agreeableness with what the apostle     
says1 in ,tit4 ii4 #aj4 when he calls   
the gospel1 ,the doctrine of ,god our   
,saviour1 and with what immediately     
follows in ver4 #ad4 where1 having      
before described him as our ,saviour1 he
 proceeds to shew wherein he was so1    
namely1 by giving himself for us1 that  
he might redeem us from all iniquity2   
and he is not only called ,god our      
,saviour by this apostle1 but he is so  
called in #b ,pet4 i4 #a4 where the     
church is said to have obtained like    
precious faith1 through the             
righteousness of ,god1 and our ,saviour 
,jesus ,christ2 or as the marginal      
reading has it1 of our ,god and         
,saviour2 this seems to be so just a    
reading of the text we are considering1 
that some1 on the other side of the     
question1 allow that the words will very
 well bear it2 but they think their     
sense agreeable1 as the author but now  
mentioned says1 to the whole tenor of   
,scripture1 which is little other than a

 boast1 as though the scripture favoured
 their scheme of doctrine1 which1       
whether it does or no1 they1 who        
consider the arguments on both sides1   
may judge2 and we think1 we have as much
 reason to conclude that our sense of   
the words1 which establishes the        
doctrine of our ,saviour's being the    
great ,god1 is agreeable to the whole   
tenor of scripture2 but1 passing that   
over1 we proceed to another argument4   
,there is one scripture in which our    
,saviour is called both ,lord and ,god1 
viz4 ,john xx4 #bh4 ,and ,thomas        
answered and said unto him1 ,my ,lord1  
and my ,god4 ,the manner of address to  
our ,saviour1 in these words1 implies an
 act of adoration1 given to him by this 
disciple1 upon his having received a    
conviction of his resurrection from the 
dead2 and there is nothing in the text1 
but what imports his right to the same  
glory which belongs to the ,father1 when
 ,he is called his people's ,god4       
,herein they lay claim to him1 as their 

covenant ,god1 their chief good and     
happiness2 thus ,david expresses        
himself1 ,psal4 xxxi4 #ad4 ,i trusted in
 thee1 ,o ,lord1 ,i said thou art my    
,god2 and ,god promises1 in ,hos4 ii4   
#bc4 that he would say to them which    
were not his people1 ,thou art my ,god2 
and chap4 viii4 #b4 ,israel shall cry   
unto me1 ,my ,god we know thee2 and the 
apostle ,paul speaking of the ,father1  
says1 ,phil4 iv4 #ai4 ,my ,god shall    
supply all your need1 c4 that is1 the   
,god from whom ,i have all supplies of  
grace2 the ,god whom ,i worship1 to whom
 ,i owe all ,i have1 or hope for1 who is
 the ,fountain of all blessedness4 ,now 
if there be nothing in this text we are 
considering1 that determines the words  
to be taken in a lower sense than this1 
as there does not appear to be1 then we 
are bound to conclude1 that ,christ's   
,deity is fully proved from it4         
,object4 ,some of the ,socinians        
suppose1 that the words1 my ,lord1 and  
my ,god1 contain a form of exclamation1 

or admiration2 and that ,thomas was     
surprized when he was convinced that our
 ,saviour was risen from the dead1 and  
so cries out1 as one in a rapture1 ,o my
 ,lord6 ,o my ,god6 intending hereby the
 ,father1 to whose power alone this     
event was owing4  ,answ4 ,such          
exclamations as these1 though often used
 in common conversation1 and sometimes  
without that due regard to the divine   
,majesty1 that ought to attend them1 are
 not agreeable to the scripture way of  
speaking4 ,but1 if any scriptures might 
be produced to justify it1 it is        
sufficiently evident1 that no such thing
 is intended in these words1 not only   
because the grammatical construction    
will not admit of it1#abb but because   
the words are brought in as a reply to  
what ,christ had spoken to him in the   
foregoing verse2 ,thomas answered and   
said unto him1 ,my ,lord1 c4 whereas it 
is very absurd to suppose1 that an      
exclamation contains the form of a      
reply1 therefore it must be taken for an

 explicit acknowledgment of him1 as his 
,lord1 and his ,god2 so that this       
objection represents the words so       
contrary to the known acceptation       
thereof1 that many of the ,socinians    
themselves1 and other late writers1 who 
oppose our ,saviour's proper ,deity1 do 
not think fit to insist on it1 but have 
recourse to some other methods1 to      
account for those difficulties1 that lie
 in their way1 taken from this1 and     
other texts1 where ,christ is plainly   
called ,god1 as in ,john i4 #a4 and many
 other places in the ,new ,testament4   
,here we may take occasion to consider  
the method which the ,anti-trinitarians 
use to account for the sense of those   
scriptures1 in which ,christ is called  
,god4 ,and1  #a4 ,some have had recourse
 to a critical remark1 which they make  
on the word  ,god1 namely1 that when it 
has the article  before it1 it adds an  
emphasis to the sense thereof1 and      
determines it to be applied to the      
,father4 ,and inasmuch as the word is   

sometimes applied to him1 when there is 
no article1 7which1 to some1 would      
appear an objection1 sufficient to      
invalidate this remark7 they add1 that  
it is always to be applied to him1 if   
there be nothing in the text that       
determines it otherwise4 ,this remark   
was first made by ,origen1 and          
afterwards largely insisted on by       
,eusebius1 as ,dr4 ,clarke observes2#abc
 and he so far gives into it1 as that he
 apprehends it is never applied1 when   
put absolutely in scripture1 to any     
other ,person2 we shall therefore       
enquire into the justice thereof4  ,by  
the word ,god absolutely taken1 7whether
  have an article before it or no7 we   
understand nothing else but its being   
used without any thing to determine its 
application1 either to the ,father1     
,son1 or ,holy ,ghost2 whereas1 on the  
other hand1 when it is not absolutely   
used1 there are several things1 by which
 we may certainly know to which of the  
divine persons it belongs3 thus it is   

particularly applied to the ,father1    
when there is something in the text that
 distinguishes him from the ,son or     
,spirit3 so ,john xiv4 #a4 ,ye believe  
in ,god1 viz4 the ,father1 believe also 
in me2 and in all those scriptures1 in  
which ,christ is called the ,son of     
,god1 there the word ,god is determined 
to be applied to the ,father2 and when  
,god is said to act in relation to      
,christ as ,mediator1 as in ,heb4 ii4   
#ac4 ,behold1 ,i and the children which 
,god hath given me1 it is so applied4   
,and the word ,god is determined to be  
applied to the ,son1 when he is         
particularly mentioned1 and so called1  
or described1 by any of his ,mediatorial
 works or characters2 as in ,matt4 i4   
#bc4 ,god1 viz4 the ,son1 with us2 and  
#a ,tim4 iii4 #af4 ,god manifest in the 
flesh2 or when there is any thing in the
 context1 which discovers that the word 
,god is to be applied to him4  ,also1   
with respect to the ,holy ,ghost1 when  
any of his ,personal works1 or          

characters1 are mentioned in the text or
 context1 and the word ,god applied to  
him1 to whom they are ascribed1 that    
determines it to belong to the ,holy    
,ghost2 as in ,acts v4 #c1 #d4 speaking 
concerning lying to the ,holy ,ghost1 it
 is explained1 ,thou hast not lyed unto 
men1 but unto ,god2 and #a ,cor4 iii4   
#af4 ,know ye not that ye are the temple
 of ,god1 and that the ,spirit of ,god  
dwelleth in you2 but more of this when  
we speak of the ,deity of the ,holy     
,ghost4 ,in these1 and such like cases1 
the word ,god is not put absolutely2    
but1 on the other hand1 it is put       
absolutely when there is nothing of this
 nature to determine its application2 as
 in those scriptures that speak of the  
divine ,unity1 viz4 in ,matt4 xix4 #ag4 
,there is none good but one1 that is    
,god2 and in #a ,cor4 viii4 #d4 ,there  
is none other ,god but one2 and in      
,james ii4 #ai4 ,thou believest that    
there is one ,god1 c4 and ,john x4 #cc4 
,thou1 being a man1 makest thyself ,god2

 and in many other places of the like   
nature1 in which there is an idea       
contained of the divine perfections2 but
 it is not particularly determined which
 of the ,persons in the ,godhead is     
intended thereby4  ,this is what we are 
to understand by the word 1 ,god1 being 
put absolutely without any regard to its
 having an article before it1 or not2   
from whence nothing certain can be      
determined concerning the particular    
application thereof1 since many         
scriptures might easily be referred to1 
in which it is put without an article1  
though applied to the ,father2 and1 on  
the other hand1 it has very often an    
article put before it when applied to   
idols1 or false gods2#abd and the devil 
is called1     1 the god of this world2 
and it may be observed1 that in two     
evangelists1#abe referring to the same  
thing1 and using the same words1 one has
 the word with an article1 and the other
 without4  ,therefore1 setting aside    
this critical remark about the          

application of the word ,god1 when there
 is an article before 1 the main thing  
in controversy is how we are to apply   
it1 when neither the context1 nor any of
 the rules above-mentioned1 give us any 
direction1 therein1 namely1 whether it  
is in that case only to be applied to   
the ,father1 or indifferently to any of 
the ,persons in the ,godhead4 ,the      
author above-mentioned1 in his          
scripture-doctrine of the ,trinity1     
always applies it to the ,father2 and it
 may easily be perceived1 that he has no
 other reason than this to apply many   
scriptures to the ,father1 which others1
 who have defended the doctrine of the  
,trinity1 in another way1 apply to the  
,son1 as being directed herein by       
something spoken of him in the context1 
as in ,rev4 xix4 #d1 #e1 #f1 #ag4abf    
,and this is1 indeed1 the method used by
 all the ,anti-trinitarians1 in applying
 the word ,god1 especially when found   
absolutely in scripture4 ,that which    
principally induces them hereunto1 is   

because they take it for granted1 that  
as there is but one divine ,being1 so   
there is but one ,person who is truly   
and properly divine1#abg and that is the
 ,father1 to whom they take it for      
granted that the word ,god is to be     
applied in scripture to signify any     
finite being1 as the ,son1 or any       
creature below him4 ,but this           
supposition is not sufficiently proved1 
viz4 that the one divine ,being is a    
person1 and that this is only the       
,father1 whom they often call the       
supreme1 or most high ,god1 that is1    
superior1 when compared with the ,son   
and ,spirit1 as well as all creatures2  
but this we cannot allow of1 and        
therefore cannot see sufficient reason  
to conclude1 that the word ,god1 when   
put absolutely1 is to be applied to no  
other than the ,father4  ,that which ,i 
would humbly offer1 as the sense of the 
word1 when thus found in scripture1 is1 
that when the ,holy ,ghost has left it  
undetermined1 it is our safest way to   

consider it as such1 and so to apply it 
indifferently to the ,father1 ,son1 or  
,spirit1 and not to one person1         
exclusive of the others3 thus when it is
 said1 ,mark xii4 #bi1 #cb4 ,the ,lord  
our ,god is one ,lord2 and there is one 
,god1 and there is none other but him2  
the meaning is1 that there is but one   
divine ,being1 who is called ,god1 as   
opposed to the creature1 or to all who  
are not ,god by nature3 thus when the   
unity of the ,godhead is asserted in    
that scripture here referred to1 ,deut4 
vi4 #d4 and ,israel was exhorted to     
serve him1 they are1 at the same time1  
forbidden to go after other gods1 ver4  
#ac1 #ad4 ,and when it is said1 that to 
love the ,lord with all our heart1 soul1
 mind1 and strength1 is more than all   
burnt-offering and sacrifices1 ,mark    
xii4 #cc4 it implies1 that religious    
worship was performed to ,god2 but it is
 certain that this was performed to all 
the ,persons in the ,godhead2 therefore 
none of them are excluded in this       

scripture1 in which the unity of ,god is
 asserted4 ,and however ,dr4 ,clarke    
concludes ,athanasius1 from his         
unguarded way of speaking1 in some other
 instances1 to be of his side2 yet1 in  
that very place1 which he refers to1#abh
 he expressly says1 that when the       
scripture saith the ,father is the only 
,god1 and that there is one ,god1 and ,i
 am the ,first1 and the ,last2 yet this 
does not destroy the divinity of the    
,son1 for he is that one ,god1 and first
 and only ,god1 c4 ,and the same thing  
may be said of the ,holy ,ghost4        
,again1 when it is said1 ,mat4 xix4 #ag4
 ,there is none good but one1 that is   
,god2 it implies1 that the divine       
nature1 which is predicated of all the  
persons in the ,god-head1 hath those    
perfections that are essential to it1   
and particularly that goodness by which 
,god is denominated ,all-sufficient3 so 
in ,acts xv4 #ah4 when it is said1      
,known unto ,god are all his works2     
where the word ,god is absolute1 and not

 in a determinate sense1 applied either 
to ,father1 ,son1 or ,spirit1 the       
meaning is1 that all the ,persons in the
 ,godhead created all things1 which they
 are expressly said to do in several    
scriptures1 and1 as the consequence     
thereof1 that they have a right to all  
things1 which are known unto them4      
,object4 ,it will probably be objected  
to this1 that we assert that there are  
four divine ,persons1 namely1 the       
,father1 ,son1 and ,holy ,ghost1 and the
 ,godhead which is common to them all1  
since we call it ,god1 which word in    
other instances1 connotes a personal    
character2 and1 if so1 then it will     
follow1 that we are chargeable with a   
contradiction in terms1 when we say that
 there are three ,persons in the        
,godhead1 viz4 in one ,person4  ,answ4  
,to this it may be replied1 that though 
the divine nature1 which is common to   
the ,father1 ,son1 and ,holy ,ghost1 is 
represented1 in scripture1 as though it 
were a ,person1 when it is called ,god1 

yet it is to be taken in a metaphorical 
sense2 whereas the ,father1 ,son1 and   
,spirit1 as has been before considered1 
are called ,divine ,persons properly1 or
 without a metaphor4#abi ,moreover1 the 
divine nature1 though it be called ,god1
 is never considered as co-ordinate     
with1 or as distinguished from the      
divine ,persons1 as though it were a    
,person in the same sense as they are2  
and therefore1 whenever it is so called1
 it must be considered as opposed to the
 creature2 as we before observed1 the   
one ,god is opposed to those who are not
 ,god by nature4 ,it may also be        
considered1 that those divine           
perfections1 which are implied in the   
word ,god1 taken in this sense1 are     
known by the light of nature2 7whereas  
the divine ,personality1 as applied     
either to the ,father1 ,son1 or ,spirit1
 is a matter of pure revelation7 and it 
is such an idea of ,god1 or the         
,godhead1 that is intended thereby2 so  
that all the force of this objection    

consists only in the sense of a word1   
and the principal thing in debate is1   
whether the word ,god thus absolutely   
and indeterminately considered1 is a    
proper mode of speaking1 to set forth   
the divine nature3 now if the scripture 
uses the word in this sense1 it is not  
for us to enquire about the propriety1  
or impropriety1 thereof2 but we must    
take heed that we do not pervert1 or    
misunderstand1 the sense hereof which   
they do1 who either speak1 on the one   
hand1 of the ,godhead1 when called ,god1
 as though it were distinct from the    
,father1 ,son1 and ,spirit2 or1 on the  
other hand1 understand it only of the   
,father1 as opposed to the ,son and     
,spirit1 as the ,anti-trinitarians do1  
who deny their proper ,deity1 and when  
they assert that there is but one ,god1 
do in effect1 maintain that there is but
 one ,person in the ,godhead4 ,thus     
concerning the sense in which the       
,anti-trinitarians take the word ,god1  
when 7as it is generally expressed7 it  

is taken absolutely in scripture1 as    
applying it only to the ,father2 we     
proceed to consider1  #b4 ,that they    
farther suppose that our ,saviour is    
called ,god1 in the ,new ,testament1 by 
a divine warrant1 as a peculiar honour  
put upon him2 and here they think it not
 difficult to prove1 that a creature may
 have a right conferred on him to       
receive divine honour2 which if they    
were able to do1 it would tend more to  
weaken our cause1 and establish their   
own1 than any thing they have hitherto  
advanced4 ,but this we shall have       
occasion to militate against under the  
fourth head of argument1 to prove the   
,deity of the ,son1 viz4 his having a   
right to divine worship1 and therefore  
shall pass it over at present1 and      
consider them as intending nothing more 
by the word ,god1 when applied to our   
,saviour1 but what imports an honour    
infinitely below that which belongs to  
the ,father2 and this they suppose to   
have been conferred upon him1 on some   

occasions1 relating to the work for     
which he came into the world4 ,the      
,socinians1 in particular1 speak of his 
being called ,god1 or the ,son of ,god4 
7#a47 ,because of his having been       
sanctified and sent into the world1     
,john x4 #cf4 viz4 to redeem it1 in that
 peculiar and low sense in which they   
understand the word redemption1 of which
 more hereafter4  7#b47 ,also from his  
extraordinary conception and birth1 by  
the power of the ,holy ,ghost1 as it is 
said1 in ,luke i4 #ce4 ,the ,holy ,ghost
 shall come upon thee1 and the power of 
the ,highest shall over-shadow thee2    
therefore also that ,holy ,thing1 which 
shall be born of thee1 shall be called  
the ,son of ,god4  7#c47 ,another reason
 of his having this honour conferred    
upon him1 they take from his            
resurrection1 and so refer to ,rom4 i4  
#d4 in which it is said1 that he was    
declared to be the ,son of ,god with    
power1 by the resurrection from the     
dead4  7#d47 ,another reason hereof they

 take from his ascension into heaven1 or
 being glorified1 at which time they    
suppose that he was made an ,high       
,priest1 and had1 in an eminent degree1 
the name and character of ,god put upon 
him1 for which they refer to ,heb4 v4   
#c4 in which it is said1 ,christ        
glorified not himself to be made an     
,high ,priest2 but he that said unto    
him1 ,thou art my ,son1 this day have ,i
 begotten thee4  ,but they plainly      
pervert the sense of these respective   
texts but now mentioned1 inasmuch as    
they suppose that his mission1          
incarnation1 resurrection1 and          
ascension1 are the principal reasons of 
his being called ,god2 and that his     
deity is founded not in the excellency  
of his nature1 but in these relative    
circumstances1 in which1 as an act of   
grace1 this honour was conferred upon   
him1 which ,god1 had he pleased1 might  
have conferred on any other creature1   
capable of yielding obedience to him1 or
 receiving such a commission from him3  

whereas1 in reality1 these scriptures   
refer to that glory which he had as     
,mediator1 as a demonstration of his    
,deity1 and these honours were agreeable
 to his character1 as a divine ,person1 
but did not constitute him ,god1 as they
 suppose4  ,but these things are not so 
particularly insisted on by some late   
,anti-trinitarians1 though they all     
agree in this1 that his right to divine 
honour is the result of that authority  
which he has received from ,god1 to     
perform the works which are ascribed to 
him1 relating to the good of mankind2   
whereas we cannot but conclude1 from the
 scriptures before brought to prove his 
proper ,deity1 in which he is called    
,lord and ,god1 in as strong a sense1 as
 when those words are applied to the    
,father1 that he is therefore ,god equal
 with the ,father4  ,thus having        
considered our ,saviour's proper ,deity1
 as evinced from his being called ,lord 
and ,god2 and also1 that these names are
 given to him in such a sense1 as that  

hereby the ,godhead is intended1 as much
 as when it is applied to the ,father2  
we shall close this head1 by considering
 two scriptures1 in which the divine    
nature is ascribed to him2 and the first
 of them is in ,coloss4 ii4 #i4 ,in him 
dwelleth all the fulness of the ,godhead
 bodily2 in which we may observe1 that  
it is not barely said1 that ,god        
dwelleth in him1 which would not so     
evidently have proved his deity1 because
 ,god is elsewhere said to dwell in     
others3 thus1 in #a ,john iv4 #ab4 it is
 said1 ,god dwelleth in us2 but here it 
is said1 the ,godhead dwelleth in him1  
which is never applied to any creature2 
and the expression is very emphatical1  
the fulness1 yea1 all the fulness of the
 ,godhead dwelleth in him2 what can we  
understand thereby1 but that all the    
perfections of the divine nature belong 
to him8 ,the apostle had been speaking1 
in ver4 #b4 of the mystery of ,christ1  
as what the church was to know1 and     
acknowledge1 as well as that of the     

,father2 and he also considers him as   
the ,fountain of wisdom1 ver4 #c4 ,in   
whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom
 and knowledge2 and what is here spoken 
concerning him1 very well corresponds   
therewith1 as being expressive of his   
divine glory2 the fulness of the        
,godhead is said1 indeed1 to dwell in   
him bodily1 by which we are to          
understand his human nature1 as the body
 is1 in some other scriptures taken for 
the man2 thus1 in ,rom4 xii4 #a4 we are 
exhorted to present our bodies1 i4 e4   
ourselves1 a living sacrifice to ,god2  
so here the divine nature1 as subsisting
 in him1 is said to dwell in1 that is1  
to have the human nature united to it1  
which is meant by its dwelling in him   
bodily4  ,the account which some give of
 the sense of this text1 to evade the   
force of the argument1 taken from       
thence1 to prove our ,saviour's ,deity1 
does little more than shew how hard the 
,anti-trinitarians are put to it to     
maintain their ground1 when they say    

that the word 1 which we render         
,godhead1 signifies some extraordinary  
gifts conferred upon him1 especially    
such as tended to qualify him to        
discover the mind and will of ,god2 or1 
at least1 that nothing else is intended 
thereby1 but that authority which he had
 from ,god1 to perform the work which he
 came into the world about2 since it is 
certain1 that this falls infinitely     
short of what is intended by the word   
,godhead1 which must signify the divine 
nature1 subsisting in him1 who assumed1 
or was made flesh1 and so dwelt therein1
 as in a temple4  ,there is another     
scripture1 which seems to attribute to  
him the divine nature1 viz4 ,phil4 ii4  
#f4 where it is said1 that he was in the
 form of ,god1 and thought it not       
robbery to be equal with ,god2 by the   
form of ,god1 ,i humbly conceive1 we are
 to understand the divine nature which  
he had1 and therefore it was no instance
 of robbery in him to assert1 that he   
was equal with ,god4 ,if this sense of  

the text can be defended1 it will       
evidently prove his proper ,deity1 since
 it is never said1 concerning any       
creature1 that he is in the form of     
,god1 or1 as the words may be rendered1 
that he subsisted in the form of ,god2  
now it is well known1 that the word     
which we render form1 is not only used  
by the schoolmen1 but by others1 before 
their time1 to signify the nature1 or   
essential properties1 of that to which  
it is applied2 so that this sense       
thereof was well known in the apostle's 
days4 ,therefore1 why may we not        
suppose1 that the ,holy ,ghost1 in      
scripture1 may once1 at least1 use a    
word which would be so understood by    
them8 ,and it will farther appear1 that 
,christ's ,deity is signified thereby1  
if the following words are to be        
understood in the sense contained in our
 translation1 that he thought it not    
robbery to be equal with ,god2 now this 
seems very plain1 for the same word 1 he
 thought1 is taken in the same sense in 

the third verse of this chapter2 ,let   
every man esteem1 or think1 others      
better than themselves2 and it is used  
about twenty times in the ,new          
,testament1 five times in this epistle1 
besides in this text1 and never         
understood otherwise than as signifying 
to think1 esteem1 or account2 and it    
would destroy the sense of the          
respective texts1 where it is used1 to  
take it otherwise4 ,this the            
,anti-trinitarians themselves will not  
deny1 inasmuch as it does not affect    
their cause2 notwithstanding they       
determine that it must be otherwise     
translated in this text2 and so they    
render the words1       1 he did not    
covet to be honoured1 or was not greedy1
 or in haste of being honoured as       
,god#acj1 that is1 he did not affect to 
appear like a divine ,person1 or catch  
at those divine honours that did not    
belong to him4 ,could this sense of the 
text be made out to be just1 it would   
effectually overthrow our argument1     

taken from thence1 to prove ,christ's   
proper ,deity3 but this is as foreign   
from the sense of the words1 as any     
sense that could be put upon them2 and  
all that is pretended to justify it1 is 
a reference which they make to a phrase1
 or two1 used in a ,greek writer1 which 
is not at all to their purpose#aca4     
,moreover the sense of this text1 as    
agreeable to the words of our           
translation1 will farther appear to be  
just1 if we consider1 that our          
,saviour's being in the form of ,god1 is
 there opposed to his having afterwards 
been in the form of a servant1 or the   
fashion of a man2 now if the latter be  
to be understood of his being truly and 
properly man1 and not to be taken barely
 for something in him which resembled   
the human nature2 or if his taking on   
him the form of a servant1 imports1 his 
being in a capacity to perform that     
obedience which was due from him1 as man
 to ,god1 in a proper1 and not a        
theatrical sense2 then it will follow1  

that his being in the form of ,god1 as  
opposed hereunto1 must be taken for his 
being truly and properly ,god1 or for   
his having the divine nature1 as before 
mentioned2 which was the thing to be    
proved4  ,i might here consider the     
sense which ,dr4 ,whitby1 in his        
annotations1 gives of our ,saviour's    
being in the form of ,god1 as opposed to
 that of a servant1 7after he had given 
up the sense of the words1 as in our    
translation1 to the adversary7 which is1
 that his being in the form of ,god1    
implies1 his appearing1 before his      
incarnation1 in a bright shining cloud1 
or light1 or in a flame of fire1 or with
 the attendance of an host of angels1 as
 he is sometimes said to have done1     
which the ,jews call ,shechinah1 or the 
divine ,majesty1 as being a visible     
emblem of his presence2 this he calls   
the form of ,god1 and his not appearing 
so1 when incarnate in this lower world1 
the form of a servant1 as opposed to it2
 and adds1 that when he ascended into   

heaven1 he assumed the form of ,god2 and
 therefore whenever he has occasionally 
appeared1 as to the martyr ,stephen at  
his death1 or to the apostle ,paul at   
his first conversion1 it has been in    
that form1 or with like emblems of      
majesty and divinity1 as before his     
incarnation1  ,here ,i would observe    
concerning this1 that what he says of   
,christ's appearing with emblems of     
majesty and glory before his            
incarnation1 and the glory that was put 
upon his human nature after his         
ascension into heaven1 is a great truth2
 but as this is never styled1 in        
scripture1 the form of ,god1 nor was the
 symbol of the divine glory ever called 
therein the divine majesty1 however it  
might be called by ,jewish writers2     
therefore this has no reference to the  
sense of this text1 nor does it1 in the 
least1 enervate the force of the        
argument1 taken from it1 to prove our   
,saviour's proper ,deity1 any more than 
this critical remark on the words       

thereof does1 the sense of our          
translation1 whereby it evidently       
appears4 ,i might also observe the sense
 which another learned#acb writer gives 
of the form of ,god in this text1 which 
is the same that is given by several of 
the ,socinians2 namely1 that it has a   
relation to his working miracles while  
here upon earth1 which is certainly very
 disagreeable to the scope and design of
 the text1 since he is said to be in the
 form of ,god1 before he took upon him  
the form of a servant1 that is1 before  
his incarnation3 and besides1 the       
working miracles1 never was deemed      
sufficient to denominate a person to be 
in the form of ,god1 for if it had1 many
 others1 both before and after him1     
might have had this applied to them2    
whereas it is a glory appropriate to    
him1 who thought it not robbery to be   
equal with ,god4  ,i would not wholly   
pass over that which some call a        
controverted text of scripture1 in #a   
,john v4 #g4 ,for there are three that  

bear record in heaven1 the ,father1 the 
,word1 and the ,holy ,ghost2 and these  
three are one1 lest it should be thought
 that ,i conclude the arguments1 brought
 by the ,anti-trinitarians1 sufficiently
 conclusive to prove it spurious1#acc   
but ,i shall say the less on this       
subject1 because it is a very hard      
matter to advance any thing that has not
 been very largely insisted on1 by      
various writers2 among whom ,i cannot   
but mention1 with great esteem2 one who 
has defended the scripture-doctrine of  
the ,trinity with a great deal of       
learning and judgment1 who has given a  
particular account of several that have 
written on either side of the           
question#acd4 ,no one pretends to deny1 
that this text is not to be found in a  
great number of manuscripts1 among which
 some are generally allowed to be of    
great antiquity2 therefore it is less to
 be wondered at1 that it is left out in 
some ancient versions thereof1 which    
were taken from copies that were        

destitute of it2 all which only proves1 
that the text has been corrupted3 but   
the main question is1 which of those    
copies are to be reckoned genuine1 those
 which have it1 or others which have it 
not8 ,it must be allowed1 that there are
 a considerable number1 in which the    
text is inserted1 as ,beza and others   
observe2 and it will be a hard matter to
 prove that these are all spurious1     
which must be done1 before we shall be  
obliged to expunge it out of scripture4 
,if it be objected1 that the            
manuscripts1 which have the text1 are   
not so ancient as those that are without
 it1 it will be a difficult matter for  
them to determine the antiquity thereof1
 with such exactness1 as1 by comparing  
one with the other1 it may be certainly 
known1 with respect to all of them1     
which has the preference1 and by what a 
number of years3 besides1 since it is   
certain1 that more manuscripts of       
scripture are lost by far1 than are now 
known to be in the world2 unless we     

suppose that religion1 in ancient times1
 was contracted into a very narrow      
compass1 or that very few1 in the first 
ages of the church1 had copies of       
scripture by them1 which is not to be   
supposed2 and1 if so1 then it will be   
hard to prove that those manuscripts1   
which have the text inserted1 did not   
take it from some others1 that were in  
being before them2 so that the          
genuineness1 or spuriousness of the     
text1 is not to be determined only or   
principally by inspection into ancient  
manuscripts4  ,nor can ,i think it very 
material to offer conjectures concerning
 the manner how the text came first to  
be corrupted4 ,dr4 ,hammond1 and others1
 suppose1 that some one1 who transcribed
 this epistle1 might commit a blunder1  
in leaving out this text1 because of the
 repetition of the words in the         
following verse1 ,there are three that  
bare record4 ,it is1 indeed1 a hard     
thing to trace every mistake made by an 
amanuensis to its first original2       

however1 this must be concluded1 that it
 is possible for it to be left out      
through inadvertency1 but it could not  
be put in without a notorious fraud2 and
 no one would attempt to do this1 unless
 some end1 which he thought valuable1   
were answered thereby4 ,indeed1 if the  
doctrine of the ,trinity could not have 
been maintained without such an         
insertion1 ,i will not say1 that every  
one1 who ever defended it1 had honesty  
enough to abhor such a vile practice2   
but this ,i am bound to say1 that if any
 one did so1 he was guilty not only of  
fraud1 but folly1 at the same time2     
since the divinity of the ,son and      
,spirit1 as well as of the ,father1 is  
maintained throughout the whole         
scripture2 and the principal thing      
asserted concerning the ,son1 in this   
text1 viz4 that he is ,one with the     
,father1 is expressly laid down in his  
own words1 ,john x4 #cj4 ,i and my      
,father are one4  ,i know the ,arians   
take occasion to censure the defenders  

of the doctrine of the ,trinity1 as     
being guilty of this fraud1 though      
,father ,simon#ace is a little more     
sparing of his reflections on them2 but 
he is no less injurious to the truth1   
when he maintains1 that some person or  
other1 in the margin of a copy1 which he
 had by him1 which he supposes to have  
been about five hundred years old1 had  
affixed to ver4 #h4 these words1 as an  
explication thereof1 as though the      
,father1 ,son1 and ,holy ,ghost were    
intended thereby1 to wit1 by the        
,spirit1 water1 and blood2 and from     
hence concludes1 that the next person1  
who transcribed from this manuscript1   
mistook this note for a part of the     
text2 and so the #gth verse came to be  
inserted4 ,this ,le ,clerc calls a      
setting the matter in a clear light2 for
 some persons are ready to believe that 
which supports their own cause1 how     
weakly soever it be maintained4  ,it    
might easily be replied to this1 that   
this text was known in the world long   

enough before that manuscript was wrote1
 and consequently this insertion could  
not first take its rise from thence2 and
 therefore to produce a single instance 
of this nature1 is1 ,i humbly conceive1 
nothing to the purpose#acf4  ,but1      
passing by what respects                
scripture-manuscripts1 there is more    
stress to be laid on the writings of    
those who have referred to this text2   
and accordingly it is certain1 that it  
was often quoted in defence of the      
doctrine of the ,trinity1 by ancient    
writers1 in the fifth and following     
centuries1 therefore it was found in the
 manuscripts that they used4 ,it is     
true1 it is not quoted by the ,fathers1 
who wrote in the fourth century1 to wit1
 ,athanasius1 ,cyril1 ,gregory1         
,nazianzen1 ,chrysostom1 nor by         
,augustin1 and some others2 but nothing 
can be inferred from hence1 but that it 
was not in the copies they made use of3 
but it does not follow that it was in no
 copy at that time2 for1 if we look     

farther back to the third century1 we   
find it expressly referred to by        
,cyprian1 which ,i cannot but lay a very
 great stress on2 he has it in two      
places#acg1 in the former of which1 he  
occasionly mentions these words1 ,these 
three are one2 and1 in the latter1 he   
expressly quotes this scripture2 and    
says1 it is written of the ,father1     
,son1 and ,holy ,ghost1 that these three
 are one2 which evidently proves1 that  
he found it in some manuscript extant in
 his time1 which was before any         
manuscript1 now in being1 is pretended  
to have been written2 for even the      
,alexandrian manuscript is1 ,i think1   
supposed by none to be of greater       
antiquity than the fourth century1 which
 seems to me to be of greater force than
 any thing that is suggested1 concerning
 its being not found in manuscripts of  
later date2 and we may observe1 that    
that ,father does not speak of it as a  
certain manuscript1 which was reserved1 
as a treasure1 in some private library1 

which might be adulterated2 nor doth he 
pretend to prove the authority thereof1 
nor make use of it1 to prove the        
genuineness of the text2 but quotes the 
text1 as we do any other place of       
scripture1 as supposing it was generally
 acknowledged to be contained therein2  
and he also was reckoned a man of the   
greatest integrity1 as well as piety1   
and so would not refer to any text1 as a
 part of the sacred writings1 which was 
not so4  ,object4 ,it is objected       
against this1 by the ,anti-trinitarians1
 that though he quotes scriptures1 yet  
it is not this1 but ver4 #h4 and that   
not in the words thereof1 but in a      
mystical sense1 which he puts upon it1  
by the ,spirit1 water1 and blood1       
agreeing in one1 intending the ,father1 
,son1 and ,spirit1 being one3 and this  
is the sense ,facundus1 an ,african     
bishop1 who lived about the middle of   
the sixth century1 puts upon it1 and    
supposes him thus to quote it4  ,answ4  
,but to this it may be answered1 that   

his judgment is no more to be valued1   
who lived three hundred years after him1
 than if he had lived in this present   
age2 nor had he any farther light to    
understand ,cyprian's meaning1 than we  
have2 and we know very well1 that       
,cyprian was not so unreasonably fond of
 mystical interpretations of scriptures1
 as ,origen1 and some others of the     
,fathers were3 and even they never      
presumed to quote any mystical sense1   
which they put on scripture1 as the     
words thereof1 or say1 as this ,father  
does1 it is so written2 much less are we
 to suppose that his words are to be    
taken in this sense4 ,and whatever      
,facundus's sense was of his words1     
another who lived in the same century1  
together with1 or a little before him1  
viz4 ,fulgentius1 refers 7as the learned
 author above mentioned#ach observes7 to
 this passage of ,cyprian2 not as a     
mystical explication of ver4 #h4 but as 
distinctly contained in ver #g4 and1 as 
such1 makes use of it against the       

,arians4  ,as for that known passage in 
,tertullian#aci1 in which he speaks of  
the union1 or connexion1 as he calls it1
 of the ,father in the ,son1 and of the 
,son in the ,comforter1 making three    
joined together1 and that these three   
are one1 that is1 one divine ,being1 not
 one ,person1 and so referring to our   
,saviour's word's1 ,i and the ,father   
are one1 it is a very good explication  
of the sense of this text1 and discovers
 that1 in that early age of the church1 
he had a right notion of the doctrine of
 the ,trinity3 but whether it is        
sufficiently evident from hence1 that he
 refers to this scripture under our     
present consideration1 though defending 
the doctrine contained in it1 ,i will   
not determine4 ,i shall add no more in  
the defence of the genuineness of this  
text1 but rather refer the reader to    
others1 who have wrote professedly on   
this subject4#adj  ,and whereas some of 
the anti-trinitarians have supposed1    
that if this scripture were genuine1 it 

doth not prove the doctrine of the      
,trinity1 because the words ought to be 
taken as implying1 that the ,father1    
,son1 and ,spirit1 are one only in      
testimony2 to this it may be answered1  
that though it be an undoubted truth    
that they agree in testimony1 yet it    
doth not amount to the sense of the     
words1 ,they are one2 for if that had   
been the principal idea designed to be  
conveyed thereby1 no reason can be      
assigned why the phrase should be       
different from what it is in the        
following verse2 but it would1          
doubtless1 have been expressed1    1    
,they agree in one4  ,thus we have      
endeavoured to prove our ,saviour's     
proper ,deity from those scriptures that
 speak of him1 not only as a being      
called ,lord and ,god1 but from others1 
that assert him to have the divine      
nature1 or to be equal with ,god the    
,father2 we shall now proceed to        
consider some scriptures1 by which it   
appears1 that he asserts this concerning

 himself2 or what proofs we have of his 
,deity from his own words1 in several   
conferences which he held with the      
,jews1 by which he gave them reason to  
conclude that he was ,god equal with the
 ,father2 and the opposition which he   
met with from them1 who1 for this       
reason1 charged him with blasphemy1     
plainly intimates1 that they understood 
his words in this sense4 ,and if it be  
replied to this1 as it often is1 that   
nothing can be inferred to prove his    
,deity from their misunderstanding his  
words1 and so charging him1 without     
ground to be guilty thereof2 to this it 
may be answered1 though we do not lay   
much stress on what they understood to  
be the meaning of his words1 yet it     
plainly appears1 that he intended them  
in this sense1 inasmuch as if they      
misunderstood him1 he did not undeceive 
them1 which certainly he ought to have  
done1 had he not been a divine ,person4 
,if any one seems to assume to himself  
any branch of the glory of ,god1 that   

does not belong to him1 though the      
ambiguity of words1 provided they may be
 taken in two contrary senses1 may in   
some measure1 excuse him from having had
 such a design1 however unadviseable it 
be to speak in such a way1 yet if he    
apprehends that they1 to whom he directs
 his discourse1 are in the least        
inclined to misunderstand him1 he is    
obliged1 from the regard which he has to
 the divine glory1 and the duty which he
 owes to those with whom he converses1  
as well as in defence of his own        
character1 to undeceive them2 therefore1
 if our ,saviour had not been equal with
 ,god1 he would1 doubtless1 upon the    
least suspicion which the ,jews might   
entertain1 that he asserted himself to  
be so1 immediately have undeceived them1
 and would have told them1 that they    
took his words in a wrong sense1 and    
that he was far from usurping that      
glory1 which belonged to ,god2 that had 
he intended them in that sense1 they    
might justly have called him a          

blasphemer2 this he would1 doubtless    
have done1 had he by his words1 given   
them occasion to think him a divine     
,person if he were not so4  ,thus the   
apostles ,paul and ,barnabas1 when the  
people at ,lystra1 upon their having    
wrought a miracle1 concluded that they  
were gods1 with what zeal and           
earnestness did they undeceive them6 ,in
 ,acts xiv4 #ad1 #ae4 it is said1 when  
they perceived they were going to offer 
sacrifice to them1 they rent their      
clothes1 and ran in among the people1   
crying out1 and saying1 ,sirs1 why do ye
 these things8 we also are men of like  
passions with you4 ,and1 at another     
time1 we read1 that ,peter and ,john1 in
 ,acts iii4 #aa-ac4 when they had cured 
the lame man1 though the people did not 
conclude them to be divine persons1 yet1
 perceiving that they were amazed1 and  
being jealous that some thoughts might  
arise in their minds1 as though they had
 a right to that glory1 which belongs to
 ,god alone1 or that this miracle was to

 be ascribed to themselves1 rather than 
to him1 we read1 that when ,peter saw   
that they marvelled1 and that the people
 ran together1 he answered1 ye men of   
,israel1 why marvel ye at this8 or why  
look ye so earnestly on us1 as though1  
by our own power1 or holiness1 we had   
made this man to walk8 and accordingly  
takes occasion to shew1 that the glory  
hereof was due to none but ,god4  ,but  
our ,saviour takes no such method to    
exculpate himself from this charge of   
blasphemy2 therefore we must suppose    
they did not mistake his words but that 
he intended thereby1 that they should   
understand him to be a divine ,person2  
yea1 he is so far from undeceiving them1
 if they were deceived1 that he rather  
confirms1 than denies1 the sense1 which 
they put upon them4 ,this appears from  
,matt4 ix4 #b-e4 when they brought to   
him a man sick of the palsey1 to whom1  
when he healed him1 he said1 ,son be of 
good cheer1 thy sins be forgiven thee1  
he perceived1 that certain of the       

scribes said within themselves1 ,this   
man blasphemeth1 supposing that none had
 power to forgive sins but ,god4 ,it is 
true1 the words might have been         
understood1 as though he had said1 thy  
sins are forgiven thee1 only in a       
declarative way1 as signifying1 that the
 man had obtained forgiveness from ,god1
 without insinuating thereby1 that he   
had a power1 as a divine ,person1 to    
forgive sins4 ,but it is plain1 that the
 ,jews took his words in this latter    
sense1 from their charging him with     
blasphemy2 but1 instead of rectifying   
the mistake1 if it was one1 he asserts1 
that notwithstanding the meanness of his
 appearance1 while in his humble state  
on earth1 yet he had a power to forgive 
sins2 and he not only asserts1 but      
proves this1 when he says1 ver4 #e4     
,whether it is easier to say1 thy sins  
be forgiven thee8 or to say ,arise1 and 
walk8 ,many suppose1 that ,our ,saviour 
hereby intends to establish his ,deity1 
by asserting his infinite power1 which  

was exerted in working a miracle1 and so
 it is as though he should say3 he that 
can produce any effect1 which is above  
the laws of nature1 as miracles are1 at 
least if he does it by his own power1   
must be ,god3 but this he had done1 and 
so proved his deity thereby1 and        
consequently his right to forgive sins4 
,but ,i am sensible it will be objected 
to this1 that since creatures have      
wrought miracles1 which were as truly   
and properly so as this that ,christ    
wrought2 therefore the working a miracle
 will not prove the divinity of the     
person that wrought it1 unless we could 
prove that he did it by his own power1  
that we cannot do without supposing his 
deity1 and therefore that ought not to  
be made use of1 as a medium to prove it4
  ,some1 indeed1 attempt to prove it    
from that scripture1 ,luke xi4 #bj4 in  
which he says1 he cast out devils by the
 finger of ,god1 supposing he means     
hereby his own divine power4 ,others    
take notice of something peculiar to    

himself as they suppose1 in the way of  
his working miracles1 that herein he    
spake1 and acted like a ,god4 ,but1     
since neither of these arguments will be
 reckoned conclusive1 therefore ,i would
 take a method somewhat different1 which
 is not liable to the aforesaid         
objection1 to account for this matter2  
and that is that our ,saviour first     
tells the man1 that his sins were       
forgiven him1 knowing1 before-hand1 how 
this would be resented by the scribes1  
who would1 upon this occasion1 charge   
him with blasphemy1 which accordingly   
they did2 and then1 to convince them    
that he was a divine ,person1 and had a 
power to forgive sin1 he wrought a      
miracle1 and so bade the man1 sick of   
the palsey1 to arise and walk2 whereby  
he proved his deity1 of which he        
designed to give an extraordinary       
conviction1 and consequently of his     
having a power to forgive sin1 by an    
appeal to this miracle4 ,now though     
miracles do not argue the divinity of   

the person that works them1 from any    
visible circumstance contained therein  
as but now mentioned1 yet they          
effectually prove it1 provided this be  
the thing contested1 and an explicit    
appeal be made to the divine power to   
confirm it by miracles1 then they are an
 undoubted proof thereof1 as much as    
they prove any thing relating to the    
,christian religion3 and1 in this sense1
 ,i humbly conceive1 ,christ proved his 
deity by miracles1 which he is expressly
 said elsewhere to have done2 as in     
,john ii4 #aa4 speaking concerning his  
first miracle in ,cana of ,galilee1 it  
is said1 that thereby he manifested     
forth his glory1 and his disciples      
believed on him2 where1 by his glory is 
doubtless1 meant his divine glory2 for  
the faith of his disciples1 which was   
consequent hereupon1 was a divine faith3
 and we never read of the glory of      
,christ1 in his humbled state more      
especially1 but it must import the glory
 of his deity1 which his disciples are  

said1 in some measure to behold1 when   
they believed in him4 ,this ,christ     
confirmed by his miracles1 in the same  
way1 as his mission was confirmed       
thereby4 ,by this means1 therefore1 he  
proved his deity and consequently his   
right to forgive sin3 and therefore was 
so far from endeavouring to convince the
 ,jews1 that they were mistaken in      
thinking him a divine person1 he farther
 insists on1 and proves1 that he was so4
  ,there is another conference which our
 ,saviour held with the ,jews1          
mentioned1 ,john vi4 in which we read1  
that after he had healed a lame man on  
the sabbath-day1 for which1 ver4 #af4   
the ,jews sought to slay him1 as a      
sabbath-breaker1 he replies1 ver4 #ag4  
,my ,father worketh hitherto1 and ,i    
work2 upon which they were more enraged1
 and as it is said1 ver4 #ah4 sought the
 more to kill him1 because he had not   
only broken the sabbath1 but said also1 
that ,god was his ,father1 making       
himself equal with ,god4 ,it is plain   

they understood his words1 as importing 
that he was equal with ,god2 and1 indeed
 they could do no otherwise1 for he     
compares his works with ,god's1 and     
speaks of himself as working            
co-ordinately with him4 ,certainly our  
works ought not to be mentioned at the  
same time with ,god's2 therefore they   
suppose that he asserted himself to be a
 divine ,person1 and farther proved it  
by calling ,god his ,father2 which1     
according to the sense in which they    
understood it1 denoted an equality with 
him4 ,hereupon they charge him with     
blasphemy1 and go round about to kill   
him for it4 ,now it is certain1 that1 if
 he had not been equal with ,god1 he    
ought to have undeceived them1 which he 
might easily have done1 by telling them 
that though ,i call ,god my ,father1 ,i 
intend nothing hereby1 but that ,i      
worship1 reverence1 and yield obedience 
to him2 or that ,i am his ,son1 by a    
special instance of favour1 in such a   
sense as a creature may be2 but far be  

it from me to give you the least        
occasion to think that ,i am equal with 
,god1 for that would be to rob him of   
his glory3 but we find that our ,saviour
 is far from denying his equality with  
the ,father1 but rather establishes and 
proves it in the following verses4  ,it 
is true1 indeed1 in some passages       
thereof1 he ascribes to himself the     
weakness of a man1 as having therein    
respect to his human nature1 which is   
included in his being the ,messiah and  
,mediator1 as well as his divine3 thus  
he says1 ver4 #ai4 ,the ,son1 viz4 as   
man1 can do nothing of himself2 and ver4
 #bj4 ,the ,father sheweth him all      
things2 but1 in other passages1 he      
proves that he had a divine nature1 and 
farther confirms what he had before     
asserted1 namely1 that he was equal with
 ,god2 in ver4 #ba4 ,for as the ,father 
raiseth up the dead1 and quickeneth     
them1 even so the ,son quickeneth whom  
he will4 ,observe1 he not only speaks of
 himself1 as having divine power1 but   

sovereignty2 the former in that he      
quickeneth2 the latter1 in that he does 
it according to his own will or         
pleasure2 and1 in ver4 #bc4 he signifies
 his expectation from men1 that all men 
should honour the ,son1 even as they    
honour the ,father4 ,thus he lays claim 
to divine glory1 as well as ascribes to 
himself the prerogative of raising the  
whole world1 at the general             
resurrection1 and determining their     
state1 either of happiness or misery1   
ver4 #bh1 #bi4 ,marvel not at this2 for 
the hour is coming1 in which all that   
are in the graves shall hear his voice1 
and shall come forth2 they that have    
done good1 unto the resurrection of     
life2 and they that have done evil to   
the resurrection of damnation4 ,from    
hence1 therefore1 we may conclude1 that 
our ,saviour was so far from disclaiming
 the charge of being equal with ,god1   
which they called blasphemy1 that he    
proves it by arguments yet more         
convincing4  ,another conference1 which 

he held with the ,jews about this       
matter1 we read of in ,john viii4       
wherein1 taking occasion to speak       
concerning ,abraham1 who rejoiced to see
 his day1 he tells them plainly1 ver4   
#eh4 ,before ,abraham was1 ,i am2 not   
intending hereby1 as the ,arians        
suppose1 that he was the first creature1
 but that he was equal with ,god2 and1  
indeed1 there seems to be something in  
his mode of speaking that argues his    
asserting his eternal and unchangeable  
,deity4 ,the phrase here used is the    
same1 with a little variation1 with that
 which is used to set forth the eternity
 and immutability of ,god1 in ,isa4     
xliii4 #ac4 ,before the day was1 ,i am  
he4 ,if the prophet is to be understood1
 as asserting that ,god the ,father     
existed before time1 before the day was1
 or the course of nature began1 why may 
we not suppose our ,saviour to intend as
 much1 when he says1 ,before ,abraham   
was1 ,i am4  ,however1 since it will be 
objected1 that this1 at best1 is but a  

probable argument1 though it is such as 
many of the ,fathers have made use of in
 defending his ,deity1 yet we will not  
lay the whole stress of our cause upon  
it1 but may observe1 that whatever      
critical remark others may make on the  
sense of the words1 it is certain the   
,jews understood them no otherwise1 than
 as implying1 that he thought himself   
equal with ,god2 therefore it is said1  
ver4 #ei4 that they took up stones to   
stone him2 which was a punishment       
inflicted1 under the law1 on            
blasphemers2 and ought he not1 had they 
misunderstood his words1 to have cleared
 himself from this imputation1 if he had
 not been equal with ,god8 ,but he is   
far from doing this2 for it is said1 in 
the following words1 that he hid        
himself1 and went out of the temple1    
going through the midst of them1 and so 
passed by4  ,again1 there is another    
conference1 which he held with the      
,jews1 mentioned in ,john x4 in which he
 speaks like a divine ,person in several

 verses2 as ver4 #ad4 ,i am the good    
,shepherd1 and know my sheep1 and am    
known of mine2 which is the same that is
 ascribed to ,god1 in ,psal4 xxiii4 #a4 
,the ,lord is my ,shepherd2 and he lays 
claim to his church1 whom he calls his  
sheep1 as his own2 and ver4 #ah4 he     
speaks of himself1 as having a power    
over his own life2 ,i have power to lay 
it down1 and ,i have power to take it   
again2 which is a greater instance of   
dominion than belongs to a creature1 who
 has not a power to dispose of his own  
life at pleasure2 and1 in ver4 #bh4 he  
ascends yet higher in his expression1   
when he speaks of himself1 as having a  
power to give eternal life to his       
people1 which is certainly the gift of  
none but ,god2 and when1 in ver4 #bi4 he
 owns himself to be inferior to his     
,father1 as man2 notwithstanding1 in    
ver4 #cj4 he plainly asserts his ,deity1
 when he says1 ,i and my ,father are    
one4  ,object4 #a4 ,the                 
,anti-trinitarians object to this1 that 

,christ did not speak of himself as one 
with the ,father1 any otherwise than in 
consent1 or1 at least1 as having power  
and authority derived from him4  ,answ4 
,to say that those words1 ,i and my     
,father are one1 imply nothing more than
 that they are ,one in consent1 does not
 well agree with the sense of the       
foregoing words1 in which he speaks of  
the greatness1 and the power of his     
,father1 and in this of his being ,one  
with him4 ,besides1 had he only meant   
his being ,one with him in consent1 as  
implying the subjection of all the      
powers and faculties of his soul to him1
 that is a sense in which every good man
 may be said to be one with ,god2       
therefore the ,jews would not have      
charged him with blasphemy for it1      
which1 it is plain1 they did1 and took  
up stones to stone him1 if his own words
 had not given them ground to conclude  
that he intended more than this1 namely1
 that he was one in nature with ,god4   
,it is therefore farther objected1      

,object4 #b4 ,that the ,jews1 indeed1   
misunderstood him1 and nothing can be   
inferred from their stupidity1 to prove 
his ,deity3 but he seems1 in the        
following verses1 to do more to the     
undeceiving them1 than he had done in   
some of the foregoing instances2 for he 
tells them plainly the reason why he    
spake of himself as a ,god1 namely1     
because he was a prophet2 and these were
 called gods1 to whom the word of ,god  
came1 or1 at least1 that he had a right 
to be so called1 from his being         
sanctified1 and sent into the world4    
,answ4 ,by these expressions1 he does   
not intend to set himself upon a level  
with the prophets of old1 but they      
contain an argument from the less to the
 greater2 and so it is1 as though he    
should say1 ,if some persons1 who made a
 considerable figure in the church of   
old1 and were sent about important      
services to them1 are called gods1 ,i   
have much more reason to claim that     
character1 as having been sanctified1   

and sent into the world about the great 
work of redemption1 consecrated1 or set 
apart to glorify the divine perfections 
therein2 which work1 as will be observed
 under a following head1 proves his     
,deity2 and therefore we are not to     
suppose that he disclaims it1 when he   
speaks of himself1 as engaged therein4  
,then he proceeds yet farther1 in       
asserting his ,deity1 when he speaks of 
his being in the ,father1 and the       
,father in him1 which1 it is certain1   
the ,jews took in a very different sense
 from what those words are taken in1    
when applied to creatures1 for they     
concluded1 that he spake of himself as a
 divine ,person2 for it follows1 ver4   
#ci4 that they sought again to take him1
 but he escaped out of their hand2 so   
that he still gives them occasion to    
conclude1 that he was ,god equal with   
the ,father4  ,thus he asserted his     
,deity in all these various conferrences
 with the ,jews2 in which1 if he had not
 been what they apprehended him to      

insinuate that he was1 many charges must
 have been brought against him2 not only
 as to what concerns matters of common  
prudence1 as incensing the people by    
ambiguous expressions1 and thereby      
hazarding his own life2 but his holiness
 would have been called in question1 had
 he given occasion to them1 to think    
that he assumed to himself divine glory1
 had he not had a right to it4#ada  ,and
 this leads us to consider that last    
public testimony1 which he gave to his  
,deity1 in the presence of the          
,sanhedrim1 which1 in some respects1 may
 be said to have cost him his life1 when
 he stood before ,pontius ,pilate2 upon 
which occasion1 the apostle says1 #a    
,tim4 vi4 #ac4 that he witnessed a good 
confession3 this we have recorded1      
,matth4 xxvi4 #fa4 where we observe1    
that when false witnesses were suborned 
to testify against him1 who contradicted
 one another1 in their evidence1 upon   
which the high priest desired that he   
would make a reply to what they said1 in

 his own defence1 he did not think that 
worthy of an answer1 and therefore held 
his peace3 but when he was asked1 in the
 most solemn manner1 and adjured by the 
living ,god1 to tell them1 ,whether he  
were the ,christ1 the ,son of ,god8 that
 is1 the ,messiah1 whom the ,jews       
expected1 who governed his church of    
old1 and whom they acknowledged to be a 
divine ,person1 or the ,son of ,god2    
here the whole matter is left to his own
 determination4 ,had he denied this1 he 
would have saved his life2 and if he    
confessed it1 he was like to die for it4
 ,on this occasion1 he does not hold his
 peace1 or refuse to answer2 therefore1 
says he1 ver4 #fd4 ,thou hast said2     
which is as though he had said1 ,it is  
as thou hast said1 ,i am the ,christ1   
the ,son of ,god2 and then in the       
following words1 ,nevertheless1 ,i say  
unto you1 ,hereafter shall ye see the   
,son of man1 sitting on the right hand  
of power1 and coming in the clouds of   
heaven2 whereupon the high priest rent  

his clothes1 and appealed to the people 
that they had heard his blasphemy1 and  
accordingly they judged him worthy of   
death4 ,here we observe1 that he not    
only asserts himself to be the ,son of  
,god1 and to have a right to the glory  
of a divine ,person1 but1 as a farther  
confirmation thereof1 applies to himself
 a text1 which the ,jews1 supposed to   
belong to the messiah1 ,dan4 vii4 #ac4  
,i saw in the night-visions1 and behold1
 one1 like the ,son of man1 came with   
the clouds of heaven1 c4 ,so that1 from 
all this1 it follows1 that if ,christ1  
when he conversed occasionally with the 
,jews1 or when he was called before the 
,sanhedrim1 asserts himself to be the   
,son of ,god1 which includes in it his  
,deity1 and so does not shun to speak of
 himself1 as equal with ,god1 we have   
the doctrine1 which we are defending1   
maintained by himself2 therefore we must
 conclude1 that he really is what he    
declared himself to be1 namely1 ,god    
equal with the ,father4  ,,ii4 ,we      

proceed to consider how our ,saviour's  
,deity appears1 from those divine       
attributes1 which are ascribed to him1  
which are proper to ,god alone2 to which
 we shall add1 those high and glorious  
titles1 by which he is described in     
scripture4 ,the attributes of ,god1 as  
has been before observed#adb1 are all   
essential to him1 and therefore cannot1 
in a proper sense1 be any of them1      
applied to a creature1 as they are to   
,christ1 which will be particularly     
considered in some following heads4  #a4
 ,he is said to be eternal1 and that not
 only without end1 as the angels and    
saints in heaven shall be1 but from     
everlasting3 this appears from ,micah v4
 #b4 ,whose goings forth have been from 
of old1 from everlasting4 ,if his goings
 forth have been from everlasting1 then 
he existed from everlasting1 for action 
supposes existence4 ,nothing more than  
this can be said1 to prove that the     
,father was from everlasting3 and that  
this is spoken of our ,saviour is very  

plain1 from the reference to this text1 
in ,matth4 ii4 #f4 where the former part
 of this verse is quoted and explained1 
as signifying our ,saviour's being born 
in ,bethlehem2 therefore the latter part
 of it1 whose goings forth1 c4 must     
belong to him4 ,again1 he is said1 in   
,john i4 #a4 to have been in the        
beginning2 observe1 it is not said he   
was from but in1 the beginning2         
therefore it is plain1 that he existed  
when all things began to be1 and        
consequently was from eternity4  ,when  
we consider this divine perfection as   
belonging to our ,saviour1 we militate  
against both the ,socinians and the     
,arians2 as for the former1 they deny1  
that he had any existence1 properly     
speaking1 before his conception in the  
womb of the virgin ,mary1 and interpret 
all those scriptures that speak of his  
pre-existence to it1 such as that in    
,john viii4 #eh4 ,before ,abraham was1  
,i am1 or that the ,word was in the     
beginning1 as importing either1 that he 

was from eternity1 in the decree and    
purpose of ,god1 relating to his        
incarnation1 in which sense every thing 
that comes to pass was eternal1 as      
fore-ordained by ,god1 which is         
therefore a very absurd exposition of   
such-like texts2 or else they suppose1  
that his being in the beginning         
signifies nothing else but his being the
 ,founder of the gospel-state1 which    
cannot be the sense of the evangelist's 
words1 because he is said to be with    
,god2 and it immediately follows1 and   
all things were made by him1 which every
 unprejudiced reader would suppose to   
intend the creation of the world1 and   
not the erecting the                    
gospel-dispensation2 this therefore     
evidently appears to be a perversion of 
the sense of the text4  ,as for the     
,arians1 they distinguish between       
,christ's being in the beginning of     
time1 and his being from eternity2 and  
so they suppose the meaning of the text 
to be1 that the ,word was from the      

beginning2 and whatever disguise they   
seem to put upon their mode of speaking1
 when they say there was not a point of 
time in which ,christ was not1 or that  
he was before the world1 they are far   
from asserting that he was without      
beginning1 or properly from eternity4   
,and1 in answer hereunto1 let it be     
considered1 that we cannot conceive of  
any medium between time and eternity2   
therefore whatever was before time1 must
 be from eternity1 in the same sense in 
which ,god is eternal4 ,that this may   
appear1 let us consider that time is the
 measure of finite beings1 therefore it 
is very absurd1 and little less than a  
contradiction1 to say that there was any
 finite being produced before time2 for 
that is1 in effect1 to assert that a    
limited duration is antecedent to that  
measure1 whereby it is determined1 or   
limited4 ,if we should allow that there 
might have been some things created     
before ,god began to create the heavens 
and the earth1 though these things might

 be said to have had a being longer than
 time has had1 yet they could not have  
existed before time1 for time would have
 begun with them2 therefore if ,christ  
had been created a thousand millions of 
ages before the world1 it could not be  
said that he existed before time2 but it
 would be inferred from hence1 that     
time1 which would have taken its        
beginning from his existence1 had       
continued so many ages2 therefore that  
which existed before time1 must have    
existed before all finite beings1 and   
consequently was not produced out of    
nothing1 or did not begin to be1 and is 
properly from eternity4 ,therefore ,i   
cannot but think the objection evasive1 
or a fruitless attempt to take off the  
force of this argument1 to prove our    
,saviour's ,deity1 since the expressions
 of scripture1 by which his eternity is 
set forth1 are as strong and emphatical1
 as those whereby the ,father's is      
expressed1 and consequently his ,deity  
is equally evident4  #b4 ,our ,saviour  

is said to be unchangeable1 which       
perfection not only belongs to ,god1 but
 is that whereby he is considered as    
opposed to all created beings1 which are
 dependent upon him1 and therefore      
changed by him1 at his pleasure4 ,now   
that ,christ is immutable1 is evident1  
if we compare the words of the          
,psalmist1 ,psal4 cii4 #be-bg4 ,of old  
hast thou laid the foundation of the    
earth2 and the heavens are the work of  
thy hands4 ,they shall perish1 but thou 
shalt endure2 yea1 all of them shall wax
 old like a garment2 as a vesture shalt 
thou change them1 and they shall be     
changed2 but thou art the same1 and thy 
years shall have no end1 with ,heb4 i4  
#aj4 where the apostle uses the same    
words and considers them as applied to  
,christ2 so that it will be a very hard 
matter for any to evade the force of    
this argument4 ,i am persuaded1 that if 
the apostle had not applied these words 
to ,christ1 the ,anti-trinitarians would
 have allowed1 that the ,psalmist gives 

as plain an account of the immutability 
of ,god1 as can be found in scripture1  
or1 indeed1 as words can express4 ,some 
of the writers on that side of the      
question1 have passed over this         
scripture1 as thinking1 ,i suppose1 that
 it is better not to attempt to account 
for it consistently with their scheme1  
than to do it in such a way1 as will    
not1 in the least1 support it3 others do
 not care to own that they are applied  
to ,christ2 but that is to break the    
chain of the apostle's reasoning1 and   
thereby to fasten an absurdity upon him4
 ,now1 that we may briefly consider the 
connexion between this and the foregoing
 verses1 whereby it will evidently      
appear that our ,saviour is the ,person 
here described1 as unchangeable1 let us 
consider1 that the design of this       
chapter is to set forth the ,mediatorial
 glory of ,christ1 to establish his     
superiority to angels2 and after he had 
referred to that scripture1 which speaks
 of the eternity of his kingdom1 to wit1

 the #deth ,psalm1 ver4 #f4 he then     
speaks of him as unchangeable1 and so   
applies the words of the ,psalmist1 but 
now mentioned1 to him4 ,we may also     
observe1 in the text1 that he is not    
only unchangeable1 as to his existence1 
but his duration is unchangeable1 which 
farther confirms what was observed under
 the last head1 that he is eternal1 as  
,god is1 viz4 without succession1 as    
well as from everlasting3 this seems to 
be contained in that expression1 ,thou  
art the same1 thy years shall not fail1 
as though he should say1 thy duration   
does not slide1 or pass away by         
successive moments1 as the duration of  
time and created beings do4  ,to this we
 might add what the apostle says1 ,heb4 
xiii4 #h4 that he is the same yesterday1
 to-day1 and for ever1 that is1         
throughout all the changes of time1 he  
remains unchangeably the same in his    
divine nature4 ,a late writer#adc       
supposes the meaning of this scripture  
to be nothing but this1 that the        

doctrine of ,christ1 once taught by the 
apostles1 ought to be preserved         
unchanged3 it is true1 he says          
elsewhere1#add that it is certainly true
 that the ,person of ,christ is the same
 yesterday1 to-day1 and for ever2       
whether1 by yesterday1 he means any     
thing more than a limited duration of   
time past1 which he must do1 or else    
give up the doctrine that he every where
 contends for1 ,i cannot tell2 but he   
does not think that this text respects  
the ,person of ,christ1 but his doctrine
 as above mentioned2 the principal      
argument by which he proves it is1 its  
supposed connexion with the foregoing   
verse2 and so it is as though he should 
say2 ,have regard to what has been      
delivered to you by those who have      
preached the word of ,god1 who1 though  
they are no more among you1 yet the     
doctrine they have delivered is the same
 yesterday1 to-day1 and for ever4 ,but  
it seems to be too great a strain on the
 sense of the words1 to suppose ,christ 

to import the same with his doctrine2   
and1 with submission1 ,i cannot think   
that this is to be inferred from what   
goes before1 or follows after it2 but   
the sense seems to be this2 ,adhere to  
the doctrine you have formerly received 
from those who have preached the word of
 ,god to you1 and be not carried about  
with divers and strange doctrines1 so as
 to change your sentiments with your    
teachers1 for that would not be to act  
in conformity to ,jesus ,christ1 who is 
the same yesterday1 to-day1 and for     
ever2 so that he designs to establish   
their faith from the consideration of   
,christ's immutability1 whatever changes
 they are liable to from the death of   
their teachers1 or the innovations of   
those who succeed them1 and endeavour to
 carry them away by divers and strange  
doctrines2 so the text seems to be as   
plain a proof of our ,saviour's         
immutability as that scripture1 ,rev4 i4
 #d4 is of the immutability of ,god1 in 
which it is said1 ,he is1 was1 and is to

 come4 ,if1 by his being yesterday1 we  
are to understand1 as some do1 his      
managing the affairs of his church under
 the legal dispensation2 and to-day1 his
 governing them under this present      
dispensation2 and for ever1 the eternity
 of his kingdom1 it plainly proves1 that
 whatever changes he has made in the    
affairs of the government of the church 
and of the world1 yet he is the same1   
and consequently a divine ,person4  #c4 
,another divine attribute ascribed to   
our ,saviour1 is omnipresence1 as in    
,matt1 xviii4 #bj4 ,where two or three  
are gathered together in my name1 there 
am ,i in the midst of them2 which       
expression imports the same thing1 with 
that whereby the divine omnipresence 7as
 is allowed by all7 is set forth in     
,exod4 xx4 #bd4 ,in all places where ,i 
record my name1 ,i will come unto thee1 
and ,i will bless thee4 ,now that       
,christ's presence in the midst of his  
people1 in all places1 argues his       
omnipresence1 is very evident1 since he 

designs1 by this promise1 to encourage  
them in all places1 and at all times1 to
 perform religious duties1 with an eye  
to this privilege2 so that wherever     
there is a worshipping assembly1 they   
have hereby ground to expect that he    
will be present with them4 ,now it is   
certain1 that no creature can be in two 
places at the same time1 much less in   
all places1 which is the same as to fill
 heaven and earth1 and is applicable to 
,god alone1 as the prophet expresses it1
 in ,jer4 xxiii4 #bd4 ,moreover1 when   
,christ says1 that he will be with his  
people in all places1 it must be meant  
at the same time1 and not successively1 
otherwise he could not be where-ever two
 or three are met in his name2 this     
therefore is a plain proof of his       
omnipresence1 which is an incommunicable
 perfection of the divine nature1 and   
consequently argues him to be true and  
proper ,god4  ,object4 #a4 ,it is       
objected to the sense we have given of  
this scripture1 7to weaken the force of 

the argument taken from it7 that our    
,saviour is here said to be present1    
only by his authority1 where two or     
three are met together in his name2 and 
accordingly the words are to be taken in
 a metaphorical sense1 as when a king is
 said to be present in all parts of his 
dominions1 where persons1 who are       
deputed to represent him1 act by his    
authority4  ,answ4 ,though we allow1    
that whatever is done in ,christ's name1
 must be said to be done by his         
authority2 yet we cannot allow that his 
being in the midst of them is to be     
taken only for his being so by his      
authority2 for we must not suppose that 
our ,saviour1 in these words1 makes use 
of a tautology2 and1 indeed1 it would be
 a very jejune and empty way of speaking
 to say1 that where two or three are met
 together in my name1 that is1 by my    
authority1 there am ,i in the midst of  
them1 by my authority4 ,certainly1      
,christ's being in the midst of them1   
must be taken in the same sense with    

that parallel scripture before referred 
to1 in ,exod4 xx4 #bd4 where ,god's     
coming to his people1 in those places   
where he records his name1 is explained1
 as having a very great privilege       
attending it1 namely1 his blessing them1
 which he is said to do1 when he confers
 blessedness upon them1 and gives them a
 full and rich supply of all their      
wants2 this therefore must be the sense 
of our ,saviour's being in the midst of 
his people4  ,moreover1 as ,god is said 
to be present where he acts1 so         
,christ's powerful influence1 granted to
 his people in all places1 which        
supposes his omnipresence1 contains a   
great deal more than his being present  
by his authority2 and if that were the  
only sense in which this scripture is to
 be taken1 it might as well be alleged1 
that all the scriptures1 which speak of 
the divine omnipresence might be taken  
in that sense1 which would be to set    
aside all the proofs we have from thence
 of this perfection of the divine       

nature2 therefore this objection seems  
to be rather an evasion1 than an        
argument1 to overthrow ,christ's        
divinity1 taken from his omnipresence4  
,object4 #b4 ,others suppose that       
,christ being in the midst of his       
people1 when met together in his name1  
implies nothing more than his knowing   
what they do when engaged in acts of    
religious worship4  ,answ4 ,we observe1 
that they who make use of this          
objection1 that they may militate       
against that argument1 which is brought 
to prove his ,deity from his            
omnipresence1 will1 for argument's sake1
 allow him to be omniscient1 not        
considering that that equally proves him
 to be a divine ,person1 as will be     
considered under our next head4 ,now1 to
 prove that ,christ's being present with
 his people1 is to be understood of his 
knowing what they do1 they refer to that
 scripture1 #b ,kings v4 #bf4 in which  
,elisha says to ,gehazi1 as knowing what
 he had done1 when he followed ,naaman1 

the ,syrian1 for a reward2 ,went not    
mine heart with thee1 when the man      
turned again from his chariot with thee8
 ,but since this scripture signifies    
nothing else but that this secret was   
revealed to him1 which is1 in a         
figurative way of speaking1 as though he
 had been present with him1 it will not 
follow from hence that the prophet      
pretended to know what was done in all  
places1 and that at all times1 which is 
more 7as will be farther observed under 
the next head7 than what seems          
communicable to any creature3 but this  
is intended by ,christ's knowing all    
things1 and more than this1 doubtless1  
is meant by his being in the midst of   
his people1 whereby he encourages them  
to expect those blessings1 which they   
stand in need of1 from him1 in which    
respect he promises to be with them in a
 way of grace2 and certainly he that is 
so present with his people1 must be     
concluded to be1 in the most proper     
sense1 a divine ,person4  ,there is     

another scripture1 which is generally   
brought to prove ,christ's omnipresence1
 and consequently his proper ,deity1 to 
wit1 ,john iii4 #ac4 ,and no man hath   
ascended up to heaven but he that came  
down from heaven1 even the ,son of man  
which is in heaven4 ,for the            
understanding of which words1 we must   
consider their connexion with what goes 
immediately before2 thus by1 ,no man    
hath ascended up into heaven1 but he    
that came down from heaven1 ,it is plain
 our ,saviour means1 that no man has a  
full and comprehensive knowledge of     
heavenly things1 of which he had been   
speaking in the foregoing verse1 but he 
that came down from heaven2 in which he 
asserts his divine omniscience#ade1 as  
the person in whom all treasures of     
wisdom and knowledge are hid1 as it is  
expressed elsewhere2 or none knows the  
mysteries which are hid in ,god1 but he 
that is in the bosom of the ,father1 who
 came down from heaven2 or1 as the      
apostle expresses it1 #a ,cor4 xv4 #dg4 

who is the ,lord from heaven2 and then1 
as a farther proof of his ,deity1 he    
adds1 that he is in heaven2 that is1    
while he was on earth1 in one nature1 as
 being omnipresent1 he was in heaven in 
the other nature2 and1 agreeably to this
 sense of the scripture1 he is said to  
come down from heaven1 as his divine    
nature manifested its glory here on     
earth1 when the nature was united to it1
 which is the only sense in which ,god  
is said to come down into this lower    
world2 as we have the same mode of      
speaking1 in ,gen4 xi4 #g4 ,exod4 iii4  
#h4 and other places2 so that if he is  
thus omnipresent1 we must conclude that 
he is a divine ,person4  ,the ,arians   
give a very different sense of this     
text1 especially those words1 ,the ,son 
of man1 who is in heaven2#adf for1 they 
suppose1 the words ought to be rendered1
 was in heaven2 and that it does not    
argue his omnipresence1 but that nature1
 which they call divine1 first resided  
in heaven from the beginning1 when it   

was produced by the ,father2 and        
afterwards in his incarnation1 by a     
removal from heaven to earth it was said
 to come down from thence4 ,but1 before 
we allow of this sense of the text1 they
 must prove that ,christ was the first  
creature1 and that1 in this finite      
nature1 he resided in heaven till his   
incarnation1 and that he afterwards1 by 
a change of place1 descended into this  
lower world2 and1 if they could make    
this appear1 there is yet a difficulty  
in the expression1 as they understand   
the words2 for it is not usual to say1  
,i came from a place1 and was in that   
place before ,i came from it2 therefore 
whether their exposition of the words1  
or ours1 be most proper1 ,i leave any   
one to judge4  ,as for the ,socinians1  
who deny that ,christ had any existence 
before his incarnation1 these are very  
much at a loss to account for the sense 
of this scripture2 though ,socinus      
himself1 and many of his followers1 have
 concluded from thence1 that ,christ was

 taken up into heaven some time after   
his incarnation1 which they suppose to  
have been in some part of those forty   
days in which the scripture says he was 
in the wilderness tempted of the devil2 
but how he could ascend into heaven1 and
 yet be in the wilderness1 where one of 
the evangelists says he was all the     
forty days1 as ,mark i4 #ac4 cannot be  
easily understood1 or accounted for2    
and1 indeed1 the scripture is altogether
 silent as to this matter3 and it is    
very strange1 if it had been so1 that   
when we have an account of other        
circumstances in his life1 which are of 
less importance1 no mention should be   
made of this1 which1 had it been        
discovered1 would have been a great     
inducement to his followers to have paid
 the highest regard to his doctrine2 for
 they suppose he was taken up into      
heaven1 that he might be instructed in  
those things which he was to impart to  
the world4 ,and1 instead of a proof     
hereof1 they only say that this is a    

parallel instance with that of ,moses1  
who was called up to the top of mount   
,sinai1 which was then the immediate    
seat of the divine presence1 and there  
received the law1 which he was to impart
 to ,israel2 so1 they suppose1 it was   
necessary1 that our ,saviour should     
ascend into heaven1 that he might there 
be instructed in that doctrine1 which he
 was to communicate to his church4  ,but
 we cannot but conclude1 that being     
omniscient1 as will be proved under our 
next head1 he had no need to receive    
instructions1 and having1 in his human  
nature1 had an unction from the ,holy   
,ghost2 or1 as it is expressed1 ,john   
iii4 #cd4 that ,god gave not the ,spirit
 by measure unto him1 therefore it was  
necessary that he should ascend into    
heaven1 to receive the doctrines from   
thence1 which he was to deliver4        
,moreover1 according to this conjecture1
 his coming from heaven1 in the end of  
time1 to judge the world1 should have   
been called his third coming1 7as his   

first coming from thence was in his     
incarnation1 and his second coming is   
supposed to be his return to this world1
 after he ascended into heaven1 during  
this interval of time7 which is contrary
 to that text of scripture1 in ,heb4 ix4
 #bh4 which calls it1 his coming the    
second time1 without sin1 unto          
salvation4 ,and1 indeed1 it is so       
ungrounded a supposition1 that some of  
the ,socinians themselves reckon it1 at 
most1 but a probable conjecture1 but do 
not pretend to say that it is           
sufficiently founded in scripture2 and  
therefore we cannot think that this will
 have any tendency to enervate the force
 of our argument1 to prove ,christ's    
,deity1 taken from the above-mentioned  
sense of that text2 ,the ,son of man1   
which is in heaven4  #d4 ,our ,saviour's
 ,deity may farther be proved1 from his 
being omniscient3 thus the apostle      
,peter says1 in ,john xxi4 #ag4 ,lord   
thou knowest all things1 thou knowest   
that ,i love thee4 ,this is too great a 

glory to be ascribed to any creature2   
and had it been spoken of the ,father1  
the ,anti-trinitarians themselves would 
have owned1 that it is as great a proof 
of his ,deity1 as any contained in      
scripture1 as importing the same thing  
with what the ,psalmist says1 ,psal4    
cxlvii4 #e4 ,his understanding is       
infinite4 ,but1 besides this there is   
another expression that abundantly      
proves this matter1 wherein he is       
denominated the ,searcher of hearts1    
which is a glory that ,god appropriates 
to himself1 in ,jer4 xvii4 #aj4 ,i the  
,lord search the hearts1 ,i try the     
reins1 even to give every man according 
to his ways2 and elsewhere1 #a ,chron4  
xxviii4 #i4 ,the ,lord searcheth all    
hearts1 and understandeth all the       
imaginations of the thoughts2 and all   
creatures are excluded from having any  
branch of this glory1 when it is said1  
in #a ,kings viii4 #ci4 ,thou only      
knowest the hearts of all the children  
of men3 now such a knowledge as this is 

ascribed to ,christ2 sometimes he is    
said to know the inward thoughts and    
secret reasonings of men within         
themselves1 ,mark ii4 #h4 ,and1 if it be
 said1 that this is only a particular   
instance of knowledge1 such as he might 
have had by immediate divine            
inspiration1 and therefore that it does 
not prove his ,godhead2 there is another
 scripture1 that speaks of his          
knowledge1 as more extensive1 viz4 that 
he knows the thoughts of all men1 ,john 
ii4 #be4 ,he needed not that any one    
should testify of man1 for he knew what 
was in man2 and this his knowledge does 
not only respect men's present1 but     
their future thoughts1 which are not    
known to themselves3 thus it is said1 in
 ,john vi4 #fd4 that he knew from the   
beginning who they were that believed   
not1 and who should betray him4 ,and if 
all this be not reckoned sufficient to  
prove him to be the heart-searching     
,god1 nothing can be expressed in       
plainer terms than this is1 concerning  

him1 in ,rev4 ii4 #bc4 ,all the churches
 shall know that ,i am he which         
searcheth the reins and hearts2 and ,i  
will give unto every one of you1        
according to your works4  ,object4 #a4  
,it is objected to this argument for    
,christ's omniscience1 taken from       
,peter's confession above-mentioned1    
,lord1 thou knowest all things1 c4 that 
nothing else is intended hereby1 but    
that he had a very great degree of      
knowledge2 not that he was strictly and 
properly omniscient1 as supposing that  
it is an hyperbolical expression1 not   
altogether unlike that of the woman of  
,tekoa to ,david1 in #b ,sam4 xiv4 #bj4 
when she says1 ,my lord is wise1        
according to the wisdom of an angel of  
,god1 to know all things that are in the
 earth4  ,answ4 ,it is true1 this       
expression of her's is either an        
unwarrantable strain of compliment1 or  
flattery1 occasioned by ,david's        
suspecting that ,joab had employed her  
to plead the cause of ,absalom2 or else 

it is a sincere acknowledgment of his   
great wisdom1 without supposing him to  
be absolutely omniscient1 as though she 
should say1 thou knowest all things that
 are done in the land3 there is no plot 
or contrivance1 how secret soever it may
 be managed1 but thou wilt1 some way or 
other1 find it out1 as thou hast done   
this that ,i am sent about4 ,but what   
reference has this to ,peter's          
confession8 ,does it follow1 that       
because there are hyperbolical          
expressions in scripture1 as well as in 
other writings1 that this must be one8  
or because a wise governor may have a   
conjectural knowledge of what is done by
 his subjects1 when considering the     
various circumstances that attend their 
actions1 that therefore the apostle     
intends nothing more than this8 ,it is  
plain he appeals to ,christ1 as the     
heart-searching ,god1 concerning the    
inward sincerity of his love to him1 as 
well as of his repentance1 after a      
public and shameful denial of him1 which

 might have given just occasion for its 
being called in question2 and it is as  
evident a proof of his omniscience1 as  
that is of the ,father's1 in ,psal4     
cxxxix4 #bc1 #bd4 ,search me1 ,o ,god1  
and know my heart2 try me and know my   
thoughts1 and see if there be any wicked
 way in me1 c4  ,object4 #b4 ,others1   
especially some of the ,arians1 do not  
so much deny ,christ's omniscience1 as  
the consequence deduced from it1 to wit1
 his proper ,deity2 and these make use  
of a more abstruse and metaphysical way 
of reasoning1 and accordingly they      
suppose that a creature may know all    
things1 that is1 all finite objects1 and
 consequently all things that are done  
in the world1 namely1 all creatures1 and
 all their actions1 since the object of 
this knowledge is1 at most1 but finite2 
therefore it is possible for a finite   
mind to be so enlarged1 as to take in   
all finite things1 or to have the       
knowledge of all things communicated to 
it1 since the object and the recipient  

are commensurate with each other4       
,therefore our ,saviour may know all    
things2 and yet it will not follow from 
hence1 that his understanding is        
infinite1 or that his knowledge is so   
properly divine as the ,father's is2 and
 consequently this is no sufficient     
argument to prove his ,deity in the     
sense in which we understand it4  ,answ4
 ,this method of reasoning might as well
 be used to evade the force of every    
argument1 brought from scripture1 to    
prove the ,father's omniscience1 or1    
indeed1 to evince his infinite power1   
since all effects produced1 which are   
the objects thereof1 are but finite2 and
 therefore it may as well be said1 that 
it does not require infinite power to   
produce them1 nor prove his eternal     
power and ,godhead4  ,moreover1 as this 
would tend to destroy the infinite      
disproportion between ,god and the      
creature in acting1 so it supposes that 
,god can communicate a branch of his own
 glory to a creature1 by enlarging it to

 such a degree1 as to take in all finite
 objects4 ,there are some things not so 
properly too great for ,god to do1 as   
for a creature to be the subject of3 we 
do not pretend to set limits to the     
divine power2 yet we may infer1 from the
 nature of things1 and the powers of    
finite beings1 that it is impossible for
 any one1 below ,god1 to know all things
 past1 present1 and to come1 at one     
view2 which our ,saviour must be        
supposed to do1 or else this attribute  
of omniscience is not justly applied to 
him2 nor would he be fit to govern the  
world1 as will be observed under a      
following head2 therefore we must       
conclude1 from hence1 that he is truly  
and properly a divine ,person4  ,to what
 has been said1 concerning ,christ's    
omniscience1 we may subjoin those       
scriptures that speak of him1 as the    
wisdom of ,god1 the ,fountain of all    
communicated wisdom1 the light which    
lighteth every man that cometh into the 
world1 as he is called1 in ,john i4 #i4 

,and it is supposed1 by many1 that      
wisdom spoken of in ,prov4 viii4 is to  
be understood of our ,saviour1 as the   
personal wisdom of ,god1 inasmuch as    
there are several personal characters   
ascribed to him3 thus it is said1 ver4  
#bc4 ,i was set up from everlasting1 c4 
and ver4 #cj1 #ca4 ,then1 to wit1 before
 the creation of all things1 ,i was by  
him1 as one brought up with him2 and ,i 
was daily his delight1 rejoicing always 
before him1 rejoicing in the habitable  
part of his earth1 and my delights were 
with the sons of men4 ,this cannot      
properly speaking1 be applied to ,god's 
essential wisdom2 it must therefore be a
 description of an eternal divine       
,person1 distinct from the ,father4     
,but since many suppose1 that whatever  
is spoken of wisdom1 in this and some   
other chapters of this book1 is only    
metaphorical1 or a beautiful description
 of divine wisdom1 as the instructor of 
mankind2 though we cannot see how this1 
if nothing else be intended by it1 can  

agree with some of the personal         
characters before mentioned1 which seem 
applicable to our ,saviour2 yet we find 
that he is elsewhere called the wisdom  
of ,god1 in a sense1 that can by no     
means be supposed to be figurative3 thus
 when we read in ,luke xi4 #di4         
,therefore also said the wisdom of ,god1
 ,i will send them prophets and         
apostles1 c4 it is certainly understood 
of our ,saviour4#adg ,to which1 if it be
 objected1 that1 by the wisdom of ,god1 
is meant there the wise ,god1 to wit1   
the ,father2 it may be answered1 that   
another evangelist1 referring to the    
very same thing1 explains what is meant 
by the wisdom of ,god1 and represents   
our ,saviour as speaking in his own     
,person1 ,matt4 xxiii4 #cd4 ,therefore1 
behold1 ,i send unto you prophets1 and  
wise men1 and scribes1 c4  #e4 ,the next
 divine perfection that is ascribed to  
,christ1 is almighty power4 ,this       
attribute is appropriated1 by the       
,arians to the ,father2#adh and         

accordingly they suppose1 that it       
implies not only his supremacy over all 
creatures1 but over the ,son and ,holy  
,ghost2 and therefore they peremptorily 
conclude it is never applied to them1   
and consequently that the ,deity of our 
,saviour cannot be proved by it2 and    
that they may turn our own weapons upon 
us1 or improve some unwary concessions1 
made by some very considerable writers1 
who have1 in other respects1 very well  
defended the doctrine of the ,trinity1  
they seem to insinuate1 as though this  
were a matter to be taken1 as it were1  
for granted1 though it might easily be  
made appear1 that they strain the sense 
of those expressions1 from whence they  
conclude them to have given up the cause
 to them1 beyond what they ever         
intended2 and there are many others1 who
 are far from making such concessions4  
,as for the word 1 ,almighty1 there is  
nothing in the derivation thereof1 from 
whence it may justly be inferred1 that  
it is a perfection1 that contains a     

greater display of the divine glory1    
than the other perfections1 that are    
attributed to all the ,persons in the   
,godhead1 though indeed it contains in  
it an idea of the universal extent of   
divine power1 with respect to the       
objects thereof2 yet this is not to be  
separated from the sense of the word1   
when power is ascribed to ,god in those 
scriptures1 where he is called the      
,almighty2 therefore1 if we can prove   
that ,christ has power ascribed to him1 
that is properly divine1 this will      
evince his ,deity1 as much as though we 
could produce several scriptures1 in    
which he is indisputably called the     
,almighty2 and this we shall first      
endeavour to do1 and then enquire       
whether we have not as much1 or more    
reason to conclude1 that he is called   
,almighty1 than they have to deny it4   
,that power1 such as is properly divine1
 is attributed to ,christ1 may be proved
 from that scripture before-mentioned1  
which is evidently applied to him1 ,isa4

 ix4 #f4 where he is called1 the mighty 
,god2 and1 in ,psal4 xlv4 #c4 which1 as 
has been before observed1 is spoken     
concerning him1 in which he is called   
most mighty2 and1 in ,phil4 iii4 #ba4 we
 read of his changing our vile body1    
that it may be fashioned like unto his  
glorious body2 which is such an effect  
of power1 as plainly argues it divine1  
as much as the production of all things 
out of nothing could do2 and this is    
said to be done1 according to the       
working1 whereby he is able to subdue   
all things to himself4 ,we might observe
 many other things1 which he has done1  
and will do1 that require infinite      
power1 which we shall have occasion to  
consider1 when we prove his deity from  
his works under a following head4  ,but 
since all this is to no purpose1 with   
respect to those who deny his proper    
,deity1 unless we can prove that he is  
called ,almighty2 and the whole stress  
of this argument is laid upon it1 for no
 other reason1 as ,i presume1 but       

because they think it impossible for us 
to do it3 ,i shall attempt it2 and ,i   
hope to make it appear that we have     
greater probability1 on our side1 that  
he is so called1 than they have ground  
to deny it4 ,here ,i shall take notice  
of this perfection of the divine nature1
 as we find it in the book of the       
,revelations1 in which this attribute is
 mentioned nine times1 and1 in some     
places1 seems to be applied to the      
,father1 but in others to the ,son4     
,the first we shall mention is in chap4 
i4 #h4 ,i am ,alpha and ,omega1 the     
beginning and the ending1 saith the     
,lord1 which is1 and which was1 and     
which is to come1 the ,almighty2 which  
seems to be spoken of our ,saviour1  #a4
 ,because he is described at large in   
the three foregoing verses2 and there is
 nothing which gives the least ground to
 question its application to him1 unless
 that character s being given to the    
,person here spoken of1 which is given  
to the ,father1 in ver4 #d4 which is1   

and which was1 and which is to come2 but
 since we find in other scriptures1 the 
same divine glories ascribed to the ,son
 that had before been ascribed to the   
,father2 as in ,john v4 #ba4 ,as the    
,father raiseth the dead1 and quickeneth
 them1 even so the ,son quickeneth whom 
he will2 and in ,tit4 iii4 #d4 the      
,father is called ,god our ,saviour1 as 
appears by comparing it with the #eth   
and #fth verses2 and so is ,christ      
called1 chap4 ii4 #aj1 #ac4 therefore1  
why may not the ,father and the ,son be 
each of them described with this        
character1 ,which was1 is1 and is to    
come8 and that more especially1 if we   
consider1 that the ascribing this to    
,christ1 is1 in effect1 the same with   
what is said of him elsewhere1 ,heb4    
xiii4 #h4 where he is said to be the    
same yesterday1 to-day1 and for         
ever4#adi  #b4 ,it farther appears1 that
 this text1 in which the ,person spoken 
of is called ,almighty1 is applied to   
,christ1 because that character1 ,alpha 

and ,omega1 seems to be applied to none 
but him in other places1 where it is    
used4 ,we find it four times in this    
book1 viz4 not only in this verse1 but  
in ver4 #aa4 in which it is indisputably
 applied to him1 as will appear1 by     
comparing it with the followings verses4
 ,and1 in chap4 xxi4 #f4 he is again    
called ,alpha and ,omega1 which1 that it
 is applied to him1 appears from the    
context2 it is he that makes all things 
new1 or puts a new face upon the affairs
 of his church2 and it is he who        
commands ,john to write what he saw and 
heard2 ,he said unto me1 ,write these   
words1 ver4 #e4 ,we may observe1 that   
whereever ,john is commanded1 in this   
book1 to write1 it is ,christ that gives
 forth the command3 thus he said to him 
before1 chap4 i4 #ai4 ,write the things 
which thou hast seen1 and the things    
which are1 and the things which shall be
 hereafter2 and he is again commanded to
 write1 ,blessed are the dead which die 
in the ,lord1 by him who is called the  

,son of man1 chap4 xiv4 #ac1 #ad4       
,again1 in chap4 xxii4 #ac4 he is called
 ,alpha and ,omega1 who is described in 
the foregoing verse1 as coming quickly1 
whose reward is with him2 which is      
undoubtedly meant of our ,saviour2 for  
it is said concerning him1 ver4 #bj4    
,surely ,i come quickly1 ,amen3 even so 
come1 ,lord ,jesus4  ,that which ,i     
infer from hence1 is1 that if ,christ be
 styled ,alpha and ,omega1 in all other 
placed in this book1 it is more than    
probable he is so in this #hth verse of 
the #ast chapter1 in which he is said to
 be the ,almighty4 ,and as he is called 
,alpha and ,omega1 so the explication of
 these words1 wherever we meet with it  
in this book without the words          
themselves1 is applied to ,christ3 thus 
he is called1 chap4 i4 #ag4 and ii4 #h4 
the first and the last2 and1 chap4 iii4 
#ad4 the beginning of the creation of   
,god3 from hence1 ,i humbly conceive1 we
 have more ground to conclude1 that     
,christ is called the ,almighty in this 

verse1 than the ,arians have to deny it4
  ,again1 there is another place in this
 book where he seems to be styled the   
,almighty1 chap4 xv4 #c4 ,and they sing 
the song of ,moses1 the servant of ,god1
 and the song of the ,lamb1 saying1     
,great and marvellous are thy works1    
,lord ,god ,almighty2 just and true are 
thy ways1 thou ,king of saints4 ,this   
triumphant song is occasioned by one of 
the greatest victories which the church 
expects to obtain in this world3 by the 
song of ,moses1 ,i humbly conceive1 is  
meant the church's celebrating the glory
 of ,god1 for the greatest victory that 
ever was obtained under the legal       
dispensation2 and the song of the ,lamb1
 is an acknowledgment of the greatest   
that is1 or shall be obtained under the 
gospel-dispensation2 and1 in celebrating
 the ,lamb's victories1 they set forth  
the praises of the mighty ,conqueror in 
the following words1 ,great and         
marvellous are thy works1 ,lord ,god    
,almighty3 it is the ,lamb that is every

 where described in this book1 as       
fighting the church's battles1 and      
obtaining victory for it2 therefore it  
is his glory which is here set forth4   
,and as he is always described1 in this 
book1 as thus fighting the church's     
battles2 so it is he who is described as
 taking vengeance on its enemies1 which 
is the just consequence thereof4        
,therefore ,i cannot but conclude1 that 
he is spoken of1 in chap4 xvi4 #f1 #g4  
as having given their persecutors blood 
to drink1 for they were worthy2 and1 in 
ver4 #g4 ,even so ,lord ,god ,almighty1 
true and righteous are thy judgments4   
,again1 in chap4 xvi4 #ad4 we read of   
the battle of that great day of ,god    
,almighty2 and then it immediately      
follows1 ,behold1 ,i come as a thief in 
the night1 c4 which expression is known 
to be elsewhere applied to our ,saviour1
 and to none but him2 and that it is he 
who fights the church's battles1 is     
evident from chap4 xvii4 #ad4 ,these    
shall make war with the ,lamb1 and the  

,lamb shall overthrow them2 and from    
chap4 xix4 #ab1 c4 where it is said1 his
 eyes were as a flame of fire2 as he is 
elsewhere described1 chap4 i4 #ad4 to   
denote that the great day of his wrath  
was come2 and his name is called1 in the
 #acth verse of this #aith chapter1 the 
,word of ,god2 and we read of the armies
 which followed him1 and that out of his
 mouth goeth a sharp sword1 that he     
might smite the nations4 ,from whence we
 may conclude1 that since ,christ is    
represented1 in so many places in this  
book1 as fighting with1 and triumphing  
and reigning over his enemies1          
inflicting his plagues upon them1 and   
delivering his church from their        
persecution1 which is a work of divine  
power1 he is fitly styled in several    
places1 ,lord ,god ,almighty4  ,we might
 consider several other divine          
attributes ascribed to ,christ1 which   
prove his ,deity1 viz4 holiness1 truth1 
and faithfulness3 thus1 in ,rev4 iii4   
#g4 ,these things saith he that is holy1

 he that is true2 and he is farther     
described in the following words1 as    
having uncontroulable power2 who        
openeth1 and no man shutteth2 and       
shutteth1 and no man openeth4 ,that this
 is spoken of him1 is beyond dispute2   
and in chap4 vi4 #aj4 ,they cried with a
 loud voice1 ,how long1 ,o ,lord1 holy  
and true1 dost thou not judge and avenge
 our blood on them that dwell upon the  
earth8 to whom did they cry but to the  
,lamb1 who is said to have opened the   
seals1 or to have discovered the        
mysteries that were thereby revealed1 as
 in ver4 #a48 ,and when he had opened   
the sixth seal1 he is described1 as     
hearing his church's prayer1 and        
avenging their blood1 and so is         
represented as coming to judgment1 in a 
very terrible manner2 upon which        
occasion it is said1 the great day of   
his wrath is come2 and therefore it is  
he who is described as holy and true4   
,but if it be replied to this1 that     
creatures are sometimes called holy and 

true1 we may farther add1 that it is    
,christ to whom it is said1 chap4 xv4   
#d4 ,who shall not fear thee1 ,o ,lord1 
and glorify thy name1 for thou only art 
holy2 for all nations shall come and    
worship before thee1 for thy judgments  
are made manifest4 ,this ,i infer from  
what has been before considered1 that it
 is he who obtains victory over1 and    
pours forth his judgments on his        
church's enemies2 and it is he whose    
praises are celebrated in the song of   
the ,lamb1 mentioned in the verse       
immediately foregoing4  ,having         
considered several divine perfections1  
as ascribed to our ,saviour1 and these  
so glorious1 that nothing greater can be
 mentioned to set forth the glory of a  
divine ,person2 yet we may add hereunto1
 those glorious titles that are given   
him with a design to excite in us       
adoring and admiring thoughts of him3   
amongst which we shall only mention some
 which are either the same with1 or are 
equivalent to those which are given to  

the ,father1 which they who deny        
,christ's ,deity1 cannot but own to be  
distinguishing characters of a divine   
,person1 when so applied4 ,thus1 is the 
,father styled1 in ,heb4 xiii4 #bj4 ,the
 ,god of peace8 our ,saviour is styled1 
in ,isa4 ix4 #f4 ,the ,prince of peace2 
and he is said1 ,eph4 ii4 #ad4 to be our
 peace2 and as peace includes in it all 
the blessings that accompany salvation1 
,christ's being styled the ,author      
thereof1 denotes him to be the ,fountain
 of blessedness1 which he could not be1 
were he not a divine ,person4  ,again1  
as ,god is called a ,sun1 and a ,shield1
 ,psal4 lxxxiv4 #i4 so ,christ is       
called1 in ,mal4 iv4 #b4 ,the ,sun of   
,righteousness2 and1 in ,isa4 xxxii4 #b4
 ,an hiding place from the wind1 a      
covert from the tempest1 and the shadow 
of a great rock in a weary land4        
,again1 it is said of ,god the ,father1 
,deut4 xxx4 #bj4 ,he is thy life1 and   
the length of thy days2 our ,saviour    
says1 concerning himself1 in ,john xi4  

#be4 compared with chap4 xiv4 #f4 that  
he is the life2 and1 ,acts iii4 #ae4 he 
is called the ,prince of life2 and1 in  
,colos4 iii4 #d4 our life4 ,again1 is   
the ,father called1 in ,psal4 lxxx4 #a4 
,the ,shepherd of ,israel8 ,christ is   
called1 in ,heb4 xiii4 #bj4 ,that great 
,shepherd of the sheep4  ,moreover1 is  
,god often described in scripture as a  
glorious ,king2 as in ,zeph4 iii4 #ae4  
,the ,king of ,israel1 even the ,lord in
 the midst of thee8 our ,saviour is     
styled1 in ,isa4 vi4 #e4 ,the ,king1 the
 ,lord of hosts2 and1 in ,john i4 #di4  
,the ,king of ,israel2 and1 in ,rev4    
xix4 #af4 ,king of kings1 and ,lord of  
lords4  ,again1 is ,god styled the ,hope
 of ,israel1 ,jer4 xiv4 #h8 our ,saviour
 seems to be so called by the apostle1  
when he says1 in ,acts xxviii4 #bj4 for 
the ,hope of ,israel1 ,i am bound with  
this chain1 that is1 for ,christ's sake1
 who is the object of his people's hope4
 ,however1 whether he is intended       
thereby1 or no1 in that scripture1 he is

 called elsewhere our hope1 #a ,tim4 i4 
#a4 compared with ,coloss4 i4 #bg4      
,moreover1 is ,god the object of desire1
 so that there is nothing in heaven or  
earth1 or within the whole compass of   
finite beings1 that is to be desired    
besides1 or in comparison with him1 as  
the ,psalmist says1 ,psal4 lxxiii4 #be8 
our ,saviour is called1 in ,hag4 ii4 #g4
 ,the desire of all nations4 ,i might   
refer to many other glorious titles that
 are given to him in the #bnd and #crd  
chapters of the ,revelations1 in the    
epistles to the seven churches2 every   
one of which is prefaced with such a    
character given of him1 as is designed  
to strike them with an holy reverence1  
and esteem of him1 as a divine ,person4 
,thus concerning those proofs of        
,christ's ,deity1 which are taken from  
the names1 attributes1 and titles which 
are given to him2 which leads us to     
consider1  ,,iii4 ,the next head of     
argument taken from those works1 which  
have been done by our ,saviour1 that are

 proper to ,god alone4 ,divine works    
argue a divine efficient1 or that he has
 infinite power1 and consequently that  
he is an infinite ,person1 or truly and 
properly ,god1 who performs them4 ,now  
these works are of two sorts2 either of 
nature and common providence1 or of     
grace1 to wit1 such as immediately      
respect our salvation2 in all which1 he 
acts beyond the power of a creature1 and
 therefore appears to be a divine       
,person4  #a4 ,he appears to be so1 from
 his having created all things4 ,he that
 made the world1 must be before it2 and 
therefore since time began with the     
first creature1 as has been before      
observed1 it follows that he must be    
before time1 that is1 from eternity4    
,again1 he that created all things1 must
 have a sovereign will1 for whose       
pleasure they are1 and were created1    
,rev4 iv4 #aa4 ,and it follows from     
hence1 that he has an undoubted right to
 all things1 and that he might have     
annihilated them1 had it been his       

pleasure2 and also1 that he has a right 
to dispose of them as he will1 as the   
potter has power over his clay4 ,all    
these things are consequent on the work 
of creation2 therefore it is an         
undeniable argument1 that he1 who       
created all things1 must be ,god4  ,it  
may also be observed1 that to create1 is
 to exert infinite power1 or to act     
above the power of a creature1 which1 at
 best1 is but finite3 now whatever is   
more than finite1 must be infinite2 and 
consequently he who created all things1 
must exert infinite power1 and that is  
certainly such as is truly divine4  ,we 
might farther consider1 that there are  
many scriptures which appropriate       
creation to ,god1 and1 indeed1 it cannot
 be otherwise2 for to suppose that a    
creature gave being to itself1 is to    
suppose him to be both a cause and an   
effect1 and consequently to be1 and not 
to be1 at the same time1 to exist as a  
creator1 and not to exist as brought    
into being1 which is a plain            

contradiction2 and it is evident1 that1 
in scripture1 the creature is opposed to
 the ,creator3 thus1 in ,rom4 i4 #be4 it
 is said1 they worshipped and served the
 creature more than the ,creator1 who is
 blessed forever4 ,and there are several
 scriptures that speak of creation1 as a
 distinguishing evidence of divine      
glory3 thus1 in ,isa4 xl4 #bh4 we have a
 magnificent description of ,god1 taken 
more especially from this work1 when he 
is called1 ,the everlasting ,god1 the   
,lord1 the ,creator of the ends of the  
earth2 and1 in chap4 xlii4 #e4 ,thus    
saith ,god the ,lord1 he that created   
the heavens1 and stretched them out2 he 
that spread forth the earth1 and that   
which cometh out of it2 he that giveth  
breath unto the people upon it1 and     
spirit to them that walk therein2 in    
which1 and many other scriptures of the 
like nature1 which might be referred to1
 it appears that creation is a work     
peculiar to ,god4  ,the next thing we   
are to prove is1 that our ,saviour      

created all things4 ,there are many who 
think that this may be proved from the  
work of creation's being ascribed to    
more persons than one2 and therefore    
when we read of creators1 in the plural 
number1 as it is in the original1 in    
,eccles4 xii4 #a4 ,remember thy         
,creator1 or creators2 and when ,god1 in
 creating man1 is represented as        
speaking after this manner1 ,let us make
 man after our own image1 c4 this seems 
to imply that there were more divine    
,persons engaged in this work than the  
,father4  ,i do not indeed lay so much  
stress on this argument1 as many do1 yet
 it is not wholly to be neglected2 for1 
,i confess1 ,i cannot see any reason why
 there should be such a mode of         
expression used1 were it not to signify 
this divine mystery1 of a plurality of  
,persons in the ,godhead1 to whom this  
work is ascribed4  ,object4 ,as for the 
objection1 which some of the            
,anti-trinitarians1 especially the      
,socinians1 bring against it1 that this 

mode of speaking1 is such as is used in 
conformity to the custom of kings who1  
speak in the plural number2  ,answ4 ,to 
this it may be answered1 that though    
kings do often speak in the plural      
number1 yet this is only a modern way of
 speaking1 implying1 that whatever a    
king does1 is by the advice of some of  
his subjects1 who are his peculiar      
favourites1 and who are also made use of
 to fulfil his will2 but1 nevertheless1 
this way of speaking is not so ancient  
as scripture-times1 much less as        
,moses's time1 or the beginning of the  
world1 which he refers to1 when ,god is 
represented as thus speaking4 ,it is the
 custom of kings1 in scripture1 to speak
 in the singular number3 and it is very 
absurd to pretend to explain any mode of
 speaking used in scripture1 by customs 
of speech1 not known till many ages     
after4  ,i am sensible1 some think that 
mode of speaking used by ,ahasuerus     
,esth4 i4 #ae4 ,what shall we do unto   
the queen ,vashti1 according to law8 is 

a proof that it was used in former ages4
 ,but the words may be rendered1 ,what  
is to be done1 according to law1 c4 or  
what is expedient for me to do8 and     
therefore it doth not prove that kings  
used1 in ancient times1 to speak of     
themselves in the plural number2 and    
consequently it cannot be argued1 that  
when ,god is represented as speaking so 
in scripture1 it is in compliance with  
any such custom4 ,besides1 whenever he  
is represented as speaking in scripture1
 in all other instances1 excepting those
 that are supposed to be contained in   
our argument1 he is always represented  
as speaking in the singular number2 and 
therefore it seems still more probable1 
that this variation from his usual way  
of speaking1 is not without some reason1
 and that hereby we are led into this   
doctrine1 that there are more divine    
,persons than one1 that created all     
things4  ,but not to insist on this1    
since we have more plain proofs hereof  
in scripture1 it evidently appears that 

,christ made all things1 not only from  
what is said in ,john i4 #c4 that all   
things were made by him2 and without him
 was not any thing made that was made2  
but1 from ,col4 i4 #af4 ,by him were all
 things created1 that are in heaven1 and
 that are on earth1 visible and         
invisible1 whether they are thrones1 or 
dominions1 or principalities1 or powers3
 all things were created by him1 and for
 him2 in which he is not only said to be
 the ,creator1 but the end of all       
things1 which is the same with what is  
said in ,prov4 xvi4 #d4 that the ,lord  
hath made all things for himself4  ,this
 farther appears from ,psal4 cii4 #be4  
,of old hast thou laid the foundations  
of the earth1 and the heavens are the   
work of thy hands2 which is expressly   
applied to ,christ by the apostle1 in   
,heb4 i4 #aj4  ,by these1 and such-like 
scriptures1 it evidently appears that   
,christ made all things4 ,the           
,socinians1 indeed1 who are sensible    
that creation was an evident proof of   

divine power1 and therefore that the    
,creator of all things must be ,god1    
labour very hard to prove that all those
 scriptures that ascribe this work to   
our ,saviour1 are to be taken in a      
metaphorical sense1 and so signify      
nothing else but his being the author of
 the gospel-state1 which is a kind of   
new creation peculiar to him2 and that  
he did this as a prophet1 revealing     
those doctrines which relate thereunto2 
and accordingly they take the sense of  
that scripture1 in ,john i4 #b1 #c4     
which speaks of his being in the        
beginning1 and that all things were made
 by him1 as intending nothing else1 but 
that he was in the beginning of the     
gospel1 and that whatever was made1 or  
ordained1 to be a standard and rule of  
faith1 was by him2 and that1 in the     
discharge of this work1 he was to       
restore decayed religion1 and to correct
 several mistaken notions1 which the    
,jews had entertained concerning the    
moral law1 to add some new precepts to  

it1 and give directions concerning that 
mode of worship which should be observed
 in the church for the future4 ,this is 
all they suppose to be intended by that 
work1 which is ascribed to ,christ as a 
,creator2 whereas1 in this scripture1 it
 is plainly said1 that there was nothing
 in the whole frame of nature1 nothing  
that was an effect of power1 made       
without him4 ,and there is another      
scripture1 which cannot1 with any colour
 of reason1 be understood in that sense1
 viz4 in ,col4 i4 #af4 ,by him were all 
things created that are in heaven1 and  
that are in earth1 visible and          
invisible2 where the apostle speaks of  
the creation of angels and men1 as well 
as all other things3 now1 certainly1    
,christ did not come into the world to  
rectify any mistakes or restore decayed 
religion among the angels1 therefore the
 apostle here plainly proves that our   
,saviour created all things4  ,but since
 this opinion of the ,socinians is now  
almost universally exploded by the      

,anti-trinitarians1 we have no occasion 
to add any thing farther in opposition  
to it2 but shall proceed to consider    
what the ,arians say concerning         
,christ's creating all things4 ,these   
allow that the work of creation is      
ascribed to him2 but they deny that this
 argues him to be ,god in the same sense
 as the ,father is4 ,the account which  
they give thereof is1 that ,god1 to wit1
 the ,father1 created all things by the 
,son1 as an instrument1 created by him1 
immediately for that purpose2 so that   
the ,son was an inferior1 or second     
cause of the production of all things2  
and therefore that it cannot1 from      
thence1 be concluded that he is ,god    
equal with the ,father4  ,what ,i would 
humbly offer1 in opposition hereunto is1
  #a4 ,that1 in this account of         
creation1 there is not a just difference
 put between the natural and            
supernatural production of things1 of   
which the latter can only be called     
creation2 therefore1 if these two be    

confounded1 the distinguishing character
 of a ,creator is set aside1 and        
consequently the glory arising from     
hence cannot be appropriated to ,god2   
nor is that infinite perfection1 that is
 displayed therein1 duly considered1 but
 according to this scheme or method of  
reasoning a creature may be a ,creator1 
and a ,creator a creature2 nor can the  
eternal power and ,godhead of the divine
 ,being be demonstrated by the things   
that are made or created1 as the apostle
 says they are in ,rom4 i4 #bj4  #b4    
,from that first mistake arises another1
 namely1 that because1 in natural       
productions1 that which was created by  
,god1 may be rendered subservient to the
 production of other things2 in which   
respect it may be termed an instrument  
made use of by a superior cause1 and may
 have an energy or method of acting1    
peculiar to itself1 whereby it produces 
effects according to the course and laws
 of nature1 fixed by ,god1 the first    
cause of all things2 therefore they     

suppose1 though without sufficient      
ground that ,god might create all things
 by an instrument1 or second cause      
thereof1 as they conclude he did by the 
,son4  #c4 ,notwithstanding we must     
assert1 that creation being a           
supernatural production of things1 what 
has been said concerning natural        
production1 is not applicable to it2    
therefore1  #d4 ,though things may be   
produced in a natural way1 by second    
causes1 whose powers are limited1 and   
subjected as aforesaid1 to the laws of  
nature2 yet supernatural effects cannot 
be produced by any thing short of       
infinite power2 therefore1 since        
creation is a supernatural work1 it must
 be concluded to be a work of infinite  
power4  #e4 ,it follows1 from hence1    
that it is not agreeable to the idea of 
creation1 or the producing all things   
out of nothing1 for ,god to make use of 
an instrument4 ,that this may appear1   
let it be considered1 that whatever     
instrument is made use of1 it must be   

either finite or infinite4 ,an infinite 
instrument cannot be made use of1 for   
then there would be two infinites1 one  
superior1 the other inferior4 ,nor can a
 finite one be made use of1 for that1   
according to our last proposition1      
cannot produce any supernatural effect1 
as creation is supposed to be1 which    
requires infinite power1 and that cannot
 be exerted by a finite medium1         
therefore no such instrument can be     
used4 ,moreover1 if it requires infinite
 power to create all things1 this power1
 in its method of acting1 would be      
limited1 by the instrument it makes use 
of2 for whatever power a superior cause 
has in himself1 the effect produced1 by 
an instrument will be in proportion to  
the weakness thereof4 ,this some        
illustrate by the similitude of a       
giant's making use of a straw1 or a     
reed1 in striking a blow in which the   
weakness of the instrument renders the  
power of the person that uses it        
insignificant4 ,thus if ,god the ,father

 should make use of the ,son1 in the    
creation of all things1 the power that  
is exerted by him therein1 can be no    
other than finite2 but that is not      
sufficient for the production of things 
supernatural1 which require infinite    
power4 ,to this we may add1  #f4 ,that  
the creation of all things is ascribed  
to the sovereignty of the divine will2  
accordingly the ,psalmist describing it1
 in ,psal4 xxxiii4 #i4 says1 ,he spake  
and it was done2 he commanded1 and it   
stood fast2 so when ,god1 in ,gen4 i4   
#c4 said1 ,let there he light1 and there
 was light2 and when we read of the     
other parts of the creation1 as produced
 by his almighty word1 it implies that  
they were produced by an act of his     
will4 ,now it seems impossible1 from the
 nature of the thing1 that an instrument
 should be made use of in an act of     
willing any more than in an act of      
understanding4  #g4 ,no cause can       
reasonably be assigned why ,god should  
make use of an instrument in the        

production of all things2 for certainly 
he that1 by his immediate power1        
produced the instrument1 might without  
any difficulty1 or absurdity1 attending 
the supposition1 have created all things
 immediately without one4 ,and we must  
farther suppose1 that if there were     
nothing in the nature of things1 which  
required him to make use of an          
instrument1 he would not1 by making use 
of one1 to wit1 the ,son1 administer    
occasion to him1 to assume so great a   
branch of his own glory1 namely1 that of
 being the ,creator of the ends of the  
earth2 or for his being1 as the result  
thereof1 worshipped as a divine ,person 
supposing him to have a right to divine 
worship1 for no other reason4  ,object4 
#a4 ,though no one supposes that ,god   
stood in need of an instrument1 or could
 not have created all things without it1
 yet we must conclude that he did not1  
because the scripture speaks of the     
,father's creating all things by the    
,son2 and when one person is said to do 

any thing by another1 it implies that he
 makes use of him as an instrument      
therein4  ,answ4 ,this seems to be the  
only foundation on which this doctrine  
is built4 ,but there is no necessity of 
understanding the words in this sense1  
especially if we consider that all      
effects are produced by the power of    
,god2 and this power1 supposing the ,son
 to be a divine ,person1 7which we have 
endeavoured1 by other arguments1 to     
prove7 must belong to him2 and the      
,father1 and the ,son being united1 in  
the same ,godhead1 one cannot act       
without the other2 therefore whatever is
 said to be done by the ,father1 may1 in
 this sense1 be said to be done by the  
,son2 for though the ,persons are       
distinct1 the power exerted is the same4
  ,thus a learned writer#aej accounts   
for this matter1 when he says1 that     
8,the ,son is of the same nature and    
substance with the ,father1 so nearly   
allied1 so closely united1 that nothing 
could be the work of one1 without being1

 at the same time1 the work of both3    
,hence it was1 that the ,son was        
,joint-creator with the ,father1 that   
all things were made by him1 and nothing
 without him2 it was not possible for   
them either to act1 or to exist         
separately2 and therefore it is that the
 work of creation is1 in scripture1     
attributed to both40 ,this is a very    
safe as well as a just way of reasoning1
 consistent with1 and founded on the    
doctrine of the ,father and the ,son's  
being united in the same ,godhead1      
though distinct ,persons2 and therefore 
it is agreeable to the sense of those   
scriptures1 which attribute this work to
 the ,son1 in the same sense1 as when it
 is attributed to the ,father4  ,but ,i 
am sensible that the ,arians will reply 
to it2 that this does not sufficiently  
account for that subordination in       
acting1 that seems to be implied in the 
sense of those scriptures1 in which the 
,father is said to have created all     
things by the ,son2 therefore ,i shall  

take leave to speak more particularly to
 those texts that treat of this matter1 
where the same mode of speaking is used4
 ,and though there are several          
scriptures that represent the ,son as a 
,creator1 or consider all things1 as    
being made by him1 as well as the       
,father1 or as a ,joint-creator with    
him2 yet there are but two places in the
 ,new ,testament1 in which the ,father  
is said to have created all things by   
the ,son1 namely1 ,eph4 iii4 #i4 in     
which it is said1 that ,god1 that is1   
the ,father1 created all things by      
,jesus ,christ2 and the other is in     
,heb4 i4 #b4 where it is said1 by whom  
also he made the worlds4  ,we have      
already considered the absurdity of the 
,socinian way of expounding those other 
scriptures1 that speak of ,christ as a  
,creator1 in which he is not said to act
 in subserviency to1 but co-ordinately  
with the ,father4 ,but inasmuch as ,god 
the ,father is1 in these scriptures1    
said to create all things by ,jesus     

,christ1 ,i shall humbly offer it1 as my
 opinion1 that though the other         
scriptures1 in which ,christ is set     
forth as a ,creator1 have no reference  
to him as ,mediator1 nor to the new     
creation1 yet this seems to be the more 
probable sense of both these            
scriptures4#aea  ,as for the former of  
them1 though some suppose that it is    
needless to give the sense of it1 since 
the words1 by ,jesus ,christ1#aeb are   
wanting in some ancient copies of       
scripture1 as well as in the vulgar     
,latin and ,syriac versions2 yet1 since 
there are many copies that have it1 we  
will suppose it to be genuine2 and that 
we may account for the sense of it1 we  
may observe that the apostle makes use  
of the word create three times in this  
epistle2 we find it1 in chap4 ii4 #aj4  
and iv4 #bd4 in both which places it is 
taken for the new creation1 which is    
brought about by ,christ1 as ,mediator2 
and1 ,i humbly conceive1 that it may be 
taken so1 in this verse1 which we are   

now considering2 and therefore this is a
 part of that mystery1 of which the     
apostle speaks in the foregoing words1  
that was hid in ,god2 and this sense    
seems not to be excluded1 by those who  
suppose1 that in other respects1 it has 
some reference to the first creation of 
all things4#aec  ,as for the other      
scripture1 by whom also he made the     
worlds1      1 that is1 by whom he made1
 instituted1 or ordained1 the various   
dispensations1 which the church was     
under1 either before or since his       
incarnation2 this was certainly done by 
him as ,mediator2 and herein he acted in
 subserviency to the ,father1 as well as
 in all other works performed by him1 as
 having this character4 ,i would not be 
too peremptory in determining this to be
 the sense of the text1 inasmuch as the 
apostle speaks of his upholding all     
things1 in the following verse1 which is
 well put after this account of his     
having created them3 ,i am also sensible
 that the word which we translate       

worlds1 is used in ,heb4 xi4 #c4 to     
signify the world that was at first     
created1 in the most proper sense of the
 word creation1 when the apostle says1  
that through faith we understand that   
the worlds1   were framed by the word of
 ,god1 c4 ,but yet when ,i find that in 
many other places of the ,new           
,testament1 where the word is used1 it  
is taken in the sense but now given1#aed
 ,i cannot but conclude it the more     
probable sense of the text2 but that    
which most of all determines me to      
acquiesce in it1 is1 because the        
subserviency of the ,son to the ,father 
in this work is most agreeable to it4   
,if it be objected1 that this sense of  
the text coincides with that which is   
given of it by ,socinus1 and his        
followers1 which we before-mentioned and
 opposed2  ,to this ,i answer1 that the 
sense ,i have given of it1 is very      
foreign to theirs1 who endeavour thereby
 to evade the force of the argument     
brought from it1 to prove our ,saviour's

 ,deity2 whereas we only exchange one   
argument1 for the proof thereof1 for    
another2 for it seems to me to be as    
great an evidence1 that he is a divine  
,person1 when considered as the ,author 
and ,founder of the church1 in all the  
ages thereof1 or the rock on which it is
 built1 as when he is called1 ,creator  
of the world3 if he be the supreme      
,head1 ,lord1 and ,lawgiver to his      
church1 in all the ages thereof2 if the 
faith and hope of all that shall be     
saved1 is founded upon him1 as the great
 ,mediator1 ,redeemer1 and ,sovereign   
thereof1 then certainly he is ,god1     
equal with the ,father4  ,object4 #b4   
,to what has been before suggested1 upon
 which the chief stress of our reasoning
 depends1 viz4 that a finite creature   
cannot be an instrument in supernatural 
productions1 it is objected1 that       
miracles are supernatural productions2  
but these have been wrought by men1 as  
instruments in the hand of ,god2        
therefore the creation of all things may

 as well be supposed to have been       
performed by the ,son1 as an instrument 
made use of to this end by the ,father4 
,answ4 ,that miracles are supernatural  
productions1 no one denies2 and it      
follows from hence1 that they are either
 a species of creation1 or equivalent to
 it2 therefore if it be allowed that a  
creature can have power communicated to 
him to work them1 and therein may be    
said to be an instrument made use of by 
,god1 then we cannot reasonably deny    
that ,god the ,father might use the ,son
 as an instrument in creating all       
things4 ,but we must take leave to deny 
that any1 who are said to have wrought  
miracles1 have had infinite power       
communicated to them for that purpose2  
therefore they are not properly         
instruments in the hand of ,god1 to     
produce supernatural effects2 but all   
that they have done therein1 was only by
 addressing themselves to ,god1 that he 
would put forth his immediate power in  
working the miracle2 and in giving the  

people1 for whose sake it was to be     
wrought1 occasion to expect it2 and     
afterwards improving it for their       
farther conviction4 ,it is true1        
miracles are oftentimes said to have    
been wrought by men2 but1 ,i humbly     
conceive1 nothing more than this is     
intended thereby2 which1 that it may    
appear1 we may observe1 that sometimes  
they who have wrought them1 have not    
made use of any action herein1 but only 
given the people ground to expect the   
divine interposure3 thus1 immediately   
before the earth swallowed up ,korah and
 his company1 ,moses gave the people to 
expect this miraculous event1 ,numb4    
xvi4 #bh-cj4 ,and ,moses said1 ,hereby  
shall ye know that the ,lord hath sent  
me4 ,if these men die the common death  
of all men1 then the ,lord has not sent 
me4 ,but if the ,lord make a new thing1 
and the earth open her mouth1 and       
swallow them up1 then shall ye know that
 these men have provoked the ,lord2 and 
as soon as he had spoken the words1 the 

ground clave asunder1 and swallowed them
 up4 ,this might be reckoned among the  
miracles wrought by ,moses2 though all  
that he did was only what tended to     
raise the people's expectation1 that    
such an extraordinary event should      
immediately happen4 ,again1 at other    
times1 when a miracle has been wrought1 
we read of nothing done but only a word 
spoken to signify that ,god would work  
it3 thus1 when the captain1 with his    
fifty men1 was sent by the king of      
,israel1 to the prophet ,elijah1 to     
command him to come to him1 the prophet 
uses this mode of speaking1 #b ,kings i4
 #ab4 ,if ,i be a man of ,god1 let fire 
come down from heaven1 and consume thee 
and thy fifty2 which immediately        
happened accordingly4  ,at other times1 
when miracles have been wrought1 the    
,person1 who1 in the sense but now      
mentioned1 is said to work them1 has    
made use of some external and visible   
sign1 which was either an ordinance for 
his own faith1 if no one was present but

 himself2 as when the prophet ,elisha   
smote the waters of ,jordan with        
,elijah's mantle1 and said1 #b ,kings   
ii4 #ad4 ,where is the ,lord ,god of    
,elijah8 or else the sign1 being given  
by divine direction1 was an ordinance   
for the faith of the people present1    
whose conviction was intended thereby2  
not that they should suppose that the   
action used had any tendency to produce 
the miracle3 but it was only designed to
 raise their expectation1 that ,god     
would work it by his immediate power2 as
 when ,moses was commanded1 in ,exod4   
xiv4 #af4 to lift up his rod1 and       
stretch out his hand over the sea1 and  
divide it1 that ,israel might pass      
through2 or1 in chap4 xvii4 #f4 to smite
 the rock1 whereupon ,god caused water  
to come out of it2 and in several other 
actions1 which he used1 by divine       
direction1 when other miracles were     
wrought2 in which respect1 though he was
 said1 in a less proper way of speaking1
 to have wrought them1 yet he was no    

more than a moral instrument herein1 and
 therefore the divine power was not     
communicated to1 or exerted by him2 and 
if creatures have been instruments in   
working miracles in no other sense than 
this1 it cannot be inferred from hence  
that ,christ might be made use of by the
 ,father1 as an instrument in creating  
the world3 a moral instrument he could  
not be2 for there was no doctrine       
contested1 no truth to be confirmed     
thereby1 no subjects present to expect a
 divine interposure2 and1 indeed1 none  
ever supposed that the ,son of ,god was 
an instrument in this sense2 therefore  
if no one ever was an instrument in any 
other1 nor could be from the nature of  
the thing1 as has been already proved1  
then the force of the argument1 which we
 have laid down to prove it1 is not in  
the least weakened by this objection4   
,thus we have endeavoured to prove the  
divinity of ,christ from the work of    
creation4  #b4 ,we shall proceed to     
consider how our ,saviour's ,deity      

appears1 from those works of providence1
 which are daily performed by him4      
,providence is as much a divine work1   
and contains as glorious a display of   
the divine perfections1 as creation2 and
 this is twofold1 viz4 preserving and   
governing4 ,with respect to the former  
of these1 some divines have asserted1   
that it is1 as it were1 a continued     
creation1 not formally so2 but as the   
one produces a creature1 the other      
prevents its sinking into nothing2 and  
because it is1 in all respects1         
dependent on the power of ,god1 and as  
much so1 for the continuance of its     
being1 as it was for its being brought  
into being2 therefore conserving        
providence is an evidence of the divine 
power of him who sustains all things4   
,now that this glory belongs to our     
,saviour1 is plain from scripture1 which
 speaks of him1 in ,heb4 i4 #c4 as      
upholding all things by the word of his 
power2 and in ,coloss4 i4 #ag4 it is    
said1 by him all things consist2 both   

these scriptures respect this branch of 
divine providence1 namely1 his          
preserving all things in being2 and this
 is certainly more than can be said of  
any creature4 ,and it is not pretended  
that herein he acts as the ,father's    
instrument1 even by those who suppose   
that he was so1 in the creation of all  
things1 inasmuch as scripture does not  
speak of ,god's upholding all things by 
him1 but of ,christ's upholding them by 
his own1 that is1 the divine power2 so  
that we have as plain a proof of his    
,deity1 from his upholding providence1  
as there is of the being of a ,god1     
which is evidently inferred from it4    
,as to the other branch of providence1  
respecting the government of the world  
in general1 or of the church in         
particular1 this is also ascribed to    
,christ1 and thereby his ,godhead is    
farther proved4 ,whatever degree of     
limited dominion may be said to belong  
to creatures2 yet universal dominion    
belongs only to ,god2 and this is       

assigned1 as one ground and reason of   
his right to divine honour2 therefore it
 is said1 in ,job xxv4 #b4 ,dominion and
 power are with him1 that is1 there is a
 holy reverence due to him1 as the      
supreme ,lord and ,governor of the      
world2 and1 in ,psal4 lxvii4 #d4 when it
 is said concerning the great ,god1 that
 he shall judge the people righteously1 
and govern the nations upon earth1 this 
is considered as the foundation of      
universal joy1 ,o let the nations be    
glad1 and sing for joy2 and of praise1  
ver4 #e4 ,let the people praise thee1 ,o
 ,god2 let all the people praise thee2  
and1 in ,psal4 xxii4 #bh4 when it is    
said1 the kingdom is the ,lord's2 and he
 is the ,governor among the nations2    
this is assigned1 as the reason of their
 worshipping him1 ver4 #bg4 ,all the    
ends of the earth shall remember and    
turn unto the ,lord2 and all the        
kindreds of the nations shall worship   
before thee4 ,this therefore is1        
undoubtedly1 a branch of the divine     

glory2 so that if we can prove that     
universal dominion belongs to ,christ1  
or that he is the ,governor of the      
world1 and of the church therein1 this  
will plainly evince his ,deity4  #a4    
,let us consider him as the ,governor of
 the world4 ,this seems to be the       
meaning of several expressions of       
scripture1 in which royal dignity is    
ascribed to him2 and he is represented  
as sitting upon a throne1 and his throne
 to be for ever and ever1 ,psal4 xlv4   
#f4 and he infinitely greater than all  
the kings of the earth2 upon which      
account1 he is called1 in ,rev4 i4 #e4  
,the ,prince of the kings of the earth2 
and they are commanded to testify their 
subjection to him1 and all are          
represented as blessed that put their   
trust in him1 ,psal4 ii4 #ab4 ,and as   
his kingdom is considered1 in ,john     
xviii4 #cf4 as not being of this world1 
and the honours due to him1 such as are 
divine1 this farther proves his ,deity4 
,moreover1 his universal dominion1 and  

consequently his ,godhead1 is evinced by
 that glorious character1 which we have 
before considered#aee1 as belonging to  
him1 namely1 the ,lord of hosts1 as the 
prophet ,isaiah says1 speaking of the   
vision which he had of his glory1 in    
chap4 vi4 #e4 ,mine eyes have seen the  
,king1 the ,lord of hosts1 as denoting  
his sovereignty over all the hosts of   
heaven1 and all creatures in this lower 
world1 as he governs them1 and makes one
 thing subservient to another1 and all  
this is done to set forth his own glory4
  #b4 ,this will farther appear1 if we  
consider him as the ,governor of his    
church2 in this he has access to the    
souls of men1 working in them those     
graces1 which are the effects of        
almighty power1 which he does1 when they
 are effectually called2 and the work of
 sanctification1 which is consequent    
hereupon1 is carried on till it is      
perfected4 ,we shall have occasion1     
under some following answers#aef1 to    
prove that these are divine and         

supernatural works2 the more full and   
particular proof whereof1 we shall      
reserve to its proper place1 and only   
observe1 at present1 that they are      
spoken of as such in scripture1 and     
ascribed to the exceeding greatness of  
the power of ,god1 no less than that    
which he wrought in ,christ1 when he    
raised him from the dead1 ,eph4 i4      
#ah1----bj4 and elsewhere they are      
called a new creation1 chap4 ii4 #a4 a  
quickening or resurrection1 a breaking  
the rock in pieces1 taking away the     
heart of stone1 giving an heart of      
flesh1 or a new heart2 ,jer4 xxiii4 #bi4
 ,ezek4 xxxvi4 #bf4 which expressions   
would never have been used1 had not the 
work been divine and supernatural2      
therefore it follows from hence1 that   
since ,christ is the ,author of this    
internal work1 he is a divine ,person4  
,now that he is so1 is obvious1 from    
many places in the ,new ,testament2 as  
when he is styled1 in ,heb4 xii4 #b4    
,the ,author and ,finisher of our faith2

 and when the apostle1 in #a ,tim4 i4   
#ad4 speaks of faith and love abounding1
 which is in ,christ ,jesus1 he speaks1 
at the same time1 of the grace of our   
,lord abounding1 as the spring and      
fountain thereof2 and when the apostles1
 in ,luke xvii4 #e4 desire him to       
increase their faith1 not in an         
objective way1 as affording some greater
 foundation for it1 but subjectively1 by
 an internal work1 exciting and         
promoting the principle thereof1 which  
was before implanted in them2 and so    
causing all those graces1 that accompany
 it1 to abound1 as the effects of his   
divine power4  ,we might farther        
consider ,christ's spiritual government1
 as extended to his church1 collectively
 considered1 which is exposed to many   
dangers and difficulties1 and meets with
 much opposition from its enemies1 who  
attempt its ruin1 but in vain1 because  
it is the object of the divine care1    
kept by the power of ,god1 through      
faith1 unto salvation3 for which reason1

 the gates of hell shall not prevail    
against it4 ,now this is1 in a peculiar 
manner1 the work of ,christ2 he is the  
rock on which it is built2 and his      
presence1 in the midst of his people1 is
 not only their glory1 but their safety2
 which it would not be1 if he were no   
more than a creature4 ,we might also    
consider the subserviency of the various
 dispensations of providence in the     
world to their good1 as he is ,head over
 all things to the church1 ,eph4 i4 #bb4
 which could not answer that valuable   
end1 had he not been a divine ,person4  
,we might farther consider how the      
divine glory of ,christ will be         
demonstrated1 in his second coming to   
compleat the work of salvation1 begun in
 this world4 ,to prepare a way for this1
 there will be an universal resurrection
 of the dead1 which will be no less an  
effect of almighty power1 than the      
creation of all things was at first4 ,i 
need not therefore say any thing farther
 to prove this to be a divine work2 we  

need only prove that this general       
resurrection shall be performed by      
,christ3 this might be proved from      
several scriptures2 in one whereof he   
expressly asserts it himself1 in words  
very plain and particular1 viz4 ,john   
vi4 #ch4 ,the hour is coming1 in which  
all that are in their graves shall hear 
his voice1 and shall come forth1 c4     
,moreover1 when1 at the same time1 he is
 represented as coming in the clouds1   
with power and great glory1 in his own  
glory1 as well as that of the ,father1  
and of the holy angels1 in ,luke ix4    
#bf4 the most natural sense of that text
 seems to be this1 that his divine      
glory1 which is called his own1 which   
was comparatively hid from his people1  
while he was here on earth1 shall       
eminently be demonstrated in his second 
coming1 and also that ,mediatorial      
glory1 which he has received from the   
,father1 as what he had a right to1 on  
his having accomplished the work of     
redemption1 which he came into the world

 about2 and then there is the glory of  
his retinue1 as appearing with all his  
holy angels2 which bears some           
resemblance to that expression whereby  
the majesty of ,god is set forth upon   
another occasion1 namely1 as appearing  
on mount ,sinai1 to give the law1 when  
it is said1 in ,deut4 xxxiii4 #b4 ,the  
,lord came with ten thousands of saints4
 ,and to this we may add1 that the work1
 which he shall1 immediately after this1
 be engaged in1 to wit1 that of judging 
the world in righteousness1 plainly     
proves his ,deity1 since none but a     
divine ,person can judge the secrets of 
all men1 and bring to light every thing 
that has been done1 from the beginning  
to the end of time2 and this is to be   
done1 in that day2 for it is said1 in   
,eccles4 xii4 #ad4 ,that ,god shall     
bring every work into judgment1 with    
every secret thing1 whether it be good1 
or whether it be evil4 ,this is a       
farther improvement of that argument1   
before laid down to prove his divinity  

from his omniscience2 if his judgment   
must be1 as the apostle says1 in ,rom4  
ii4 #b4 according to truth1 and         
consequently performed with the greatest
 impartiality1 as well as an exquisite  
knowledge or discerning of the cause1   
without which it could not be said1 that
 the ,judge of all the earth does right1
 7as he certainly will7 in ,gen4 xviii4 
#be4 and if rewards shall be            
proportioned to every work done1 so that
 every one shall receive as the apostle 
says1 in #b ,cor4 v4 #aj4 according to  
what he has done1 whether it be good or 
bad2 and if persons are to be rewarded1 
or punished1 for all the secret springs 
of action1 which must be reckoned either
 good or bad1 according to what they    
produce1 as well as the actions         
themselves2 and if this respects not    
particular persons only1 but all men1   
who have lived1 or shall live1 from the 
beginning to the end of the world1 it   
evidently proves1 that he1 to whom this 
glorious work is ascribed1 must be a    

divine ,person4  ,and to this we may    
add1 that the manner of his appearing1  
with the terror1 as well as the majesty 
of a judge1 being such as shall strike  
his enemies with the utmost horror and  
confusion1 is a farther proof of this   
matter4 ,this is represented in a lively
 manner1 in ,rev4 vi4 #ae-ag4 in which  
it is said1 the kings of the earth1 and 
the great men1 those who once rendered  
themselves formidable to their subjects 
shall desire to hide themselves in the  
dens and rocks of the mountains1 and    
shall say to the rocks and to the       
mountains1 fall on us1 and hide us from 
the face of him that sitteth upon the   
throne1 and from the wrath of the ,lamb3
 ,for the great day of his wrath is     
come2 and who shall be able to stand8   
,and1  ,lastly1 ,he will not only       
pronounce the sentence but execute it1  
and that with respect to his saints and 
subjects2 and his enemies3 as to the    
former of these he will not only command
 them to come1 and possess the kingdom  

prepared for them1 but the blessedness  
which he will confer upon them1 pursuant
 thereunto1 is called the beatific      
vision1 in #a ,john iii4 #b4 ,we shall  
be like him1 for we shall see him as he 
is2 and the happiness of heaven is      
described in such a way as plainly      
proves our ,saviour to be the fountain  
thereof1 and consequently a divine      
,person2 for it is represented as a     
state1 in which they will behold his    
glory1 ,john xvii4 #bd4 whereas         
certainly the beholding the glory of the
 most exalted creature1 falls infinitely
 short of this ingredient in the        
heavenly blessedness4  ,and on the other
 hand1 the immediate impressions of the 
wrath of ,god on the consciences of his 
enemies1 or the power of his anger1     
which shall render them eternally       
miserable1 when banished from his       
presence1 proves him to be a divine     
,person1 inasmuch as the highest degree 
of misery consists in a separation1 or  
departure from him1 which it could not  

do1 if he were not the fountain of      
blessedness2 nor could the punishment of
 sinners be proportioned to their       
crimes1 if it were not to be inflicted  
by the glory of his power2 the apostle  
joins both these together1 in #b ,thess4
 i4 #i4 though some understand the      
words1 as implying1 that their          
punishment proceeds from his immediate  
presence1 in the display of the         
greatness of his power1 as a            
sin-avenging ,judge2 in either of which 
senses1 it argues him to be a divine    
,person4 ,and that it is our ,saviour   
who is spoken of1 is evident1 from the  
foregoing and following verses2 it is he
 who shall appear in flaming fire1      
taking vengeance on them that know not  
,god1 and obey not the gospel2 and it is
 he that shall come to be glorified in  
his saints1 and to be admired in all    
them that believe2 so that we have a    
very plain proof of his ,deity1 from the
 exercise of his government1 either in  
this or the other world4  ,having       

endeavoured to prove the divinity of    
,christ1 from his works of creation and 
providence and under the former of      
these1 offered some things in answer to 
the methods taken by the ,socinians1 and
 especially the ,arians1 in accounting  
for the sense of those scriptures that  
speak of the ,father's creating all     
things by the ,son2 it is necessary for 
us now to consider the most material    
objections1 brought by the              
,anti-trinitarians in general1 against  
what has been said in defence of this   
doctrine1 taken from the works of common
 and special providence1 as ascribed to 
him1 and1 in particular1 from the       
administration of his kingdom of grace2 
it is therefore objected4  ,object4 #a4 
,that his kingdom1 and power of acting1 
in the administration of the affairs    
relating thereunto1 is wholly derived   
from the ,father3 thus he says in ,luke 
xxii4 #bi4 ,i appoint unto you a        
kingdom1 as my ,father hath appointed   
unto me2 and1 in ,mat4 xi4 #bg4 ,all    

things are delivered unto me of my      
,father2 and in ,psal4 ii4 #f4 ,yet have
 ,i set my ,king upon my holy hill of   
,zion4 ,and whatever he does in managing
 the affairs thereof1 is by the         
,father's commission and appointment3   
thus in ,john v4 #cf4 he speaks of the  
works which he was to perform1 as those 
which the ,father had given him to      
finish4 ,and as for his power of        
executing judgment1 which is one of the 
greatest glories of his kingly          
government1 this is derived from the    
,father1 in ,john v4 #bb4 ,for the      
,father judgeth no man1 but hath        
committed all judgment unto the ,son2   
and1 in ,acts xvii4 #ca4 it is said1    
that he hath appointed a day1 in which  
he will judge the world in              
righteousness1 by that man whom he hath 
ordained1 meaning our ,saviour2 and when
 he speaks1 in ,rev4 ii4 #bg4 of his    
ruling his enemies with a rod of iron1  
and breaking them to shivers1 as the    
vessels of a potter1 he adds1 that this 

he received of his ,father2 from whence 
they argue1 that since he received his  
dominion1 or right to govern the world  
and the church1 from the ,father1       
therefore he cannot be ,god equal with  
the ,father4 ,as we say1 in opposition  
to their scheme of doctrine1 that a     
derived ,deity1 such as they suppose his
 to be1 cannot be the same with that    
which the ,father has2 so they allege   
this1 by way of reprisal1 against the   
argument we have but now insisted on1   
that a derived dominion cannot be made  
use of as a medium to prove him that has
 it to be a divine ,person1 in the same 
sense in which we maintain him to be4   
#b4 ,in all his works1 and particularly 
in the administration of the affairs of 
his kingdom1 he acts for the ,father's  
glory1 and not his own2 whereas a divine
 ,person1 cannot act1 for any other end 
than for his own glory3 this therefore  
rather disproves1 than evinces1 his     
proper ,deity2 as when he says1 in ,john
 viii4 #di4 ,i honour my ,father2 and1  

in chap4 v4 #cj4 he says1 ,i seek not   
mine own will1 but the will of my       
,father which hath sent me4 ,he also    
speaks of the ,father giving him a      
commandment to do what he did2 as in    
,john xii4 #di4 ,i have not spoken of my
 self1 but the ,father which sent me2 he
 gave me a commandment1 what ,i should  
say1 and what ,i should speak2 and1 in  
chap4 xiv4 #ca4 ,as the ,father gave me 
commandment1 so do ,i2 and1 in chap4 xv4
 #aj4 he speaks of his having kept his  
,father's commandment1 and pursuant     
hereunto1 abiding in his love1 from     
whence they argue1 that he who is       
obliged to fulfil a commandment1 or who 
acts in obedience to the ,father1 is    
properly a subject1 or a servant1 and   
therefore cannot be ,god in the same    
sense as the ,father1 who gave this     
commandment1 is4  #c4 ,they add1 that in
 the government of his church1 and the  
world1 in subserviency thereunto1 he    
acts in the ,father's name1 as deputy   
and vicegerent2 as in ,john x4 #be4 ,the

 works that ,i do in my ,father's name1 
they bear witness of me2 and accordingly
 his works are called the ,father's1 in 
ver4 #cg4 ,if ,i do not the works of my 
,father1 believe me not2 and these works
 are said to be done from the ,father1  
ver4 #cb4 ,many good works have ,i      
shewed you from my ,father3 and1 as the 
consequence of all this1 he             
acknowledges1 as he ought to do1 in     
,john xiv4 #bh4 that the ,father is     
greater than he4 ,how then can he be a  
divine ,person1 in the sense in which we
 have proved him to be1 when there is a 
,god above him1 in whose name he acts in
 all he does8  #d4 ,they farther argue1 
that he was made both ,lord and ,christ1
 and that by the ,father1 as it is      
expressly said1 in ,acts ii4 #cf4  #e4  
,they farther argue that the donatives  
of his kingdom1 or those honours which  
are bestowed on his subjects1 are not   
his to give1 but the ,father's2 as it is
 said1 in ,matt4 xx4 #bc4 ,to sit on my 
right hand1 and on my left1 is not mine 

to give2 but it shall be given to them1 
for whom it is prepared of my ,father4  
#f4 ,this kingdom which he received from
 the ,father1 and thus administers in   
subserviency to him1 is1 in the end1 to 
be resigned1 or delivered up3 thus1 in  
#a ,cor4 xv4 #bd4 ,then cometh the end1 
when he shall have delivered up the     
kingdom to ,god1 even the ,father2 and  
in ver4 #bh4 ,when all things shall be  
subdued unto him1 then shall the ,son   
also himself be subject unto him1 that  
put all things under him1 that ,god may 
be all in all2 and accordingly1 he shall
 lay aside those divine honours which he
 now has1 or cease to perform those     
works which give him a right to claim   
them4 ,these are the strongest          
arguments1 of any1 that are brought by  
the ,anti-trinitarians against our      
,saviour's proper ,deity2 and1 indeed1  
as though they had little else to       
object1 there is scarce an argument to  
disprove it1 but what is supported in   
this method of reasoning1 which they    

think to be altogether unanswerable1    
7and there are many more scriptures1    
which might have been brought to the    
same purpose7 therefore it is necessary 
that we should consider what may be     
replied to it4  ,the sum of what has    
been objected1 as thus branched out into
 several particulars1 is1 that since    
,christ is represented as below the     
,father1 or inferior to him1 he cannot  
he equal with him1 for that is no other 
than a contradiction4#aeg  ,answ4 ,to   
this it may be replied1 that though the 
scripture speaks of our ,saviour1 as    
receiving a commission from the ,father1
 and acting in subserviency to him2 yet 
let it be considered1 that this does not
 respect the inferiority of the divine  
nature1 but the subserviency of what is 
done by him1 as ,mediator1 to the glory 
of the ,father1 as this character and   
office were received from him4 ,and1    
indeed1 whenever the ,son is            
represented1 as engaged in the great    
work of redemption1 or in any thing     

tending thereunto1 or in any work       
consequent thereupon1 whereby what was  
before purchased is said to be applied  
by him1 this has a peculiar reference to
 him1 as ,mediator3 therefore let us    
consider1  #a4 ,that nothing is more    
common1 in scripture1 than for him to be
 represented as ,mediator1 especially in
 all those things that concern the      
spiritual advantages1 or salvation of   
his church1 which is the principal thing
 to be considered in his government2 and
 in this sense we are to understand     
those scriptures1 which have been       
brought to support the objection3 and it
 is plain1 that our ,saviour generally  
speaks of himself under this character1 
which is included in his being the      
,messiah1 or ,christ1 which is the main 
thing that he designed to evince by his 
doctrine and his miracles2 therefore1 if
 we duly consider the import of this    
character1 it will not only give light  
to the understanding such like          
scriptures1 but sufficiently answer the 

objection against his ,deity taken from 
them4  ,our adversaries will not deny   
that ,christ is represented as a        
,mediator2 but they widely differ from  
us1 when they take occasion to explain  
what they intend thereby3 sometimes they
 seem to mean nothing else by it1 but a 
middle-,being betwixt ,god and the      
creature2 and therefore the work        
performed by him as such is not what    
requires him to be1 in the most proper  
sense1 a divine ,person1 and            
consequently whatever inferiority to the
 ,father is contained in this character1
 they conclude that this respects his   
,deity2 whereas we distinguish between  
the subserviency of the work1 performed 
by him1 as ,mediator1 to the glory of   
,god the ,father1 together with the     
subjection1 or real inferiority of the  
human nature1 in which he performed it  
to the ,father2 and the inferiority of  
his divine nature3 the former we allow2 
the latter we deny4  #b4 ,when we speak 
of him as ,mediator1 we always suppose  

him to be ,god and ,man1 in one ,person2
 and that these two natures1 though     
infinitely distinct1 are not to be      
separated4 ,as ,god1 without the        
consideration of a human nature united  
to his divine ,person1 he would be too  
high to sustain the character1 or to    
perform the work of a servant1 and1 as  
such1 to yield obedience1 which was     
incumbent on him1 as ,mediator2 and on  
the other hand1 to be a mere man1 is too
 low1 and would be altogether           
inconsistent with that infinite value   
and dignity1 that was to be put on the  
work which he was to perform4 ,therefore
 it was necessary that he should have   
two distinct natures1 a divine and a    
human1 or that he should be ,god        
incarnate4 ,this will be more           
particularly considered under some      
following answers#aeh2 and therefore we 
shall reserve the proof hereof for its  
proper place1 and there consider the    
distinct properties of each nature2 and 
all that we shall observe at present is1

 that the evangelist ,john1 in whose    
gospel our ,saviour is often described1 
as inferior to the ,father1 as well as  
equal with him1 which is agreeable to   
his ,mediatorial character1 lays down   
this1 as a kind of preface1 designing   
hereby to lead us into the knowledge of 
such like expressions1 when he says1 in 
,john i4 #ad4 ,the ,word was made flesh 
and dwelt among us2 which is all the    
proof we shall give of it at present4   
#c4 ,it follows from hence1 that several
 things may be truly spoken concerning1 
or applied to him1 which are infinitely 
opposite to one another1 namely that he 
has almighty power in one respect1 as to
 what concerns his ,deity2 and yet that 
he is weak1 finite1 and dependent in    
another1 as to what respects his        
humanity4 ,in one nature1 he is ,god    
equal with the ,father1 and so receives 
nothing from him1 is not dependent on   
him1 nor under any obligation to yield  
obedience4 ,in this nature1 he is the   
object of worship1 as all worship       

terminates on that ,deity1 which is     
common to all the ,persons in the       
,godhead3 but1 in the other nature1 he  
worships1 receives all from1 and refers 
all to the glory of the ,father2        
therefore1  #d4 ,those scriptures which 
speak of him as receiving a kingdom1    
doing all things from1 or in obedience  
to the ,father1 or in his name1 and for 
his glory1 and as inferior to1 and      
dependent on him1 are not only applied  
to him1 as ,mediator1 but they have a   
particular respect to his human nature2 
so that all that can be inferred from   
such modes of speaking1 as those        
above-mentioned1 as so many objections  
against the doctrine which we are       
defending1 is1 that he who is ,god is   
also man1 and consequently has those    
things predicated of him1 as such which 
are proper to a nature infinitely below1
 though inseparably united with his     
divine4  ,moreover1 whereas it is said1 
that the ,father has committed all      
judgment to the ,son1 or that he judgeth

 the world in righteousness1 by that man
 whom he hath ordained2 all that can be 
inferred from hence is1 that so far as  
this work is performed by him1 in his   
human nature1 which will be rendered    
visible to the whole world at the day of
 judgment1 it is an instance of the     
highest favour and glory conferred upon 
this nature1 or upon ,god-man ,mediator1
 as man3 but whereas he is elsewhere    
described1 as having a right to judge   
the world1 as ,god2 and as having those 
infinite perfections1 whereby he is fit 
to do it1 these are the same that belong
 to the ,father1 and therefore not      
derived from him4  ,again1 when1 in     
another scripture1 before referred to1  
it is said1 that ,god hath made him both
 ,lord and ,christ1 it is not there     
said1 that the ,father hath made him    
,god1 or given him any branch of the    
divine glory2 but it signifies the      
unction that he received from the       
,father1 to be the ,king1 ,head1 and    
,lord of his church2 which1 so far as   

this is an act of grace1 or connotes his
 dependence on the ,father herein1 it   
has an immediate respect to him1 in his 
human nature1 in which1 as well as in   
his divine nature1 this dominion is     
exercised2 whereas his sovereignty1 and 
universal dominion over the church and  
the world1 or those divine perfections1 
which render him1 in all respects1 fit  
to govern it2 they belong1 more         
especially to the ,mediator1 as ,god1   
and are the same as when they are       
applied to the ,father4  ,moreover1 when
 he says1 ,i seek not my own will1 but  
the ,father's1 that sent me2 and        
elsewhere1 ,not my will1 but thine be   
done2 it argues that he had a human     
will1 distinct from his divine1 in which
 he expresses that subjection to the    
,father1 which becomes a creature2 this 
is plainly referred to him as man2 so1  
on the other hand1 when he says1        
speaking of himself co-ordinately with  
the ,father1 ,as the ,father raiseth up 
the dead1 and quickeneth them1 so even  

the ,son quickeneth whom he will2 this1 
though spoken of him as ,mediator1 has a
 peculiar reference to his divine       
nature4  ,again1 when he says1 in       
another scripture1 ,the ,father is      
greater than ,i1 that is applied to him 
as man2 whereas elsewhere1 in ,john x4  
#cj4 when he says1 ,i1 and my ,father   
are one1 that is spoken of him as ,god1 
having the same nature with the ,father 
so that if we suppose our ,saviour to be
 ,god and ,man1 as he is plainly proved 
to be1 from scripture1 then it follows1 
that whatever is said concerning him1 as
 importing his right to divine honour on
 the one hand1 or his disclaiming it on 
the other1 these are both true1 when we 
consider him in these different natures4
  ,thus we are to understand those      
scriptures1 that speak of the real      
inferiority of the ,son to the ,father3 
but when1 in other places1 nothing is   
intended but the subserviency of what is
 done by the ,son1 as ,mediator1 or its 
tendency to set forth the ,father's     

glory1 this may be applicable to those  
divine works1 which the ,mediator       
performs2 and so we may distinguish     
between the subserviency of the divine  
actions to the ,father's glory1 and the 
inferiority of one divine ,person to    
another2 the former may be asserted     
without detracting from his proper      
,deity1 while the latter is denied1 as  
inconsistent with it4  ,thus we have    
endeavoured to explain those scriptures1
 which are referred to by the ,arians1  
to overthrow our ,saviour's divinity3   
and1 by the same method of explication1 
,i humbly conceive1 all others1 that can
 be brought to that purpose1 may be     
understood4 ,i have passed over that    
scripture1 indeed1 which respects       
,christ's delivering up the kingdom to  
the ,father1 and being subject to him1  
which it might have been expected that  
,i should have endeavoured to explain2  
but ,i choose rather to refer the       
consideration thereof to its proper     
place1 when we speak concerning         

,christ's kingly office1 and his being  
exalted in the execution thereof4  ,,iv4
 ,the next argument to prove the        
divinity of ,christ is taken from his   
being the object of religious worship1  
which is a practical owning of him to be
 a divine ,person1 when there is an     
agreement between our words and actions1
 in both which we acknowledge him to    
have the perfections of the divine      
nature4 ,this argument is so strong and 
conclusive1 that it is very difficult to
 evade the force thereof2 and1 indeed1  
it affects the very essentials of       
religion4 ,now1 that we may herein      
proceed with greater plainness1 we      
shall1  #a4 ,consider what we understand
 by worship in general1 and by religious
 worship in particular4 ,i am very      
sensible that the ,anti-trinitarians    
understand the word in a sense very     
different from what we do1 as taking it 
in a limited sense1 for our expressing  
some degree of humility1 or reverence1  
to a person1 whom we acknowledge in some

 respect1 to be our superior2 but       
whatever external signs of reverence1 or
 words1 we use1 as expressive of our    
regard to him who is the object thereof1
 this1 when applied to our ,saviour1 is 
no more than what they suppose to be due
 to a person below the ,father4         
,therefore1 that we may not mistake the 
meaning of the word1 let it be          
considered2 that worship is either civil
 or religious2 the former contains in it
 that honour and respect which is given 
to superiors1 which is sometimes        
expressed by bowing1 or falling down1   
before them1 or some other marks of     
humility1 which their advanced station  
in the world requires2 ,though this is  
seldom called worshipping them2 and it  
is always distinguished from religious  
worship1 even when the same gestures are
 used therein4 ,it is true1 there is one
 scripture1 in which the same word is   
applied to both1 in #a ,chron4 xxix4    
#bj4 where it is said1 ,all the         
congregation bowed down their heads1 and

 worshipped the ,lord and the king1 that
 is1 they paid civil respect1           
accompanied with those actions that are 
expressive of humility1 and that honour 
that was due to ,david1 but their       
worship given to ,god was divine or     
religious4 ,this is the only sense in   
which we understand worship in this     
argument1 and it includes in it         
adoration and invocation4 ,in the       
former1 we ascribe infinite perfection  
unto ,god1 either directly1 or by       
consequence2 an instance whereof we have
 in #a ,chron4 xxix4 #aa1 #ab4 ,thine1  
,o ,lord1 is the greatness1 and the     
power1 and the glory1 and the victory1  
and the majesty2 for all that is in     
heaven1 and in the earth is thine2 thine
 is the kingdom1 ,o ,lord1 and thou art 
exalted as ,head above all4 ,both riches
 and honour come of thee1 and thou      
reignest over all1 and in thine hand is 
power and might and in thine hand it is 
to make great1 and to give strength unto
 all2 and1 in ,deut4 xxxii4 #c4 in which

 we are said to ascribe greatness unto  
him2 and1 in ,rom4 i4 #ba4 to glorify   
him as ,god1 or1 give unto him the glory
 due to his name1 ,psal4 xxix4 #b4      
,invocation is that wherein we glorify  
,god1 as the ,fountain of blessedness1  
when we ask those things from him1 which
 none but a ,god can give1 which is     
sometimes called seeking the ,lord1     
,psal4 cv4 #d4 or calling upon him1     
,psal4 l4 #ae4 ,and this includes in it 
all those duties which we perform1 in   
which we consider him as a ,god of      
infinite perfection1 and ourselves      
dependent on him1 and desirous to       
receive all those blessings from him1   
which we stand in need of2 and          
particularly faith1 in the various acts 
thereof1 is a branch of religious       
worship1 as connoting its object to be a
 divine ,person2 as also supreme love1  
and universal obedience2 and1 indeed1 it
 contains in it the whole of religion1  
in which we have a due regard to that   
infinite distance that there is between 

him and the best of creatures2 and      
religious worship is no where taken in a
 lower sense than this in scripture4    
#b4 ,religious worship1 as thus         
described1 is to be given to none but a 
divine ,person1 according to our        
,saviour's words1 in ,matth4 iv4 #aj4   
,thou shall worship the ,lord thy ,god1 
and him only shalt thou serve4 ,this is 
evident1 from the idea we have of       
religion in general1 which is a giving  
that glory1 or ascribing those          
perfections to ,god1 which belong to    
him1 as being founded in his nature2 and
 therefore it is the highest instance of
 blasphemy and profaneness to apply them
 to any creature1 since it is in effect 
to say that he is equal with ,god4  #c4 
,it plainly appears1 from ,scripture1   
that ,christ is the object of religious 
worship1 and consequently that the      
argument we are maintaining is just1    
namely1 that1 for this reason1 he must  
be concluded to be a divine ,person4    
,now that he is the object of religious 

worship1 is evident1 from many examples 
in scripture of such worship being given
 to him1 when1 at the same time1 they1  
who have given it1 have not been        
reproved or restrained1 but rather      
commended1 for performing it4 ,we have  
various instances of this nature in the 
,old ,testament1 of which ,i shall      
mention two or three1 viz4 in ,gen4     
xlviii4 #ae1 #af4 ,god1 before whom my  
fathers ,abraham and ,isaac did walk1   
the ,god which fed me all my life long  
unto this day1 the ,angel which redeemed
 me from all evil1 bless the lads4 ,when
 he speaks of ,abraham and ,isaac's     
walking before him1 it implies1 that1 in
 their whole conversation1 they         
considered themselves as under his      
all-seeing eye2 and ,jacob acknowledges 
him as the ,god1 who had sustained1     
preserved1 and provided for him         
hitherto1 the support of his life1 and  
his ,deliverer1 or ,redeemer1 from all  
evil4 ,this divine ,person he addresses 
himself to1 in a way of supplication1   

for a blessing on the posterity of      
,joseph2 and that he intends our        
,saviour hereby1 is evident1 because he 
has a reference to his appearance in the
 form of an angel1 and therefore        
describes him under that character4 ,now
 we cannot suppose that this holy       
patriarch is here represented as praying
 to a created angel1 for that would be  
to charge him with idolatry4 ,moreover1 
this is the same description that is    
given of ,christ elsewhere1 in ,isa4    
lxiii4 #i4 ,in all their affliction he  
was afflicted1 and the ,angel of his    
presence saved them2 in his love1 and in
 his pity he redeemed them1 and he bare 
them1 and carried them all the days of  
old2 and in ,mal4 iii4 #a4 ,the ,lord1  
whom ye seek1 shall suddenly come to his
 temple2 even the ,messenger1 or ,angel1
 of the covenant1 whom ye delight in2   
which contains a very plain prediction  
of our ,saviour's incarnation1 whose way
 is said to be prepared by ,john the    
,baptist1 who is spoken of in the words 

immediately foregoing4 ,now it is       
certain1 that ,god the ,father is never 
called an angel in scripture1 inasmuch  
as this is a peculiar description of the
 ,mediator1 who1 as such1 is never      
mentioned as the ,person sending1 but   
sent2 in which he is considered as one  
that was to be incarnate1 and1 in our   
nature1 to execute those offices1 which 
he was therein obliged to perform4 ,this
 is the ,person then whom ,jacob adored 
and prayed to4  ,we have another        
instance1 not only of his being         
worshipped1 but of his demanding this   
divine honour of him that performed it1 
in ,josh4 v4 #ad1 #ae4 where he appeared
 as the ,captain of the host of the     
,lord2 upon which1 ,joshua fell on his  
face to the earth1 and did worship1 and 
said unto him1 ,what saith my ,lord unto
 his servant8 ,and the ,captain of the  
,lord's host said unto ,joshua1 ,loose  
thy shoe from off thy foot1 for the     
place whereon thou standest is holy2 and
 ,joshua did so4 ,it cannot be supposed 

that it was any other than a divine     
,person that appeared2 not only because 
,joshua fell on his face and worshipped 
him1 and expressed his willingness to   
fulfil his command1 but because he bid  
him loose his shoe from his foot1 since 
the place on which he stood was holy2   
which expression is no where used in any
 other text of scripture1 except in     
,exod4 iii4 #e4 in which our ,saviour1  
as we before considered1 appeared to    
,moses1 with the majesty and glory of a 
divine ,person1 whose immediate presence
 made the place relatively holy1 which  
the presence of a creature never did4   
,moreover1 the character which he here  
gives of himself to ,joshua1 as the     
,captain of the ,lord's host1 not only  
implies1 that all his success was owing 
to his conduct and blessing1 on his     
warlike enterprizes2 but this is also   
agreeable to the description which is   
elsewhere given of our ,saviour1 in     
,isa4 lv4 #d4 in which he is said to be 
a ,leader and ,commander to the people2 

and he is called in ,heb4 ii4 #aj4 ,the 
,captain of our salvation2 and          
elsewhere1 ,the ,prince of life2 and1   
,the ,prince of the kings of the earth4 
,moreover1 there are various instances  
in the ,new ,testament of worship given 
to ,christ2 in which1 by several        
circumstances contained in it1 it is    
evident1 that it was divine or          
religious4 ,thus he had divine honour   
given him by the wise men from the      
,east1 in ,matth4 ii4 #aa4 who fell down
 and worshipped him1 c4 and1 in ,luke   
xxiv4 #eb4 when he ascended up into     
heaven1 his disciples worshipped him2   
where there is nothing in the mode of   
expression that distinguishes this from 
that worship that is due to ,god4       
,moreover1 there is a very illustrious  
instance of his being thus worshipped by
 a numerous assembly1 represented in    
that vision1 in ,rev4 v4 #aa-ac4 ,i     
beheld1 and heard the voice of many     
angels round about the throne1 saying1  
,worthy is the ,lamb that was slain1 to 

receive power1 and riches1 and wisdom1  
and strength1 and honour1 and glory1 and
 blessing3 ,and every creature that is  
in heaven1 and on the earth1 and under  
the earth1 saying1 ,blessing1 and       
honour1 and glory1 and power1 be unto   
him that sitteth upon the throne1 and to
 the ,lamb for ever and ever2 in which  
words there are such glories ascribed1  
that higher expressions cannot be used  
by any1 who adore the divine ,majesty2  
and it is plain1 that our ,saviour is   
intended hereby1 because he is described
 as the ,lamb that was slain2 and he is 
also considered co-ordinately with the  
,father1 when it is said1 that this     
glory is given to him that sitteth upon 
the throne1 and to the ,lamb4 ,now if   
our ,saviour be thus worshipped1 he must
 have a right to it1 or else his        
worshippers would have been reproved1 as
 guilty of idolatry2 thus ,peter        
reproves ,cornelius1 or rather prevents 
his paying divine adoration to himself1 
who was no more than a man1 in ,acts x4 

#bf4 ,stand up1 ,i myself also am a man2
 and the angel1 in ,rev4 xix4 #aj4 when 
,john at first1 through mistake1        
thinking him to be a divine person1 fell
 at his feet to worship him1 expressly  
forbad him1 saying1 ,see thou do it not2
 ,i am thy fellow-servant1 and of thy   
brethren that have the testimony of     
,jesus2 worship ,god4 ,but our ,saviour 
never forbids any to worship him2       
therefore we must conclude that he is   
the object thereof1 and consequently a  
divine ,person4  ,we shall now proceed  
to consider the various branches of     
divine worship that are given to him1   
viz4  #a4 ,swearing by his name1 whereby
 an appeal is made to him1 as the ,judge
 of truth1 and the ,avenger of          
falsehood4 ,some think that the apostle1
 in ,rom4 ix4 #a4 intends as much as    
this1 when he says1 ,i speak the truth  
in ,christ1 ,i lie not1 that is1 ,i     
appeal to ,christ1 as the               
heart-searching ,god1 concerning the    
truth of what ,i say4 ,but there is also

 another sense of swearing1 namely1 when
 in a solemn manner1 we profess         
subjection to him1 as our ,god and      
,king2 which agrees with1 or is taken   
from the custom of subjects1 who swear  
fealty or allegiance to their king3 thus
 it is said1 in ,isa4 xlv4 #bc4 ,unto me
 every knee shall bow1 and every tongue 
shall swear2 and1 in doing this1 they   
acknowledge him to be the object of     
faith1 and to have a right to universal 
obedience1 as well as the ,fountain of  
blessedness4 ,this religious worship1 as
 the prophet foretels1 was to be given  
to the ,person here spoken of1 who is   
particularly said to be our ,saviour by 
the apostle1 referring to it in ,rom4   
xiv4 #aa4  #b4 ,this leads us to        
consider another act of religious       
worship1 which has some affinity with   
the former1 contained in the baptismal  
vow2 in which there is a consecration1  
or dedication1 of the person baptized1  
to the ,father1 ,son1 and ,holy ,ghost1 
according to the command given1 in      

,matt4 xxviii4 #ai4 or a public         
profession1 that it is our indispensable
 duty to exercise an entire subjection  
to them1 in a religious manner4 ,this is
 one of the most solemn acts of worship 
that can be performed1 wherein there is 
an explicit mention of the name of the  
,father1 ,son1 and ,holy ,ghost4 ,and   
here we may consider1 in general1 that  
the ,son is put co-ordinately with the  
,father1 which no creature ever is3 and 
it will be also necessary for us to     
enquire what is meant by being baptized 
in the name of the ,father1 ,son1 and   
,holy ,ghost1 that so it may farther    
appear to be an act of religious        
worship4  ,some hereby understand       
nothing else but our being baptized by  
the authority of the ,father1 ,son1 and 
,holy ,ghost1 or by a warrant received  
from them to do it3 but though this be  
sometimes the meaning of our acting in  
the name of ,god1 yet more is intended  
by this expression1 used in the         
administration of this ordinance1       

otherwise it is not sufficiently        
distinguished from all other acts of    
religious worship2 which cannot be      
rightly performed without a divine      
warrant4 ,according to this sense of the
 word1 ministers may as well be said to 
preach the gospel1 and the church to    
attend on their ministration1 in the    
name of the ,father1 ,son1 and ,holy    
,ghost2 for this cannot he done without 
a divine warrant1 upon which account it 
may be deemed an ordinance4  ,moreover1 
to suppose that this instituted form of 
administering baptism1 conveys no other 
idea1 but that of a divine warrant to do
 it1 is to conclude that there is no    
determinate meaning of the action       
performed1 contained in it2 but the     
administrator is to intend nothing else 
by it1 but only that he has a warrant   
from ,god to baptize2 whereas its being 
performed in the name of the ,father1   
,son1 and ,holy ,ghost1 seems plainly to
 intimate the principal thing signified 
thereby1 as a direction for our faith1  

when engaging in it3 which is1 that they
 who are baptized are consecrated1 or   
devoted to the ,father1 ,son1 and ,holy 
,ghost1 devoted to ,god professedly1 and
 called by his name1 in the sense in    
which the phrase is elsewhere used in   
scripture2 his right to them is hereby  
signified1 and their indispensable      
obligation to be entirely his2 and that 
with a peculiar acknowledgment of the   
distinct personal glory of the ,father1 
,son1 and ,holy ,ghost1 and the concern 
that each of them have in our salvation4
 ,the apostle speaking of our being     
baptized in the name of ,christ1 calls  
it1 in ,gal4 iii4 #bg4 a putting on     
,christ2 which seems to imply a         
consecration1 or dedication1 to him4    
,persons as well as things1 before this 
ordinance was instituted1 were          
consecrated to ,god by divers washings1 
as well as other rites1 used under the  
ceremonial law2 and this seems to be the
 sense in which the apostle himself     
explains this putting on ,christ1 in    

ver4 #bi4 when he infers1 from this     
action1 that they who had so done were  
,christ's1 not only by that right1 which
 he has to them as their ,creator and   
,redeemer1 but by another1 which is the 
immediate result of their professed     
dedication to him2 therefore this is    
such a comprehensive act of worship1    
that it includes in it the whole of that
 subjection1 which is due to the        
,father1 ,son1 and ,spirit2 and since1  
in particular1 the ,son is considered as
 the object thereof1 together with the  
,father1 it follows that he is ,god1    
equal with the ,father4  ,i might here  
consider1 that it would be not only an  
unwarrantable action1 but an instance of
 the greatest profaneness1 for us to be 
baptized in the name of any one who is  
not a divine ,person1 which farther     
argues that it is an act of divine      
worship2 upon which occasion1 the       
apostle ,paul1 speaking concerning some 
of the church of ,corinth1 as being     
disposed to pay too great a veneration  

to those ministers who had been         
instrumental in their conversion1 as    
though1 for this reason1 they were to be
 accounted the lords of their faith2    
and1 in particular1 that some said they 
were of ,paul1 and1 being apprehensive  
that they thought the minister1 who     
baptized them1 had a right to be thus   
esteemed1 he not only reproves this     
ungrounded and pernicious mistake2 but  
takes occasion to thank ,god1 that he   
baptized none of them1 but ,crispus and 
,gaius1 together with the household of  
,stephanas1 lest any should say he      
baptized in his own name2 so that while 
he testifies his abhorrence of his      
giving any just occasion to any1 to     
conclude that he was the object of this 
branch of divine worship1 he takes a    
great deal of pleasure in this          
reflection1 that the providence of ,god 
had not led them through the ignorance  
and superstition that prevailed among   
them1 to draw this false conclusion from
 his exercising this branch of the      

ministerial work1 which properly they   
would not have inferred from any other's
 having baptized them1 who had not so   
great an interest in their affections as
 he had4 ,this ,i apprehend to be the   
meaning of what the apostle says1 in #a 
,cor4 i4 #ab-af4 which ,i take occasion 
to refer to1 as a farther proof of      
baptism's being an act of religious     
worship1 unalienable from the ,father1  
,son1 and ,spirit1 in whose name alone  
we are to be baptized2 and ,i cannot but
 conclude1 that if the ,son were not a  
divine ,person1 we might as well be     
baptized in the name of ,paul1 or any   
other of the apostles1 as in his name1  
which is a just consequence from its    
being an act of religious worship2 and  
therefore he would never have joined his
 own name with the ,father's when he    
gave forth his commission to baptize1 if
 he had not had a right to it1 as well  
as the ,father4  ,again1 divine worship 
is due to ,christ1 as he is the object  
of faith2 and that not only as we are to

 depend upon whatever he has revealed1  
as a matter of infallible verity1       
otherwise the faith of the church       
especially under the ,new ,testament    
dispensation1 would be built on an      
uncertain foundation2 but1 since ,i am  
sensible it would be objected to this1  
that whatever is transmitted to us by   
divine inspiration1 is infallibly true1 
though the instruments made use of      
herein were not divine persons2 and when
 we assert that what ,christ delivered  
was infallible1 in a higher sense than  
this1 we rather suppose than prove his  
,deity2 the ,anti-trinitarians will not 
deny1 that what he imparted was         
infallibly true1 and therefore the      
object of faith2 but they suppose at the
 same time1 that whatever was imparted  
to the world by the apostles and        
prophets1 was equally true and          
infallible2 therefore they were the     
objects of faith1 in the same sense that
 our ,saviour himself was4  ,in answer  
to this ,i would not compare what was   

delivered immediately by our ,saviour   
with what was transmitted by those who  
spake and wrote by divine inspiration1  
or suppose that one was more infallibly 
true than the other2 and therefore that 
which ,i would principally insist on1   
when ,i speak of ,christ1 as the object 
of faith1 whereby he appears to be a    
divine ,person1 is not only that we are 
obliged to yield an assent to what he   
has imparted to us1 but this is to be   
attended with a firm reliance on him1 or
 trusting him with all we have1 or for  
all we expect1 to make us completely    
happy3 in this sense we are to          
understand the apostle's words1 when he 
says1 in #b ,tim4 i4 #ab4 ,i know whom  
,i have believed1 or trusted1 and ,i am 
persuaded that he is able to keep that  
which ,i have committed unto him against
 that day2 this is such a faith1 as no  
creature is the object of4 ,trust in man
 is prohibited1 and called a departure  
from ,god1 in ,jer4 xvii4 #e4 ,cursed be
 the man that trusteth in man1 or1 by a 

parity of reason in any other creature1 
and maketh flesh his arm1 and whose     
heart herein departeth from the ,lord4  
,trust is such an act of faith1 as is   
appropriated to a divine ,person2 and ,i
 cannot but observe1 that there is      
something peculiar in the mode of       
speaking1 when ,christ is represented as
 the object thereof1 that is never      
applied to any creature2 as his         
worshippers are said to believe in him2 
thus1 in ,john xiv4 #a4 ,ye believe in  
,god1 believe also in me1#aei where he  
commands his people to believe in him1  
in such a way2 as that this act of faith
 is accompanied with other graces1 which
 argue him a divine ,person4  ,this     
leads us to consider him as the object  
of supreme love and universal obedience1
 which are also acts of religious       
worship2 the former respects him1 as our
 chief good and happiness2 the latter as
 our undoubted sovereign and proprietor3
 we do not say1 that a person's having a
 right to be obeyed1 or loved1 or       

trusted1 in a limited degree1 argues him
 to be a divine ,person2 but when these 
graces are to be exercised in the       
highest degree1 without any possibility 
of our exceeding therein2 and when the  
exercise thereof is inseparably         
connected with salvation1 as it often is
 in scripture1 and our not exercising   
them1 is said to exclude from it1 ,i    
cannot but from hence conclude1 that1   
being thus circumstanced1 is an act of  
religious worship2 and it is certain1   
that our saviour is often represented1  
in scripture1 as the object thereof4    
,the last thing that we shall consider1 
under this head1 is1 that he is the     
object of prayer and praise2 and that   
these are parts of religious worship1   
needs no proof4 ,some think1 and the    
conjecture is not altogether improbable1
 that this is intended by the ,psalmist1
 ,psal4 lxxii4 #ae4 ,prayer also shall  
be made for him continually2 since it   
might as well be rendered1 continually  
made to him1 which agrees with what     

follows1 ,and daily shall he be praised2
 and that this ,psalm respects the      
,messiah1 who had a right to more glory 
than ,solomon1 appears from several     
things1 which are said concerning him   
therein2 but ,i will not insist on this1
 since we have more evident proofs      
thereof in other scriptures4 ,it is also
 foretold concerning him in ,isa4 xi4   
#aj4 that to him1 for so the words ought
 to be rendered1 shall the ,gentiles    
seek2 which mode of speaking is         
frequently used1 to signify our         
addressing ourselves to a divine ,person
 with prayer and supplication1 for the  
supplying of our wants4 ,but we have yet
 more evident proofs hereof in the ,new 
,testament2 the ,syrophenician woman's  
prayer1 which was directed to him1 was  
indeed short1 but very comprehensive1   
,matt4 xv4 #bb4 ,have mercy on me1 ,o   
,lord1 thou ,son of ,david2 and1 in ver4
 #be4 ,she came and worshipped him1     
saying1 ,lord help me2 and this act of  
religious worship was commended by our  

,saviour1 and her prayer answered4 ,and 
can we suppose any other than an act of 
religious worship1 contained in that    
petition of the man who came to him to  
cast the devil out of his son1 in ,mark 
ix4 #bd8 ,who said1 with tears1 ,lord1  
,i believe2 help thou mine unbelief2 by 
which we are not to understand that he  
desired that his unbelief should be     
removed in an objective way1 by our     
,saviour's giving him more convincing   
arguments to confirm his faith1 but by a
 powerful access to his heart1 as the   
,author and ,finisher of faith1 which is
 the peculiar gift of ,god2 and         
accordingly he is considered as a divine
 ,person1 by those who thus address     
themselves to him4  ,we shall conclude  
this head1 with giving a few instances  
of short prayers directed to ,christ1   
together with doxologies1 or ascriptions
 of praise1 in which he is sometimes    
joined with the ,father and ,holy       
,ghost2 and he is also argued1 from the 
subject matter thereof1 to be a divine  

,person3 thus the apostle ,paul         
concludes his epistles with1 ,the grace 
of our ,lord ,jesus ,christ be with you 
all1 ,amen2 #a ,cor4 xvi4 #bc4 ,phil4   
iv4 #bc4 #a ,thess4 v4 #bh4 #b ,thess4  
iii4 #ah4 and1 ,the grace of our ,lord  
,jesus ,christ be with your spirit2     
,philem4 ver4 #be4 and1 ,the ,lord      
,jesus ,christ be with thy ,spirit2 #b  
,tim4 iv4 #bb4 which is a short and     
comprehensive prayer directed to        
,christ1 that he would bestow on them   
all those graces that are necessary to  
their salvation2 and that this grace may
 so govern and influence their spirits1 
as to fit them for his service1 which   
supposes him to be the ,god and ,giver  
of all grace4 ,and1 in #b ,cor4 x4 iii4 
#ad4 he puts up a prayer to the three   
,persons in the ,godhead expressly2 ,the
 grace of the ,lord ,jesus ,christ1 and 
the love of ,god1 and the communion of  
the ,holy ,ghost1 be with you all1      
,amen2 desiring1 that they would        
communicate those blessings1 which      

accompany salvation1 by which the divine
 perfections1 and in particular the     
,personal glory of the ,father1 ,son1   
and ,holy ,ghost1 are demonstrated2 and 
herein the ,son is as much considered as
 the object of prayer as the ,father1   
and consequently hereby proved to be a  
divine ,person4  ,to this we may add    
those doxologies whereby praise is given
 to ,christ2 and so he is farther       
considered as the object of divine      
worship2 thus1 in #b ,pet4 iii1 #ah4    
speaking of our ,lord and ,saviour      
,jesus ,christ1 he says1 ,to him be     
glory1 both now and for ever1 ,amen2    
and1 in ,jude1 ver4 #bd1 #be4 ,unto him 
that is able to keep you from falling1  
and to present you faultless before the 
presence of his glory with exceeding    
joy1 to the only wise ,god our ,saviour1
 be glory and majesty1 dominion and     
power1 both now1 and for ever1 ,amen2   
where it is plain that he ascribes this 
divine glory to ,jesus ,christ2 for he  
is spoken of in ver4 #ba4 ,looking for  

the mercy of our ,lord ,jesus unto      
eternal life1 that is1 for that mercy   
which shall preserve us unto eternal    
life1 and then confer it upon us2 which 
is the sense of those words1 ,keeping us
 from falling1 and presenting us        
faultless before the presence of his    
glory1 with a small variation of the    
phrase2 and the very same thing he is   
expressly said to do elsewhere1 in ,eph4
 v4 #bg4 to present it to himself a     
glorious church1 not having spot or     
wrinkle1 or any such thing1 but that it 
should be holy1 and without blemish1    
that is1 that he may present it to his  
own view1 as taking a survey of his     
workmanship1 when brought to perfection2
 as ,god is said to have taken a view of
 all things that he had made at first1  
when he pronounced them good ,gen4 i4   
#ca4 and1 when he has thus taken a      
survey of his church1 or presented it to
 himself1 then he presents it to the    
view of the whole world of angels and   
men1 which1 as it is said1 is attended  

with exceeding joy2 which plainly makes 
it appear that our ,saviour is the      
,person here spoken of2 which is        
agreeable to what follows1 where he is  
called1 as he is elsewhere1 ,god our    
,saviour1 ,tit4 ii4 #aj1 #ac4 which     
character agrees with the name by which 
he was most known1 to wit1 ,jesus4      
,another doxology we have in ,rev4 i4   
#d1 #e1 #f4 ,grace be unto you1 and     
peace from ,jesus ,christ1 c4 ,unto him 
that loved us1 and washed us from our   
sins in his own blood2 and hath made us 
kings and priests unto ,god and his     
,father1 to him be glory and dominion   
for ever and ever1 ,amen4  ,there are   
also two places more1 in which1 to me1  
it seems more than probable1 that       
doxologies are directed to ,christ1     
namely1 in #a ,tim4 vi4 #ae1 #af4 ,who  
is the blessed and only ,potentate1 the 
,king of kings1 and ,lord of lords2 who 
only hath immortality1 dwelling in the  
light1 which no man can approach unto3  
whom no man hath seen1 or can see2 to   

whom be honour and power everlasting1   
,amen3 ,all allow that nothing greater  
can be said of ,god than is here spoken2
 therefore the only thing denied by the 
,arians is1 that this is applied to any 
but the ,father2 but to me1 it seems    
very obvious that it is spoken of       
,christ1 because he is mentioned        
immediately before3 thus1 in ver4 #ac4  
it is said1 ,i give thee charge in the  
sight of ,god1 who quickeneth all       
things1 and before ,christ ,jesus#afj2  
who1 before ,pontius ,pilate1 witnessed 
a good confession2 ,that thou keep this 
commandment without spot1 until the     
appearing of our ,lord ,jesus ,christ1  
which in his times he shall shew2 ,who  
is the blessed and only ,potentate1 c4  
where by his times is meant that season 
in which his glory shall shine most     
brightly1 when1 what he witnessed before
 ,pontius ,pilate1 to wit1 that he was  
the ,son of ,god1 he will demonstrate in
 the highest degree1 and then will      
eminently appear to have a right to that

 glory1 which the apostle ascribes to   
him4  ,again1 there is another          
scripture1 in which a glorious doxology 
is ascribed to ,christ1 in #a ,tim4 i4  
#ag4 ,now unto the ,king eternal1       
immortal1 invisible1 the only wise ,god1
 be honour and glory1 for ever and ever1
 ,amen4 ,a late learned writer#afa puts 
this among those scriptures which he    
applies to the ,father1 without         
assigning any reason for it2 which he   
ought to have done1 inasmuch as the     
context seems to direct us to apply it  
to the ,son1 spoken of in the foregoing 
verses2 thus1 in ver4 #ab4 ,i thank     
,jesus ,christ our ,lord1 who counted me
 faithful1 putting me into the ministry2
 and1 ver4 #ad4 ,the ,grace of our ,lord
 was exceeding abundant1 c4 and ver4    
#ae4 ,christ ,jesus came into the world 
to save sinners2 and ver4 #af4 ,howbeit1
 for this cause ,i obtained mercy1 that 
in me first ,jesus ,christ might shew   
forth all long-suffering1 for a pattern 
to them which should hereafter believe  

on him to life everlasting4 ,thus having
 mentioned the great things which       
,christ did for him1 it is natural to   
suppose that he would take occasion1    
from hence1 to ascribe glory to him1    
which he does in the words immediately  
following1 ,now1 unto the ,king1        
eternal1 immortal1 c4  ,having          
considered the force of this argument1  
taken from divine worship being ascribed
 to ,christ1 to prove his deity1 we     
shall now proceed to observe the methods
 used by the ,anti-trinitarians to evade
 it4 ,some of the ,socinians1 as though 
there had been no scriptures that speak 
of him as the object of religious       
worship1 have peremptorily denied that  
it is due to him1 and thought very      
hardly of their brethren1 as though they
 were involved in the common guilt of   
idolatry1 which they suppose his        
worshippers to have been chargeable     
with4 ,this occasioned warm debates in  
,transylvania and ,poland1 where        
,socinianism most prevailed towards the 

close of the #af century#afb2 and1      
indeed1 the method of reasoning1 made   
use of by those who denied that he was  
the object of worship1 though it tended 
more to his dishonour1 yet it carried in
 it a greater consistency with that     
scheme of doctrines1 which both sides   
maintained1 who denied his divinity4    
,as for the ,arians1 they do not        
expressly deny him to be the object of  
worship1 but rather deviate from the    
true sense of the word1 when they       
maintain his right to it3 they speak of 
great honours that are to be ascribed to
 him1 by which one would almost be ready
 to conclude that they reckoned him a   
divine ,person2 but when these honours  
are compared with those that are due to 
the ,father1 they very plainly discover 
that they mean nothing more hereby1 but 
what in consistency with their own      
scheme may be applied to a creature4    
,thus a late writer#afc1 in his         
explication of that text1 in ,john v4   
#bc4 ,that all men should honour the    

,son1 even as they honour the ,father1  
plainly discovers his sense of divine   
worship1 as due to our ,saviour1 to be  
very remote from that which is defended 
by those who maintain his proper deity4 
,his explication of this text is1 8,that
 the meaning is not that the ,son's     
authority should1 like that of the      
,father1 be looked upon as underived1   
absolute1 supreme1 and independent2 but 
that as the ,jews already believed in   
,god1 so they should also believe in    
,christ3 as they already honoured ,god  
the ,father1 so they should also for the
 future1 honour the ,son of ,god2 honour
 him1 as having all judgment committed  
unto him2 honour him1 to the honour of  
the ,father1 which sent him2 acknowledge
 him to be ,god1 to the glory of the    
,father40 ,which is a very low idea of  
divine honour2 for it is as much as to  
say1 that as the ,father is to be       
honoured as ,god1 so there is a degree  
of honour1 which he has conferred upon  
the ,son1 infinitely below that which is

 due to himself1 but yet called divine1 
because it is given him by a divine     
warrant4 ,whether1 in this sense1 an    
angel might not have had a warrant to   
receive divine honour1 ,i leave any one 
to judge2 and1 indeed1 nothing is       
contained in this sense1 but what rather
 tends to depreciate1 than advance the  
glory of ,christ4 ,but that we may      
better understand how far they allow    
that religious worship may be given to  
our ,saviour1 as well as that we may    
take occasion to defend that right to   
divine worship1 which we have proved to 
be due to him1 we shall briefly         
consider1 and endeavour to make some    
reply to the following objections4      
,object4 #a4 ,to what has been said     
concerning a right to religious worship1
 being founded only in a person's having
 the perfections of the divine nature2  
and accordingly that it is an argument  
that our ,saviour is truly and properly 
,god1 equal with the ,father1 because as
 such1 he has a right to it1 it is      

objected1 that if ,god commands us to   
worship a creature1 we are bound to obey
 him2 and accordingly1 without          
considering any right that is founded in
 his nature1 we are to give divine      
worship to ,christ1 by divine direction1
 or in obedience to a command given us  
to that purpose2 and that such a command
 was given1 upon which ,christ's right  
to receive divine worship is founded1   
appears from ,heb4 i4 #f4 ,when he      
bringeth his first-begotten into the    
world1 he saith1 and let all the angels 
of ,god worship him2 which supposes that
 they did not worship him before1 nor   
would they have done it afterwards1     
without this divine intimation4  ,answ4 
#a4 ,as to our yielding obedience to a  
divine command1 provided ,god should    
require us to give divine worship to a  
creature1 it may be replied1 that we do 
not deny but that all the divine        
commands are to be obeyed2 but yet this 
supposition is groundless1 inasmuch as  
,god cannot command us to worship a     

creature1 any more than he can discharge
 us from an obligation to worship       
himself4 ,this1 therefore1 is1 in       
effect1 to suppose what can never be2   
therefore nothing can be inferred from  
such a supposition2 we might as well    
say1 that if ,god should cease to exist1
 he would cease to be the object of     
worship2 or if a created being had      
divine perfection1 he would have a right
 to equal honour with ,god2 which is to 
suppose a thing that is in itself       
impossible2 and it is no less absurd to 
suppose it warrantable for us to pay    
divine worship to a creature4 ,this will
 farther appear1 from what has been said
 in explaining the nature of religious  
worship4 ,adoration is a saying to a    
person1 who is the object thereof1 thou 
hast divine perfections1 and to say this
 to a creature1 is contrary to truth2   
and therefore1 certainly the ,god of    
truth can never give us a warrant to say
 that which is false1 as this certainly 
would be4 ,and if we consider worship1  

as it is our addressing ourselves to    
him1 whom we worship1 in such a way1 as 
becomes a ,god1 he cannot give us a     
warrant so to do1 for that would be for 
him to divest himself of his glory3 and 
it would also disappoint our            
expectations1 by putting us on trusting 
one that cannot save us2 and such are   
justly reproved1 in ,isa4 xlv4 #bj4 as  
having no knowledge1 who pray unto a god
 that cannot save4 ,we must therefore   
conclude1 that since ,god cannot give   
his glory to another1 he cannot give any
 warrant to us to pay divine worship to 
a creature1 as is supposed in the       
objection1  #b4 ,as for that scripture1 
referred to1 in which ,god commanded the
 angels to worship our ,saviour1 when he
 brought him into the world1 it is not  
to be supposed that he had no right to  
divine worship before his incarnation2  
for if he be a divine ,person1 as the   
scriptures assert him to be1 the angels1
 doubtless adored him as such before2   
the only new discovery that was then    

made to them was1 that the second       
,person in the ,godhead was now ,god    
incarnate2 and therefore this instance  
of infinite condescension was to be     
considered as a motive to excite their  
adoration1 but not the formal reason of 
it3 thus we are sometimes commanded to  
adore and magnify ,god for the visible  
displays of his divine perfections in   
his works2 as the ,psalmist says1 ,psal4
 cvii4 #h4 ,oh that men would praise the
 ,lord for his goodness1 and for his    
wonderful works to the children of men6 
and1 in many other scriptures1 where the
 works of ,god are represented1 as a    
means or motive to excite our worship or
 adoration2 whereas the divine          
perfections1 which are displayed or     
rendered visible therein1 are the great 
foundation or reason thereof2 we worship
 this ,god because he is infinitely     
perfect2 though we take occasion1 from  
the visible display of his perfections1 
to worship him4 ,in this sense we       
understand the worship given to ,christ 

by the angels1 when brought into the    
world2 they took occasion1 from this    
amazing instance of his condescension1  
to adore those perfections1 which       
induced the ,son of ,god to take the    
human nature into union with his divine2
 not that they supposed his right to    
worship was founded therein4  ,object4  
#b4 ,since our worshipping ,christ      
includes in it ascribing all that glory 
to him that is his due2 it is enough for
 us1 when we worship him1 to confess    
that he has an excellency above the     
angels1 or that he is the best of all   
created beings1 as well as the most     
honourable1 and the greatest blessing to
 mankind1 as he was sent of ,god to     
instruct us in the way of salvation as a
 ,prophet1 to intercede for us as a     
,priest1 and to give laws to us as a    
,king1 and that he has done all this    
faithfully1 and with great compassion to
 us4 ,these things1 and whatever else he
 does for the advantage of mankind1 may1
 and ought to be acknowledged to his    

praise1 as a debt due to him1 in which  
respect he is to be considered as the   
object of worship2 nevertheless1 we are 
not to give him that glory which is due 
to the ,father1 as though he were a     
,person truly and properly divine1 in   
the same sense as he is4  ,answ4 #a4 ,it
 is agreed1 on both sides1 that that    
glory1 which is due to him1 is to be    
ascribed2 but we humbly conceive1 that  
the ascribing to a person that honour1  
which he has a right to1 unless we      
suppose it to be divine1 is not         
religious worship2 or1 to confess that  
those works which he has done1 are      
wonderful1 and of great advantage to    
mankind1 is no instance of adoration1   
unless we suppose that these works are  
such1 as none but a ,person who has the 
divine nature can perform2 whereas all  
those works1 which they ascribe to him1 
may1 according to them1 be performed by 
a finite being1 or else they must allow 
the arguments1 which have been taken    
from thence1 to prove his proper deity4 

#b4 ,if the works that are ascribed to  
him be considered as properly divine1 as
 they are represented to be in          
scripture1 it must not be concluded1    
from hence1 that he is to be adored1 as 
performing them2 but we are rather to   
take occasion from thence1 as was       
observed in our last head1 to adore     
those divine perfections1 which are     
evinced hereby1 which render him the    
object of worship2 as the works of ,god 
are motives to induce us to worship him1
 and not the formal reason of that      
worship2 as when1 in the first          
commandment1 ,god lays claim to divine  
honour1 or obliges the ,israelites to   
have no other gods before him1 because  
he had brought them out of the land of  
,egypt1 we are to consider their        
deliverance from thence1 indeed1 as a   
motive to worship2 but it is the divine 
power that was exerted therein1 that was
 properly the object thereof2 so1 in    
,psal4 cxxxvi4 #a4 we are to give thanks
 to the ,lord1 whose mercy endureth for 

ever2 and1 in the following verses1     
there is a particular mention made of   
some glorious works which ,god had done1
 who alone doth great wonders1 who1 in  
wisdom1 made the heavens1 stretched out 
the earth2 made the sun to rule by day1 
and the moon by night1 c4 ,these1 and   
several other works there mentioned are 
all considered as motives to excite our 
adoration2 but his being ,jehovah1 the  
,god of gods1 and ,lord of lords1 as in 
the #ast1 #b;d1 and #c;d verses1 is the 
great foundation of his right to        
worship1 since that is infinite2 whereas
 his works are only the effects of      
infinite power1 and so a demonstration  
of his right to divine glory4 ,now to   
apply this to those works which are done
 by our ,saviour1 if we suppose them1 as
 we ought1 to be properly divine1 they  
are to be considered only as evincing   
his right to divine honour1 as they are 
a demonstration of his deity1 which is  
the only thing that renders him the     
object of divine worship4  ,object4 #c4 

,but some will proceed a little farther1
 when they speak of ,christ as the      
object of worship1 and so will allow1   
that honours1 truly divine1 may be given
 to him2 yet that this does not prove   
him to be ,god equal with the ,father1  
since he is herein only considered as   
the ,father's ,representative1 on whom  
the worship1 that is immediately applied
 to him1 must be supposed to terminate2 
as when an ambassador1 who represents   
the prince that sent him1 is considered 
as sustaining that character1 and so    
receives some honour1 which otherwise he
 would have no right to1 or rather he is
 honoured as personating him whom he    
represents4  ,answ4 ,to this it may be  
replied1 that whatever may be said to be
 done by an ambassador1 as representing 
the prince that sent him1 there is      
always something contained in the manner
 of his address1 or in the honours      
ascribed to him1 that denotes him to be 
more than a subject2 and it would be ill
 represented1 should he assume that     

honour to himself that is due to his    
master4 ,therefore our ,saviour1 were he
 not a divine ,person1 but only the     
,father's ,representative1 could not    
have a right to claim that divine honour
 that is ascribed to him2 neither have  
we any foundation1 in scripture1 to     
distinguish concerning a supreme and a  
subordinate worship1 or a worship given 
to a person that does not terminate in  
him1 but in another1 whom he represents4
  ,if there be any apparent foundation  
for this supposition1 it must be taken  
from those expressions in which ,christ 
is represented1 as ,mediator1 as acting 
in the ,father's name1 and not seeking  
his own glory1 but the glory of him that
 sent him1 or referring all the honour1 
that is given to him as such1 to the    
,father4 ,but to this it may be replied1
 that when our ,saviour uses such a mode
 of speaking1 he disclaims any right to 
divine honour due to him as ,man1 in    
which respect he received a commission  
from the ,father1 and acted in his name2

 but when the honour of a divine ,person
 is given to him as ,god1 though        
considered as ,mediator1 he is not to be
 looked upon as representing the        
,father1 or transferring the divine     
glory that he receives1 to the ,father1 
but as having the same right to it as   
the ,father has1 inasmuch as he has the 
same divine nature1 otherwise we cannot 
account for those modes of speaking1 in 
which the glory of a divine ,person is  
ascribed to him1 without restriction or 
limitation1 as it oftentimes is in      
scripture4  ,object4 #d4 ,to what has   
been said in defence of ,christ's       
divinity1 from our being baptized in his
 name1 it is objected1 that it does not 
follow1 that because we are baptized in 
the name of the ,son1 as well as of the 
,father1 that therefore he is ,god equal
 with the ,father2 for though this      
ordinance1 as it respects the ,father1  
contains1 properly1 an act of divine    
worship1 in which we consider him as the
 great ,lord of all things1 to whom     

divine worship1 in the highest sense is 
due2 yet we consider the ,son1 as well  
as the ,holy ,ghost1 only as having a   
right to an inferior kind of worship1 in
 proportion to the respective parts     
which they sustain1 by the will of the  
,father1 in the work of our salvation2  
and1 in particular1 to be baptized in   
the name of ,christ1 implies in it      
nothing else but a declaration that we  
adhere to him1 as the ,father's         
,minister1 delegated by him to reveal   
his mind and will to us1 and to erect   
that gospel-dispensation1 which we1 in  
this ordinance1 professedly submit to2  
and accordingly to be baptized in the   
name of ,christ1 is to be taken in the  
same sense1 as when1 in #a ,cor4 x4 #b4 
the ,israelites were said to be baptized
 into ,moses1 in the cloud1 and in the  
sea2 as they signified thereby their    
consent to be governed by those laws1   
which ,moses was appointed1 by ,god1 to 
give them2 upon which account1 they were
 denominated a particular church1       

separated from the world1 and obliged to
 worship ,god in such a way1 as was     
prescribed in the ceremonial law3 even  
so1 by baptism1 we own ourselves        
,christians1 under an obligation to     
adhere to ,christ1 as our ,leader and   
,commander1 who has revealed to us the  
gospel1 which1 by subjecting ourselves  
to1 we are denominated ,christians2 and 
to this they also add1 especially the   
,socinians1 that as baptism was first   
practised as an ordinance1 to initiate  
persons into the ,jewish church1 and was
 afterwards applied by our ,saviour1 to 
signify the initiating the heathen into 
the ,christian church2 so it was        
designed to be no longer in use among   
them1 than till ,christianity was       
generally embraced2 and consequently we 
being a ,christian nation1 are not      
obliged to submit to it1 since we are   
supposed to adhere to the doctrines of  
,christianity1 and therefore it is      
needless to signify the same by this    
ordinance4 ,it was upon this account    

that ,socinus1 and some of his          
followers1 not only denied the baptism  
of infants1 but that of all others1 who 
were supposed to be ,christians4  ,answ4
 #a4 ,as to the first part of this      
objection1 to wit1 that baptism does not
 signify the same thing when it is      
administered in the name of ,christ1 as 
when administered in the name of the    
,father1 this is founded on a           
supposition1 that the ,son has not a    
right to the same honour that is due to 
the ,father1 which ought to be proved1  
and not taken for granted2 and it       
altogether sets aside the consideration 
of the ,father1 ,son1 and ,holy ,ghost's
 being herein co-ordinately represented1
 as the objects of this solemn          
dedication1 which tends very much to    
derogate from the ,father's glory4 ,as  
it supposes the ,son and ,spirit to have
 a right to that glory which belongs to 
him1 while they deny them to be divine  
,persons2 and according to this method  
of reasoning1 ,god might as well have   

ordained1 that we should have been      
baptized in his name1 together with the 
name of any of his prophets and         
apostles1 which were appointed to be his
 ministers1 in revealing his will to us1
 as in the name of the ,son and ,spirit1
 unless they were accounted worthy of   
having an honour infinitely superior to 
that which is given to any creature     
given to them herein4  #b4 ,when it is  
supposed that our professed subjection  
to ,christ in baptism1 is nothing else  
but our consent to be governed by those 
laws1 which he has given us in the      
gospel1 and so is compared with that    
declaration of subjection to the law of 
,moses1 which was contained in the      
baptism of the ,israelites into ,moses4 
,to this it may be replied2 that this   
supposes ,christ to be no other than a  
,lawgiver2 and that to be a ,christian1 
is nothing else but to be professedly a 
member of that society1 which goes under
 that denomination2 and that to put on  
,christ is not to consecrate or devote  

ourselves to him as a divine ,person2   
which is a very low idea of             
,christianity2 and consequently the     
character of a ,christian does not imply
 in it so much1 when assumed by an      
,anti-trinitarian1 as when applied to   
those who suppose that they are hereby  
obliged to honour him1 as they honour   
the ,father1 or to submit to his        
government1 as truly and properly       
divine4 ,a ,christian is not barely one 
who is of ,christ's party1 in the same  
sense as a ,mahometan1 who adheres to   
the laws of ,mahomet1 is of his2 for    
,christianity contains in it an         
obligation to perform those religious   
duties1 of trust1 universal obedience1  
and love1 that are due to ,christ as a  
divine ,person4  #c4 ,as to the         
supposition1 that baptism being an      
ordinance of ,proselytism to the        
,christian faith1 therefore a ,christian
 nation is no longer obliged to submit  
to it1 this is directly contrary to what
 our ,saviour says in the words         

immediately following the institution   
thereof1 in ,matt1 xxviii4 #bj4 ,lo1 ,i 
am with you always1 even unto the end of
 the world1 that is1 you may expect my  
presence with you in administering this 
ordinance1 as well as preaching the     
gospel1 not only during the first age of
 the church1 till ,christianity shall   
obtain in the world1 but as long as     
there shall be a society of ,christians 
in it4 ,and1 indeed1 if ,christianity   
were nothing more than a public         
declaration of our obligation1 to adhere
 to the laws of ,christ2 it does not    
follow1 that because we are born in a   
,christian nation1 therefore such a     
profession is no longer necessary4 ,but 
since more than this is contained       
therein1 as hath been before observed1  
namely1 our professed subjection to     
,christ1 in a religious way1 as a divine
 ,person1 this extends the baptismal    
obligation much farther than to our     
being called ,christians1 and argues the
 necessity of our engaging in this      

ordinance1 as long as ,christ is the    
object of faith1 or to be acknowledged  
to be the ,prophet1 ,priest1 and ,king  
of his church1 and1 as such1 the object 
of religious worship1 namely1 unto the  
end of the world4  ,object4 #e4 ,there  
is another objection against the        
argument in general1 relating to        
,christ's being the object of divine    
worship1 taken from his having refused  
to have one of the divine perfections   
ascribed to him1 and directing the      
,person that gave it1 to ascribe it to  
the ,father1 in ,matt4 xix4 #ag4 ,he    
said unto him1 ,why callest thou me     
good1 there is none good but one1 that  
is ,god2 q4 d4 there is but one ,person 
who is good1 as goodness is properly a  
divine attribute1 and that is the       
,father3 therefore he alone is the      
object of that worship1 which consists  
in the ascribing the perfections of the 
divine nature to him1 in which sense we 
have before supposed religious worship  
to be understood4  ,answ4 #a4 ,as to    

what our ,saviour says1 concerning the  
divine unity1 when he asserts1 that     
there is none good but one1 that is     
,god2 it is1 doubtless to be understood 
in the same sense with all other        
scriptures1 that deny a plurality of    
gods1 in opposition to the principles   
and practice of idolaters2 but it does  
not follow from hence1 that the ,father 
is the only ,person who is ,god1 or the 
object of divine worship4 ,this has been
 before considered#afd1 and therefore   
all that ,i shall reply to this part of 
the objection is1 that the word ,god is 
sometimes taken for the ,godhead1       
without a particular restriction or     
limitation thereof1 either to ,father1  
,son1 or ,holy ,spirit1 but may be      
equally applied to them all4 ,in this   
sense it is to be taken1 when the being 
of a ,god is demonstrated by the light  
of nature2 as from the effects of the   
divine power1 we argue1 that there is a 
,god1 who is the ,creator of all things2
 but this cannot1 if we have no other   

light to guide us herein but that of    
nature1 be applied to the ,father1 as a 
distinct ,person in the ,godhead1 for   
the distinction that there is between   
the divine ,persons is a matter of pure 
revelation2 therefore all that our      
,saviour intends by this expression is1 
that no one has a right to have divine  
perfections ascribed to him1 but he that
 has a divine nature1 which whether it  
be meant of the ,father1 ,son1 or ,holy 
,ghost1 he is denominated the one only  
living and true ,god4  ,it follows from 
hence1 that when such modes of speaking 
are used in scripture1 though the       
,father be called the one or only ,god1 
the ,son is not excluded1 as a late     
judicious writer well observes4#afe  #b4
 ,as to that part of the objection1     
which concerns our ,saviour's blaming   
the man for calling him good1 there are 
two senses given of it2 one is taken    
from a different reading of the words1  
namely1 ,why dost thou ask me concerning
 good4#aff ,but it will not be much to  

our purpose either to defend or disprove
 this reading1 since ,mark and ,luke    
read it1 ,why callest thou me good1 c4  
therefore1 passing this over and        
supposing that it ought to be read1 as  
we generally do2 the common answer that 
is given to this objection1 which1 ,i   
humbly conceive1 may be well acquiesced 
in1 is2 that our ,saviour considers the 
man1 as ascribing a divine perfection to
 him1 whom1 at the same time1 he        
concluded to be no more than a creature2
 and therefore it is as though he should
 say2 either1 first1 acknowledge me to  
be a divine ,person1 or else do not     
ascribe divine honours to me1 for then  
by consequence1 thou mightest as well   
ascribe them to any other creature4 ,and
 accordingly1 by the same method of     
reasoning1 had he conversed with any    
,anti-trinitarian1 in his day1 who had  
given divine worship to him1 and yet    
denied his proper deity1 he would have  
reproved him for this mistake arising   
from an erroneous conscience1 as much as

 he does the man1 whom he reproves1 in  
the same sense1 for styling him good4   
,that ,christ does not exclude himself  
from having a right to this divine      
perfection1 is not only evident1 from   
those several scriptures1 which have    
been before referred to1 that ascribe   
perfections to him that are equally     
divine1 inasmuch as he that has a right 
to one divine perfection1 has a right to
 all2 but he also styles himself1 in    
,john x4 #ad4 ,the good ,shepherd1 which
 certainly imports as much as good      
,master1 which expression was used by   
the man before-mentioned2 and that his  
being the good ,shepherd argues him to  
be the ,fountain of blessedness1 which  
is certainly a divine perfection1 is    
evident1 because he speaks of himself1  
as communicatively good in the highest  
sense1 ver4 #bh4 ,i give unto them1 viz4
 my sheep1 eternal life4#afg  ,secondly1
 ,having proved the deity of the ,son1  
we proceed to consider that of the ,holy
 ,ghost1 in which we are obliged to     

oppose the ,socinians and ,arians1      
though in different respects3 ,as for   
the ,socinians1 they seem to be divided 
in their sentiments about this matter1  
some of them considering the ,holy      
,ghost no otherwise than as a divine    
power2 and therefore they call him      
,virtus ,dei1 or the divine energy1 or  
power of acting1 seeming1 by this       
account of it1 to deny his distinct     
,personality1 as the ,sabellians do that
 of the ,son and ,spirit2 though others 
of them1 being convinced that there is  
sufficient proof of his ,personality in 
scripture1 to deny his deity1 supposing 
him to be no other than a created       
ministering ,spirit4#agd  ,as for the   
,arians1 though this controversy was not
 brought upon the stage in the council  
at ,nice1 which was so much employed in 
defending the deity of our ,saviour1 by 
proving him to have the same essence    
with the ,father1 that they had no      
opportunity to proceed in the defence of
 the consubstantiality of the ,holy     

,ghost2 yet this is universally denied  
by all who give into the ,arian scheme3 
,it is true1 that as they do not        
question his ,personality1 so they allow
 that he has many glories ascribed to   
him1 agreeing1 in words1 with the       
scripture account thereof2 but they are1
 notwithstanding1 far from asserting his
 proper deity1 any more than that of the
 ,son4  ,we have already proved him to  
be a distinct ,person1#age and therefore
 nothing remains1 but that we consider  
him as having a divine nature4 ,and1 to 
make this appear1 we shall proceed in   
the same method1 in which we have proved
 the divinity of the ,son1 namely1 from 
those divine names1 attributes1 works1  
and worship1 which are ascribed to him2 
though we have no occasion here to      
insist on the proof of that proposition1
 that he who is thus described is ,god1 
as having done that already under each  
of those distinct heads1 in defence of  
our ,saviour's deity2 and therefore we  
need only consider them as applied to   

the ,holy ,ghost4 ,and1  #a4 ,it appears
 that he is ,god1 equal with the ,father
 and ,son1 inasmuch as the same divine  
names are given to him that are given to
 them2 particularly1  7#a47 ,he is      
called ,god1 without any thing tending  
to detract1 or diminish1 from the proper
 sense of the word1 when applied to the 
,father or the ,son3 thus1 in ,acts v4  
#c1 #d4 ,peter said1 ,ananias1 ,why hath
 satan filled thine heart to lie to the 
,holy ,ghost8 thou hast not lied unto   
men1 but unto ,god1 where he is not only
 called ,god1 but put in opposition to  
the creature2 and it is as though the   
apostle should say1 thou hast           
endeavoured to deceive him1 by whom ,i  
am inspired1 which is a greater crime1  
than if thou hadst only lied to me4     
,object4 ,it is objected1 that it is not
 the ,holy ,ghost who is here called    
,god1 but the ,father2 in defence of    
which sense of the text it is supposed1 
that though the lie was immediately     
designed to deceive the apostles1 or the

 ,holy ,ghost1 by whom they were known  
to be inspired1 yet this was interpreted
 by ,god the ,father1 as an attempt to  
impose upon him1 whose ,minister the    
objectors suppose the ,holy ,spirit to  
be1 as well as the apostles2 and        
accordingly they thus argue2 he that    
does any thing against ,god's ministers1
 to wit1 the ,father's1 may be said to  
do the same against him4 ,and here they 
refer to some scriptures1 which1 they   
think1 give countenance to this argument
 namely1 ,exod4 xvi4 #h4 where ,moses   
tells the ,israelites1 when they        
murmured against him1 ,your murmurings  
are not against us1 but against the     
,lord2 and1 in #a ,sam4 viii4 #g4 where 
,god says to ,samuel1 speaking          
concerning the ,israelites1 ,they have  
not rejected thee1 but they have        
rejected me2 and also our ,saviour's    
words to his disciples1 in ,luke x4 #af4
 ,he that heareth you1 heareth me2 and  
he that despiseth you1 despiseth me2 and
 he that despiseth me1 despiseth him    

that sent me2 and1 in #a ,thes4 iv4 #h4 
,he that despiseth1 despiseth not man1  
but ,god1 who hath also given unto us   
his ,holy ,spirit4#agf  ,answ4 ,how     
plausible soever this objection may seem
 to be1 yet1 if duly considered1 it will
 not appear sufficient to overthrow the 
argument we are maintaining2 it is true1
 indeed1 that what is done against any  
one1 who acts by a commission1 as a     
servant to another1 is interpreted to be
 done against him that gives him the    
commission2 as he that affronts a judge1
 or an ambassador1 in this respect1     
affronts the king1 whom he represents2  
or if an inferior servant is ill        
treated1 in delivering a message from   
his master1 this is always supposed to  
contain a reflection on him who sent    
him2 ,but1 ,i humbly conceive1 this     
cannot be applied1 as it is in the      
objection1 to ,ananias's not lying unto 
men1 but unto ,god4 ,and1 to make this  
appear1 let it be considered2 that here 
are two terms of opposition2 and these  

either respect ,god the ,father and the 
apostles2 or ,god the ,father and the   
,holy ,ghost2 or else ,god the ,holy    
,ghost and the apostles4  #a4 ,god the  
,father cannot be said here to be       
opposed to the apostles1 so as to give  
countenance to this phrase1 or mode of  
speaking used1 ,thou hast not lied unto 
men1 but unto ,god1 because it is said1 
in the foregoing verse1 that they had   
lied to the ,holy ,ghost3 if the ,holy  
,ghost had not been mentioned1 indeed1  
then there might have been more ground  
to conclude1 that ,peter opposed himself
 to ,god the ,father1 or intimated      
hereby1 that ,ananias1 in attempting to 
deceive him1 attempted to deceive ,god  
that sent him2 but even then it would   
not have fully corresponded with the    
sense of those scriptures but now       
referred to2 for though he that despises
 a servant1 despises him that sent him2 
and1 accordingly1 he that despises a    
minister1 when he is preaching the      
gospel1 or despises the message that he 

brings1 may be said to despise ,god1    
whose message it is2 yet it does not    
follow1 that if a person designs to     
impose upon a minister1 in other        
respects1 that he imposes upon ,god that
 sent him2 for he may not disown the    
divine authority1 or commission1 which  
he has to preach the gospel1 and yet may
 conclude that he may deceive him1      
though he be sensible that he cannot    
deceive ,god1 who knoweth all things3   
,but this ,i need not farther insist on1
 since it is not supposed1 in the       
objection2 but ,god the ,father is      
therein opposed to the ,holy ,ghost1 or 
else there would be no appearance of any
 argument in it2 therefore1  #b4 ,let us
 consider ,god the ,father as being here
 opposed to the ,holy ,ghost2 and then  
it is as much as to say1 ,thou hast lied
 to the ,holy ,ghost1 wherein thou hast 
not lied to man1 but to ,god1 to wit1   
the ,father2 to which we may answer1    
,that had the apostle designed to oppose
 the ,holy ,ghost to the ,father1 and   

thereby deny his deity1 it ought to have
 been expressed thus2 ,thou hast not    
lied unto the ,holy ,ghost1 but unto    
,god2 and this would effectually have   
determined him not to have been ,god1   
and removed any umbrage or suspicion1 as
 though1 by the expression1 ,thou hast  
not lied unto men1 we were to understand
 the apostles2 or since it will be      
objected1 that this would have been     
contrary to matter of fact1 for ,ananias
 did lie both to the apostles and to the
 ,holy ,ghost2 therefore it would have  
been better understood1 had it been     
said1 ,thou hast not lied to the ,holy  
,ghost1 or to men1 that is1 not to them 
only1 but thou hast1 interpretatively1  
in lying to them1 lied unto ,god1 to    
wit1 the ,father4 ,if it had been so    
expressed1 the sense would have been    
plain and obvious1 in favour of the     
,anti-trinitarians1 as well as agreeable
 to the scriptures before-mentioned1 as 
giving countenance to it2 but since it  
is not so expressed1 we must conclude1  

#c4 ,that in this text there is no other
 opposition1 but of ,god the ,holy      
,ghost to the apostles2 and accordingly 
the sense is very plain and natural1    
which is as though the apostle had said1
 ,thou hast endeavoured to deceive me1  
who am under the immediate inspiration  
of the ,holy ,ghost1 which is a greater 
crime than if thou hadst only lied to   
me1 at another time1 when this honour   
was not conferred upon me2 for herein   
thou hast committed a double crime1     
inasmuch as thou hast not only lied to  
me1 which thou oughtest not to have     
done1 but thou hast lied to the ,holy   
,ghost1 and1 in so doing1 hast not lied 
unto men1 but unto ,god2 or1 as it is   
expressed1 in ver4 #i4 that ,ananias and
 his wife had agreed together to tempt  
the ,holy ,ghost4 ,which is called a    
lying to him1 in one verse1 is styled a 
tempting him in the other2 this         
therefore seems to be a plain and easy  
sense of the words1 which any           
unprejudiced reader would be inclined to

 give into2 and since the scripture is  
written to instruct the most injudicious
 ,christians1 as well as others1 ,i     
cannot conceive that such modes of      
speaking would have been made use of    
therein1 which have a tendency to lead  
persons out of the way1 by deviating    
from the common sense of words1         
7especially in a matter of so great     
importance as this is7 whereby some1 at 
least1 would be inclined1 as we are1 by 
adhering to the most proper sense       
thereof1 to acknowledge the ,holy ,ghost
 to be ,god1 if he were not so4  ,there 
is another scripture1 in which the ,holy
 ,ghost is called ,the ,god and the     
,rock of ,israel1 in #b ,sam4 xxiii4 #c4
 ,now it seems very evident1 that this  
is applied to him1 by comparing it with 
the foregoing and following words2 in   
which it is said1 the ,spirit of the    
,lord spake by me1 and his word was in  
my tongue2 and then we have an account  
of what be said1 namely1 ,he that ruleth
 over man1 must be just1 c4 ,it cannot1 

with any colour of reason1 be supposed  
that there is more than one ,person here
 intended1 who imparted this to the     
prophet2 and inasmuch as this ,person is
 not only called the ,god1 but also the 
,rock of ,israel1 that is a plain       
intimation that he is the almighty ,god 
of ,israel1 which is the sense of the   
metaphor1 taken from a rock1 when       
applied to ,god in other scriptures4    
,again1 it is said1 in #a ,cor4 iii4    
#af4 ,know ye not that ye are the temple
 of ,god1 and that the ,spirit of ,god  
dwelleth in you4 ,here it must be       
observed1 that their being called the   
temple of ,god1 who is said to dwell in 
them1 denotes the inhabitant to be a    
divine ,person1 since a temple1         
according to the known acceptation of   
the word1 always connotes a deity2 and  
so it is called the house of ,god4 ,now 
he that dwelt in them1 upon which       
account they are called his temple1 is  
expressly said to be the ,spirit of     
,god1 which is agreeable to what is said

 concerning him elsewhere1 in chap4 vi4 
#ai4 ,know ye not that your body is the 
temple of the ,holy ,ghost1 which1 or   
who1 is in you8  7#b47 ,he is called    
,lord2 this seems very evident1 from    
,isa4 vi4 #h1 #i4 ,and ,i heard the     
voice of the ,lord1 saying1 ,whom shall 
,i send1 and who will go for us8 ,then  
said ,i1 ,here am ,i1 send me4 ,and he  
said1 ,go1 and tell this people1 ,hear  
ye1 indeed1 but understand not1 c4 where
 we observe1 that the person sending    
speaks both in the singular number and  
the plural1 ,whom shall ,i send1 and who
 will go for us8 by the former          
expression1 ,whom shall ,i send1 he     
evinces his divinity1 as having a right 
to give a commission to the prophets1 to
 declare his mind and will to man1      
which1 as will be observed under a      
fol-head1 none but a divine ,person has 
a right to do2 by the latter1 ,who shall
 go for us1 he includes himself among   
the ,persons in the ,godhead1 as it has 
before been observed#agg2 viz4 that when

 ,god is represented1 as speaking in the
 plural number1 a ,trinity of ,persons  
seems to be intended thereby4  ,but that
 which we shall principally consider is1
 that the ,holy ,ghost is here called   
,lord1 which appears from what the      
apostle says1 in ,acts xxviii4 #be1 #bf4
 ,well spake the ,holy ,ghost1 by       
,esaias the prophet1 unto our fathers1  
saying1 ,go unto this people1 and say1  
,hearing1 ye shall hear1 and shall not  
understand1 c4  ,it cannot be reasonably
 objected to this1 that the apostle only
 refers to the book of ,isaiah1 and not 
to this particular part thereof2 for    
though1 indeed1 these words1 ,thus saith
 the ,holy ,ghost1 might be used1 as a  
preface to any quotation from scripture1
 as all scripture is given by his       
inspiration2 yet this message1 referred 
to by the apostle1 was not only         
transmitted by ,esaias to the church1   
but it is distinguished from all those  
other things1 which the ,spirit of the  
,lord spake by him2 and therefore it    

cannot be supposed that the apostle     
means1 when referring to this scripture1
 any other than the ,holy ,ghost's      
giving him this commission1 when he     
says1 ,well spake the ,holy ,ghost by   
him2 and consequently he that gave this 
commission1 or spake thus to him1 is the
 ,holy ,ghost1 who is1 in the foregoing 
words1 called the ,lord4  ,moreover1    
there is another scripture1 in #b ,cor4 
iii4 #ah4 where it is said1 ,we are     
changed from glory to glory1 even as by 
the ,spirit of the ,lord2 or1 as it is  
observed in the margin1 ,as by the ,lord
 the ,spirit2 which reading is certainly
 as proper as any other1 and is         
preferred1 by some1 to it2 and therefore
 it contains1 at least1 a probable      
argument that the ,spirit is expressly  
called ,lord4#agh  #b4 ,the ,holy ,ghost
 appears to be ,god1 from those divine  
attributes that are ascribed to him4    
,accordingly1  7#a47 ,he is said to be  
eternal1 in ,heb4 ix4 #bd4 ,christ1     
through the eternal ,spirit1 offered    

himself without spot to ,god4 ,i am     
sensible1 many think this eternal       
,spirit signifies ,christ's eternal     
,godhead2 which is so called1 because of
 the spirituality of its nature2 and    
that1 in this place1 it is designed to  
set forth the infinite value1 which the 
oblation that he made of himself1 in his
 human nature to ,god1 received from the
 divine nature1 to which it was united2 
which1 though it be a very great truth1 
yet there does not seem to be so great a
 propriety in the expression1 when we   
suppose the eternal ,spirit is taken for
 the divine nature1 as if it be         
understood of the ,holy ,ghost3 and     
,christ may be said1 by him1 to have    
offered himself1 without spot1 to ,god1 
as implying1 that the unction1 which he 
received from the ,holy ,ghost1 was the 
means to preserve him from all sinful   
defilement1 upon which account his      
oblation was without blemish2 and1      
indeed1 it was no less necessary1 in    
order to its being accepted1 that it    

should be spotless1 than that it should 
be of infinite value2 therefore ,i must 
conclude1 that it is the ,holy ,ghost   
who is here called the eternal ,spirit4 
,moreover1 his eternity may be evinced  
from his having created all things1 as  
he that made the world1 and all finite  
things1 wherewith time began1 must be   
before them1 and consequently from      
everlasting2 by which the eternity of   
,christ was proved1 under a foregoing   
head2 and that the ,holy ,ghost made all
 things1 will be proved under our next  
argument4  7#b47 ,his immensity or      
omnipresence1 is a farther proof of his 
deity2 and this seems to be plainly     
contained in ,psal4 cxxxix4 #g4 ,whither
 shall ,i go from thy ,spirit8 or       
whither shall ,i flee from thy presence8
 q4 d4 there is no place where the      
,spirit is not2 and it is allowed by    
all1 that the divine immensity is here  
described in a very elegant manner2     
though1 it is true1 it is objected1 that
 one part of this verse is exegetical of

 the other1 and therefore the ,psalmist1
 by the ,spirit1 intends nothing else   
but the presence of ,god2 but it is     
equally1 if not more probable1 that the 
,spirit is distinguished from the       
presence of ,god1 and consequently that 
he is a distinct ,person in the         
,godhead2 and this does not contain any 
strain upon the sense of the words1     
since the ,spirit is so often spoken of 
in scripture as a ,person1 as has been  
before observed2#agi and therefore it is
 not strange that he should be mentioned
 as such in this text2 and1 if he be    
spoken of as a ,person1 it is beyond    
dispute that he is there proved to be a 
divine ,person4  7#c47 ,he is said to be
 omniscient in #a ,cor4 ii4 #aj4 ,the   
,spirit searcheth all things2 yea1 the  
deep things of ,god4 ,to search1 indeed1
 is a word used in condescension to our 
common mode of speaking1 as we arrive to
 the knowledge of things by searching1  
or enquiry1 though this idea is to be   
abstracted from the word1 when applied  

to ,god2 for him to search1 is to know  
all things2 and1 in this sense1 it is   
used1 in ,psal4 cxxxix4 #bc1 #bd4       
,search me1 ,o ,god1 and know my heart2 
try me1 and know my thoughts2 and see if
 there be any wicked way in me1 c4 ,it  
does not imply the manner of his        
knowing1 but the exquisiteness of his   
knowledge2 and so we must understand it 
in this scripture1 when applied to the  
,spirit's searching all things1 in which
 we have an account of the objects of   
his knowledge1 namely1 the deep things  
of ,god3 thus he knows all those things1
 which were hid in the divine mind from 
all eternity1 and the infinite          
perfections of the divine nature1 which 
are incomprehensible to a creature1 and 
which none can1 by searching1 find out  
to perfection1 ,job xi4 #g4 in which    
respect the highest creatures1 viz4 the 
angels1 are said to be charged with     
folly1 whose knowledge is comparatively 
imperfect1 chap4 iv4 #ah4 ,moreover1 we 
may observe1 that the manner of the     

,spirit's knowing all things1 is not    
like ours1 that is by inferring         
consequences from premises1 in a way of 
reasoning2 for it is said1 in the verse 
immediately following1 that he knows the
 things of ,god1 in such a way1 as a man
 knoweth the things of a man1 that is1  
his own thoughts1 by an internal        
principle of knowledge1 not by          
revelation1 or any external discovery3  
thus the ,spirit knows the divine       
nature1 as having it2 therefore his     
omniscience is a plain proof of his     
,deity4  #c4 ,the ,deity of the ,holy   
,ghost may be farther evinced1 from his 
performing those works which are proper 
to ,god alone4 ,and1  7#a47 ,he is said 
to have created all things3 thus1 in    
,gen4 i4 #b4 ,the ,spirit of ,god moved 
upon the face of the waters2 where1 by  
the ,spirit of ,god1 cannot be meant1 as
 some suppose1 the air or the wind2 for 
that was not created till the second    
day1 when ,god made the firmament4      
,again1 it is said1 in ,job xxvi4 #ac4  

,by his ,spirit he hath garnished the   
heavens2 and1 in chap4 xxiii4 #d4 ,the  
,spirit of ,god hath made me4 ,some of  
the ,arians are so sensible that the    
,spirit is represented as the ,creator  
of all things as well as the ,son2 that 
they suppose him to be an instrument to 
the ,son in the creation thereof2 which 
is as much as to say1 he is an          
instrument of an instrument2 and1       
indeed1 to say the ,son created all     
things1 as an instrument1 has been      
considered as an indefensible           
notion2#ahj but this is much more so4   
7#b47 ,extraordinary or miraculous      
works1 which are equivalent to creation1
 have been performed by the ,spirit2    
thus the apostle1 speaking concerning   
extraordinary gifts1 subservient to the 
propagation of the gospel1 in the first 
preaching thereof1 attributes them to   
the ,spirit1 which he largely insists   
on1 in #a ,cor4 xii4 and when he says1  
ver4 #d1 #e1 #f4 that there are         
diversities of gifts1 but the same      

,spirit2 and there are differences of   
administrations1 but the same ,lord2 and
 there are diversities of operations1   
but it is the same ,god1 which worketh  
all in all2 which many who defend the   
doctrine of the ,trinity1 take for      
granted1 that it signifies all the      
,persons in the ,godhead1 that our      
,saviour is called ,lord1 and the father
 ,god1 therein2 and some of the         
,anti-trinitarians1 from hence1 would   
argue1 that the ,spirit is not ,god1    
because he is distinguished from the    
,father1 whom they suppose to be there  
called ,god1 ,i cannot but from hence   
conclude1 that the ,holy ,spirit is set 
forth under all these three names2 and  
the works attributed to him1            
notwithstanding the variety of          
expressions1 are the same1 and included 
in that general term of spiritual gifts4
 ,and so ,i take the meaning of the text
 to be this1 there are diversities of   
gifts1 or extraordinary operations1     
which some were enabled to put forth in 

the exercise of their ministry1 which   
are all from the same ,spirit1 who is   
called ,lord and ,god1 who has an       
infinite sovereignty1 and bestows these 
blessings as he pleases1 as becomes a   
divine ,person2 and this agrees very    
well with what is said1 in ver4 #aa4    
,all these worketh that one and the     
self-same ,spirit1 dividing to every man
 severally as he will4  7#c47 ,the      
,spirit of ,god commissioned and        
qualified ministers to preach the       
gospel1 and thereby to gather and build 
up churches1 determining that their     
ministry should be exercised in one     
place1 and not in another2 which is a   
peculiar branch of the divine glory1 and
 no one has a right to do it1 but a     
divine ,person4 ,a creature may as well 
pretend to command the sun to shine1 or 
stop its course in the heavens at his   
pleasure1 as he can commission a        
minister to preach the gospel1 or       
restrain the preaching thereof4 ,and    
here we may observe1 that the ,holy     

,ghost is plainly said to have called   
and appointed the apostles to exercise  
their ministry in the first preaching of
 the gospel1 after he had1 by conferring
 extraordinary gifts upon them1         
qualified them for it2 and accordingly  
he speaks in a style truly divine1 in   
,acts xiii4 #b4 ,the ,holy ,ghost said1 
separate me ,barnabas and ,saul1 for the
 work whereunto ,i have called them2    
and1 in ,acts xx4 #bh4 the apostle tells
 the elders1 or ministers of the church 
at ,ephesus1 that the ,holy ,ghost had  
made them overseers4 ,we read also of   
the ,spirit's determining where they    
should exercise their ministry2 thus he 
commanded ,philip to go and preach the  
gospel to the eunuch1 in ,acts viii4    
#bi4 ,then the ,spirit said unto        
,philip1 ,go near1 and join thyself to  
this chariot2 and1 at another time1 the 
,spirit bade ,peter to go and preach the
 gospel to ,cornelius1 when he doubted  
whether it were lawful for him to do it 
or no1 in ,acts x4 #ai1 #bj4 ,the       

,spirit said unto him1 ,behold1 three   
men seek thee2 therefore get thee down1 
and go with them1 doubting nothing1 for 
,i have sent them2 and1 at another time1
 it is said1 in ,acts xvi4 #f1 #g4 ,they
 were forbidden of the ,holy ,ghost to  
preach the word in ,asia2 and that they 
assayed to go into ,bithynia1 but the   
,spirit suffered them not2 and1 in ver4 
#i1 #aj4 the apostle ,paul was ordered1 
in a vision1 to go to ,macedonia2 which 
command he obeyed1 assuredly gathering  
that the ,lord1 that is1 the ,spirit1   
had called him to preach the gospel unto
 them4 ,nothing can be a greater        
argument of the sovereignty of the ,holy
 ,ghost1 in what respects this matter1  
which was of the highest importance2    
therefore it is an evident proof of his 
divinity4 ,but to this we may add1      
7#d47 ,that his divinity farther appears
 from the unction1 which he conferred on
 our ,saviour1 to perform the work of a 
,mediator in his human nature3 thus it  
is said1 in ,isa4 lxi4 #a4 ,the ,spirit 

of the ,lord ,god is upon me1 because   
the ,lord hath anointed me to preach    
good tidings to the meek1 c4 ,and this  
is particularly referred to1 as         
signifying our ,saviour's unction by the
 ,holy ,ghost1 in ,luke iv4 #ah1 #ai4   
,the ,spirit of the ,lord is upon me1   
because he hath anointed me1 c4 ,and1   
indeed1 it is not denied that this is   
spoken of the ,holy ,ghost1 even by     
those who do not infer his deity from   
it2 accordingly it is inserted1 by a    
late writer1 among those scriptures that
 speak particularly of the ,holy        
,ghost2#aha and it would be a great     
strain on the sense of the text1 to     
suppose that he hath anointed me1 refers
 to the ,father1 and not to the ,spirit4
 ,as to the meaning of the word unction1
 it is borrowed from the ceremonial law1
 under which the prophets1 priests1 and 
kings were publickly anointed with oil1 
as used to signify the warrant1 or      
commission1 they had received from ,god1
 to execute these offices1 together with

 the qualifications which were to be    
expected for the discharge thereof4 ,in 
this sense our ,saviour is said to have 
been anointed by the ,holy ,ghost1 to   
wit1 in his human nature1 in which he   
was obliged to yield obedience and      
subjection to ,god1 and accordingly he  
was authorized and qualified to perform 
this obedience by the ,holy ,ghost2 so  
that1 how difficult soever it was1 it   
might be discharged by him1 without the 
least failure or defect therein1 as we  
observed before1 that it was owing      
hereunto1 that his oblation was without 
spot3 the work was certainly            
extraordinary1 and consequently the     
glory redounding to the ,holy ,ghost    
from hence1 is such as proves him to be 
a divine ,person4  7#e47 ,he farther    
appears to be so1 inasmuch as the work  
of grace1 both as to the beginning1     
progress1 and completing of it1 in the  
souls of believers1 is ascribed to him1 
as well as to the ,father and the ,son4 
,that this is a work of ,god's almighty 

power1 and consequently too great to be 
performed by any creature2 and that the 
,holy ,ghost is1 in particular1 the     
author thereof1 we shall here take for  
granted1 without attempting to prove it1
 which would not be a just method of    
reasoning1 were we not led to insist on 
this subject1 under some following      
answers1 in which this will be more     
particularly proved4#ahb ,and if the    
work appears to be the effect of the    
exceeding greatness of the power of     
,god1 whereby we are regenerate and     
sanctified1 and enabled to overcome all 
the opposition which attends it1 till we
 are brought to glory1 then he1 who is  
the author hereof1 will evidently appear
 to be the ,god of all grace2 and       
therefore we shall proceed to consider1 
#d4 ,that the ,holy ,ghost appears to be
 ,god1 inasmuch as he has a right to    
divine worship4 ,that none but a divine 
,person has a right hereunto1 has been  
already proved2 and that the ,spirit has
 a right to it1 might be evinced1 from  

his having those divine perfections1    
which1 as has been before observed1 are 
ascribed to him in scripture2 since he  
has the perfections of the divine       
nature1 which are the objects of        
adoration1 then it follows1 that he is  
to be adored2 and if he has performed   
those works1 which argue him to be the  
proprietor of all things1 this must be  
acknowledged2 and if all that grace1    
which is necessary to make us meet for  
the heavenly blessedness1 be his work   
and gift1 it follows from hence1 that he
 is to be sought to for it1 which is a  
great branch of religious worship4 ,but 
this being only an improvement of1 or a 
deduction from those foregoing          
arguments1 laid down to prove his       
,deity1 we shall enquire whether we have
 not something that contains in it the  
obligation of a command1 or whether     
there are not some examples1 which are  
equivalent thereunto1 which will farther
 warrant our giving divine worship to   
him4 ,some suppose1 that that prayer is 

directed to the ,holy ,ghost1 which is  
mentioned in ,acts i4 #bd1 #be4 ,thou1  
,lord1 which knoweth the hearts of all  
men1 shew whether of these two thou hast
 chosen1 that he may take part of this  
ministry and apostleship2 and the reason
 of this supposition is1 because the    
designation of persons to the exercise  
of their ministry1 as well as the       
extraordinary gifts with which they were
 furnished1 is peculiarly applied to the
 ,holy ,ghost in this book2 therefore1  
it is supposed1 they prayed to the ,holy
 ,ghost1 that he would signify whom he  
had chosen to the apostleship1 in the   
room of ,judas1 of those two that were  
nominated by them2 but this being1 at   
most1 but a probable argument1 ,i shall 
lay no stress upon it4  ,but1 ,i humbly 
conceive1 that we have a more evident   
example of prayer made to the ,holy     
,ghost1 in #b ,thess4 iii4 #e4 ,the     
,lord direct your hearts into the love  
of ,god1 and into the patient waiting   
for ,christ2 it seems more than probable

 that the ,holy ,ghost1 who is here     
called ,lord1 is prayed to2 for he is   
distinguished from the ,father and ,son2
 and the apostle prays to him that he   
would direct them into the love of the  
,father1 and enable them patiently1 to  
wait for the ,son4  ,again1 there is    
another instance hereof1 in #a ,thess4  
iii4 #ab1 #ac4 ,the ,lord make you to   
increase and abound in love one towards 
another1 to the end1 that he may        
establish your hearts unblameable in    
holiness before ,god our ,father1 at the
 coming of our ,lord ,jesus ,christ2    
where the ,holy ,ghost seems to be the  
person prayed to2 and is plainly        
distinguished from the ,father and ,son1
 inasmuch as what is prayed to him for1 
is their being holy before the ,father1 
at the coming of the ,son4  ,there is   
another scripture1 in which it is still 
more evident1 that the apostle prays to 
the ,holy ,ghost1 together with the     
,father and ,son1 viz4 ,cor4 xiii4 #ad4 
,the grace of the ,lord ,jesus ,christ1 

and the love of ,god1 and the communion 
of the ,holy ,ghost1 be with you all1   
amen2 where1 in that part of this       
prayer1 which respects the ,holy ,ghost1
 is contained an humble supplication1   
that he would be pleased to manifest    
himself to them1 or that he would       
communicate to them those graces which  
they stood in need of2 that so1 as the  
church is said elsewhere1 in ,john i4   
#c4 to have fellowship with the ,father1
 and with his ,son ,jesus ,christ2 here 
the apostle prays that they may have    
fellowship with the ,holy ,ghost2 and   
how can this blessing be prayed for1    
without supposing him addressing himself
 herein to the ,holy ,ghost8 ,whenever  
any thing is desired1 or prayed for1    
that can be considered no otherwise than
 as an effect1 produced by a free agent1
 this prayer1 or desire1 is supposed    
more immediately to be directed to him3 
,as suppose a person should use this    
mode of speaking1 in presence of a      
disobliged friend2 ,oh that he would    

look upon me1 that he would converse    
with me1 or that he would discover his  
wonted love to me6 though1 according to 
the form of expression1 it seems not be 
directed to him1 yet every one would    
suppose it to be equivalent to an       
immediate address made to him to that   
purpose2 wherefore1 for the apostle to  
desire that the ,holy ,ghost would have 
communion with1 that is1 converse with1 
and manifest himself to them1 in        
performing all those works1 which were  
necessary for their edification and     
salvation1 this desire cannot contain   
less than a prayer to him4  ,we shall   
now proceed to consider some objections1
 brought by the ,anti-trinitarians1     
against the deity of the ,holy ,ghost4  
,object4 ,a divine ,person cannot be the
 gift of ,god1 for that supposes him to 
be at his disposal1 and inferior to him2
 but the ,spirit is said to be given by 
him1 in ,neh4 ix4 #bj4 ,thou gavest also
 thy good ,spirit to instruct them2 and1
 in ,acts xi4 #ag4 ,god gave them the   

like gift1 meaning the ,spirit1 that he 
did unto us2 and1 in ,luke xi4 #ac4     
,god1 the ,father1 is said to give the  
,holy ,spirit to them that ask him4     
,again1 the ,spirit is said to be sent1 
and that either by the ,father1 as in   
,john xiv4 #bf4 ,the ,comforter1 which  
is the ,holy ,ghost1 whom the ,father   
will send in my name2 or by the ,son1 as
 in chap4 xvi4 #g4 ,if ,i depart1 ,i    
will send him unto you4 ,again1 he is   
said to receive what he communicates    
from another1 in ,john xvi4 #ad4 ,he    
shall receive of mine1 and shall shew it
 unto you2 which is inconsistent with   
the character of a divine ,person1 who  
is never said to receive what he imparts
 to others1 as the apostle speaks       
concerning ,god1 in ,rom4 xi4 #ce4 ,who 
hath first given to him8 ,again1 he is  
said not to speak of himself1 but what  
he hears1 when he shews things to come1 
,john xvi4 #ac4 ,accordingly he did not 
know that which he was to communicate   
before he heard it4 ,again1 he is said  

to have a mind distinct from ,god1      
unless we suppose that there are a      
plurality of gods1 and so more distinct 
divine minds than one2 for this1 they   
bring that scripture1 in ,rom4 viii4    
#bg4 ,he that searcheth the heart1      
knoweth the mind of the ,spirit4 ,again1
 he is represented as making            
intercession1 which is an act of        
worship1 and consequently he cannot be  
the object thereof2 ver4 #bf4 ,the      
,spirit itself maketh intercession for  
us1 c4 this also argues that he is not  
possessed of the blessings which he     
intercedes for4 ,again1 he is not only  
said to be resisted and grieved1 which  
expressions1 it is true1 are sometimes  
applied to ,god1 though in an improper  
sense1 speaking after the manner of men2
 but the ,spirit is said to be quenched1
 or extinguished3 thus1 #a ,thess4 v4   
#ai4 this1 together with what has been  
before said concerning him1 is not      
applicable to a divine ,person4 ,these  
are the most material objections that   

are brought against the doctrine which  
we have been endeavouring to maintain1  
and the sum of them all is this2 that it
 is inconsistent with the character of a
 divine ,person to be thus dependent on1
 and subjected to the will of another1  
as the ,spirit is supposed1 by them1 to 
be4  ,answ4 ,that we may defend the     
,godhead of the ,holy ,ghost1 against   
such-like objections as these1 we shall 
first premise something relating to all 
those scriptures which speak of the     
,spirit1 as given or sent by the        
,father1 and then apply it to the sense 
of those in particular which are brought
 to support the objections1 as          
before-mentioned4  #a4 ,it may be easily
 observed1 that in several places of    
scripture1 especially in the ,new       
,testament1 the ,holy ,ghost is often   
taken for the gifts or graces of the    
,spirit2 and more particularly for that 
extraordinary dispensation1 in which the
 apostles were endowed with those       
spiritual gifts1 which were necessary   

for the propagation and success of the  
gospel3 these1 by a ,metonymy1 are      
called the ,spirit2 and1 ,i humbly      
conceive1 all those scriptures1 which   
speak of the ,spirit's being poured     
forth1 as in ,prov4 i4 #bc4 and ,joel   
ii4 #bh4 compared with ,acts ii4 #ag4   
and elsewhere1 are to be understood in  
this sense2 and thus it is explained1 in
 ,acts x4 #dd1 #de4 ,the ,holy ,ghost   
fell on all them which heard the word2  
upon which occasion it is said1 that    
upon the ,gentiles was poured out the   
gift of the ,holy ,ghost4 ,thus we are  
to understand that scripture1 in ,acts  
xix4 #b4 ,we have not so much as heard  
whether there be any ,holy ,ghost2 and  
another in ,john vii4 #ci4 the ,holy    
,ghost was not yet1 because ,jesus was  
not yet glorified2 the word given is    
supplied by our translators1 probably1  
to fence against a weak argument of some
 ,anti-trinitarians1 taken from that    
text1 to overthrow the eternity of the  
,spirit2 but whether the word be        

supplied or no1 the sense of the text is
 plainly this1 that the gifts of the    
,holy ,ghost were not conferred before  
,christ's ascension into heaven2 which  
is a farther confirmation of this       
acceptation of the word1 or of this     
figurative way of speaking1 being used  
in this1 and several other places of    
scripture1 to the same purpose4  #b4    
,all those scriptures which seem to     
represent the ,holy ,ghost1 as inferior 
to the ,father and ,son1 some of which  
are contained in the objection1 may be  
understood as denoting the subserviency 
of the works of the ,spirit1 which are  
also called the ,holy ,ghost1 to those  
works which are said to be performed by 
the ,father and ,son3 ,now it is certain
 that the subserviency of one work unto 
another1 performed by different persons1
 does not necessarily infer the         
inferiority of one person to the other3 
accordingly we must distinguish between 
the ,spirit1 as subsisting1 and as      
acting2 in the former sense1 he is a    

divine ,person1 equal with the ,father  
and ,son2 in the latter1 he may be said 
to be subservient to them4  ,but now we 
shall proceed to consider the sense of  
those scriptures1 brought to support the
 objection1 in consistency with what has
 been premised4 ,the first scripture    
mentioned1 is that in which it is said1 
,thou gavest them thy good ,spirit to   
instruct them2 where the ,holy ,ghost is
 described with a personal character1   
and probably it is not to be understood 
metonymically for his gifts and graces2 
accordingly the meaning of it seems to  
be this2 that the ,spirit's efficiency1 
in guiding and instructing them1 was a  
special gift of ,god conferred upon     
them2 and1 in this respect1 though he   
was a sovereign ,agent1 yet he is said  
to act by the will of the ,father1 which
 is the same with his own will3 for     
though the ,persons in the ,godhead are 
distinct1 yet they have not distinct    
wills2 and it is no improper way of     
speaking to say1 that when a divine     

,person displays his glory1 and therein 
confers a blessing upon men1 that this  
is given2 as when ,god is said to give  
himself to his people1 when he promises 
to be a ,god to them4 ,there is1 indeed1
 in this mode of speaking1 a            
discriminating act of favour conferred  
on men1 upon which account it is called 
a gift2 but this does not militate      
against the divinity of the ,holy       
,ghost1 though he is said to be given to
 them4  ,as for the other scripture1 in 
which it is said1 ,god gave them the    
like gift1 as he gave to us1 meaning the
 ,holy ,ghost1 that is plainly taken for
 the extraordinary gifts of the ,spirit1
 the conferring whereof is called1 in   
the foregoing words1 a being baptized   
with the ,holy ,ghost2 as it is         
particularly explained in that          
scripture1 referred to1 in ,acts x4 #de1
 #df4 where it is said1 that on the     
,gentiles was poured out the gift of the
 ,holy ,ghost2 what this gift is1 we may
 learn from the following words1 ,they  

spake with tongues1 and magnified ,god4 
,again1 when it is said1 in ,luke xi4   
#ac4 that your heavenly ,father shall   
give the ,holy ,spirit to them that ask 
him2 this is explained by another       
evangelist1 in ,matt4 vii4 #aa4 where it
 is taken for good things in general1   
and so includes the graces of the       
,spirit1 that accompany salvation1 when 
it is said1 your ,father1 that is in    
heaven1 shall give good things to them  
that ask him2 so that here the ,spirit  
is taken for all those blessings which  
he bestows upon his people1 in answer of
 prayer4  ,as for those scriptures      
before mentioned1 in which the ,spirit  
is said to be sent1 either by the       
,father1 or the ,son1 they are not1     
indeed1 to be understood in the same    
sense1 as when the ,son is said to be   
sent in his human nature1 appearing in  
the form of a servant1 to fulfil the    
will of ,god2 but when ,god is said to  
send his ,spirit1 the word is to be     
taken in a metaphorical sense2 in which1

 sending imports as much as giving2 and 
when the ,spirit is said to be given1 it
 has a peculiar reference to the grace  
which he was to bestow upon them4 ,if we
 enquire into the reason of this        
metaphorical way of speaking1 it may    
probably be this2 that we may understand
 hereby that the ,spirit1 which was to  
produce these effects1 was a divine     
,person1 and that the effects themselves
 were subservient to those works which  
were performed1 by which the ,personal  
glories of the ,father and ,son were    
demonstrated4  ,again1 when it is       
farther said by our ,saviour1 in ,john  
xvi4 #ad4 that the ,spirit shall receive
 of mine1 and shew it unto you2 this    
plainly intends the ,spirit's applying  
to them those blessings which ,christ   
had purchased by his blood1 which tended
 to his glory2 and still it signifies   
only the subserviency of the ,spirit to 
the ,son1 in working1 as the application
 of redemption tends to render the      
purchase thereof effectual1 to answer   

its designed end4  ,as to the next      
scripture1 before mentioned1 in ,john   
xvi4 #ac4 where the ,spirit is said not 
to speak of himself1 but whatsoever he  
shall hear1 that shall he speak2 this   
does not argue1 in the least1 that the  
,spirit receives what he communicates1  
as dependent on the ,father1 for the    
knowledge of those things he is to      
impart1 or that he has ideas impressed  
on his mind1 as creatures are said to   
have2 for that is inconsistent with what
 has been before proved from scripture1 
viz4 ,that the ,spirit knoweth the deep 
things of ,god1 even as the spirit of a 
man knoweth the things of a man2 or1 as 
an intelligent being1 is conscious of   
his own thoughts1 or actions1 not by    
information1 but by an immediate        
internal perception4 ,the sense         
therefore of this text is this2 that the
 ,spirit shall communicate no other     
doctrines1 or give no other laws1 but   
what ,christ had before given in the    
gospel2 or that what he revealeth1 is   

the same that ,christ had given them    
ground to expect3 accordingly1 it is so 
far from militating against the         
,spirit's divinity1 that it proves the  
harmony and consent of what is suggested
 by one divine ,person1 with what had   
been before delivered by another2 and as
 to the mode of expression here used1   
concerning the ,spirit's speaking what  
he had heard2 this is spoken after the  
manner of men1 and is no more           
inconsistent with his divine            
omniscience1 or the independence        
thereof1 than when ,god is said1 in     
other scriptures1 to know things by     
searching them1 or1 as it were1 by      
enquiry1 as hath been before observed1  
in considering omniscience1 as          
attributed to the ,holy ,ghost4 ,these1 
and suchlike expressions1 by which ,god 
is represented1 by words1 accommodated  
to our usual way of speaking1 when      
applied to men1 are to be understood1   
notwithstanding1 in a way agreeable to  
the divine perfections1 by abstracting  

from them every thing that argues the   
least imperfection in him1 when applied 
to the ,holy ,ghost2 as when some       
expressions1 agreeable to human modes of
 speaking1 are elsewhere used1 with a   
particular application to the ,father1  
without detracting from his divine      
glory4  ,again1 when it is objected1    
that the ,spirit hath a distinct mind   
from ,god1 as when it is said1 ,god     
knoweth the mind of the ,spirit2 and1 as
 though he were represented as engaged  
in an act of worship1 he is1 in the     
following words1 described1 as praying1 
or1 making intercession for us1         
according to the will of ,god2 as1 in   
,rom4 viii4 #bf1 #bg4 it is plain1 that1
 by the mind of the ,spirit1 we are to  
understand those secret desires in      
prayer1 which are wrought in believers  
by the ,spirit1 when they want words to 
express them2 instead of which1 they    
address themselves to ,god1 as it is    
said1 with groanings that cannot be     
uttered1 which are from the ,spirit1 as 

the ,author of these secret desires1    
which are only known to the             
heart-searching ,god1 who knows the     
meaning of them1 what it is we want1 in 
which respect1 this is called the mind  
of the ,spirit1 as the ,author thereof1 
though it is subjectively our own mind  
or desires1 which we want words to      
express2 and when the ,spirit is said to
 make intercession for us1 it implies   
nothing else but his enabling us1       
whether in more or less proper modes of 
speaking1 to plead with ,god for        
ourselves4  ,lastly1 ,as to those       
expressions1 by which the ,spirit is    
represented1 as quenched1 or            
extinguished1 these are to be understood
 in the same sense as when by a         
metonymy1 as before mentioned1 the gifts
 of the ,spirit2 as when those          
extraordinary gifts were first promised1
 they were led to expect that they      
should be baptized with the ,holy       
,ghost1 and with fire1 that is1 they    
should have the extraordinary gifts of  

the ,holy ,ghost conferred upon them1   
which were to be signified by the emblem
 of fiery tongues1 that sat on them1 in 
,acts ii4 #c4 the reason of which emblem
 might probably be this2 that as a      
necessary qualification from their      
preaching the gospel1 they should be    
filled with an holy flame of love to    
,god1 and zeal for his glory1 as well as
 with the gift of tongues1 by which they
 might communicate his mind to the      
world4 ,this privilege1 which they had  
received1 the apostle exhorts them not  
to forfeit1 abuse1 or provoke the ,holy 
,ghost to take from them1 which is      
called a quenching the ,spirit2         
therefore this metaphorical way of      
speaking1 accommodated hereunto1 must   
not be supposed to be inconsistent with 
his divinity4  ,i shall conclude with   
some inferences1 which more especially  
respect the practical improvement of the
 doctrine of the ,trinity4 ,and1  #a4   
,we may take occasion1 from hence1 to   
observe the difference that there is    

between natural and revealed religion4  
,as the former respects the knowledge of
 ,god so far1 as it may be attained     
without the help of divine revelation1  
and that worship1 which the heathen1 who
 have nothing else to guide them but the
 light of nature1 are obliged to give to
 the divine ,being2 the latter1 which is
 founded on scripture1 contains a       
display of the ,personal glory of the   
,father1 ,son1 and ,holy ,ghost1 which  
is necessary to be known and believed1  
as being the foundation of all revealed 
religion2 so that the sum of            
,christianity consists in our subjection
 to1 and adoring the ,godhead1 as       
subsisting in the ,father1 ,son1 and    
,holy ,spirit4  #b4 ,as this doctrine is
 eminently displayed in the work of     
redemption1 it is necessary for us to   
consider how it is accommodated to1 and 
demonstrated by all the branches        
thereof4 ,the price that was given1 by  
our great ,redeemer1 has a value put    
upon it1 in proportion to the dignity of

 his ,person1 and lays a sure foundation
 for our hope of being accepted in the  
sight of ,god1 on account of his        
obedience and sacrifice1 which was of   
infinite value3 and the application of  
redemption being a work which the       
,spirit1 who is a divine ,person1 has   
undertaken to perform1 encourages us to 
expect that it shall be brought to      
perfection2 so that they1 who are the   
objects of redeeming love and           
sanctifying grace1 shall1 in the end1 be
 completely saved4  #c4 ,as it is       
necessary for us to adore and magnify   
the ,father1 ,son1 and ,holy ,ghost1 for
 the hope which we have of this         
inestimable privilege in the gospel2 so 
we must observe the distinct glory that 
is to be given to each of these divine  
,persons for this work2 to the ,father1 
in that whatever is done by the         
,mediator1 to procure this privilege for
 us1 is considered1 in scripture1 as    
taking its rise from him1 #a ,cor4 i4   
#cj4 ,of him are ye in ,christ ,jesus1  

who of ,god is made unto us1 wisdom1 and
 righteousness1 and sanctification1 and 
redemption3 ,and whatever was done in   
the human nature1 or by ,god incarnate2 
that is1 in a peculiar manner1 the work 
of the ,son1 and a revenue of glory is  
due to him for it1 who gave his life a  
ransom for many1 and herein expressed   
the highest instance of condescension1  
which is enhanced by the infinite       
dignity of his ,person4 ,moreover1      
whatever work is performed in           
subserviency to the ,mediator's glory1  
whereby the ,spirit demonstrates his    
distinct ,personal glory2 this gives us 
occasion to adore him1 in all the       
displays of his power1 in beginning1    
carrying on1 and completing the work of 
grace in the souls of men4  #d4 ,as to  
what respects that fellowship or        
communion1 which believers have with the
 ,father1 ,son1 and ,spirit1 this       
depends on the account we have1 in      
scripture1 of the distinct methods1 in  
which their ,personal glory is set forth

 therein3 ,thus we have access to ,god  
the ,father1 through the ,mediation of  
the ,son1 by the powerful influence of  
the ,holy ,spirit1 as the apostle says1 
in ,eph4 ii4 #ah4 ,through him we have  
an access1 by one ,spirit unto the      
,father2 and our hope of blessedness    
proceeds this way1 as it is the gift of 
the ,father1 who has prepared an        
inheritance for us1 the purchase of the 
,son1 on whose death it is founded1 and 
the work of the ,holy ,ghost1 as        
bringing us to and putting us into the  
possession of it4  #e4 ,this directs us 
as to the way of performing the great   
duty of self-dedication1 to the ,father1
 ,son1 and ,spirit2 to the ,father1 as  
our covenant ,god in ,christ2 to the    
,son1 as the ,mediator1 ,head1 and      
,surety of this covenant2 and to the    
,spirit1 by whom we are made partakers  
of the blessings promised therein2 in   
all these1 and many other respects1 we  
are to have a particular regard to the  
persons in the ,godhead1 in such a way1 

as their ,personal glory is set forth in
 scripture4  #f4 ,since the ,father1    
,son1 and ,spirit1 are one1 though we   
distinguish them as ,persons1 yet we    
must consider them as having the same   
divine perfections1 the same divine     
understanding and will1 lest1 while we  
give glory to each of the ,persons in   
the ,godhead1 we should suppose that    
there are more ,gods than one2          
therefore1 though the ,person of the    
,father is distinct from that of the    
,son and the ,holy ,ghost1 we are not to
 suppose the power1 wisdom1 goodness1   
and faithfulness1 or any other divine   
perfections1 belong1 in a more or less  
proper sense1 to one ,person than       
another4  #g4 ,this doctrine is of use  
to direct us how we are to address      
ourselves to ,god in prayer3 thus1 when 
therein we call him our ,father1 we are 
not to consider him in the same sense1  
as when he is represented as the ,father
 of our ,lord ,jesus ,christ2 but we    
address ourselves to him1 as the ,author

 of our being1 the ,god of all grace1   
and the ,fountain of blessedness2 in    
which respect1 the ,son and the ,holy   
,ghost are not to be excluded1          
especially unless we consider him as our
 ,father in ,christ1 and so express our 
faith with respect to his distinct      
,personality1 from that of the ,son and 
the ,spirit4 ,and though only one divine
 ,person be particularly mentioned in   
prayer1 the blessed ,trinity is to be   
adored2 or whatever ,personal glory we  
ascribe to one1 as subsisting distinctly
 from the other1 we must1               
notwithstanding1 consider the ,father1  
,son1 and ,spirit1 as the one only      
living and true ,god4  ,thus we have    
gone through this great and important   
subject1 and therein have taken         
occasion1 particularly1 to insist on the
 chief matters in controversy relating  
to the doctrine of the ever-blessed     
,trinity1 and consider the various      
methods taken to oppose it both by the  
,socinians and ,arians1 and endeavoured1

 not only to defend the ,deity of our   
,saviour1 and the ,holy ,ghost by       
enquiring into the sense of those many  
scriptures1 in which our faith therein  
is founded1 but to answer the most      
material objections that are brought    
against it2 and our enlarging more on   
it1 than we shall do on several         
following answers1 cannot be reckoned a 
needless work1 inasmuch as a great deal 
hath been written in opposition to it1  
whereby the faith of some has not only  
been shaken1 but overthrown4 ,i would   
never attempt to speak of this doctrine1
 or any of the divine perfections1      
without being sensible of the difficulty
 of the subject1 it being such as is not
 to be comprehended by a finite mind4 ,i
 hope nothing will appear to have been  
suggested inconsistent with the         
essential1 or ,personal glory of the    
,father1 ,son1 or ,spirit2 and it may   
reasonably be expected that there should
 be allowances made for great defects1  
since it is but a little of ,god that   

can be known by us2 therefore1 when we  
pretend to speak concerning him1 it will
 not be thought strange if we give      
occasion to any to say1 that we have the
 greatest reason to acknowledge1 that1  
in many instances1 we cannot order our  
words1 by reason of darkness4  ,footnote
 #gf3    8,god is ,one3 a most pure1    
most simple1 and most perfect ,being4   
8,the absolute unity and simplicity of  
this glorious ,being is strictly        
exclusive of any division of            
perfections4 ,yet1 as human knowledge is
   not intuitive but discursive1 we find
 it necessary to form and   communicate 
our conceptions1 by referring them to   
distinct and   infinite attributes4     
,such are independence1 spirituality1   
eternity1   immutability1 power1        
knowledge1 rectitude1 and benevolence4  
8,it is absurd to say1 that either the  
abstract essence1 or any of the         
infinite perfections of ,god1 in        
themselves1 or in their exercise1 can   
be grasped1 included1 or comprehended   

7or whatever equivalent term be   used7 
by a limited intellect4 #8,a part of    
,his ways1 a little   portion of ,him1' 
we know2 for ,he has unveiled it4 ,the  
knowledge of   the best and greatest    
finite mind can only be1 to immortality1
 an   approximation2 and therefore must 
for ever be infinitely small4 ,god      
alone is ,,capable ,,of ,,comprehending 
,his own nature1 mode of existence1     
and perfections4    8,the only          
questions1 therefore1 that we have to   
ask1 are1 ,has ,deity1   in fact1       
communicated to man any information     
concerning ,,himself8 ,and   what has   
,he communicated8 ,whatever such        
revelation may be1 it is   impossible   
that it should be self-contradictory1 or
 any other than   most becoming to      
infinite wisdom and purity4    8,this   
revelation authorizes us1 by a variety  
of inductive proofs1 to   conclude1     
that1 with regard to the mode of        
existence of the ,,one ,divine          
,essence1 the ,unity of the ,godhead    

includes a ,trinity of ,persons 7so     
denominated for want of any better      
terms7 who are scripturally styled   the
 ,father1 the ,son1 and the ,holy       
,spirit3 ,distinct1 not in essence or   
in perfections1 but only personally3    
,one1 not personally1 but in the        
common possession of the same identical 
nature and attributes4    8,no          
contradiction or absurdity is involved  
in this doctrine1 because   the unity   
refers to one respect1 and the trinity  
to another4 ,but we   make no difficulty
 in professing our incapacity to include
 in our   knowledge1 or express by any  
possible terms1 the respect in which    
the ,trinity of persons subsists in the 
perfect ,oneness of the ,deity4   ,such 
pretension would imply a contradiction40
    ,,smith',s ,,letters ,,to ,,belsham4
  ,footnote #gg3    8,that which is     
taught in the scriptures concerning the 
incomprehensible and spiritual essence  
of ,god ought to suffice1 not   only to 
overthrow the foolish errors of the     

common people1 but also to   confute the
 fine subtilties of profane philosophy4 
,one of the old   writers seemed to have
 said very well1 #8,that ,god is all    
that we do   see1 and all that we do not
 see4' ,but by this means he hath       
imagined   the ,godhead to be diffused  
into all the parts of the world4        
,although   ,god1 to the intent to keep 
men in sober mind1 speak but sparingly  
of   his own essence1 yet1 by those two 
names of addition that ,i have          
rehearsed1 he doth both take away all   
gross imaginations1 and also   repress  
the presumptuous boldness of man's mind4
 ,for surely his   immeasurable         
greatness ought to make us afraid1 that 
we attempt not to   measure him with our
 sense3 and his spiritual nature        
forbiddeth us to   imagine any thing    
earthly or fleshly of him4 ,for the same
 cause he   often assigneth his dwelling
 place to be in heaven4 ,for though1 as 
he   is incomprehensible1 he filleth the
 earth also3 yet because he seeth   our 

minds by reason of their dulness to lie 
still in the earth1 for   good cause he 
lifteth us up above the world1 to shake 
off our sloth   and sluggishness4 ,and  
here falleth to ground the error of the 
,manichees1 which1 in appointing two    
original beginnings1 have made the      
devil in a manner equal with ,god4      
,surely1 this was as much as to break   
the unity of ,god1 and restrain his     
unmeasurableness4 ,for where they   have
 presumed to abuse certain testimonies1 
that sheweth a foul   ignorance1 as     
their error itself sheweth a detestable 
madness4 ,and the   ,anthropomorphites  
are also easily confuted1 who have      
imagined ,god to   consist of a body1   
because oftentimes the scripture        
ascribeth unto him   a mouth1 ears1     
eyes1 hands1 and feet4 ,for what man1   
yea1 though he be   slenderly witted1   
doth not understand that ,god doth so   
with us speak   as it were childishly1  
as nurses do with their babes8 therefore
 such   manner of speeches do not so    

plainly express what ,god is1 as they do
   apply the understanding of him to our
 slender capacities4 ,which to do1   it 
behoved of necessity that he descended a
 great way beneath his own   height4    
8#b4 ,but he also setteth out himself by
 another special mark1 whereby   he may 
be more nearly known4 ,for he so        
declareth himself to be but   one1 that 
he yet giveth himself distinctly to be  
considered in three   persons3 which1   
except we learn1 a bare and empty name  
of ,god without   any true ,god fleeth  
in our brain4 ,and that no man should   
think that he   is a threefold ,god1 or 
that the one essence of ,god is divided 
in three   persons1 we must here seek a 
short and easy definition1 to deliver us
   from all error4 ,but because many do 
make much about this word ,person1   as 
a thing invented by man1 how justly they
 do so1 it is best first to   see4 ,the 
apostle naming the ,son the engraved    
form of the hypostasis of   his ,father1
 he undoubtedly meaneth1 that the       

,father hath some being1   wherein he   
differeth from the ,son4 ,for to take it
 for essence 7as some   expositors have 
done1 as if ,christ like a piece of wax 
printed with a   seal did represent the 
substance of the ,father7 were not only 
hard1   but also an absurdity4 ,for     
since the essence of ,god is single or  
one1   and indivisible1 he that in      
himself containeth it all1 and not by   
piece-meal1 or by derivation1 but in    
whole perfection1 should very           
improperly1 yea1 foolishly1 be called   
the engraved form of him4 ,but   because
 the ,father1 although he be in his own 
property distinct1 hath   expressed     
himself wholly in his ,son1 it is for   
good cause said1 that   he hath given   
his hypostasis to be seen in him4       
,wherewith aptly   agreeth that which by
 and by followeth1 that he is the       
brightness of   his glory4 ,surely by   
the apostle's words we gather1 that     
there is a   certain proper hypostasis  
in the ,father1 that shineth in the     

,son3   whereby also again is easily    
perceived the hypostasis of the ,son1   
that   distinguisheth him from the      
,father4 ,the like order is in the holy 
,ghost4 ,for we shall by and by prove   
him to be ,god1 and yet he must   needs 
be other than the ,father4 ,yet this    
distinction is not of the   essence1    
which it is unlawful to make manifold4  
,therefore1 if the   apostle's testimony
 be credited1 it followeth that there be
 in ,god   three hypostasis4 ,this term 
seeing the ,latins have expressed by the
   name of ,person1 it were too much    
pride and frowardness to wangle about   
so clear a matter4 ,but if we list word 
for word to translate1 we may   call it 
subsistance4 ,many in the same sense    
have called it substance4   ,and the    
name of ,person hath not been in use    
among the ,latins only1 but   also the  
,grecians1 perhaps to declare a consent1
 have taught that   there are three     
,prosopa1 that is to say ,persons1 in   
,god4 ,but they1   whether they be      

,greeks or ,latins that differ one from 
another in the   word1 do very well     
agree in the sum of the matter4    8#c4 
,now howsoever the hereticks cry out    
against the name of ,person1 or   some  
overmuch precise men do carp that they  
like not the word feigned   by the      
device of men2 since they cannot get of 
us to say1 that there   be three1       
whereof every one is wholly ,god1 nor   
yet that there be many   gods3 what     
unreasonableness is this1 to dislike    
words1 which express   none other thing 
but that which is testified and approved
 by the   scriptures8 ,it were better   
7say they7 to restrain not only our     
meanings but also our words within the  
bounds of scripture1 than to   devise   
strange terms1 that may be the          
beginnings of disagreement and          
brawling3 so do we tire ourselves with  
strife about words3 so the   truth is   
lost in contending3 so charity is broken
 by odiously brawling   together4 ,if   
they call that a strange word1 which    

cannot be shewed in   scripture1 as it  
is written in number of syllables2 then 
they bind us   to a hard law1 whereby is
 condemned all exposition that is not   
pieced   together1 with bare laying     
together of texts of scripture4 ,but if 
they   mean that to be strange1 which1  
being curiously devised1 is             
superstitiously defended1 which maketh  
more for contention than   edification1 
which is either improperly1 or to no    
profit1 used1 which   withdraweth from  
the simplicity of the word of ,god1 then
 with all my   heart ,i embrace their   
sober mind4 ,for ,i judge that we ought 
with no   less devout reverence to talk 
of ,god than to think of him1 for as    
much   as whatsoever we do of ourselves 
think of him is foolish1 and            
whatsoever we speak is unsavoury4 ,but  
there is a certain measure to be   kept4
 ,we ought to learn out of the          
scriptures a rule both to think and     
speak1 whereby to examine all the       
thoughts of our mind1 and words of   our

 mouth4 ,but what hindereth us1 but that
 such as in scripture are to   our      
capacity doubtful and entangled1 we may 
in plainer words express   them1 being  
yet such words as do reverently and     
faithfully serve the   truth of the     
scripture1 and be used sparingly1       
modestly1 and not   without occasion8   
,of which sort there are examples       
enough4 ,and whereas   it shall by proof
 appear that the church of great        
necessity was forced   to use the names 
of ,trinity1 and ,persons1 if any shall 
then find fault   with the newness of   
words1 shall he not be justly thought to
 be   grieved at the light of the truth1
 as he that blameth only this1 that     
the truth is made so plain and clear to 
discern8    8#d4 ,such newness of words1
 if it be so called1 cometh then chiefly
 in   use1 when the truth is to be      
defended against wranglers that do mock 
it out with cavils4 ,which thing we have
 at this day too much in   experience1  
who have great business in vanquishing  

the enemies of true   and sound         
doctrine4 ,with such folding and crooked
 winding1 these   slippery snakes do    
slide away1 unless they be strongly     
gripped and   holden hard when they be  
taken4 ,so the old fathers1 being       
troubled   with contending against false
 doctrines1 were compelled to shew their
   meanings in exquisite plainness1 lest
 they should leave any crooked   byeways
 to the wicked1 to whom the doubtful    
constructions of words   were           
hiding-holes of errors4 ,arius confessed
 ,christ to be ,god1 and the   ,son of  
,god1 because he could not gainsay the  
evident words of ,god1   and1 as if he  
had been so sufficiently discharged1 did
 feign a certain   consent with the     
rest4 ,but in the meanwhile he ceased   
not to scatter   abroad that ,christ was
 created1 and had a beginning1 as other 
creatures4 ,but to the end that they    
might draw forth his winding   subtilty 
out of his den1 the ancient fathers went
 further1 pronouncing   ,christ to be   

the eternal ,son of the ,father1 and    
consubstantial with   the ,father4      
,hereat wickedness began to boil1 when  
the ,arians began to   hate and detest  
the name ,omoousion1 consubstantial4    
,but if in the   beginning they had     
sincerely and with plain meaning        
confessed ,christ   to be ,god1 they    
would not now have denied him to be     
consubstantial   with the ,father4 ,who 
dare now blame these good men as        
brawlers and   contentious1 because1 for
 one little word's sake1 they were so   
keen in   disputation1 and disturbed the
 peace of the church8 ,but that little  
word shewed the difference between the  
true believing ,christians1 and   the   
,arians1 who were robbers of ,god4      
,afterwards rose up ,sabellius1 who     
accounted in a manner for nothing the   
names of the ,father1 the ,son1   and   
,holy ,ghost1 saying in disputation that
 they were not made to shew   any manner
 of distinction1 but only were several  
additions of ,god1 of   which sort there

 are many4 ,if he came to disputation1  
he confessed   that he believed the     
,father ,god1 the ,son ,god1 the ,holy  
,ghost ,god4 ,but   afterwards he would 
readily slip away with saying1 that he  
had in no   otherwise spoken than as if 
he had named ,god1 a powerful ,god1 just
   ,god1 and wise ,god3 and so he sung  
another song1 that the ,father is the   
,son1 and the ,holy ,ghost is the       
,father1 without any order1 without any 
distinction4 ,the good doctors who then 
had care of godliness1 to   subdue his  
wickedness1 cried out on the other side1
 that there ought   to be acknowledged  
in one ,god three properties3 and to the
 end to   fence themselves against the  
crooked winding subtilties with plain   
and   simple truth1 they affirmed1 that 
there did truly subsist in one ,god1    
or 7which is the same thing7 that there 
did subsist in the unity of   ,god1 a   
,trinity of ,persons4    8#e4 ,if then  
the names have not been without cause   
invented1 we ought   to take heed1 that 

in rejecting them we be not justly      
blamed of proud   presumptuousness4 ,i  
would to ,god they were buried indeed1  
so that this   faith were agreed of all 
men1 that the ,father1 and the ,son1 and
 the   ,holy ,ghost1 be one ,god3 and   
yet that the ,father is not the ,son1   
nor   the ,holy ,ghost the ,son1 but    
distinctly1 by certain property4 ,yet ,i
 am   not so precise1 that ,i can find  
in my heart to strive for bare words4   
,for ,i observe1 that the ancient       
fathers1 who otherwise spake very       
religiously of such matters1 did not    
every where agree one with   another1   
nor every one with himself4 ,for what   
forms of speech used by   the councils  
doth ,hillary excuse8 ,to how great     
liberty doth ,augustine   sometimes     
break forth8 ,how unlike are the ,greeks
 to the ,latins8 ,but of   this         
disagreement one example shall suffice  
for this time4 ,when the   ,latins      
wanted to express the word ,omoousion1  
they called it   ,consubstantial1       

declaring the substance of the ,father  
and the ,son to   be one1 thus using the
 word substance for essence4 ,whereupon 
,hierom to   ,damasus saith1 it is      
sacrilege to say1 that there are three  
substances   in ,god3 and yet above a   
hundred times you shall find in         
,hillary1 that   there are three        
substances in ,god4 ,in the word        
hypostasis1 how is   ,hierom            
difficulted8 for he suspecteth that     
there lurketh poison in   naming three  
hypostasis in ,god4 ,and if a man do use
 this word in a   godly sense1 yet he   
plainly saith that it is an improper    
speech1 if he   spake unfeignedly1 and  
did not rather wittingly and willingly  
seek to   charge the bishops of the     
,east1 whom he sought to charge with an 
unjust slander4 ,sure this one thing he 
speaketh not very truly1 that   in all  
profane schools1 ,ousia1 essence1 is    
nothing else but   hypostasis1 which is 
proved false by the common and          
accustomed use4   ,augustine is more    

modest and gentle1 who1 although he     
says1 ,de trint4   li4 #e4 cap4 #h1 #i4 
that the word hypostasis in that sense  
is strange   to ,latin ears1 yet so far 
is it off1 that he taketh from the      
,greeks   their usual manner of         
speaking1 that he also gently beareth   
with the   ,latins who had followed the 
,greek phrase4 ,and that which ,socrates
   writeth in the fifth book of the     
,tripartite history tendeth to this     
end1 as though he meant that he had by  
unskilful men been wrongfully   applied 
unto this matter4 ,yea1 and the same    
,hillary himself layeth it   as a great 
fault to the heretics charge1 ,de trin4 
li4 #b4 that by   their frowardness he  
is compelled to put those things in     
peril of the   speech of men1 which     
ought to have been kept in religiousness
 of   minds1 plainly confessing that    
this is to do things unlawful1 to speak 
what ought not to be spoken1 to attempt 
things not licensed4 ,a little   after1 
he excuseth himself with many words1 for

 that he was so bold to   utter new     
names4 ,for after he had used the       
natural names1 ,father1 ,son1   and     
,holy ,ghost1 he addeth1 that whatsoever
 is sought further is beyond   the      
compass of speech1 beyond the reach of  
sense1 and beyond the   capacity of     
understanding4 ,and in another place he 
saith1 that happy   are the bishops of  
,gallia1 who had not received1 nor knew 
any other   confession but that old and 
simple one1 which from the time of the  
apostles was received in all churches4  
,and much like is the excuse of         
,augustine1 that this word was wrung out
 of necessity1 by reason of the         
imperfection of men's language in so    
great a matter3 not to express   that   
which is1 but that it should not be     
unspoken1 how the ,father1 the   ,son1  
and the ,holy ,ghost1 are three4 ,this  
modesty of the holy men ought   to warn 
us1 that we do not forthwith so         
severely1 like censors1 brand   them    
with infamy1 who refuse to subscribe and

 swear to such words as   we propound   
them3 so that they do not of pride1 or  
frowardness1 or of   malicious craft4   
,but let them again consider1 by how    
great necessity   we are driven to speak
 so1 that by little and little they may 
he   enured with that profitable manner 
of speech4 ,let them also learn to      
beware1 lest since we must meet on the  
one side with the ,arians1 on   the     
other side with the ,sabellians1 while  
they be offended that we cut   off      
occasion from them both to cavil1 they  
bring themselves in   suspicion1 that   
they be the disciples either of ,arius  
or of ,sabellius4   ,arius saith that   
,christ is ,god1 but he muttereth that  
he was created1   and had a beginning4  
,he saith ,christ is one with the       
,father1 but   secretly he whispereth in
 the ears of his disciples1 that he was 
made   one as the other faithful be1    
although by singular prerogative4 ,say  
once that ,christ is consubstantial with
 his ,father1 then pluck you off   his  

visor from the dissembler1 and yet you  
add nothing to the   scripture4         
,sabellius saith1 that the several      
names1 ,father1 ,son1 and   ,holy       
,ghost1 signify nothing in ,god         
severally distinct4 ,say that they   are
 three1 and he will cry out that you    
name three gods4 ,say that   there is in
 one essence a ,trinity of persons1 then
 shall you in one   word both say what  
the scripture speaketh1 and stop their  
vain   babbling4 ,now if any be holden  
with so curious superstition1 that they 
cannot abide these names1 yet is there  
no man1 though he would never   so fain1
 that can deny but that when we hear of 
one1 we must   understand an unity of   
substance3 when we hear of three in one 
essence1 that1 it is meant of the       
persons of the ,trinity4 ,which thing   
being without fraud confessed1 we stay  
no longer upon words4 ,but ,i   have    
long ago found1 and that often1 that    
whosoever do obstinately   quarrel about
 words1 do keep within them a secret    

poison3 so that it   is better willingly
 to provoke them1 than for their        
pleasure to speak   darkly40            
,,calvin4  ,footnote #gh3    8,there are
 some doctrines in the gospel the       
understanding could not   discover2 but 
when they are revealed1 it hath a clear 
apprehension of   them upon a rational  
account1 and sees the characters of     
truth visibly   stampt on their         
forehead3 as the doctrine of            
satisfaction to divine   justice1 that  
pardon might be dispensed to repenting  
sinners4 ,for our   natural conception  
of ,god includes his infinite purity and
 justice2   and when the design of the  
gospel is made known1 whereby he hath   
provided abundantly for the honour of   
those attributes1 so that ,he   doth the
 greatest good without encouraging the  
least evil1 reason   acquiesces1 and    
acknowledges4 ,this ,i sought1 but could
 not find4 ,now1   although the primary 
obligation to believe such doctrines    
ariseth from   revelation1 yet being    

ratified by reason1 they are embraced   
with more   clearness by the mind4      
8#b4 ,there are some doctrines1 which as
 reason by its light could not          
discover2 so when they are made known1  
it cannot comprehend2 but they   are by 
a clear and necessary connexion joined  
with the other that   reason approves3  
as the mystery of the ,trinity1 and the 
,incarnation of   the ,son of ,god1     
which are the foundations of the whole  
work of our   redemption4 ,the nature of
 ,god is repugnant to plurality1 there  
can be   but one essence2 and the nature
 of satisfaction requires a distinction 
of persons3 ,for he that suffers as     
guilty1 must be distinguished from   the
 person of the judge that exacts        
satisfaction2 and no mere creature   is 
able by his obedient sufferings to      
repair the honour of ,god3 ,so   that a 
divine person1 assuming the nature of   
man1 was alone capable to   make that   
satisfaction1 which the gospel          
propounds1 and reason   consents to4    

,now1 according to the distinction of   
capacities in the   ,trinity1 the       
,father required an honourable          
reparation for the breach   of the      
divine law1 and the ,son bore the       
punishment in the sufferings   of the   
human nature2 that is peculiarly his    
own4 ,besides1 'tis clear   that the    
doctrine of the ,trinity1 that is1 of   
three glorious relations   in the       
,godhead1 and of the ,incarnation1 are  
most firmly connected with   all the    
parts of the christian religion1 left in
 the writings of the   apostles1 which  
as they were confirmed by miracles1 the 
divine   signatures of their certainty1 
so they contain such authentic marks of 
their divinity1 that right reason cannot
 reject them4    8#c4 ,whereas there are
 three principles by which we apprehend 
things1   ,sense1 ,reason and ,faith2   
these lights have their different       
objects   that must not be confounded4  
,sense is confined to things material2  
,reason considers things abstracted from

 matter2 ,faith regards the   mysteries 
revealed from heaven3 and these must not
 transgress their   order4 ,sense is an 
incompetent judge of things about which 
reason is   only conversant4 ,it can    
only make a report of those objects1    
which by   their natural characters are 
exposed to it4 ,and reason can only     
discourse of things1 within its sphere3 
supernatural things which   derive from 
revelation1 and are purely the objects  
of faith1 are not   within its          
territories and jurisdiction4 ,those    
superlative mysteries   exceed all our  
intellectual abilities4 ',tis true1 the 
understanding is   a rational faculty1  
and every act of it is really or in     
appearance   grounded on reason4 ,but   
there is a wide difference between the  
proving   a doctrine by reason1 and the 
giving a reason why we believe the truth
   of it4 ,for instance1 we cannot prove
 the ,trinity by natural reason2   and  
the subtilty of the schoolmen1 who      
affect to give some reason of   all     

things1 is here more prejudicial than   
advantageous to the truth3   ,for he    
that pretends to maintain a point by    
reason1 and is   unsuccessful1 doth     
weaken the credit which the authority of
 revelation   gives4 ,and 'tis          
considerable1 that the scripture1 in    
delivering   supernatural truths1       
produces ,god's authority as their only 
proof1   without using any other way of 
arguing3 ,but although we cannot        
demonstrate these mysteries by reason1  
yet we may give a rational   account why
 we believe them4    8,is it not the    
highest reason to believe the discovery 
that ,god hath   made of himself1 and   
his decrees8 ,for he perfectly knows his
 own   nature and will2 and 'tis        
impossible he should deceive us3 this   
natural principle is the foundation of  
faith4 ,when ,god speaks1 it   becomes  
man to hear with silence and submission4
 ,his naked word is as   certain as a   
demonstration4    8,and is it not most  
reasonable to believe that the ,deity   

cannot be   fully understood by us8 ,the
 sun may more easily be included in a   
spark   of fire1 than the infinite      
perfections of ,god be comprehended by a
   finite mind4 ,the angels1 who dwell  
so near the fountain of light1   cover  
their faces in a holy confusion1 not    
being able to comprehend   ,him4 ,how   
much less can man in this earthly state1
 distant from ,god1   and opprest with a
 burthen of flesh8 ,now from hence it   
follows2    8#a4 ,that ignorance of the 
manner how divine mysteries exist is no 
sufficient plea for infidelity1 when the
 scripture reveals that they   are4 ,for
 reason that is limited and restrained  
cannot frame a   conception that is     
commensurate to the essence and power of
 ,god4 ,this   will appear more clearly 
by considering the mysterious           
excellencies of   the divine nature1 the
 certainty of which we believe1 but the 
manner   we cannot understand3 ,as that 
his essence and attributes are the same1
   without the least shadow of          

composition2 yet his wisdom and power   
are   to our apprehensions distinct1 and
 his mercy and justice in some   manner 
opposite4#gi ,that his essence is intire
 in all places1 yet not   terminated in 
any4 ,that he is above the heavens1 and 
beneath the   earth1 yet hath no        
relation of high or low1 distant or     
near4 ,that he   penetrates all         
substances1 but is mixed with none4     
,that he   understands1 yet receives no 
ideas within himself3 ,that he wills1   
yet   hath no motion that carries him   
out of himself4 ,that in him time hath  
no succession2 that which is past is not
 gone1 and that which is   future is not
 to come4 ,that he loves without        
passion1 is angry without   disturbance1
 repents without change4 ,these         
perfections are above the   capacity of 
reason fully to understand2 ,yet        
essential to the deity4   ,here we must 
exalt faith1 and abase reason4 ,thus in 
the mystery of the   incarnation1 7#a   
,tim4 iii4 #af47 that two such distant  

natures should   compose one person1    
without the confusion of properties1    
reason cannot   reach unto2 but it is   
clearly revealed in the word3 7,john i4 
#ad47   ,here therefore we must obey1   
not enquire4    8,the obedience of faith
 is1 to embrace an obscure truth with a 
firm   assent1 upon the account of a    
divine testimony4 ,if reason will not   
assent to revelation1 till it           
understands the manner how divine things
   are1 it doth not obey it at all4 ,the
 understanding then sincerely   submits1
 when it is inclined by those motives1  
which demonstrate that   such a belief  
is due to the authority of the revealer1
 and to the   quality of the object4 ,to
 believe only in proportion to our      
narrow   conceptions is to disparage the
 divine truth1 and debase the divine    
power4 ,we can't know what ,god can do2 
he is omnipotent1 though we are   not   
omniscient3 ',tis just we should humble 
our ignorance to his   wisdom1 and that 
every lofty imagination1 and high thing1

 that exalts   itself against the       
knowledge of ,god1 should be cast down1 
and every   thought captivated into the 
obedience of ,christ2 #b ,cor4 x4 #e4   
',tis   our wisdom to receive the great 
mysteries of the gospel in their        
simplicity3 for in attempting to give an
 exact and curious explication   of     
them1 the understanding1 as in an hedge 
of thorns1 the more it   strives1 the   
more 'tis wounded and entangled4 ,god's 
ways are far   above ours1 and his      
thoughts above ours as heaven is above  
the earth4   ,to reject what we can't   
comprehend1 is not only to sin against  
faith1   but against reason1 which      
acknowledges itself finite1 and unable  
to   search out the ,almighty to        
perfection2 ,job xi4 #g4    8#b4 ,we are
 obliged to believe those mysteries that
 are plainly   delivered in scripture1  
notwithstanding those seeming           
contradictions   wherewith they may be  
charged4 ,in the objects of sense1 the  
contrariety of appearances doth not     

lessen the certainty of things4   ,the  
stars to our sight seem but glittering  
sparks1 yet they are   immense bodies4  
,and it is one thing to be assured of a 
truth1 another   to answer to all the   
difficulties that encounter it3 a mean  
understanding is capable of the first2  
the second is so difficult1   that in   
clear things the profoundest            
philosophers may not be able to   untie 
all the intricate and knotty objections 
which may be urged   against them4 ',tis
 sufficient the belief of supernatural  
mysteries is   built on the veracity and
 power of ,god2 this makes them         
prudently   credible3 this resolves all 
doubts1 and produces such a stability of
   spirit1 as nothing can shake4 ,a     
sincere believer is assured1 that all   
opposition against revealed truths is   
fallacious1 though he cannot   discover 
the fallacy4 ,now the transcendent      
mysteries of the ,christian   religion1 
the ,trinity of persons in the divine   
nature1 the incarnation   of the ,son of

 ,god1 are clearly set down in the      
scripture4 ,and although   subtile and  
obstinate opponents have used many      
guilty arts to dispirit   and enervate  
those texts by an inferior sense1 and   
have rackt them   with violence to make 
them speak according to their           
prejudices1 yet   all is vain1 the      
evidence of truth is victorious4 ,a     
heathen1 who   considers not the gospel 
as a divine revelation1 but merely as a 
doctrine delivered in writings1 and     
judges of its sense by natural   light1 
will acknowledge that those things are  
delivered in it3 ,and   notwithstanding 
those who usurp a sovereign authority to
 themselves1   to judge of divine       
mysteries according to their own        
apprehensions1   deny them as mere      
contradictions1 yet they can never      
conclude them   impossible3 for no      
certain argument can be alledged against
 the being   of a thing without a clear 
knowledge of its nature3 ,now1 although 
we   may understand the nature of man1  

we do not the nature of ,god1 the       
conomy of the persons1 and his power to 
unite himself to a nature   below him4  
8,it is true1 no article of faith is    
really repugnant to reason2 for   ,god  
is the author of natural1 as well as of 
supernatural1 light1 and   he cannot    
contradict himself3 ,they are emanations
 from him1 and though   different1 yet  
not destructive of each other4 ,but we  
must distinguish   between those things 
that are above reason and               
incomprehensible1 and   things that are 
against reason and utterly              
inconceivable3 ,some things   are above 
reason in regard of their transcendent  
excellency1 or   distance from us2 the  
divine essence1 the eternal decrees1 the
   hypostatical union1 are such high and
 glorious objects1 that it is an        
impossible enterprise to comprehend     
them3 the intellectual eye is   dazzled 
with their overpowering light4 ,we can  
have but an imperfect   knowledge of    
them2 and there is no just cause of     

wonder that   supernatural revelation   
should speak incomprehensible things of 
,god4   ,for he is a singular and       
admirable ,being1 infinitely above the  
ordinary course of nature4 ,the maxims  
of philosophy are not to be   extended  
to him4 ,we must adore what we cannot   
fully understand4 ,but   those things   
are against reason1 and utterly         
inconceivable1 that   involve a         
contradiction1 and have a natural       
repugnancy to our   understandings1     
which cannot conceive any thing that is 
formally   impossible3 and there is no  
such doctrine in the ,christian         
religion4    8#c4 ,we must distinguish  
between reason corrupted1 and right     
reason4   ,since the fall1 the clearness
 of the human understanding is lost1 and
   the light that remains is eclipsed by
 the interposition of sensual   lust4   
,the carnal mind cannot1 out of         
ignorance1 and will not from   pride and
 other malignant habits1 receive things 
spiritual4 ,and from   hence arises many

 suspicions and doubts1 7concerning     
supernatural   verities7 the shadows of 
darkened reason1 and of dying faith4 ,if
 any   divine mystery seems incredible1 
it is from the corruption of our        
reason1 not from reason itself2 from its
 darkness1 not its light4 ,and   as     
reason is obliged to correct the errors 
of sense1 when it is   deceived either  
by some vicious quality in the organ1 or
 by the   distance of the object1 or by 
the falseness of the medium1 that       
corrupts the image in conveying of it4  
,so it is the office of faith to        
reform the judgment of reason1 when     
either from its own weakness1 or   the  
height of things spiritual1 it is       
mistaken about them4 ,for this   end    
supernatural revelation was given1 not  
to extinguish reason1 but   to redress  
it1 and enrich it with the discovery of 
heavenly things4   ,faith is called     
wisdom and knowledge3 it doth not quench
 the vigour of   the faculty wherein it 
is seated1 but elevates it1 and gives it

 a   spiritual perception of those      
things that are most distant from its   
commerce4 ,it doth not lead us through a
 mist to the inheritance of the   saints
 in light40    ,,bates4  ,footnote #gi3 
,infinitus1 immensus  soli sibi tantus1 
quantus est notus1 nobis vero   ad      
intellectum pectus angustum est1  ide   
sic cum dign estimamus1   cm            
inaestimabilem dicimus4 ,min4 ,fel4     
,footnote #hj3    ,he who has marked the
 differences between truth and error1   
good and   evil1 made them discoverable1
 and formed human minds susceptible of  
their impressions1 thereby discovers his
 will that we should attend to   them1  
and has made it our duty to do so4 ,with
 this sentiment sacred   revelation is  
expressly accordant2 8prove all things1 
hold fast that   which is good40 ,the   
,gospel requires not faith without      
evidence1 it   demands no more assent   
than is proportioned to the weight of   
probability1 and charges as a crime only
 our refusing to attend to the          

evidence1 or our coming to it with      
hearts prejudiced against1 and          
therefore insensible to1 its evidence4  
,the exercise of reason is   essential  
to faith1 for how sudden soever our     
convictions1 still it is   the judgment 
which is convinced4    ,yet reason has  
her due province2 she may and ought to  
ascertain the   genuineness1            
authenticity1 and divine authority of   
the scriptures4   ,when this is done1   
she cannot correctly delay her assent1  
because she   may not fully comprehend  
the promises or works of ,god1 for this 
would   require wisdom no less than     
,divine4 ,but suppose she should presume
 to   try them1 by what balances shall  
she weigh them8 ,to what shall she      
compare them8 ,to the reasons and       
fitness of things8 what are these but   
circumstances and relations springing   
from the works of ,god8 ,his   creation 
originated from his wisdom and power1   
and is ever dependent   on them4 ,this  
is therefore to circumscribe infinite   

wisdom by what has   been already       
discovered of it2 it is to limit        
infinite power from   effecting any     
thing which it has not hitherto         
accomplished4 ,such   judgment is not   
the work of reason1 it is irrational4   
,reason can only   make an induction1   
where there exists premises from which a
 conclusion   can be drawn2 but here her
 limits are exceeded1 she has no        
standard by   which she can measure     
infinity4 ,by reasoning we justly infer 
from the   works of ,god1 many of his   
glorious moral1 as well as natural1     
perfections2 we gather that he is holy1 
just1 true1 and good1 and we   may      
fairly say that he will never depart    
from such rectitude1 but that   all his 
works will be conformed to such         
principles4 ,we can go no   farther than
 unto generals1 we have no right to     
question any word or   act of his1 and  
say it is not conformed to such         
perfections1 because   this would       
suppose that we possess infinite wisdom4

 ,he may have ways   of solving our     
difficulties and objections1 with which 
we are not   acquainted4 ,such judgment 
is not only irrational1 but arrogant1 as
 it   is an extension of the claims of  
reason beyond her just limits4 ,our     
duty in such case is exemplified in the 
father of the faithful4 ,at   ,god's    
command we must1 like him1 sacrifice our
 ,isaacs1 and leave to   him both to    
accomplish his promises and to justify  
the action4 ,it is   evident that the   
doctrine of the ,trinity is but         
partially revealed to   man1 but        
sufficiently to let him into a competent
 knowledge of the   plan of redemption4 
,footnote #ha3    ,vid4 ,epist4 #b4 ad  
,dionys4  ,footnote #hb3    ,vid4       
,euseb4 ,prp4 ,evang4 ,lib4 ,,xiii4 cap4
 #ab4  ,footnote #hc3    ,vid4 ,huet4   
,concord4 ,ration4  ,fid4 ,lib4 ,,ii4   
cap4 #c4  ,footnote #hd3    ,see ,dr4   
,berriman's ,historical account1 c4 page
 #id4  ,footnote #he3    8,philo uses   
not the name for his derivative ,being  

in the ,godhead1   which we see the     
other ,jews of the time using in the    
,gospels4 ,he   speaks not of him1 by   
his natural appellation of the ,son of  
,god4 ,no6   ,he takes up another title 
for him1 which indeed was known equally 
to   other ,jews1 or ,philo could not   
possibly have adopted it2 which was     
known equally to the ,gentiles1 as ,i   
shall show hereafter2 but which   was   
known only to the scholars of either4   
,he calls him #8the ,,logos of   ,god4' 
,this is a name1 that can be borrowed1  
together with the idea   annexed to it1 
only from the ,jews1 or from the common 
ancestors of   them and of the          
,gentiles2 that answers exactly to the  
,dabar of   ,jehovah in the ,hebrew     
,scriptures1 and to the ,memra of       
,jehovah in the   ,chaldee paraphrasts  
upon them2 and signifies merely #8the   
,,word of ,god4'   ,this name has been  
since introduced into our religion1 by  
one of the   inspired teachers of it4   
,and notwithstanding the ductility of   

the   ,greek language in this instance1 
which would allow it to be rendered     
either the ,word or the ,reason of ,god2
 yet the ,english ,bible1 with   a      
strict adherence to propriety1 and in   
full conformity to the ancient          
,christians and ancient ,jews1 has      
rejected the accidental   signification1
 and embraced only the immediate and the
 genuine4 ,yet1   even now1 the name is 
confined in its use to the more improved
   intellects among us4 ,and it must    
therefore have peculiarly been1 in   the
 days of ,philo1 the philosophical      
denomination of ,him1 who was           
popularly called the ,son of ,god4      
8,the use of the name of ,logos1 or     
,word1 by ,philo and by ,st4 ,john in   
concurrence1 sufficiently marks the     
knowledge of the name among the   ,jews4
 ,but the total silence concerning it1  
by the ,jewish writers of   the three   
first ,gospels2 the equal silence of the
 introduced ,jews   concerning it1 in   
all the four2 and the acknowledged use  

of it   through all the ,jewish records 
of our religion1 merely by ,st4 ,john   
himself2 prove it to have been familiar 
to a few only4 ,it is indeed   too      
mysterious in its allusion1 and too     
reducible into metaphor in its   import1
 to have ever been the common and       
ordinary appellation for the   ,son of  
,god4 ,originating from the spiritual   
principle of connexion1   betwixt the   
first and the second ,being in the      
,godhead2 marking this1   by a spiritual
 idea of connexion2 and considering it  
to be as close   and as necessary as the
 ,word is to the energetick ,mind of    
,god1   which cannot bury its           
intellectual energies in silence1 but   
must put   them forth in speech2 it is  
too spiritual in itself1 to be addressed
   to the faith of the multitude4 ,if   
with so full a reference to our   bodily
 ideas1 and so positive a filiation of  
the ,second ,being to   the ,first1 we  
have seen the grossness of ,arian       
criticism endeavouring   to resolve the 

doctrine into the mere dust of a figure2
 how much more   ready would it have    
been to do so1 if we had only such a    
spiritual   denomination as this1 for   
the second8 ,this would certainly have  
been   considered by it1 as too         
unsubstantial for distinct personality1 
and   therefore too evanescent for equal
 divinity4    8,st4 ,john indeed adopted
 this philosophical title1 for the      
denomination of the ,son of ,god2 only  
in one solemn and prefatory   passage of
 his ,gospel1 in two slight and         
incidental passages of his   ,epistles1 
and in one of his ,book of revelations4 
,even there1 the use   of the popular   
instead of the philosophical name1 in   
the three ,gospels   antecedent to his1 
precluded all probability of            
misconstruction4 ,yet1   not content    
with this1 he formed an additional      
barrier4 ,at the same   instant in which
 he speaks of the ,logos1 he asserts him
 to be distinct   from ,god the ,father1
 and yet to be equally ,god with him4   

#8,in the   beginning1' he says1 #8was  
,,the ,,word2 and ,,the ,,word was with 
,god2 and   ,,the ,,word was ,,god4'    
,having thus secured the two grand      
points relating   to the ,logos1 he can 
have nothing more to say upon the       
subject1 than   to repeat what he has   
stated1 for impressing the deeper       
conviction4 ,he   accordingly repeats   
it4 ,his personality he impresses again1
 thus2 #8,,the   ,,same was in the      
beginning with ,god4' ,his divinity also
 he again   inculcates1 thus3 #8,,all   
,,things ,,were ,,made ,,by ,,him1 and  
,,without ,,him ,,was   ,,not ,,any     
,,thing ,,made ,,that ,,was ,,made4'    
,here the very repetition itself1 of    
enforcing his claim to divinity1 by     
ascribing the creation to him2 is       
plainly an union of two clauses1 each   
announcing him as the ,creator of   the 
universe1 and one doubling over the     
other4 ,and the uncreated   nature of   
his own existence is the more strongly  
enforced upon the   mind1 by being      

contrasted with the created nature of   
all other   existences4 ,these were     
,,made1 but he himself ,,was2 made by   
,him1 who   was with ,god1 and was ,god4
 ,nor would all this precaution suffice1
   in the opinion of ,st4 ,john4 ,he    
must place still stronger fences        
against the dangerous spirit of error4  
,he therefore goes on to say1 in        
confirmation of his personality and     
divinity1 and in application of   all to
 our ,saviour3 #8,,he was in the world1 
and ,,the ,,world ,,was ,,made ,,by     
,,him1 and the world knew him not2 ,,he 
came unto ,,his ,,own ,,proper          
,,domains1 and ,,his ,,own ,,proper     
,,domesticks received him not4' ,and he 
closes all1 with judiciously drawing the
 several parts of his   assertions      
before into one full point2 and with    
additionally   explaining his           
philosophical term1 by a direct         
reference of it to that   popular one   
which he uses ever afterwards3 #8and    
,,the ,,word was made   flesh1 and dwelt

 among us2 and we beheld his glory1 the 
glory as of   ,,the ,,only ,,begotten   
,,of ,,the ,,father1 full of grace and  
truth4'    8,yet1 when such guards were 
requisite1 what induced ,st4 ,john to   
use   this philosophical title at all8  
,the reason was assuredly this4 ,the    
title was in high repute1 and in        
familiar use1 among the refined         
spirits of the age2 and his ,gospel was 
peculiarly calculated for the   service 
of such4 ,the almost perpetual          
recurrence of the appellation   in      
,philo's works shows evidently the use  
and the repute in which it   was1 among 
the more spiritualized of the ,jews4    
,st4 ,john therefore   adopted it       
himself1 for the more easy access to    
their conviction4 ,it   was also        
congenial1 probably1 of itself to the   
spiritualized state of   ,st4 ,john's   
mind4 ,he1 who has dwelt so much more   
than the other   ,evangelists upon the  
doctrines of our ,saviour2 and who has  
drawn out   so many of them1 in all     

their spiritual refinement of ideas2    
would   naturally prefer the spiritual  
term of relationship for ,god the ,son  
and ,god the ,father1 before the bodily1
 whenever the intellect was   raised    
enough to receive it1 and whenever the  
use of it was   sufficiently guarded    
from danger4 ,these were two reasons1 ,i
 suppose1   that induced ,st4 ,john to  
use it a few times4 ,and these were     
equally   7,i suppose7 the reasons1 that
 induced him1 with all his guards1 to   
use   it only a few4    8,nor let us be 
told1 in the rashness of ,arian         
absurdity1 that we   misunderstand ,st4 
,john in this interpretation of his     
words4 ,if reason   is capable of       
explaining words1 and if ,st4 ,john was 
capable of   conveying his meaning in   
words to the ear of reason2 then we may 
boldly appeal to the common sense of    
mankind1 and insist upon the   truth of 
our interpretation4 ,common sense indeed
 hath already   determined the point1 in
 an impartial person1 in an enemy1 in a 

,heathen4 ,i allude to that             
extraordinary approbation1 which was    
given   by a ,heathen of the third      
century to this passage of ,st4 ,john4  
#8,of   modern philosophers1' says      
,eusebius1 #8,amelius is an eminent one1
   being himself1 if ever there was one1
 a zealot for the philosophy of         
,plato2 and he called the ,divine of the
 ,hebrews a ,barbarian1 as if he   would
 not condescend to make mention of the  
,evangelist ,john by name4'   ,such is  
,eusebius's account of our referee4 ,but
 what are the terms of   his award8     
,they are these4 #8,and such indeed was 
the ,logos1' he says1   #8by whom1 a    
perpetual existence1 the things created 
were created1 as   also ,heraclitus has 
said2 and who by ,jupiter1 the          
,barbarian says1   being constituted in 
the rank and dignity of a ,principle1 is
 with ,god   and is ,god1 by whom all   
things absolutely were created2 in whom 
the   created living thing1 and life1   
and existence1 had a birth1 and fell    

into a body1 and putting on flesh       
appeared a man2 and1 after showing   the
 greatness of his nature1 and being     
wholly dissolved1 is again   deified and
 is ,god1 such as he was before he was  
brought down into the   body and the    
flesh and a man4 ,these things1 if      
translated out of the   ,barbarian's    
theology1 not as shaded over there1 but 
on the contrary   as placed in full     
view1 would be plain4' ,in this very    
singular and   very valuable comment    
upon ,st4 ,john's ,gospel in general1   
and upon his   preface in particular1 we
 may see1 through the harsh and obscure 
language of the whole1 some             
circumstances of great moment4 ,the bold
   air of arrogance in the blinded      
,heathen over the illuminated ,divine   
must strike at once upon every eye4 ,but
 the ,logos appears1 from him1   to have
 been known to the philosophers of      
antiquity later than the   ,gospel2 and 
known too as a perpetual ,existence1 and
 the ,maker of the   world4 ,st4 ,john  

also is witnessed by a ,heathen1 and by 
one who put him   down for a ,barbarian1
 to have represented the ,logos as ,,the
 ,,maker ,,of   ,,all ,,things1 as      
,,with ,,god1 and as ,,god2 as one      
likewise1 #8in whom the   created living
 ,thing1' or the human soul of our      
,saviour1 #8and' even   #8,life and     
,existence' themselves1 those           
primogenial principles of   ,deity1     
#8had a birth1 and fell into a body1 and
 putting on flesh   appeared a man1' who
 was therefore man and ,god in one2 who 
accordingly #8showed the greatness of   
his nature' by his miracles1 was        
#8wholly dissolved1' and then #8was     
again ,,deified1 and ,,is ,,god1' even  
#8,,such ,,as ,,he ,,was1 before he was 
brought down into the body and the      
flesh and a man4' ,and ,st4 ,john is    
attested to have declared this1   #8not 
even as shaded over1' but #8on the      
contrary as placed in full   view4' ,we 
have thus a testimony to the plain      
meaning of ,st4 ,john1   and to the     

evident ,godhead of his ,logos1 a       
,godhead equally   before and after his 
death2 most unquestionable in its       
nature1   very early in its age1 and    
peculiarly forcible in its import4 ,st4 
,john1 we see1 is referred to in a      
language1 that shows him to have   been 
well known to the ,grecian cotemporaries
 of ,amelius1 as a writer1   as a       
foreigner1 and as a marked assertor of  
,divinity for his ,logos40              
,,whitaker4  ,footnote #hf3    ,vid4    
,forbes4 ,instruct4 ,hist4 ,theol4 ,lib4
 ,i4 cap4 #b 4 #h4  ,footnote #hg3      
,vid4 ,curcell in ,quattern4 ,dissert4  
de ,voc4 ,trinit4 person ge4  ,footnote 
#hh3    ,vid4 ,calv4 ,institut4 ,lib4   
,i4 cap4 #ac4 4 #e4  ,footnote #hi3     
8,the doctrine of a plurality appears in
 the very first words of   inspiration4 
,god would not record the history of    
creation1 without   informing the       
,church that the character of ,creator  
was by no means to   be confined to one 
person4 ,it has often been observed1    

that this is   taught in the words      
rendered ,god created1 where we have a  
noun in   the plural joined with a verb 
in the singular number1 plainly         
expressing a plurality in unity4 ,that  
this is the genuine sense of the        
passage appears from the work ascribed1 
in the next verse1 to the   ,spirit of  
,god1 who is said to have #8moved on the
 face of the waters4'   ,by modern      
,jews1 whom some ,christians have       
followed1 this expression   has been    
rendered1 #8a wind of ,god1' or #8a     
mighty wind4' ,but the   firmament1 or  
expanse1 was not created till the second
 day4 ,this   includes the atmosphere   
which surrounds our earth3 for the fowl 
is   said to #8fly above the earth in   
the open firmament of heaven4' ,now1 it 
cannot reasonably be supposed that there
 could be a mighty wind1 or   any wind  
at all1 before the existence of an      
atmosphere4    8,if we turn to the      
gospel-history1 we find a third person  
mentioned as   engaged in the work of   

creation4 #8,all things were made by'   
that ,word1   who #8in the beginning    
existed with ,god4'    8,this plurality 
appears still more expressly1 when the  
sacred   historian gives an account of  
the creation of man3 #8,and ,god said1  
,let   us make man in our image1 after  
our likeness4' ,but it is a   plurality 
in unity3 #8,so ,god created man in his 
own image4' ,it has   been justly       
observed1 that to this the language of  
,elihu1 and of the   royal ,preacher1   
agrees3 #8,none saith1 ,where is ,god my
 ,makers2' and1   #8,remember now thy   
,creators4' ,nothing can be more absurd 
than the   various attempts which have  
been made to shew1 that this language   
may   be otherwise understood4 ,god     
could never speak in this manner to     
angels1 or to any second causes4 ,for to
 whomsoever these words were            
addressed1 they must have been          
co-operators with ,god in this divine   
work4 ,they must have assisted him in   
making man4 ,philo the ,jew   expressly 

says that these words1 ,let us make1    
declare a plurality4   ,that the ,jewish
 writers in general view this language  
as including a   mystery1 not to be made
 known to the vulgar1 and indeed        
studiously   concealed by them1 from    
their abhorrence of ,christianity1 has  
been   elsewhere demonstrated4 ,it is   
therefore unnecessary to enlarge here4  
,i   shall only add1 that the modern    
,jews are so fully convinced that the   
doctrine of a plurality is contained in 
these words1 as to wish to   alter the  
reading4 ,instead of ,let us make man1  
they incline to read1   ,let man be     
made2 although the ,samaritan text1 the 
,septuagint1 the   ,talmudists1 and all 
their translations1 whether ancient or  
modern1   express the language in the   
same manner with our version4    8,the  
same important doctrine is introduced in
 the history of the   ,fall4 ,that      
three-one ,god1 who said1 #8,let us make
 man after our   image1' in the same    
character laments the loss of this      

image4 #8,,jehovah   ,god said1 ,behold1
 the man is become as one of us2' or1 as
 some read   the passage1 #8,behold the 
man1 who was as one of us6' ,here ,philo
   observes2 #8,these words1 as one of  
us1 are not put for one1 but for   more 
than one4' ,the learned ,allix has      
remarked that the ancient ,jewish       
writers maintain1 that ,god #8speaks not
 this to the angels1 who had no   common
 likeness to the unity or essence of    
,god1 but to ,him who was the           
celestial ,adam1 who is one with ,god4' 
,to whom this character applies1   we   
learn from the ,targum of ,jonathan on  
the place1 who here speaks of   #8the   
only begotten in heaven4'    8,this     
doctrine is also taught in the history  
of the ,confusion of   ,tongues4        
#8,,jehovah said1--,go to1 let us go    
down1 and there confound   their        
language4' ,here the ,jews repeat their 
contemptible subterfuge1   that ,god    
addresses his #8house of judgment1' that
 is1 created angels4   ,for it is an    

established doctrine with them1 that    
#8,god does nothing   without previously
 consulting with his family above4' ,but
 it has   justly been observed1 that    
these words1 if spoken to angels1 would 
imply that ,god were one of them1 or    
that he descended in the same   manner  
with them1 by a real change of place4   
,besides1 in a moment to   change one   
language into many1 and to infuse these 
into the minds of   men1 who were utter 
strangers to them before1 so that they  
should   entirely forget their former   
modes of speech1 is a work that far     
surpasses the power of angels1 and can  
be accomplished by no being but   that  
,god1 with whom to will and to do is the
 same4    8,it must be evident to every 
one1 who reads the history of the ,old  
,testament with any degree of attention1
 that an ,angel is often   introduced as
 speaking the language1 performing the  
works1 and   accepting the worship1     
which exclusively belong to the ,supreme
 ,being4   ,in other words1 one1 who is 

undoubtedly a divine person1 often      
appears   in a delegated character4     
,now1 while it was the will of ,god in  
this   manner constantly to remind his  
,church of the economy of redemption1   
he at the same time taught her a        
distinction of persons in the divine    
essence4 ,it was this ,angel who        
appeared to ,abraham on different       
occasions1 to ,hagar1 to ,jacob1 to     
,moses1 to ,joshua1 to the ,israelites  
at ,bochim1 to ,gideon1 to ,manoah and  
his wife4 ,but ,i enter not into a      
particular consideration of these       
appearances1 having endeavoured to      
illustrate the character of this divine 
,messenger in another place4   ,there it
 has also been proved1 that the law was 
given to the   ,israelites at ,mount    
,sinai by the second person of the      
adorable   ,trinity1 in the character of
 the ,angel of ,,jehovah4 ,it deserves  
particular attention1 that at the very  
time that the ,god of ,israel   gave his
 people a law1 by which they were to be 

distinguished from all   the idolatrous 
nations around1 one special design of   
which was to   preserve the doctrine of 
the divine unity2--at the very time that
 he   pronounced that leading precept1  
#8,thou shalt have no other gods before 
me2' he1 according to the ,sacred       
,history1 viewed in its connexion1      
sustained the character of an ,angel1   
and was pleased to communicate   the    
knowledge of this fact to his people4   
,how can these apparent   contradictions
 be reconciled1 but by admitting that it
 was the will of   ,god to reveal       
himself to his church1 as at the same   
time possessing   essential unity and   
personal plurality8    8,the more       
ancient ,jewish writers declare1 that   
two persons were   engaged in           
promulgating the law4 ,they say2 #8,the 
two first precepts   were spoken by the 
,supreme ,spirit1 but he spoke all the  
rest by his   ,glory1 who is called ,el 
,shaddai1 known to the fathers2 by whom 
the   prophets foretold future events2  

who is called ,jah3 in whom the ,name   
of ,god is2 the ,beloved of ,god who    
dwelt in the temple2 and the ,mouth   of
 the ,,lord2 and the ,face of the       
,,lord2 and the ,rock2 and that         
,goodness   which ,moses saw1 when he   
could not see ,god4' ,elsewhere they    
call him   #8the ,schechinah1 by whom we
 draw near to ,god1 and present our     
supplications to him2 who is that ,angel
 in whom the name of ,god is1   who is  
himself called ,god and ,,jehovah4' ,the
 change of person1 in the   promulgation
 of the law1 asserted by these writers1 
is evidently a   mere fancy4 ,but their 
language deserves attention2 as it shews
 how   fully they were convinced of the 
doctrine of a plurality in unity1   when
 they introduced it in this manner4     
8,it has been universally admitted by   
the friends of revelation1 that   the   
great end which ,god hath in view in the
 work of ,redemption is   the display of
 his own adorable perfections4 ,but     
there is doubtless   another1 although  

less attended to1 nowise incompatible   
with this1   nay1 itself an eminent     
branch of the supreme end4 ,this is the 
manifestation of the mystery of the     
,trinity1 and of the mode of            
subsistence peculiar to each person in  
the divine essence4 ,this must          
undoubtedly be viewed as included in the
 one great design of the   all-wise ,god
 in our redemption2 and it is evident   
that he hath still   kept it in eye1 in 
the revelation given to the ,church1 and
 especially   in the history of that    
work1 as it is recorded in the gospels4 
,we may   trace the doctrine of a       
,trinity in the accounts given of the   
old   creation2 but it appears with far 
superior evidence in the history of     
the new4 ,this corresponds to the       
superior greatness of the work1 and   to
 the brighter and more extensive display
 of divine perfection4    8,such was the
 state of the ,church1 as to admit of a 
more full   manifestation of this       
mystery4 ,it was more obscurely revealed

 to the   patriarchs1 and under the     
,mosaic economy4 ,this was analogous to 
the   general character of the          
revelation then made2 as well as to the 
state   of the ,church1 yet in her      
infancy1 and exposed to constant        
temptations   to polytheism1 from the   
situation of all the surrounding        
nations4 ,but   #8when the fulness of   
the time was come1' that the gospel     
should be   preached to every creature1 
and the kingdom of ,satan fall as       
lightning   from heaven1 in the         
overthrow of heathen darkness2 there    
were no such   impediments to the more  
clear revelation of this mysterious     
doctrine4   ,the rest of the divine     
conduct indeed rendered this necessary4 
,god had   now #8sent forth his ,son1   
made of a woman1 made under the law1 to 
redeem them that were under the law4'   
,the ends of this mission could   not be
 accomplished1 without a full revelation
 of the character of   this illustrious 
,messenger4 ,he could not otherwise     

receive that homage   from the ,church1 
which he merited as her ,redeemer1 and  
which was   necessary1 in order to her  
salvation4 ,now1 his character1 as      
essentially the ,son of ,god1 and at the
 same time a divine ,messenger1   could 
not be properly unfolded1 without a     
declaration both of the   paternity of  
the ,first ,person1 and of that         
wonderful dispensation1   according to  
which the ,second1 although equal in    
power and glory1   voluntarily #8emptied
 himself4' ,nor could the unity of the  
work of   redemption1 as pervading all  
the dispensations given to the ,church1 
and the beautiful harmony of the law and
 the gospel1 be otherwise   displayed4  
,without a full revelation of this      
mystery1 how could it   have been known 
that he1 who appeared in the end of ages
 as sent of   ,god1 was the very same   
person who had formerly led the ,church1
 as the   ,angel of his face2 that ,he1 
who now brought spiritual redemption to 
his folk1 was no other than that        

,angel-,redeemer1 who had already so    
frequently delivered them from temporal 
calamities8    8,if this mystery be     
unknown or disbelieved1 there can be no 
faith in   ,christ as the ,mediator     
between ,god and men4 ,for he who       
believes not   that the ,son is in the  
,father1 and the ,father in the ,son1 as
 to   identity of essence1 while at the 
same time there is a distinction of     
persons1 denies the voluntary subjection
 of the ,son to the ,father in   the    
eternal covenant1 and thus the whole    
foundation of his merit and   of our    
salvation4 ,in relation to the work of  
our redemption1 and in   the history    
given of it1 are revealed various       
internal actings of the   divine persons
 towards each other1 as well as those of
 an external   nature4 ,the ,father     
appoints1 gives1 sends1 prepares a human
 nature for   his ,son2 the ,son        
undertakes1 gives himself1 comes1       
assumes this   nature4    8,from the    
history given of the conception of      

,christ1 we find that   three divine    
persons were engaged in the creation of 
this #8new thing   in the earth4' ,the  
,father appears in the character of     
#8the ,highest2'   the ,third ,person1  
as #8the ,holy ,ghost1' and #8the ,power
 of the ,highest2'   and the ,second1 as
 #8the ,son of ,god4' ,when this        
wonderful ,person1 the   incarnate      
,word1 was to be manifested to ,israel  
at his baptism1 each   divine ,person   
concurred in the work4 ,the ,father     
testified his presence   and approbation
 by a voice from the excellent glory1   
announcing ,jesus   as his beloved ,son2
 and the ,holy ,ghost descended like a  
dove1 and   rested on him4 ,the history 
of his death1 viewed in its connexion1  
affords a proof of a similar kind4 ,as  
#8it pleased ,,jehovah1' in the   person
 of the ,father1 sustaining the         
character of ,judge1 to bruise the      
,son as our ,surety2 and as he1 having  
power over his own life1   commended his
 spirit into the hands of his ,father1  

thus presenting   unto him a sacrifice  
of a sweet-smelling savour2 he did so   
#8through   the ,eternal ,spirit4' ,the 
same thing appears from the resurrection
 of   ,jesus4 ,he was #8powerfully      
declared to be the ,son of ,god in his  
resurrection from the dead2' for he had 
#8power to take again' that   which no  
one could take from him4 ,this work is  
frequently ascribed to   ,god1 where the
 term evidently denotes the ,first      
,person4 #8,god hath   raised up ,jesus 
again2 as it is also written in the     
second psalm1 ,thou   art my ,son1 this 
day have ,i begotten thee4' ,as he was  
#8put to death in   the flesh1 he was   
quickened by the ,spirit1' by that      
,spirit of   holiness1 #8by which also  
he went and preached unto the spirits in
   prison4' ,nor is this less evident   
from the account given of the   effusion
 of the ,spirit4 ,this is undoubtedly a 
divine work2 and it is   described as   
belonging to each adorable ,person4     
,jesus had foretold   that the          

,comforter should come1 that himself    
should send him1 and that   he should at
 the same time be sent by the ,father4  
,accordingly1 from   the account given  
of this wonderful event by the apostle  
,peter1 which   is left on record for   
the instruction of the ,church1 we find 
that each   divine ,person was engaged  
in accomplishing it3 #8,jesus1 having   
received   of the ,father the promise of
 the ,holy ,ghost1 hath shed forth this 
which ye now see and hear4'    8,it is  
undeniable1 that one special end1 which 
,christ had in view in   his miraculous 
works1 was to confirm his doctrine with 
respect to his   equality with the      
,father4 ,when he gave thanks at the    
tomb of ,lazarus1   before raising him  
from the dead1 it was because of the    
people who   stood by1 that they might  
believe that the ,father had sent him2  
and   sent him as a ,messenger invested 
with divine power1 because   essentially
 possessing divine perfection4 ,for he  
had previously said   to his disciples3 

#8,this sickness is not unto death1 but 
for the glory   of ,god1 that the ,son  
of ,god might be glorified thereby2' and
 taught   ,martha1 that if she #8would  
believe1 she would see the glory of     
,god1'   in seeing the manifestation of 
that power which essentially belonged   
to himself1 as #8the ,resurrection and  
the ,life4' ,when he cured the man      
sick of the palsy1 it was in order to   
prove that he had #8power on   earth to 
forgive sin2' while he admitted the     
principle held by the   scribes1 that no
 one could forgive sins but ,god only4  
,on different   occasions he refers to  
his miraculous works1 as irrefragable   
evidences   of his having the same      
essence with the ,father2 and of the    
mutual   inexistence1 as some have      
expressed it1 of the ,father in the     
,son1 and   of the ,son in the ,father1 
in respect of this essential unity1     
while   there is at the same time a real
 distinction of persons4 ,when his      
enemies accused him of blasphemy1       

because he said1 #8,i am the ,son of    
,god1' #8making himself ,god2' he       
replied1 #8,if ,i do not the works of my
   ,father1 believe me not4 ,but if ,i  
do1 though ye believe not me1 believe   
the works2 that ye may know and believe 
that the ,father is in me1 and   ,i in  
him4' ,to ,philip1 when desiring to see 
the ,father1 he said1   #8,believe me1  
that ,i am in the ,father1 and the      
,father in me2 or else   believe me for 
the very work's sake4' ,the ,evangelist 
,john1 when   referring to the signs    
recorded in the preceding history1      
subjoins   this declaration2 #8,these   
are written1 that ye might believe that 
,jesus   is the ,son of ,god4' ,that he 
appropriates this character to ,jesus1  
as   expressive of supreme deity1 is    
evident from the uniform tenor of the   
gospel which bears his name4    8,the   
doctrine of the ,trinity is peculiarly  
elucidated by the history   of          
redemption2 as it does not merely       
exhibit all the adorable ,persons   as  

engaged in this work1 but ascribes a    
peculiar operation to each   ,person4   
,the contrivance of our redemption is   
ascribed to the ,father2   the purchase 
of it to the ,son2 and the effectual    
application of this   purchased         
redemption to the ,holy ,spirit4 ,the   
,father sends his ,son as   our ,surety2
 the ,son cheerfully comes in this      
character2 and the ,holy   ,spirit is   
sent by both4 ,the purpose of election  
is more immediately   ascribed to the   
,father2 the objects of his love are all
 chosen in   ,christ2 and they1 who were
 thus chosen from eternity1 are in time 
chosen out of the world1 and separated  
for himself1 by the renewing   and      
sanctifying work of the ,spirit4        
8,nor is this all4 ,the peculiar        
operation of each ,person1 in the work  
of our salvation1 is perfectly analagous
 to the order of subsistence   in the   
,holy ,trinity2 and thus beautifully    
illustrates the mutual   relations of   
the divine ,persons4 ,all the external  

works of ,god1   indeed1 are common to  
each ,person2 as the divine nature is   
the same   indivisible principle of     
operation4 ,yet these works are         
distinctly   ascribed to the three      
,persons1 because each ,person operates 
according   to the order of subsistence4
 ,in the old creation1 the ,father      
called   all things into being by his   
co-essential ,word1 communicating life  
immediately by the ,spirit1 as          
exercising a generating power on the    
unformed mass4 ,when ,god created man1  
the ,first ,person formed him by   the  
,second1 as his essential ,image1 giving
 him life1 both natural and   moral1 by 
the ,third1 as #8the ,spirit of life4'  
,yet this implies no   inferiority1 or  
mere instrumentality1 in any of the     
adorable ,persons2   but only the most  
perfect order and harmony4 ,the case is 
the same in   the new creation4 ,it     
seems most consistent with divine       
wisdom1 that he   who is first in the   
order of subsistence should rather send 

than be   sent2 that the ,son1 who is   
#8the image of the invisible ,god1'     
should   procure the restoration of that
 blessed image lost by sin2 and that    
he1 who proceeds from the ,father and   
the ,son1 should be sent by both1   to  
quicken those who are spiritually dead4 
,this distinct operation   indeed1 as it
 corresponds with the order of          
subsistence1 beautifully   harmonizes   
with the distinguishing character       
belonging to each ,person4   ,he1 who is
 essentially the ,father1 assumes the   
character of paternity1   in a federal  
respect1 towards those who are orphans  
and aliens4 ,the   only begotten ,son of
 ,god is sent forth1 made under the law1
 that they   may #8receive the adoption 
of sons1' and appears as #8the          
first-born   among many brethren4' ,the 
adorable ,spirit1 #8the breath of       
,,jehovah1'   breathes on the slain1    
that they may live2 giving them a new   
heart and   a right spirit4 ,he1 who    
proceeds from the ,father and the ,son1 

unites   the sinner to both4    8,is it 
#8life eternal to know the only true    
,god1 and ,jesus ,christ whom   he hath 
sent8' ,hath no one the ,father1 who    
#8denieth the ,son8' ,can no   one      
honour the ,father1 #8who honoureth not 
the ,son8' ,is it the ,spirit   alone   
who quickeneth1 and who teacheth us to  
#8know the things that are   freely     
given us of ,god8' ,can no man #8say    
that ,jesus is the ,lord1 but   by the  
,holy ,ghost8' ,is it through ,christ   
that #8we have access by one   ,spirit  
unto the ,father8' ,let us bless ,god   
for the revelation of the   mystery of a
 ,trinity in unity2 and especially      
because he hath revealed   it so clearly
 in the history of our redemption1 in   
relation to that   work in which a      
peculiar operation belongs to each      
adorable ,person1 in   which the love of
 a three-one ,god is so wonderfully     
displayed1 in   which we discern so     
blessed a harmony1 not only of divine   
perfections1   but of divine ,persons6  

,in all our worship1 let us view ,god   
according   to this revelation1         
ascribing glory to him #8who is1 and who
 was1 and   who is to come1 and to the  
,seven ,spirits which are before his    
throne1   and to ,jesus ,christ1 who is 
the faithful witness1 and the           
first-begotten from the dead1 and the   
prince of the kings of the   earth4'    
,let us earnestly desire communion with 
this three-one ,god2   with the ,father1
 in his love as the spring of our       
salvation2 with the   ,son1 in all that 
grace which he hath purchased by his    
blood2 and with   the ,holy ,ghost1 in  
the whole extent of his efficacious     
operation4 ,in   order to this1 let us  
press after union with ,christ1 that in 
him we   may be united to the ,father by
 that one ,spirit who proceeds from     
both1   and who is conferred by both as 
the ,spirit of adoption4 ,let us        
cultivate love to the brethren1 as      
members of the same mystical body1      
desiring to be #8one heart and one      

soul2' that although many1 we may be    
one1 and thus be assimilated1 in our    
weak measure1 to the blessed   ,trinity 
in respect of unity2 as ,jesus prays in 
behalf of his   ,church2--#8,that they  
all may be one2 as thou1 ,father1 art in
 me1 and ,i   in thee2 that they also   
may be one in us4--,i in them1 and thou 
in me1   that they may be made perfect  
in one2 and that the world may know that
   thou hast sent me1 and hast loved    
them1 as thou hast loved me4'0          
,,jamieson4  ,footnote #ij3    ,see ,le 
,clerc's ,supplement to ,dr4 ,hammond on
 the ,new ,testament1   preface to ,john
 i4  ,footnote #ia3    ,see ,biddle's   
,confession of ,faith1 touching the holy
 ,trinity1 ,article   ,,vi4  ,footnote  
#ib3    ,some have thought1 that  being 
of the masculine gender1   because it   
refers immediately to 1 which is of the 
neuter1   implies1 that the ,spirit is  
taken personally1 which is the reason of
   this grammatical construction2 but if
 it be said that the reason why   it is 

masculine is1 because it agrees with 1  
it1   notwithstanding1 proves the       
,personality of the ,holy ,ghost1 since 
a   ,comforter is a personal character4 
,the same thing is observed in the      
grammatical construction of that        
scripture1 ,eph4 i4 #ac1 #ad4 speaking  
concerning the ,holy ,spirit of promise1
    2 it   is said1   1 which denotes   
the personal character of   the ,spirit1
 otherwise it would have been   1 unless
 you   suppose  agrees with 1 which     
seems to be a more strained   sense of  
the grammatical construction than the   
other1 which proves his   personality4  
,footnote #ic3    8,,that the ,holy     
,scriptures make mention of ,three by   
way of great   eminence and distinction 
may appear from many passages1 out of   
which ,i shall only produce some4 ,at   
the ,prediction of the blessed          
,virgin's conception1 which was to be   
without the concurrence of a man1   the 
divine message is delivered in these    
words3 ,the ,holy ,ghost shall   come   

upon thee1 and the power of the ,highest
 shall overshadow thee2   ,therefore1   
also that ,holy ,thing1 that shall be   
born of thee1 shall be   called the ,son
 of ,god4 ,here are plainly             
distinguished from each   other1 the    
,holy ,ghost1 or ,power overshadowing2  
the ,highest1   whose ,power that       
,spirit is2 and the ,holy ,thing1 or    
,person1 who is   called the ,son of    
,god1 because born of a mother1         
impregnated by that   ,divine ,power4   
,at our ,blessed ,lord's ,baptism1 the  
,spirit of ,god1 we   read1 descended   
like a dove and rested upon him1 and a  
voice from   ,heaven declared him to be 
the ,son of ,god3 ,nothing can be       
plainer   than three ,personalities in  
this transaction2 the ,father speaking  
from ,heaven1 the ,son coming out of    
,jordan1 and the ,spirit   descending   
from above4 ,in the ,promise1 which our 
blessed ,saviour makes   his disciples1 
to comfort their hearts against what was
 coming upon   them1 ,i will pray the   

,father1 and he shall give you another  
comforter1 that he may abide with you   
forever1 even the ,spirit of   ,truth2  
and when the comforter is come1 whom ,i 
will send unto you   from the ,father1  
even the ,spirit of ,truth1 which       
proceedeth from the   ,father1 he shall 
testify of me1 there are manifestly     
,acts1 and   ,persons1 and capacities1  
different4 ,the ,father1 from whom the  
,spirit   proceeds1 whom the ,son prays1
 and by whom1 at the ,son's ,request1   
the ,comforter was given3 ,the ,son1    
praying the ,father2 sending   the      
,comforter from the ,father1 and        
testified of by the ,spirit so   sent3  
,and the ,spirit1 given by the ,father1 
sent by the ,son1   testifying of the   
,son1 and1 upon the ,son's ,departure1  
abiding for   ever with the ,disciples4 
8,the great ,apostle of the ,gentiles1  
to enforce the ,doctrine of the         
resurrection1 tells the ,romans1 that if
 the ,spirit of him1 who raised   ,jesus
 from the dead1 dwelt in them1 he that  

raised ,christ from the   dead would    
also quicken their mortal bodies by his 
,spirit1 that   dwelled in them2 where  
he evidently refers to ,jesus1 the ,son 
of   ,god2 raised from the ,dead2 to the
 ,spirit of ,god1 by which he was       
raised2 and to him that raised ,jesus1  
and at the last great day   shall raise 
all others1 in whom his ,spirit dwells4 
,the same apostle1   to satisfy the     
,corinthians of the benefits of their   
conversion1   after having enumerated   
several ranks of sinners1 and such were 
some of you1 says he1 but ye are washed1
 but ye are sanctified1 but   ye are    
justified1 in the name of the ,lord     
,jesus ,christ1 and by the   ,spirit of 
our ,god1 i4 e4 ,god the ,father4 ,it   
cannot be denied that   ,sanctification 
and ,justification are the gifts of ,god
 alone2 for   none can absolve us from  
the ,guilt and pollution of sin1 but he 
only3   ,but then the ,apostle tells the
 ,corinthians1 that this benefit they   
received not only from ,god the ,father1

 but from the ,lord ,jesus   likewise1  
and from the ,holy ,spirit3 ,analogous  
to which is that other   ,passage in the
 same epistle2 ,there are diversities of
 gifts1 but the   same ,spirit1 7there  
is the third ,person in the ,trinity7   
there are   differences of              
,administration1 but the same ,lord1    
7there is the   second ,person7 and     
there are diversities of operations1 but
 it is   the same ,god1 7or first person
 in the ,trinity7 that worketh all   in 
all4 ,once more1 the same ,apostle1 in  
his prayer for the   ,thessalonians1    
directs his devotion to the ever blessed
 ,trinity3   ,now ,god himself1 even our
 ,father1 and our ,lord ,jesus ,christ1 
direct   our way unto you1 and the      
,lord1 7i4 e4 the ,holy ,ghost7 make you
 to   increase and abound in love one   
towards another3 ,for that by the       
,lord we are here to understand the     
,holy ,ghost1 ,i think is very plain    
from the next verse2 #8to the end1 that 
he may establish your hearts            

unblameable in holiness before ,god1    
even our ,father1 at the coming of   our
 ,lord ,jesus ,christ with all his      
saints2' since he is the   ,sanctifier1 
and to establish our hearts in holiness 
is his proper   work and office3 ,and if
 so1 then is there a plain enumeration  
of the   three ,persons of the ,trinity 
in this passage4    8,the great ,apostle
 of the ,jews begins his first ,epistle 
general to   his dispersed ,brethren    
with a declaration of the same article1 
when   he calls them elect according to 
the foreknowledge of ,god the ,father1  
through ,sanctification of the ,spirit1 
unto obedience1 and sprinkling   of the 
blood of ,jesus2 for there we may       
observe1 that the three   ,persons are  
not only expressly named1 but their     
distinct   employments1 with reference  
to man's salvation1 are particularly    
specified1 while the ,father is said to 
elect1 the ,spirit to   sanctify1 and   
the holy ,jesus to shed his blood4 ,the 
beloved   ,apostle ,st4 ,john1 in his   

,salutation to the ,churches1 ,grace1   
and   ,peace from him1 which is1 and    
which was1 and which is to come1 and    
from the seven spirits which are before 
his ,throne1 and from ,jesus   ,christ  
has given us a distinct enumeration of  
the three ,persons in   the ,deity1 if  
we will but admit1 7as most interpreters
 have done7 that   by the ,seven        
,spirits1 which was a sacred number     
among the ,jews1   that one ,person     
7viz4 the ,holy ,ghost7 is to be        
understood1 from   whom all that variety
 of gifts and operations1 which were    
then   conspicuous in the ,christian    
,church1 did proceed4 ,but however this 
be1   'tis certain1 that the passage in 
his ,epistle of the ,three which bear   
record in ,heaven1 the ,father1 the     
,word1 and the ,holy ,ghost1 are as     
full and plain a ,testimony and         
declaration of this ,mystery1 as can    
be cited in words2 and though some have 
endeavoured to invalidate the           
authority of this passage1 as not extant

 in some ancient copies1 and   seldom   
appealed to by the first defenders of   
the catholick faith   against the       
,arians and ,macedonians1 yet the       
contrary to this is   most evident4     
,tertullian1 ,st4 ,cyprian1 and         
,fulgentius quote it   in their         
writings3 ,athanasius made use of it in 
the council of   ,nice against ,arius2  
and the reason why it was left out in   
some   ancient copies ,socrates         
acquaints us with in his ,ecclesiastical
   history1 when he tells us1 #8,that   
the ,christian ,church had all along    
complained1 that the ,epistle of ,st4   
,john had been corrupted by the   first 
adversaries of the doctrine of ,christ's
 divinity4' ',twas by   their artifice  
therefore that it was omitted2 for      
several learned   pens1 both of our own 
and other churches1 have made it very   
manifest1   that it was#id originally in
 the text1 and that the most and        
ancientest copies always had it4        
8,but we need not be so tenacious of one

 text1 when1 besides these   already    
mentioned1 and many more that might be  
produced upon a farther   enquiry1 the  
very form of our admission into the     
,christian covenant   is in the name of 
the ,father1 and of the ,son1 and of the
 ,holy ,ghost2   the form of our prayers
 is thus directed1 that through the ,son
 we   have an access by one ,spirit to  
the ,father2 and the form of our        
dismission from them is1 every day1 with
 this benediction1 ,the   grace of the  
,lord ,jesus1 and the love of ,god1 and 
the fellowship of   the ,holy ,ghost1 be
 with us all evermore2 as if the ,wisdom
 of ,god had   intended to inculcate    
this notion of the ,trinity1 and1 in    
every act   of our religious worship1 to
 remind us of the manner of his         
subsistence4    8,thus it appears that  
there are ,three1 very often occurring  
in   scripture1 under the different     
appellations of ,father1 ,son1 and      
,holy ,ghost3 and that these three are  
not one and the same ,being1   under    

different respects and considerations1  
but three real and   distinct persons1  
with a peculiar manner of subsisting1 is
 plain   from the very names of ,father1
 ,son1 and ,holy ,ghost1 if we          
understand them in a proper and natural 
sense2 because these are   opposite     
relations1 which can never meet in the  
same subject3 for   a ,father cannot be 
,father to himself1 but to his ,son2 nor
 can a   ,son be ,son to himself1 but to
 his ,father2 nor can the ,holy ,ghost  
proceed from himself1 or 7in this sense7
 be his own ,spirit1 but   the ,spirit  
of the ,father1 and ,son1 from whom he  
proceeds3 and   therefore the ,father is
 not the ,son1 nor the ,holy ,spirit2   
nor the ,son   the ,father1 or ,holy    
,spirit2 nor the ,holy ,spirit either   
,father or ,son4   ,the only question   
is1 whether these names1 when spoken of 
the   ,trinity have a proper and        
natural1 or only an allusive and        
metaphorical signification4    8,the    
divine nature and perfections indeed1   

7as they are far exalted   above our    
conception7 may be brought down by      
metaphors1 taken from   some things1    
that are analagous in creatures2 in     
which sense we may   allow ,father and  
,son to be metaphorical names1 when     
applied to   ,god3 not that ,god the    
,father is not1 in the highest and most 
perfect   sense1 a ,father1 and his ,son
 a most proper1 natural1 and genuine    
,son2   but because the divine          
generation is so perfect a communication
 of   the divine nature and being from  
,father to ,son1 that human             
generations are but obscure and         
imperfect images and resemblances   of  
it4 ,the truth is1 when any thing is    
spoken metaphorically of ,god1   the    
metaphor and image are always in the    
creatures2 the truth1   perfection1 and 
reality of all1 in ,god3 and if so1 then
 if ,god be a   ,father1 and have a     
,son1 an only-begotten ,son1 begotten   
eternally of   himself2 though this     
eternal generation be infinitely above  

what we   can imagine or conceive1 yet  
it is evident1 that ,god the ,father is 
more properly and perfectly a ,father1  
and ,god the ,son more   properly and   
perfectly a ,son1 than any earthly      
fathers or sons ever   were4 ,and if    
,god the ,father and his ,son be truly  
and perfectly ,father   and ,son1 they  
must be truly and perfectly distinct    
beings2 for the   ,father cannot be the 
,son whom he begets2 nor the ,son the   
,father that   begat him2 nor the ,holy 
,ghost either the ,father or the ,son1  
from   whom he proceeds3 consequently1  
they must be distinct1 and real1 and    
proper persons2 for he that begets1 and 
he that is begotten1 and   he that      
proceeds from both1 cannot be one and   
the same person4    8,and as this       
difference of relations makes a manifest
 distinction   between the three        
persons2 so the different offices and   
employments1 that are ascribed to them  
in scripture1 is a farther   note of    
discrimination4 ,for who sees not1 that 

the work of   creation of all things at 
first1 and ever since the just1 and     
wise1   and merciful disposal of them1  
are attributed to the ,father2 that     
the great undertaking of our redemption 
is the care and employment   of the     
,son2 and the business of enlightening  
and sanctifying   those1 whom the ,son  
redeemeth1 the particular province of   
the ,holy   ,ghost8 ,without supposing  
them to be three distinct persons1 ,i   
say1 no   satisfactory solution can be  
given1 why1 in the great work of man's  
salvation1 a distinct office and        
operation should be proper to each of   
them2 why the ,father only should be    
said to elect2 the ,son only to   have  
shed and sprinkled his blood2 and the   
,holy ,ghost only to   sanctify us unto 
obedience4 ,so far then as a diversity  
of names1   offices1 and operations1    
distinguishes one being from another1   
there   is plainly a distinction of     
persons subsisting in the ,godhead4 ,but
   this is not all4 ,those1 who pretend 

to state#ie the true notion of a        
person as a term made use of in this    
argument1 tell us1 that it is   a being1
 which has understanding1 and is a      
distinct1 entire substance   of itself2 
an individual substance of a rationed   
nature1 or a complete   intelligent     
substance1 with a peculiar manner of    
subsistence3 so that   there is a common
 nature1 which must be joined by a      
peculiar   manner of subsisting1 to make
 a person1 otherwise it would be a mere 
mode2 for we never conceive a person    
without the essence in   conjunction    
with it4 ,and this notion may haply be  
of use1 not only to   state the true    
distinction of the ,persons in the      
,godhead1 but to   account likewise for 
some dubious passages in the fathers1   
and   reconcile the different parties   
that contend about them3 only we must   
take care 7as ,i said before7 that1 when
 we discourse of the sacred   ,trinity1 
the word person be not conceived in the 
same sense as   among men4 ,the persons 

of men are distinct men1 as well as     
distinct persons2 but this is no ground 
for us to affirm1 that the   persons in 
the divine nature are distinct ,gods4   
,the distinction of   the persons of men
 is founded in a separate and divided   
subsistence2   but this cannot be the   
foundation of the distinction of the    
divine   persons1 because separation and
 division cannot belong to an   infinite
 ,being4 ,in a word1 three human persons
 are three men1   because1 though they  
have the same specific nature1 yet they 
have   not the same numerical nature3   
but the three ,persons in the ,godhead  
are not three ,gods1 because they have  
the same numerical essence1   which     
belongs in common to them all3 and since
 it is confessed on all   hands1 that   
nature and subsistence go to the making 
up of a   person1 why may not the way of
 their subsistence be as different as   
the human and ,divine natures 7one      
finite1 and the other   infinite7 are   
confessed to be8 ,though therefore in   

things created   it is necessary for one
 single essence to subsist in one single
   person1 and no more2 yet this does   
not at all prove that the same must   be
 necessary in him1 whose nature is      
wholly different from   theirs1 and1    
consequently1 may differ as much in the 
manner of his   subsistence4 ,for 'tis a
 thing agreeable even to the notions of 
bare   reason to imagine1 that the      
divine nature has a way of subsisting   
very different from the subsistence of  
any created being1 and   consequently1  
may have one and the same nature        
diffused into three   distinct persons3 
but how1 and in what manner this is     
effected2   how one substance in the    
,deity is communicated to more1 and     
becomes   theirs2 how of one and the    
same essence1 there can be three persons
   numerically different2 this is the   
difficulty1 and what made the   holy    
father 7writing upon the argument7      
confess1 #8,that the mystery   of the   
,trinity is immense and                 

incomprehensible1 beyond the            
expression of words1 or reach of sense2 
that it blinds our sight1 and   exceeds 
the capacity of our understanding3 ,i   
understand it not1 says   he2           
nevertheless ,i will comfort myself in  
this1 that angels are   ignorant of it1 
nor do ages apprehend it2 that neither  
the apostles   enquired after it1 nor   
the ,son himself has thought fit to     
declare it4'    8,the only valid        
objection 7and to which all others are  
reducible7   against these              
personalities1 so often occurring in    
scripture1 is   taken from the          
simplicity of the divine nature1 which1 
in the   opinion of some1 will not admit
 of any distinction4 ,but though the    
simplicity of ,god excludes all mixture1
 i4 e4 all composition of   things      
heterogeneous in the ,godhead1 7there   
being nothing in ,god but   what is     
,god7 yet1 notwithstanding this1 there  
may be a distinction of   hypostases in 
the ,godhead1 provided they are         

homogeneous1 and of   the same nature4  
,nay1 the simplicity of the divine      
nature1 if rightly   considered1 is so  
far from excluding1 that it necessarily 
infers a   distinction of hypostases in 
the ,godhead3 for1 since the simplicity 
of the ,godhead consists chiefly in     
this1 that ,god is a pure eternal       
,mind1 free from the mixture of all kind
 of matter whatever2 an eternal   ,mind 
must needs have in it1 from all         
eternity1 a notion or conception   of   
itself1 which the schools call verbum   
mentis2 nor can it1 at any   time1 be   
conceived without it4 ,now this word    
cannot be in ,god1 what   it is in us1 a
 transient vanishing accident2 for then 
the divine   nature would be compounded 
of substance and accident1 which would  
be repugnant to its simplicity2 and     
therefore must be a substantial         
subsisting word1 and though not divided1
 yet distinct from the   eternal ,mind1 
from whence it proceeds4 ,this is no    
novel subtlety of   the schools1 but a  

notion1 that#if runs through all the    
,fathers of   the first ages1 and is not
 destitute of a sufficient foundation in
   scripture4 ,it proves indeed only two
 ,persons in the ,godhead1 not a        
,trinity2 but then it proves1 that a    
distinction of persons in the   ,godhead
 is very consistent with its simplicity2
 nay1 that from the   true nature of the
 simplicity of the ,godhead1 such a     
distinction   necessarily follows2 and  
if there is a distinction of two1 there 
may   be of three2 and that there is of 
three1 the full evidence of   scripture 
7as ,i have already shewn7 abundantly   
assures us40    ,,stackhouse4  ,footnote
 #id3    ,to confirm this we may add1   
that1 if the difference of copies       
happened   by the negligence of         
transcribers1 such a mistake is much    
more easily   made by omitting a clause1
 than by inserting one1 especially when 
the same words occur twice very near    
together1 which is the present   case3  
and that1 without this clause1 the next 

verse is maimed1 and   hardly good      
sense1 the words1 in earth1 standing    
disjointed by   themselves2 whereas the 
words1 in heaven1 7as we now read them7 
make   a clear1 strong1 and elegant     
antithesis3 and for these reasons1 those
   copies1 in which this passage is     
found1 are more likely to be true1      
than those in which it is               
wanting4--,trapp's ,doctrine of the     
,trinity4  ,footnote #ie3    ,a late    
learned author has given us this        
definition of a single   person1 8,that 
it is an intelligent agent1 having the  
distinctive   characters of ,i1 thou1   
and he1 and not divided or distinguished
   into more intelligent agents1 capable
 of the same characters40   ,waterland's
 second ,defence1 and thereupon he thus 
argues in   another place1 8,our ideas  
of person are plainly taken from our    
conceptions of human persons1 and from  
them transferred to other   subjects1   
though they do not strictly answer in   
every circumstance4   ,properly         

speaking1 he and him1 are no more       
applicable to a divine   person1 than   
she or her20 but we have no third way of
 denoting a   person1 and so1 of the    
two1 we choose the best1 and custom     
familiarizes it4--,his ,sermons at ,lady
 ,moyer's ,lectures4  ,footnote #if3    
,it has1 with good reason1 been supposed
 by the ,catholick writers1   that the  
design of the word  was to intimate1    
that the relation   of ,father and ,son 
hears some resemblance and analogy to   
that of   thought1 viz4 that as thought 
is co-eval with the mind1 so the   ,son 
is co-eval with the ,father2 and that as
 thought is closely united   to1        
proceeds from1 and yet remains in the   
mind1 so also may we   understand that  
the ,son is in the bosom of the ,father1
 proceeding from   him1 and yet never   
divided or separate1 but remaining in   
him and with   him4--,waterland's       
,sermons at ,lady ,moyer's ,lectures4   
,footnote #ig3    ,some1 who take       
delight in darkening this matter1 by    

pretending to   explain it1 call the    
former a  1 stans2 the latter1 fluens4  
,footnote #ih3    8,in the ,saviour's   
exalted relation to his ,father1 the    
name ,son of ,god   comes chiefly under 
observation4 ,it is known that in the   
sacred word1   rational creatures are   
often dignified with the honorary title 
of ,sons   or ,children of ,god2 and    
that in various respects1 and for       
obvious   reasons4 ,but certainly that  
name in ,christ signifies something     
higher4   ,john x4 #ce-ch4 ,he is not   
only a ,son of ,god1 but the ,son1 by   
way of   eminence above all  3 ,so that 
he is by this1 as a peculiar and        
proper denomination1 distinguished from 
other subjects4 ,we know1 that   the    
,son of ,god is come4 #a ,john v4 #bj4  
,john viii4 #cf4--;,he is ,god's        
only-begotten ,son4 ,john i4 #ad1 #ah4  
iii4 #af4 ,god's own ,son4 ,rom4 viii4  
#cb4 #8,to which of the angels said he  
at any time1 ,thou art my ,son1 this    
day have ,i begotten thee8' ,heb4 i4 #e4

 ,when ,christ spoke to his   disciples 
concerning the ,father1 he never said1  
our ,father1 7as he   had taught them to
 pray27 but always with an express      
distinction my   ,father4 ,luke ii4 #dh1
 #di4 ,john ii4 #af4 chiefly ,john xx4  
#ag4----;,from the   prophetic doctrine1
 that name was known in ,israel1 as in  
its full   force applicable to the      
,messias2 which can be clearly evinced  
from   various passages4 ,mat4 xvi4 #ae1
 #af4 xxvi4 #fc4 ,mark iii4 #aa4 ,john  
vi4   #fi4 xi4 #bg4 x4 #cf4 ,amidst all 
the confusion of their apprehensions1   
they found so much emphasis in it1 that 
the acknowledgment of it was   among    
them a ground of adoration1 ,mat4 xiv4  
#cc4 ,john ix4 #ce-ch42 so   that when  
,jesus1 with the distinction and        
appropriation of the divine   works1    
called ,god his ,father1 they thence    
concluded1 which the   ,saviour did not 
contradict1 that he held ,god for his   
own ,father1 and   thus made himself    
equal to ,god4 ,john v4 #ah4 x4 #cc-cf4 

,indeed1 however   intimate the         
connexion is betwixt being the ,messias1
 the ,christ1 and   being the ,son of   
,god1 this last signifies still         
something different1   something more   
original4 ,for ,paul preached ,christ1  
that he was the ,son   of ,god#ii4 ,in  
the love of the truth1 let us observe   
the divine   testimony1 he did not      
become the ,son of ,god by or after his 
coming in   the flesh1 by or after the  
execution of his ministry2 but herein is
   ,god's great mercy celebrated1 that  
#8he sent him who was his ,son1 made    
him under the law1 and delivered him up 
for us all4' ,this is evident1   from a 
variety of passages4 ,gal4 iv4 #d4 ,rom4
 viii4 #cb4 ,heb4 v4 #h4 #a   ,john iv4 
#i1 #aj4 ,it is plainly supposed in the 
parable1 the lord of the   vineyard sent
 to the husbandmen many servants1 some  
of whom they beat1   and others they    
slew4 ,having therefore yet one son who 
was dear to   him1 he sent him last of  
all to them1 saying1 #8they will surely 

reverence my son4' ,mark xii4           
#f4----;,in his supreme excellence1 as  
the ,son   of ,god1 lies the reason of  
punishing unbelief4 ,as the ,son of     
,god1 #8he   is the brightness of his   
glory1 and the express image of his     
person4'   ,heb4 i4 #c4 ,on the         
self-same account1 he is1 according to  
the language   of men1 his heir1 that   
is1 has a natural right to all the works
 of   ,god1 especially to his church2   
which are also made by him1 in          
communion with the ,father4 ,see this   
described in a lofty strain by the      
apostle1 ,heb4 i4 #a-c4 iii4 #c-f4 ,col4
 i4 #ae-ag4 and also by ,jesus          
himself4 ,mark xii4 #f1 #g4----,though1 
therefore1 a further theological        
illustration of ,christ's divine sonship
 should best be preceded by the   proof 
of his true ,deity1 yet in the meantime1
 the name ,son of ,god1 as   ascribed to
 him1 points us not only to his         
distinguished elevation   above all     
creatures1 which ,arius acknowledged1   

but also to his unity   of nature with  
the ,father1#ajj and to the ground of   
his existence in   the eternal and      
necessary existence of the ,father40    
,,wynpersse4  ,footnote #ii3    ,acts   
ix4 #bj42 see also chap4 viii4 #cg4 ,in 
both these places1 however1   there is a
 different reading in the ,greek4 ,but  
compare ,jesus' first   accusation      
before ,pilate1 that he said he was the 
,christ4 7,luke xxiii4   #b47 with a new
 and a later1 that he made himself the  
,son of ,god4 7,john   xix4 #g4         
,footnote #ajj3    ,unity of nature with
 the ,father4 ,in the original it is    
equality of   his nature4 ,but          
apprehending that1 by an error of the   
press1 gelykheid   is put for eenigheyd1
 ,i have adventured to translate the    
passage as   above2 and that in the     
fullest consistency with the design of  
the   worthy author1 in the whole of    
this treatise1 and with his express     
words in the close of the second        
paragraph of this very section1 where   

he says1 8we dare not esteem ,christ    
less than 1 that is1 of   the same      
nature or essence with ,god40  ,footnote
 #aja3    8,the meaning of the terms1   
,son of ,god1 only-begotten ,son of     
,god1   must needs be of importance1    
inasmuch as the belief of the idea      
signified by them was made a leading    
article in the primitive   professions  
of faith4 ,john vi4 #fi4 iii4 #ah4 xx4  
#ca4 ,acts xviii4 #cg4 #a   ,john iv4   
#ae4 ,whatever disputes have arisen of  
late among christians1   there seems to 
have been none on this subject in the   
times of the   apostles4 ,both ,jews and
 ,christians appear to have agreed in   
this3 the   only question that divided  
them was1 whether ,christ was the ,son  
of   ,god1 or not8 ,if there had been   
any ambiguity in the term1 it would     
have been very unfit to express the     
first article of the christian   faith4 
8,it has been frequently suggested1 that
 the ground of ,christ's sonship   is   
given us in ,luke i4 #ce1 and is no     

other than his miraculous   conception3 
,the ,holy ,ghost shall come upon thee1 
and the power of the   ,highest shall   
overshadow thee3 therefore also that    
holy thing which   shall be born of     
thee1 shall be called the ,son of ,god4 
8,it is true that our ,lord was         
miraculously conceived of the ,holy     
,spirit1 and that such a conception was 
peculiar to him2 but it does   not      
follow that by this he became the ,son1 
or only-begotten ,son of   ,god4 ,nor   
does the passage in question prove any  
such thing4 ,it has   been thought that 
the phrase ,son of ,god1 in this place1 
is used in a   peculiar sense1 or that  
it respects the origin of ,christ's     
human   nature1 as not being by ordinary
 generation of man1 but by the          
extraordinary influence of ,god2 and    
that he is here called the ,son of      
,god in the same sense as ,adam is so   
called1 7,luke iii4 #ch47 as being      
produced by his immediate power4 ,if    
this be the meaning of the term in   the

 passage in question1 ,i should think it
 will be allowed to be   peculiar1 and  
therefore that no general conclusion can
 be drawn from   it1 as to the meaning  
of the term in other passages4 ,but     
granting that   the sonship of ,christ1 
in this place1 is to be understood in   
the same   sense as it is commonly to be
 taken in the new testament1 still it   
does not follow that the miraculous     
conception is the origin of it4 ,it     
may be a reason given why ,christ is    
called the ,son of ,god2 but not   why  
he is so4 ,christ is called the ,son of 
,god as raised from the   dead1 and as  
exalted at the right hand of ,god4 ,acts
 xiii4 #cc4 ,heb4 i4   #d1 #e4 ,did he  
then become the ,son of ,god by these   
events8 ,this is   impossible2 for      
sonship is not a progressive matter4 ,if
 it arose from   his miraculous         
conception1 it could not for that reason
 arise from his   resurrection1 or      
exaltation3 and so on the other hand1 if
 it arose   from his resurrection1 or   

exaltation1 it could not proceed from   
his   miraculous conception4 ,but if    
each be understood of his being hereby  
proved1 acknowledged1 or1 as the        
scriptures express it1 declared   to be 
the ,son of ,god with power1 all is easy
 and consistent4    8,whether the terms1
 ,son of ,god1 and only-begotten ,son of
 ,god1 be   not expressive of his divine
 personality1 antecedent to all         
consideration of his being conceived of 
the holy ,spirit1 in the womb   of the  
,virgin1 let the following things       
determine4    8,first3 ,the glory of the
 only-begotten of the ,father1 and the  
glory of the ,word1 are used as         
convertible terms1 as being the same3   
but the latter is allowed to denote the 
divine person of ,christ1   antecedent  
to his being made flesh2 the same       
therefore must be true of   the former4 
,the ,word was made flesh1 and we beheld
 his glory2 that   is1 the glory of the 
,word1 the glory as of the only-begotten
 of the   ,father1 full of grace and    

truth4 ,john i4 #ad4 ,it is true1 it was
 by   the ,word being made flesh1 and   
dwelling amongst us1 that his glory     
became apparent2 but the glory itself   
was that of the eternal ,word1   and    
this is the same as the glory of the    
only-begotten of the   ,father4         
8,secondly3 ,the ,son of ,god is said to
 dwell in the bosom of the   ,father2   
that is1 he is intimately acquainted    
with his character and   designs1 and   
therefore fit to be employed in making  
them known to men4   ,the only-begotten 
,son1 who is in the bosom of the        
,father1 he hath   declared him4 ,john  
i4 #ah4 ,if this be applied to his      
divine person1 or   that eternal life   
which was with the ,father1 and was     
manifested to   us1 #a ,john i4 #b4 it  
is natural and proper2 it assigns his   
omniscience   as qualifying him for     
making known the mind of ,god3 but if he
 became   the only-begotten of the      
,father by his miraculous conception1 or
 by   any other means1 the beauty of the

 passage vanishes4    8,thirdly3 ,god is
 frequently said to have sent his ,son  
into the   world3 ,john vii4 #ag4 x4    
#cf4 #a ,john iv4 #i1 #aj4 but this     
implies that he   was his ,son          
antecedent to his being sent4 ,to       
suppose otherwise1 is no   less absurd  
than supposing that when ,christ is said
 to have sent forth   his twelve        
disciples1 they were not disciples1 but 
in consequence of   his sending them1 or
 of some preparation pertaining to their
 mission4    8,fourthly3 ,christ is     
called the ,son of ,god antecedently to 
his   miraculous conception1 and        
consequently he did not become such by  
it4--,in the fulness of time ,god sent  
forth his ,son1 made of a woman1   made 
under the law1 that he might redeem them
 that were under the   law--,god sent   
his own ,son1 in the likeness of sinful 
flesh4 ,gal4 iv4   #d4 ,rom4 viii4      
#c4--,the terms1 made of a woman1 made  
under the law1   are a parenthesis4 ,the
 position affirmed is1 that ,god sent   

forth his   ,son to redeem the          
transgressors of the law4 ,his being    
made of a woman1   and made under the   
law1 or covenant of works1 which man had
 broken1   expressed the necessary means
 for the accomplishment of this great   
end2 which means1 though preceding our  
redemption1 yet follow the   sonship of 
the ,redeemer4 ,there is equal proof    
that ,christ was the ,son   of ,god     
before he was made of a woman1 as that  
he was the ,word   before he was made   
flesh4 ,the phraseology is the same in  
the one   case as in the other4 ,if it  
be alleged that ,christ is here called  
the   ,son of ,god on account of his    
being made of a woman1 ,i answer1 ,if   
so1   it is also on account of his being
 made under the law1 which is too       
absurd to admit of a                    
question4--,moreover3 ,to say that ,god 
sent his own   ,son in the likeness of  
sinful flesh1 is equal to saying that   
the ,son   of ,god assumed human nature3
 he must therefore have been the ,son of

   ,god before his incarnation4         
8,fifthly3 ,christ is called the ,son of
 ,god antecedent to his being           
manifested to destroy the works of the  
devil3 but he was manifested   to       
destroy the works of the devil by taking
 upon him human nature2   consequently1 
he was the ,son of ,god antecedent to   
the human nature   being assumed4 ,there
 is equal proof from the phraseology of 
#a ,john   iii4 #h4 that he was the ,son
 of ,god antecedent to his being        
manifested to destroy the works of the  
devil1 as there is from that   of #a    
,tim4 iii4 #af4 that he was ,god        
antecedent to his being   manifested in 
the flesh2 or from #a ,john i4 #b1 that 
that eternal   life1 which was with the 
,father1 was such antecedent to his     
being   manifested to us4    8,sixthly3 
,the ordinance of baptism is commanded  
to be administered   in the name of the 
,father1 and of the ,son1 and of the    
,holy ,spirit4   ,matt4 xxviii4 #ai4    
,the terms1 ,father and ,holy ,spirit1  

will be   allowed to denote divine      
persons2 and what good reasons can be   
given   for another idea being fixed to 
the term ,son8    8,seventhly3 ,the     
proper deity of ,christ precedes his    
office of   ,mediator1 or ,high ,priest 
of our profession1 and renders it an    
exercise   of condescension4 ,but the   
same is true of his sonship3 ,he maketh 
the ,son a ,high ,priest--,though he was
 a ,son1 yet learned he obedience4      
,heb4 vii4 #bh4 v4 #h4 ,his being the   
,son of ,god1 therefore1 amounts to     
the same thing as his being a divine    
person4    8,eighthly3 ,it is the proper
 deity of ,christ which gives dignity to
   his office of ,mediator3 but this    
dignity is ascribed to his being the    
,son of ,god4 ,we have a ,,great ,high  
,priest2 ,jesus1 the ,,son of   ,,god4  
,heb4 iv4 #ad4 ,his being the ,son of   
,god1 therefore1 amounts to the   same  
thing as his being a divine person4     
8,lastly3 ,it is the proper deity of    
,christ which gives efficacy to   his   

sufferings--,by ,,himself he purges our 
sins4 ,heb4 i4 #c4 ,but this   efficacy 
is ascribed to his being the ,son of    
,god--,the blood of ,jesus   ,christ1   
,,his ,,son1 cleanseth us from all sin4 
#a ,john i4 #g4 ,his being   the ,son of
 ,god therefore amounts to the same     
thing as his being a   divine person4   
8,those who attribute ,christ's sonship 
to his miraculous conception1   7those  
however to whom ,i refer17 are          
nevertheless constrained to allow   that
 the term implies proper divinity4      
,indeed this is evident from   ,john v4 
#ah1 where his saying that ,god was his 
own ,father is supposed   to be making  
himself equal with ,god4 ,but if the    
miraculous   conception be the proper   
foundation of his sonship1 why should it
   contain such an implication8 ,a holy 
creature might be produced by the       
over-shadowing of the ,holy ,spirit1    
which yet should be merely a   creature2
 i4 e4 he might1 on this hypothesis1    
profess to be the ,son   of ,god1 and   

yet be so far from making himself equal 
with ,god1 as to   pretend to be nothing
 more than a man4    8,it has been      
objected1 that ,christ1 when called the 
,son of ,god1 is   commonly spoken of as
 engaged in the work of mediation1 and  
not simply   as a divine person         
antecedent to it4 ,i answer2 ,in a      
history of the   rebellion in the year  
#agde1 the name of his ,royal ,highness1
 the   commander in chief1 would often  
be mentioned in connexion with his      
equipage and exploits2 but none would   
infer from hence that he thereby        
became the king's son4    8,it is       
further objected1 that sonship implies  
inferiority1 and   therefore cannot be  
attributed to the divine person of      
,christ4--,but1   whatever inferiority  
may be attached to the idea of ,sonship1
 it is not   an inferiority of nature1  
which is the point in question3 and if  
any   regard be paid to the ,scriptures1
 the very contrary is true4 ,christ's   
claiming to be the ,son of ,god was     

making himself1 not inferior1 but   as  
,god1 or equal with ,god4    8,once     
more3 ,sonship1 it is said1 implies     
posteriority1 or that   ,christ1 as     
,son1 could not have existed till after 
the ,father4 ,to   attribute no other   
divinity to him1 therefore1 than what is
 denoted by   sonship1 is attributing   
none to him2 as nothing can be divine   
which is   not eternal4 ,but if this    
reasoning be just1 it will prove that   
the   divine purposes are not eternal1  
or that there was once a point in       
duration1 in which ,god was without     
thought1 purpose or design4 ,for it   is
 as true1 and may as well be said1 that 
,god must exist before he   could       
purpose1 as that the ,father must exist 
before he had a ,son3 but   if ,god must
 exist before he could purpose1 there   
must have been a   point in duration in 
which he existed without purpose1       
thought1 or   design2 that is1 in which 
he was not ,god6 ,the truth is1 the     
whole of   this apparent difficulty     

arises from the want of distinguishing  
between the order of nature and the     
order of time4 ,in the order of         
nature1 the sun must have existed before
 it could shine2 but in the   order of  
time1 the sun and its rays are coeval3  
it never existed a   single instant     
without them4 ,in the order of nature1  
,god must have   existed before he could
 purpose2 but in the order of time1 or  
duration1 he never existed without his  
purpose3 for a ,god1 without   thought  
or purpose1 were no ,god4 ,and thus in  
the order of nature1 the   ,father must 
have existed before the ,son2 but1 in   
that of duration1 he   never existed    
without the ,son1 ,the ,father and the  
,son therefore are   properly eternal40 
,,fuller4  ,footnote #ajb3      is used 
six times in the ,new ,testament2 in two
 or three of   which places it might be 
rendered1 without deviating from the    
sense of   the respective texts1        
quidem1 as well as quamvis2 and ,i see  
no   reason why the enclitic particle 1 

being added to 1 should   always1       
without exception1 alter the sense      
thereof1 any more than when   it is     
joined to 1 1 or 4 ,and whereas ,i      
render 1 in   ver4 #i4 ,but1 instead of 
,and1 that may be justified by several  
scriptures1 where it is so rendered2 as 
,luke vii4 #ce4 ,matth4 xii4 #ci4       
,acts x4 #bh4 #a ,cor4 xvi4 #ab4        
,footnote #ajc3    ,dr4 ,ridgley differs
 from the most of his brethren on the   
,sonship of   ,christ as ,mediator4 ,the
 following note1 and the two preceding1 
represent1 it is presumed1 the orthodox 
doctrine on this important   head4      
8,the ,redeemer is the ,son of ,god1 in 
a peculiar and appropriated sense1   and
 by which he is distinguished from every
 other person in the   universe4 ,he is 
therefore called the first begotten1 or 
first born   son of ,god3 his only      
begotten son1 his own son2 and eminently
 ,the   ,son1 and ,the ,son of the      
,father4 ,his dear ,son2 or1 as it is in
 the   original1 ,the ,son of his love2 

,his beloved ,son1 in whom he is well   
pleased4 #8,for he received from ,god   
the ,father1 honour and glory1 when     
there came such a voice to him from the 
excellent glory1 ,this is my   beloved  
,son1 in whom ,i am well pleased4' #b   
,pet4 i4 #ag4 ,he is #8,the only        
begotten ,son1 which is in the bosom of 
the ,father4' ,john i4 #ah4 ,who   only 
knows the ,father2 and none does or can 
reveal and make him known   but the     
,son4 ,matt4 xi4 #bg4 ,john i4 #ah4 ,he 
being the brightness of his   glory1 and
 the express image of his person2 he    
that hath seen the ,son1   hath seen the
 ,father1 ,john xiv4 #i4 ,heb4 i4 #c4   
,which epithets and   declarations      
distinguish him from all other sons2 as 
much as his   ,father is distinguished  
from all other fathers4 ,he is mentioned
 as the   ,son of ,god above an hundred 
times in the ,new ,testament2 and fifty 
times by the apostle ,john4 ,and the    
,father of ,jesus ,christ1 the ,son1 is 
mentioned above two hundred and twenty  

times2 and more than one   hundred and  
thirty times in the gospel and epistles 
of ,st4 ,john4 ,jesus   ,christ often   
makes use of the epithets1 ,the ,father1
 ,my ,father1 c4   ,this character is   
represented as essential to the         
,redeemer and   peculiar to him1 and is 
an essential article of the ,christian  
faith4   ,this confession ,peter made as
 the common faith of the disciples of   
,christ4 #8,we believe1 and are sure    
that thou art that ,christ1 the ,son    
of the living ,god1' ,john vi4 #fi4     
,matt4 xvi4 #af4 ,this was the ,eunuch's
   faith1 required in order to his being
 baptized4 #8,i believe that ,jesus     
,christ is the ,son of ,god4' ,and he   
who believes with all his heart1   that 
,jesus ,christ is the ,son of ,god1 hath
 the ,son1 and with him   eternal life4 
,when ,peter made this confession1      
#8,thou art ,christ1 the   ,son of the  
living ,god1' ,christ said to him1      
#8,blessed art thou2 for   flesh and    
blood hath not revealed it unto thee1   

but my ,father which is   in heaven4'   
,matt4 xvi4 #af1 #ag4 #8,he that        
believeth on the ,son1 hath             
everlasting life1 and he that believeth 
not the ,son1 shall not see   life4'    
,john iii4 #cf4 ,and ,john says1        
#8,whosoever shall confess that   ,jesus
 is the ,son of ,god1 ,god dwelleth in  
him1 and he in ,god4 ,who is he   that  
overcometh the world1 but he that       
believeth that ,jesus is the ,son   of  
,god6 ,he that hath the ,son1 hath life2
 and he that hath not the ,son   of     
,god1 hath not life4 ,these things have 
,i written unto you that   believe on   
the name of the ,son of ,god3 that ye   
may know ye have   eternal life1 and    
that ye may believe on the name of the  
,son of   ,god4' #a ,john iv4 #ae4 v4   
#e1 #ab1 #ac4    8,it must be farther   
observed1 that this title1 the ,son of  
,god1 is the   highest title that is    
given to the ,redeemer1 and denotes his 
divinity1 or that he is himself ,god1   
and therefore equal with the   ,father1 

if his divinity be any where expressed  
in the ,bible2 and that   it is there   
abundantly declared1 we have before     
shewed4 ,he styles   himself1 and is    
called ,the ,son of ,man1 more than     
eighty times in   the ,new ,testament1  
by which epithet his humanity is more   
especially   denoted1 but not excluding 
his divinity4 ,and1 on the contrary1 he 
is   called the ,son of ,god1 more      
particularly to express his infinitely  
superior character1 his divinity or     
godhead4 ,in this view1 let the         
following passages be considered4 ,when 
the angel1 who declared to the   virgin 
,mary that she should be the mother of  
the ,messiah1 expressed to   her the    
greatness of this her ,son1 he does it  
by saying that he should   be called the
 ,son of the ,highest1 the ,son of ,god4
 #8,he shall be   great1 and shall be   
called the ,son of the ,highest4        
,therefore also that   holy thing which 
shall be born of thee1 shall be called  
the ,son of   ,god4' ,luke i4 #cb1 #ce4 

,if this were not his greatest1 his     
highest title   and character1 he most  
certainly would have given him a higher1
 and   one that did fully express       
divinity4 ,this1 therefore1 did express 
it   in the fullest and strongest       
manner4 ,and no one1 who believes in the
   divinity of ,christ1 can1            
consistently1 have any doubt of it4 ,and
 when   the ,father gives him the       
highest encomium1 and recommends him to 
men1   as worthy of their highest       
regards1 implicit obedience1 and        
unlimited   trust and confidence1 and   
commands them thus to regard1 love1     
trust   in1 and obey him1 this is the   
highest character he gives him1 by which
   his divinity is expressed1 #8,this is
 my beloved ,,son1 in whom ,i am   well 
pleased3 ,hear ye him4' ,if this does   
not express his divinity1 we   may be   
sure divinity is no part of his         
character2 and that he is not   ,god4   
,so1 when ,peter undertakes to express  
the idea he had of the high   and       

glorious character of his ,lord and     
,master1 he does it in the   following  
words1 #8,thou art the ,christ1 the ,son
 of the living ,god4' ,if   ,peter      
believed the divinity of ,christ1 he    
certainly expressed this in   these     
words2 for he did not conceive of any   
higher character1 that   could be given 
in any other words4 ,this also appears  
by ,nathaniel's   using this epithet1   
when he was struck with wonder and      
surprise at the   omniscience of        
,christ4 #8,rabbi1 thou art the ,,son of
 ,god1 thou art   the ,king of ,israel4'
 ,john i4 #di4 ,when our ,lord ,jesus   
,christ proposed   himself to the man   
whom he had restored to sight1 as the   
proper object   of his faith and trust1 
he said to him1 #8,dost thou believe on 
the ,son   of ,god8' ,and when he told  
the man that he himself was the person1 
he   said1 #8,lord1 ,i believe4 ,and he 
worshipped him4' ,john ix4 #ce1 #ch4 ,it
   appears from this1 that ,son of ,god 
was the highest title which ,jesus      

assumed1 and that this had special      
reference to1 and expressed his         
divinity2 and therefore in this         
character1 and as the ,son of ,god1 this
   pious man paid him divine honour1 and
 worshipped him4 ,when the   disciples  
of our ,lord1 and all that were in the  
ship with them1 had   seen him walking  
upon the sea1 in the midst of a terrible
 storm1 and   reducing the boisterous   
winds1 and raging waves1 to a calm1 by  
his   word and presence1 they were      
struck with a fresh and affecting       
conviction of his divinity1 that he was 
,god1 and expressed it by   coming to   
him1 falling down and worshiping him1   
#8saying1 of a truth1   thou art the    
,son of ,god4' ,matt4 xiv4 #cc4 ,in     
which words they expressed   his        
divinity1 and gave a reason for their   
worshipping him1 as their   ,lord and   
their ,god1 viz4 that they were sure    
from clear and abundant   evidence1 that
 he was the ,son of ,god4 ,the apostle  
,john1 when he would   represent ,jesus 

,christ in his highest and most glorious
 character1   gives him this title1 and 
adds1 #8,this is the true ,god4' ,he    
says1 #8,we   know that the ,son of ,god
 is come1 and hath given us an          
understanding1   that we may know him   
that is true3 ,and we are in him that is
 true1   even in his ,son ,jesus        
,christ4 ,this is the true ,god1 and    
eternal   life4' #a ,john v4 #bj4       
8,it is to be farther observed1 that    
when our ,lord said to the ,jews1       
#8,my ,father worketh hitherto1 and ,i  
work1' the ,jews1 therefore sought   the
 more to kill him1 because he said that 
,god was his ,father1 7his   own proper 
,father1 as it is in the original7      
#8,,making ,,himself ,,equal   ,,with   
,,god4' ,this is to be understood as the
 sense which ,st4 ,john the             
,evangelist puts upon the words of      
,christ1 #8,my ,father worketh hitherto1
   and ,i work4' ,for this was making   
himself equal with ,god the ,father1 as 
doing the same work with him3 ,and this 

is represented as implied in   ,god's   
being his own ,father2 or in his being  
the ,father's own ,son1   the ,son of   
,god4 ,but if we understand it as the   
sense which the ,jews   put upon the    
words of ,christ1 and that they said    
this was making   himself equal with    
,god1 it amounts to the same thing2 for 
it appears   that their inference was   
just2 and our ,saviour is so far from   
denying   it to be true1 that in his    
reply to them1 he confirms it1 and      
asserts   that whatsoever the ,father   
does1 the ,son does the same2 and       
instances   in his raising the dead1 and
 judging the world1 and having all      
things1   and all power in his hands4   
#8,that all men should honour the ,son1 
even   as they honour the ,father4'     
,john v4 #ac-ag4 ,thus he makes the ,son
 equal   with the ,father4 ,hence it    
appears that to be the ,son of ,god1 and
 ,god's   own ,son1 is the same with a  
divine person1 and denotes one who is   
truly ,god2 and that this title is used 

to express the divinity1 rather   than  
the humanity of ,jesus ,christ4    8,the
 same appears from what passed between  
our ,lord and the ,jews at   another    
time4 ,he said to them1 #8,i and my     
,father are ,one4' ,this1 they   said1  
was blasphemy1 because being a man1 he  
made himself ,god4 ,it is   plain from  
the answer which he makes to them that  
they considered him   as a blasphemer1  
because he claimed to be the ,son of    
,god1 by calling   ,god his ,father4    
#8,say ye of him whom the ,father hath  
sanctified1 and   sent into the world1  
,thou blasphemest1 because ,i said1 ,i  
am the ,son   of ,god8' ,this was the   
blasphemy with which they charged him2  
because   they considered his saying1   
that he was the ,son of ,god1 by calling
 ,god   his ,father1 as an assertion    
that he was ,god4 ,john x4 #cj1 #cc1    
#cf4 ,and   it appears1 not only from   
this passage1 but from others1 that the 
,jews1 and others1 did affix the idea of
 divinity to the ,son of ,god1   and    

considered this title as expressing a   
character infinitely above a   mere     
creature4 ,when ,jesus was arraigned    
before the ,jewish council1 the   ,high 
,priest charged him with the solemnity  
of an oath1 saying1 #8,i   adjure thee  
by the living ,god1 that thou tell us1  
whether thou be the   ,christ1 the ,son 
of the living ,god4' ,and when ,jesus   
answered in the   affirmative1 he with  
all the members of the council1 charged 
him with   blasphemy2 and pronounced him
 worthy of death for making this claim4 
,matt4 xxvi4 #fd1 #fe1 #ff4 ,and they   
brought this accusation against him   to
 ,pilate1 #8,we have a law1 and by our  
law he ought to die1 because he   made  
himself the ,son of ,god4 ,when1        
therefore1 ,pilate heard that   saying1 
he was the more afraid4' ,john xix4 #g1 
#h4 ,by this1 it is   evident that      
,pilate considered the ,son of ,god1 to 
imply divinity4 ,when   the ,centurion1 
and the guard who were with him1 saw the
 earthquake and   the other supernatural

 events which attended the crucifixion  
of ,jesus   ,christ1 #8they feared      
greatly1 saying1 ,truly this was the    
,son of ,god4'   ,matt1 xxvii4 #ed4     
,from this1 it is evident that they     
considered the ,son   of ,god to be more
 than a man1 at least1 if not really    
,god4    8,there was some idea and      
belief propagated among other nations1  
as   well as the ,jews1 of an           
extraordinary personage1 a divinity1 who
 was   denominated ,the ,son of ,god1   
and who was to make his appearance in   
the world4 ,to this1 ,nebuchadnezzar    
doubtless had reference1 when he   said1
 that in a vision1 he saw a fourth      
person1 walking in the midst   of the   
fire of the furnace into which he had   
cast three men2 and that   none of them 
had been hurt by the fire2 and the form 
of the fourth was   like the ,son of    
,god4 ,dan iii4 #be4 ,and who but this  
divine person can   be meant by ,agur1  
when he says1 #8,who hath ascended up   
into heaven1 or   descended8 ,who hath  

gathered the wind in his fists8 ,who    
hath bound the   waters in a garment8   
,who hath established all the ends of   
the earth8   ,what is his name1 and what
 is his ,son's name1 if thou canst      
tell8'   ,prov4 xxx4 #d4    8,this      
epithet and character we find expressly 
mentioned by ,david1 the   divinely     
inspired king of ,israel1 in the second 
,psalm4 ,and he is there   introduced   
and described1 as a divinity1 who claims
 divine homage1   trust1 and worship1 as
 the ,omnipotent heir1 possessor and    
ruler of the   world4 #8,i will declare 
the decree4 ,the ,lord hath said unto   
me1 ,thou   art ,,my ,,son1 this day    
have ,i begotten thee4 ,ask of me1 and  
,i shall give   thee the heathen for    
thine inheritance1 and the uttermost    
parts of   the earth for thy possession4
 ,thou shalt break them with a rod of   
iron2 thou shalt dash them in pieces    
like a potter's vessel4 ,be wise   now1 
therefore1 ,o ye kings2 be instructed1  
ye judges of the earth4   ,serve the    

,lord with fear1 and rejoice with       
trembling4 ,kiss the ,son1   lest he be 
angry1 and ye perish from the way1 when 
his wrath is   kindled but a little4    
,blessed are all they that put their    
trust in   him4'#ajd ,from this ancient 
oracle in ,israel1 and from a revelation
   which was made upon the first        
apostacy1 and handed down by tradition1 
not only the ,jews1 but also those of   
other nations who had any   particular  
connexion with them1 were taught to     
consider the expected   ,messiah as the 
,son of ,god in a peculiar and          
appropriated sense2 and as   implying   
real divinity4 ,therefore1 it was       
supposed on all hands1 that   this      
person1 the ,son of ,god1 the ,king of  
,israel1 the ,king of the ,jews1   was  
to be worshipped as worthy to receive   
divine honours4 ,hence the   wise men   
from the ,east1 being admonished of the 
birth of this glorious   personage1 came
 to worship him1 to pay him divine      
honours2 for which   they had a         

particular warrant1 having had him      
pointed out to them by a   ,,star1 which
 was a known symbol1 or hieroglyphic of 
the ,divinity1 or a   ,god4 ,and ,herod 
took it for granted1 that this person   
was to be   worshipped1 and receive     
divine honours4 ,for he said to the wise
 men1   #8,when ye have found him1 bring
 me word again1 that ,i may come and    
worship him also4'    8,all this will be
 of no weight1 indeed1 and as nothing   
with the   ,anti-trinitarians1 the      
,sabellians2 and with all those who deny
 the   divinity of ,jesus ,christ1 the  
,arians and ,socinians4 ,but they who   
believe in a ,trinity of persons in the 
,deity1 and that ,jesus ,christ is      
,god1 the second person of the ,trinity1
 must be sensible that he is   called   
the ,son of ,god1 the ,son of the       
,father1 with a special reference   to  
his divine nature1 and to denote his    
,godhead1 as the second person   in the 
,triune ,god4--,the ,arians and         
,socinians hold that he is the ,son of  

,god1 considered as a mere creature1    
being by this distinguished from   all  
other creatures2 and consequently that  
there was no ,son of ,god   before this 
creature did exist4 ,the latter1 or     
,trinitarians1 believe   that the       
sonship of ,jesus ,christ1 necessarily  
includes his divinity2   but are not all
 agreed as to the foundation of his     
sonship1 and in   what it consists4 ,it 
has been generally believed1 and the    
common   doctrine of the church of      
,christ1 from the beginning of the      
fourth   century1 and so far as appears 
from the days of the apostles to this   
time1 that ,jesus ,christ is the eternal
 ,son of ,god3 ,that his ,sonship   is  
essential to him1 as the second person  
in the ,trinity1 and that in   this     
sense1 he is the only begotten ,son of  
the ,father1 antecedent   to his        
incarnation1 and independent on it1 even
 from eternity4 ,but   there are some   
who think that the ,sonship of the      
,redeemer consists in   an union of the 

second person of the ,trinity1 or the   
,word1 with the   human nature2 and that
 he became the ,son of ,god by becoming 
man2 and   therefore before the         
incarnation1 there was no ,son of ,god1 
though   there were a ,trinity of       
persons in the ,,godhead4 ,this opinion 
seems to   be rather gaining ground1 and
 spreading1 of late4    8,those on each 
side of this question differ in their   
opinion of the   importance of it1 and  
of the bad tendency of either of these  
opposite   sentiments4 ,some suppose    
that the difference is of little or no  
importance1 as both believe the         
,redeemer to be ,god and man1 in one    
person1 and that he is the ,son of ,god1
 and that this implies his   divinity1  
though they differ in opinion respecting
 the time and manner   of his filiation4
 ,others think this is a difference so  
great and   important1 and attended with
 such consequences2 and that those who  
are   opposed to them on this point     
embrace such a great and dangerous      

error1 that they ought to be strenuously
 opposed3 and consequently do   not     
desire an accommodation1 or think it    
possible4    8,though it be needless and
 improper here to undertake the labour  
of   entering into all the arguments    
which have been produced1 or may be     
mentioned in support of each side of    
this question2 yet the following        
observations may not be altogether      
useless2 but may be of some help to     
form a judgment upon this point1        
agreeable to the scriptures4    8#a4 ,as
 this question respects the character of
 the ,redeemer1 it may   justly be      
considered as an important one2 as every
 thing relating to   his character is   
very important and interesting4 ,who    
would be willing   to be found at last  
taking the wrong side of this question2 
and always   to have entertained so     
unbecoming ideas and conceptions of the 
,redeemer1 which his must be1 if on this
 point he embraces and contends   for   
that which is directly contrary to the  

truth8 ,though such an error   should   
not be fatal to him who embraces it1 but
 be consistent with his   being a real  
,christian2 yet it must be a very       
criminal mistake1 and   dishonourable to
 ,jesus ,christ2 as every idea of him   
must be1 which is   contrary to his true
 character3 ,for that is so perfect and 
glorious1   that nothing can be taken   
from it1 or added to it1 which will not 
mar   and dishonour it4 ,his character1 
as it respects the question before   us1
 is without doubt properly and clearly  
stated in divine revelation1   and if we
 embrace that which is contrary to the  
truth1 it must be   wholly our own      
fault1 and a very criminal abuse of the 
advantages   which we enjoy1 to know the
 only true ,god1 and ,jesus ,christ his 
,son1   whom he has sent4 ,those        
considerations ought to awaken our      
attention   to this subject1 and excite 
a concern and earnest desire to know and
   embrace the truth2 which will be     
attended with a modest1 humble1         

diligent enquiry1 sensible of the danger
 in which we are1 through   prejudice1  
or from other causes1 of embracing      
error2 and earnestly   looking to the   
great ,prophet to lead us into the      
truth4    8#b4 ,what has been observed  
above1 and1 it is believed1 made        
evident1   viz4 that the term1 ,son of  
,god1 so often given to ,christ1 is used
 to   denote his divine nature1 and to  
express his divinity1 rather than his   
humanity1 seems naturally1 if not       
necessarily1 to lead us to consider     
this character as belonging to him      
independent of his union to the   human 
nature1 and antecedent to his becoming  
man2 and therefore1 that   it belongs to
 him as ,god1 the second person in the  
,trinity4 ,for if his   sonship consists
 in his union to the human nature1 and  
he became a   son1 only by becoming a   
man2 then this character depends wholly 
upon   this union1 and is derived from  
his being made flesh3 ,therefore this   
epithet could not be properly used to   

denote his divinity1 independent   of   
his humanity1 or what he is as a divine 
person1 antecedent to his   incarnation2
 or to express his divine1 rather than  
his human nature4   ,and ,son of ,god1  
would be no higher a character1 and     
express no more   than ,son of man2     
which is contrary to the idea which the 
scripture   gives us on this head1 as   
has been shown4    8,this may1 perhaps1 
be in some measure illustrated by the   
following   instance4 ,the son of a     
nobleman of the first honour and        
dignity1 came   from ,europe1 and       
married the daughter of a plebian in    
,america1 by   which he became his son3 
,but as his honour and dignity did not  
consist   in his marrying this woman1 or
 in his being the son of the plebian1 by
   this union with his daughter1 but in 
his original character2 no man   thought
 of expressing his highest and most     
dignified character by   which he was   
worthy of the greatest respect1 by using
 an epithet which   denoted only his    

union to that woman1 and which was not  
applicable to   him in any other view2  
or by calling him son1 as expressing    
this new   relation3 ,but the highest   
title which they gave him1 was that     
which   had a special respect to1 and   
expressed his original character1 which 
he sustained antecedent to this union2  
and in which his highest   dignity      
consisted4 ,and he being the son of a   
nobleman and a lord1 in   which all his 
honour and dignity did consist1 they    
used this phrase1   ,my noble ,lord1 to 
express their highest respect1 and his  
most worthy   character4 ,this epithet  
was always used to express his original 
and   highest character and relation1   
and could not1 with propriety1 be used  
to express any thing else4 ,he was often
 called1 indeed1 the son of the         
plebian1 when they designed particularly
 to express his union to his   wife1 and
 speak of him as standing in this       
relation4    8#c4 ,the ,son of ,god is  
spoken of in many instances1 if not in  

every one   where this term is used1 so 
as will naturally lead the reader to    
consider him as sustaining this         
character and relation antecedent to    
his incarnation1 and independent of it4 
#8,god so loved the ,world that   he    
gave his only begotten ,son4' ,john iii4
 #af4 ,do not these words seem   to     
express this idea1 viz4 that there      
existed an only begotten son1           
antecedent to his being given2 that ,god
 gave this his ,son to the world   by   
his becoming flesh1 and being united to 
the human nature2 and not   that he     
became his ,son by this union8 #8,in    
this was manifested the love   of ,god  
towards us1 because that ,god sent his  
only begotten ,son into   the world1    
that we might live through him4 ,herein 
is love1 not that   we loved ,god1 but  
that he loved us1 and sent his ,son to  
be a   propitiation for our sins4' #a   
,john iv4 #i1 #aj4 ,if ,god sent his    
only   begotten ,son into the world1    
does not this suppose he had a ,son to  

send1 antecedent to his sending him2 and
 that he did not become his   ,son by   
his sending him into the world1 or only 
in consequence of this6   ,this is      
expressed in the same manner by ,st4    
,paul4 #8,but when the   fulness of time
 was come ,god sent forth his ,son1 made
 of a woman1   made under the law4'     
,gal4 iv4 #d4 ,the ,son was sent forth4 
,does not   this seem at least to imply 
that there was a ,son to be sent forth  
antecedent to his being made of a woman1
 and that he was not made a   ,son1 by  
being made of a woman or becoming man8  
#8,no man hath seen ,god   at any time3 
,the only begotten ,son which is in the 
bosom of the   ,father1 he hath declared
 him4' ,john i4 #ah4 ,do not these words
   naturally lead us to conceive of the 
only begotten ,son as existing in   the 
nearest union with the ,father as his   
,son1 independent of the human   nature8
    8,it is said1 #8,god was manifested 
in the flesh4' #a ,tim4 iii4 #af4 ,it   
would be unnatural and absurd to        

suppose1 from this expression1 that     
,jesus ,christ was not ,god1 antecedent 
to his being manifested in the   flesh1 
and that by his becoming man1 he became 
a ,god4 ,directly the   contrary to this
 is asserted1 viz4 that he who is ,god  
from eternity1   did in time appear in  
the human nature1 and manifested himself
 to be   ,god1 independent of the flesh1
 in which he appeared4 ,it is also said1
   #8,for this purpose1 the ,son of ,god
 was manifested1 that he might   destroy
 the works of the devil4' #a ,john iii4 
#h4 ,these two passages   appear to be  
parallel4 ,god manifested in the flesh1 
and the ,son of ,god   manifested1 are  
two expressions of the same thing4 ,from
 this it may be   inferred1 that the    
,son of ,god1 and ,god1 are synonymous  
here1 and of   the same import4 ,this   
serves to confirm what has been said    
above of   the use and meaning of the   
term1 ,son of ,god4 ,and may it not with
 equal   certainty be inferred from     
these two passages1 compared together1  

that   the ,son of ,god existed in this 
character as the ,son of ,god1          
antecedent   to his manifestation in the
 flesh1 and independent of it2 and that 
he   did not become the ,son of ,god by 
being made flesh8 ,if ,god be           
manifested in the flesh1 there must be a
 ,god to be manifested   antecedent to  
such a manifestation1 and independent of
 it4 ,and is it   not equally certain   
that if the ,son of ,god be manifested1 
he must have   existed the ,son of ,god1
 antecedent to such manifestation1 and  
independent of it8 ,consequently he did 
not become the ,son of ,god by   his    
being manifested in the flesh3 ,his     
,sonship does not consist in the   union
 of the divine and human natures in one 
person4 ,his personality   existed      
before this union with the human nature2
 and he was the ,son of   ,god before   
this3 ,this same ,son of ,god1 this same
 person who existed   without beginning1
 assumed the human nature1 not a human  
person1 into   a union with himself1 his

 own person1 and so appeared1 was       
manifested   in the flesh4    8,when    
,david speaks of the ,son of ,god1 and  
represents the ,father as   saying1     
#8,thou art my ,son1 this day have ,i   
begotten thee1' so long   before his    
incarnation1 the idea which most        
naturally arises in the   mind from this
 is1 that there was then such a person  
as the ,son1 who   did at that time     
declare the decree1 by the mouth of     
,david2 and not1   that there should in 
some future time be a ,son begotten1 who
 should   then declare the decree4 #8,i 
will declare the decree3 ,the ,lord said
   unto me1 thou art my ,son1 this day  
have ,i begotten thee4' ,it is very     
unnatural1 and contrary to all propriety
 of speech to suppose1 #8this   day have
 ,i begotten thee1' means ,i will beget 
thee in some future   time2 and that the
 ,son should be made to declare the     
decree1 long   before any such person   
existed2 and when there was in fact no  
such   ,son4 ,the decree which the ,son 

declares is not that declaration1       
#8,thou   art my son1 this day have ,i  
begotten thee2' but what follows1 #8ask 
of   me1 and ,i will give thee the      
heathen for thine inheritance1 and the  
uttermost parts of the earth for thy    
possession4 ,thou shalt break them      
with a rod of iron1 c4' #8,this day1'   
that is1 now1 not in time   which is    
passed1 or which is to come2 for with   
,god there is no   succession1 no time  
passed or to come2 but he exists1 as we 
may say1   in one eternal1 unsuccessive 
,,now4 ,therefore1 when we speak of an  
eternal1 immanent act1 it is most       
properly expressed thus1 #8,this day1   
or ,,now1 have ,i begotten thee4' ,this 
therefore is the sense in which   the   
best divines have generally understood  
it4    8,st4 ,paul cites this passage as
 being illustrated and verified in the  
resurrection of ,jesus ,christ4 ,acts   
xiii4 #cc4 ,but he cannot mean that   he
 by the resurrection became the ,son of 
,god1 and was then begotten3   for he   

had this title before that4 ,his meaning
 is explained by himself   in his       
epistle to the ,romans4 #8,declared to  
be the ,son of ,god by the              
resurrection from the dead4' ,rom4 i4   
#d4 ,that is1 this was a fresh and      
open manifestation and declaration that 
he was indeed what had been   often     
asserted of him1 and what he always was3
 ,the only begotten ,son   of ,god4     
8,what the angel said to the virgin     
,mary1 #8,he shall be great1 and shall  
he called the ,son of the ,highest--,the
 ,holy ,ghost shall come upon thee1     
and the power of the ,highest shall     
overshadow thee3 therefore also   that  
holy thing which shall be born of thee1 
shall be called the ,son   of ,god1'    
cannot reasonably be understood as a    
declaration that his   sonship consisted
 in his miraculous conception1 or in the
 union of the   second person of the    
,trinity with the human nature1 thus    
conceived3   ,but that this child1      
conceived in this manner1 and born of a 

virgin1   should appear1 and be known to
 be the ,son of ,god1 that very person  
who   had been spoken of and known in   
all past ages by this title2 of whom    
,isaiah had particularly spoken1 when he
 said1 #8,behold1 a virgin shall        
conceive1 and bear a ,son1 and shall    
call his name ,,immanuel4 ,unto us a    
,son is given1 and the government shall 
be upon his shoulder3 ,and his   name   
shall be called1 ,wonderful1            
,counsellor1 the mighty ,god3' ,isaiah  
vii4 #ad4 ix4 #f4 ,that this ,son was   
now to be born of the virgin ,mary3     
the long expected ,messiah1 who is      
considered and spoken of by the   people
 of ,god1 by the title of the ,son of   
,god1 which title he shall   bear1 as he
 is indeed the mighty ,god4    8,we are 
naturally lead to consider the ,son of  
,god as existing in this   character    
before his incarnation1 and the same    
with the ,word1 by what   is said of him
 in the first chapter of ,john4 #8,the  
,word was made flesh1   and dwelt among 

us2 and we beheld his glory as of the   
only begotten of   the ,father4 ,no man 
hath seen ,god at any time4 ,the only   
begotten ,son1   which is in the bosom  
of the ,father1 he hath declared him4   
,john bare   witness of him1 and cried1 
saying1 this was he of whom ,i spake1 he
   that cometh after me1 is preferred   
before me3 ,for he was before me4   ,and
 ,i saw1 and bear record that this is   
the ,son of ,god4' ,here ,john is       
represented as asserting that the ,son  
of ,god1 concerning whom he bore        
witness1 did exist before him1 which    
therefore must be before his            
incarnation2 for ,john was conceived    
before the incarnation of ,jesus4   ,but
 how can this be true1 if there were no 
,son of ,god1 before ,john   existed8   
,but if we consider the ,word and the   
,son of ,god as synonymous1   who was in
 the beginning with ,god1 and who was   
,god1 and created all   things1 this    
whole chapter will be plain and easy to 
be understood2   and we shall see ,john 

bearing witness to the ,son of ,god1 who
 existed   before him in this character1
 and was now come in the flesh4    8,we 
find the same representation made in the
 epistle to the ,hebrews4   #8,god1 who 
spake in time past unto the fathers1 by 
the prophets1 hath   in these last days 
spoken unto us by his ,son1 whom he hath
 appointed   heir of all things2 by whom
 also he made the worlds4 ,who being the
   brightness of his glory1 and the     
express image of his person1 and        
upholding all things by the word of his 
power1' c4 ,how could ,god   make the   
worlds by his ,son1 four thousand years 
before he had a ,son2   and on this     
supposition1 where is the propriety or  
truth of this   assertion8 ,and how     
could the ,son be said to uphold all    
things by the   word of his power1      
thousands of years before any ,son      
existed8 #8,and   again1 when he        
bringeth the first begotten into the    
world1 he saith1   ,and let all the     
angels of ,god worship him4' ,this      

expression naturally   suggests the idea
 that ,god the ,father had a            
first-begotten ,son to   bring into the 
world1 whom he commanded the angels to  
worship4 ,how can   he be said to bring 
his first begotten ,son into the world1 
when he   had no such ,son to bring into
 the world2 and indeed never did bring  
this his ,son into the world1 if he was 
begotten and received his   sonship in  
this world1 when he took the human      
nature in the womb of   the virgin1 and 
was not a son before8    8,again1       
speaking of ,melchisedec1 he says1 he   
was #8,without father1   without mother1
 without descent1 having neither        
beginning of days1   nor end of life2   
but made like unto the ,son of ,god4'   
,heb4 vii4 #c4 ,if   there were no ,son 
of ,god till the human nature of ,christ
 existed1 then   the ,son of ,god did   
begin to exist2 consequently there was a
   beginning of his days2 and           
,melchisedec was not made like him1 but 
unlike to him1 by having no beginning of

 days4    8,since there are so many     
passages of scripture1 7and there are   
many   more than have now been          
mentioned7 which seem to represent the  
,redeemer as the ,son of ,god1          
antecedent to his incarnation1 and      
independent of it1 which will naturally 
lead those who attend to them   to this 
idea of him2 and some of them cannot be 
easily reconciled to   the contrary     
opinion2 this will fully account for the
 generally   received doctrine in the   
,christian world from the earliest ages 
to   this time1 viz4 ,that the ,redeemer
 of man is the second person in the     
,trinity1 the eternal ,son of ,god1 who 
in the fulness of time was made   flesh1
 by a personal union with the human     
nature4    8#d4 ,it is worthy of        
consideration1 whether the contrary     
opinion1   viz4 ,that the ,redeemer is  
the ,son of ,god1 only by the second    
person   in the ,trinity being united to
 human nature1 and becoming man1 does   
not naturally lead to dangerous and evil

 consequences2 and what good   end is to
 be answered by it8 ,if it be not       
agreeable to scripture1 we   know it    
must be dangerous and hurtful in a      
greater or less degree1 7as   all errors
 respecting the person and character of 
the ,redeemer are7   and naturally tends
 to lead into other mistakes1 still     
greater1 and of   worse consequence4    
,and if it be agreeable to scripture1 it
 certainly   has no bad tendency4 ,if1  
therefore1 it does appear from reasoning
 upon   it1 or from fact and experience1
 that this opinion tends to evil        
consequences1 and has a bad effect2 we  
may safely conclude that it is   wrong1 
and contrary to divine revelation4      
8#a4 ,does not this sentiment tend to   
lower our ideas of the ,redeemer1   and 
lead into a way of thinking less        
honourably of him8 ,it has been         
observed that it appears from scripture1
 that this title1 ,son of ,god1   was   
used to express the highest and most    
honourable idea which his   friends had 

of his person and character4 ,but if we 
understand by it1   nothing but what    
takes place by his union to man1 by     
taking flesh upon   him1 and consider it
 as signifying nothing but what took    
place by his   becoming man1 nothing is 
expressed by it more than by ,son of    
man3   ,and we are left without any     
epithet or common scripture phrase1     
whereby to express the divinity1 the    
,godhead of the ,redeemer1 and his      
equality with the ,father4 ,thus1       
instead of raising our conceptions of   
the ,redeemer1 does it not tend to sink 
them8 ,does not the sonship of   ,christ
 become an infinitely less and more     
inconsiderable matter1 upon   this plan1
 than that which has always been        
esteemed the orthodox   sentiment on    
this point1 which considers his sonship1
 as wholly   independent of the whole   
creation1 as eternal1 and altogether    
divine8    8,we live in an age when the 
enemies of the ,redeemer lift up their  
heads1 and are suffered to multiply and 

prevail4 ,the deists attempt to   cast  
him out as an impostor4 ,arians and     
,socinians strip him of his   divinity3 
,and the careless1 ignorant1 immoral and
 profane1 treat him   with contempt1 or 
neglect4 ,this is agreeable to his great
 enemy1   ,satan2 who seems now to be   
let loose in an unusual degree1 and has 
uncommon power among men1 to lead them  
into gross errors1 and those            
especially which are dishonourable to   
,christ1 and injurious to his           
character4 ,and if this sentiment now   
under consideration1 concerning   the   
,sonship of the ,redeemer1 should spread
 and prevail now1 this   would be no    
evidence in favour of it2 but1          
considering what has been   now         
observed1 concerning it1 would it not   
give reason to suspect1 at   least1 that
 it is dishonourable to the ,son of     
,god1 and leads to other   errors yet   
more dishonourable to him8    8,this    
leads to observe1    8#b4 ,it is worthy 
of consideration1 whether this doctrine 

of the   filiation of ,jesus ,christ1   
does not tend to reject the doctrine of 
the   ,trinity1 as it has been held by  
those who have been called the          
orthodox in the christian church1 and   
leads to what is called   ,sabellianism2
 which considers the ,deity as but one  
person1 and to be   three only out of   
respect to the different manner or kind 
of his   operations4    8,this notion of
 the ,sonship of ,christ1 leads to      
suppose that the ,deity   is the ,father
 of the ,mediator1 without distinction  
of persons2 and   that by ,father so    
often mentioned in the ,new ,testament1 
and generally   in relation to the ,son 
is commonly1 if not always1 meant       
,deity1   without distinction of        
persons4 ,if this be so1 it tends to    
exclude all   distinction of persons in 
,god1 and to make the personality of the
   ,redeemer to consist wholly in the   
human nature2 and finally1 to make   his
 union with ,deity no more1 but the same
 which ,arians and ,socinians   admit1  

viz4 the same which takes place between 
,god and good men in   general2 but in a
 higher and peculiar degree4 ,but if    
there be no   tendency in this doctrine 
of the sonship of ,christ1 to the       
consequences which have been now        
mentioned2 and it can be made evident   
that none of those supposed evils do    
attend it1 or can follow from it2   yet 
it remains to be considered what        
advantage attends it1 and the   good    
ends it will answer1 if it were admitted
 to be true4 ,none will   say1 it is    
presumed1 that it is more agreeable to  
the general   expressions of scripture  
relating to this point1 than the        
opposite   doctrine2 who well considers 
what has been observed above4 ,the most 
that any one can with justice say with  
respect to this is1 that the   scripture
 may be so construed and understood1 as 
to be consistent with   the sonship of  
,christ1 commencing at the incarnation1 
however   inconsistent with it some     
passages may appear at first view4      

8,it may be thought1 perhaps1 that this 
notion of the sonship of the   ,redeemer
 is attended with two advantages1 if not
 with more1 viz4 ,it   frees the        
doctrine of the ,trinity from that which
 is perfectly   incomprehensible1 and   
appears a real contradiction and        
absurdity2 that   the second person     
should be ,son of the first1 who is the 
,father2 the   ,son being begotten by   
the ,father from eternity2 than which   
nothing can   be more inconceivable1 and
 seemingly absurd4 ,and this appears    
inconsistent with the second person     
being equal with the first2 for a   son 
begotten of a father1 implies           
inferiority1 and that he exists   after 
his father1 and consequently begins to  
exist1 and is dependent4   ,both these  
difficulties are wholly avoided1 it is  
thought1 by   supposing that the second 
person in the ,trinity became a son by  
being   united to the human nature1 and 
begotten in the womb of the virgin4     
,and it is probable that these supposed 

advantages have recommended   this      
scheme of the ,sonship of ,christ1 to   
chose who embrace it1 and led   them to 
reject the commonly received opinion2   
and not a previous   conviction that the
 former is most agreeable to the        
scripture4 ,this   therefore demands our
 serious and candid attention4 ,and the 
following   things may be observed upon 
it4    8#a4 ,if we exclude every thing  
from our creed1 concerning ,god1 his    
existence1 and the manner of his        
existence1 which to us is               
incomprehensible and unaccountable1 we  
must reject the doctrine of the         
,trinity in unity1 and even of the      
existence of a ,god4 ,the doctrine of   
three persons in one ,god is wholly     
inconceivable by us1 and ,unitarians    
consider it as the greatest             
contradiction and absurdity imaginable4 
,and those ,trinitarians1 who have      
undertaken to explain it1 and make it   
more intelligible1 have generally failed
 of giving any light2 but have   really 

made it absurd and even ridiculous1 by  
#8darkening counsel by   words without  
knowledge4' ,if we reasoned properly on 
the matter1 we   should expect to find  
in a revelation which ,god has made of  
himself1   his being and manner of      
subsistence1 mysteries which we can by  
no   means understand1 which are to     
creatures wonderful1 and wholly         
unaccountable4 ,for the being of ,god1  
and the manner of his existence1   and  
of his subsisting1 must be infinitely   
above our comprehension3 ,god   is      
infinitely great1 and we know him not4  
,and if we attempt to search   out these
 mysteries by reason1 we are prone to   
think they are   contradictions and     
absurdities1 merely because our reason  
cannot   fathom them2 and they appear   
more unintelligible1 the more we try to 
understand them4 #8,canst thou by       
searching find out ,god8 ,canst thou    
find out the ,,almighty to perfection8  
,it is as high as heaven1 what   canst  
thou do8 ,deeper than hell1 what canst  

thou know8 ,the measure   thereof is    
longer than the earth1 and broader than 
the sea4' ,job ii4   #g1 #h1 #i4        
#8,teach us what we shall say unto him1 
7and what we shall say   concerning     
him27 for we cannot order our speech by 
reason of darkness4   ,shall it be told 
him that ,i speak8' and attempt to      
comprehend and   explain the mysteries  
that relate to his existence8 #8,if a   
man speak1   surely he shall be         
swallowed up4' ,job xxxvii4 #ai1 #bj4   
,if a man   undertake thus to speak1    
instead of giving any light1 he will be 
involved and overwhelmed in impenetrable
 darkness4    8,they1 therefore1 who do 
not believe the eternal sonship of      
,jesus   ,christ1 because it is         
mysterious and incomprehensible1 and to 
some it   appears to be full of         
contradiction1 will1 if they be         
consistent with   themselves1 for the   
same reason1 reject the doctrine of a   
,trinity of   persons in one ,god4#aje  
8#b4 ,if the doctrine of the eternal    

generation and sonship of the   second  
person in the ,trinity be soberly and   
modestly considered in the   light of   
the foregoing observation1 and with a   
proper sense of our own   darkness and  
infinite inferiority to the divine      
,being1 and how little   we can know of 
him2 we shall not be forward to         
pronounce it   inconsistent with reason1
 and absurd2 but be convinced1 that to  
do   thus1 is very bold and assuming2   
and that it may be consistent and       
true1 notwithstanding any thing we may  
know2 though it be mysterious   and     
incomprehensible4 ,this is a divine     
generation1 infinitely above   any thing
 that takes place among creatures1 and  
infinitely different4   ,it is that of  
which we can have no adequate idea1 and 
is infinitely   out of our reach4 ,what 
incompetent judges are we then of this  
matter8   ,what right or ability have we
 to pronounce it absurd or inconsistent1
   when we have no capacity to know or  
determine what is true1   consistent1 or

 inconsistent in this high point1 any   
farther than ,god   has been pleased to 
reveal it to us8 ,there may be          
innumerable   mysteries in the existence
 and manner of subsistence of the       
infinite   ,being1 which are1 and must  
be1 incomprehensible1 by a finite       
understanding4 ,god has been pleased1   
for wise ends1 to reveal that of   the  
,trinity1 and this of the eternal       
generation and sonship of the   second  
person3 ,and he has done it in a manner1
 and in words best   suited to convey   
those ideas of it to men1 which it is   
necessary they   should have3 ,and we   
ought to receive it with meekness and   
implicit   submission1 using our reason 
in excluding every thing which is       
contrary to1 or below infinite          
perfection1 and absolute independence2  
without pretending to comprehend it1 or 
to be able to judge of that   which is  
infinitely high and divine1 by that     
which takes place among   creatures1    
with respect to generation1 and father  

and son4    8,god is said in scripture1 
to repent and be grieved at his heart2  
to   be angry1 and to have his fury to  
come up in his face2 and hands1   feet1 
eyes1 mouth1 lips and tongue1 c4 are    
ascribed to him4 ,these   words are     
designed and suited to convey useful    
ideas1 and important   instruction to   
men4 ,but if we should understand these 
expression as   meaning the same thing  
in the ,divine ,being1 that they do when
 applied   to men2 we must entertain    
very unworthy1 and most absurd notions  
of   ,god1 and wholly inconsistent with 
other declarations in the sacred        
,oracles4 ,but if we exclude every thing
 that is human1 or that implies   any   
change or imperfection from these       
expressions when applied to the         
,deity1 they will convey nothing absurd 
or inconsistent1 or that is   unworthy  
of ,god4 ,and it will doubtless be      
equally so in the case   before us2 if  
it be constantly kept in mind that the  
only begotten ,son   of ,god denotes    

nothing human1 but is infinitely above  
any thing which   relates to natural1 or
 creature generation1 and does not      
include any   beginning1 change1        
dependence1 inferiority1 or             
imperfection4 ,this will   effectually  
exclude all real absurdity and          
contradiction4    8,it will be asked1   
perhaps1 when all this is excluded from 
our ideas   of generation1 of ,father   
and ,son1 what idea will remain in our  
minds1   which is conveyed by these     
words8 ,will they not be without any    
signification to us1 and altogether     
useless8 ,to this1 the following        
answer may be given3 ,from what is      
revealed concerning this high and       
incomprehensible mystery1 we learn1 that
 in the existence of the   ,deity1 there
 is that which is high above our        
thoughts1 as the heavens   are above the
 earth1 infinitely beyond our           
conception1 and different   from any    
thing which takes place among creatures1
 which is a   foundation of a personal  

distinction1 as real and great as that  
between father and son among men1 and   
infinitely more perfect3 which          
distinction may be in the best manner   
conveyed to us by ,father and   ,son1 to
 express the most perfect union and     
equality2 that the ,son is   the        
brightness of the ,father's glory1 and  
the express image of his   person1 and  
that there is infinite love and         
endearment between them2   and that in  
the economy of the work of redemption1  
the ,son is obedient   to the ,father1  
c4 ,all this1 and much more1 our minds  
are capable of   conceiving from what is
 revealed on this high and important    
subject2   which is suited to impress   
our hearts with a sense of the          
incomprehensible1 infinite1 adorable    
perfection and glory of the   ,father   
and the ,son2 and is necessary in order 
to give us a right   understanding of   
the gospel2 of the true character of the
 ,redeemer1   and of the work of        
redemption4    8,what has been now said 

under this second particular1 may serve 
to   remove the other supposed          
difficulty in admitting the eternal     
filiation of the second person in the   
,trinity1 viz4 that it   represents the 
,son as inferior to the ,father1 and as 
existing after   him1 and therefore his 
existence had a beginning4 ,this is     
obviated by   the above observations2   
and particularly by this1 that it is a  
divine   filiation1 and therefore       
infinitely unlike that which is human2  
and   above our comprehension4 ,besides1
 to suppose eternal generation admits   
of before or after1 or of a beginning1  
is inconsistent4 ,it may be   further   
observed1    8#c4 ,that the opinion that
 ,jesus ,christ is the first and only   
begotten   ,son of ,god1 by the second  
person in the ,trinity becoming         
incarnate1   and united to the human    
nature1 is1 perhaps1 attended with as   
great   difficulties as the other which 
has been considered1 if not greater4    
,if so1 the inducement to embrace it1   

and reject the other1 which we   are    
examining1 wholly ceases4    8,if the   
,son was begotten by the miraculous     
formation of the human   nature2 then   
the ,holy ,ghost begot the ,son and is  
the ,father1 as much   as the first     
person in the ,trinity4 ,for the angel  
said to the virgin1   #8,the ,holy      
,ghost shall come upon thee1 and the    
power of the ,highest   shall overshadow
 thee3 therefore also that holy thing   
which shall be   born of thee1 shall be 
called the ,son of ,god4' ,if we take   
these words   as referring only to the  
production of the human nature1 and if  
it be   granted that by the highest1 is 
meant the first person in the ,trinity1 
of which there does not appear to be any
 evidence1 yet the third   person1 the  
,holy ,ghost1 is represented as doing as
 much1 and being as   active in this    
production as the first person4 ,but if 
this were no   difficulty1 and the first
 person of the ,trinity be supposed to  
produce   the human nature1 and in this 

sense to be the ,father of ,jesus       
,christ2   yet this will make him his   
,father in no other and higher sense    
than he   is the ,father of angels1 and 
of ,adam2 and ,jesus ,christ will be the
 ,son   of ,god in no other1 or higher  
sense than they2 for they were created  
and formed in an extraordinary1         
miraculous way4    8,if the ,son was    
begotten by uniting the second person of
 the ,trinity   with the human nature1  
and the filiation of the ,son is        
supposed to   consist wholly in being   
thus united to man2 this is attended    
with the   following difficulties1 as   
great1 perhaps1 if not greater1 than    
those   which attend the eternal        
,sonship of the second person4    8#a4  
,this is as different in nature and kind
 from natural or creature   generation1 
as eternal divine generation2 and the   
one bears no analogy   or likeness to   
the other4    8#b4 ,this union of ,god  
with the creature so as to become one   
person1 is   as mysterious and          

incomprehensible1 as the eternal        
,sonship of the   second person of the  
,trinity2 and as inexplicable3 so that  
nothing is   gained with respect to     
this1 by embracing this scheme4    8#c4 
,it is not agreeable to scripture to    
suppose that the first person   of the  
,trinity only1 united the second person 
to the human nature1 and   so became a  
,father by thus begetting a ,son4 ,the  
third person1 the ,holy   ,ghost1 is    
represented as doing this1 or at least1 
being active in it2   and there is      
nothing expressly said of the first     
person doing any   thing respecting it  
as such4 #8,the ,holy ,ghost shall come 
upon thee1 and   the power of the       
,highest shall overshadow thee3         
therefore also1 that   holy thing which 
shall be born of thee1 shall be called  
the ,son of   ,god4' #8,now the birth of
 ,jesus ,christ was on this wise4 ,when 
his   mother1 ,mary1 was espoused to    
,joseph1 before they came together1 she 
was found with child of the ,holy       

,ghost4' ,and the angel of the ,lord    
said unto ,joseph1 #8,fear not to take  
unto thee ,mary thy wife3 ,for that     
which is conceived in her is of the     
,holy ,ghost4' ,matt4 i4 #ah1 #bj4 ,and 
this uniting the divine nature with the 
human1 is expressly ascribed1   not to  
the first1 but to the second person4    
#8,for as much as the   children are    
partakers of flesh and blood1 he also   
himself took part   of the same4 ,for   
verily he took not on him the nature of 
angels2   but he took on him the seed of
 ,abraham4' ,heb4 ii4 #ad1 #af4 ,do not 
they speak not only without scripture1  
but contrary to it1 who say   that the  
first person of the ,trinity became a   
,father by uniting the   second person  
to the human nature1 in the womb of the 
virgin ,mary2 by   which the latter     
became the only begotten ,son of the    
,father8 ,that the   relation of ,father
 and ,son began in the incarnation of   
,christ1 and   consists wholly in this8 
,and do they by this supposition avoid  

any   difficulty1 and render the        
filiation of the ,redeemer more         
consistent1   intelligible1 or          
honourable to him8 ,let the thoughtful1 
candid   discerning reader judge40      
,,hopkins4  ,footnote #ajd3    ,this is 
an incontestable proof that the ,son is 
,god1 even ,,jehovah4 ,the   ,psalmist  
often says1 8,blessed are they1 blessed 
is the man who   trusteth in the ,lord40
 ,and here he says1 ,blessed are all    
they who   trust in the ,son of ,god1   
and yet forbids us to put our trust in  
any   but ,god4 8,put not your trust in 
princes1 or in the son of man1 in whom  
there is no help4 ,happy is he that hath
 the ,god of ,jacob for his help1       
whose hope is in the ,lord his ,god40   
,psalm cxlvi4 #c1 #e4 ,and he says1     
8,my soul1 wait thou only upon ,god2 for
 my expectation is from him40   ,psalm  
lxii4 #e4 ,they only are blessed1 who   
trust in ,god2 and all   others are     
cursed4 8,thus saith the ,lord1 ,cursed 
be the man that   trusteth in man4      

,blessed is the man that trusteth in the
 ,lord1 and   whose hope the ,lord is40 
,jer4 xvii4 #e1 #g4 ,they are blessed1  
who trust   in the ,son of ,god4        
,therefore he is the ,lord4  ,footnote  
#aje3    ,it has been before observed1  
that the denial of the eternal sonship  
of   ,christ seemed to have a tendency  
to a rejection of the doctrine of the   
,trinity2 and in what way4 ,but what is 
here observed1 shews how the   denial of
 the former tends1 another way1 to the  
rejection of the   latter4 ,for if the  
former be rejected1 because it is       
incomprehensible1   and appears         
inconsistent1 it may be expected that   
when the doctrine of   the ,trinity is  
more particularly considered1 it will   
appear equally   unintelligible2 and    
therefore be rejected1 for the same     
reason4 ,is it   not probable1 that     
,sabellius1 the ancient                 
,anti-trinitarian1 was in   this way led
 to give up the doctrine of the         
,trinity8  ,footnote #ajf3    ,see ,dr4 

,owen against ,biddle1 p4 #cfb4         
,footnote #ajg3     4  ,footnote #ajh3  
,antiq4 ,lib4 ,,iii4 ,cap4 #e4          
,footnote #aji3    ,this the ,holy      
,ghost has condescended1 for what reason
 ,i know not1 to   give countenance to1 
in all those quotations in the ,new     
,testament1   where the name ,,jehovah1 
is referred to from the ,old4  ,footnote
 #aaj3    ,in two places1 indeed1 it is 
rendered by 1 ,god1 ,gen4 iv4 #a4 and   
,isa4 liv4 #ac4 ,and there is one place 
in which some think they attempt   a    
literal translation of it1 #b ,sam4 i4  
#aa4 where1 instead of the   people of  
the ,lord1 they translate the text1    1
 in   which1 some think1 1 is put for 1 
or 1 through the   mistake of some      
amanuensis2 but it seems rather to be an
 explication   than a literal           
translation of the words2 and whereas   
some think1 the   reason of this method 
used by them in their translation1 is1  
because   the ,hebrew letters1 of which 
that name consists1 cannot well be      

expressed by the letters of the ,greek  
alphabet1 so as to compose a   word like
 it1 that does not seem to be the reason
 of it1 inasmuch as   they attempt to   
translate other names equally difficult2
 as in ,gen4 x4   #b4 1 for ,javan2 and 
#b ,kings xii4 #b4  for ,jehoiada4      
,footnote #aaa3    ,see ,dr4 ,allix's   
judgment of the ,jewish church against  
the ,unitarians1   chap4 xiii4 to xvi4  
,footnote #aab3    ,vid4 ,catech4       
,racov4 ad ,quest4 lix4  ,footnote #aac3
    ,it is elsewhere said concerning    
him1 #a ,john iii4 #e4 that he was      
manifested1 c4 1 as also in ver4 #h4    
,and as for what is   said in the last  
clause of the verse we are considering1 
that he was   received up into glory1 it
 is a very great strain on the sense of 
these words1 to apply it to a mystery1  
or to the gospel1 since the   words1   1
 plainly intimate a person's meeting    
with a   glorious reception when        
ascending into heaven2    signifies     
sursum recipere1 therefore we render it1

 received up2 and   so it is often      
applied to our ,saviour1 ,acts i4 #b1   
#aa1 #bb4 and his   ascension is called1
 ,luke ix4 #ea4   1 the time in   which 
he should be received up4  ,footnote    
#aad3    ,see ,whitby in loc4  ,footnote
 #aae3    ,see ,dr4 ,clarke's reply to  
,nelson1 page #hf4  ,footnote #aaf3     
,thus they are four times1 ,luke i4 #fh4
 #b ,cor4 i4 #e4 ,eph4 i4 #c4 and #a    
,pet4 i4 #c4 wherein  is put before 4   
,footnote #aag3    ,dr4 ,owen against   
,biddle1 page #bef4  ,footnote #aah3    
,see ,dr4 ,clarke's reply to ,nelson1   
page #ig4  ,footnote #aai3    ,see ,page
 #cjg4  ,footnote #abj3    ,it is       
certain1 that  is oftentimes exegetical1
 as well as   copulative2 and it appears
 to be so1 by a great many instances in 
the   ,new ,testament2 when it is put   
between two nouns1 the first whereof has
   an article1 and the other none2 thus 
it will be acknowledged by all1   that  
it is taken1 in #b ,cor4 i4 #c4 ,blessed
 be ,god1 even the ,father of   our     

,lord ,jesus ,christ1    2 so in ,eph4  
i4 #c4 #b ,thes4   ii4 #af4 #a4 ,pet4 i4
 #c4 ,rom4 xv4 #f4 ,phil4 iv4 #bj4 #b   
,cor4 xi4 #ca4 and   in ,col4 ii4 #b4   
,in these scriptures1 and others of the 
like nature1   the ,arians themselves   
allow that this rule holds good1 though 
they   will not allow it1 when it proves
 our ,saviour's ,deity1 because it      
militates against their own scheme2 as  
in ,eph4 v4 #e4 where the   apostle     
speaks of the kingdom of ,christ1 and of
 ,god1 as we render   it2 but1 ,i think1
 it ought to be rendered1 even of ,god2 
for it is1       so in #b ,thess4 i4    
#ab4 ,the grace of our ,god1   and1 or  
even1 of the ,lord ,jesus ,christ1 the  
words are1         4 ,see among many    
other scriptures to the   like purpose1 
#a ,tim4 v4 #ba4 and chap4 vi4 #ac4 #b  
,pet4 i4 #b4 ,it is   true there are    
several exceptions to this rule1 though 
they are   generally in such instances1 
in which it is impossible for the latter
   word to contain an explication of the

 former1 though1 in other   instances1  
it1 for the most part1 holds good2 and  
therefore it will1   at least1 amount to
 a probable argument1 that the words in 
this text1           ought to be        
rendered1 of the great ,god1 even our   
,saviour ,jesus ,christ4 ,vide          
,granville ,sharp on the ,greek article1
 and ,middleton on the same   subject4  
,footnote #aba3    ,see ,dr4 ,clark's   
reply to ,nelson1 page #he4  ,footnote  
#abb3    ,the words1   and   are in the 
nominative case1 which   denotes that   
they are not spoken in a way of         
exclamation4  ,footnote #abc3    ,see   
reply to ,nelson1 page #fg4  ,footnote  
#abd3    ,acts vii4 #dc4 chap4 xiv4 #aa4
  ,footnote #abe3    ,see ,matt4 xix4   
#bf4 compared with ,mark x4 #bg4        
,footnote #abf3    ,see                 
,scripture-doctrine1 c4 page #fg1 #fh1  
and in many other places4  ,footnote    
#abg3    ,this is the sense of ,dr4     
,clarke's first section in ,part #b1 on 
which   the whole scheme seems to be    

founded2 and he speaks to the same      
purpose in several other places2 and1 in
 particular1 in his reply to   ,nelson1 
page #fg1 #fh1 he concludes the word 1  
,god1 absolutely   taken to import the  
same1 as   or    1 by   which he always 
intends the ,father4  ,footnote #abh3   
,see ,scripture-doctrine1 page #c4      
,footnote #abi3    ,see page #abj4      
,footnote #acj3    ,see ,dr4 ,clarke's  
,scripture ,doctrine1 page #agf4        
,footnote #aca3    ,whitby is very      
particular in laying down this sense of 
the text1 with   the defence thereof1 in
 his annotations on this scripture1 from
   ,heliodorus1 where he finds the      
words1  1 which he   renders1 to snatch 
at2 and  1 which1 he supposes1          
signifies to pursue1 or covet1 a thing  
that is desirable1 but1   however1 the  
words going before1 or following1 in    
that author1 may   determine that to be 
his sense thereof1 as the sense of      
particular   words is oftentimes greatly
 varied thereby2 yet this will not      

justify   the rendering them in the same
 sense1 in other instances1 very foreign
   thereunto1 as certainly the text we  
are explaining must be reckoned to   be2
 besides1 the word is not the same1 for 
it is 1 which   properly signifies a    
prey1 or the thing stolen2 and therefore
 though      may signify1 to catch an   
opportunity1 as a   person catches at   
what he thinks for his advantage1 yet if
 the word    had been used instead of   
it1 it would very much have altered     
the sense thereof2 also though          
signifies1 to   esteem a thing worthy to
 be pursued1 or catched at1 as a prey1  
yet    1 which are the words in the text
 we are   considering1 signify no such  
thing1 but rather to reckon a thing     
unlawful to be pursued1 as what he has  
no right to2 and that is the   sense    
thereof in our text1 q4 d4 ,he did not  
think it unlawful to   pursue1 or lay   
claim to that divine honour1 of being   
equal with ,god1   or1 as we render it1 
thought it not robbery1 c4 ,for the     

justifying   of this sense1 every one1  
that observes the acceptation of the    
,greek   words1 will find that          
signifies1 the action of robbing1   and 
the thing stolen1 as may be observed in 
many other   words1 where the former    
construction signifies the act2 the     
latter the   effect3 as in  and 1 1 and 
1    and 1  and 1  and 1    and 2 and1  
in the ,new ,testament1    signifies the
 action of baptizing1 and  the ordinance
 in   which it is performed4 ,see ,mark 
vii4 #h4 compared with ,matt4 iii4 #g4  
and chap4 xxi4 #be4 ,multitudes of      
instances might have been given1 but    
these are sufficient4  ,footnote #acb3  
,grotius in loc4  ,footnote #acc3       
8,it may readily be granted that any    
tract published by an apostolick   man1 
in the early ,christian church1 would be
 circulated among the   ,christians of  
those times1 with great dispatch1       
immediately on its   publication4 ,this 
is a natural and indefeasible position1 
since it   arises from a principle in   

human nature itself4 ,it is natural1    
too1   that1 in those times1 it should  
be copied without delay in such         
churches as were then extant4 ,and this 
first edition would be   circulated to  
the widest extent1 of course4 ,churches 
that were   established afterwards were 
more likely to receive the second       
edition of such a writer's works2       
especially1 if they had intercourse     
with the town where he resided in his   
latter days1 and drew their   copies    
from thence1 immediately4 ,but ,i think 
we may say1 that for one   copy of the  
second edition that was circulated1     
there would be #bj1 or   #ej1 or #ajj   
copies of the first edition2 since not  
only would it have   the advantage of   
priority1 but not one reader in a       
hundred would think   of the second as  
different from the first4 ,and this has 
led our   translators to mark1 as       
doubtful1 the first quotation which ,i  
selected from the first ,epistle of     
,john1 in my last2 chap4 ii4 #bc4 ,i    

have no doubt of the genuineness of the 
addition2 but possibly there   may be   
#ej copies without it to one which      
contains it4    8,admitting1 then1 the  
residence of ,st4 ,john be at ,ephesus1 
or any part   of ,asia ,minor1 for the  
last thirty years of his life1 for which
 we   have the testimony of ancient     
history1 we may date his first epistle1 
early in that period3 or even before he 
came to live there4 ,this would   spread
 first1 among the neighbouring churches 
in ,asia ,minor3   secondly1 eastward1  
to those countries which professed      
,christianity1   ,antioch1 for certain3 
,syria1 ,cilicia1 ,pontus1 ,cappadocia1 
,galatia1   ,babylonia1 c4 ,toward these
 countries1 there are caravans which go 
every month1 or six weeks1 from ,asia   
,minor3 there is a regular   intercourse
 maintained1 between ,smyrna1 and the   
internal parts of ,asia   ,minor1 and on
 through ,tarsus to ,antioch3--from     
,ephesus to ,smyrna was   easy4 ,we have
 every reason to affirm1 that it was the

 same anciently1   and therefore1 there 
was an immediate conveyance of such     
addresses   as the apostle ,john        
published for the general use of all    
,christians1   from ,ephesus1 eastward  
to the oriental provinces of the ,roman 
empire1   where ,christianity was       
settled and flourished4 ,in these       
churches his   writings would be in     
request4 ,moreover1 these churches would
 be the   first to translate his        
writings into their current language1   
for the   use of the natives of these   
provinces1 who did not understand ,greek
   7which1 however prevalent the ,greek 
language was1 must have been many7      
because here was a great number of      
professing ,christians1 who desired   to
 be acquainted with their contents4     
8,it is evident1 therefore1 that these  
translations1 having for their   basis  
the first edition1 can be no evidences  
of what the apostle   thought proper to 
add in his second addition4 ,the ,syriac
 version1   for instance1 if we suppose 

that to be the earliest of all1 would   
represent the first edition1 as would   
also1 all versions made from   it1 and  
all copies made from those1 at that     
time1 received in those   parts4        
,whereas1 the ,armenian version1 because
 it is much later1 would   at least     
stand the chance of obtaining 7and being
 made from7 the   second edition4 ,the  
,syriac version1 therefore1 is no       
evidence   against an addition4 ,the    
,armenian version is an evidence for it4
   ,this version contains #a ,john v4   
#g4    8,also1 the churches in ,africa  
were not planted till many years after  
those of ,asia2 their intercourse with  
,ephesus1 being by sea1 was   irregular1
 and could only take place1             
occasionally1 if it was direct4   ,if we
 suppose it to be1 on the subject before
 us1 through ,italy1 then   it was      
subject to the same circumstances as    
attended the intercourse   between      
,ephesus and ,rome4 ,i say ,rome1       
because we have no reason to   think    

that there was any number of            
,christians1 worth mentioning1 in   any 
other city of ,italy4 ,the apostle      
,paul1 when travelling from ,rhegio     
upward was met by brethren from ,rome2  
which when he saw1 he thanked   ,god1   
and took courage4 ,certainly1 then1 he  
had not met with many   friends in      
places that he passed through1 and his  
courage had been   somewhat cast down1  
for that reason4 ,we find no trace of   
,christianity   in ,herculaneum1 one of 
the cities of ,italy1 of the second     
size1 which   was destroyed ,a4 ,d4 #gi1
 though we meet with traces of ,judaism 
there2   and in short1 it must be       
admitted1 that1 compared with ,asia1 the
   western provinces had but few        
,christians4 ,we have no reason to think
   that ,rome sent out missionaries     
early4 ,the south of ,france was        
christianized from ,asia1 though so much
 further off than ,rome4 ,the   natural 
inference is1 that these parts would    
receive later copies of   any apostolick

 writing1 published in ,asia ,minor1    
than those parts   which had a regular  
intercourse1 half a dozen times in a    
year1 at   least1 but probably much     
oftener1 with ,ephesus4 ,and whatever   
versions   were extant in the west1     
would represent the second edition with 
its   variations1 whatever they might   
be4    8,as to ,rome itself1 ,i infer1  
that that capital of the empire had1 if 
any place had1 both editions4 ,suppose1 
for a moment1 that the   first edition  
had reached ,rome1 when ,aristobulus    
quitted that city   for ,britain1 or    
that it was sent to ,aristobulus1 in    
,britain1 from   ,rome1 it will follow1 
that the ancient ,british copies would  
not   contain those additions which the 
apostle ,john inserted in the   second  
edition4 ,and to this agrees the fact3  
for ,pelagianism could   hardly have    
been repressed by any text more         
effectually than by the   one in        
question4 ,yet that errour rose in      
,britain1 and it was not so   decidedly 

opposed then1 as it is now1 minus the   
testimony of this   text4 ,moreover1 the
 text is not quoted by the venerable    
,bede1 in a   passage of his works1     
where we should expect to find it1 at   
least1   alluded to4 ,he1 therefore1    
might have the first edition4    8,in   
short1 almost all the arguments employed
 against the authenticity   of the text 
may be admitted4 ,they cease to have any
 great force1 after   it is once        
conceded to those who use them1 that the
 first edition1   together with all its 
representatives1 in the first century1  
suppose1   had not the words in debate4 
,they are reduced to the infirmity of a 
negative argument1 at best4    8,i must 
now observe1 that the ,african churches 
being planted long   after the          
,asiatick1 they1 no doubt1 would obtain 
the best transcripts   of the works of  
any inspired writer1 which could be     
procured about the   time of their being
 founded2 i4 e4 the second edition of   
the   letter under consideration4 ,to   

this agrees the fact2 the ,african      
bishops quote the passage4 ,tertullian1 
,cyprian1 ,eucherius1 ,eugenius1   with 
his consistory of #djj bishops1         
,vigilius1 ,fulgentius1 c4 c4 so   that 
it was undeniably extant in their copies
 from the second century   downwards4   
,the argument1 then1 is reduced to a    
point3 either these   divines found the 
passage in their copies1 or they put it 
there4   ,the latter alternative is so  
dishonourable to ,christians and to     
,christianity1 that one is willing to   
accept of any hypothesis which   may    
vindicate professors and teachers from  
such enormous guilt4--,but   further3   
8,i have said1 that ,rome might be      
expected to procure whatever was most   
excellent in ,christian literature1 as  
well as in other studies4 ,it   had1    
then1 the first edition1 because that   
was the earliest which   could be       
procured2 and the second because the    
influx of persons to   ,rome from all   
parts was so great1 that every thing    

which was portable   of a literary      
nature1 might be expected to be brought 
there4 ,rome had   an ancient version of
 the scriptures1 known under the name of
 the old   ,italic version4 ,it is not  
of any consequence to our argument1     
whether this version contained the text 
of the heavenly witnesses1   since it   
was made very early2 but if the revised 
,roman version of   the ,new ,testament 
contained it1 we are reduced to the same
 dilemma as   before1 in reference to   
the ,african bishops--,the reviser of   
this   edition 7,jerom7 either found it1
 or forged it4 ,the same arguments      
that relieve the characters of the      
,african bishops1 relieve the           
character of this father4 ,the          
accusation is incredible4 ,it is loading
   the party with a crime so far beyond 
ordinary culpability1 that the   mind   
revolts at the charge4 ,it is admitted1 
then1 that the ,latin   version reads   
this verse2 that ,st4 ,jerome adopted   
it2 that it was   adopted by the learned

 after him2 as by our own famous        
,alkwin1 at the   time1 and in the court
 of ,charlemagne1 and has so continued  
ever   since4 ,the inference is1 that   
,st4 ,jerome preferred the authority and
   text of the second edition1 and      
followed it4    8,these1 moreover1 are  
independent witnesses2 for1 the ,african
   bishops1 who wrote before ,jerom1    
could not receive this passage from     
his revised version3 or1 if any choose  
to affirm that the ,african   bishops   
received this passage from the old      
,italic version1 then the   authenticity
 of the passage follows of course1 in   
proportion to   whatever importance is  
attached to this increased antiquity40  
,,select ,,reviews4  ,footnote #acd3    
,mr4 ,abraham ,taylor1 in his true      
,scripture-doctrine of the ,trinity1    
,part4 ,i4 chap4 #b4 in which we have   
his own method of reasoning in   defence
 thereof1 which is1 at least1 sufficient
 to remove the boasts   and insults of  
those who wonder that we should not give

 up the cause   entirely to them4       
,footnote #ace3    ,see ,histoire ,crit4
 du4 ,nouv4 ,testam4 chap4 #ah4 page    
#bjd4  ,footnote #acf3    ,see this     
conjecture of ,father ,simon learnedly  
opposed in ,smith4   ,miscellan4 contra 
,simon4  ,footnote #acg3    ,vid4       
,epist4 lxxiii4 ad ,jubaianum1  de      
,unitate ,eccl4  v4  ,footnote #ach3    
,see true ,scripture-doctrine1 c4 page  
#ec4  ,footnote #aci3    ,contra        
,praxeam1 cap4 #be4  ,footnote #adj3    
,see the ,author before referred to1 in 
the true scripture-doctrine1   c4 as    
also ,trigland de tribus in clo         
testibus4  ,footnote #ada3    ,vide     
,abbadie on the ,divinity of ,christ1   
per totum4  ,footnote #adb3    ,see     
,quest4 vii4  ,footnote #adc3    ,see   
,dr4 ,clarke's ,scripture doctrine1 page
 #abg4  ,footnote #add3    ,reply to    
,nelson1 page #afi4  ,footnote #ade3    
,see a parallel scripture1 ,prov4 xxx4  
#b1 #c4  ,footnote #adf3        1 is    
admitted by ,griesback into his text4   

,footnote #adg3    ,by the wisdom of    
,god seems here to be meant the wisdom  
of ,god   essentially considered4 ,but  
see ,matt4 xxiii4 #cd4  ,footnote #adh3 
,see ,dr4 ,clarke's ,scripture          
,doctrine1 page #fc4  ,footnote #adi3   
,see page #cdd1 #cde1 ante4  ,footnote  
#aej3    ,dr4 ,waterland1 ,serm4 ,,iii4 
in defence of ,christ1 page #ajf4       
,footnote #aea3    8,that ,christ was   
not a mere instrument which ,god used in
 the work of   creation1 as the ,arians 
pretend1 is plain from this1 that the   
,scriptures not only teach1 that ,christ
 was the very supreme ,god   himself    
that created all things2 ,psal4 cii4    
#be4 ,heb4 i4 #aj4 but also   that no   
instrument was used in that work4 ,it   
was wrought immediately   by ,god       
himself4 ,as it is written1 #8,god      
himself formed the earth and   made it4'
 ,isa4 xlv4 #ah4 7,this1 all grant1 was 
the supreme ,god3 ,and   this ,god was  
,jesus ,christ47 #8,he alone spread out 
the heavens4' ,job ix4   #h4 ,not by an 

instrument1 but by himself alone1 ,isa4 
xliv4 #bd4 with   his own hands4 ,isa4  
xlv4 #ab40    ,,bellamy4  ,footnote     
#aeb3       are omitted by ,griesbach4  
,footnote #aec3    ,vid4 ,bez4 in loc4  
,unus ,deus omnes populos condidit1 sic 
etiam nunc   omnes ad se vocat2 condidit
 autem per ,christum1 sic per ,christum 
instaurat4  ,footnote #aed3    ,see     
,matt4 xii4 #cb4 #a ,cor4 x4 #aa4 ,eph4 
i4 #ba4 and chap4 ii4 #g4 ,heb4   vi4   
#e4 and chap4 ix4 #bf4 the apostle      
speaking of the foundation of   the     
world1 meaning the first creation1 uses 
the word 2 but   when1 in the following 
words1 he speaks of ,christ's appearing 
in the   end of the world1 to put away  
sin1 c4 he uses the words  4  ,footnote 
#aee3    ,see page #cjd4  ,footnote     
#aef3    ,see ,quest4 lxvii4 and lxxv4  
,footnote #aeg3    8,the ,father1 saith 
he1 is greater than ,i4 ,john xiv4 #bh4 
,as ,christ is   the head of the church1
 so the head of ,christ is ,god4 #a     
,cor4 iii4 #bc4   xi4 #c4 ,he calleth   

the ,father his ,god4 ,matt1 xxvii4 #df4
 ,john xx4   #ag4--,the ,father raised  
him to ,israel2 ,acts xiii4 #bc4        
anointed him with   the ,holy ,ghost and
 with power2 ,acts x4 #ch4 spared him   
not1 but   delivered him up for us all2 
,rom4 viii4 #cb4 and raised him from the
   dead4 ,acts ii4 #bd4--;,god had      
appointed him to execute his saving     
designs1 sent him into this world1 and  
gave him commandments4 ,john   iii4 #af1
 #ag4 vi4 #ch-dj4 ,the work given him he
 finished1 and in it he   was faithful  
to the ,father4 ,john iv4 #cd4 xvii4 #d4
 ,heb4 iii4 #b4 x4   #i4--,therefore1   
,god hath also exalted him above        
measure2 ,phil4 ii4 #i4   set him at his
 own right hand in heaven2 ,eph4 i4 #bj4
 and gave him all   power4 ,matt1       
xxviii4 #ah4 ,he hath made him ,lord and
 ,christ2 ,acts ii4   #cf4 exalted him  
to be a ,prince and a ,saviour1 to give 
to ,israel   repentance and remission of
 sins4 ,acts v4 #ca4 ,he hath also      
ordained   him to judge the world in    

righteousness2 ,acts xviii4 #ca4 and to 
him1   ,christ shall then be subject1   
and deliver up the kingdom4 #a ,cor4 xv4
   #bd-bh4    8,to be the true ,god1 and
 to be under ,god1 to be the ,infinite1 
and to   be the subject1 are1 according 
to all reason1 and the scripture        
itself1 inconsistent properties4 ,by    
undeniable authority1 however1   they   
are ascribed to the same subject2 and   
therefore1 there must be a   way to     
solve the difficulty4 ,how often do we  
meet with particulars in   the system of
 truth1 which seem to oppose one        
another2 but when well   considered1    
agree1 and even support one another4    
,the human   constitution itself1       
exhibits a clear instance4 ,the grand   
inquiry is1   upon what foundation every
 different truth is established1 and how
 to   reconcile seeming contradictions4 
,now1 while they who attack the         
,godhead of ,jesus1 can never in our    
opinion1 answer the multitude of        
proofs in its favour2 there is on the   

contrary1 for the confessors of   that  
doctrine1 the greatest store of         
solutions1 as often as something   not  
divine1 something beneath the nature and
 authority of his ,father1   and        
something finite are testified          
concerning him4 #8,he who was in the    
form of ,god1 and counted it not robbery
 to be equal with ,god1 took   upon him 
the form of a servant4' ,phil4 ii4 #f1  
#g4 #8,the ,word who was   with ,god1   
and who was ,god1 became flesh2 but in  
that flesh1 manifested   a glory as of  
the only-begotten of the ,father1 full  
of grace and   truth4' ,john i4 #a1     
#ad4--;,according to the infallible     
testimony1 he is   therefore true ,god  
and true man2 and his saving mediatory  
performances   are inseparably founded  
on both natures4 ,while the value of    
these1 the   power to save his people   
forever1 and to direct all things in    
heaven   and on earth to that end1 as   
also the fitness to be the object of    
their grateful confidence1 and his      

capacity for conducting the general     
judgment1 are founded on1 and give an   
invincible proof of his divine          
perfection2 it is at the same time his  
finite nature1 wherein he   finished the
 human ministrations of his teaching    
office1 and of his   priestly           
sacrifice4--,and thus it is             
intelligible1 how the glory and         
majesty with which he governs the       
kingdom of ,god1 to the mighty          
ingathering and defence of his people1  
and to the destruction of all           
opposition1 occur as an exaltation2 in  
as far as the human nature1   according 
to its capacity shared therein1 obtained
 the fruit and   reward of its labour1  
and the ,lamb that was slain1 deserves  
and   receives everlasting honour1      
because of the works of salvation in    
both   natures4 ,this appears1 because  
every where1 his obedience and deepest  
humiliation are assigned as the reason  
of his exaltation4--#8,i was dead   and 
behold ,i am alive for evermore1 ,amen6 

and have the keys of hell   and of      
death4' ,rev4 i4 #ah4 #8,to this end    
,christ died1 and rose1 and   revived1  
that he might be ,lord over the dead and
 the living4' ,rom1   xiv4 #i4 ,see also
 ,phil4 ii4 #g-aj4 ,heb4 i4 #c4 ,john v4
 #bg4 ,rev4 i4 #e1 #f4   v4 #ab-ad40    
,,wynpersse4  ,footnote #aeh3    ,see   
,quest4 vii4  ,footnote #aei3           
,creatures are said to be believed1 as  
our ,saviour speaking concerning   ,john
 the ,baptist1 in ,mark xi4 #ca4 says1  
,why did ye not believe him8       2    
and1 in ,acts viii4 #ab4 the            
,samaritans believed ,philip1   2 and1  
in ,john v4   #df4 ,moses is described  
as a person who ought to be believed2   
,had ye   believed ,moses1 c4 says our  
,saviour1    2 but   it is never said   
that a creature is believed in4 ,this   
was ,augustin's   observation2 upon     
which occasion he says1 ,in ,exposit4   
,evangel4 ,johan4   ,tract4 #bi4        
8,though we may be said to believe ,paul
 and ,peter1 yet we   are never said to 

believe in them40 ,but as for our       
,saviour1 we are   not only to believe  
him1 namely1 what he has spoken1 but    
1 to believe in him4  ,footnote #afj3   
,the words are1              2 where    
seems to be exegetical1 according to the
   rule laid down1 page #cah4 and       
therefore ,i would render the words1    
,god1 who quickeneth all things even    
,jesus ,christ2 and1 if this be a   just
 rendering1 then the ,father is not     
mentioned in the context2 and           
therefore this doxology is not ascribed 
to him but to our ,saviour4  ,footnote  
#afa3    ,see ,dr4 ,clarke's ,scripture 
,doctrine1 page #eh1 #gg4  ,footnote    
#afb3    ,the chief opposers of         
,christ's being the object of worship1  
were   ,jacobus ,palologus1 ,franciscus 
,davidus1 ,christianus ,franken1 ,simon 
,buduus2 and1 on the other hand1 it was 
defended by ,socinus1 and   several     
others1 though not in the same sense in 
which we maintain it4  ,footnote #afc3  
,see ,dr4 ,clarke's ,scripture          

,doctrine1 page #acb4  ,footnote #afd3  
,see page #cbb1 #cbc4 ante4  ,footnote  
#afe3    ,see ,dr4 ,waterland's defence 
of the divinity of ,christ1 serm4 iv4   
pag4 #abg4  seq4 where he proves1 that  
the exclusive terms of ,one1   only1 c4 
do not except the ,son1 so as to deny   
him to have the same   ,godhead with the
 ,father3 this he proves from several   
scriptures1   viz4 ,mat4 xi4 #bg4 ,no   
one knoweth the ,son1 but the ,father2  
nor any   one the ,father1 save the     
,son2 it does not follow from hence1    
that the   ,father does not know himself
 nor the ,son himself3 and when it is   
said1   in #a ,cor4 ii4 #aa4 ,the things
 of ,god knoweth no one1 but the ,spirit
 of   ,god2 this does not exclude the   
,son1 for that would contradict the     
scripture but now mentioned2 no more    
than the ,son's only knowing the        
,father excludes the ,holy ,ghost1 which
 would be contrary to this   scripture2 
so in ,rev4 xix4 #ab4 it is said1 that  
the ,son had a name   written which no  

one knew but he himself3 none ever      
thought that the   ,father was excluded 
by this exclusive term2 so when ,god the
 ,father   saith1 in ,isa4 xliv4 #bd4 ,i
 am he that maketh all things1 that     
stretcheth forth the heavens alone1 that
 spreadeth abroad the earth by   myself3
 this would contradict many other       
scriptures1 which speak of   the ,son as
 the ,creator of all things1 if he were 
to be excluded by it4   ,again1 when the
 ,psalmist saith1 concerning the        
,father1 in ,psal4   lxxxiii4 #ah4 that 
his name alone is ,jehovah1 we must set 
aside all   those scriptures in which   
our ,saviour is called ,jehovah1 if he  
is   contained in this exclusive term4  
,see more to this purpose in the said   
sermon1 in which this argument is       
managed with a great deal of   judgment4
 ,i shall only take leave farther to    
cite what is well   observed in page    
#cc4 8,that1 perhaps the word ,god in   
those places1   namely1 such in which   
there are these exclusive terms1 is to  

be   understood in the indefinite sense1
 abstracting from the particular        
consideration of this or that person1 in
 like manner as the word man   often    
stands not for any particular human     
person1 but the whole   species1 or     
human nature2 as when we say1 man is    
frail2 man is   mortal1 or the like40   
,footnote #aff3         4 ,beza speaks  
of two or three of the most   ancient   
copies in which this reading is found2  
and ,grotius also   adheres to it1 from 
the credit1 as he says1 of the most     
ancient and   correct copies2 and it is 
also observed1 that the vulgar ,latin   
version   renders it so2 and ,augustin  
read it so in the copy that he made use 
of3 and whereas the evangelists1 ,mark  
and ,luke1 read it1 ,why callest   thou 
me good1 he endeavours to reconcile this
 different reading   therewith as       
supposing there was a seeming           
contradiction between them   which he   
might better have done1 by referring to 
some copies which had   it1 as we read  

it1 why callest thou me good2 from      
whence1 it is   probable1 he saw none   
that so rendered it in his time4 ,vid4  
,agust4 de   ,consensu4 ,evan4 lib4 ii4 
cap4 #fc4 ,it is also thus translated in
 the   ancient ,hebrew version of the   
gospel of ,matthew4  ,footnote #afg3    
8,if ,dr4 ,priestley1 in his celebrated 
efforts to establish the   ,unitarianism
 of the primitive church against ,dr4   
,horsley1 fell so   short of #8complete 
victory2' it may be presumed1 that the  
failure   would1 in some degree1 affect 
his greater work1 ,the ,history of      
,early   ,opinions concerning ,jesus    
,christ4 ,many parts of that elaborate  
performance are merely a republication  
of the ,letters1 excluding the          
personalities4 ,their merits and their  
fate must1 therefore1 be   closely1     
interwoven4    8,this large and capital 
work was given to the world under       
circumstances which appeared very       
promising for bringing the   controversy
 to a satisfactory issue4 ,with great   

and long continued   diligence the      
indefatigable author collected his      
materials4 ,he   digested and arranged  
them1 with that lucid perspicuity for   
which he   was so justly distinguished4 
,he tried every method to call forth    
into   the field of preparatory         
discussion1 some learned and able       
,trinitarians and ,arians4 ,he waited   
for some years after the   publication  
of the work2 and then renewed his public
 challenge1   affording an additional   
period for the fate of the question4 ,it
 was1   of course1 implied1 and the     
obligation was frankly avowed by the    
,doctor2 that he would in proper time   
duly notice what any fair and   candid  
opponents should produce4    8,it is to 
be lamented1 however that the           
expectations thus excited have   not    
been completely answered2 and the       
decease of ,dr4 ,priestly excludes      
every hope that they will be so4        
8,early in the year #agij1 a mild and   
amiable writer1 ,dr4 ,williams1#afh     

addressed to ,dr4 ,priestley his        
objections to the whole structure of    
the argument built on the ,history of   
,early ,opinions4 ,he offered   reasons 
to shew1 that the appeal to the fathers 
was a method   calculated to increase   
difficulties1 and to render the         
controversy   almost interminable2 that 
it has been experimentally proved an    
insufficient mode of argument2 that it  
has been long ago solidly   refuted2#afi
 that it was plainly reprehended by     
,jesus ,christ2 that it   is highly     
untheological in its just consequences2 
and that it is   illogical and          
inconclusive4 ,this letter breathed the 
sincere spirit of   amicable            
controversy2 and ,i cannot but think    
that it deserved the very   candid and  
serious attention of your learned       
friend4 ,but ,i believe it   was never  
noticed in any other way than that of   
private compliment4    8,in #agid1 ,dr4 
,jamieson published a professed and     
minute examination of   the ,history of 

,early ,opinions4 ,this elaborate and   
learned work was the   very performance 
which ,dr4 ,priestley had so long       
desired and   challenged4 ,it surely1   
then1 had a just claim on his particular
 and   public notice4 ,at the time of   
this work's appearance1 ,dr4 ,priestley 
was occupied in the important measure of
 emigration to ,america4 ,but   when    
that step was accomplished1 he enjoyed1 
for the remaining years   of life1 a    
calm and undisturbed retreat4 ,we have1 
however1 yet to be   informed of the    
reason why his former pledge was not    
fulfilled4    8,as the controversy has  
been thus left open1 it cannot be deemed
   illiberal in me to mention the result
 of personal observation in   reading   
this large work of ,dr4 ,priestley's4 ,i
 am the more inclined to   do so1 since 
what ,i have remarked may be of use in  
answering a   question of some          
importance2 ,what degree of reliance can
 be placed on   ,dr4 ,priestley's care  
and accuracy in his citations of the    

fathers8    8,you1 ,sir1 are well aware 
of the importance which ,dr4 ,priestley 
attaches to the position1 that the      
doctrines of the pre-existence and      
divinity of ,christ were acknowledged by
 the orthodox fathers to have   been    
most cautiously concealed1 in the       
earlier preaching of the   apostles1 and
 not to have been clearly divulged1 till
 ,john taught them   at the close of the
 apostolic age4    8,dr4 ,jamieson      
appears to me to have solidly refuted   
this   assertion4#agj ,but he has1 by no
 means1 proceeded so far as he might    
easily have done1 in shewing ,dr4       
,priestley's remarkable inattention to  
rigid accuracy in the allegation of his 
authorities4    8,the instances of this 
kind which ,i have observed have given  
me much   astonishment4 ,if they        
concerned merely the literary reputation
 of this   truly eminent character1 to  
drag them into public notice could only 
be   the work of a petulant and little  
mind4 ,but they become cases of a   very

 different nature1 when conclusions of  
prime importance on a very   interesting
 subject are inferred from egregious    
misconstructions of an   author's       
meaning4 ,in such cases regard to truth 
must supersede   personal delicacies4   
8,this duty becomes the more urgent when
 we are told1 from high and             
respectable authority1 that1 #8in all   
the most important controversies   in   
which' ,dr4 ,priestley #8was engaged1 he
 had studied the subject   thoroughly1  
and was a complete master of the whole  
question3' and   that1 in his reasoning1
 #8there was nothing artificial and     
ambiguous2   no design to slur over     
difficulties and objections1 or to lay  
greater   stress upon a topic than it   
would well bear4'#aga    8,the doctor   
has selected ,chrysostom as the father  
whose evidence is   most ample in       
support of the opinion1 that ,john first
 taught the   divinity of ,christ4      
#8,chrysostom1' says ,dr4 ,priestley1   
#8represents all   the preceding writers

 of the ,new ,testament as children1 who
 heard1 but   did not understand things1
 and who were busy about cheese-cakes   
and   childish sports1 but ,john1' he   
says1 #8taught what the angels          
themselves did not know before he       
declared it4'#agb    8,at the bottom of 
the page1 ,dr4 ,priestley faithfully    
transcribes the   ,greek of this        
passage1 and no one can say that his    
translation is   materially unfair1 so  
far as it goes4 ,the sentence is exactly
 thus3   #8,all the rest1 like little   
children1 hear indeed1 yet do not       
understand what they hear1 but are      
captivated with cakes and childish      
sports4' ,the omission of the clause    
#8all the rest1' 7     7 does not appear
 of much consequence4 ,the insertion of 
it   would only have led the reader to  
inquire for the antecedent1 and ,dr4    
,priestley has provided a ready answer3 
#8all the preceding writers of   the    
,new ,testament4'    8,do me the favour1
 my dear ,sir1 to take down the volume  

of ,chrysostom1   and turn to the       
passage4 ,will you find the antecedent  
to this relative   clause to be any     
#8writers of the ,new ,testament1' or   
any persons at all   connected with the 
,new ,testament8 ,no1 ,sir4 ,you will   
find it to be the   effeminate and      
dissipated spectators of athletic games1
 and the   auditors of musicians and    
oratorial sophists6#agc0    ,,smith',s  
,,letters ,,to ,,belsham4  ,footnote    
#afh3    ,letter to ,dr4 ,priestley1 in 
vol4 i4 of ,dr4 ,williams' edition of   
,owen   on the ,hebrews4  ,footnote     
#afi3    ,dr4 ,williams refers only to  
,chillingworth by name4 ,i would take   
the   liberty of adding1 that ,m4       
,daille's admirable work ,on the ,use of
 the   ,fathers in ,determining         
,religious ,controversies1 is deserving 
of the   most careful perusal with      
reference to this subject4  ,footnote   
#agj3    ,see his valuable work1        
,vindication of the ,primitive ,faith1  
c4 in   ,reply to ,dr4 ,priestley's     

,hist4 of ,early ,opinions3 vol4 i4 p4  
#bhd-cac4  ,footnote #aga3    ,mr4      
,belsham's ,disc4 p4 #bd1 #be4          
,footnote #agb3    ,hist4 of ,early ,op4
 vol4 iii4 p4 #abh1 #abi4  ,footnote    
#agc3    ,mr4 ,belsham denies that these
 characters are the antecedent to the   
exceptive clause in question1 and       
conceives that it refers to the mass    
of unlearned ,christians1 who are placed
 in opposition to 8the   spectators and 
auditors of ,john1 men that are become  
angels1 or are   desirous of becoming   
such40 ,but the ,greek fathers give some
 additional   features of their         
character4 8,these10 he says1 8are      
devoted to   merriment and              
luxuriousness1 living in riches1        
honours1 and gluttony40   ,the candid   
reader will judge whether this          
description be more   applicable to     
plain and honest christians1 than to the
 gay and   dissipated persons mentioned 
in a preceding part of the discourse4   
,footnote #agd3    ,in this they agree  

with those who were formerly called     
,macedonians1   from ,macidonius1 bishop
 of ,constantinople1 who lived about the
 middle   of the fourth century1 who    
entertained such sentiments of the ,holy
   ,ghost1 and had a considerable party 
that adhered to him1 who were also      
called ,pneumatomachi4  ,footnote #age3 
,see page #bdi1 #bej4  ,footnote #agf3  
,see ,woltzogen1 and other ,socinian    
writers1 in loc4 and ,dr4 ,clarke's     
,scripture-doctrine1 page #ac4 where he 
inserts this among those   scriptures2  
in all which he supposes that the word  
,god is applied to   the ,father4       
,footnote #agg3    ,see page #ceh4      
,footnote #agh3    ,several of the ,post
 ,nicene ,fathers have taken the words1 
1 in the same sense as by the ,lord1 the
 ,spirit2 and1 in   particular1 ,basil4 
de ,spirit4 ,sanct4 ad ,amphiloc4 ,cap4 
#ba4  ,chrysost4   in loc4  ,footnote   
#agi3    ,see page #bdi1 #bej1 #bea4    
,footnote #ahj3    ,see page #cei1 #cfj4
  ,footnote #aha3    ,see ,dr4 ,clarke's

 ,scripture-doctrine1 page #aih4        
,footnote #ahb3    ,see ,quest4 lix4    
lxvii4 lxxii4 lxxv4                     
,quest4 ,,xii41 ,,xiii4       ,,quest4  
,,xii4 ,what are the decrees of ,god8   
,,answ4 ,god's decrees are the wise1    
free1 and holy acts of the counsel      
of his will2 whereby1 from all eternity1
 he hath1 for his own glory1            
unchangeably fore-ordained whatsoever   
comes to pass in time2     especially   
concerning angels and men4      ,,quest4
 ,,xiii4 ,what hath ,god especially     
decreed concerning angels and     men8  
,,answ4 ,god1 by an eternal and         
immutable decree out of his mere love1  
for the praise of his glorious grace1 to
 be manifested in due time1     hath    
elected some angels to glory1 and1 in   
,christ1 hath chosen some     men to    
eternal life1 and the means thereof2 and
 also1 according to     his sovereign   
power1 and the unsearchable counsel of  
his own will     7whereby he extendeth1 
or with-holdeth favour1 as he pleaseth7 

hath     passed by1 and fore-ordained   
the rest to dishonour and wrath1 to be  
for their sin inflicted1 to the praise  
of the glory of his justice4   ,having  
considered the perfections of the divine
 nature1 and the ,personal glories of   
the ,father1 ,son1 and ,spirit1 the next
 thing to be insisted on is1 what ,god  
has purposed to do from eternity1 or    
does1 or will do1 in pursuance thereof2 
the former we call his decrees2 the     
latter1 the execution of them4 ,the     
object of his decree is whatever comes  
to pass1 which is the most large and    
comprehensive sense of his purpose3 but 
whereas his determinations1 in a        
particular manner1 respect angels and   
men1 or the intelligent part of the     
creation1 and more especially the       
eternal happiness of some1 or the       
display of his righteous judgments      
against others2 in these respects1 they 
being taken in a more limited sense1 are
 called as relating to the former1      
election1 and1 with respect to the      

latter1 reprobation1 which is the       
subject matter of these two answers4    
,and1 before we proceed to insist on    
this sublime and difficult subject1 it  
may not be inexpedient for us to premise
 some things concerning it in general4  
#a4 ,it is well known that there is no  
doctrine1 contained in scripture1 which 
is more contested than this1 which lies 
before us2 and it is not only denied by 
some1 but treated with the utmost       
dislike or detestation1 and that to such
 a degree1 that we must either wholly   
forbear to mention it in public         
discourses1 or writings1 or else must be
 liable to the hard fate of being       
censured by those who will not do that  
justice to the argument1 to consider    
what may be advanced in defence thereof1
 as though it were to be taken for      
granted that we are maintaining a       
doctrine that is not only indefensible1 
but injurious to mankind1 and subversive
 of all religion4  #b4 ,if there be any 
who give just occasion to these         

prejudices1 by the methods which they   
have used in explaining1 as well as the 
weakness of their arguments in defending
 it1 or by laying themselves open to    
those popular objections1 which are     
usually brought against it1 we cannot   
but conclude that they are highly to    
blame2 and therefore we are far from    
approving of any unguarded expressions1 
which are to be met with in some        
writings1 whereby a stumbling-block is  
laid in the way of those who are        
disposed to make men offenders for a    
word1 rather than to judge impartially  
of the main drift of their discourse3 it
 is to be owned1 that this has done     
dis-service to the cause1 which might   
have been better defended4  #c4 ,if     
these prejudices against this doctrine  
are ill grounded1 and the objections    
only founded on the popular cry1 by     
which it is endeavoured to be run down1 
and condemned with reproach and censure2
 and if persons know not1 nor desire to 
know what may be said in defence        

thereof1 how such-like objections may be
 answered2 the disgust and opposition is
 both unreasonable and uncharitable1 and
 contains a capricious resolution not to
 be undeceived1 and consequently renders
 the person thus prejudiced1 highly     
culpable in the sight of ,god1          
especially if there be any ground to    
conclude that his cause is therein      
maintained4  #d4 ,let it be farther     
considered1 that it is not a new        
doctrine1 or such as was altogether     
unheard of in the world before2 nor has 
it been only defended by the more       
ignorant or licentious part of mankind1 
or those who have been bold and         
presumptuous in affirming that for      
truth1 which they had not duly weighed1 
or been convinced of1 from the strongest
 evidence4 ,whether it be as ancient as 
scripture1 and1 indeed1 founded upon it1
 we shall leave others to judge1 when we
 have considered what may be said from  
it in defence thereof4  #e4 ,it was     
generally asserted1 and publicly owned  

in most of the confessions of faith of  
the reformed churches in the last age1  
and1 in particular1 in the church of    
,england1 as contained in one of the    
articles thereof1 and there is no       
apparent ambiguity in the words         
themselves1 however1 some have          
endeavoured1 of late1 to strain the     
sense thereof1 and put such a meaning on
 them1 as is very different from the    
writings of those who compiled them1    
which might serve as a comment on them4 
,and to this we may add1 that it was    
maintained by far the greatest number of
 divines1 in their public discourses and
 writings in the last century1 how much 
soever the contrary doctrines are       
maintained at this day3 however1 we do  
not insist on this as a proof of the    
truth thereof1 as though it needed to be
 supported by numbers of advocates for  
it1 or were founded thereon2 nor do we  
suppose1 that when it has been most     
strenuously1 and almost universally     
defended1 there were not at the same    

time1 others who opposed it4 ,this ,i   
only mention1 that ,i may1 if possible1 
remove those prejudices that are        
inconsistent with persons judging       
impartially of it4  ,since we are       
considering the head of prejudices      
against this doctrine1 we think it      
necessary to add1 that we shall         
endeavour to vindicate it1 from the     
reproach that is generally cast on it1  
by those who suppose that it cannot be  
defended1 without asserting ,god to be  
the author of sin1 or supposing him to  
be severe1 cruel1 and unjust to his     
creatures1 as some conclude we represent
 him to be1 by unjust consequences      
deduced from it4 ,we are far from       
asserting1 as will hereafter appear1    
that ,god from all eternity1 purposed to
 damn a great part of the world1 as the 
result of his mere sovereign will1      
without the foresight of sin1 which     
would render them liable to that        
condemnation4  ,moreover1 we shall      
endeavour to make it appear1 in         

opposition to the calumnies of some1    
that the decree of ,god does not        
destroy1 or take away1 the liberty of   
man's will1 with respect to things1     
within its own sphere2 or that          
considered in itself1 it doth not lay a 
natural necessity on him1 to rush into  
inevitable damnation1 as though the     
destruction of sinners were only to be  
resolved into the divine purpose1 and   
not their own wickedness4 ,in           
considering which1 we shall maintain1   
that the decree of ,god does not lay any
 force on the will of man1 nor preclude 
the means of grace1 as ordained by him1 
for the salvation of them that do1 or   
shall hereafter1 believe unto life      
everlasting2 nor does it obstruct the   
preaching of the gospel1 and therein    
proclaiming the glad tidings of         
salvation1 to those who set under the   
sound thereof1 as an ordinance for their
 faith4  ,and inasmuch as many are      
prejudiced against this doctrine1 as    
being influenced by that popular        

out-cry1 which is made by some1 as      
though it were of a very pernicious     
tendency1 either1 on the one hand1 to   
lead men to presumption1 as giving      
occasion to persons to conclude that    
they may be saved as being elected      
though they live as they list2 or1 on   
the other hand1 that it leads to        
despair1 as supposing1 that if there be 
such a decree1 as that of reprobation1  
they must necessarily be included in it1
 and1 by this means1 instead of         
promoting holiness of life1 it is       
inconsistent therewith3 if we cannot    
maintain this doctrine1 without giving  
just ground for such exceptions1 we     
shall not only think our labour lost1   
but condemn it as pernicious and        
unscriptural1 as much as they do1 as it 
must of necessity be1 if it cannot be   
defended from such-like exceptions2     
which1 ,i hope1 we shall be able to do1 
and at the same time1 make it appear1   
that it is not only consistent with1 but
 a very great motive and inducement to  

practical godliness3 and1 if this can be
 made to appear1 the greatest part of   
the censorious prejudices1 that are     
entertained against it1 will be removed1
 and persons will be better able to     
judge whether truth lies on that side of
 the question1 which we shall endeavour 
to defend1 or the contrary4  ,i could   
not but premise these things in our     
entrance on this subject1 as being      
sensible that such-like reproaches1 as  
these we have mentioned1 are brought by 
many1 without duly weighing whether they
 are well grounded or no2 so that this  
doctrine is often opposed1 in such a way
 of reasoning1 that the premises1 as    
well as the conclusions drawn from them1
 are rather their own than ours2 or1 at 
least1 if some ideas thereof may be     
found in the writings1 or taken from the
 unguarded expressions1 which some who  
have defended this doctrine1 have made  
use of2 yet they have appeared in such a
 dress that even they1 who are supposed 
to have advanced them1 would have       

disowned and rejected them4 ,if persons 
who are in another way of thinking1     
resolve not to lay aside these          
misrepresentations1 it plainly appears  
that they are not disposed to lie open  
to conviction1 and then all attempts to 
defend this doctrine will be to no      
purpose2 the preventing whereof has     
rendered these prefatory cautions       
needful4  ,we shall only add1 to what   
has been said1 some rules1 by which we  
desire that the truth1 either of this or
 the opposite doctrine1 may be judged   
of4  #a4 ,if we do not confirm what we  
assert1 by proofs taken from scripture1 
let it not be received2 but if we do1   
whatever may be said of our method of   
managing this controversy1 the greatest 
deference ought to be paid to the sacred
 oracles3 ,but since it is very common  
for persons to answer the arguments     
taken from one scripture1 by producing  
other scriptures1 which seems to assert 
the contrary1 as desirous to shift aside
 in the dispute1 and put us upon solving

 the difficulties which they suppose to 
be contained in them2 though this is not
 to be declined1 yet a more direct      
answer must be given before the doctrine
 itself is overthrown4 ,whether our     
explication of those scriptures1 on     
which our faith therein is founded1 be  
just1 we shall leave others to judge2   
and also whether the sense we give of   
other scriptures that are brought as    
objections against it1 be not equally   
probable with that of those that bring  
them2 which is all that need be insisted
 on in such cases4  #b4 ,let that       
doctrine be received1 and the contrary  
rejected1 on which side of the question 
soever it lies1 that is most agreeable  
to the divine perfections1 and explains 
those scriptures1 brought in defence of 
it1 most consistently therewith2 which  
is a fair proposal2 and such as ought   
not only to be applied to this          
particular head of doctrine1 but to the 
whole of religion1 as founded on        
scripture1 which is far from            

overthrowing the divine glory1 the      
advancement whereof is the great end of 
it4  #c4 ,let that doctrine be rejected1
 as inconsistent with itself1 and not   
worthy to be believed or embraced1      
whether it be ours1 or the contrary     
thereunto1 that shall detract from the  
harmony of the divine perfection1 or    
pretend to set up1 or plead for one1    
and1 at the same time militate against  
the glory of another2 and ,i desire     
nothing more than that our whole method 
of reasoning on this subject may be     
tried by these rules1 and be deemed true
 or false1 agreeably to what is         
contained therein4  ,in considering this
 subject1 relating to the decrees of    
,god1 as in the two answers1 which we   
are explaining1 we shall proceed in the 
following method2 and shew1  ,i4 ,what  
we are to understand1 by ,god's         
fore-ordaining whatever comes to pass1  
according to the counsel of his own     
will2 wherein we shall compare the      
decree with the execution thereof1 and  

observe how one exactly answers to the  
other1 and is to be a rule for our      
judging concerning it4  ,,ii4 ,we shall 
prove the truth of that proposition1    
that ,god hath fore-ordained whatever   
shall come to pass1 either in time1 or  
to eternity4  ,,iii4 ,we shall then     
particularly consider intelligent       
creatures1 such as angels and men1 and  
that both good and bad1 with respect to 
their present1 or future state1 as the  
objects of ,god's eternal decree or     
purpose1 and so shall proceed to speak  
concerning the decree of election1 and  
reprobation1 as contained in the latter 
of these answers4  ,,iv4 ,we shall lay  
down some propositions concerning each  
of these1 tending to explain and prove  
them1 and that more especially as to    
what respects the election and          
reprobation of men4  ,v4 ,we shall      
consider the properties thereof1 and how
 the divine perfections are displayed   
therein1 and endeavour to make it       
appear1 in various instances1 that the  

account we shall give thereof is        
agreeable thereunto1 as well as founded 
on scripture4  ,,vi4 ,we shall enquire  
whether the contrary doctrine defended  
by those who deny election and          
reprobation1 be not derogatory to1 and  
subversive of the divine perfections1   
or1 at least1 inconsistent with the     
harmony thereof2 or whether it doth not1
 in many respects1 make ,god altogether 
such an one as ourselves4  ,,vii4 ,we   
shall endeavour to prove that their     
reasoning from scripture1 who maintain  
the contrary doctrine1 is not           
sufficiently conclusive2 and that the   
sense they give of those scriptures1    
generally brought to support it1 does   
not so well agree with the divine       
perfections1 as it ought to do1 but that
 they may be explained in a different   
way1 more consistent therewith4  ,,viii4
 ,we shall endeavour to answer the most 
material objections that are usually    
brought against the doctrine that we are
 maintaining4 ,and1  ,,ix4 ,shew how it 

is practically to be improved by us1 to 
the glory of ,god1 and our spiritual    
good and advantage4  ,i4 ,what we are to
 understand by ,god's fore-ordaining    
whatever comes to pass1 according to the
 counsel of his own will4  #a4 ,by      
,god's fore-ordaining whatever comes to 
pass1 we do not understand barely his   
fore-knowledge of all things1 that are1 
or shall be done in time1 and to        
eternity1 although this be included in1 
and inseparably connected with his      
eternal purpose1 since no one can       
purpose to act without the foreknowledge
 thereof2 yet more than this is         
certainly contained therein2 therefore1 
#b4 ,god's pre-determining1 or          
fore-ordaining whatsoever comes to pass1
 includes not only an act of the divine 
understanding1 but an act of his        
sovereign will3 ,it is not only his     
knowing what shall come to pass1 but his
 determining1 by his own agency1 or     
efficiency1 what he will produce in     
time1 or to eternity4 ,accordingly1 some

 call the decrees of ,god his eternal   
providence1 and the execution thereof   
his actual providence2 by the former1 he
 determines what he will do2 by the     
latter1 he brings his determinations to 
pass1 or effects what he before designed
 to do4 ,it follows therefore1  #c4     
,that ,god's fore-ordaining whatsoever  
shall come to pass1 is vastly different 
from his bringing things to pass3 the   
one is an internal act of his will2 the 
other1 an external act of his almighty  
power3 ,he fore-ordained that they      
should come to pass1 and therefore1 till
 then1 they are considered as future2   
though this determination necessarily   
secures the event1 unless we suppose it 
possible for his eternal purpose to be  
defeated1 which is disagreeable to the  
divine perfections1 as will farther     
appear under some following heads4 ,and1
 on the other hand1 when we consider    
him1 as bringing all things to pass1 or 
producing them by his power1 this       
renders what was before future1 present4

 ,with respect to the former1 he decrees
 what shall be2 and1 with respect to the
 latter1 his decree takes effect1 and is
 executed accordingly4  ,they who treat 
of this matter1 generally consider      
things1 either as possible or future4   
,things are said to be possible1 with   
respect to the power of ,god1 as every  
thing that he can do1 is possible to be 
done1 though some things1 which he could
 have done1 he never will do4 ,as for   
instance3 ,he could have made more      
worlds1 had he pleased2 or have produced
 more men upon earth1 or more species of
 creatures2 or have given a greater     
degree of perfection to creatures1 than 
he has done1 or will do2 for it is      
certain1 that he never acted to the     
utmost of his power1 accordingly he     
could have done many things that he will
 never do2 and those things are said to 
be possible1 but not future4  ,moreover1
 things future are rendered so1 by the  
will of ,god1 or his having             
fore-ordained1 or determined to produce 

them2 this is what we call the decree of
 ,god1 which respects the event1 or     
determines whatever shall come to pass4 
,we are now to consider1 what we are to 
understand by ,god's fore-ordaining all 
things1 according to the counsel of his 
will2 which is a mode of speaking used  
in scripture1 in ,eph4 i4 #aa4 ,being   
predestinated according to the purpose  
of him who worketh all things after the 
counsel of his own will4  #a4 ,we are   
not hereby to understand that the       
decrees of ,god are the result of       
deliberation1 or his debating matters   
within himself1 as reasoning in his own 
mind about the expediency1 or           
inexpediency of things1 or calling in   
the advice of others1 as creatures are  
said to do1 when acting with counsel2   
for he must not be supposed to determine
 things in such a way1 since that would 
argue an imperfection in the divine     
mind2 ,with whom took he counsel1 and   
who instructed him1 and taught him in   
the paths of judgment1 and taught him   

knowledge1 and shewed to him the way of 
understanding8 ,isa4 xl4 #ad4 ,but1  #b4
 ,it implies1 that his decrees are      
infinitely wise4 ,as what is done with  
counsel is said1 according to human     
modes of speaking1 to be done advisedly1
 in opposition to its being done rashly1
 or with precipitation2 accordingly all 
the works of ,god are done with wisdom1 
therefore all his purposes and          
determinations to do what is done in    
time1 are infinitely wise1 which1       
according to our way of speaking1 is    
called the counsel of his will3 thus it 
is said1 ,he is wonderful in counsel1   
and excellent in working1 chap4 xxviii4 
#bi4  ,we are now to consider the object
 of ,god's decree2 ,this1 as has been   
before observed1 is every thing that    
has1 or shall come to pass1 and it may  
be considered in different respects4    
,there are some things which he has     
determined to effect1 namely1 such as   
are the objects of his power2 or all    
things1 which have a natural or moral   

goodness in them1 which are becoming an 
infinitely holy ,god to produce3 and    
this includes in it every thing but sin1
 which ,god does not produce1 it not    
being the object of power3              
,nevertheless1 this must be supposed to 
be committed by his permission1 and     
therefore it is the consequence of his  
decree to permit1 though not1 as other  
things1 of his decree to effect2 it is  
one thing to suffer sin to be committed 
in the world1 and another thing to be   
the author of it4 ,but this we shall    
have occasion to enlarge on1 under a    
following head4  ,,ii4 ,we shall now    
proceed to prove the truth of what is   
laid down in this answer1 namely1 that  
,god hath fore-ordained whatever comes  
to pass4 ,this will evidently appear1 if
 we consider the five following         
propositions in their due connexion4    
#a4 ,nothing comes to pass by chance1   
with respect to ,god1 but by the        
direction of his providence1 which we   
are bound to assert against the ,deists1

 who speak of ,god1 as though he were   
not the ,governor of the world4 ,this   
cannot be denied by any1 who think1 with
 any degree of modesty1 concerning1 or  
pay a due deference to the divine       
perfections1 since ,god may as well be  
denied to be the ,creator as the        
,governor of the world4#ahc  #b4 ,it    
follows from hence1 that nothing is done
 without the divine influence1 or       
permission4 ,the former 7as was before  
observed7 respects things that are good1
 which are the effects of his power2 the
 latter1 sin4 ,that nothing comes to    
pass without the divine influence1 or   
permission1 is evident2 for if any thing
 came to pass1 which is the object of   
power1 without the divine influence1    
then the creature would be said to      
exist1 or act independently on the power
 of ,god2 and1 if so1 then it would     
follow1 that it would exist1 or act     
necessarily2 but necessary existence is 
a perfection appropriate to ,god4  ,as  
to what respects the latter1 namely1    

sins being committed by divine          
permission1 it is evident1 that if it   
might be committed without the divine   
permission1 it could not be restrained  
by ,god3 and to suppose that he could   
not hinder the commission of sin1 is to 
suppose that sin might proceed to the   
greatest height1 without any possible   
check or controul1 which would argue a  
great defect in the divine government of
 the world1 as it is also contrary to   
daily experience1 as well as scripture4 
,certainly he who sets bounds to the    
sea1 and says to its proud waves1       
,hitherto shall ye come1 and no farther1
 must be supposed to set bounds to the  
corrupt passions of wicked men3 thus the
 ,psalmist says1 ,surely the wrath of   
men shall praise thee2 the remainder of 
wrath shalt thou restrain1 ,psal4 lxxvi4
 #aj4  ,notwithstanding1 this does not  
argue his approbation of sin1 or that he
 is the author of it2 since it is one   
thing to suffer1 or not to hinder1 and  
another thing to be the author of any   

thing4 ,thus it is said1 ,these things  
hast thou done1 and ,i kept silence1    
,psal4 l4 #ba4 that is1 ,i did not      
restrain thee from doing them1 as ,i    
could have done2 so it is said1 in times
 past he suffered all nations to walk in
 their own ways4 ,acts xiv4 #af4  #c4   
,god never acts or suffers any thing to 
be done1 but he knows1 beforehand1 what 
he will do or suffer4 ,this an          
intelligent creature1 acting as such1 is
 said do1 therefore it must not be      
denied of him1 who is omniscient1 and   
infinitely wise3 ,he who knows all      
things that others will do1 cannot but  
know what himself will do1 or what      
others will do by the interposition of  
his providence1 or what he will suffer  
to be done1 before it is acted4  #d4    
,whatever ,god does1 and consequently   
knows before-hand that he will do it1   
that he must be supposed to have before 
determined to do3 ,this must be allowed1
 or else it argues him defective in     
wisdom4 ,as no wise man acts            

precipitantly or without judgment1 much 
less must the wise ,god be supposed to  
do so2 concerning whom it is said1 that 
all his ways are judgment1 ,deut4 xxxii4
 #d4  #e4 ,it therefore appears1 even to
 a demonstration1 that ,god before      
determined1 or fore-ordained1 whatever  
comes to pass1 which was the thing to be
 proved4  ,and inasmuch1 as he never    
began to determine1 as he never began to
 exist1 or as he never was without      
purposes of what he would do2 therefore 
it is evident1 that he before ordained1 
from eternity1 whatever should come to  
pass1 either in time1 or to eternity4   
,it farther appears1 that ,god          
fore-ordained whatsoever comes to pass1 
otherwise he did not determine to create
 all things before he gave being to     
them2 and then it could not be said1 ,o 
,lord1 how manifold are thy works6 in   
wisdom hast thou made them all1 ,psal4  
civ4 #bd4 ,there are1 indeed1 many      
admirable discoveries of wisdom1 as well
 as power1 in the effects produced2 but 

to suppose that all this was done       
without fore-thought1 or that there was 
no eternal purpose relating thereunto1  
would be such a reflection on the glory 
of this perfection1 as is inconsistent  
with the idea of a ,god4 ,moreover1 if  
herein he designed his own glory1 as he 
certainly did1 since every intelligent  
being designs some end1 and the highest 
and most excellent end must be designed 
by a ,god of infinite wisdom2 and1 if he
 did all this for his own glory1 then it
 must be allowed1 that it was the result
 of an eternal purpose3 all which1 ,i am
 persuaded1 will not be denied by those 
on the other side of the question1 who  
defend their own cause with any measure 
of judgment4  ,to this we may farther   
add1 that to deny that ,god             
fore-ordained whatever comes to pass1   
is1 in effect1 to deny a providence1 or1
 at least1 that ,god governs the world  
in such a way1 as that what he does     
therein was pre-concerted4 ,and herein  
we expect to meet with no opposition    

from any but the ,deists1 or those who  
deny a ,god2 and if it be taken for     
granted that there is a providence1 or  
that ,god is the ,governor of the world1
 we cannot but conclude from hence1 that
 all the displays of his glory therein1 
are the result of his eternal purpose4  
,this is also agreeable to what is said 
concerning him1 that he doth according  
to his will in the army of heaven1 and  
among the inhabitants of the earth1     
,dan4 iv4 #ce4 the meaning of which is  
not barely this1 7which is a great      
truth7 that he acts without controul1   
inasmuch as his power is infinite3 ,but 
that all he does is pursuant to his     
will2 and1 indeed1 it cannot be         
otherwise1 if we suppose that the divine
 power1 and will1 are so inseparably    
connected1 that he cannot be said to    
produce any thing1 but by the word of   
his power2 or when he willeth that any  
thing should come to pass1 it is not in 
an efficacious will1 as ours is1 for    
want of power1 to effect what we have   

done4 ,therefore for ,god to will the   
present existence of things1 is to      
effect them1 which seems to be the      
reason of that mode of speaking1 which  
was used when he produced all things at 
first2 he said1 let them exist in that  
form1 or perfection1 which he had before
 designed to give them1 and the effect  
immediately followed1 ,gen4 i4 #c1 #f1  
#i1 c4  ,hitherto1 ,i presume1 our      
argument will not be much contested2 for
 the main thing in controversy is what  
relates to the divine determination     
respecting intelligent creatures1 which 
will be considered under a following    
head3 ,what ,i have hitherto attempted  
to prove is1 the proposition in general1
 namely1 that whatever ,god brings to   
pass1 or is the effect of power1 is the 
result of his determinate purpose4 ,and 
herein1 ,i think1 ,i have carefully     
distinguished between ,god's will to    
effect1 and his will to permit2 but that
 will be farther explained1 when we     
speak of the decrees of ,god1 with a    

particular application to angels and    
men1 under the head of election4        
,having endeavoured to prove that ,god  
hath fore-ordained whatever comes to    
pass1 we shall lay down the following   
propositions relating to his end and    
design in all his purposes1 together    
with the nature of things1 as coming to 
pass pursuant thereunto1 and the method 
in which we are to conceive of the      
decree1 when compared with the execution
 thereof4  #a4 ,god cannot design any   
thing1 in his eternal purpose1 as the   
highest end1 but his own glory1 which is
 here assigned1 as the end of his       
decrees4 ,as this is the principal      
motive1 or reason1 inducing him to      
produce whatever comes to pass2 so it   
must be considered as the end of his    
purpose relating thereunto3 ,this is    
very evident2 for since the divine glory
 is the most excellent of all things1 he
 cannot1 as an infinitely wise ,god1    
design any thing short of it1 as the    
great motive or inducement for him to   

act2 therefore1 whatever lower ends are 
designed by him1 they are all resolved  
into this as the principal1 to wit1 the 
advancement of his divine perfections4  
,though ,god designs his own glory as   
the highest end1 yet he has purposed not
 only that this should be brought about1
 by means conducive thereunto1 but that 
there should be a subserviency of one   
thing to another1 all which are the     
objects of his decree1 as well as the   
highest end1 namely1 his own glory4 ,as1
 for instance1 he determines that the   
life and health of man shall be         
maintained by the use of proper means   
and medicine1 or that grace shall be    
wrought instrumentally by those means1  
which he has ordained1 in order         
thereunto3 thus his purpose respects the
 end and means1 together with the       
connexion that there is between them4   
#b4 ,according to the natural order of  
things1 the divine purpose is antecedent
 to the execution thereof4 ,therefore it
 seems very absurd to distinguish the   

decree of ,god1 as some do1 into        
antecedent and consequent1 one going    
before the use of means1 the other      
following1 of which more hereafter3 ,it 
is certain1 that every intelligent being
 first determines to act1 and then      
executes his determinations2 so that    
nothing can be more absurd1 than to say1
 that a person determines to do a thing 
which is already done4 ,therefore we    
conclude1 that ,god first decreed what  
shall come to pass1 and then brings it  
to pass3 ,accordingly he first          
determined to create the world1 and then
 created it2 he first determined to     
bestow the means of grace on men1 and to
 render them effectual to the salvation 
of all who shall be saved1 and then he  
does this accordingly2 so1 with respect 
to his judicial actings1 he first       
determined by a permissive decree1 not  
to prevent the commission of sin1 though
 infinitely opposite to his holiness1   
and then1 knowing the consequence of    
this permissive decree1 or that men1    

through the mutability or corruption of 
their nature1 would rebel against him1  
he determined to punish sin after it    
should be committed4 ,thus the decree of
 ,god is1 in all respects1 antecedent to
 the execution of it2 or his eternal    
providence1 as his decrees are sometimes
 called1 is antecedent to1 and the      
ground and reason of1 his actual        
providence4  #c4 ,though the purpose of 
,god be before the execution thereof1   
yet the execution of it is first known  
by us2 and so it is by this that we are 
to judge of his decree and purpose1     
which is altogether secret1 with respect
 to us1 till he reveals it2 therefore we
 first observe the discoveries thereof1 
as contained in his word1 or made       
visible in his actual providence1 and   
from thence we infer his eternal purpose
 relating thereunto4 ,every thing that  
is first in the order of nature1 is not 
first with respect to the order of our  
knowing it3 thus the cause is before the
 effect1 but the effect is often known  

before the cause2 the sun is1 in the    
order of nature1 before the enlightening
 the world by it2 but we first see the  
light1 and then we know there is a sun1 
which is the fountain thereof3 or1 to   
illustrate it by another similitude1    
which comes nearer the matter before us2
 ,a legislator determines first to make 
a law1 which determination is antecedent
 to the making1 and that to the         
promulgation of it1 whereby his subjects
 come to the knowledge thereof1 and act 
in conformity thereunto2 but1 according 
to our method of judging concerning it1 
we must first know that there is such a 
law1 and from thence we conclude1 that  
there was a purpose relating to it1 in  
him that gave it2 ,thus we conclude1    
that though the decree of ,god be the   
ground and reason of the execution      
thereof1 yet we know that there was such
 a decree by its execution1 or1 at      
least1 by some other way designed to    
discover this to us4  ,these things     
being duly considered1 may obviate an   

objection1 which is no other than a     
misrepresentation of the doctrine we are
 maintaining1 as though we asserted1    
that our conduct of life1 and the       
judgment we are to pass concerning      
ourselves1 relating to our hope of      
future blessedness1 were to be          
principally1 if not altogether          
regulated1 by ,god's secret purpose or  
decree2 as though we were first to      
consider him as determining the event1  
that is1 as having chosen or rejected   
us1 and1 from this supposition1 to      
encourage ourselves to attend upon the  
means of grace2 or otherwise that we    
should take occasion to neglect them2   
since it is a preposterous thing for a  
man1 who considers himself as           
reprobated1 to attend on any of those   
means1 which are ordained to salvation4 
,what has been said under the foregoing 
heads1 is sufficient to take away the   
force of this objection2 but this will  
be more particularly considered1 when we
 come to answer several objections      

against the doctrine of election3       
,therefore all ,i shall add at present  
is1 that since our conduct and hope is  
to be governed by the appearances of    
things1 and not by ,god's secret purpose
 relating to the event thereof1 we are  
to act as those who have not1 nor can   
have1 any knowlege of what is decreed1  
with relation thereunto1 till it is     
evinced by the execution thereof2 or1 at
 least1 those graces wrought in us1     
which are the objects of ,god's purpose1
 as well as our future blessedness2 and 
our right to one is to be judged of by  
the other4  ,this leads us to consider  
the properties of these decrees of ,god1
 as mentioned in the former of the      
answers we are now considering2 in which
 it is said1 they are wise1 free1 and   
holy4 ,this is very evident1 from the   
wisdom1 sovereignty1 and holiness1 which
 appear in the execution of them2 for   
whatever perfections are demonstrated in
 the dispensations of providence1 or    
grace1 these ,god designed to glorify in

 his eternal purpose2 therefore if his  
works1 in time1 are wise1 free1         
sovereign1 and holy1 his decree1 with   
respect thereunto1 which is fulfilled   
thereby1 must be said to be so likewise4
 ,these things we shall have occasion to
 speak more particularly to1 under a    
following head1 when we consider the    
properties of election1 and particularly
 that it is wise1 sovereign1 and holy2  
,i shall therefore1 at present1 only    
add1 that whatever perfections belong to
 the nature of ,god1 they are           
demonstrated by his works1 since he     
cannot act unbecoming himself2 for that 
would give occasion to the world to deny
 him to be infinitely perfect1 that is1 
to be ,god4 ,if we pass a judgment on   
creatures by what they do1 and so       
determine him to be a wise man1 who acts
 wisely1 or a holy man1 who acts holily1
 or a free and sovereign agent1 who acts
 without constraint1 certainly the same 
must be said of the divine ,majesty2 and
 consequently1 since whatever he does   

has the marks of infinite wisdom1       
holiness1 and sovereignty1 impressed    
upon it1 it is evident that these       
properties1 or perfections1 belong to   
all his purposes4 ,if all his works are 
performed in wisdom1 as the ,psalmist   
observes1 ,psal4 civ4 #bd4 then we have 
reason to admire that wisdom which      
appears1 from hence1 to be contained in 
all his purposes relating thereunto1 as 
the apostle doth1 ,rom4 xi4 #cc4 ,o the 
depth of the riches1 both of the wisdom 
and knowledge of ,god6 ,how unsearchable
 are his judgments1 and his ways past   
finding out6 ,if he be righteous in all 
his ways1 and holy in all his works1    
,psal4 cxlv4 #ag4 and therein           
demonstrates a divine sovereignty1 as   
acting without any obligation1 or       
constraint laid upon him to bestow the  
favours he confers on mankind2 then we  
must certainly conclude1 that his       
eternal purpose which is executed       
hereby1 is free and sovereign4 ,this    
leads us to consider1  ,,iii4 ,that     

intelligent creatures1 such as angels   
and men1 with respect to their present  
or future state1 are the objects of     
,god's eternal decree1 or purpose1 which
 is generally called predestination4    
,and this1 as it relates to the         
happiness of some1 or misery of others1 
is distinguished into election or       
reprobation1 which is a very awful      
subject1 and ought never to be thought  
of1 or mentioned1 but with the utmost   
caution and reverence1 lest we speak    
those things that are not right         
concerning ,god1 and thereby dishonour  
him1 or give just occasion to any to    
deny or reproach this doctrine1 as      
though it were not founded on scripture4
  ,hitherto we have considered the      
purpose of ,god1 as including in it all 
things future1 as the objects thereof2  
and now we are to speak of it in        
particular1 as it relates to angels and 
men4 ,when we confine the objects of    
,god's purpose to those things that come
 to pass1 which have no dependence on   

the free-will of angels or men1 we do   
not meet with much opposition from      
those1 who are in other respects1 in the
 contrary scheme of doctrine2 for most  
of them1 who are masters of their own   
argument1 and consider what may be      
allowed without weakening their cause1  
do not deny that ,god fore-ordained     
whatever comes to pass1 nor that he did 
this from all eternity1 if we except    
what respects the actions of free       
agents4 ,thus they will grant that ,god1
 from all eternity1 determined to create
 the world1 and then to govern it1 and  
to give laws to men1 as the rule of     
government1 and a free-will1 or power to
 yield obedience thereunto3 but when we 
consider men's free actions1 as the     
objects of a divine decree1 and the     
final state of men1 as being determined 
by it1 here we are like to meet with the
 greatest opposition1 and therefore must
 endeavour to maintain our ground in the
 following part of this argument4  ,the 
decree of ,god1 respecting intelligent  

creatures1 is to be considered as       
containing in it two branches1 namely1  
election and reprobation3 the former of 
which is contained in those words1 that 
,god1 out of his mere love1 for the     
praise of his glorious grace1 hath      
elected some to glory in ,christ1 and   
also to the means thereof2 and as for   
reprobation1 that is described in the   
following words2 that according to his  
sovereign power1 and the unsearchable   
counsel of his own will1 he hath passed 
by1 and fore-ordained the rest to       
dishonour and wrath1 to be1 for their   
sin1 inflicted1 to the praise of the    
glory of his justice4 ,both these are to
 be considered2 and1  ,first1 ,what     
respects the doctrine of election4 ,to  
elect1 or choose1 according to the      
common use1 or acceptation of the word1 
signifies the taking a small number out 
of a greater1 or a part out of the      
whole2 and this is applied1 either to   
things or persons4  7#a47 ,to things4   
,as when a person has a great many      

things to choose out of1 he sets aside  
some of them for his own use1 and       
rejects the others1 as refuse1 that he  
will have nothing to do with4  7#b47 ,to
 persons4 ,as when a king chooses1 out  
of his subjects1 some whom he will      
advance to great honours2 or when a     
master chooses1 out of a number of      
servants offered to him1 one1 or more1  
whom he will employ in his service2 this
 from the nature of the thing1 implies1 
that all are not chosen1 but only a     
part1 in which there is a               
discrimination1 or a difference put     
between one and another4  ,but we are   
more particularly to consider the       
meaning of the word election1 as we find
 it in scripture1 wherein it is used in 
several senses4  ,to elect or choose1   
according to the acceptation of the     
word1 does not connote the particular   
thing that a person is chosen to1 but   
that is to be understood by what is     
farther added to determine the sense    
thereof2 as sometimes we read of persons

 being chosen to partake of some        
privileges1 short of salvation2 at other
 times1 of their being chosen to        
salvation2 sometimes it is to be        
understood as signifying their being    
chosen to things of a lower nature1 at  
other times their being chosen to       
perform those duties1 and exercise those
 graces that accompany salvation2 and we
 may1 very easily1 understand the sense 
of it by the context4  ,again1 it is    
sometimes taken for the execution of    
,god's purpose1 or for his actual       
providence1 making choice of persons to 
fulfil his pleasure1 in their various   
capacities2 at other times1 as we are   
here to understand it1 for his fixing   
his love upon his people1 and purposing 
to bring them to glory1 making choice of
 some out of the rest of mankind1 as the
 monuments of his discriminating grace2 
we have instances of all these senses of
 the word in scripture2 and1  #a4 ,it is
 sometimes taken for ,god's actual      
separation of persons1 for some peculiar

 instances of service1 which is a branch
 of his providential dispensation1 in   
time3 thus we sometimes read in         
scripture1 of persons being chosen1 or  
set apart1 by ,god1 to an office1 and   
that either civil or sacred3 thus1 upon 
the occasion of ,saul's being made king1
 by ,god's special appointment1 ,samuel 
says1 ,see ye him whom the ,lord hath   
chosen1 #a ,sam4 x4 #bd4 so it is said  
elsewhere1 ,he chose ,david also his    
servant1 and took him from the          
sheep-fold2 from following the ewes     
great with young1 he brought him to feed
 ,jacob1 his people1 and ,israel his    
inheritance4 ,psal4 lxxviii4 #gj1 #ga4  
,it also signifies his actual           
appointment of persons to perform some  
sacred office3 thus it is said1         
concerning the ,levites1 that the ,lord 
had chosen them to carry the ark1 and to
 minister unto him1 #a ,chron4 xv4 #b4  
and our ,saviour says1 to his disciples1
 ,have not ,i chosen you1 namely1 to be 
my disciples1 and as such to be employed

 in preaching the gospel1 and one of you
 is a devil1 ,john vi4 #gj4  #b4 ,it is 
sometimes taken for ,god's providential 
designation of a people1 to be made     
partakers of those external privileges  
of the covenant of grace1 which belong  
to them as a church1 which1 as such1 is 
the peculiar object of the divine       
regard3 thus the people of ,israel are  
said to have been chosen1 or separated1 
from the world1 to enjoy the external   
blessings of the covenant of grace1 as  
,moses tells them1 ,because the ,lord   
loved your fathers1 therefore he chose  
their seed after them1 ,deut4 iv4 #cg4  
and elsewhere1 ,thou art an holy people 
unto the ,lord thy ,god2 the ,lord thy  
,god hath chosen thee to be a special   
people unto himself1 above all people   
that are upon the face of the earth1    
chap4 vii4 #f1 #g4 ,and1 in many other  
places in the ,old ,testament1 the word 
election is taken in this sense1 though 
something more than this seems to be    
included in some particular scriptures  

in the prophetic writings1 in which the 
,jews are described1 as ,god's chosen   
people1 as we shall endeavour to shew   
under a following head4  #c4 ,it also   
signifies ,god's bestowing special grace
 on some1 who are highly favoured by    
him1 above others1 as having called1 or 
set them apart for himself1 to have     
communion with him1 to bear a testimony 
to him1 and to be employed in eminent   
service1 for his name and glory in the  
world4 ,thus it seems to be taken1 in #a
 ,cor4 i4 #bf1 #bg4 where the apostle   
speaks of their calling1 which imports  
some special privileges1 that they were 
made partakers of1 as the objects of    
divine power1 and grace1 to whom ,christ
 was made wisdom1 righteousness1        
sanctification1 and redemption2 which   
therefore signifies the powerful1       
internal1 effectual call1 and not barely
 the external call of the ,gospel1 as   
appears1 by the foregoing and following 
verses1 ver4 #bd4 compared with #cj4 and
 they1 whose calling he speaks of1 are  

said to be chosen3 ,you see your        
calling1 how that not many wise men1 c4 
are called1 but ,god hath chosen the    
foolish things of this world1 c4 so that
 to be chosen1 and effectually called   
there1 seem to import the same thing4   
,and sometimes it is taken1 for some    
peculiar excellency1 which one          
,christian has above another2 as that   
hospitable1 or public-spirited person1  
to whom the apostle ,john directs his   
second epistle1 is called by him1 ,the  
elect lady1 ver4 #a4 as an excellent    
person is sometimes styled a choice     
person4  ,but1 though the word is taken1
 in scripture1 in these various senses  
above mentioned1 yet it is not confined 
to any1 or all of them2 for we shall    
endeavour to make it appear1 that it is 
often taken1 in scripture1 as it is     
expressed in this answer2 for ,god's    
having fore-ordained particular persons1
 as monuments of his special love1 to be
 made partakers of grace here1 and glory
 hereafter1 as it is styled1 their being

 chosen to eternal life1 and the means  
thereof4 ,this is what we shall         
endeavour to prove1 and accordingly     
shall consider the objects thereof1     
namely1 angels and men1 and that it is  
only a part of mankind that is chosen to
 salvation1 to wit1 that remnant which  
shall be eventually saved2 and that     
these are chosen to the means thereof1  
as well as the end2 and how this is said
 to be in ,christ4  ,the objects of     
election are angels and men4 ,a few     
words may be said concerning the        
election of angels1 as being            
particularly mentioned in this answer2  
we have not1 indeed1 much delivered     
concerning this matter in scripture1    
though the apostle calls those who      
remain in their state of holiness and   
happiness1 in which they were created1  
elect angels1 #a ,tim4 v4 #ba4 ,but1 had
 we no mention of their election in     
scripture1 their being confirmed in     
their present state of blessedness1     
must1 from the foregoing method of      

reasoning1 be supposed to be the result 
of a divine purpose1 or the execution of
 a decree relating thereunto2 though    
there is this difference between their  
election1 and that of men1 in that the  
latter are chosen unto salvation1 which 
the angels are not subjects capable of1 
inasmuch as they were never in a lost1  
undone state2 neither are they said to  
be chosen in ,christ1 as men are4  ,but 
we shall proceed1 to that which more    
immediately concerns us1 to consider men
 as the objects of election4 ,this is   
variously expressed in scripture2       
sometimes it is called their being      
appointed to attain salvation1 or being 
ordained to eternal life or their names 
being written in the book of life2 and  
it is also called1 the purpose of ,god1 
according to election1 or his having    
loved them before the foundation of the 
world1 or his having predestinated them1
 7who have been blessed with all        
spiritual blessings1 in heavenly places 
in ,christ7 unto the adoption of        

children1 by him1 according to the good 
pleasure of his will4 ,that the         
scriptures speak of persons as elect1   
and that this is always represented as a
 great instance of divine favour and    
goodness1 is not denied3 ,but the main  
thing in controversy is1 whether this   
relates to the purpose of ,god1 or his  
providence2 and whether it respects     
particular persons1 or the church of    
,god in general1 as distinguished from  
the world2 and1 if it be supposed to    
relate to particular persons1 how these 
are considered in ,god's purpose1 or    
what is the order and reason of his     
determination to save them4  ,that      
election sometimes respects the         
disposing providence of ,god1 in time1  
has been already considered1 and some   
particular instances thereof1 in        
scripture1 referred to2 but when they1  
on the other side of the question1      
maintain1 that this is the only1 or     
principal sense in which it is used     
therein1 we must take leave to differ   

from them4 ,there is a late writer#ahe1 
who sometimes misrepresents1 and at     
other times1 opposes this doctrine1 with
 more assurance and insult1 than the    
strength of his reasoning will well     
allow of2 and his performance on this   
head1 and others1 that have some        
affinity with it1 is concluded1 by many 
of his admirers1 to be unanswerable2 and
 the sense that he has given of several 
scriptures therein1 as well as in his   
paraphrase on the ,new ,testament1 in   
which he studiously endeavours to       
explain every text1 in conformity to his
 own scheme1 has tended to prejudice    
many in favour thereof2 and therefore we
 shall take occasion sometimes to       
consider what he advances against the   
doctrine that we are maintaining2 and   
particularly1 as to this head of        
election1 he supposes1 8#a4 ,that the   
election1 mentioned1 in scripture1 is   
not of particular persons1 but only that
 of churches and nations1 or their being
 chosen to the enjoyment of the means of

 grace1 rather than a certainty of their
 being saved by those means2 that it    
does not contain any absolute assurance 
of their salvation1 or of any such      
grace1 as shall infallibly1 and without 
any possibility of frustration1 procure 
their salvation4 #b4 ,that the election 
to salvation1 mentioned in scripture1 is
 only conditional1 upon our perseverance
 in a life of holiness#ahf2 and he      
attempts to prove1 that election1 in the
 ,old ,testament1 belongs not to the    
righteous and obedient persons only1 but
 the whole nation of the ,jews1 good and
 bad2 and that1 in the ,new ,testament1 
it is applied to those who embrace the  
,christian faith1 without any regard had
 to their eternal happiness40 ,these    
things1 ought to be particularly        
considered1 and therefore we shall      
endeavour to prove1  #a4 ,that though   
election oftentimes1 in the ,old        
,testament1 respects the church of the  
,jews1 as enjoying the external means of
 grace1 yet it does not sufficiently    

appear that it is never to be taken in  
any other sense2 especially when1 there 
are some of those privileges which      
accompany salvation mentioned in the    
context1 and applied to some of them1   
who are thus described2 or when there   
are some promises made to them1 which   
respect more than the external means of 
grace2 therefore if there were but one  
scripture that is to be taken in this   
sense1 it would be a sufficient answer  
to the universal negative1 in which it  
is supposed1 that the ,old ,testament   
never intends by it1 any privilege1 but 
such as is external1 and has no         
immediate reference to salvation4 ,here 
,i might refer to some places in the    
evangelical prophecy of ,isaiah1 which  
are not foreign to our purpose2 as when 
it is said1 ,thou ,israel1 art my       
servant1 ,jacob1 whom ,i have chosen2   
and ,i have chosen thee1 and not cast   
thee away1 ,isa4 xli4 #h1 #i4 that this 
respects more than the continuance of   
their political and religious state1 as 

enjoying the external means of grace1   
seems to be implied in those promises   
that are made to them1 in the following 
words1 which not only speak of their    
deliverance from captivity1 after they  
had continued sometime therein1 but     
their being made partakers of ,gods     
special love1 which had an immediate    
reference to their salvation3 thus it is
 said1 in the following1 ,fear not1 for 
,i am with thee2 be not dismayed1 for ,i
 am thy ,god2 ,i will strengthen thee1  
yea1 ,i will help thee2 yea1 ,i will    
uphold thee with the right hand of my   
righteousness2 and elsewhere ,god1      
speaking to the ,jews1 says1 ,i1 even   
,i1 am he that blotteth out thy         
transgressions for mine own sake1 and ,i
 will not remember thy sins1 chap4      
xliii4 #be4 and1 ,israel shall be saved 
in the ,lord1 with an everlasting       
salvation2 ye shall not be ashamed nor  
confounded1 world without end1 chap4    
xlv4 #ag4 ,there are also many other    
promises1 which seem to import a great  

deal more than the external privileges  
of the covenant of grace1 which many    
very excellent ,christians have applied 
to themselves1 as supposing that they   
contain those blessings which have a    
more immediate reference to salvation2  
and it would detract very much from the 
spirituality and usefulness of such-like
 scriptures1 to say that they have no   
relation to us1 as having nothing to do 
with the ,jewish nation1 to whom these  
promises were made4  ,object4 ,to this  
it may be objected1 that these promises 
are directed to the church of the ,jews1
 as a chosen people2 and therefore to   
suppose that there were a number elected
 out of them to eternal salvation1 is to
 extend the sense of the word beyond the
 design of the context1 to destroy the  
determinate sense thereof1 and to       
suppose an election out of an election4 
,answ4 ,since the word election1 denotes
 persons being chosen to enjoy the      
external means of grace1 and to attain  
salvation by and under them1 it may1    

without any impropriety of expression1  
be applied in these different senses1 in
 the same text2 so that ,israel may be  
described as a chosen people in the     
former sense1 and yet there might be a  
number elected out of them1 who were    
chosen to eternal life1 to whom this    
promise of salvation more especially    
belonged1 who are distinguished from the
 general body of the ,jewish nation1 who
 are called1 in the other sense1 ,god's 
elect2 as when it is said1 ,i will leave
 in the midst of thee an afflicted and  
poor people1 and they shall trust in the
 name of the ,lord2 the remnant of      
,israel shall not do iniquity1 nor speak
 lies1 c4 ,zeph4 iii4 #ab1 #ac4 ,so that
 as ,israel was an elect people1 chosen 
out of the world to enjoy the external  
privileges conferred upon them1 as a    
church1 which they are supposed to have 
mis-improved1 for which they were to be 
carried captive into ,babylon2 there was
 a remnant chosen out of them to be made
 partakers of the blessings that        

accompany salvation1 such as are here   
promised2 these are not considered as a 
church1 governed by distinct laws1 from 
those that ,israel was governed by2 and 
therefore not as a church selected out  
of that church1 but as a number of      
people among them whom ,god had kept    
faithful1 as having chosen them to enjoy
 better privileges than those which they
 had as a professing people2 or as a    
number elected to be made partakers of  
special grace1 out of those which had   
been made partakers of common grace1    
which they had miserably abused1 and    
were punished for it4  #b4 ,our ,saviour
 speaking concerning the final          
destruction of ,jerusalem by the ,roman 
army1 and a great time of distress that 
should ensue hereupon1 tells them1 in   
,matt4 xxiv4 #bb4 that those days should
 be shortened for the elect's sake1 that
 is1 those who were chosen to eternal   
life1 and accordingly should be         
converted to the ,christian faith1 not  
from among the heathen1 but out of the  

,jewish nation2 for it is to them that  
he more particularly directs his        
discourse1 forewarning them of this     
desolating judgment2 and he advises them
 to pray that their flight be not on the
 ,sabbath-day1 ver4 #bj4 intimating     
thereby1 that that nation deemed it     
unlawful to defend themselves from the  
assaults of an enemy on the             
,sabbath-day1 though their immediate    
death would be the consequence thereof2 
therefore this advice was suited to the 
temper of the ,jews1 and none else3 ,no 
people in the world1 except them1       
entertained this superstitious opinion  
concerning the prohibition of           
self-defence on the ,sabbath-day2 from  
whence it may therefore be inferred1    
that our ,saviour speaks of them in     
particular1 and not of the ,christians1 
which were amongst them2 upon which     
account it seems probable1 that these   
are not intended by the elect1 namely1  
that small number for whose sake those  
days of distress and tribulation were to

 be shortened2#ahg therefore there were 
an elect people whom ,god had a peculiar
 regard to1 who should afterwards be    
converted to ,christianity1 namely1 a   
number elected to eternal life out of   
that people1 who were elected to the    
external privileges of the covenant of  
grace4 ,and this farther appears from   
what follows1 where our ,saviour speaks 
concerning false ,christs1 and false    
prophets1 that should shew great signs1 
and wonders1 insomuch that1 if it were  
possible1 they should deceive the very  
elect1 ,matt4 xxiv4 #bd4 ,now it cannot 
be supposed of them that are called     
false ,christs1 that they would attempt 
to pervert the ,christians1 by          
pretending to be the ,messiah2 for that 
would be impracticable1 inasmuch as they
 did not expect any other to come with  
that character since our ,saviour2      
whereas the ,jews did1 and many of them 
were perverted thereby to their own     
ruin2 but it is intimated here1 that the
 elect people1 which was among them1    

should be kept from being deceived by   
them1 inasmuch as they were chosen to   
obtain salvation1 and therefore should  
believe in ,christ by the gospel4       
,there is also another scripture1 which 
seems to give countenance hereunto1     
where the apostle shews1 that ,god had  
not cast away his people1 ,rom4 xi4 #b4 
to wit1 the ,jews1 that is1 he had not  
rejected the whole nation1 but had made 
a reserve of some who were the objects  
of his special love1 as chosen to       
salvation2 and these are called1 ,a     
remnant according to the election of    
grace1 ver4 #e4 and this seems still    
more plain from what follows1 ver4 #g4  
,what then8 ,israel hath not obtained   
that which he seeketh for1 that is1     
righteousness and life1 which they      
sought after1 as it were1 by the works  
of the law1 which1 as is mentioned in   
the foregoing verse1 is inconsistent    
with the attaining it by grace2 but the 
election1 that is1 the elect among that 
people have obtained it2 for they sought

 after it in another way1 and the rest  
were blinded1 that is1 the other part of
 the ,jewish nation1 which were not     
interested in this privilege1 were left 
to the blindness of their own minds1    
which was their ruin4  ,to this let me  
add one scripture more1 ,rom4 ix4 #f1   
#g4 where the apostle1 speaking         
concerning the nation of the ,jews1     
distinguishes between the natural and   
spiritual seed of ,abraham1 when he     
says1 ,all are not ,israel that are of  
,israel1 that is1 there was a remnant   
according to the election of grace1 who 
were chosen to eternal life out of that 
people1 who were in other respects1     
chosen to be made partakers of the      
external privileges that belonged to    
them1 as ,god's peculiar people4 ,the   
sum of this argument is1 that though1 it
 is true1 there are some scriptures that
 speak of the church of the ,jews1 as   
separated from the world1 by the        
peculiar hand of divine providence1 and 
favoured with the external means of     

grace1 yet there are others in which    
they are said to be chosen to partake of
 privileges of an higher nature1 even   
those which accompany salvation2        
therefore election1 in the ,old         
,testament1 sometimes signifies ,god's  
purpose1 relating to the salvation of   
his people4  #b4 ,we shall proceed to   
consider how election is taken in the   
,new ,testament1 in opposition to those 
who suppose that it is there used only  
to signify ,god's bringing persons to be
 members of the ,christian church1 as   
being instructed in the doctrines       
relating thereunto by the apostles3#ahh 
,the principal ground of this opinion   
is1 because sometimes whole churches are
 said to be elected1 as the apostle     
speaks of the church at ,babylon1 as    
elected together with them1 to whom he  
directs his epistle1 #a ,pet4 i4 #b4    
compared with chap4 v4 #ac4 by which it 
is supposed that nothing is intended1   
but that they were both of them         
,christian churches4 ,if this be the    

sense of every scripture in the ,new    
,testament1 that treats of election1    
then we must not pretend that the       
doctrine we are maintaining is founded  
on it3 ,but on the other hand1 we think 
we have reason to conclude1 that when we
 meet with the word in the ,new         
,testament1 it is to be understood1 in  
most places1 for ,god's eternal purpose 
relating to the salvation of his people4
 ,i will not pretend to prove an        
universal negative1 viz4 that it is     
never taken otherwise1 but shall refer  
to some scriptures1 in which it is      
plainly understood so1 and endeavour to 
defend this sense thereof4  ,the first  
scripture that we shall refer to1 is in 
,eph4 i4 #d4 ,he hath chosen us in him  
before the foundation of the world1 that
 we should be holy1 and without blame   
before him in love2 and1 in ver4 #e4 he 
speaks of their being predestinated to  
the adoption of children by ,jesus      
,christ2 that this respects not the     
external dispensation of ,god's         

providence1 in constituting them a      
,christian church1 or giving them the   
knowledge of those doctrines1 on which  
it was founded2 but their being chosen  
to salvation and grace1 as the means    
thereof1 according to ,god's eternal    
purpose1 will very evidently appear from
 the context1 if we consider that they  
who are thus chosen1 are called faithful
 in ,christ ,jesus1 which implies much  
more than barely to be in him by        
external profession3 they are farther   
described1 as blessed with all spiritual
 blessings in ,christ1 in ver4 #c4 or   
blessed with all those blessings which  
respect heavenly things2 grace1 which   
they had in possession1 and glory1 which
 they had in expectation2 and they are  
farther described1 as having obtained   
redemption through the blood of ,christ1
 and forgiveness of sins2 and all this  
is said to be done1 according to the    
riches of his grace1 and the good       
pleasure of his will1 who worketh all   
things after the counsel thereof2 and   

certainly all this must contain much    
more than the external dispensation of  
providence relating to this privilege1  
which they enjoyed as a church of       
,christ4  ,again1 in #a ,thess4 i4 #d4  
the apostle says concerning them1 to    
whom he writes1 that he knew their      
election of ,god4 ,that this is to be   
understood of their election to eternal 
life1 is very evident2 and1 indeed1 he  
explains it in this sense1 when he says1
 ,god hath1 from the beginning1 chosen  
you unto salvation1 through             
sanctification of the ,spirit1 and the  
belief of the truth1 ,whereunto he      
called you by our gospel1 to the        
obtaining the glory of our ,lord ,jesus 
,christ1 #b ,thess4 ii4 #ac1 #ad4 the   
gospel is considered as the means of    
their attaining that salvation1 which   
they are said to be chosen to2 so that  
their election contains more than their 
professed subjection thereunto as a     
church of ,christ3 ,besides1 the apostle
 gives those marks and evidences of this

 matter1 which plainly discover that it 
is their election to salvation that he  
intends2 accordingly he speaks of their 
work of faith1 labour of love1 and      
patience of hope1 in our ,lord ,jesus   
,christ1 and of the gospel's coming not 
in word only1 but also in power1 #a     
,thess4 i4 #c1 #e4 by which he means not
 the power that was exerted in working  
miracles1 for that would be no evidence 
of their being a church1 or of their    
adhering to the doctrines that were     
confirmed thereby1 since every one1 who 
saw miracles wrought1 did not believe2  
therefore he means1 that by the powerful
 internal influence of the ,holy ,ghost1
 they were persuaded to become followers
 of the apostles1 and the ,lord1 and    
were ensamples to others1 and           
public-spirited1 in endeavouring to     
propagate the gospel in the world4      
,certainly this argues that they were   
effectually called by the grace of ,god1
 and so proves that they were chosen to 
be made partakers of this grace1 and of 

that salvation1 that is the consequence 
thereof4  ,there is another scripture1  
in which it is very plain that the      
apostle speaks of election to eternal   
life inasmuch as there are several      
privileges connected with it1 which the 
,christian church1 as such1 cannot lay  
claim to3 thus1 in ,rom4 viii4 #cc4 ,who
 shall lay any thing to the charge of   
,god's elect8 ,it is ,god that          
justifieth4 ,now if justification or    
freedom from condemnation1 accompanied  
with their being effectually called     
here1 which shall end in their being    
glorified hereafter1 be the result of   
their election1 as4 in ver4 #cj4 then   
certainly this includes in it more than 
the external privileges of the covenant 
of grace1 which all who adhere to the   
,christian faith are possessed of1 and  
consequently it is an election to       
salvation that the apostle here intends4
  ,object4 ,it is objected1 that it is  
more than probable1 when we find1 as we 
sometimes do1 whole churches styled     

elect in the ,new testament1 that some  
among them were hypocrites2 particularly
 those to whom the apostle ,peter       
writes1 who were converted from ,judaism
 to ,christianity1 whom he calls elect1 
according to the fore-knowledge of ,god 
the ,father3 notwithstanding they had   
some in communion with them1 concerning 
whom it might be said1 that they had    
only a name to live1 but yet were dead2 
and he advises them1 to lay aside all   
malice1 guile1 and hypocrisy1 envies1   
and evil speaking1 and1 as new born     
babes1 to receive the word1 if so be    
they had tasted that the ,lord is       
gracious1 #a ,pet4 ii4 #a4 which makes  
it more than probable1 that there were  
some among them who had not1 in reality1
 experienced the grace of ,god2 so when 
he says1 that there should be false     
teachers among them1 whose practice     
should be as vile as their doctrine1 and
 that many amongst them should follow   
their pernicious ways4 #b ,pet4 ii4 #a1 
#b4 it seems to argue that the whole    

church he writes to1 were not chosen to 
salvation2 therefore their election only
 signifies their being chosen to enjoy  
the privileges1 which they had1 as a    
professing society of ,christians4      
,answ4 ,it is certain that there was a  
very considerable number among them who 
were not only ,christians in name2 but  
they were very eminent for the exercise 
of those graces1 which evinced their    
election to eternal life2 and           
particularly he says concerning them1   
,whom having not seen1 ye love2 and in  
whom believing1 ye rejoice with joy     
unspeakable1 and full of glory2         
receiving the end of your faith1 even   
the salvation of your souls1 #a ,pet4 i4
 #h1 #i4 which agrees very well with the
 other character given them of their    
being elect1 through sanctification of  
the ,spirit1 unto obedience and         
sprinkling of the blood of ,jesus       
,christ1 ver4 #b4 ,therefore the only   
thing that seems to affect our argument 
is1 that this character did not belong  

to every individual4 ,but supposing this
 should be allowed1 might not the church
 be here described as chosen to         
salvation1 inasmuch as the far greater  
number of them were so8 ,nothing is more
 common1 in scripture1 than for a whole 
body of men to be denominated from the  
greatest part of them1 whether their    
character be good or bad2 thus when the 
greatest part of the ,jewish church were
 revolted from ,god1 and guilty of the  
most notorious crimes1 they are         
described as though their apostacy had  
been universal1 ,they are all grievous  
revolters1 walking with slanders1 ,jer4 
vi4 #bh4 whereas it is certain1 there   
were some who had not apostatized3 some 
of them were slandered and reproached   
for the sake of ,god1 and therefore were
 not included in the number of them that
 walked with slanders1 though their     
number were very small2 as ,god says by 
the prophet ,ezekiel1 ,i sought for a   
man among them that should make up the  
hedge1 and stand in the gap before me   

for the land that ,i should not destroy 
it1 but ,i found none1 ,ezek4 xxii4 #cj4
 whereas at that time1 in which the     
people were most degenerate1 there were 
found some who sighed and cryed for all 
the abomination that were done in the   
midst of them1 chap4 ix4 #d4 ,so on the 
other hand1 when the greater number of  
them kept their integrity1 and walked   
before ,god in holiness of life1 the    
whole church is thus characterized1 ,i  
remember the kindness of thy youth1 the 
love of thine espousals1 when thou      
wentest after me in the wilderness2     
,israel was holiness to the ,lord1 ,jer4
 ii4 #b1 #c4 whereas it is certain1     
that1 at that time1 there were a great  
many who rebelled1 murmured1 and        
revolted from ,god1 and were plagued for
 their iniquities2 yet because the      
greater number of them were upright and 
sincere1 this character is given in     
general terms1 as if there had been no  
exception4 ,and the prophet looked back 
to some age of the church1 in which a   

great number of them were faithful2 and 
therefore he speaks of the people in    
general1 at that time1 as such1 and     
accordingly calls them1 ,the faithful   
city1 ,isa4 i4 #ba4 and the prophet     
,jeremiah calls them1 ,the precious sons
 of ,zion1 comparable to fine gold1     
,lam4 iv4 #b4 yet there never was a time
 when there were none among them that   
rebelled against ,god4 ,therefore may   
not this be supposed concerning the     
first gospel churches that were planted 
by the apostles2 and accordingly1 when  
they are styled elect1 to whom the      
apostle ,peter writes1 #a ,pet4 v4 #ac4 
as well as the church at ,babylon1 why  
may not this be supposed to signify1    
that the greatest part of them were     
really sanctified1 and therefore chosen 
to sanctification8 ,and consequently    
their character1 as elect1 does not     
barely signify their being chosen to be 
made partakers of the external          
privileges of the gospel4 ,we might also
 consider1 that it is very agreeable to 

our common mode of speaking1 to         
denominate a city1 or a kingdom1 from   
the greater number thereof1 whether we  
call them a rich1 or a wise or a valiant
 people1 we never suppose there are no  
exceptions to this character2 therefore 
why may we not1 in this instance1       
conclude1 that the apostle ,peter1 when 
he describes this church as elected1    
intends their election to salvation8    
,thus we have endeavoured to prove that 
election1 in scripture1 is not always   
taken1 in the ,old ,testament1 for the  
external privileges which the ,jewish   
nation had1 as a church2 nor in the ,new
 ,testament for those who belonged to   
the churches1 namely1 such as professed 
the ,christian faith4 ,and probably that
 learned author1 before mentioned1 was  
apprehensive that this observation of   
his would not hold universally true2 and
 therefore he has another provisionary  
objection against the doctrine of       
particular election of persons to       
eternal life1 and says1 as ,arminius and

 his contemporaries before did1 that all
 those scriptures1 which speak of this  
doctrine1 contain nothing more than     
,god's conditional purpose1 that if a   
person believes1 he shall be saved4 ,it 
is necessary for us to consider what may
 be said in answer hereunto2 but        
inasmuch as we shall have occasion to   
speak to this when we consider the      
properties of election1 under a         
following head1 we shall rather chuse to
 reserve to that place1 than be obliged 
to repeat what might be here said       
concerning it4  ,thus having premised   
something concerning election in        
general1 and the sense in which it is to
 be understood1 in scripture1 we shall  
briefly mention a matter in dispute1    
among divines relating to the objects   
thereof1 as they are considered in      
,god's eternal purpose3 and here we     
shall take notice of some different     
opinions relating thereunto1 without    
making use of those scholastic modes of 
speaking1 which render this subject much

 more difficult1 than otherwise it would
 be3 and shall take occasion to avoid1  
and fence against those extremes1 which 
have only had a tendency to prejudice   
persons against the doctrine in general4
  ,the object of election is variously  
considered by divines1 who treat of this
 subject4  #a4 ,there are some who1     
though they agree in the most material  
things in their defence of this doctrine
 yet they are divided in their          
sentiments about some nice metaphysical 
speculations1 relating to the manner how
 man is to be considered1 as the object 
of predestination3 accordingly some1 who
 are generally styled ,supralapsarians1 
seem to proceed in this way of          
explaining it1 namely that ,god from all
 eternity1 designed to glorify his      
divine perfections1 in some objects out 
of himself1 which he could not then be  
said to have done1 inasmuch as they did 
not exist2 and the perfections1 which he
 designed to glorify1 were1 more        
especially1 his sovereignty and absolute

 dominion1 as having a right to do what 
he will with the work of his hands2 and 
also his goodness1 whereby he would     
render himself the object of their      
delight2 and1 as a means conducive to   
this end1 he designed to create man an  
intelligent creature1 in whom he might  
be glorified2 and since a creature1 as  
such1 could not be the object of the    
display of his mercy1 or justice1 he    
farther designed to permit man to fall  
into a state of sin and misery1 that so1
 when fallen1 he might recover some out 
of that state1 and leave others to      
perish in it3 the former of which are   
said to be loved1 the other hated2 and  
when some extend the absoluteness of    
,god's purpose1 not only to election but
 reprobation1 and do not take care to   
guard their modes of speaking1 as they  
ought to do1 but conclude reprobation1  
at least predamnation1 to be1 not an act
 of justice1 but rather of sovereignty2 
they lay themselves open to exception1  
and give occasion to those1 who oppose  

this doctrine1 to conclude1 that they   
represent ,god as delighting in the     
misery of his creatures1 and with that  
view giving being to them4 ,it is true1 
several1 who have given into this way of
 thinking1 have endeavoured to extricate
 themselves out of this difficulty1 and 
denied this and other consequences of   
the like nature1 which many have thought
 to be necessary deductions from this   
scheme2 whether they have done this     
effectually1 or no1 may be judged of by 
those who are conversant in their       
writings#ahi4 ,i cannot but profess     
myself to set a very high value on them 
in other respects1 yet ,i am not bound  
to give into some nice speculations1    
contained in their method of treating   
this subject1 which renders it          
exceptionable2 particularly1 ,i cannot  
approve of any thing advanced by them1  
which seems to represent ,god as        
purposing to create man1 and then to    
suffer him to fall1 as a means by which 
he designed to demonstrate the glory of 

his vindictive justice1 which hath given
 occasion to many to entertain rooted   
prejudices against the doctrine of      
predestination1 as though it necessarily
 involved in it this supposition1 that  
,god made man to damn him4  ,there are  
others1 who are generally styled        
,sublapsarians#aij1 who suppose1 that   
,god considered men as made and fallen1 
and then designed to glorify his grace  
in the recovery of those who were       
chosen1 by him1 to eternal life2 and his
 justice in them1 whom he designed to   
condemn1 as a punishment for their sins1
 which he foreknew that they would      
commit1 and purposed not to hinder2 and 
he designed to glorify his sovereignty1 
in that one should be an object of      
grace1 rather than another1 whereas he  
might have left the whole world in that 
state of misery1 into which he foresaw  
they would plunge themselves4  ,that    
which is principally objected1 by those 
who are in the other way of thinking1   
against this scheme1 is1 that the       

,sublapsarians suppose that ,god's      
creating men1 and permitting them to    
fall1 was not the object of his eternal 
purpose4 ,but this they universally     
deny1 and distinguish between ,god's    
purpose to create and suffer men to     
fall2 and his purposes being considered 
as a means to advance his sovereignty1  
grace1 and justice1 in which the        
principal difference between them       
consists4 ,we shall enter no farther    
into this controversy1 but shall only   
add1 that whatever may be considered1 in
 ,god's eternal purpose1 as a means to  
bring about other ends2 yet it seems    
evident1 from the nature of the thing1  
that ,god cannot be said to choose men  
to salvation1 without herein considering
 them as fallen2 for as no one is a     
subject capable of salvation1 but one   
who is fallen into a state of sin and   
misery2 so when ,god purposed to save   
such1 they could not be considered as to
 be created1 or created and not fallen1 
but as sinners4  #b4 ,there are others  

who deny particular election of persons 
to eternal life1 and explain those      
scriptures1 which speak of it1 in a very
 different way3 these suppose1 that ,god
 designed1 from all eternity1 to create 
man1 and foreknew that he would fall1   
and1 that1 pursuant to this eternal     
foreknowledge1 he designed to give him  
sufficient means for his recovery1      
which1 by the use of his free will1 he  
might improve1 or not1 to the best      
purposes2 and also1 fore-knowing who    
would improve1 and who would reject1 the
 means of grace1 which he purposed to   
bestow1 he determined1 as the           
consequence thereof1 to save some1 and  
condemn others4 ,this method of         
explaining ,god's eternal purpose is    
exceptionable1 as will farther appear1  
in the method we shall take1 in         
prosecuting this subject1 in two        
respects4  7#a47 ,as they suppose that  
the salvation of men depends on their   
own conduct1 or the right use of their  
free will1 without giving the glory     

which is due to ,god1 for that powerful1
 efficacious grace1 which enables them  
to improve the means of grace1 and      
brings them into a state of salvation1  
7#b47 ,as the result of the former1 they
 suppose that nothing absolute is       
contained in the decree of ,god1 but his
 fore-knowledge1 which is rather an act 
of his understanding1 than his will2 and
 therefore it seems to militate against 
his sovereignty and grace1 and1 to make 
his decrees depend on some conditions1  
founded in the free-will of man1 which1 
according to them1 are not the object of
 a peremptory decree4 ,thus having      
considered intelligent creatures1 and   
more particularly men1 as the objects of
 predestination4  ,,iv4 ,we proceed to  
the farther proof and explication of    
this doctrine2 and1 in order thereto1   
shall insist on the following           
propositions4  #a4 ,that it is only a   
part of mankind that were chosen to     
salvation4  #b4 ,that they who were     
chosen to it1 as the end1 were also     

chosen to sanctification1 as the means  
thereof1 ,and1  #c4 ,that they were     
chosen in ,christ2 which propositions   
are contained in that part of this      
answer1 in which it is said1 that ,god  
has chosen some men to eternal life1 and
 the means thereof4  #a4 ,that some were
 chosen to salvation2 not the whole race
 of mankind1 but only those that shall  
be eventually saved3 that the whole     
world is not the object of election     
appears from the known acceptation of   
the word1 both in scripture1 and in our 
common modes of speaking2 since to      
choose1 as has been before observed1 is 
to take1 prefer1 or esteem1 one thing   
before another1 or to separate a part   
from the whole1 for our own proper use1 
and what remains is treated with neglect
 and disregard3 accordingly it is not a 
proper way of speaking1 to say that the 
whole is chosen2 and therefore it       
follows1 that if all mankind had been   
fore-ordained to eternal life1 which    
,god might have done if he had pleased1 

this would not have been called a       
purpose1 according to election4  ,but   
there are other arguments more          
conclusive1 than what results barely    
from the known sense of the word1 which 
we shall proceed to consider1 and       
therein make use of the same method of  
reasoning1 which we observed1 in proving
 that ,god fore-ordained whatever comes 
to pass1 with a particular application  
thereof to the eternal state of         
believers4 ,as we before observed1 that 
the decree of ,god is to be judged of by
 the execution of it1 in time2 so it    
will appear1 that those whom ,god in his
 actual providence and grace1 prepares  
for1 and brings to glory1 he also before
 designed for it4 ,were ,i only to treat
 of those particular points in          
controversy1 between us and the         
,pelagians1 ,i would first consider the 
method which ,god takes in saving his   
people1 and prove that salvation is of  
grace1 or that it is the effect of the  
power of ,god1 and not to be ascribed to

 the free-will of man1 as separate from 
the divine influence2 and then ,i would 
proceed to speak concerning the decree  
of ,god relating hereunto1 which might  
then1 without much difficulty1 be       
proved3 but being obliged to pursue the 
same method in which things are laid    
down1 in their respective connexion1 we 
must sometimes defer the more particular
 proof of some doctrines1 on which our  
arguments depend1 to a following head1  
to avoid the repetition of things2      
therefore1 inasmuch as the execution of 
,god's decree1 and his power and grace  
manifested therein1 will be insisted on 
in some following answers1 we shall1 at 
present1 take this for granted1 or shall
 speak but very briefly to it4  7#a47   
,it appears that it is only a part of   
mankind that are chosen to be made      
partakers of grace and glory1 inasmuch  
as these invaluable privileges are      
conferred upon1 or applied to no more   
than a part of mankind3 if all shall not
 be saved1 then all were not chosen to  

salvation2 for we are not to suppose    
that ,god's purpose1 relating hereunto1 
can be frustrated1 or not take effect2  
or if there be a manifest display of    
discriminating grace in the execution of
 ,god's decree relating thereunto1 there
 is1 doubtless1 a discrimination in his 
purpose1 and that is what we call       
election4 ,this farther appears from    
some scriptures1 which represent those  
who are saved as a remnant3 thus when   
the apostle is speaking of ,god's       
casting away the greatest part of the   
,jewish nation1 he says of some of them 
notwithstanding1 that at this present   
time also there is a remnant according  
to the election of grace1 ,rom4 xi4 #e4 
that is1 there are some among them who  
are brought to embrace the faith of the 
gospel1 and to be made partakers of the 
privileges that accompany salvation3    
these are called a remnant2 as when it  
is said1 in ,rom4 ix4 #bg4 ,though the  
number of the children of ,israel be as 
the sand of the sea1 it is no more than 

a remnant of them that shall be saved4  
,he doubtless speaks in this and other  
scriptures1 concerning the eternal      
salvation of those who are described as 
a remnant1 according to the election of 
grace4  ,here it will be necessary for  
us to consider1 that this remnant       
signifies only a small part of the      
,jewish church1 selected1 by divine     
grace1 out of that nation1 of whom the  
greater number were rejected by ,god2   
and that the salvation1 here spoken of1 
is to be taken not for any temporal     
deliverance1 but for that salvation     
which the believing ,jews should be made
 partakers of in the gospel day1 when   
the rejection of the others had its full
 accomplishment4 ,that this may appear1 
we shall not only compare this scripture
 with the context1 but with that in     
,hosea1 from whence it is taken3 as to  
what respects the context1 the apostle1 
in ver4 #b4 expresses his great         
heaviness1 and continual sorrow of      
heart1 for the rejection of that nation 

in general1 which they had brought upon 
themselves2 but yet he encourages       
himself1 in ver4 #f4 with this thought1 
that the word of ,god1 that is1 the     
promise made to ,abraham relating to his
 spiritual seed1 who were given to      
expect greater blessings1 than those    
which were contained in the external    
dispensation of the covenant of grace1  
should not take none effect1 since1     
though the whole nation of the ,jews1   
who were of ,israel1 that is1 ,abraham's
 natural seed1 did not attain those     
privileges2 yet a part of them1 who are 
here called ,israel1 and elsewhere a    
remnant1 chosen out of that nation1     
should be made partakers thereof2 the   
former are called ,the children of the  
flesh1 in ver4 #h4 the latter1 by way of
 eminence1 ,the children of the promise2
 these are styled1 in ver4 #bc1 #bd4    
,the vessels of mercy1 which he had     
afore prepared unto glory1 to whom he   
designed to make known the riches of his
 glory1 namely1 those whom he had       

called2 not of the ,jews only1 but also 
of the ,gentiles1 which he intends by   
that remnant1 which were chosen out of  
each of them1 for so the word properly  
signifies4#aia ,and this sense is       
farther confirmed1 by the quotation out 
of the prophecy of ,hosea1 chap4 i4 #aj4
 compared with another taken out of the 
prophecy of ,isaiah1 chap4 x4 #bb4 both 
which speak only of a remnant that shall
 be saved1 when the righteous judgments 
of ,god were poured forth1 on that      
nation in general2 and the prophet      
,hosea adds another promise relating to 
them1 which the apostle takes notice of1
 namely1 that in the place where it was 
said unto them1 ,ye are not my people1  
there it shall be said unto them1 ,ye   
are the sons of the living ,god1 which  
plainly respects this remnant2 for he   
had before prophesied concerning the    
nation in general1 ,ye are not1 that is1
 ye shall not be my people1 and ,i will 
not be your ,god2 so that here is a     
great salvation foretold1 which1 they1  

among the ,jews1 should be made         
partakers of1 who were fore-ordained to 
eternal life1 when the rest were        
rejected4  ,object4 ,the prophet seems  
to speak1 in this scripture1 of a       
temporal salvation1 inasmuch as it is   
said1 in the words immediately          
following1 ,then shall the children of  
,judah1 and the children of ,israel1 be 
gathered together1 and shall appoint    
themselves one head1 and they shall come
 up out of the land1 viz4 of ,babylon1  
for great shall be the day of ,jezreel4 
,therefore this remnant1 here spoken of1
 which should be called the sons of the 
living ,god1 respects only such as      
should return out of captivity1 and     
consequently not the election of a part1
 to wit1 the believing ,jews1 to eternal
 life3 for it is plain1 that1 when this 
prediction was fulfilled1 they were to  
appoint themselves one head1 or         
governor1 namely1 ,zerubbabel1 or some  
other1 that should be at the head of    
affairs1 and help forward their         

flourishing state1 in1 or after their   
return from captivity4  ,answ4 ,it seems
 very evident1 that part of this        
prophecy1 viz4 chap4 iii4 #e4 respects  
the happiness of ,israel1 at that time1 
when they should seek the ,lord their   
,god1 and ,david their ,king1 and should
 fear the ,lord and his goodness1 in the
 latter days2 therefore why may not this
 verse also1 in chap4 i4 in which it is 
said1 that they shall be called the sons
 of the living ,god1 have its           
accomplishment in the gospel-day1 when  
they should adhere to ,christ1 who is   
called1 ,david their ,king8 ,the only   
difficulty which affects this sense of  
the text is1 its being said1 that they  
shall return to their own land1 under   
the conduct of a ,head1 or governor1    
whom they should appoint over them1     
which seems to favour the sense         
contained in the objection3 but the     
sense of the words would be more plain1 
if we render the text1 instead of ,,then
 ,and the children of ,judah1 c4 as it  

is rendered in most translations1 and is
 most agreeable to the sense of the     
,hebrew word4#aib ,according to our     
translation1 it seems to intimate1 that 
the prophet is speaking of something    
mentioned in the foregoing verse2 and   
inasmuch as the latter respects their   
return from the captivity1 therefore the
 former must do so2 whereas if we put   
and1 instead of then1 the meaning of    
both verses together is this3 there are 
two blessings which ,god promised1      
namely1 that a part of the ,jewish      
nation should be made partakers of the  
saving blessings of the covenant of     
grace1 which was to have its            
accomplishment when they were brought to
 believe in ,christ1 by the gospel1 or  
when this remnant1 taken out from them1 
should be saved2 and there is also      
another blessing promised to the whole  
nation1 which should be conferred upon  
them1 when they returned from the       
,babylonish captivity4  ,if it be       
objected1 to this sense of the text1    

that their return from captivity is     
mentioned after that promise1 of their  
being called the sons of the living     
,god1 therefore it cannot be supposed to
 relate to a providence that should     
happen before it2 ,i need only reply to 
this1 that it is very usual1 in         
scripture1 for the ,holy ,ghost1 when   
speaking concerning the privileges which
 the church should be made partakers of1
 not to lay them down in the same order 
in which they were to be accomplished2  
and therefore1 why may we not suppose1  
that this rule may be applied to this   
text8 ,and accordingly the sense is     
this3 the prophet had been speaking1 in 
the tenth verse1 of that great          
salvation1 which this remnant of the    
,jews1 converted to ,christianity1      
should be made partakers of in the      
gospel-day2 and then he obviates an     
objection1 as though it should be said1 
,how can this be1 since the ,jews are to
 be carried into captivity1 and there   
broken1 scattered1 and1 as it were      

ruined8 ,in answer to this1 the prophet 
adds1 that the ,jews should not be      
destroyed in the captivity1 but should  
be delivered1 and return to their own   
land1 and so should remain a people1    
till this remnant was gathered out of   
them1 who were to be made partakers of  
these spiritual privileges under the    
gospel-dispensation1 as mentioned in the
 foregoing words4  ,thus having         
endeavoured to prove1 that this remnant1
 spoken of in ,rom4 xi4 are such as     
should be made partakers of eternal     
salvation1 we may now apply this to our 
present argument4 ,if that salvation1   
which this remnant was to be made       
partakers of1 be the effect of divine   
power1 as the apostle says1 in ,rom4 ix4
 #af4 ,it is not of him that willeth1   
nor of him that runneth1 but of ,god1   
that sheweth mercy2 and if it be the    
gift of divine grace1 as he says        
elsewhere1 in ,eph4 ii4 #h4 ,by grace   
are ye saved1 through faith1 and that   
not of yourselves1 it is the gift of    

,god2 then it follows from hence1 that  
,god designed1 before-hand1 to give them
 these blessings2 and if he designed    
them only for this remnant1 then it is  
not all1 but a part of mankind1 to wit1 
those that shall be eventually saved1   
that were chosen to salvation4  7#b47   
,the doctrine of election may be farther
 proved1 from ,god's having foreknown   
whom he will sanctify and save4 ,it will
 be allowed1 that ,god knows all things1
 and consequently that he knows all     
things that are future1 and so not only 
those whom he has saved1 but whom he    
will save4 ,we need not prove that ,god 
fore-knew all things1 for that is not   
denied by those who are on the other    
side of the question1 or1 at least1 by  
very few of them2 and1 indeed1 if this  
were not an undoubted truth1 we could   
not depend on those predictions1 which  
respect things that shall come to pass2 
and these not only such as are the      
effects of necessary causes1 or things  
produced according to the common course1

 or laws of nature1 but those which are 
contingent1 or the result of the        
free-will of man1 which have been       
foretold1 and consequently were         
fore-known by ,god2 and if it be allowed
 that he fore-knew whatever men would   
be1 and do1 let me farther add1 that    
this foreknowledge is not barely an act 
of the divine mind1 taking a fore-view  
of1 or observing what others will be1 or
 do1 without determining that his actual
 providence should interest itself      
therein2 therefore it follows1 that if  
he fore-knew the salvation of those who 
shall be eventually saved1 he fore-knew 
what he would do for them1 as a means   
conducive thereunto2 and if so1 then he 
determined1 before-hand1 that he would  
bring them to glory2 but this respects  
only a part of mankind1 who were chosen 
by him to eternal life4  ,in this sense 
we are to understand those scriptures   
that set forth ,god's eternal purpose to
 save his people1 as an act of          
fore-knowledge3 thus1 in ,rom4 xi4 #b4  

,god hath not cast away his people1 whom
 he fore-knew1 that is1 he hath not cast
 them all away1 but has reserved to     
himself a remnant1 according to the     
election of grace4 ,that he either had1 
or soon designed1 to cast away the      
greatest number of the ,jewish nation1  
seems very plain1 from several passages 
in this chapter3 thus1 in verses #ag1   
#ai4 he speaks of some of the branches  
being broken off1 and ver4 #bb4 of      
,god's severity1 by which we are to     
understand his vindictive justice in    
this dispensation3 ,but yet we are not  
to suppose1 says the apostle1 that ,god 
has cast them all away1 as in ver4 #a4  
and so he mentions himself1 as an       
instance of the contrary1 as though he  
should say1 ,i am called1 and           
sanctified1 and chosen1 though ,i am an 
,israelite4  ,moreover1 ,god's not      
casting away his remnant of the         
,israelites1 being the result of his    
fore-knowledge1 does not barely respect 
his knowing what they should be1 or do1 

whom he had chosen to eternal life1 for 
it is represented as a discriminating   
act of favour2 whereas1 in other        
respects1 they1 who are rejected by him1
 are as much the objects of his         
knowledge1 as any others1 since the     
omniscience of ,god is not the result of
 his will2 but it is a perfection       
founded in his nature1 and therefore not
 arbitrary1 but necessary4  ,again1 the 
apostle1 in #a ,pet4 i4 #b4 speaks of   
some who were elected1 according to the 
foreknowledge of ,god the ,father1 unto 
obedience1 c4 that is1 not chosen1      
because of any obedience performed by   
them1 which ,god foreknew2 for this is  
considered1 as the result of his        
fore-knowledge1 not the cause of it2 and
 this word is yet farther explained in  
another place1 where it is used1 when   
the apostle says1 in #b ,tim4 ii4 #ai4  
,the ,lord knoweth them that are his4   
,he had before been speaking of the     
faith of some1 who professed the gospel1
 being overthrown2 nevertheless1 says   

he1 that foundation of hope1 which ,god 
has laid in the gospel1 is not hereby   
shaken1 but stands sure2 the faithful   
shall not be overthrown1 for the ,lord  
knoweth them that are his1 that is1 he  
knows who are the objects of his love1  
who shall be kept by his power1 through 
faith1 unto salvation2 so that ,god's   
fore-knowledge1 considered as a         
distinguishing privilege1 is not to be  
understood barely of his knowing how men
 will behave themselves1 and so1 taking 
his measures from thence1 as though he  
first knew what they would do1 and then 
resolved to bestow his grace2 but he    
knows whom he has set apart for himself1
 or designed to save1 and1 with respect 
to them1 his providence will influence  
their conduct1 and prevent their        
apostasy4  ,god's knowledge1 in         
scripture1 is sometimes taken for his   
approving1 or loving1 those who are the 
objects thereof3 thus he says unto      
,moses1 in ,exod4 xxxiii4 #ag4 ,thou    
hast found grace in my sight1 and ,i    

know thee by name1 where one expression 
explains the other1 and so it imports a 
knowledge of approbation2 and1 on the   
other hand1 when our ,saviour says to   
some1 in ,matt4 vii4 #bc4 ,i will       
profess unto you1 ,i never knew you1 it 
is not to be supposed that he did not   
know they would behave themselves1 or   
what they would do against his name and 
interest in the world2 but ,i never knew
 you1 that is1 ,i never approved of you1
 and accordingly1 it follows1 ,depart   
from me1 ye that work iniquity2 and when
 it is said concerning knowledge1 as    
applied to man1 in ,john xvii4 #c4 ,this
 is life eternal1 that they may know    
thee1 the only true ,god2 no one        
supposes that a speculative knowledge of
 divine truths will give any one ground 
to conclude his right to eternal life2  
therefore to know ,god1 is to love1 to  
delight in him3 and the same is applied1
 by the apostle1 to ,god's loving man1  
when he says1 in #a ,cor4 viii4 #c4 ,if 
any man love ,god1 the same is known of 

him1 that is1 beloved by him4 ,now if   
,god's knowing his people signifies his 
loving them1 then his fore-knowing them 
must signify his determining to do them 
good1 and to bestow grace and glory upon
 them1 which is the same as to choose   
them to eternal life3 he fore-knew what 
he designed to confer upon them2 for he 
prepared a kingdom for them1 from the   
foundation of the world1 ,matt4 xxv4    
#cd4 which is the same with his having1 
from the beginning1 chosen them to      
salvation4  ,object4 ,as all actions1   
performed by intelligent creatures1 as  
such1 suppose knowledge1 so their       
determinations are the result of        
fore-knowledge1 for the will follows the
 dictates of the understanding2         
therefore we must suppose ,god's        
fore-knowledge1 to be antecedent to1 and
 the ground and reason of his           
determinations4 ,this the apostle seems 
to intimate1 when he says1 in ,rom4     
viii4 #bi4 ,whom he did fore-know1 he   
did predestinate1 that is1 he had a     

perfect knowledge of their future       
conduct1 and therefore determined to    
save them4  ,answ4 ,i do not deny that1 
according to the nature of things1 we   
first consider ,god as knowing1 and then
 as willing3 but this does not hold     
good1 with respect to his knowing all   
things future2 for we are not to suppose
 that he first knows that a thing shall 
come to pass1 and then wills that it    
shall4 ,it is true1 he first knows what 
he will do1 and then does it2 but1 to   
speak of a knowledge in ,god1 as        
conversant about the future state1 or   
actions of his people1 without          
considering them as connected with his  
power and providence1 7which is the     
immediate cause thereof7 ,i cannot think
 consistent with the divine perfections4
  ,as for this scripture1 ,whom he did  
fore-know1 them he did predestinate1 we 
are not to suppose1 that the meaning is1
 that ,god fore-knew that they1 whom he 
speaks of1 would be conformed to the    
image of his ,son1 and then as the      

result hereof1 determined that they     
should2 for their being conformed to    
,christ's image1 consists in their      
exercising those graces which are       
agreeable to the temper and disposition 
of his children1 or brethren1 as they   
are here called2 and this conformity to 
his image is certainly the result of    
their being called3 but their calling as
 well as justification and              
glorification1 is the consequence of    
their being fore-known2 therefore ,god's
 fore-knowing here1 must be taken in the
 same sense as it is in the scriptures1 
but now referred to2 for his having     
loved them before the foundation of the 
world1 or chosen them to enjoy those    
privileges which are here mentioned4    
7#c47 ,it farther appears1 that there is
 a number chosen out of the world to    
eternal life1 from the means which ,god 
has ordained for the gathering a people 
out of it1 to be made partakers of the  
blessings which he has reserved for them
 in heaven4 ,this is what we generally  

call the means of grace2 and from hence 
it appears1 that there is a chosen      
people1 whose advantage is designed     
hereby4 ,for the making out of this     
argument1 let it be considered1  #ast4  
,that there always has been a number of 
persons1 whom ,god1 by his              
distinguishing providence1 has separated
 from the world1 who have enjoyed the   
ordinances1 or means of grace1 and to   
whom the promises of eternal life have  
been made4 ,we do not say that these are
 all chosen to eternal life2 but it     
appears1 from the design of providence  
herein1 that there have been some1 among
 them who were ordained to eternal life4
 ,if ,god gives the means of grace to   
the church1 it is an evident token that 
some are designed to have grace bestowed
 upon them1 and consequently brought to 
glory4  #b;dly4 ,they who have been     
favoured with these means of grace1 have
 had some peculiar marks of the divine  
regard to them4 ,thus we read1 in the   
early ages of the world1 of the         

distinction between those1 who had the  
special presence of ,god among them1 and
 others1 who were deprived of it2 as    
,cain is said1 to go out from the       
presence of the ,lord1 ,gen4 iv4 #af4 as
 one1 who1 together with his posterity1 
was deprived of the means of grace1 and 
also of ,god's covenant1 in which he    
promised to be a ,god to some1 from     
which privilege others were excluded3   
thus he was called the ,god of ,shem1   
chap4 ix4 #af4 and afterwards of        
,abraham1 ,isaac1 and ,jacob1 ,exod4    
iii4 #f4 whose descendants were hereby  
given to expect the ordinances and means
 of grace1 and many instances of that   
special grace1 which a part of them     
should be made partakers of3 and would  
he have made this provision1 for a      
peculiar people1 in so discriminating a 
way1 if there had not been a remnant    
among them1 according to the election of
 grace1 to whom he designed to manifest 
himself here1 and bring to glory        
hereafter8 ,no1 he would have neglected1

 or over-looked them as he did the      
world2 whereas both they and their seed 
had the promises of the covenant of     
grace made to them which argues1 that   
there was a remnant among them1 whom    
,god designed hereby to bring into a    
state of grace and salvation1 and1 in   
this respect1 they are said to be the   
objects of divine love4  ,this leads us 
to consider the meaning of that text1   
which is generally insisted on1 as a    
very plain proof of this doctrine1 in   
,rom4 ix4 #aa1 #ab1 #ac4 ,the children  
being not yet born1 neither having done 
any good or evil1 that the purpose of   
,god according to election1 might stand2
 not of works1 but of him that calleth3 
,it was said unto her1 the elder shall  
serve the younger2 as it is written1    
,jacob have ,i loved1 but ,esau have ,i 
hated4 ,here is an express mention of   
the purpose of ,god1 according to       
election1 and ,jacob is1 pursuant       
thereunto1 said to be the object of     
divine love4 ,for the understanding of  

which1 let us consider the sense that is
 given of it1 by those on the other side
 of the question2 and how far it may be 
allowed of1 and what there is in the    
words to prove this doctrine1 and       
wherein our sense of them differs from  
their's4  ,it is supposed1 by those who 
deny particular election1 that ,jacob   
and ,esau are not here considered in a  
personal capacity1 but that the apostle 
speaks of their respective descendants1 
as referring to two divine predictions2 
in one of which1 ,gen4 xxv4 #bc4 ,god   
told ,rebekah1 before her two sons were 
born1 that two nations were in her womb2
 and the elder1 that is1 the posterity  
of ,esau1 should serve the younger1     
namely1 that of ,jacob2 and in the      
other1 ,mai4 i4 #b1 #c4 he says1 ,i     
loved ,jacob1 and hated ,esau1 and laid 
his mountains waste2 so that if1 in both
 these scriptures1 referred to by the   
apostle1 nothing else be intended but   
the difference that should be put       
between them as to the external         

dispensations of providence1 or that    
,jacob's family1 in future ages should  
be in a more flourishing state than that
 of ,esau1 we must not suppose that he  
designed thereby to represent them as   
chosen to1 or excluded from eternal     
life4  ,this seems a very plausible     
sense of the text2 but yet the apostle's
 words may very well be reconciled with 
those two scriptures1 cited to enervate 
the force of the argument taken from it2
 and at the same time1 it will not      
follow from thence1 that there is no    
reference had to the doctrine of eternal
 election therein4 ,therefore1  #a4 ,we 
will not deny1 when it is said1 ,jacob  
have ,i loved1 and ,esau have ,i hated1 
that their respective descendants were  
intended in this prediction1 yet it will
 not follow from hence1 that ,jacob and 
,esau1 personally considered1 were not  
also included4 ,whoever reads their     
history1 in the book of ,genesis1 will  
evidently find in one the marks and     
characters of a person chosen to eternal

 life2 whereas1 in the other1 we have no
 account of any regard which he         
expressed to ,god or religion1 therefore
 he appears to have been rejected2 yet1 
#b4 ,so far as it respects the posterity
 of ,jacob and ,esau we are not to      
suppose that ,god's having loved the    
one1 and rejected the other1 implies    
nothing else1 but that ,jacob's         
posterity had a better country allotted 
for them1 or exceeded ,esau's in those  
secular advantages1 or honours1 which   
were conferred upon them4 ,this seems to
 be the principal sense1 which they1 on 
the other side of the question1 give of 
the apostle's words2 when comparing them
 with those of the prophet ,malachi1    
who1 speaking concerning ,esau's being  
hated1 explains it1 as relating to his  
lands being laid waste for the dragons  
of the wilderness4 ,this had been       
foretold by some other prophets1 ,jer4  
xlix4 #ag1 #ah4 ,ezek4 xxxv4 #g1 #i4    
,obed4 ver4 #aj4 and had its            
accomplishment soon after the ,jews were

 carried captive into ,babylon1 from    
which time they ceased to be a nation2  
but1 certainly1 though this be that     
particular instance of hatred1 which the
 prophet ,malachi refers to1 yet there  
is more contained in the word1 as       
applied to them by the apostle ,paul4   
,it is true1 the prophet designs1 in    
particular to obviate an objection which
 the ,jews are represented as making1   
against the divine dispensations towards
 them1 as though they had not such an   
appearance of love1 as he supposes them 
to have had1 therefore they are brought 
in as speaking to this purpose3 how     
canst thou say1 that ,god has loved us1 
who have continued seventy years        
captives in ,babylon1 and since our     
return from thence1 have been exposed to
 many adverse dispensations of          
providence8 ,the prophet's reply is to  
this effect3 that1 notwithstanding1 they
 still remained a nation1 and therefore 
were in this respect1 more the objects  
of the divine regard1 than the posterity

 of ,esau were1 which is represented as 
hated1 for they never returned unto     
their former state2 or what attempts    
soever they made to recover it1 they    
were all to no purpose4 ,this the       
prophet alleges1 as a sufficient answer 
to the ,jews' objection1 in the same    
sense in which they understood the      
words1 love or hatred2 but1 doubtless   
more than this was contained in the     
prediction before ,jacob and ,esau were 
born1 and in the apostle's application  
of it1 in the text before-mentioned4 ,if
 nothing were intended but outward      
prosperity1 or their vying with each    
other in worldly grandeur1 ,esau's      
posterity1 in this respect1 might be    
concluded to have been preferable to    
,jacob's2 thus when they are reckoned1  
by their genealogies1 ,gen4 xxxvi4 they 
are many of them described as dukes and 
kings who made a considerable figure in 
the world4 ,when ,jacob's posterity were
 few in number1 and bondmen in the land 
of ,egypt1 and when the ,israelites were

 carried captive into ,babylon1 the     
,edomites are represented by the        
prophet1 as looking on1 and rejoicing in
 their destruction1 as being1 at that   
time1 in all appearance1 secure1 and    
enjoying their former liberty4  ,neither
 could this love or hatred signify      
nothing else but the descendants of     
,jacob being planted in a more fruitful 
soil2 for there is little difference put
 between them1 in this respect1 in the  
patriarchal benediction pronounced by   
their father1 who tells ,jacob1 that    
,god would give him the dew of heaven1  
and the fatness of the earth1 and plenty
 of corn and wine2 and to ,esau he says1
 ,thy dwelling shall be the fatness of  
the earth1 and the dew of heaven from   
above1 chap4 xxvii4 #bh1 compared with  
#ci4 therefore1 when one is described1  
in the prediction1 as loved1 and the    
other as hated1 we are not to suppose1  
that outward prosperity on the one hand1
 or adversity on the other1 are1        
principally intended thereby1 for that  

might be said of both of them by turns2 
therefore let me add1  #c4 ,that ,god's 
loving or hating1 as applied to the     
posterity of ,jacob or ,esau1           
principally respects his determining to 
give or deny the external blessings of  
the covenant of grace1 or the means of  
grace1 and therewith many special tokens
 of his favour4 ,in ,jacob's line the   
church was established1 out of which1 as
 has been before observed1 there was a  
remnant chosen1 and brought to eternal  
life2 how far this may be said of       
,esau's1 is hard to determine4  ,object4
 #a4 ,but to this it will be objected1  
that ,job and his friends were of       
,esau's posterity1 as is more than      
probable2 but these were far from being 
rejected of ,god4  ,answ4 ,to this it   
may be replied1 that a few single       
instances are not sufficient to         
overthrow the sense we have given of    
this divine oracle1 since the rejection 
of ,esau's posterity may take its       
denomination from the far greater number

 thereof1 without including in it every 
individual1 as it is very agreeable to  
the sense of many scriptures4 ,moreover1
 we may consider1 that these lived1 as  
we have sufficient ground to conclude1  
before the seed of ,jacob were          
increased1 and advanced to be a distinct
 nation1 as they were after their       
deliverance from the ,egyptian bondage2 
as also before that idolatry1 which     
first overspread the land of ,chaldea1  
in ,abraham's time1 had universally     
extended itself over the country of     
,idumea1 where ,esau's family was       
situate2 so that it doth not follow from
 hence1 because this prediction did not 
take place in a very considerable       
degree1 in the first descendants from   
him1 that therefore it does not respect 
their rejection1 as to what concerns the
 spiritual privileges of that people    
afterwards4 ,and1 indeed1 idolatry seems
 to have had some footing in the country
 where ,job lived1 even in his time1    
which gave him occasion to exculpate    

himself from the charge thereof1 when he
 signifies1 that he had not beheld the  
sun when it shineth1 or the moon walking
 in brightness1 and his heart had not   
been secretly enticed1 or his mouth     
kissed his hand1 ,job xxxi4 #bf1 #bg4   
alluding to some modes of worship1      
practised by idolaters in his day1 who  
gave divine honour to the sun and moon2 
and1 soon after his time1 before ,israel
 had taken possession of ,canaan1 there 
seems to have been an universal         
defection of the ,edomites from the true
 religion1 otherwise1 doubtless1 ,moses 
might1 without any difficulty1 have got 
leave to have passed through their      
country1 in his way to the land of      
,canaan1 which he requested in a most   
friendly and obliging manner1 but to no 
purpose1 ,numb4 xx4 #ad-ba4 especially  
considering they had no reason to fear  
that they would do any thing against    
them in a hostile manner2 therefore the 
unfriendly treatment they met with from 
them1 proceeded from the same spring    

with that of the ,amalekites1 and other 
bordering nations1 namely1 they had all 
revolted from the ,god and religion of  
their father ,abraham2 so that this     
prediction seems to have been fulfilled1
 before the promise1 respecting ,jacob's
 posterity1 in any considerable degree1 
began to take place4  ,having briefly   
considered this objection1 we return to 
the argument1 namely1 that ,god's loving
 or hating1 in this scripture1 as it has
 a relation to the distinct nations that
 descended from ,jacob and ,esau1       
includes in it his determining to give  
or deny the external privileges of the  
covenant of grace1 which we generally   
call the ordinances1 or means of grace4 
,these were the spiritual and more      
distinguishing instances of divine      
favour1 which ,jacob was given to       
expect1 when he obtained the blessing4  
,as for the double portion1 or the      
greatest part of the paternal estate1   
that descended with it1 together with   
the honour of having dominion over their

 brethren1 or a right 7as it is probable
 they had7 to act as civil magistrates  
in their respective families1 these were
 all small things1 if compared with     
those spiritual privileges1 wherein     
,god's love to ,jacob1 and his          
posterity1 was principally expressed2 it
 was this which is so often signified by
 ,god's being the ,god of ,abraham1     
,isaac1 and ,jacob3 ,in other respects1 
,esau was blessed as well as ,jacob2 for
 the apostle1 speaking concerning that  
part of ,isaac's prediction1 which      
respected the temporal advantage of     
their posterity1 says1 that he blessed  
,jacob and ,esau1 concerning things to  
come1 ,heb4 xi4 #bj4 yet ,esau was      
rejected1 as to what concerns the       
spiritual part of the blessing1 which   
was his birth-right1 that he is said to 
have despised1 ,gen4 xxv4 #cd4 and1 for 
this reason1 he is styled1 by the       
apostle1 a profane person1 ,heb4 xii4   
#af4 ,if it had been only a temporal    
privilege that he contemned1 it might   

have been a sin2 but it could not then  
have been properly said to have been an 
instance of profaneness1 for that has   
respect only to things sacred2 therefore
 it evidently appears1 that the         
blessings which ,esau despised1 and ,god
 had before designed to confer on       
,jacob1 and his seed1 as a peculiar     
instance of his love1 were of a         
spiritual nature4  ,object4 #b4 ,it will
 be farther objected1 that men's        
enjoying the external privileges of the 
covenant of grace1 has no immediate     
reference to their salvation1 or        
election to it4  ,answ4 ,since salvation
 is not to be attained1 but by and under
 these means of grace1 we must conclude1
 that whenever ,god bestows and         
continues them1 to a church or nation1  
he has a farther view therein1 namely1  
the calling some1 by his grace1 to      
partake of those privileges that        
accompany salvation4 ,if there were no  
such blessings to be conferred on the   
world1 there would be no means of grace1

 and consequently no external           
dispensation of the covenant of grace2  
for it is absurd to suppose that any    
thing can be called a means1 where all  
are excluded from the end which they    
refer to2 therefore the sum of this     
argument is1 that ,god had a peculiar   
love to the posterity of ,jacob1 and    
accordingly he designed to give them    
those privileges which were denied to   
others1 namely1 the means of grace1     
which he would not have done1 had he not
 intended to make them effectual to the 
salvation of some of them2 and this     
purpose1 relating hereunto1 is what is  
called election1 which1 though it be not
 applicable to all the seed of ,jacob2  
for all1 as the apostle says elsewhere1 
are not ,israel who are of ,israel2 yet1
 inasmuch as there was a remnant of     
them1 to whom it was applied1 they are  
that happy seed1 who are represented1 by
 the apostle1 as the objects of ,god's  
compassion1 or vessels unto honour1 in  
whom he designed to make known the      

riches of his glory1 having1 in this    
respect1 afore prepared them unto glory1
 ,rom4 ix4 #ae1 #ba1 #bc4  ,thus having 
considered that ,god has chosen a part  
of mankind to salvation1 we may1 without
 being charged with a vain curiosity1   
enquire whether this privilege belongs  
to the greater or smaller part of       
mankind1 since the scripture goes before
 us in this matter4 ,if we judge of the 
purpose of ,god by the execution        
thereof1 it must be observed1 that      
hitherto the number of those1 who have  
been made partakers of the special      
privileges of the gospel1 has been      
comparatively small4 ,if we look back to
 those ages before our ,saviour's       
incarnation1 what a very inconsiderable 
proportion did ,israel bear to the rest 
of the world1 who were left in darkness 
and ignorance6 ,and1 after this1 our    
,saviour observes1 that many were       
called1 in his time1 but few were       
chosen1 ,matt4 xx4 #af4 and he advises  
to enter in at the strait gate1 chap4   

vii4 #ac1 #ad4 by which he means the way
 to eternal life1 concerning which he   
says1 that there are1 comparatively1 few
 that find it4 ,and when the gospel had 
a greater spread1 and wonderful success 
attended the preaching thereof1 by the  
apostles1 and many nations embraced the 
,christian faith1 in the most           
flourishing ages of the church1 the     
number of ,christians1 and much more of 
those who were converted1 and           
effectually called1 was comparatively   
small4 ,whether the number of true      
believers shall be greater1 when there  
is a greater spread of the gospel1 and a
 more plentiful effusion of the ,spirit1
 to render it more successful1 as we    
hope and pray for that time1 and that   
not altogether without                  
scripture-warrant2 ,i say1 whether then 
the fewness of those who have hitherto  
been chosen and sanctified1 shall not be
 compensated1 by a far greater number1  
who shall live in that happy age of the 
church1 it is not for us to be          

over-curious in our enquiries about3    
,however1 we may determine this from    
scripture1 that1 in the great day1 when 
all the elect shall be gathered         
together1 their number shall be         
exceeding great1 if what the apostle    
says refers to this matter1 as some     
suppose it does1 when he speaks of a    
great multitude1 which no man could     
number1 of all nations1 and kindreds1   
and people and tongues1 who stood before
 the throne1 and before the ,lamb1      
clothed with white robes1 and palms in  
their hands1 ,rev4 vii4 #i4 ,but these  
things are no farther to be searched    
into1 than as we may take occasion1 from
 thence1 to enquire whether we are of   
that number2 and1 if we are1 we ought to
 bless ,god for his discriminating      
grace1 which he has magnified therein4  
,and this leads us to consider1  #b4    
,that they who are chosen to salvation1 
are also chosen to sanctification1 as   
the means thereof3 ,as the end and means
 are not to be separated in the         

execution of ,god's decree1 so they are 
not to be separated in our conception of
 the decree itself2 for1 since ,god     
brings none to glory1 but in a way of   
holiness1 the same he determined to do  
from all eternity1 that is1 to make his 
people holy1 as well as happy2 or first 
to give them faith and repentance1 and  
then1 the end of their faith1 the       
salvation of their souls4  ,there are   
many scriptures1 in which the purpose of
 ,god1 relating hereunto1 is plainly    
intended2 as when it is said1 ,he hath  
chosen us that we should be holy1 and   
without blame1 before him in love1 ,eph4
 i4 #d4 and elsewhere the apostle tells 
others1 that ,god had1 from the         
beginning1 chosen them unto salvation1  
through sanctification of the ,spirit1  
and belief of the truth1 #b ,thes4 ii4  
#ac4 and the apostle ,james saith1 that 
,god hath chosen the poor of this world1
 rich in faith1 and heirs of the        
kingdom1 ,james ii4 #e4 and elsewhere   
the apostle ,paul speaks of persons     

being predestinated to be conformed to  
the image of his ,son1 which he explains
 of their being called1 justified1 and  
glorified1 ,rom4 viii4 #bi4 and it is   
also said1 speaking of those who were   
converted under the apostle ,paul's     
ministry1 as many as were ordained unto 
eternal life believed1 ,acts xiii4 #dh4 
accordingly they were ordained to one as
 well as the other4  ,the argument1     
which seems very plainly contained in   
these1 and such-like scriptures1 is1    
that ,god's eternal purpose respects the
 grace that his people are made         
partakers of here1 as well as the glory 
that they expect hereafter1 which are   
inseparably connected2 this cannot      
reasonably be denied by those who are   
not willing to give into the doctrine of
 election3 ,but if the inseparable      
connexion between faith and salvation be
 allowed1 as having respect to the      
execution of ,god's purpose1 it will be 
no difficult matter to prove that this  
was determined by him1 or that his      

purpose respects faith1 as well as      
salvation4 ,therefore the main thing in 
controversy between us is1 whether this 
grace1 that accompanies salvation1 is   
wrought by the power of ,god1 or whether
 it depends on the free-will of man4    
,that which induces them to deny that   
,god has chosen persons to faith1 is    
this supposition2 that that which is the
 result of man's free-will1 cannot be   
the object of ,god's unchangeable       
purpose1 and consequently that ,god has 
not chosen men to it4 ,this is the hinge
 on which the whole controversy turns1  
and if the doctrine of special          
efficacious grace be maintained1 all the
 prejudices against that of election    
would soon be removed2 but this we must 
refer to its proper place1 being obliged
 to insist on that subject in some      
following answers2#aic and1 what may be 
farther considered1 concerning the      
absoluteness of election1 as one of the 
properties that belong to it1 under a   
following head1 will add some strength  

to our present argument4 ,all that we   
shall do1 at present1 shall be to defend
 our sense of the scriptures1 but now   
referred to1 to prove that election     
respects sanctification1 as well as     
salvation2 and that it does so1 is plain
 from the first of them1 in ,eph4 i4 #d4
 which proves that holiness is the end  
of election1 or the thing that persons  
are chosen to1 as appears from the      
grammatical construction of the words3  
,it is not said he had chosen us1       
considered as holy1 and without blame1  
but that we should be holy2#aid that    
which is plainly intended1 as the result
 of election1 cannot be the cause and   
reason of it4  ,as to what the apostle  
says1 in #b ,thess4 ii4 #ac4 ,god hath1 
from the beginning1 chosen you unto     
salvation1 through sanctification of the
 ,spirit1 and belief of the truth1 that 
plainly intimates1 that sanctification  
is the end of election2 and therefore   
the principal answer that some give to  
it1 which appears to be an evasion1 is1 

that the apostle does not speak of      
eternal election1 because ,god is said  
to have done this from the beginning1   
that is1 as one explains the words1 from
 the beginning of the apostle's         
preaching to them3 ,but if we can prove 
that there is such a thing as a purpose 
to save1 it will be no difficult matter 
to prove the eternity of the divine     
purpose2 and this is not disagreeable to
 the sense1 in which the words1 ,from   
the beginning1 are elsewhere used4#aie  
,as for that other scripture1 in ,james 
ii4 #e4 where it is said1 ,god hath     
chosen the poor of this world1 rich in  
faith1 and heirs of the kingdom2 here   
the words1 ,that they may be1#aif 7which
 are inserted by the apostle1 in the    
scripture but now mentioned7 may1       
without any strain on the sense thereof1
 be supplied1 and so the meaning is1    
,god hath chosen them1 that they might  
be rich in faith1 and heirs of the      
kingdom3 ,but if it will not be allowed1
 that these words ought to be supplied1 

the sense is the same1 as though they   
were these1 8,god has chosen the poor of
 this world1 who are described as rich  
in faith1 to be heirs of the kingdom20  
and so we distinguish between election's
 being founded upon faith1 and faith's  
being a character by which the elect are
 described2 and1 if faith be a character
 by which they are described1 then he   
who enabled them to believe1 purposed to
 give them this grace1 that is1 he chose
 them to faith1 as well as to be heirs  
of the kingdom4  ,as for that other     
text1 in ,rom4 viii4 #bi4 ,he hath      
predestinated us to be conformed to the 
image of his ,son2 these words1 to be1  
are supplied by our translators1 as ,i  
apprehend they ought1 for the reason but
 now mentioned1 taken from the parallel 
scripture1 in ,eph4 i4 #d4 ,but1 to     
evade the force of the argument1 to     
prove that we are predestinated to      
grace1 as well as to glory1 they who    
deny this doctrine1 give a very         
different turn to the sense of this     

text1 as though the apostle only        
intended hereby1 that the persons1 whom 
he speaks of1 were predestinated to an  
afflicted state in this life1 a state of
 persecution1 in which they are said to 
be conformed to the image of            
,christ2#aig ,but though it is true that
 believers are said to be made partakers
 of the sufferings of ,christ1 and1 by  
consequence1 are predestinated          
thereunto1 yet that does not appear to  
be the sense of this text1 as not well  
agreeing with the context2 for the      
apostle had been describing those1 whom 
he speaks of1 as loving ,god1 and called
 according to his purpose1 and then     
considers them as predestinated1 to be  
conformed to the image of his ,son1     
which must be meant of their being made 
partakers of those graces1 in which     
their conformity to ,christ consists1 as
 well as in sufferings2 and then he     
considers them1 in the following verse1 
as called1 justified1 and glorified2 and
 all this is the result of their being  

predestinated4  ,as for that scripture1 
in ,acts xiii4 #dh4 ,as many as were    
ordained to eternal life believed2 their
 faith is here considered as the result 
of their being ordained to eternal life1
 or they are represented as             
predestinated to the means1 as well as  
the end4  ,object4 #a4 ,but it will be  
objected by some1 that this is not      
agreeable to the sense of the ,greek    
word here used2#aih partly1 because it  
is not said they were fore-ordained to  
eternal life1 but ordained2 and the     
genuine sense thereof is1 that they were
 disposed to eternal life1 and          
consequently to faith1 as the means     
thereof4 ,and this is also taken in a   
different sense2 some suppose that it   
imports a being disposed1 by the        
providence of ,god1 or set in order1 or 
prepared for eternal life2 others1      
agreeably to the exposition which       
,socinus1 and some of his followers1    
give of the text1 7which sense a late   
learned writer falls in with#aii7       

understand the words1 as signifying     
their having an internal disposition1 or
 being well inclined1 as having an      
earnest desire after eternal life1 for  
which reason they believed2 or were     
fitted and prepared for eternal life1 by
 the temper of their minds1 and         
accordingly they believed4  ,answ4 #a4  
,if the word1 which we render ordained1 
be justly translated1 the thing which   
they were ordained to1 being something  
that was future1 it is1 in effect1 the  
same1 as though it were said they were  
fore-ordained to it1 as ,beza           
observes4#bjj  #b4 ,suppose the word    
ought rather to be translated1 they were
 disposed unto eternal life2 that seems 
to contain in it a metaphor1 taken from 
a general's disposing1 or ordering his  
soldiers to their respective posts1 or  
employments1 to which he appoints them1 
and so it is as though he should say1 as
 many as ,god had1 in his providence1 or
 antecedent purpose1 intended for       
salvation1 believed1 inasmuch as faith  

is the means and way to attain it2 and  
that amounts to the same thing with our 
translation4 ,but1  #c4 ,as to that     
other sense given of it1 viz4 their     
being internally disposed for eternal   
life1 it seems very disagreeable to the 
import of the ,greek word2 and those    
texts1 that are generally brought to    
justify this application thereof1 appear
 to be very much strained and forced by 
them1 to serve their purpose2#bja and1  
indeed1 if the word would bear such a   
sense1 the doctrine contained therein1  
namely1 that there are some internal    
dispositions in men1 antecedent to the  
grace of ,god1 whereby they are fitted  
and prepared for it1 does not well agree
 with the sense of those scriptures1    
which set forth man's natural opposition
 to the grace of ,god1 before he is     
regenerate and converted1 and his enmity
 against him2 and others that assert the
 absolute necessity of the previous work
 of the ,spirit1 to prepare for1 as well
 as excite the acts of faith4  ,object4 

#b4 ,it is farther objected1 that it    
cannot respect their being ordained1 or 
chosen to eternal life1 who believed1   
inasmuch as none that plead for that    
doctrine suppose that all1 who are      
elected in one place1 believe at the    
same time2 had it been said1 that all1  
who believed at that time1 were ordained
 to eternal life1 that would be         
agreeable to what is maintained by those
 who defend the doctrine of election2   
but to say1 that all1 who are elected to
 eternal life1 in any particular city1  
are persuaded to believe at the same    
time1 this is what they will not allow  
of3 besides1 it is not usual for ,god to
 discover this to1 or by1 the inspired  
writers1 that1 in any particular place1 
there are no more elected than those who
 are1 at any one time1 converted2 and1  
indeed1 it is contrary to the method of 
,god's providence1 to bring in all his  
elect at one time1 therefore we cannot  
suppose that this was revealed to the   
inspired writer1 and consequently       

something else must be intended1 and not
 eternal election1 namely1 that all     
those that were prepared for eternal    
life1 or who were disposed to pursue    
after it1 believed4#bjb  ,answ4 ,when   
the apostle says1 as many as were       
ordained to eternal life believed1 we   
are not hereby led into this hidden     
mystery of the divine will1 so as to be 
able to judge1 whether more than they   
that then believed1 were ordained to it 
in that place2 but the meaning is1 that 
there were many that believed1 and that 
all of them were ordained to eternal    
life2 and so it is as though he should  
say1 that ,god has a people in this     
place1 whom he has ordained to eternal  
life1 who were to be converted1 some at 
one time1 others at another3 some of    
them were converted at this time1 to    
wit1 a part of those who were ordained  
to eternal life1 if more were ordained  
to it2 so that the objection supposes   
that the words1 which we render1 as many
 as1 imports the whole number of the    

elect in that place2 whereas1 we think  
that the meaning is1 that there were    
many who believed1 and these were only  
such who were ordained to eternal life1 
of which there might be many more1 who  
then did not believe1 but hereafter     
should2 but this remained a secret1     
which the inspired writer was not led   
into1 nor we by him4  ,object4 #c4      
,there is another objection1 which the  
learned author1#bjc 7whose paraphrase on
 the ,new ,testament1 and discourse on  
election1 ,i am sometimes obliged to    
refer to in considering the objections  
that are made against this doctrine7    
proposes with a great deal of warmth2   
and if no reply can be given to it1 it  
will be no wonder to find many          
prejudiced against it2 his words are    
these3 8,if the reason why these men    
believed be only this1 that they were   
men ordained to eternal life1 the reason
 why the rest believed not1 can be this 
only1 that they were not ordained by    
,god to eternal life3 and1 if so1 what  

necessity could there be that the word  
of ,god should be first preached to     
them1 as we read1 ver4 #df4 was it only 
that their damnation might be the       
greater8 ,this seems to charge that     
,lover of souls1 whose tender mercies   
are over all his works1 with the        
greatest cruelty1 seeing it makes him   
determine1 from all eternity1 not only  
that so many souls as capable of        
salvation as any other1 shall perish    
everlastingly2 but also to determine1   
that the dispensations of his providence
 shall be such towards them1 as         
necessarily tends to the aggravation1 of
 their condemnation2 and what could1    
even their most malicious and enraged   
enemy1 do more8 ,what is it the very    
devil aims at1 by all his temptations1  
but this very end1 viz4 the aggravation 
of our future punishment8 ,and therefore
 to assert that ,god had determined that
 his word should be spoken to these     
,jews1 for this very end1 is to make    
,god as instrumental to their ruin1 as  

the very devil1 and seemeth wholly      
irreconcileable with his declarations1  
that he would have all men to be saved1 
and would not that any man should       
perish40  ,answ4 ,according to this     
author1 we must either quit the doctrine
 we are maintaining1 provided it be the 
same as he represents it to be1 or else 
must be charged by all mankind1 with    
such horrid blasphemy1 as is shocking to
 any one that reads it1 as charging the 
,lover of souls with the greatest       
cruelty1 and with acting in such a way1 
as their greatest enemy is said to do2  
determining1 that the dispensations of  
his providence should tend to aggravate 
their condemnation1 and that the gospel 
should be preached for this end1 and no 
other4 ,but let the blasphemy rest on   
his misrepresentation1 and far be it    
from us to advance any such doctrine2   
therefore that which may be considered1 
in answer to it1 is1  #a4 ,the immediate
 reason why men believe to eternal life1
 is1 because ,god exerts the exceeding  

greatness of his power1 whereby he works
 faith2 and the reason of his exerting  
this power1 is1 because he determined to
 do it1 as it is the execution of his   
purpose4  #b4 ,it does not follow1 from 
hence1 that the only reason why others  
do not believe1 is1 because they were   
not ordained to eternal life4 ,it is    
true1 indeed1 that their not having been
 ordained to eternal life1 or ,god's not
 having purposed to save them1 is the   
reason why he does not exert that power 
that is necessary to work faith3 and    
unbelief will certainly be the          
consequence thereof1 unless man could   
believe without the divine energy2 yet  
the immediate spring and cause of       
unbelief1 is the corruption and         
perverseness of human nature which is   
chargeable on none else but man himself4
 ,we must certainly distinguish between 
unbelief's being the consequence of     
,god's not working faith1 whereby       
corrupt nature takes occasion to exert  
itself1 as being destitute of preventing

 grace2 and its being the effect hereof4
 ,is ,god's denying the revengeful      
person1 or the murderer1 that grace1    
which would prevent his executing his   
bloody designs1 the cause thereof8 ,or  
his denying to others the necessary     
supply of their present exigencies1 the 
cause of their making use of unlawful   
means1 by plundering others to subsist  
themselves8 ,no more is his denying     
special grace1 which he was not obliged 
to give to any1 the cause of men's      
unbelief and impenitency2 for that is to
 be assigned only to that wicked        
propensity of nature1 which inclines us 
to sin1 and not to the divine           
efficiency2 and how farsoever this may  
be the result of ,god's determining to  
deny his grace1 it is not to be reckoned
 the effect of that determination4  #c4 
,the design of the word's being         
preached1 is not to aggravate the       
damnation of those that shall not       
believe1 according to this vile         
suggestion2 but that men might be hereby

 led to know their duty and that the    
sovereignty of ,god1 and the holiness of
 his law1 which requires faith and      
repentance1 as well as man's obligation 
hereunto might be made known to the     
world4 ,i do not deny1 but that         
unbelief1 and the condemnation          
consequent thereupon1 is aggravated by  
the giving of the gospel1 for that      
appears from many scriptures1 ,matt4 xi4
 #ba4 ,luke x4 #ac4 as when our ,saviour
 upbraids ,chorazin1 ,bethsaida1        
,capernaum1 and other places1 amongst   
whom he was conversant1 with their      
unbelief1 and represents their          
condemnation as greater than1 that of   
others1 who were destitute of those     
privileges3 ,but yet it is a malicious  
insinuation1 to suppose we conclude that
 the gospel was given for this end2 and 
we must still distinguish between the   
greater aggravation of condemnation's   
being the result of giving the gospel1  
or the remote consequence thereof1 and  
its being the effect of it in those that

 reject the gospel1 and much less the   
design of ,god in giving it4  #d4 ,god's
 denying that grace1 which would have   
enabled men to believe1 is not to be    
charged as an instance of cruelty1 any  
more than his denying it to fallen      
angels1 but it is rather a display of   
his justice4 ,he was not obliged to give
 grace to any of the apostate race of   
man2 shall therefore his denying the    
grace of faith be reckoned an instance  
of cruelty1 when we consider the        
forfeiture that was before made thereof1
 and man's propensity to sin1 which is  
chargeable only on himself8  #e4 ,god's 
purpose to deny the grace of faith to   
those whom he has not ordained to       
eternal life1 is not inconsistent with  
that scripture1 #a ,tim4 ii4 #d4 in     
which it is said1 that he will have all 
men to be saved2 so that1 as will be    
farther observed elsewhere1#bjd it      
respects either ,god's determining that 
salvation should be applied to all sorts
 of men1 or else his declaring by his   

revealed will1 that it is the duty of   
all men to believe1 and to acknowledge  
the truth1 as made known to them in the 
gospel4  #f4 ,they who are elected to   
salvation1 are chosen in ,christ3 thus  
it is expressly said1 in ,eph4 i4 #d4   
,he hath chosen us in him1 before the   
foundations of the world4 ,we are not to
 suppose that the apostle intends       
hereby1 that we are chosen for the sake 
of ,christ1 as though any of his        
mediatorial acts were the ground and    
reason thereof2 for election is an act  
of sovereign grace1 or is resolved into 
the good pleasure of the will of ,god1  
and is not to be accounted a purchased  
blessing2 therefore when we speak of the
 concern of the ,mediator1 with relation
 hereunto1 this is to be considered as a
 means ordained by ,god1 to bring his   
elect to salvation rather than the      
foundation of their election4 ,this     
proposition necessarily follows from the
 former2 for if they1 who are chosen to 
the end1 are chosen to the means1 then  

,christ's mediatorial acts being the    
highest and first means of salvation1   
,god's eternal purpose respects this1 as
 subservient thereunto4  ,there are some
 very considerable divines1#bje who     
distinguish between our being chosen in 
,christ1 as an ,head1 and being chosen  
in him as a ,redeemer2 and accordingly1 
they conclude1 that there are two       
distinct relations1 in which the elect  
are said to stand to ,christ1 both which
 are mentioned by the apostle1 when he  
says1 ,christ is the ,head of the       
church1 and the ,saviour of the body1   
,eph4 v4 #bc4 and they are also         
mentioned distinctly elsewhere1 ,he is  
the ,head of the body1 the church1 and  
then it follows1 that he made peace     
through the blood of the cross1 ,col4 i4
 #ah1 #ai1 #bj4 and they add1 that the  
elect are considered as his members1    
without any regard had to their fallen  
state2 and that the blessings contained 
therein1 are such as render their       
condition more honourable and glorious1 

than otherwise it would have been1 had  
they been only considered as creatures1 
without any relation to him as their    
,head2 and this ,headship of ,christ    
they extend not only to men1 but to the 
holy angels1 whom they suppose to be    
chosen1 in this respect1 in ,christ1 as 
well as men1 and that it is owing       
hereunto that they have the grace of    
confirmation conferred upon them2 and it
 also follows1 from hence1 that ,christ 
would have been the ,head of the        
election of grace1 though man had not   
fallen1 and that our fallen state       
rendered that other relation of ,christ 
to his elect necessary2 so that as they 
are chosen to salvation1 they are chosen
 in him as a ,redeemer1 designed to     
bring about his great work for them1    
and1 for this end1 set up1 as it is     
expressed1 from everlasting1 ,prov4     
viii4 #bc4  ,this distinction of        
,christ's double relation to the elect1 
is1 doubtless1 designed by those who    
thus explain this doctrine to advance   

his glory2 notwithstanding it remains   
still a matter of doubt to me1 whether  
,christ's ,headship over his church be  
not a branch of his ,mediatorial glory2 
and1 if so1 it will be very difficult to
 prove that a ,mediator respects any    
other than man1 and him more            
particularly considered as fallen2 and  
accordingly1 ,god did not design hereby 
to advance him to an higher condition1  
than what was barely the result of his  
being a creature1 but to deliver him    
from that state of sin and misery1 into 
which he foresaw that he would plunge   
himself4 ,therefore1 in considering the 
order of ,god's eternal purpose1        
relating to the salvation of his people1
 we must suppose that he first designed 
to glorify all his perfections in their 
redemption and salvation2 and1 in order 
hereunto1 he fore-ordained1 or appointed
 ,christ to be their great ,mediator1 in
 whom he would be glorified1 and by whom
 this work was to be brought about3 ,he 
appointed him to be their ,head1        

,surety1 and ,redeemer2 first1 to       
purchase salvation for them2 and then1  
to make them meet for it1 in the same   
order in which it is brought about by   
him in the execution thereof2 so that1  
as the glory of ,god1 in the salvation  
of the elect1 was the end1 ,christ's    
redemption was the means more           
immediately conducive thereunto1 and1 as
 such1 he is said to be fore-ordained1  
to wit1 to perform those offices that he
 executes as ,mediator1 #a ,pet4 i4 #bj4
 and as ,christ1 when he was manifested 
in the flesh1 did all things for his    
people1 that were necessary to bring    
them to glory1 he is1 in ,god's purpose1
 considered as the great ,mediator1 by  
whom he designed this work should be    
brought about3 thus he is set forth in  
the gospel1 as a propitiation for sin2  
and the apostle seems to speak of it1 as
 what was the result of ,god's purpose1 
in ,rom4 iii4 #be4 whom ,god hath set   
forth to be a propitiation2 the ,greek  
word#bjf properly signifies1 as it is   

observed in the marginal reference1     
fore-ordained so to be2 and accordingly1
 we must consider him as from all       
eternity in ,god's purpose1 appointed to
 be the federal ,head of those who are  
said to be chosen in him1 and to have   
all the concerns of the divine glory1   
relating to their salvation1 committed  
to his management4  ,v4 ,we shall now   
consider the properties of election1 and
 how the divine perfections are         
displayed therein1 agreeably to what is 
said concerning it in scripture4  #a4   
,as it is taken for the purpose of ,god1
 relating to the sanctification or      
salvation of men1 as distinguished from 
the execution thereof1 it is eternal3   
,this is evident1 because ,god is       
eternal1 his purposes must be concluded 
to be of equal duration with his        
existence2 for we cannot suppose that an
 infinitely wise and sovereign ,being   
existed from all eternity1 without any  
fore-thought1 or resolution what to do1 
for that would be to suppose him to have

 been undetermined1 or unresolved1 when 
he first gave being to all things2 nor  
is it to be supposed that there are any 
new determinations in the divine will1  
for that would argue him to be          
imperfect1 since this would be an       
instance of mutability in him1 as much  
as it would be for him to alter his     
purpose2 but neither of these are       
agreeable to the idea of an infinitely  
perfect ,being4  ,moreover1 if ,god's   
purpose1 with respect to the salvation  
of men were not eternal1 then it must be
 considered as a new after-thought      
arising in the divine mind1 which1 as to
 its first rise1 is but1 as it were1 of 
yesterday1 and consequently he would    
have something in him that is finite4   
,if it be contrary to his omniscience to
 have new ideas of things1 it is equally
 contrary to the sovereignty of his will
 to have new determinations1 therefore  
all his purposes were eternal4  #b4     
,god's purpose relating to election1 is 
infinitely wise and holy4 ,this appears 

from the footsteps of infinite wisdom1  
and holiness1 which are visible in the  
execution thereof1 namely1 in bringing  
men to grace and glory2 nothing is more 
conspicuous than the glory of these     
perfections in the work of redemption1  
and the application thereof2 as hereby  
the salvation of man is brought about in
 such a way1 that the glory of all the  
divine perfections is secured1 and the  
means made use of1 as conducive         
thereunto1 the most proper that could   
have been used1 therefore it is a work  
of infinite wisdom4 ,and inasmuch as    
herein ,god discovers the infinite      
opposition of his nature to sin1 and    
thereby advances the glory of his       
holiness1 it follows from hence1 that   
these perfections of the divine nature  
had their respective concern1 if we may 
so express it1 in the purpose relating  
hereunto2 for whatever glory is         
demonstrated in the execution of his    
purpose1 that was certainly before      
included in the purpose itself4  #c4    

,the purpose of ,god1 relating to the   
final state of man1 is secret1 or cannot
 be known1 till he is pleased to        
discover it4 ,nothing is more obvious   
than this2 for even the purposes or     
resolutions of creatures are secret1    
till they are made known by them3 thus  
the apostle says1 ,what man knoweth the 
things of a man1 that is1 what he       
designs to do1 save the spirit of a man1
 which is in him8 and infers1 in the    
following words1 so the things of ,god  
knoweth no man1 but the ,spirit of ,god1
 #a ,cor4 ii4 #ab4 and elsewhere he     
says1 ,who hath known the mind of the   
,lord8 or who hath been his councellor8 
,rom4 xi4 #cd4 ,and1 for this reason1 it
 is called1 ,the mystery of his will1   
,eph4 i4 #i4 and this also follows from 
its being eternal1 therefore it was hid 
in ,god1 from before the foundation of  
the world1 and consequently would for   
ever have been so1 had he not1 by his   
works1 or word1 made some discoveries   
thereof1 to those whom he first brought 

into being1 and then gave some          
intimations of his purpose to them4     
,therefore it could not have been known 
that ,god had purposed to save any1 had 
he not revealed this in the gospel3 much
 less have any particular persons ground
 to conclude themselves to be elected1  
without first observing those           
intimations which ,god has given1       
whereby they may arrive at the knowledge
 thereof4 ,this head ought to be duly   
considered1 by those who deny1 and are  
prejudiced against this doctrine1 though
 it be generally neglected in the       
methods they take to oppose it2 for they
 will not consider the distinction we   
make between ,god's having chosen a     
person to eternal life1 and a person's  
having a right to conclude that he is   
thus chosen2 but take it for granted1   
that if there be such a thing as        
election1 that we must necessarily      
determine ourselves to be the objects   
thereof1 and ought to regulate our      
future conduct accordingly4 ,it is from 

thence they conclude1 that the doctrine 
of election leads men to presumption1 or
 gives them occasion to say1 that they  
may live as they list2 whereas we       
suppose that it is an instance of       
presumption in any one to determine that
 he is elected1 unless there be some    
discovery hereof made to him2 and this  
discovery cannot take its rise from     
,god1 unless it be accompanied with that
 holiness1 which is1 from the nature of 
the thing1 inconsistent with our being  
led hereby to licentiousness4 ,and here 
we take occasion to consider1 that ,god 
does not make known his secret purpose1 
relating to this matter1 to any1 by     
inspiration1 especially since that      
extraordinary dispensation of providence
 is ceased2 and1 indeed1 it never was   
his ordinary way to discover it hereby  
to those1 who1 in other instances1 were 
favoured with the gift of inspiration4  
,the means therefore by which we come to
 the knowledge hereof1 is1 by ,god's    
giving certain marks1 or evidences of   

grace1 or by shewing us the effects of  
the divine power1 in calling and        
sanctifying us1 whereby we have a       
warrant to conclude that we were chosen 
to eternal life2 and1 whilst we make a  
right improvement thereof1 and conclude 
that our judgment1 concerning our state1
 is rightly founded1 or not1 by the     
holiness of our lives1 we are in no     
danger of abusing this great and        
important doctrine1 to the dishonour of 
,god1 or our own destruction4  ,this    
leads us to consider a distinction1     
which we are often obliged to make use  
of1 when we speak concerning the will of
 ,god1 as secret or revealed1 by which  
we account for the sense of many        
scriptures1 and take occasion from it to
 answer several objections that are     
brought against this doctrine4 ,i am    
sensible that there is nothing advanced 
in defence thereof1 which they1 who are 
in the other way of thinking1 are more  
prejudiced against1 than this           
distinction1 which they suppose to      

contain a reproachful idea of the divine
 ,majesty1 and is the foundation of many
 popular prejudices against the doctrine
 we are defending1 as though we hereby  
intended that ,god has a secret meaning1
 different from what he reveals2 or that
 we are not to judge of his intentions  
by those discoveries which he makes     
thereof1 which it would be the highest  
reproach to charge any creature with1   
and contrary to that sincerity which he 
cannot be destitute of1 but he is hereby
 rendered the object of detestation2    
therefore no one1 who conceives of an   
holy ,god1 in such a way as he ought to 
do1 can entertain a thought1 as though  
the least appearance thereof were       
applicable to him4 ,however1 this is the
 common misrepresentation that is made  
of this distinction4 ,whether it arises 
from its being not sufficiently         
explained by some2 or a fixed resolution
 to decry the doctrine of election1 and 
render it odious1 as it must certainly  
be1 if supported by a distinction1      

understood in so vile a sense1 ,i will  
not determine4 ,however1 that we may    
remove this prejudice1 and consider how 
it is to be understood1 in a sense more 
agreeable to the divine perfections1 we 
shall proceed to explain it2 and here we
 may observe1  ,first1 ,that the will of
 ,god is sometimes taken1 in scripture1 
for that which he has1 from all         
eternity1 determined1 which is          
unchangeable1 and shall certainly come  
to pass1 which is impossible for any    
creature to disannul1 resist1 or render 
ineffectual2 and it is such a branch of 
divine sovereignty1 that to deny it1    
would be1 in effect1 to deny him to be  
,god4 ,this the apostle intends1 when he
 represents the malicious and obstinate 
sinner as replying against ,god1 and    
defending himself in his bold crimes1 by
 saying1 ,why doth he yet find fault2   
for who hath resisted his will8 ,rom4   
ix4 #ai1 #bj1 #ba1 #bb4 ,in answer to   
which1 he asserts the sovereignty of    
,god1 and that he is not accountable to 

any for what he does1 nor to be         
controuled by them2 and this is also    
intended in another scripture1 in ,eph4 
i4 #aa4 where it is said1 that ,god     
worketh all things after the counsel of 
his own will2 and elsewhere he says1 ,my
 counsel shall stand1 and ,i will do all
 my pleasure1 ,isa4 xlvi4 #aj4 ,this    
will of ,god is the rule of his own     
acting1 and1 as it determines the event 
of things1 it is impossible for him to  
act contrary to it2 and it is equally   
disagreeable to his perfections1 to     
signify to his creatures1 that he       
determines to do one thing1 but will do 
another2 therefore1 in this sense1 we   
are far from asserting that there is a  
revealed will of ,god1 which contradicts
 his secret4  ,secondly1 ,we often read1
 in scripture1 of the will of ,god1 as  
taken for what he has prescribed to us1 
as a rule of duty2 and also of our      
judging concerning the apparent event of
 things4  7#a47 ,the will of ,god may be
 considered as a rule of duty1 which is 

a well-known and proper sense of his    
revealed will3 thus our ,saviour teaches
 us to pray1 ,let thy will be done on   
earth1 as it is in heaven2 by which he  
principally intends his revealed will1  
or law4 ,enable us to yield obedience to
 thy law1 in our measure1 as thou art   
perfectly obeyed in heaven4 ,so our     
,saviour says1 ,whosoever shall do the  
will of ,god1 the same is my brother1   
and my sister1 and mother1 ,mark iii4   
#ce4 which can be meant of no other than
 his revealed will1 or of his law1 in   
which it is contained2 because no one   
can act contrary to ,god's              
determination1 which is that sense of   
his will1 contained in the foregoing    
head2 and1 consequently1 a doing his    
will1 in that sense1 would not have been
 laid down as a distinguishing character
 of those whom ,christ preferred above  
all1 who were related to him in the     
bonds of nature4  ,again the apostle    
understands the will of ,god in this    
sense1 when he says1 ,thou knowest his  

will1 ,rom4 ii4 #ah4 where he speaks to 
the ,jews1 who were instructed out of   
the law1 in which it is contained2 and  
elsewhere1 ,eph4 vi4 #f4 he speaks of   
his will1 as what is to be obeyed1 and  
therefore gives this description of     
faithful servants1 that they do the will
 of ,god1 namely1 what he has commanded1
 from the heart4 ,and there are many    
other scriptures thus to be understood2 
and this we call his revealed will1 as  
it is the rule of duty and obedience4   
7#b47 ,the revealed will of ,god may be 
considered as a rule which he has given 
us1 whereby we are to judge of the      
apparent event of things4 ,i make this a
 branch of ,god's revealed will1        
inasmuch as sometimes he condescends to 
discover future events to his creatures1
 which otherwise they could never have  
known2 but yet there is a difference1 as
 to the manner of their judging thereof1
 pursuant to the intimations which he   
has given them4 ,accordingly1 when ,god 
has told us expressly1 that this or that

 particular thing shall come to pass1   
then we are infallibly sure concerning  
the event1 and need no other rule to    
judge of it1 but by considering it as   
revealed3 ,as when ,god has said1 that  
there shall be a general resurrection of
 the dead1 and that ,christ shall come  
to judgment1 and receive his redeemed1  
and sanctified ones1 to heaven1 to      
behold his glory1 we are infallibly     
assured of these events1 because they   
are expressly revealed2 and1 when we    
speak of the secret and revealed will of
 ,god1 as applicable to things of this  
nature1 we intend nothing else hereby   
but what all will allow of1 viz4 that   
what would have been for ever a secret1 
had it not been discovered1 is now      
revealed1 and therefore ceases to be so2
 and in that sense1 the revealed will of
 ,god1 in all respects1 agrees with his 
secret2 in this case1 we suppose that   
,god expressly revealed the event4  ,but
 there are other instances1 in which the
 event of things is not expressly       

revealed2 as when ,god has only         
discovered to us what is the rule of our
 duty4 ,nevertheless1 since it is       
natural for man1 when any duty is       
commanded1 to pass some judgment        
concerning the event thereof2 and1      
inasmuch as we suppose the event not    
expressly revealed1 it follows1 that the
 judgment1 which we pass concerning it1 
is only what appears to us1 or what1    
according to our rule of judging1 seems 
to be the probable event of things4 ,in 
this case we are not infallibly assured 
concerning it2 and when we pass a       
judgment relating thereunto1 we may     
conclude that some consequences may     
attend our present duty1 which1 perhaps1
 will never come to pass4 ,as if a      
general of an army gives forth a command
 to his soldiers1 to march towards the  
enemy1 they will readily conclude1 that 
he designs1 by this command1 that they  
should enter on some action1 which1 had 
he expressly told them1 he must either  
change his purpose1 or else the event   

must certainly happen2 but1 inasmuch as 
he has not discovered this to them1 all 
the judgment that they can form1 at     
present1 concerning it1 is only such1 as
 is founded on the appearance of things1
 and the event might probably afterwards
 shew1 without any impeachment of his   
veracity or conduct herein1 that his    
only design was to try whether his      
soldiers would obey the word of command1
 or not4 ,or if a king should order a   
number of malefactors to the place of   
execution1 without discovering the event
 thereof1 the apparent event is their   
immediate death2 but if1 pursuant to his
 secret purpose1 he resolved1 there to  
give forth a pardon to them1 it cannot  
be supposed that he changed his purpose2
 but the event makes it appear1 that his
 purpose was not then known2 whatever   
the apparent event might be1 his real   
design was to humble them for their     
crimes1 and afterwards to pardon them4  
,it is only in such-like instances as   
these1 that we apply this distinction to

 the doctrine that we are maintaining2  
and therefore it must be a very great   
stretch1 of malicious insinuation1 for  
any one to suppose1 that hereby we      
charge ,god with insincerity in those   
declarations of his revealed will1 by   
which we pass a probable judgment       
concerning the event of things4 ,but to 
apply this to particular instances4 ,god
 commanded ,abraham to offer up his son 
,isaac1 ,gen4 xxii4 #b4 whereas it is   
certain1 unless we suppose that he      
altered his purpose1 that he intended1  
not that he should lay his hand upon    
him1 but1 when ,isaac was upon the      
altar1 to forbid him to do it4 ,here was
 a great and a difficult duty1 which    
,abraham was to perform pursuant to     
,god's revealed will1 which was the rule
 of his obedience2 had ,abraham known1  
before this1 that ,god designed to hold 
his hand1 and prevent him from striking 
the fatal blow1 it had been no trial of 
his faith2 for it would have been no    
difficult matter for him to have done   

every thing else4 ,the holy patriarch   
knew well enough that ,god could prevent
 him from doing it2 but this he had no  
ground to conclude1 because he had no   
divine intimation concerning it2        
therefore that which appeared to him to 
be the event1 was the loss of his son1  
and he reconciled this with the truth of
 the promise before given him1 that in  
,isaac his seed should be called1 by    
supposing that ,god1 at some time or    
other1 would raise him from the dead1 as
 the apostle observes1 ,heb4 xi4 #ai4   
therefore that which ,abraham concluded 
as judging1 not by an express           
revelation1 but by the voice of         
providence1 was1 that ,isaac must be    
slain by his hand3 ,but this was        
contrary to the real event1 as is       
evident1 from the account thereof in    
scripture2 and1 consequently since the  
real event was agreeable to the divine  
determination1 as all events are1 it    
follows1 that there is a difference     
between the will of ,god1 determining   

the event of things1 which shall        
certainly come to pass accordingly2 and 
the revelation of his will1 relating to 
what is the creatures present duty1     
which may1 at the same time1 appear to  
them1 when judging only by the command1 
which is the rule of duty1 and some     
circumstances that attend it1 to be     
contrary to what will afterwards appear 
to have been the real design of ,god    
therein4 ,god's real design was to try  
,abraham's faith1 and to prevent him    
from slaying his son1 when he had given 
a proof of his readiness to obey him2   
but this remained1 at first1 a secret to
 ,abraham1 and the apparent design was1 
that he should slay him4 ,therefore     
there is a foundation for this          
distinction1 as thus explained1         
concerning the secret and revealed will 
of ,god2 the former belongs not to us1  
nor are we to take our measures from it1
 as being unknown3 and1 when the latter 
appears contrary to it1 we must         
distinguish between two things1 that are

 contrary in the same1 and different    
respects2 or between the judgment which 
we pass concerning events1 which are    
apparent to us1 and1 at most1 are only  
probable and conjectural1 as we judge of
 the consequence of a duty commanded2   
and those events1 which1 though they are
 infallibly certain1 yet are not        
revealed1 nor can be known1 till they   
come to pass4 ,in this sense we         
understand the distinction between      
,god's secret and revealed will1 when   
they seem to oppose each other2 which it
 was necessary for us thus to explain1  
inasmuch as we shall frequently have    
occasion to mention1 and apply it1 when 
we account for the difference that there
 seems to be1 between the purpose of    
,god1 relating to the event of things1  
and our present views thereof1 whereby  
we may understand and account for the   
difficulties contained in several       
scriptures1 which ,i would have         
mentioned in this place1 for the farther
 illustration hereof1 had it been       

necessary4 ,but this is sufficient to   
explain and vindicate it from the       
prejudices entertained against it1 by   
those who are disposed to misrepresent  
what is said in defence of this         
doctrine4  ,from what has been said1    
concerning ,god's secret and revealed   
will1 we may infer1  #ast1 ,that it is a
 great boldness1 and unwarrantable      
instance of presumption1 for any one to 
enter into1 or judge of ,god's secret   
purpose1 so as peremptorily to          
determine1 beyond the present appearance
 of things1 that this or that shall     
certainly come to pass1 till he makes   
them known2 for secret things belong    
unto the ,lord our ,god1 but those      
things which are revealed belong unto   
us1 and to our children forever1 ,deut4 
xxiv4 #bi4 ,therefore no one ought to   
determine that he is elected to         
salvation1 before the work of grace is  
wrought1 and1 some way or other1 made   
visible to him2 or1 on the other hand1  
to determine that he is rejected or     

reprobated1 when he has no other ground 
to go upon1 but uncertain conjecture1   
which would be a means to drive him to  
despair3 that some are1 indeed1 elected1
 and others rejected1 is no secret      
because ,god has revealed this in his   
word2 so that we may assert it as a     
proposition1 undoubtedly true1 when we  
do not apply it to particular persons2  
and therefore this doctrine has not that
 pernicious tendency1 which many pretend
 that it has4  #b;dly1 ,the first act of
 saving faith does not consist in our   
believing that we are elected2 neither  
is it the duty of unregenerate persons1 
as such to apply this privilege to      
themselves any more than to conclude    
themselves rejected3 ,but our business1 
is1 so long as the purpose of ,god      
remains a secret to us1 to attend on the
 means of grace1 hoping and waiting for 
the display of divine power1 in         
effectually calling us2 and afterwards  
for the ,spirit's testimony1 or seal1 to
 be set to it1 whereby he discovers his 

own work2 and then it may1 in some      
measure1 be reckoned a branch of his    
revealed will and will afford us matter 
of thanksgiving and praise to him1 and a
 foundation of peace and comfort in our 
own souls4 ,but this may be farther     
insisted on1 when we come to consider   
the improvement we ought to make of this
 doctrine4 ,we proceed to consider the  
next property of election4  #d4 ,it is  
free1 and sovereign1 or absolute1 and   
unconditional2 for that which would be a
 reflection on the divine perfections1  
if applied to ,god's method of working1 
is1 by no means1 to be said concerning  
his purpose to work1 or1 7which is the  
same7 his decree of election2 therefore 
if there are no obligations laid on him 
by his creatures1 to display or perform 
any of his works of grace1 but they are 
all free and sovereign1 then it follows1
 that the fore-sight of any thing that  
shall be done by them1 in time1 could   
not be the motive1 or reason of his     
purpose1 or decree1 to save them1 or of 

his choosing them to salvation4  ,this  
may be farther argued1 from the         
independence of the divine nature3 if   
his nature and perfections are          
independent1 his will must be so4 ,but  
more particularly1  7#a47 ,the displays 
of ,god's grace1 in time1 are expressly 
resolved into his sovereign pleasure1 in
 scripture1 in ,rom4 ix4 #ae4 ,he saith 
to ,moses1 ,i will have mercy on whom ,i
 will have mercy2 and ,i will have      
compassion on whom ,i will have         
compassion4 ,and there are many other   
scriptures1 which might be referred to1 
where all merit1 or motives1 taken from 
the creature1 which might be supposed to
 induce him to bestow spiritual and     
saving blessings1 are entirely excluded1
 and the whole is resolved in to the    
glory of his own name1 and in           
particular1 of those perfections which  
he designed herein to illustrate4 ,this 
is applied1 even to the common blessings
 of providence2 ,nevertheless1 he saved 
them for his name's sake1 that he might 

make his mighty power to be known1      
,psal4 cvi4 #h4 and it is also applied  
to sparing mercy1 or the exercise of    
,god's patience1 ,for my name's sake    
will ,i defer mine anger1 and for my    
praise will ,i refrain for thee1 that ,i
 cut thee not off1 ,isa4 xlviii4 #i4 and
 to pardoning mercy1 ,for thy name's    
sake1 ,o ,lord1 pardon mine iniquity1   
for it is great1 ,psal4 xxv4 #aa4 ,and  
when he is represented as doing great   
things for his people1 he puts them in  
mind1 at the same time1 of their own    
vileness and unworthiness1 that the     
freeness and sovereignty of his grace1  
to them1 might be more conspicuous3     
,thus1 when he tells them how he        
delivered ,israel out of ,egypt1 he puts
 them in mind of their idolatry in that 
land2 therefore no motive could be      
taken1 from their behaviour towards him1
 which could induce him to do this for  
them2 as it is said1 ,but they rebelled 
against me1 and would not hearken unto  
me2 they did not every man cast away the

 abominations of their eyes1 neither did
 they forsake the idols of ,egypt2 then 
,i said1 ,i will pour out my fury upon  
them1 to accomplish my anger against    
them1 in the midst of the land of       
,egypt4 ,but ,i wrought1 for my name's  
sake1 that it should not be polluted    
before the heathen1 among whom they     
were1 in whose sight ,i made myself     
known unto them1 in bringing them forth 
out of the land of ,egypt1 ,ezek4 xx4   
#h1 #i4  7#b47 ,if the grace of ,god1   
and consequently his purpose relating   
thereunto1 were not absolute1 free1 and 
sovereign1 then all the glory thereof   
could not be attributed to him1 neither 
would boasting be excluded2 but as the  
creature might be said to be a worker   
together with ,god1 so he would lay     
claim to a share1 if not to the greatest
 part of the honour1 that will redound  
to him from it2 which is directly       
contrary to the divine perfections1 and 
the great design of the gospel4 ,this   
will farther appear1 if we consider1    

#ast4 ,that a conditional purpose to    
bestow a benefit1 cannot take effect    
till the condition be performed1 and    
accordingly it is said to depend on it4 
,this is obvious1 from the known idea   
affixed to the word condition1 and the  
common signification thereof2 it follows
 therefore1  #b;dly4 ,that the          
performance of the condition is the     
next1 or immediate cause of a           
conditional purpose's taking effect2    
and1 to apply this to the case before   
us1  #c;dly4 ,if1 on our performing the 
condition of ,god's purpose to save us1 
it be rendered effectual1 which         
otherwise it would not have been1       
7agreeably to the nature of a           
conditional purpose7 then we are more   
beholden to our own conduct1 than the   
divine purpose1 and so the glory thereof
 will be due to ourselves2 which would  
not only cast the highest dishonour on  
the divine perfections1 but it is       
contrary to the design of the gospel1   
which is to stain the pride of all      

flesh1 and take away all occasions of   
glorying1 from the creature4 ,thus the  
prophet ,isaiah1 fore-telling the glory 
of the gospel-state1 considers its      
tendency to humble the pride of man1    
when he says1 ,the loftiness of man     
shall be bowed down1 and the haughtiness
 of men shall be made low1 and the ,lord
 alone shall be exalted in that day1    
,isa4 ii4 #ag4 and the apostle1         
describing the nature of faith1         
considers its tendency to exclude       
boasting2 ,rom4 iii4 #bg4 and our       
,saviour1 speaking concerning the       
discriminating grace of ,god1 that      
appears in election1 either in his      
purpose relating to it1 or in the       
execution thereof1 says1 ,ye have not   
chosen me1 but ,i have chosen you1 ,john
 xv4 #af4 that is1 you have done nothing
 that has laid any obligation on me to  
choose you by that act of faith1 whereby
 you are inclined to prefer me to all   
others2 for this is the consequence and 
result of my discriminating grace4  ,we 

shall now proceed to consider those     
arguments1 which are generally made use 
of by those1 who are in the other way of
 thinking1 to support the conditionality
 of ,god's purpose1 as well as of his   
works of grace1 in opposition to what   
has been said concerning the freeness   
and sovereignty thereof4 ,they generally
 allege those scriptures for that       
purpose1 that are laid down in a        
conditional form2 as when the apostle   
speaks of such a confession of ,christ  
with the mouth1 as is attended with     
believing in the heart1 that ,god raised
 him from the dead1 and calling on the  
name of the ,lord1 as connected with    
salvation1 ,rom4 x4 #i1 #ac4 and our    
,saviour says1 that whosoever believeth 
on him should not perish1 but have      
everlasting life1 ,john iii4 #ae4 and   
that he that believeth shall be saved1  
,mark xvi4 #af4 and elsewhere1 ,except  
ye repent1 ye shall all likewise perish1
 ,luke xiii4 #c4 and many other         
scriptures of the like nature2 from     

whence they argue1 that since the       
dispensations of ,god's providence1 the 
gifts of his grace1 and the execution of
 his purpose are all conditional1 the   
purpose itself must be so4 ,were it but 
allowed that election is conditional    
whether it respects the purpose or      
providence of ,god1 we should meet with 
no opposition from those who are on the 
other side of the question2 but as such 
a purpose to save1 as is not absolute1  
peremptory1 or independent on the will  
of man1 has many absurd consequences    
attending it1 which are derogatory to   
the glory of the divine sovereignty1 as 
has been already considered2 so this    
cannot be the sense of those scriptures1
 that are laid down in a conditional    
form1 as those and such-like are1 that  
we have but now mentioned2 for no sense 
of scripture can be true or just1 that  
has the least tendency to militate      
against any of the divine perfections2  
so that there may without any strain or 
violence offered to the sense of words1 

be another sense put upon these1 and all
 other scriptures1 in which we have the 
like mode of speaking1 whereby they may 
be explained1 agreeably to the analogy  
of faith2 therefore let us consider1    
#a4 ,that all such scriptures are to be 
understood as importing the necessary   
connexion of things1 so that one shall  
not be brought about without the other2 
accordingly1 repentance1 faith1 and all 
other graces1 are herein no otherwise   
considered1 than as inseparably         
connected with salvation2 which depends 
upon one of those propositions1 which   
was before laid down1 viz4 that ,god    
having chosen to the end has also chosen
 to the means4 ,we are far from denying 
that faith and repentance are necessary 
to salvation1 as ,god never gives one   
without the other1 and consequently they
 are inseparably connected in his       
eternal purpose relating thereunto4 ,if 
nothing else were intended by a         
conditional purpose than this1 we would 
not offer any thing against it2 but     

certainly this would be to use words    
without their known or proper ideas2 and
 the word condition1 as applicable to   
other things1 is never to be understood 
in this sense4 ,there is a necessary    
connection between ,god's creating the  
world1 and his upholding it1 or between 
his creating an intelligent creature1   
and his giving laws to him2 but none    
ever supposed one to be properly a      
condition of the other3 so a king's     
determining to pardon a malefactor1 is  
inseparably connected with his pardoning
 him1 and his pardon given forth1 with  
his having a right to his forfeited     
life2 but it is not proper to say1 one  
is a condition of the other2 so a       
person's seeing is inseparably connected
 with his opening his eyes2 and         
speaking1 with the motion of his lips2  
but we do not say1 when he determines to
 do both of them1 that one is a         
condition of the other4 ,a condition1   
properly speaking is that which is not  
only connected with the privilege that  

follows upon the performance thereof1   
but it must be performed by a subject   
acting independently on him who made the
 conditional overture1 or promise4  ,if 
it be said1 that a duty1 which we are   
enabled to perform by ,god1 who promised
 the blessing connected with it1 is     
properly a condition1 we will not       
contend about the propriety1 or         
impropriety1 of the word2 but inasmuch  
as it is taken by many1 when applied to 
divine things1 in the same sense as in  
matters of a lower nature1 and so used  
to signify the dependence of the        
blessings promised1 or the efficacy of  
the divine purpose1 relating thereunto1 
on our performance of the condition1    
which is supposed to be in our own      
power1 whereby we come to have a right  
and title to eternal life2 it is this   
that we principally militate against1   
when we assert the absoluteness of      
,god's purpose4  #b4 ,whatever ideas    
there may be contained in those         
scriptures1 which are brought to support

 the doctrine we are opposing1 that     
contain in them the nature of a         
condition1 nothing more is intended     
thereby1 but that what is connected with
 salvation is a condition of our claim  
to it1 or expectation of it3 ,in this   
sense1 we will not deny faith and       
repentance to be conditions of          
salvation1 inasmuch as it would be an   
unwarrantable instance of presumption1  
for impenitent and unbelieving sinners1 
to pretend that they have a right to it1
 or to expect the end without the means1
 since these are inseparably connected  
in ,god's purpose1 as well as in all his
 dispensations of grace4 ,this being    
laid down1 as a general rule for our    
understanding all those scriptures1     
which are usually brought to prove that 
,god's purposes are sometimes           
conditional1 we shall farther illustrate
 it1 by applying it to three or four    
other scriptures1 that are often brought
 in defence thereof1 which we shall     
endeavour to explain1 consistently with 

the doctrine we are maintaining4  ,one  
is taken from ,gen4 xix4 #bb4 where the 
angel bade ,lot escape to ,zoar1 telling
 him1 that he could not do any thing    
till he came thither4 ,if we suppose    
this to have been a created angel1 as   
most divines do1 yet he must be         
considered as fulfilling the purpose of 
,god1 or acting pursuant to his         
commission2 and therefore it is all one1
 to our present argument1 as though ,god
 had told ,lot1 that he could do nothing
 till he was gone from that place4 ,it  
is plain1 that he had given him to      
understand1 that he should be preserved 
from the flames of ,sodom1 and that1 in 
order thereunto1 he must flee for his   
life2 and adds1 that he could do        
nothing1 that is1 he could not destroy  
,sodom1 consistently with the divine    
purpose to save him1 till he was escaped
 out of the place2 for ,god did not     
design to preserve him alive 7as he did 
the three ,hebrew captives1 in ,daniel7 
in the fire1 but by his escaping from   

it2 one was as much fore-ordained as the
 other1 or was designed as a means      
conducive to it2 and therefore the      
meaning of the text is1 not that ,god's 
purpose1 relating to ,sodom's           
destruction1 was founded on ,lot's      
escape1 as an uncertain and dubious     
condition1 depending on his own will1   
abstracted from the divine determination
 relating to it2 but he designed that   
those two things should be connected    
together1 and that one should be        
antecedent to the other2 and both of    
them1 as well as their respective       
connection1 were the object of ,god's   
absolute and peremptory determination4  
,there is another scripture1 sometimes  
brought to the same purpose1 in ,gen4   
xxxii4 #bf4 where the angel says to     
,jacob1 ,let me go1 for the day         
breaketh2 and ,jacob replies1 ,i will   
not let thee go1 except thou bless me1  
which does not infer1 that ,god's       
determinations were dependent on        
,jacob's endeavour to detain him1 or his

 willingness to let him depart2 but we  
must consider ,jacob as an humble1 yet  
importunate suppliant1 as it is said    
elsewhere1 ,weeping and making          
supplication1 ,hos4 xii4 #d4 ,let me go1
 says ,god1 appearing in the form of an 
angel1 and speaking after the manner of 
men1 that he might give occasion to     
,jacob to express a more ardent desire  
of his presence and blessing1 as well as
 to signify how unworthy he was of it2  
not as though he was undetermined       
before-hand what to do1 but since the   
grace which ,jacob exercised1 as well as
 the blessing which he received1 was    
,god's gift1 and both were connected in 
the execution of his purpose1 we must   
conclude that the purpose itself was    
free1 sovereign1 and unconditional4     
,again1 there is another scripture1 in  
which ,god condescends to use a mode of 
speaking1 not much unlike to the other1 
in which he says to ,moses1 speaking    
concerning ,israel1 in ,exod4 xxxii4    
#aj4 ,this is a stiff-necked people2 now

 therefore let me alone1 that my wrath  
may wax hot against them1 and that ,i   
may consume them2 we are not to suppose 
that the whole event was to turn upon   
,moses's prayer1 as though ,god's       
purposing to save his people were       
dependent on it2 or that that grace1    
which inclined him to be importunate    
with ,god1 did not take its rise from   
him4 ,moses1 indeed1 when first he began
 to plead with ,god1 knew not whether   
his prayer would be prevalent or no2    
however1 he addresses himself1 with an  
uncommon degree of importunity1 for     
sparing mercy2 and1 when ,god says1 ,let
 me alone1 it signifies1 that his people
 were unworthy that any one should plead
 their cause2 and1 if ,god should mark  
iniquity1 then ,moses's intercession    
would be altogether in vain1 and so he  
might as well let him alone1 in that    
respect1 as ask for his mercy4 ,he does 
not1 indeed1 at first1 tell him what he 
designed to do1 that he might aggravate 
their crime1 but afterwards he answers  

his prayer in ,israel's favour1 and     
signifies that he would work1 not for   
their sakes1 but for his own name's     
sake2 so that he takes occasion1 on the 
one hand1 to set forth the people's     
desert of punishment2 and1 on the other1
 the freeness of his own grace4  ,there 
is but one scripture more that ,i shall 
mention1 among many that might have been
 brought1 and that is what is said      
concerning our ,saviour1 in ,matt4 xiii4
 #eh4 that he could not do many mighty  
works there1 at that time1 in his own   
country1 because of their unbelief8     
where he speaks either of their not     
having a faith of miracles that was     
sometimes required1 in those for whom   
they were wrought3 or else of the       
unaccountable stupidity of that people1 
who were not convinced1 by many others  
that he had wrought before them2        
therefore he resolves to put a stop to  
his hand1 and not1 for the present1 to  
work so many miracles amongst them1 as  
otherways might have been expected3 ,if 

we suppose that their want of faith     
prevented his working them1 this is not 
to be considered as an unforeseen event4
 ,and as he had determined not to confer
 this privilege upon them1 or to        
continue to work miracles amongst them1 
if those1 which he had already wrought1 
were disregarded and despised by their  
unbelief1 we must conclude that he had a
 perfect knowledge of this before-hand1 
and that his determinations were not    
dependent on uncertain conditions1      
though he had resolved to act in such a 
way1 as was most for his own glory2 and 
that there should be an inseparable     
connexion between that faith1 which was 
their duty1 and his continuing to exert 
divine power1 as an ordinance adapted to
 excite it4  #e4 ,god's purpose         
concerning election is unchangeable2    
this is the result of his being         
infinitely perfect4 ,mutability is an   
imperfection that belongs only to       
creatures3 ,as it would be an instance  
of imperfection1 if there were the least

 change in ,god's understanding1 so as  
to know more or less than he did from   
all eternity2 the same must be said with
 respect to his will1 which cannot admit
 of any new determinations4 ,there are1 
indeed1 many changes in the external    
dispensations of his providence1 which  
are the result of his will1 as well as  
the effects of his power2 yet there is  
not the least appearance of mutability  
in his purpose4 ,we have before         
considered1 in speaking concerning the  
immutability of the divine nature#bjg1  
that whatever may be a reason obliging  
men to alter their purposes1 it cannot1 
in the least1 take place1 so that ,god  
hereby should be obliged to alter his3  
,no unforeseen occurrence can render it 
expedient for him to change his mind1   
nor can any superior power oblige him to
 do it2 nor can any defect of power1 to 
bring about what he had designed1 induce
 him to alter his purpose4  ,if it be   
objected to this1 that the obstinacy of 
man's will may do it2 that is to suppose

 his will exempted from the governing   
influence of divine providence1 and the 
contrary force1 that offers resistance1 
superior to it1 which cannot be         
supposed1 without detracting from the   
glory of the divine perfections4 ,it    
would be a very unworthy thought for any
 one to conclude that ,god is one day of
 one mind1 and another day forced to be 
of the contrary2 how far this is a      
necessary consequence from that scheme  
of doctrine that we are opposing1 let   
any one judge4 ,it will be very hard to 
clear it of this entanglement1 which    
they are obliged to do1 or else all the 
absurdities that they fasten on the     
doctrine of election1 which are far from
 being unanswerable1 will not be        
sufficient to justify their prejudices  
against it4  ,they who are on the other 
side of the question1 are sensible that 
they have one difficulty to conflict    
with1 namely1 the inconsistency of      
,god's infallible knowledge of future   
events1 with a mutability of will       

relating thereunto2 or how the          
independency of the divine              
fore-knowledge is consistent with the   
dependence and mutability of his will4  
,to fence against this1 some have       
ventured to deny the divine prescience2 
but that is to split against one rock1  
whilst endeavouring to avoid another4   
,therefore others distinguish concerning
 the objects of the divine prescience1  
and consider them1 either as they are   
necessary or contingent1 and accordingly
 suppose that ,god has a certain        
foreknowledge of the former2 but his    
knowledge of the latter1 7from the      
nature of the things known7 is          
uncertain1 and consequently the         
determination of his will is not        
unalterable4 ,but this is to set bounds 
to the fore-knowledge of ,god1 with     
respect to its object1 and1 indeed1 to  
exclude the free actions of the creature
 from being the objects thereof1 which  
is a limiting and lessening of this     
perfection1 and is directly contrary to 

the idea of omniscience2 and therefore  
we must insist on their proving this to 
be consistent with the infinite         
perfection of ,god1 which they will find
 it very difficult to do2 and to        
suppose1 on the other hand1 that any    
thing is the object of ,god's certain   
fore-knowledge1 about which his will is 
no way conversant1 or only so1 in such a
 way1 as that it is subject to change1  
according to the mutability of things1  
is altogether as indefensible1 and      
equally subversive of the independency1 
wisdom1 and sovereignty thereof4        
,object4 ,the most material objection   
against this doctrine1 is take from some
 scriptures1 which seem to represent    
,god as repenting1 and therein1 as it is
 supposed1 changing his purpose4 ,thus  
he is sometimes said to repent1 that he 
had bestowed some blessings upon men1   
when he perceives how they have been    
abused by them1 and accordingly he      
purposes to bring evil on them2 as we   
read1 in ,gen4 vi4 #f1 #g4 ,it repented 

the ,lord that he had made man1 and it  
grieved him at his heart2 and the ,lord 
said1 ,i will destroy man1 whom ,i have 
created2 and1 at other times he is said 
to repent of the evil that he designed  
to bring upon them1 and alter his       
purpose in their favour2 thus it is     
said1 in ,deut4 xxxii4 #cf4 ,the ,lord  
shall judge his people1 and repent      
himself for his servants2 when he seeth 
that their power is gone1 and there is  
none shut up1 or left2 and in ,joel ii4 
#ac4 ,rend your hearts1 and not your    
garments1 and turn unto the ,lord your  
,god2 for he is gracious and merciful1  
slow to anger1 and of great kindness1   
and repenteth him of the evil2 and in   
,psal4 xc4 #ac1 ,return1 ,o ,lord1 how  
long8 and let it repent thee concerning 
thy servants2 and in ,jer4 xviii4 #h4   
,if that nation1 against whom ,i have   
pronounced1 turn from their evil1 ,i    
will repent of the evil that ,i have    
thought to do unto them4 ,and we have a 
very remarkable instance of this1 in    

,god's sparing ,nineveh1 on their       
repentance1 after he had threatened1 by 
the prophet ,jonah1 that within forty   
days they should be destroyed4  ,answ4  
,it is true1 there are many scriptures1 
in which repentance is ascribed to ,god1
 which1 if we consider nothing else but 
the grammatical sense of the words1 seem
 to favour the objection2 but we are    
bound to conclude1 that such a sense of 
repentance1 as that on which it is      
founded1 is inconsistent with the divine
 perfections1 and therefore those       
scriptures1 referred to therein1 cannot 
imply a change in ,god's purpose4 ,and1 
indeed1 there are other scriptures1     
which assert what is directly contrary  
thereunto2 as when it is said1 in ,numb1
 xxiii4 #ai4 ,god is not a man1 that he 
should lye1 neither the son of man1 that
 he should repent2 hath he said1 and    
shall he not do it8 or hath he spoken1  
and shall he not make it good8 ,and     
elsewhere1 in #a ,sam4 xv4 #bi4 it is   
said1 ,the strength of ,israel will not 

lye1 nor repent2 for he is not a man    
that he should repent4  ,but we must    
have recourse to some methods to        
reconcile this seeming contradiction1   
and so consider the sense thereof1 in   
different respects1 as applicable to    
them both2 in some scriptures1 ,god is  
said to repent2 in others1 it is said   
that he cannot repent4 ,that these may  
not appear inconsistent with one        
another1 nor either of them infer any   
imperfection in ,god1 let it be         
considered1 that ,god is sometimes      
represented1 in scripture1 in           
condescension to our common mode of     
speaking1 as though he had human        
passions1 as in others1 he is described1
 as though he had a body1 or bodily     
parts3 ,but such expressions are always 
to be taken in a metaphorical sense1    
without the least supposition1 that he  
is subject to any such imperfections2   
and particularly we must not conclude1  
that repentance is ever ascribed to ,god
 in the same sense as it is to men1 viz4

 as implying a change in his purpose1   
occasioned by an unforeseen occurrence1 
which is the sense contained in the     
objection4 ,such a repentance1 as this1 
is a passion peculiarly belonging to the
 creature1 and therefore in this sense  
we must understand those words2 ,god is 
not a man1 that he should lye1 nor the  
son of man1 that he should repent2      
accordingly1 he is said to repent1 not  
by changing his purpose1 but by changing
 his work4 ,thus when it is said1 that  
he repented that he had made man1       
nothing is meant by it1 but that he     
determined to destroy him1 as he did    
afterwards by the flood4 ,and this was  
no new determination arising from any   
thing in the creature1 which ,god did   
not foresee2 he knew before-hand that   
all flesh would corrupt their way1 and  
therefore his determination to punish   
them for it1 was not a new resolve of   
the divine will1 after the sin was      
committed2 but ,god determined things in
 their respective order1 first to permit

 sin1 and then knowing what would be the
 consequence thereof1 namely1 that they 
would rebel against him1 he determined  
to punish it1 or to destroy the old     
world1 which is1 in effect1 the same1 as
 though he had repented that he made it4
 ,he cannot be said to repent as we do1 
by wishing that he had not done that    
which he is said to repent of1 but by   
denying us the advantage1 which we might
 have otherwise expected from it4 ,in   
this sense we are to understand all     
those scriptures that speak of ,god1 as 
repenting of the good that he had       
bestowed on man4  ,and1 on the other    
hand1 when he is said to repent of the  
evil which he threatened to bring on    
men1 as in the case of ,nineveh1 this   
does not argue any change in his        
purpose2 for he determined that ,nineveh
 should be destroyed1 provided they did 
not repent1 and it was not uncertain to 
him whether they would repent or no2    
for1 at the same time1 he determined to 
give them repentance1 as appears by the 

event1 and so not to inflict the        
judgment threatened2 and therefore when 
,jonah was sent to make a public        
proclamation to the people1 that in     
forty days they should be destroyed1 it 
is plain that they understood the       
threatening in this sense1 that they had
 no ground to expect any thing else1    
except they repented1 which accordingly 
they did1 and so were spared1 without   
having any reason to conclude that ,god 
changed his purpose relating thereunto4 
,if it be objected hereunto1 that this  
is nothing less than to establish a     
conditional purpose in ,god1 and so     
overthrows the argument that we are     
maintaining2 the reply that may be made 
to it1 is1 that we distinguish between a
 conditional purpose1 in ,god's secret  
will1 and a conditional proposition1    
which was to be the subject of the      
prophet's ministry3 ,the prophet1 it is 
plain1 was not told1 when he received   
his commission to go to ,nineveh1 that  
,god would give them repentance1 but    

only1 that1 without repentance1 they    
should be destroyed2 whereas ,god1 as   
the event makes it appear1 determined   
that they should repent1 and therefore  
that they should not be destroyed2 and1 
consequently1 we must not suppose1 that1
 when ,god sent him1 he was             
undetermined1 in his own purpose1       
whether to destroy them or not1 or that 
there was any thing conditional in the  
divine mind1 that rendered the event    
uncertain to ,god1 though there was a   
condition contained in the              
subject-matter of the prophet's message1
 which the ,ninevites very well         
understood1 namely1 that they had no    
ground to expect deliverance without    
repentance1 and therefore they repented1
 in hope of obtaining mercy1 which they 
supposed would be connected with their  
repentance2 and it is evident1 that     
,jonah himself suspected that this might
 be the event1 though ,god had not told 
him that it would be so1 and therefore  
says1 in chap4 iv4 #b4 ,for ,i knew that

 thou art a gracious ,god1 and merciful1
 slow to anger1 and of great kindness1  
and repentest thee of the evil4  #f4    
,the purpose of ,god1 in choosing men to
 eternal life1 renders their salvation  
necessary2 so that nothing shall defeat1
 or disannul it4 ,what ,god says        
concerning ,israel's deliverance from   
the ,babylonish captivity1 may be       
applied to all his other determinations1
 and particularly to what relates to the
 eternal salvation of his people2 ,my   
counsel shall stand1 and ,i will do all 
my pleasure2 yea1 ,i have spoken it1 ,i 
will also bring it to pass2 ,i have     
purposed it1 ,i will also do it1 ,isa4  
xlvi4 #aj1 #aa4 ,the purposes of ,god1  
indeed1 are distinguished from his      
bringing them to pass2 it is one thing  
to design to bring his people to glory1 
and another thing to bring them to it4  
,it is not to be supposed that the      
decree of ,god has1 in itself1 a proper 
efficiency to produce the thing         
decreed3#bjh for then there would be no 

difference between an eternal decree1   
and an eternal production of things2    
whereas the apostle plainly             
distinguishes between man's being       
predestinated to glory1 and brought to  
it1 when he says1 ,those whom he        
predestinated1 them he glorified1 ,rom4 
viii4 #cj4  ,the purpose of ,god1 is1   
indeed1 the internal moving cause1 or   
the first ground and reason of the      
salvation of those who are elected to   
it2 but his power is the more immediate 
cause of it1 so that his purpose is the 
reason of his exerting this power1 and  
both concurring to the salvation of men1
 render it certain and necessary4       
,therefore some distinguish1 for the    
explaining of this1 between the         
determining and powerful will of ,god2  
the latter of which1 is sometimes called
 the word of his power1 and renders the 
former effectual2 this it must certainly
 do1 otherwise ,god would be said to    
will the existence of things1 that shall
 never have a being4 ,in this respect1  

the purpose of ,god renders things      
necessary1 which are in themselves      
contingent1 or arbitrary1 and would     
otherwise never come to pass4#bji  ,this
 is a great encouragement to those who  
are enabled to make their calling and   
election sure2 for their perseverance in
 grace1 notwithstanding all the         
opposition that they meet with1 is the  
necessary consequence of their election 
to eternal life4 ,thus1 as we before    
distinguished predestination into       
election and reprobation1 we have       
considered the former of these1 and we  
proceed1  ,secondly1 ,to speak          
concerning the doctrine of              
reprobation2#baj which is become        
obnoxious to those on the other side of 
the question1 almost to a proverb2 so   
that if any doctrine is considered as   
shocking1 and to be answered no         
otherwise than by testifying their      
abhorrence of it1 it is compared to this
 of reprobation2 and1 indeed1 if it were
 not a consequence from the doctrine of 

election to eternal life1 that doctrine 
would not be so much opposed by them4   
,how far some unguarded expressions1 or 
exceptionable methods of explication1   
may have given occasion for this        
prejudice1 it is not to our present     
purpose to enquire2 but we shall take   
occasion1 from thence1 to explain it in 
such a way1 as that a fair and          
unprejudiced disputant will not see just
 reason to except against it1 at least  
to reproach it1 as though it were a     
doctrine subversive of the divine glory1
 and to be defended by none but those   
who seem to have a design to raise      
prejudices1 in the minds of men1 against
 religion in general4  ,and here we     
shall take occasion to consider the     
meaning of the word1 as it is contained 
in1 or deduced from scripture1 where the
 same word that is used to signify the  
execution of this decree1 may be applied
 to express the decree itself4 ,thus we 
read of ,god's rejecting1 or            
disregarding men1 as a punishment of    

their rebellion against him3 and these  
are compared by the prophet ,jeremiah1  
chap4 vi4 #cj4 ,to reprobate silver1    
because the ,lord hath rejected them2   
or1 as it is in the margin1 ,the refuse 
of silver2 and1 in the ,new ,testament1 
the same word#bab is sometimes          
translated reprobates2 at other times1  
disapproved or rejected1 #a ,cor4 iv4   
#bg4 #b ,cor4 xiii4 #e4 ,heb4 vi4 #h4   
and when this disapprobation1 or        
rejection1 respects not only their      
actions1 as contrary to the holy nature 
of ,god1 but their persons1 as punished 
for their iniquities2 and when this     
punishment is considered as what        
respects their eternal state1 as the    
objects of vindictive justice1 the      
purpose of ,god1 relating hereunto1 is  
what we call reprobation4  ,but1 that we
 may more particularly consider the     
sense of the word1 it seems1 in         
scripture1 to contain in it two ideas4  
#a4 ,god's determining to leave a part  
of the world in that state of sin and   

misery1 which he from all eternity1     
fore-knew that they would bring         
themselves into1 or his decreeing not to
 save them2 and1 since all will allow   
that a part of mankind shall not be     
saved1 it cannot reasonably be denied   
that this was determined by him         
before-hand2 and this is what divines   
generally call preterition4  #b4 ,there 
is another idea in the word reprobation1
 which is also contained in scripture1  
or deducible from it1 and that respects 
the purpose of ,god to punish those for 
their iniquities1 whom he will not save4
 ,not to be saved1 is the same as to be 
punished with everlasting destruction1  
from the presence of the ,lord1 and the 
glory of his power4 ,and ,god's purpose1
 relating hereunto1 is expressed in     
scripture by his appointing them to     
wrath1 #a ,thess4 v4 #i4 for those sins 
which he fore-saw they would commit4    
,this is what some call pre-damnation1  
as taken from that expression of the    
apostle1 ,jude1 ver4 #d1 #ac4 concerning

 some who had crept into the church     
unawares1 whom he describes as ungodly  
men1 that is1 notoriously so1 who turned
 the grace of ,god into lasciviousness1 
for whom is reserved the blackness of   
darkness forever2 of these he says1 that
 they were before of old1 ordained to   
this condemnation1 where ,god is        
represented as punishing sinners1 in    
proportion to their crimes2 and this is 
considered as the result of that eternal
 purpose1 which was founded on his      
fore-sight of their contracting that    
guilt whereby they would render         
themselves liable to it4  ,if this      
doctrine be thus explained1 it will     
appear agreeable1 not only to scripture1
 but to the divine perfections1 and     
therefore too great a truth to be       
treated with that abhorrence1 with which
 it generally is1 without explaining1   
distinguishing or fairly entering into  
the merits of the cause4 ,it is a very  
easy matter to render any doctrine      
odious1 by misrepresentation1 as they on

 the other side of the question1 have   
done this of reprobation1 which we shall
 briefly consider1 and therein take     
leave to explain it in a different      
manner1 whereby it will appear not only 
worthy to be defended1 as redounding to 
the glory of ,god1 but a plain and      
evident truth1 founded on scripture4    
,if this doctrine were to be considered 
no otherwise1 than as it is often       
represented by them1 we should dislike  
it1 as much as they do2 for when they   
pretend that we herein suppose ,god to  
be severe and cruel to his creatures1   
delighting himself in1 and triumphing   
over them1 in their misery3 and that he 
decreed1 from all eternity1 to damn the 
greatest part of mankind1 without any   
consideration of their sin1 as the      
result of his arbitrary will1 or        
dominion1 as he has a right to dispose  
of his creatures1 according to his      
pleasure1 and that as a means to attain 
this end1 as though it were in itself   
desirable1 he leaves them to themselves1

 blinds their minds1 and hardens their  
hearts1 and offers these occasions of1  
and inducements to sin1 which are as    
stumbling-blocks in their way1 and that 
he determined that his providence should
 be so conversant about the will of man1
 as that it should be under a natural   
necessity1 or kind of compulsion1 to    
what is evil1 without considering the   
corruption and depravity of nature1 as a
 vicious habit1 which they had          
contracted2 and that all this is done in
 pursuance of this decree of            
reprobation4  ,it is very probable that 
many who give this account of this      
doctrine1 have no other foundation for  
it1 but the popular outcry of those who 
are not apprised of the methods that are
 generally taken to explain and defend  
it2 or else they suppose that it cannot 
be defended1 without being exposed to   
those exceptions which are contained in 
the account they give of it4 ,but we    
shall take no farther notice of this1   
but proceed to explain and defend it    

another way4 ,and1  #a4 ,as to the      
former branch thereof1 namely1          
preterition1 or ,god's passing by1 or   
rejecting those whom he hath not chosen 
to salvation1 let it be premised2 that  
,god1 in his eternal purpose1 considered
 all mankind as fallen1 which must be   
supposed to have been foreknown by him1 
otherwise he would not be said to be    
omniscient1 and the result of his       
fore-knowledge is his determining to    
leave a part of them in their fallen    
state1 in which he might have left the  
whole world to perish without being     
liable to the least charge of injustice4
 ,this is what we call his rejecting    
them1 and accordingly it is opposed to  
his having chosen the rest to eternal   
life4 ,these terms of opposition are    
plainly contained in scripture3 thus it 
is said1 ,the election hath obtained it1
 and the rest were blinded1 ,rom4 xi4   
#g4 not by ,god's leading them into     
mistakes1 or giving them false ideas of 
things1 but they were left to the       

blindness of their minds1 which was the 
result of their apostasy from ,god2 and 
elsewhere our ,saviour says1 ,thou hast 
hid these things from the wise and      
prudent1 and hast revealed them unto    
babes1 ,matt4 xi4 #be4 ,thou hast hid1  
that is1 not revealed them2 and that    
either objectively1 as respecting those 
who are destitute of the light of the   
gospel2 or subjectively1 as he did not  
effectually1 or savingly enlighten them 
with the light of life1 by revealing    
,christ in them1 as the apostle calls   
it1 ,gal4 i4 #af4 and therefore it is as
 though he had said1 thou hast          
determined not to give to some the means
 of grace1 nor to others the saving     
efficacy thereof1 such as they are      
partakers of1 who are chosen to         
salvation4 ,accordingly1 he is said to  
have suffered all nations to walk in    
their own ways1 ,acts xiv4 #af4 that is1
 not to restrain or prevent the breaking
 forth of corruption1 as he might have  
done2 and elsewhere1 to have winked at1 

chap4 xvii4 #cj4 that is1 as it may be  
rendered1 over-looked the greatest part 
of the world1 which is no other than his
 rejecting or passing them by2 and in   
this sense we are to understand that    
difficult mode of speaking used by the  
apostle1 ,whom he will he hardeneth1    
,rom4 ix4 #ah4 by which nothing else is 
intended but his purposing to leave many
 to the hardness of their own hearts4   
,god forbid that any one should think   
that there is a positive act contained  
in those words1 as though ,god infused  
hardness into the hearts of any2 for the
 meaning is only this1 that he          
determined to deny heart-softening grace
 to that part of mankind1 whom he had   
not fore-ordained to eternal life4 ,that
 there was such a purpose relating      
hereunto1 is evident1 because whatever  
,god does in the methods of his         
providence1 is the result of an eternal 
purpose4 ,this no one1 who observes the 
dispensations of ,god's providence1 and 
allows as every one must do1 that all   

that he does was pre-concerted by him1  
can justly deny4  ,but that which must  
be farther enquired into1 as to this    
matter1 is1 whether ,god's determining  
to pass by a part of mankind1 be an act 
of sovereignty or of justice4 ,and this 
may also be judged of1 by the external  
dispensation of his providence2 so far  
as there is sovereignty1 or justice1    
visible in them1 we are to conclude that
 this purpose1 relating thereunto1 was  
the result of one or other of these     
perfections4 ,in some respects it is an 
act of sovereignty3 ,as1 for instance1  
that ,god should give one nation the    
gospel1 or the means of grace1 and deny 
it to another2 it is not because he sees
 any thing in one part of the world1    
that obliges him thereunto1 more than in
 the other2 but the reason is1 as was   
observed in the scripture but now       
mentioned1 because it seemed good in his
 sight1 ,matt4 xi4 #bf4 ,moreover1 his  
giving special grace1 whereby some are  
effectually called and sanctified2 and  

denying it to others1 is an act of      
sovereign pleasure4  ,but on the other  
hand1 ,god is said sometimes1 in the    
external dispensations of his           
providence1 to leave men to themselves1 
to give them up to their own hearts     
lust1 in a judicial way1 which supposes 
not only the commission of sin1 but     
persons being obstinate and resolutely  
determined to continue in it4 ,thus ,god
 saith concerning his people2 ,israel   
would none of me2 so ,i gave them up to 
their own hearts' lusts1 and they walked
 in their own counsels1 ,psal4 lxxxi4   
#aa1 #ab4 and the ,psalmist says        
elsewhere1 ,add iniquity to their       
iniquity1 ,psal4 lxix4 #bg4 which words 
,i would rather consider as a prediction
 than a prayer1 or as an expression of  
the church's acquiescence in ,god's     
righteous judgments1 which they had     
ground to conclude1 that he would       
inflict on an impenitent1 incorrigible  
people2 these are expressed1 by adding  
iniquity to iniquity1 not as though he  

designed to infuse any habit of sin into
 them1 for that is inconsistent with the
 holiness of his nature2 but that he    
would reject1 and leave them to         
themselves1 in a judicial way1 as a     
punishment inflicted on them for their  
iniquities1 the consequence whereof     
would be their own adding iniquity to   
iniquity4 ,thus1 in different respects1 
the purpose of ,god1 in passing by a    
part of mankind1 may be considered1     
either as the result of his sovereign   
pleasure1 or as an act of justice4  #b4 
,we shall now proceed to consider the   
other branch of reprobation1 which some 
call pre-damnation1 or 7to use the      
scripture-expression before referred to7
 ,god's fore-ordaining those who shall  
not be saved1 to that condemnation1     
which they shall fall under1 as exposing
 themselves to it by their own          
wickedness2 which is nothing else but   
his determining1 from all eternity1 to  
punish those1 as a judge1 who should1 by
 their own crimes1 deserve it1 and      

thereby to vindicate the holiness of his
 nature and law4 ,here let it be        
observed1 that when this doctrine is    
reproached or misrepresented1 it is     
described as an act of divine           
sovereignty1 but that we are as ready to
 deny and oppose as they are1 since1    
according to the description we have    
given of it1 it can be no other than an 
act of justice2 for1 if to condemn1 or  
punish1 be an act of justice1 then the  
decree1 relating hereunto1 must be      
equally so1 for one is to be judged of  
by the other4 ,if ,god cannot punish    
creatures as such1 but as criminals and 
rebels1 then he must be supposed to have
 considered them as such1 when1 in his  
eternal purpose1 he determined to punish
 them4 ,no man can style this an act of 
cruelty1 or severity in ,god1 but those 
who reckon the punishing of sin to be   
so1 and are disposed to charge the      
,judge of all with not doing right1 or  
offering an injury to his creatures1    
when he pours forth the vials of his    

wrath on them1 who1 by their bold and   
wilful crimes1 render themselves        
obnoxious thereunto4  ,here let it be   
considered1 that ,god1 in his actual    
providence1 is not the author of sin1   
though he suffer it to be committed in  
the world4 ,and1 since his permitting1  
or not hindering it1 cannot be said to  
be the cause of its being committed1    
there being no cause thereof1 but the   
will of man2 it follows1 from hence1    
that ,god's punishing sin1 is not to be 
resolved into his permission of it1 as  
the cause thereof1 but into the         
rebellion of man's will1 as refusing to 
be subject to the divine law2 and thus  
,god considered men1 when1 in his       
eternal purpose1 he determined to       
condemn those1 whose desert of this     
punishment was foreseen1 by him1 from   
all eternity4 ,and is this a doctrine to
 be so much decried8  ,i cannot but     
wonder the learned author1 whom ,i have 
before referred to1 as opposing this    
doctrine1#bac should so far give into   

the common and popular way of           
misrepresenting it1 unless he designed1 
by this way of opposing it to render it 
detested2 when he speaks concerning     
them1 mentioned in ,jude1 ver4 #d4 who  
were before1 of old1 ordained to this   
condemnation1 he says1 8,this cannot be 
meant of any divine ordination1 or      
appointment of them1 to eternal         
condemnation1 because it cannot be      
thought1 without horror1 that ,god doth 
thus ordain men to perdition1 before    
they had a being40 ,if he had expressed 
his horror and resentment against ,god's
 ordaining men to perdition1 as         
creatures1 it had been just2 but to     
express this detestation against ,god's 
ordaining men to perdition1 who are     
described as these are1 is to expose    
this doctrine without reason2 and it is 
still more strange that he should cast  
this censure upon it1 when he owns in   
his farther explication of this text1   
8,that ,god ordaineth none to punishment
 but sinners1 and ungodly men1 as these 

persons here are styled1 and that these 
were men of whom it was before written1 
or prophesied1 that they should be      
condemned for their wickedness20 since  
there is not much difference in the     
method of reasoning1 between saying that
 the condemnation of sinners1 for their 
wickedness1 was before written1 or      
prophesied1 and saying1 that ,god       
fore-ordained them to eternal           
punishment4  ,i am sensible that many   
are led into this mistake1 by supposing 
that we give a very injurious and       
perverse sense of that text1 in which   
the doctrine of reprobation is          
contained1 which1 it may be1 has        
occasioned this reproach to be cast upon
 it4 ,for when the apostle says1 in     
,rom4 ix4 #bb4 ,what if ,god willing to 
shew his wrath1 and to make his power   
known1 endured with much long-suffering1
 the vessels of wrath fitted to         
destruction1 some suppose that we       
understand this text1 as though these   
vessels of wrath were1 from all         

eternity1 prepared for destruction by   
,god1 and that his eternal purpose1 is  
his fitting them for it1 as intending to
 bring about that end1 viz4 his         
destroying them4 ,but if any have       
expressed themselves in such a way1 as  
is equivalent thereunto1 let them be    
accountable for their own sense of the  
text2 though this ,i may say1 that some1
 even of them1 who give into the        
,supralapsarian way of explaining the   
doctrine of predestination1 have not    
understood it in this sense2#bad and the
 sense which ,i would give of it is     
this1 that those1 whom the apostle      
speaks of as vessels of wrath1 are      
persons whom ,god had rejected1 and from
 the foresight of the sins which they   
would commit1 he had appointed them to  
wrath1 which is an expression the       
apostle uses elsewhere1 #a ,thess4 v4   
#i4 but they were appointed to wrath1   
not as creatures1 but as sinners2 they  
are described as fitted to destruction1 
not by ,god's act1 but their own1 and   

that is the reason of their being       
fore-ordained to it4#bae  ,there is     
another scripture1 which is generally   
cited by those who treat on this        
subject1 that we are to use the utmost  
caution in explaining1 lest we give just
 occasion1 to those who oppose it1 to   
express their abhorrence of it1 as      
inconsistent with the divine            
perfections1 namely1 what the apostle   
says concerning those that were not     
elected1 whom he calls the rest of the  
,jewish nation1 in ,rom4 xi4 #g-aj4 that
 they were blinded1 and that ,god had   
given them the spirit of slumber1 eyes  
that they should not see1 and ears that 
they should not hear2 and he speaks of  
their table being made a snare1 and a   
trap and a stumbling-block1 and a       
recompense to them2 let their eyes be   
darkened1 that they may not see1 and bow
 down their back always4 ,the sense     
which they1 who misrepresent this       
doctrine1 suppose that we put upon this 
scripture1 is1 that they1 who are       

reprobated1 have1 as a consequence      
thereof1 occasions of sin laid in their 
way1 some things designed to blind their
 minds1 cast a mist before their eyes1  
and so lead them out of the way1 and    
other things1 that prove a snare to     
them1 a trap1 and occasion of sin1 and  
all this with a design to bring about   
that damnation which ,god had ordained  
for them1 in this decree of reprobation2
 which sense of this scripture never    
was1 nor could be given1 by any one1 who
 has a due regard to the divine         
perfections4  ,and shall this doctrine  
be judged of hereby1 when it is very    
hard to find any1 how unguarded soever  
they are in their modes of speaking1    
that understand this text as they       
represent it8 ,we shall therefore       
consider what is probably the meaning of
 this scripture1 with which the doctrine
 we have laid down is very consistent4  
,it is not to be understood as though   
,god were the author of these sins1     
which they are said to be charged with2 

but this blindness and stupidity1 which 
is called1 ,a spirit of slumber as it is
 connected with the idea of their being 
rejected of ,god1 and his determining   
not to give them the contrary graces1 is
 considered1 as the consequence1 not the
 effect thereof1 and that not the       
immediate1 but the remote consequence   
thereof1 in the same sense as stealing  
is the consequence of poverty1 in those 
who have a vicious inclination          
thereunto4 ,thus when a person1 who has 
contracted those habits of sin1 that    
tend to turn men aside from ,god1 is    
destitute of preventing and restraining 
grace1 the consequence thereof1 is1 that
 these corruptions will break forth with
 greater violence2 and ,god is not      
obliged to give this grace to an        
apostate1 fallen creature1 much less to 
one who has misimproved the means of    
grace1 by which a multitude of sins     
might have been prevented2 so that      
nothing is intended hereby but this1    
that they are left to themselves1 and   

permitted to stumble and fall1 and to   
commit those abominations1 which1 if    
they had not been thus judicially left1 
would have been prevented1 and as the   
consequence thereof1 they run into many 
sins1 which they might have avoided2 for
 though we suppose that it is not in a  
man's own power1 as destitute of the    
grace of ,god1 to bring himself into a  
regenerate or converted state1 7as will 
be farther considered1 in its proper    
place7 nevertheless1 we do not deny but 
that men might1 in the right use of the 
gifts of nature1 avoid many sins1 which 
they1 who are said to be thus blinded1  
and hardened1 run into1 and so increase 
their guilt and misery1 especially where
 they are not prevented by the grace of 
,god1 which he may1 without any         
impeachment of his providence1 deny to  
those whom he has not chosen to eternal 
life1 as he might1 had he pleased1 have 
denied it to the whole world1 and much  
more to those who have not improved the 
common grace1 which they received1 but  

have1 through the wickedness of their   
nature1 proceeded from one degree of sin
 unto another4  ,there is another       
scripture1 which1 some suppose we       
understand in such a sense1 as gives the
 like occasion of prejudice to many     
against this doctrine1 in #b ,thess4 ii4
 #aa1 #ab4 ,for this cause ,god shall   
send them strong delusion1 that they    
should believe a lie1 that they all     
might be damned who believed not the    
truth1 but had pleasure in              
unrighteousness2 the meaning whereof is 
this1 that ,god suffered them to be     
deluded1 who1 in the following verse1   
are represented as not receiving the    
love of the truth2 not that ,god was the
 author of these delusions1 or deceived 
them by a false representation of things
 to them1 or by exciting or inclining   
them to adhere to the suggestions of    
those who lie in wait to deceive2 but1  
since he did not design to give them    
grace under the means of grace1 or to   
enable them to receive the truth in the 

love thereof1 which he was not obliged  
to do to any1 much less to those who    
rebelled against the light that had been
 already given them2 hereupon1 through  
the blindness of their own minds1 they  
became an easy prey to those who        
endeavoured to ensnare or delude them2  
so that the decree of ,god only respects
 his denying preventing grace to those1 
who1 through the corruption of their own
 nature1 took occasion1 from thence1 to 
run greater lengths in their apostasy   
from1 and rebellion against ,god4 ,and  
as for that mode of speaking here used1 
that ,god shall send them strong        
delusions1 that only respects his will  
to permit it1 and not his design to     
delude them4  ,there is another         
scripture to the same purpose1 in ,psal4
 lxxxi4 #ab4 ,so ,i gave them up unto   
their own heart's lust1 and they walked 
in their own counsels2 the meaning of   
which is1 that ,god left them to        
themselves1 and then lust1 or the       
corrupt habits of sin1 which they had   

acquired1 conceived1 and1 as the apostle
 ,james speaks1 brought forth sin1 chap 
i4 #ae4 or greater acts of sin1 which   
exposed them to a greater degree of     
condemnation2 and all this is to be     
resolved into ,god's permissive will1 or
 purpose1 to leave man1 in his fallen   
state1 to himself1 which he might do1   
without giving occasion to any to say1  
on the one hand1 that he is the author  
of sin2 or1 on the other1 that he deals 
injuriously with the sinful creature4   
,and to this we may add our ,saviour's  
words concerning the ,jews1 in ,john    
xii4 #ci1 #dj4 ,therefore they could not
 believe1 because that ,esaias said     
again1 ,he hath blinded their eyes1 and 
hardened their heart2 that they should  
not see with their eyes1 nor understand 
with their heart1 and be converted1 and 
,i should heal them4 ,the sense which   
they1 who misrepresent this doctrine1   
suppose we put upon them1 and conclude1 
that no other is consistent with the    
argument we are maintaining1 is1 that   

the unbelief1 which the ,jews are       
charged with1 was principally1 if not   
altogether1 resolved into ,god's eternal
 purpose1 to blind their eyes1 and      
harden their hearts1 namely1 by some    
positive act1 as a cause producing this 
effect1 with this view1 that they should
 not be converted1 and saved1 that      
thereby his decree to condemn them1     
might take effect4 ,it is no wonder to  
find persons prejudiced against this    
doctrine1 when set in such a light2 but 
as this is very remote from the         
explication we have given thereof1 so   
our ,saviour's design1 in this text1 is 
to give an account why those miracles1  
which he wrought before the ,jews1 were 
ineffectual for their conviction2 the   
more immediate cause whereof was the    
blindness of their mind1 and the        
hardness of their hearts1 inasmuch as   
they had shut their eyes against the    
light1 and1 through the corruption of   
their nature1 had hardened their own    
hearts4 ,as to what ,god is said to have

 done1 in a judicial way1 agreeable to  
the mode of speaking here used1 when it 
is said1 ,he hath hardened their hearts1
 it imports nothing else but his leaving
 them to the hardness of their own      
hearts1 or denying them heart-softening 
grace1 which would have been an         
effectual remedy against it4 ,and may   
not ,god deny his grace to sinners1     
without being charged as the author of  
sin1 or the blame thereof devolved on   
him1 and not themselves8 ,and1 since    
this judicial act of providence cannot  
but be the result of an eternal purpose1
 is there any thing1 in this decree1    
that reflects on his perfections1 any   
more than there is in the execution     
thereof8  ,there is another scripture1  
in ,prov4 xvi4 #d4 ,the ,lord hath made 
all things for himself2 yea1 even the   
wicked for the day of evil2 from whence 
they infer1 that the doctrine of        
reprobation1 which they suppose to be   
founded on a perverse sense given of it1
 includes in it the divine purpose to   

make man to damn him2 for they conclude 
that we understand it in that sense2 and
 they proceed a little farther than     
this1 and pretend that we infer from it1
 that ,god made men wicked1 or that he  
made them wicked for his glory1 as if he
 had need of sinful man for that end4 ,i
 should never have thought that so vile 
a consequence could be drawn from this  
doctrine1 if the learned writer1 before 
mentioned1 had not told the world that  
we infer this from it2#baf and1 to give 
countenance to this suggestion1 he      
quotes a passage out of ,dr4 ,twiss2#bag
 his words are these3 8,that all1       
besides the elect1 ,god hath ordained to
 bring them forth into the world in     
their corrupt mass1 and to permit them  
to themselves1 to go on in their own    
ways1 and so finally to persevere in    
sin2 and1 lastly1 to damn them for their
 sin1 for the manifestation of the glory
 of his justice on them40  ,i am not    
ashamed to own my very great esteem of  
this excellently learned and pious      

writer1 who was as considerable for that
 part of learning1 which his works      
discover him to have been conversant in1
 as most in his day2 though ,i cannot   
think myself obliged1 in every respect1 
to explain this doctrine as he does2 and
 ,dr4 ,whitby knew very well1 that if   
such an inference1 as what we have been 
speaking of1 were to be deduced from the
 writings of any1 who maintain the      
doctrine of reprobation1 it must be from
 one who gives into the ,supralapsarian 
way of explaining it2 and this          
expression1 which1 it may be1 was a     
little unguarded1 seems to bid as fair  
for it as any other he could have found 
out3 ,but any one that reads it1 without
 prejudice1 and especially that compares
 it with what is connected therewith1   
would not suppose that any thing is     
intended hereby1 that gives the least   
ground to conclude that ,god made men   
wicked for the manifestation of his     
justice4 ,the most obnoxious part of    
this quotation1 is1 ,god ordained to    

bring forth into the world the          
non-elect1 in their corrupt mass1 that  
is1 that persons1 who are every day born
 into the world1 are the seed of corrupt
 and fallen man1 and so have the habits 
of sin propagated with their nature1    
which many other divines have           
endeavoured to maintain4 ,what my       
sentiments are concerning this matter1  
,i shall rather choose to insist on1    
under a following answer1 in which we   
shall be lead to speak of the doctrine  
of original sin1 and of that corruption 
of nature1 which is the consequence of  
it2 therefore1 passing this by1 there is
 nothing1 in what remains of this       
quotation1 but what is very defensible1 
and far from making ,god the author of  
sin2 for we may observe1 that all he    
says1 concerning the providence of ,god 
relating to this matter1 is only1 that  
he permits1 or leaves them to           
themselves1 and he supposes them finally
 to persevere in sin1 without which they
 cannot be liable to damnation1 or the  

display of the justice of ,god therein2 
and if the author1 who brings this      
quotation1 had duly considered the words
 immediately before1 he might have seen 
the reason to have saved himself the    
trouble of making this reflection upon  
it2 for ,dr4 ,twiss1 who1 though a      
,supralapsarian1 says1 8,that he reckons
 that controversy1 relating to the order
 of ,god's decrees1 to be merely ,apex  
,logicus1 as he calls it1 a logical     
nicety20 and adds1 8,that his opinion   
about it is well known1 namely1 that    
,god doth not ordain any man to         
damnation1 before the consideration of  
sin20 and1 a few lines after1 he says1  
8,that ,god1 of his mere pleasure1      
created all1 but1 of his mere pleasure1 
he damneth none2 but every one that is  
damned1 is damned for his sin1 and that 
wilfully committed1 and contumaciously  
continued in by them that come to ripe  
years40 ,and if nothing more than this  
is intended by the doctrine of          
reprobation1 it ought not to be so      

misrepresented1 with a design to cast an
 odium upon it4  ,but to return to the  
scripture but now mentioned3 ,when ,god 
is said to have made the wicked for the 
day of evil1 the meaning is not that    
man's damnation was the end designed by 
,god1 in creating him1 for there are    
some other ideas that intervene between 
,god's purpose to create and condemn    
him2 he must be considered not barely as
 a creature1 but as a sinner2 now1 as   
,god did not create man that he might   
sin1 he could not be said to create him1
 that he might condemn him4             
,accordingly1 the sense which some give 
of this text1 is1 that ,god is said to  
have made all things for himself1 to    
wit1 for his own glory4 ,and inasmuch as
 some will be ready to object1 that ,god
 will have no glory from the wicked1 who
 oppose his name and interest in the    
world2 the answer to this is1 that in   
them1 from whom he shall have no glory1 
as a ,saviour1 he will1 notwithstanding1
 be glorified as a ,judge2 which        

judicial act1 though it be deferred for 
a time1 while his long-suffering waits  
upon them1 yet it shall fall heavily on 
them1 in the day of evil3 which is very 
remote from that supposition1 that ,god 
made man to damn him4 ,and there is a   
sense given of it by some1 who are on   
the other side of the question1 which   
seems equally probable1 or agreeable to 
the mind of the ,holy ,ghost1 and is not
 in the least subversive of the doctrine
 we are maintaining1 namely1 8,that the 
,lord disposeth all things throughout   
the world1 to serve such ends as he     
thinks fit to design1 which they cannot 
refuse to comply withal2 for if any man 
be so wicked as to oppose his will1 he  
will not lose their service2 but when he
 brings a public calamity upon a        
country1 employ them to be the          
executioners of his wrath3 ,of this     
there was a remarkable instance in the  
destruction of ,jerusalem1 by the ,roman
 soldiers1 whom our ,saviour used1 to   
punish his crucifiers1 not that they    

undertook that war out of any design or 
desire to do our blessed ,saviour right1
 but out of an ambition to enslave the  
world2 yet ,god made use of them for    
another design1 as public executioners1 
by whom he punished the ungodly#bah40   
,so the ,assyrian is said1 in ,isa4 x4  
#e1 #f4 to be the rod of ,god's anger1  
and to be sent against the people of    
,israel1 and to lead them captive1 and  
therein to tread them down1 like the    
mire in the streets#bai4 ,and as to what
 concerns the purpose of ,god1 on which 
these judicial proceedings depend1 this 
is to be judged of by the execution     
thereof1 as is evidently to be inferred 
from thence4 ,and this is the sense in  
which we understand the doctrine of     
reprobation1 as in the foregoing        
argument4  ,thus we have endeavoured to 
prove the doctrine of election and      
reprobation1 and defend it from the     
reproaches and misrepresentations cast  
upon it by considering it1 not only as  
agreeable to the divine perfections1 but

 as founded on scripture4 ,we shall     
therefore proceed1  ,,vi4 ,to enquire1  
whether the contrary doctrine as        
defended by some1 be not derogatory to  
the divine perfections1 and therefore   
does not contain greater absurdities2   
or1 if expressions of detestation were a
 sufficient argument to set it aside1   
whether we have not as much reason to   
testify our dislike that way1 as they   
have against the doctrine we are        
maintaining8 ,as to that part of the    
charge brought against us1 as though we 
represented ,god as severe and cruel to 
his creatures2 or that it is            
inconsistent with his goodness to       
suppose that he leaves any to themselves
 in their fallen state1 so as not to    
give them the means of grace1 when he   
knew that being destitute thereof1 they 
could not believe1 and so would fall    
short of salvation1 pursuant to his     
eternal purpose relating thereunto3 can 
this be said to be inconsistent with his
 goodness1 any more than all his other  

displays of vindictive justice8 ,if they
 suppose that it is1 we might easily    
retort the argument upon them since they
 will not assert1 that the whole race of
 fallen man shall be saved2 and1 if so1 
must we not suppose that ,god certainly 
fore-knew this1 otherwise where is his  
infinite understanding8 ,and if he knew 
that this would be the consequence of   
their being born1 and living in the     
world1 where is his goodness in bringing
 them into it8 ,if it be said that they 
have a free-will to choose what is good1
 and so had a power to attain salvation2
 therefore their not attaining it1 is   
wholly owing to themselves4 ,suppose    
this were taken for granted1 without    
entering on that subject at present2 yet
 it must be farther enquired whether    
they will allow that ,god fore-know that
 they would abuse this freedom of will1 
or power to make themselves holy or     
happy2 and1 if so1 could he not have    
prevented this8 ,did he make a will that
 he could not govern or restrain8 ,could

 he not have prevented the sin that he  
knew they would commit8 ,and1 if he     
could1 why did he not do it1 and thereby
 prevent their ruin1 which he knew would
 be the consequence hereof8 ,so that if 
men are disposed to find fault with the 
divine dispensation1 it is no difficult 
matter to invent some methods of        
reasoning to give umbrage to it2 and1   
indeed this objection is not so much    
against ,god's fore-ordaining what comes
 to pass1 as it is a spurning at his    
judicial hand1 and finding fault with   
the equity of his proceedings1 when he  
takes vengeance on sinners for their    
iniquities2 or charging severity on     
,god1 because all mankind are not the   
objects of his goodness1 and            
consequently not elected to eternal     
life4  ,but passing by this1 we shall   
proceed to consider how1 in several     
instances1 the methods used to oppose   
the doctrine1 which we are maintaining1 
are attended with many absurd           
consequences1 derogatory to the divine  

perfections2 which farther discovers the
 unreasonableness of their opposition to
 it2 particularly1  #a4 ,it represents  
,god as indeterminate1 or unresolved    
what to do1 which is the plain sense of 
their asserting that he has not         
fore-ordained whatever comes to pass4   
,to suppose him destitute of any        
determination1 is directly contrary to  
his wisdom and sovereignty1 and it would
 argue that there are some excellencies 
and perfections belonging to intelligent
 creatures1 which are to be denied to   
him1 who is a ,god of infinite          
perfection3 but if1 on the other hand1  
they suppose that every thing1 which    
comes to pass1 is determined by him2    
nevertheless1 that his determinations1  
as they respect the actions of          
intelligent creatures1 are not certain  
and peremptory1 but such as may be      
disannulled1 or rendered ineffectual as 
taking his measures from the uncertain  
determinations of man's will2 this is1  
in effect to say1 that they are not     

determined by ,god2 for an uncertain    
determination1 or a conditional purpose1
 cannot properly be called a            
determination4 ,thus for ,god to        
determine1 that he that believes shall  
be saved1 without resolving to give that
 faith which is necessary to salvation1 
is1 in effect1 not to determine that any
 shall be saved2 for1 since they suppose
 that it is left to man's free-will to  
believe or not1 and liberty is generally
 explained by them1 as implying that a  
person might1 had he pleased1 have done 
the contrary to that which he is said to
 do freely2 it follows that all mankind 
might not have believed1 and repented1  
and consequently that they might have   
missed of salvation1 and then the       
purpose of ,god1 relating thereunto1 is 
the same as though he had been          
indeterminate1 as to that matter4 ,but1 
if1 on the other hand1 they suppose that
 to prevent this disappointment1 ,god   
over-rules the free actions of men1 in  
order to the accomplishment of his own  

purpose1 then they give up their own    
cause1 and allow us all that we contend 
for2 but this they are not disposed to  
do2 therefore we cannot see how the     
independency of the divine will can be  
defended by them1 consistently with     
their method of opposing this doctrine4 
,again1 if it be supposed1 as an        
expedient to fence against this absurd  
consequence1 that ,god fore-knew what   
his creatures would do1 and that his    
determinations were the result thereof1 
and1 consequently1 that the event is as 
certain as the divine fore-knowledge1   
this is what is not universally allowed 
of by them2 for many are sensible that  
it is as hard to prove1 that ,god       
fore-knew what must certainly come to   
pass1 without inferring the inevitable  
necessity of things1 as it is to assert 
that1 he willed or determined them1     
whereby they are rendered eventually    
necessary4 ,and if they suppose that    
,god fore-knew what his creatures would 
do1 and1 particularly1 that they would  

convert themselves1 and improve the     
liberty of their will1 so as to render  
themselves objects fit for divine grace1
 without supposing that he determined to
 exert that power and grace1 which was  
necessary thereunto2 this is to exclude 
his providence from having a hand in the
 government of the world1 or to assert  
that his determinations rather respect  
what others will do1 than what he will  
enable them to do1 which farther appears
 to be inconsistent with the divine     
perfections4  #b4 ,there are some       
things1 in their method of reasoning1   
which seem to infer a mutability in     
,god's purpose which is all one as to   
suppose1 that he had no purpose at all  
relating to the event of things3 ,thus1 
in opposing the doctrine of election1   
they refer to such-like scriptures as   
these1 namely1 that ,god will have all  
men to be saved1 and come to the        
knowledge of the truth1 #a ,tim4 ii4 #d4
 applying this act of the divine will to
 every individual1 even to those who    

shall not be saved1 or come to the      
knowledge of the truth2 and they        
understand our ,saviour's words1 ,how   
often would ,i have gathered thy        
children together as a hen gathereth her
 chickens under her wings1 and ye would 
not8 ,behold your house is left unto you
 desolate1 ,mat4 xxiii4 #cg1 #ch4 as    
implying1 that ,god purposed to save    
them1 but was obliged afterwards1 by the
 perverseness of their actions1 to      
change his purpose4 ,what is this1 but  
to assert him to be dependent and       
mutable8  #c4 ,they1 who suppose that   
salvation is not to be resolved into the
 power and will of ,god1 must ascribe it
 to the will of man1 by which we        
determine ourselves to perform those    
duties1 which render us the objects of  
divine mercy2 and then what the apostle 
says1 ,it is not of him that willeth1   
nor of him that runneth1 but of ,god    
that sheweth mercy1 ,rom4 ix4 #af4 would
 hardly be intelligible1 or a defensible
 proposition2 and when it is said1 ,we  

love him1 because he first loved us1 #a 
,john iv4 #ai4 the proposition ought to 
be inverted1 and it should rather be    
said1 ,he loved us1 because we first    
loved him2 and that humbling question1  
which the apostle proposes1 ,who maketh 
thee to differ1 #a ,cor4 iv4 #g4 should 
be answered1 as one proudly did1 ,i make
 myself to differ4  #d4 ,as to what     
concerns the doctrine of discriminating 
grace1 which cannot well be maintained1 
without asserting a discrimination in   
,god's purpose relating thereunto1 which
 is what we call election2 if this be   
denied1 there would not be so great a   
foundation for admiration1 or           
thankfulness1 as there is1 or for any to
 say1 as one of ,christ's disciples did1
 speaking the sense of all the rest1    
,lord1 how is it1 that thou wilt        
manifest thyself unto us1 and not unto  
the world1 ,john xiv4 #bb4 ,nor is there
 so great an inducement to humility1 as 
what will arise from the firm belief1   
that1 when no eye pitied the poor       

helpless and miserable sinner1 he was   
singled out of a ruined and undone      
world1 among that remnant whom ,god     
first designed for1 and then brought to 
glory4  ,,vii4 ,we shall now consider   
those methods of reasoning1 by which the
 contrary doctrine is defended1 and     
enquire into the sense of those         
scriptures1 which are generally brought 
for that purpose2 and shall endeavour to
 make it appear1 that they may be       
explained1 in a different way1 more     
consistently with the divine            
perfections4 ,it is plain that the main 
design of those1 who oppose the doctrine
 of election1 is to advance the goodness
 of ,god2 and1 since all mankind cannot 
be said to be equally partakers of the  
effects of this goodness1 inasmuch as   
all shall not be saved1 they suppose    
that ,god has put all mankind into a    
salvable state2 and1 accordingly1 as the
 gospel-overture is universal1 so ,god's
 purpose to save1 includes all to whom  
it is made2 but the event1 and          

consequently the efficacy of the divine 
purpose relating hereunto1 depends on   
the will of man2 and1 that there may be 
no obstruction which may hinder this    
design from taking effect1 ,god has     
given him a power to yield obedience to 
his law1 which1 though it be not        
altogether so perfect as it was at      
first1 but is somewhat weakened by the  
fall2 yet it is sufficient to answer the
 end and design of the gospel1 that is  
to bring him to salvation if he will1   
and the event of things is wholly put on
 this issue2 so that1 though there be   
not an universal salvation1 there is a  
determination in ,god to save all upon  
this condition4 ,how far this is        
inconsistent with the divine perfections
 has been already considered2 and we are
 farther to enquire1 whether there be   
any foundation for it in scripture1 and 
what is the sense of some texts1 which  
are often brought in defence thereof4   
,one text referred to1 is1 those words  
of the apostle1 in #a ,tim4 ii4 #d4 ,who

 will have all men to be saved1 and come
 to the knowledge of the truth2 and     
another scripture1 to the same purpose1 
in #b ,pet4 iii4 #i4 ,the ,lord is not  
willing that any should perish1 but that
 all should come to repentance2 and     
several others1 from whence they argue  
the universality of the divine purpose  
relating to the salvation of mankind1 or
 that none are rejected1 or excluded    
from it1 by any act of ,god's will1 and 
consequently that the doctrine of       
election and reprobation is to be       
exploded1 as contrary hereunto4  ,that  
the sense of these scriptures cannot be1
 that ,god designed that all men should 
be eventually saved1 or come to the     
knowledge of the truth1 so that none of 
them should perish1 is evident1 from    
many other scriptures1 that speak of the
 destruction of ungodly men1 which1     
doubtless1 will be allowed by all2      
therefore it follows1 that the meaning  
of these two scriptures1 is not that    
,god purposed1 or determined1 what shall

 never come to pass1 which is           
inconsistent with the glory of his      
wisdom and sovereignty1 as has been     
before observed2 but they are to be     
understood with those limitations1 which
 the word all1 which refers to the      
persons mentioned1 as designed to be    
saved1 is subject to in other           
scriptures2 as will be more particularly
 considered1 when we treat of universal 
and particular redemption1 under a      
following answer#bbj4 ,and therefore1 at
 present1 we need only observe1 that    
these scriptures may be set in a true   
light1 that the word all is oftentimes  
taken for all sorts of men1 or things2  
as when it is said1 that of every thing 
that creepeth upon the earth1 there went
 in two and two unto ,noah into the ark1
 ,gen4 vii4 #h1 #i4 that is all the     
species of living creatures1 not every  
individual2 so1 ,acts x4 #ab4 in the    
vision that ,peter saw of the sheet let 
down from heaven1 in which there were   
all manner of four-footed beasts#bba1 c4

 and it is said concerning our ,saviour1
 that he went about1 healing all manner 
of sickness1 and all manner of diseases 
among the people#bbb2 and elsewhere ,god
 promises1 that he will pour out his    
,spirit on all flesh1 ,acts ii4 #ag4    
that is1 persons of all ages and        
conditions1 young and old4  ,there are  
many instances of the like nature in    
scripture1 which justify this sense of  
the word all2 and it seems plain1 from  
the context1 that it is to be so taken  
in the former of the scriptures1 but now
 referred to1 when it is said1 ,god will
 have all men to be saved2 for he       
exhorts1 in ver4 #a4 that prayer and    
supplication should be made for all men1
 that is1 for men of all characters and 
conditions in the world1 and1 in        
particular1 for kings1 and all that are 
in authority1 and thereby he takes      
occasion to resolve a matter in dispute 
among them1 whether those kings that    
were tyrants and oppressors1 ought to be
 prayed for1 when he tells them1 that   

all sorts of men are to be prayed for2  
and the reason of this is assigned1     
namely1 because ,god will have all men1 
that is1 all sorts of men1 to be saved4 
,moreover1 they whom ,god will save1 are
 said to be such as shall come1 that is1
 as he will bring to the knowledge of   
the truth4 ,now it is certain1 that ,god
 never designed to bring every          
individual to the knowledge of the      
truth2 for1 if he did1 his purpose is   
not fulfilled1 or his providence runs   
counter to it1 for every individual of  
mankind have not the gospel2 therefore  
it follows1 that since ,god did not     
purpose that all men should come to the 
knowledge of the truth1 the foregoing   
words1 ,who will have all men to be     
saved1 are not to be understood in any  
other sense1 but as signifying all sorts
 of men4 ,neither can it well be proved1
 whatever may be attempted in order     
thereto1 that the following words1 which
 speak of ,christ's being a ,mediator   
between ,god and men1 intend1 that he   

performs this office for every          
individual man1 even for those that     
shall not be saved2 for then it would be
 executed in vain for a great part of   
them1 as will be farther considered in  
its proper place2 therefore we must     
conclude1 that1 in the former of these  
scriptures1 nothing else is intended1   
but that ,god determined to give saving 
grace to all sorts of men4  ,and as for 
the latter1 in which the apostle ,peter 
says1 that ,god is not willing that any 
should perish1 but that all should come 
to repentance2 there the word all is    
expressly limited1 in the context1 as   
referring only to those who are elect   
and faithful2 and therefore he says1    
including himself among them1 that the  
,lord is long-suffering to us-ward4 ,now
 if we observe the character which he   
gives of the church1 to which he writes1
 in the beginning of both his epistles1 
7which1 as he says1 in ver4 #a4 of this 
chapter1 were directed to the same      
persons7 it is as great as is given of  

any in scripture2 and they are          
distinguished from those profane        
scoffers1 who walked after their own    
lusts1 and other ungodly men1 whose     
perdition he speaks of1 as what would   
befal them in the dissolution of the    
world1 by fire1 in the day of ,judgment2
 and they are described not only as     
elect unto obedience1 and as having     
obtained like precious faith with the   
apostles1 but they were such as ,god    
would keep1 through faith1 unto         
salvation2 therefore the apostle might  
well say1 concerning them1 that ,god    
determined that none of them should     
perish1 without advancing any thing that
 militates against the doctrine we are  
maintaining4  ,object4 ,the apostle1 in 
this verse1 speaks of ,god1 as willing  
that all should come to repentance2     
therefore they are distinguished from   
that part of the church1 who had        
obtained like precious faith1 and were  
included in the character that he gives 
of some of them1 in both his epistles1  

which infers their being then in a state
 of salvation2 therefore the word1 all1 
in this text1 is not subject to the     
limitation before mentioned1 but must be
 applied to all the world1 and          
consequently the meaning is1 that ,god  
is not willing that any of mankind      
should perish1 but that all should come 
to repentance4  ,answ4 ,the apostle1 in 
this text1 speaks of ,god's deferring   
the day of judgment1 and perdition of   
ungodly men1 and so exercising his      
long-suffering towards the world in     
general2 not that he designed to bring  
them all to repentance hereby1 for that 
would be to intend a thing which he knew
 should never come to pass3 ,but the end
 of his patience1 to the world in       
general1 is1 that all whom he designed  
to bring to repentance1 or who were     
chosen to it1 as well as to obedience1  
and sprinkling of the blood of ,jesus1  
should be brought to it4  ,there are    
other arguments1 which they bring in    
defence of their sense of the doctrine  

of election1 as supposing that it is not
 peremptory1 determinate1 or            
unchangeable1 and such as infers the    
salvation of those who are the objects  
thereof1 taken from those scriptures1   
which1 as they apprehend1 ascribe a kind
 of disappointment to ,god2 as when he  
says1 in ,isa4 v4 #d4 concerning his    
vineyard1 to wit1 the church of the     
,jews1 ,wherefore1 when ,i looked that  
it should bring forth grapes1 brought it
 forth wild grapes8 and our ,saviour's  
words1 in ,luke xiii4 #f4 that he sought
 fruit on the fig-tree1 meaning the     
church of the ,jews in his day1 but     
found none2 and1 speaking concerning    
,jerusalem1 he says1 in ,matth4 xxiii4  
#cg1 #ch4 ,how often would ,i have      
gathered thy children together1 even as 
a hen gathereth her chickens under her  
wings1 and ye would not6 ,behold1 your  
house is left unto you desolate2        
therefore they conclude1 that ,god's    
purpose1 or design of grace1 may be     
defeated2 so that these1 and many other 

scriptures1 not unlike to them1 are     
inconsistent with the doctrine of       
election1 as ascertaining the event1 to 
wit1 the salvation of those who are     
chosen to eternal life2 which leads us1 
particularly to consider the sense      
thereof4  ,as to the first of them1 in  
which ,god says1 by the prophet1 ,what  
could have been done more to my         
vineyard1 that ,i have not done in it8  
,wherefore1 when ,i looked that it      
should bring forth grapes1 brought it   
forth wild grapes8 ,he condescends      
therein to speak of himself after the   
manner of men1 as he often does in      
scripture1 and is said to look for what 
might reasonably have been expected1 as 
the consequence of all the means of     
grace1 which he had vouchsafed to them2 
the reasonableness of the thing is      
called his looking for it1 as though he 
should say1 it might have been expected1
 from the nature of the thing1 that     
they1 who had been laid under such      
obligations1 should express some        

gratitude for them1 and so have brought 
forth some fruit1 to the glory of ,god4 
,and those words1 which seem to         
attribute disappointment to him1 when it
 is said1 ,i looked1 c4 signifying      
nothing else but the ingratitude of the 
people1 that they did not walk agreeably
 to the obligations they were under2 not
 that ,god was really disappointed1 for 
that would militate against his         
omniscience4 ,he knew1 before he laid   
these obligations on them1 what their   
behaviour would be2 therefore1 had he   
eyes of flesh1 or seen as man seeth1    
their behaviour would have tended to    
disappoint him2 but there is no         
disappointment in the divine mind1      
though the sin reproved in the people be
 the same as though it had had a        
tendency to defeat the divine purpose1  
or disappoint his expectation4  ,as for 
that other scripture1 in which it is    
said1 that he sought fruit on the       
fig-tree1 but found none1 that is to be 
explained in the same way1 he sought    

fruit1 that is1 it might reasonably have
 been expected1 but he found none1 that 
is1 they did not act agreeably to the   
means of grace which they enjoyed4      
,therefore neither this1 nor the other  
scripture1 does in the least argue1 that
 the purpose of ,god was not concerned  
about the event1 or that he did not know
 what it would be2 for1 as his          
providential dispensation gives us      
ground to conclude1 that he determined  
to leave them to themselves1 so he knew 
beforehand that this1 through the       
corruption of their nature1 would issue 
in their unfruitfulness1 otherwise he is
 not omniscient4 ,therefore it follows1 
that neither of these scriptures have   
the least tendency to overthrow the     
doctrine of the certainty and           
peremptoriness of the divine purpose4   
,as to what our ,saviour says1 relating 
to his willingness1 to have gathered    
,jerusalem1 as a hen gathereth her      
chickens under her wings1 but they would
 not1 it may be taken1 without the least

 absurdity attending the sense thereof1 
as referring to the end and design of   
his ministry among them2 and it is as   
though he should say1 your nation shall 
be broken1 and you scattered1 as a      
punishment inflicted on you for your    
iniquities1 and this destruction would  
have been prevented1 had you believed in
 me2 so that all that can be inferred   
from hence1 is1 that ,christ's ministry 
and doctrine were attended with that    
convincing evidence1 being confirmed by 
so many undoubted miracles1 that their  
unbelief was not only charged on them as
 a crime1 but was the occasion of their 
ruin2 or 7as it is said in the following
 words7 of their houses being left unto 
them desolate4 ,and this might have been
 prevented1 by their making a right     
improvement of that common grace1 which 
they had2 for though it be not in man's 
power1#bbc without the special influence
 of divine grace1 to believe to the     
saving of the soul2 yet ,i know no one  
who denies that it is in his power to do

 more good1 and avoid more evil1 than he
 does1 or so far to attend to the       
preaching of the gospel1 as not to      
oppose it with that malice and envy as  
the ,jews did2 and1 had they paid such a
 deference to ,christ's ministry1 as    
this amounted to1 they would not have   
been exposed to those judgments which   
afterwards befel them2 for it is one    
thing to say1 that men1 by improving    
common grace1 can attain salvation1 and 
another thing to conclude1 that they    
might have escaped temporal judgments   
thereby4  ,therefore1 if it be enquired1
 what was ,god's intention in giving    
them the gospel8 the answer is very     
plain3 ,it was not that hereby he might 
bring them all into a state of          
salvation1 for then it would have taken 
effect2 but it was1 as appears by the   
event1 to bring those1 that should be   
saved among them1 to that salvation1 and
 to let others know1 whether they would 
hear1 or whether they would forbear1    
that ,god had a right to their          

obedience1 and therefore that the       
message which the ,redeemer brought to  
them1 ought to have met with better     
entertainment from them1 than it did4   
,and if it be farther enquired1 whether1
 provided they had believed1 their ruin 
would have been prevented8 ,this is an  
undoubted consequence1 from our         
,saviour's words2 but yet it does not   
follow1 from hence1 that it was a matter
 of uncertainty with ,god1 whether they 
should believe or no2 for it is one     
thing to say1 that he would not have    
punished them1 unless they rejected our 
,saviour2 and another thing to suppose  
that he could not well determine whether
 they would reject him or no4 ,so that  
the purpose of ,god must be considered1 
as agreeing with the event of things1   
and the design of ,christ's ministry1 as
 being what it really was2 yet he might1
 notwithstanding1 take occasion to      
charge the ,jews' destruction upon their
 own obstinacy4  ,there are many other  
scriptures1 which they bring to the like

 purpose1 which ,i pass over1 because   
the sense they give of them differs not 
much from that1 in which they understand
 the scriptures before-mentioned1 and   
their reasoning from them1 in opposition
 to this doctrine is the same1 and the  
same answer may be given to it4         
,however1 ,i cannot but observe1 that   
as1 from some scriptures1 they attribute
 disappointment to ,god1 they represent 
him1 from others1 as wishing1 but in    
vain1 that it had happened otherwise1   
and as being grieved at the             
disappointment2 so they understand those
 words1 in ,psal4 lxxxi4 #ac1 #ad4 ,oh6 
that my people had hearkened unto me1   
and ,israel had walked in my ways6 ,i   
should soon have subdued their enemies1 
and turned my hand against their        
adversaries2 and that1 in ,luke xix4    
#db4 ,if1 or1 ,oh6 that thou hadst      
known1 even thou at least1 in this thy  
day1 the things which belong unto thy   
peace6 but now they are hid from thine  
eyes4  ,as for the sense of these1 and  

such-like scriptures1 it is no more than
 this1 that the thing which they refused
 to perform1 was1 in itself1 most       
desirable1 or a matter to be wished for1
 and not that ,god can be said to wish  
for a thing that cannot be attained4    
,and when our ,saviour laments over     
,jerusalem1 as apprehending their       
destruction near at hand1 whether the   
words are to be considered in the form  
of a wish1 that it had been otherwise1  
or an intimation1 that if they had known
 the things of their peace1 their       
destruction would not have ensued1 it is
 only to be understood as a             
representation of the deplorableness of 
their condition1 which1 with a          
tenderness of human compassion1 he could
 not speak of1 without tears3 ,yet we   
are not to suppose that this mode of    
expression is applicable to the divine  
will2 so that1 when the misery of that  
people is hereby set forth1 we are not  
to strain the sense of words1 taken from
 human modes of speaking1 so far1 as to 

suppose that the judicial acts of ,god1 
in punishing a sinful people1 are not   
the execution of his purpose relating   
thereunto4  ,again1 when the ,spirit is 
said to be grieved1 ,eph4 iv4 #cj4 or   
resisted1 ,acts vii4 #ae4 nothing else  
is intended hereby1 but that men act in 
such a way1 as that1 had the ,spirit of 
,god been subject to human passions1 it 
would have been matter of grief to him4 
,but far be it from us to suppose that  
the divine nature is liable hereunto1 or
 that any disappointment can attend his 
purposes1 which has a tendency to excite
 this passion in men4 ,and when he is   
said to be resisted1 it is not meant as 
though his will1 or design1 could be    
rendered ineffectual1 but it only       
implies1 that men oppose what the       
,spirit communicated by the prophets1 or
 in his word4 ,this a person may do1 and
 yet it may be truly said1 that the     
counsel of the ,lord standeth for ever1 
the thoughts of his heart to all        
generations1 ,psal4 xxxiii4 #aa4        

,,viii4 ,we shall proceed to consider   
several objections that are made against
 the doctrine we have endeavoured to    
maintain1 and what reply may be given to
 them4 ,some have been occasionally     
mentioned under several foregoing heads1
 and there are others which require a   
distinct reply4  ,object4 #a4 ,that the 
doctrine of absolute ,election and      
,reprobation was altogether unknown by  
the ,fathers in the three first         
centuries1 and that it was first brought
 into the ,christian world by ,augustin2
 before whose time1 the only account we 
have of it1 is1 that ,god foreknowing   
who would live piously1 or believe and  
persevere to the end1 accordingly       
predestinated them to eternal life1 or  
determined to pass them by1 and so is   
said to have rejected them4#bbd  ,answ4 
,this objection1 were it literally true1
 cannot have any tendency to overthrow  
this doctrine1 in the opinion of those1 
who depend not on the credit of         
,augustin1 as defending it1 on the one  

hand1 nor are staggered by the          
opposition made to it by some of the    
,fathers1 who lived before his time1 on 
the other2 and therefore we might have  
passed it by1 without making any reply  
to it4 ,however1 since it contains a    
kind of insult1 or boast1 which will    
have its weight with some1 it may be    
expected that a few things should be    
said1 in answer to it4  ,we will not    
deny but that the ,fathers1 before the  
,pelagian heresy was broached in the    
world2 expressed themselves1 in many    
parts of their writings1 in so lax and  
unguarded a manner concerning the       
doctrines of predestination1 free-will1 
and grace1 that1 had they lived after   
those doctrines began to be publickly   
contested1 one would have thought that  
they had verged too much towards        
,pelagius's side2 but1 since they were  
not the subject-matter of controversy in
 those ages1 it is no wonder to find    
them less cautious in their modes of    
expressing themselves1 than they might  

otherwise have been2 and therefore it is
 a just observation1 which one#bbe makes
 of this matter1 that they had to do    
with the ,manichees1 and some of the    
heathen1 who supposed that men sinned by
 a fatal necessity of nature1 as though 
there were no wicked action committed in
 the world1 but some would be ready to  
excuse it1 from the impotency or        
propensity of human nature to sin1 which
 rendered it1 as they supposed1         
unavoidable2 and others took occasion1  
from hence1 to charge ,god with being   
the author of sin4 ,it is very probable 
the ,fathers1 in those ages1 were afraid
 of giving countenance to this vile     
opinion1 and therefore they were less on
 their guard1 in some respects1 than    
they would have been1 had they been to  
encounter with ,pelagius1 or his        
followers4  ,and indeed1 ,augustin      
himself1 before he took occasion to     
enquire more diligently into the state  
of this controversy1 gave into the same 
way of expressing his sentiments about  

the power of nature1 or the grace of    
,god1 as some others of the ,fathers had
 done1 and concluded that faith was in  
our power1 as well a duty incumbent on  
us1 but afterwards retracted such modes 
of speaking as the result of more mature
 deliberation4#bbf ,but notwithstanding 
though he expressed himself in a        
different way from them1 yet he often   
takes occasion1 from some passages which
 he purposely refers to in their        
writings1 to vindicate them as holding  
the same faith1 though not always using 
the same phrases4 ,and1 after he had    
thus defended ,cyprian and ,ambrose1 in 
that respect1 he puts a very charitable 
construction on their unguarded way of  
expressing themselves1 and says1 that   
this arose from their not having any    
occasion to engage in that controversy1 
which was on foot in his day4#bbg ,the  
same might be said to ,gregory          
,nazianzen1 ,basil1 ,chrysostom1 and    
several others1 whom some modern writers
 defend from the charge of favouring the

 ,pelagian scheme1 by referring to some 
places in their writings1 in which they 
acknowledge1 that the salvation of men  
is owing to the grace of ,god1 whereby  
all occasions of glorying are taken away
 from the creature1#bbh or expressions  
used by them to the like purpose4 ,and  
the learned ,vossius1 though he         
acknowledges1 that the ,fathers1 before 
,augustin1 expressed themselves in such 
a way1 as is represented in the         
objection1 yet he vindicates them from  
the charge of verging towards the       
,pelagian1 or ,semi-,pelagian heresy2   
inasmuch as he concludes1 that when they
 speak of ,god's predestinating men to  
eternal life1 on the foresight of good  
works1 they only intend those good      
works1 which ,god would enable them to  
perform2 and this will clear many of    
those expressions which they use1 from  
this imputation4#bbi ,but if all these  
endeavours to establish our claim to    
those ,fathers1 who lived before        
,augustin1 as not being opposers of this

 doctrine1 appear to be to no purpose1  
yet this will not weaken the truth      
thereof2 for we suppose it to be founded
 on scripture1 and several consequences 
plainly deduced from it1 and therefore  
it doth not want the suffrage of human  
testimony to support it4  ,but if it be 
said1 that this is a very desirable     
thing as doubtless it is1 we might      
consider this doctrine1 as obtaining    
very much in1 and after ,augustin's     
time1 being examined and defended by    
very considerable numbers of men1 who   
have transmitted it down to posterity1  
throughout the various ages of the      
church4 ,notwithstanding1 by whomsoever 
it is defended1 or opposed1 we lay no   
great stress on human authority1 as a   
judicious divine well observes#bcj4 ,we 
shall therefore proceed to consider some
 other objections1 which it will be more
 necessary for us to give a particular  
answer to4  ,object4 #b4 ,to the        
doctrine of ,god's purpose's            
ascertaining all events1 it is objected 

that he has not determined the bounds of
 the life of man1 but that it may be    
lengthened1 or shortened1 by the        
intervention of second causes4 ,this is 
nothing else but the applying one branch
 of this controversy1 relating to the   
decrees of ,god1 to a particular        
instance4 ,and it was very warmly       
debated in the ,netherlands1 towards the
 beginning of the last century4#bca     
,this objection is managed in a popular 
way1 and is principally adapted to give 
prejudice to those who are disposed to  
pass over1 or set aside1 these necessary
 distinctions1 which1 if duly           
considered1 would not only shorten the  
debate1 but set the matter in a clearer 
light1 which we shall endeavour to do2  
but shall first consider their method of
 reasoning on this subject1 and the     
sense they give of some scriptures1     
which as they suppose1 give countenance 
to this objection4  ,they therefore thus
 argue1 that if the term of life be     
immoveably fixed by ,god1 then it is a  

vain thing for any one to use those     
means that are necessary to preserve it1
 and the skill of the physician1 as well
 as the virtue of medicine1 is          
altogether needless2 and the good advice
 which is often given to persons1 to    
take heed that they do not shorten their
 lives by intemperance1 will be to no   
purpose2 for they have a reply ready at 
hand1 namely1 that they shall live their
 appointed time1 do what they will4 ,and
 that1 which is still more absurd1 is1  
that if a person attempts to lay violent
 hands upon himself1 it will be to no   
purpose1 if ,god has determined that he 
shall live longer2 or if he has         
determined that he shall die1 then he is
 guilty of no crime1 for he only fulfils
 the divine purpose4  ,they add1        
moreover1 that this not only renders all
 our supplications to ,god to preserve  
our lives1 or to restore us from        
sickness1 when we are in danger of      
death1 needless2 but our conduct herein 
is a practical denial of the argument we

 maintain2 for what is this1 but to     
suppose that the bounds of life are     
unalterably fixed4  ,as to what concerns
 the countenance1 which they suppose1   
scripture gives to this objection1 they 
refer us to those places in which the   
life of man is said to be lengthened or 
shortened2 accordingly1 there are       
promises of long life given to the      
righteous who love ,god1 and keep his   
commandments1 ,exod4 xx4 #ab4 ,deut4 iv4
 #dj4 #a ,kings iii4 #ad4 and ,solomon  
says expressly1 ,the fear of the ,lord  
prolongeth days2 but the years of the   
wicked shall be shortened1 ,prov4 x4    
#bg4 and elsewhere he speaks of the     
wicked's dying before their time1 ,eccl4
 vii4 #ag4 and the ,psalmist says1 that 
bloody and deceitful men shall not live 
out half their days1 ,psal4 lv4 #bc4    
,they also refer to that scripture in   
which ,martha tells our ,saviour1 that  
if he had been with her brother         
,lazarus1 before his death1 he had not  
died1 ,john xi4 #ba4 which either       

contradicts the argument we are         
maintaining1 or else ,martha was        
mistaken2 which1 had she been1 our      
,saviour would have reproved her1 for   
asserting that which was false4         
,moreover1 they add1 that when the old  
world was destroyed in the deluge1 and  
so died before their time1 they might   
have prolonged their lives1 had they    
repented in that space of time1 wherein 
,noah as a preacher of righteousness1   
gave them warning of this desolating    
judgment1 and ,christ1 by his ,spirit1  
in him1 preached to them1 as the apostle
 says1 #a ,pet4 iii4 #bj4 which1        
doubtless1 was with a design to bring   
them to repentance1 and save them from  
this destruction4  ,and when ,abraham   
pleaded with ,god in the behalf of      
,sodom1 ,god tells him1 that if he found
 but ten righteous persons in the city1 
he would spare it for their sake1 ,gen4 
xviii4 #cb4 which is inconsistent with  
his determination1 that they should all 
die by an untimely death1 if the bounds 

of their lives had been fixed4  ,and    
lastly1 they refer to that scripture1 in
 which ,god first told ,hezekiah1 that  
he should die1 and not live1 and        
afterwards1 that he would add to his    
days fifteen years1 ,isa4 xxxviii4 #a4  
compared with #e4  ,answ4 ,to prepare   
our way for a reply to this objection1  
let us consider that the contrary side  
of the question1 which we are           
maintaining1 is equally supported by    
express texts of scripture3 thus it is  
said ,his days are determined1 the      
number of his months are with thee2 thou
 hast appointed him bounds that he      
cannot pass1 ,job xiv4 #e4 than which1  
nothing can be more express1 where he   
speaks concerning that decree of ,god1  
which respects all mankind1 without     
exception1 and sets forth his absolute  
sovereignty1 and the irreversibleness of
 his purpose herein2 and the apostle    
,paul1 in reasoning with the ,athenians 
concerning the decree and providence of 
,god in whom we live1 move1 and have our

 being says1 that he hath determined the
 times before appointed1 and fixed the  
bounds of their habitation1 ,acts xvii4 
#bf4 ,as he has placed men upon the     
earth1 by his decree and providence1 so 
he has determined not only the place    
where they should live1 but the time of 
their continuance in the world4 ,this   
was no new doctrine2 for the heathen had
 been instructed in it by their own     
philosophers and therefore the apostle  
speaks their sense1 especially that of  
the stoicks1 about this matter4#bcb     
,when he mentions the times are         
determined1 it is not to be understood  
of the seasons of the year1 which ,god  
has fixed to return in their certain    
courses1 but the seasons appointed for  
every work1 or for every occurrence of  
life2 and1 among the rest1 the time of  
life1 and of serving our generation     
therein1 as ,solomon expressly says1 in 
,eccl4 iii4 #a1 #b4 ,to every thing     
there is a season1 and a time to every  
purpose2 a time to be born1 and a time  

to die4 ,several other scriptures might 
be brought to the same purpose1 as a    
farther proof hereof1 namely1 those in  
which ,god has foretold the death of    
particular persons1 #b ,sam4 xii4 #ad4  
#a ,kings xiv4 #ab4 chap4 xxii4 #bh4    
,moreover1 if the providence of ,god is 
conversant about all the actions of men1
 and the hairs of their head are all    
numbered1 ,matt4 x4 #cj4 so that the    
smallest changes in life do not come by 
chance1 but are subject thereto2 then   
certainly the time of life must be      
subjected to his providence1 who is     
styled1 ,our life1 and the length of our
 days1 ,deut4 xxx4 #bj4 ,he must        
therefore certainly be considered as the
 sovereign ,arbiter thereof1 which      
doctrine none that own a providence1    
can1 with any shadow of reason1 gainsay2
 so that this doctrine is agreeable not 
only to several scriptures1 but to the  
very nature and perfections of ,god4    
,this being premised we return to the   
arguments laid down against it1 and the 

scriptures cited to give countenance to 
them4 ,it is certain1 that two          
contradictory propositions cannot be    
both true in the same sense2 and the    
scriptures1 which are exactly           
harmonious1 as well as infallibly true1 
no where contradict themselves4         
,therefore we must consider what answer 
may be given to the objections          
before-mentioned2 and1 that our work    
herein may be shortened1 we may observe1
 that the bounds of life are twofold2   
either such as men might have lived to1 
according to the common course of nature
 if nothing had intervened to ruin the  
constitution1 or no disease1 or violent 
death1 had broken the thread of life    
before2 or that time which ,god has     
ordained that men shall live1 whether it
 be longer or shorter3 the former of    
these respects the lengthening or       
shortening of life1 by the influence of 
second causes2 and1 in this respect1 we 
do not suppose that the terms of life   
are immoveably fixed1 but that in some1 

it is longer1 and1 in others shorter2   
for it is certain1 that by intemperance1
 or other methods1 men may shorten their
 days2 or1 by laying violent hands on   
themselves1 not live the time that      
otherwise they would have done4 ,but if 
we consider the over-ruling1 or         
disposing providence of ,god1 as        
conversant about this matter1 there is  
nothing happens without the concurrence 
thereof4 ,therefore persons1 who shorten
 their days by intemperance1 do this by 
the permissive providence of ,god2      
though he be not the author of their    
intemperance1 which is sinful1 yet he   
permits1 or determines not to hinder it1
 and consequently though he has fixed   
the bounds of life1 which can neither be
 lengthened or shortened1 yet knowing   
what men will do1 in a natural way1 to  
shorten them1 he determines that this   
shall put an end to their lives4#bcc    
,and when we read1 in scripture1 of     
,god's delivering him1 who dies a       
violent death1 into his hands1 who is   

the immediate cause of it1 ,exod4 xxi4  
#ac4 ,god is not the author of the sin  
of the murderer2 yet providence is not  
wholly to be exempted from that action1 
so far as it is not sinful1 but purely  
natural1 or the effect of power2 and1   
when this is said to have a tendency to 
shorten the life of man1 it does not    
detract from the time that he had in his
 own purpose affixed to it4 ,we must    
also consider1 that his decree and      
providence respects the means1 as well  
as the end1 which are always inseparably
 connected1 and equally subject         
thereunto4  ,these things being         
premised1 we proceed more particularly  
to answer the arguments brought against 
this doctrine4 ,and1  #a4 ,when it is   
said1 that ,god's fixing the bounds of  
life1 renders all means for the         
preservation thereof unnecessary1 that  
depends upon a false supposition1       
namely1 that ,god does not ordain the   
means as well as the end4 ,if ,god had  
determined that persons shall live1 he  

has determined to give them the supports
 of life1 and to prevent every thing    
that might tend to destroy it2 so1 on   
the other hand1 when he takes them away1
 by a disease1 this is ordained by him1 
as a means conducive thereunto4 ,if     
health is to be supported1 or recovered1
 by means1 and thereby life preserved1  
,god has ordained that these means shall
 be used1 as well as the end attained4  
#b4 ,as to persons shortening their     
lives by intemperance1 this has a       
natural tendency to do it2 so that1     
though ,god be not the author of the    
sin1 he certainly knows1 before-hand1   
what methods the sinner will take to    
hasten his end1 and leaves him to       
himself2 so that1 though the sin be not 
from ,god1 the punishment1 which is the 
consequence thereof1 may truly be said  
to be from him1 and therefore this was  
determined by him4  ,and when it is     
farther objected1 that they1 who destroy
 their health1 or lay violent hands on  
themselves1 cannot be said to sin in so 

doing1 because they do that which tends 
to fulfil the divine will1 provided ,god
 has determined the fatal event2 herein 
they oppose this doctrine1 without      
taking the words in the same sense in   
which it is maintained2 for it is well  
known1 that the will of ,god is         
sometimes taken for that prescribed rule
 that he has given us1 which is the     
matter of our duty1 in which sense we   
readily allow1 that he that fulfils it1 
cannot be said to sin4 ,but1 besides    
this1 it is sometimes taken for his     
purpose to permit sin2 or1 to give the  
sinner up to his own heart's lusts1 to  
act that which he hates1 and is resolved
 to punish4 ,in this sense1 the sinner  
is said to do that which ,god would not 
have suffered him to do1 had he willed  
the contrary2 but it is a very          
groundless insinuation1 to suppose that 
this exempts him from the guilt of sin4 
#c4 ,to say1 that ,god's fixing the     
bounds of life1 is inconsistent with our
 praying1 that our lives may be         

prolonged1 or that we may be delivered  
from sickness1 or death1 when we are    
apprehensive that we are drawing nigh to
 it1 is no just consequence2 for as we  
do not pray that ,god would alter his   
purpose1 when we desire any blessing of 
him1 but suppose this to be hid from us1
 and expect not to know it any otherwise
 than by the event2 so a person1 who    
prays to be delivered from sickness1 or 
death1 is not to address the divine     
,majesty1 as one who presumptuously1 and
 without ground1 supposes that ,god has 
decreed that he shall immediately die1  
but as one who hopes1 or who has no     
ground to conclude otherwise1 but that  
he will make it appear1 by answering his
 prayer1 that he has determined to spare
 his life4 ,for the secret purpose of   
,god1 relating to the event of things1  
is no more to be a rule of duty1        
inasmuch as it is secret1 than if there 
had been no purpose relating thereunto2 
but yet it does not follow from hence1  
that this matter is not determined by   

him4  #d4 ,as to those scriptures1 that 
seem to give countenance to this        
objection1 they may1 without the least  
absurdity1 be understood consistently   
with other scriptures1 which have been  
before produced1 whereby it is proved1  
that ,god has fixed1 or determined the  
bounds of life4 ,as for those promises1 
which ,god has made of a long life1 to  
those that love him1 and keep his       
commandments1 the meaning thereof is    
this1 that he will certainly bestow this
 blessing1 either in kind or value1 on  
those whose conversation is such as is  
therein described2 this none can deny1  
who rightly understand the meaning of   
that scripture1 in which it is said1    
that godliness hath the promise of the  
life that now is1 as well as of that    
which is to come1 #a ,tim4 iv4 #h4 ,but1
 so far as it affects the argument we   
are maintaining1 we must consider1 that 
that efficacious grace1 whereby we are  
enabled to love ,god1 and keep his      
commandments1 is as much his gift1 and  

consequently the result of his purpose1 
as the blessing connected with it2      
therefore if he has determined that we  
shall enjoy a long and happy life in    
this world1 and to enable us to live a  
holy life therein2 if both the end and  
the means are connected together1 and   
are equally the objects of ,god's       
purpose1 then it cannot justly be       
inferred from hence1 that the event1    
relating to the lengthening or          
shortening our lives1 is not determined 
by him4  ,as for those scriptures that  
speak of the wicked's dying before their
 time1 or not living half their days1   
these are to be understood agreeably to 
that distinction before-mentioned1      
between men's dying sooner1 than they   
would have done according to the course 
of nature1 or the concurrence of second 
causes thereunto1 in which sense it is  
literally true1 that many do not live   
out half their days2 and their dying    
sooner than ,god had before determined4 
,may not the sovereign ,disposer of all 

things inflict a sudden and immediate   
death1 as the punishment of sin1 without
 giving us reason to conclude that this 
was not pre-concerted1 if we may so     
express it1 or determined beforehand8   
,as for that other scripture1 referred  
to in the objection1 in which ,martha   
tells our ,saviour1 that if he had been 
with ,lazarus1 when sick1 he had not    
died1 she does not suppose ,christ's    
being there1 would have frustrated the  
divine purpose1 for then1 he would1     
doubtless1 have reproved her for it2    
whereas1 in reality1 he did not come to 
visit him1 because he knew that ,god had
 purposed that he should die1 and be    
afterwards raised from the dead2 so that
 this does not argue that he has not    
fixed the bounds1 or term of life4      
,again1 as for that argument1 to support
 this objection1 taken from the         
destruction of the world in the flood1  
or that of ,sodom1 by fire from heaven1 
that they might have prolonged their    
lives1 had they repented1 we do not deny

 but that this would have been the      
consequence thereof1 but then their     
repentance would have been as much      
determined by ,god1 as their deliverance
 from that untimely death1 which befel  
them4  ,the last scripture mentioned1 in
 which ,god1 by the prophet ,isaiah1    
tells ,hezekiah1 that he should die1 and
 not live2 notwithstanding which1       
fifteen years were added to his life1   
which is very frequently insisted on1 by
 those who deny the unalterable decree  
of ,god1 relating to life and death1 as 
that which they apprehend to be an      
unanswerable argument to support it3 to 
this it may be replied1 that when ,god  
says1 ,set thine house in order1 for    
thou shalt die1 and not live1 he gave   
,hezekiah to understand1 that his       
disease was what we call mortal1 namely1
 such as no skill of the physician1 or  
natural virtue of medicine1 could cure1 
and therefore that he must expect to    
die1 unless ,god recovered him by a     
miracle2 and ,hezekiah1 doubtless1 took 

the warning in this sense1 otherwise it 
would have been a preposterous thing for
 him to have prayed for life1 as it     
would have been an affront to ,god1 to  
have desired to have changed his        
purpose4 ,but ,god1 on the other hand1  
designed1 by this warning1 to put him   
upon importunate prayer for life2       
therefore when he says1 ,i will add to  
thy days fifteen years1 the meaning is  
only this1 though thou mightest before  
have expected death1 my design in giving
 thee that intimation1 was1 that thou   
shouldest pray for life1 which might be 
given thee by a miracle1 and now ,i will
 work a miracle1 and fulfil1 in this    
respect1 what ,i before purposed in     
adding to thy life fifteen years4       
,object4 #c4 ,it is farther objected1   
against the doctrine of election and    
reprobation1 and particularly the       
immutability of ,god's purpose therein1 
that it tends to establish a fatal      
necessity of things1 and overthrow that 
known distinction that there is between 

things1 as necessary1 or contingent1 as 
though nothing in the whole series of   
causes and effects could happen         
otherwise than it does1 and ,god himself
 were confined to such a method of      
acting1 that it was impossible for him  
to have done the contrary2 which is     
nothing else but the ,stoical doctrine  
of fate applied to1 and defended by some
 scriptures1 though it be contrary to   
others1 which speak of the uncertainty  
of future events4  ,thus ,god speaks of 
the ,jews1 turning from their           
iniquities1 and his bestowing pardoning 
mercy1 as the result thereof1 as an     
uncertain event1 when he says1 in ,jer4 
xxxvi4 #c4 ,it may be that the house of 
,judah will hear all the evil1 which ,i 
purpose to do unto them1 that they may  
return every man from his evil way1 that
 ,i may forgive their iniquity and their
 sin4 ,so when ,god gave the ,jews a    
sign1 immediately before the captivity1 
taken from the prophet ,ezekiel's       
personating one that was removing his   

stuff1 or household-goods1 as           
signifying1 that the nation in general  
should soon remove to other habitations1
 when carried captive into ,babylon1 he 
adds1 upon this occasion1 ,it may be    
they will consider1 though they be a    
rebellious house1 ,ezek4 xii4 #c4 ,and  
the prophet ,zephaniah exhorts the      
people to seek righteousness and        
meekness1 and1 as the consequence       
thereof1 says1 ,it may be ye shall be   
hid in the day of the ,lord's anger1    
,zeph4 ii4 #c4 ,and the apostle speaks  
of the uncertainty of the divine        
dispensations of grace1 when he advises 
,timothy1 in meekness1 to instruct those
 that oppose themselves1 if ,god1       
peradventure1 will give them repentance1
 to the acknowledging of the truth1 #b  
,tim4 ii4 #be4 which is directly        
contrary to the unalterable necessity of
 events1 depending upon the divine      
purpose1 according to the doctrine of   
election4  ,answ4 #a4 ,as to the former 
part of this objection1 in which this   

doctrine is pretended to have taken its 
rise from1 and to be agreeable to1 that 
of the ,stoics1 concerning fate and     
destiny1 it will not be much to our     
purpose to enquire what was the opinion 
of that sect of philosophers concerning 
it2 and1 indeed1 it will be difficult to
 fix on a just sense thereof1 in which  
they all agree4 ,some are of opinion1   
that many of them intended nothing else 
thereby1 but the immutability of ,god's 
purposes1 but the dispensation of his   
providence1 being a necessary execution 
thereof2 and when he is said to be bound
 by the laws of fate1 they mean1 that he
 cannot act contrary to what himself has
 determined4#bcd ,and1 had it been      
universally explained by them in this   
sense1 it would not have done them much 
service1 who oppose the doctrine of     
election1 to have compared it therewith2
 for it would only have proved the      
agreeableness of the doctrine of the    
immutability of ,god's purpose1 relating
 to all events1 to the light of nature1 

as some of the heathen were thereby     
instructed in it4 ,but since this does  
not appear to be the sense of all the   
,stoicks about the doctrine of fate1 but
 some of them understood it in the same 
sense as it is represented in the       
objection1 this we cannot but militate  
against1 and assert the doctrine of     
election to be very remote from it4     
,therefore we need only1 in answer to   
this part of the objection1 explain what
 we mean1 when we maintain the necessity
 of events1 as founded on the will of   
,god4 ,we are far from asserting that   
there is a necessary connexion between  
second causes1 and their respective     
effects1 in which some are produced     
arbitrarily1 by the will of intelligent 
creatures2 and when we call any thing a 
necessary cause1 producing effects1     
according to its own nature1 we suppose 
that this is agreeable to the order1 or 
course of nature1 which was fixed by    
,god4 ,all that we pretend to prove1 is 
the dependence of things on the divine  

will1 and the necessity of ,god's       
purposes taking effect2 so that that    
which is arbitrary or contingent1 which 
might be1 or not be1 as depending on1 or
 relating to second causes1 is          
eventually necessary1 as it is an       
accomplishment of the divine purpose4   
,therefore we always distinguish between
 things being contingent1 with respect  
to us1 and their being so1 with respect 
to ,god2 and1 consequently1 though it   
may be1 or peradventure1 may be applied 
to the apparent event of things1 these  
words can never be applied to the       
fulfilling of the divine will2 and this 
leads us to consider the latter part of 
the objection2 therefore1  #b4 ,as to   
the scripture's speaking concerning the 
uncertainty of future events1 in those  
places mentioned in the objection1      
these1 and all others of the like       
nature1 in which such a mode of speaking
 is used1 may be explained1 by          
distinguishing between what might       
reasonably have been expected to be the 

event of things1 supposing men had not  
been given up to the blindness of their 
mind1 and hearts1 to act below the      
dictates of reason1 without consulting  
their own safety and happiness1 or      
expressing their gratitude to ,god2 and 
what would be the real event of things1 
which ,god was not pleased to reveal1   
and therefore was unknown to them4      
,thus1 when the prophets ,jeremiah and  
,ezekiel represented the repentance and 
reformation of ,israel as an uncertain  
event1 as well as their forgiveness1 and
 deliverance from the captivity1        
connected with it1 in such dubious      
terms1 ,it may be they will consider and
 return1 every man from his evil way2 it
 implies1 that this was what might have 
been reasonably expected by men1 though 
it was no matter of uncertainty to the  
heart-searching ,god1 who knoweth the   
end from the beginning1 and perfectly   
foresees what will be the event of      
things1 which1 in various respects1 are 
under the direction of his providence4  

,though it could hardly be thought1 by  
men1 that such an admonition should be  
treated with such contempt1 yet ,god    
knew how they would behave themselves2  
there was no peradventure with respect  
to his judgment thereof2 he knew that   
they would not repent1 otherwise he     
would have inclined their wills1 and    
effectually have persuaded them to      
exercise this grace1 and thereby have   
prevented his expectation1 or           
determination1 from being disappointed1 
or frustrated4  ,if it be objected1     
that1 according to this sense of the    
text1 the prophet's message to the      
people would have been to no purpose1   
and his ministry1 among them1 exercised 
in vain2 or that it was contrary to the 
wisdom and goodness of ,god to make this
 overture to them1 when he knew it would
 not be complied with4  ,to this it may 
be replied1 that the great ,god is not  
bound to decline the asserting his right
 to man's obedience1 or requiring that  
which is a just debt to him1 though he  

knew that they would not comply with his
 demand thereof2 and1 indeed1 this      
objection cannot be maintained1 without 
supposing1 that1 when the gospel is     
preached to man1 the glory of the divine
 wisdom and goodness therein cannot be  
secured1 unless we conclude either that 
,god doth not know whether man will     
embrace it1 or no1 which is contrary to 
his omniscience2 or that he determines1 
that all1 to whom the gospel is         
preached1 shall embrace it1 which is    
contrary to matter of fact4 ,but there  
may be a medium between both these1     
which vindicates the divine perfections1
 in ordering that the gospel should be  
preached1 and thereby asserting his     
sovereignty1 and unalienable right to   
their obedience2 accordingly1 there     
might be a small remnant among them1 in 
whom ,god designed that this message    
should take effect4 ,and will any one   
say1 that because the goodness of ,god  
was not herein demonstrated to all1 that
 therefore no glory was brought to that 

perfection8  ,and if it be farther said1
 that supposing there were some who     
turned from their evil ways1 the        
captivity1 which was threatened1 was not
 hereby prevented1 and therefore the    
promise1 relating thereunto1 did not    
take place2 to this it may be replied2  
that as ,god did not give them ground to
 expect this blessing1 unless this      
repentance should be more universal1    
than it really was1 so he had various   
ways to testify his regard to those who 
should receive advantage by this        
message1 for whose sake it was          
principally intended4  ,as for that     
other scripture1 in which ,god advises  
his people to seek righteousness and    
meekness1 and1 as the consequence       
hereof1 says1 it may be ye may be hid in
 the day of the ,lord's fierce anger2   
the meaning is1 that they1 who were     
enabled to exercise these graces1 should
 either have some instances of temporal 
deliverance vouchsafed to them2 or if   
not1 that they should have no reason to 

complain that the exercise thereof was  
altogether in vain4  ,as for that       
scripture1 in which the apostle bids    
,timothy to exhort those that oppose the
 gospel1 if1 peradventure1 ,god would   
give them repentance to the             
acknowledging of the truth2 the meaning 
is1 that it was uncertain to ,timothy   
whether ,god would give this grace or   
no2 and therefore he must preach the    
gospel1 whatever were the event thereof3
 ,nevertheless1 it was no matter of     
uncertainty1 with respect to ,god1 who  
must be supposed to know what grace he  
designs to bestow1 and therefore the    
event of things may be dubious to us1   
and yet be certain with respect to him4 
,object4 #d4 ,another objection1 against
 the doctrine of election and           
reprobation1 is1 that it is altogether  
inconsistent with the preaching of the  
gospel2 for if ,god has determined the  
final state of man1 so that his purpose 
cannot be altered1 then it is a         
preposterous thing1 not to say illusory1

 for grace to be offered to the chief of
 sinners1 which must certainly argue1   
that it is impossible to be attained by 
them2 and1 since the overture is        
universal1 we must conclude that ,god   
has put all mankind into a salvable     
state1 and consequently not excluded any
 from salvation by his peremptory and   
unchangeable decree4 ,to what purpose   
are the promises of the gospel held     
forth1 to all that sit under the sound  
thereof1 if it be impossible for them to
 attain the blessings promised therein8 
,or what regard could men be supposed to
 have to the promises1 if they were not 
a declaration of ,god's purpose8 ,and1  
on the other hand1 the threatnings      
denounced would be as little regarded1  
as an expedient to deter men from       
sinning1 if their state were unalterably
 fixed by ,god1 according to this       
doctrine of election1 as it has been    
before considered4  ,answ4 ,that we may 
proceed with greater clearness in       
answering this objection1 we shall first

 shew what we mean by preaching the     
gospel1 which is nothing else but a     
declaration of ,god's revealed will1 and
 our duty pursuant thereunto1 which is  
to be made known1 particularly what is  
contained in the word of ,god1 relating 
to the salvation of men1 and the way    
which he has ordained in order to their 
attaining it4 ,therefore1  #a4 ,when    
this salvation is said to be offered in 
the gospel1 we intend nothing else      
thereby1 but that a declaration is made 
to sinners1 that there are many         
invaluable privileges which ,christ has 
purchased for1 and will1 in his own time
 and way1 apply to all those whom ,god  
has purposed to save2 and1 since we     
cannot describe them by name1 and no    
unregenerate person has ground to       
conclude that he is of that number1     
therefore there is a farther declaration
 to be made1 namely1 that ,god has      
inseparably connected this salvation1   
which he has chosen them to1 with faith 
and repentance1 and the exercise of all 

other graces1 which1 as they are ,god's 
gift1 and to be prayed for1 and         
expected1 in a diligent attendance on   
all his ordinances2 so they are to be   
considered as the mark and evidences of 
their being chosen to salvation1 without
 which1 it is certainly a vain and      
presumptuous thing for any one to       
pretend that he has a right to it1 as   
the object of ,god's eternal election4  
#b4 ,no one1 who preaches the gospel1   
has any warrant from ,god to tell any   
individual person that whether he       
repents and believes1 or no1 he shall be
 saved2 or1 to direct his discourse to  
him1 as one that is chosen thereunto1   
much less to give the impenitent sinner 
occasion to conclude1 that1 though he   
obstinately1 and finally1 remain in a   
state of rebellion against ,god1        
notwithstanding he may hope to be saved1
 because there is a number of mankind   
chosen to salvation2 for this is not to 
declare ,god's revealed will1 but that  
which is directly contrary to it1 and   

therefore not to preach the gospel4     
,therefore1  #c4 ,all1 who sit under the
 sound of the gospel1 ought to look upon
 it as a declaration of ,god's design to
 save a part of mankind1 under the      
preaching thereof1 and among them the   
chief of sinners1 which they have a     
sufficient ground to conclude themselves
 to be2 but yet a door of hope is so far
 opened hereby1 that they have no reason
 to conclude that they are rejected1 any
 more than that they are elected2 and1  
while they wait on ,god's instituted    
means of grace1 they have1 at least1    
this encouragement1 that1 peradventure1 
they may be of the number of ,god's     
elect2 and1 when they find in themselves
 that faith1 which is the evidence      
thereof1 then they may determine their  
interest in1 and lay claim to this      
privilege1 when they are enabled to make
 their calling1 and thereby their       
election sure4  ,and as for the promises
 and threatnings1 these are to be       
considered by unregenerate persons1     

without determining their right to the  
one1 or falling under the other1 as     
elected or rejected2 for that is still  
supposed to be a secret2 therefore they 
are to regard the promise1 as a         
declaration of ,god's purpose1 relating 
to the connexion that there is between  
faith and salvation1 as an inducement to
 perform the one1 in expectation of the 
other4 ,and as for the threatnings1     
though they determine the present state 
of impenitent sinners to be such1 in    
which they are undone and miserable1 yet
 they are not to be extended to those   
events1 which are hid in the purpose of 
,god1 so as to give any one ground to   
conclude that he is thereby finally     
excluded from salvation1 since such an  
exclusion as this is inseparably        
connected with final impenitency and    
unbelief4  ,object4 #e4 ,it is farther  
objected1 that this doctrine is1 in many
 instances subversive of practical      
religion4 ,and1  #a4 ,that it is        
inconsistent with the duty of prayer2   

for if ,god has determined to save a    
person1 what need has he to ask a       
blessing1 which is already granted8 and1
 if he has determined to reject him1 his
 prayer will be in vain4  #b4 ,it is    
farther supposed1 that it leads to      
presumption1 on the one hand1 or        
despair1 on the other2 election1 to     
presumption2 reprobation1 to despair4   
,and1  #c4 ,they add1 that it leads to  
licentiousness1 as it is inconsistent   
with our using endeavours that we may be
 saved3 for to what purpose is it for   
persons to strive to enter in at the    
strait gate1 when all their endeavours  
will be ineffectual1 if they are not    
elected8 or to what purpose is it for   
persons to use any endeavours to escape 
the wrath of ,god1 due to sin1 if they  
are appointed to wrath1 and so must     
necessarily perish8  ,answ4 ,this       
objection is1 beyond measure1 shocking2 
and it is no wonder1 that a doctrine1   
that is supposed to have such           
consequences attending it1 is treated   

with the utmost degree of detestation3  
but as the greatest part of the         
objections against it1 are no other than
 misrepresentations thereof1 so it is no
 difficult matter to reply to them1 to  
the conviction of those who are disposed
 to judge impartially of the matter in  
controversy between us4 ,we shall       
therefore proceed to reply to the       
several branches of this objection4     
,and1  #a4 ,as to what concerns the duty
 of prayer2 when we are engaged in it1  
we are not to suppose that we are to    
deal with ,god1 in such a way1 as when  
we have to do with men1 whom we suppose 
to be undetermined1 and that they are to
 be moved1 by intreaties1 to alter their
 present resolutions1 and to give us    
what we ask for2 for that is to conceive
 of him as altogether such an one as    
ourselves2 accordingly1 we are not to   
conclude1 that he has not determined to 
grant the thing that we are to pray to  
him for2 for that would be              
presumptuously to enter into his secret 

purpose1 since he has no where told us  
we shall be denied the blessings we     
want2 but rather that there is          
forgiveness with him1 and mercy for the 
chief of sinners1 as an encouragement to
 this duty2 and1 besides this1 has given
 us farther ground to hope for a        
gracious answer of prayer1 where he     
gives a heart to seek him4 ,therefore we
 are to behave ourselves1 in this duty1 
as those who pretend not to know ,god's 
secret purpose1 but rather desire to    
wait for some gracious intimation or    
token for good1 that he will hear and   
answer our prayer2 therefore his secret 
purpose is no more inconsistent with    
this duty1 than if1 with those that deny
 the doctrine we are maintaining1 we    
should conclude that this matter is not 
determined by him4  #b4 ,as to this     
doctrine's leading to presumption1 or   
despair1 there is no ground to conclude 
that it has a tendency to either of     
them4 ,it cannot lead to presumption1   
inasmuch as election is not discovered  

to any one till he believes2 therefore  
an unconverted person has no ground to  
presume and conclude1 that all is well  
with him1 because he is elected2 for    
that is boldly to determine a thing that
 he knows nothing of2 the objection     
therefore1 with respect to such1        
supposes that to be known1 which remains
 a secret4 ,and1 on the other hand1 they
 have no ground to despair1 on a        
supposition that they are finally       
rejected2 for it is one thing to be the 
object of the decree of reprobation1    
which no one can1 or ought to determine1
 concerning himself1 so long as he is in
 this world1 much more if we consider   
him as enjoying the means of grace1 and 
a door of hope is open to him therein2  
and ,god has pleased to declare1 in the 
gospel1 that he will receive sinners    
that repent and believe in him1 how     
unworthy soever they are2 therefore such
 are not to conclude that their state is
 desperate1 though it be exceeding      
dangerous1 but to wait for the efficacy 

of the means of grace1 and those        
blessings that accompany salvation4     
,and as for those that are in a         
converted state1 this doctrine is far   
from having a tendency1 either to lead  
them to presumption1 or despair2 but1 on
 the other hand1 to thankfulness to     
,god1 for his discriminating grace1     
which1 when persons experience1 they are
 not only encouraged to hope for farther
 blessings1 but to perform those duties 
whereby they may express their gratitude
 to him4 ,as for presumption1 which is  
the only thing that election is         
pretended to lead them to1 that cannot  
be the natural consequence or tendency  
thereof2 for if they presume that they  
shall be saved1 this is not to be       
reckoned a crime in them2 for that      
presumption which is supposed to be so  
in the objection consists in a person's 
expecting a blessing without reason2 but
 this is contrary to the supposition    
that he is a believer2 and it would be a
 strange method of reasoning to infer1  

that he1 who has ground to conclude that
 he has a right to eternal life1 from   
those marks and evidences of grace1     
which he finds in himself1 is guilty of 
a sinful presumption1 when he is induced
 hereby to lay claim to it2 and         
therefore the sense of the objection1   
must be this1 that a believer having    
been once enabled to conclude himself   
elected1 may1 from hence1 take occasion1
 supposing that his work is done1 and   
his end answered1 to return to his      
former wicked life1 and yet still       
presume that he shall be saved2 whereas 
that would be a certain indication that 
he had no ground to conclude this1 but  
was mistaken1 when he thought that he   
had2 so that this doctrine cannot lead a
 believer1 as such1 to presumption1 and 
consequently the objection1 in which it 
is supposed that it does1 is founded on 
one of these two mistakes1 viz4 that    
every one1 who is elected to salvation1 
knows his interest in this privilege1 as
 though it were immediately revealed to 

him1 without inferring it from any marks
 and evidences of grace that he finds in
 himself2 or else1 that it is impossible
 for any one1 who thinks that he        
believes1 and1 from thence1 concludes   
that he is elected1 to appear afterwards
 to have been mistaken in the judgment1 
which he then passed upon himself2 but  
either of these contain a               
misrepresentation of the consequences of
 the doctrine of election2 neither is   
there any regard had to that necessary  
distinction that there is1 between a    
person's being chosen to eternal life1  
and his being able to determine himself 
to be interested in this privilege2 and 
it is contrary to what we have before   
considered1 that whenever ,god chooses  
to the end1 he chooses to the means1    
which are inseparably connected with it1
 which is the only rule whereby we are  
warranted1 when applying it to          
ourselves1 to conclude that we shall be 
saved4  #c4 ,it cannot1 in the least1 be
 proved that this doctrine has any      

tendency to lead persons to             
licentiousness2 nor is it inconsistent  
with our using the utmost endeavours to 
attain salvation4 ,if it be said1 that  
many vile persons take occasion1 from   
hence1 to give the reins to their       
corruption2 that is not the natural1 or 
necessary consequence thereof2 since    
there is no truth but what may be       
abused4 ,the apostle ,paul did not think
 the doctrine of the grace of ,god1     
which he so strenuously maintained1 was 
less true1 ,or glorious1 because some   
drew this vile consequence from it1 ,let
 us continue in sin1 that grace may     
abound1 ,rom4 vi4 #a4  ,and as for those
 means1 which ,god has ordained to bring
 about the salvation of his people1 we  
are obliged to attend upon them1 though 
we know not1 before-hand1 what will     
certainly be the event thereof2 and if  
through the blessing of ,god            
accompanying them1 we are effectually   
called and sanctified1 and thereby      
enabled to know our election1 this will 

7agreeably to the experience of all true
 believers17 have a tendency to promote 
holiness4  ,object4 #f4 ,it is farther  
objected1 that more especially against  
the doctrine of reprobation1 that it    
argues ,god to be the author of sin2 and
 particularly in such instances as      
these1 viz4 with respect to the first   
entrance of sin into the world1 and in  
,god's imputing the sin of our first    
parents to all their posterity1 and     
afterwards suffering it to make such a  
progress as it has done ever since2 and1
 most of all1 when it is supposed that  
this is not only the result of the      
divine purpose1 but that it also        
respects the blinding men's minds1 and  
hardening their hearts1 and so rendering
 their final impenitency and perdition  
unavoidable4  ,answ4 ,to this it may be 
answered1  #a4 ,as to what concerns the 
first entrance of sin into the world1 it
 cannot reasonably be denied1 that the  
purpose of ,god was concerned about it1 
before it was committed1 in the same    

sense as his actual providence was      
afterwards1 namely1 in permitting1      
though not effecting it2 notwithstanding
 this was not the cause of the          
committing it1 since a bare permission  
has no positive efficiency in order     
thereunto2 the not hindering1 or        
restraining a wicked action1 does not   
render him the author of it4 ,it is     
true1 ,god knew how man would behave1   
and particularly1 that he would         
mis-improve and forfeit that original   
righteousness1 in which he was created1 
and that1 by this means1 he would       
contract that guilt1 which was the      
consequence thereof1 and thereby render 
himself liable to his just displeasure2 
to deny this1 would be to deny that he  
foreknew that1 from eternity1 which he  
knew in time4 ,and1 so far as the actual
 providence of ,god was conversant about
 what was natural therein1 so far his   
purpose determined that it should be2   
but neither does this argue him to be   
the author of sin4 ,but this will be    

farther considered1 when we speak       
concerning the actual providence of ,god
 under a following answer4#bce  #b4 ,as 
to that part of the objection1 which    
respects the imputing the sin of our    
first parents to all their posterity1   
that is more frequently brought against 
this doctrine than any other2 and it is 
generally represented in the most       
indefensible terms1 without making any  
abatements as to the degree of          
punishment that was due to it2 and1     
accordingly1 they think that we can     
hardly have the front to affirm1 that   
our arguments1 in defence hereof1 are   
agreeable to the divine perfections1 as 
we pretend those others are1 which have 
been brought in defence of this         
doctrine4 ,but1 ,i hope1 we shall be    
able to maintain the doctrine of        
original sin1 in consistency with the   
divine perfections1 as well as          
scripture1 in its proper place1 to which
 we shall refer it4#bcf ,therefore all  
that ,i shall add1 at present1 is1 that 

if the doctrine of original sin be so   
explained1 as that it does not render   
,god the author of sin1 his purpose     
relating thereunto1 which must be       
supposed1 in all respects1 to correspond
 with it1 does not argue him to be the  
author of it4  #c4 ,as to the progress  
of sin in the world1 and the proneness  
of all mankind to rebel against ,god2   
this1 as before was observed1 concerning
 sin in general1 is the object of his   
permissive1 but not his effective will2 
though there is this difference between 
,god's suffering sin to enter into the  
world at first1 and his suffering the   
continuance1 or increase of it therein1 
that1 at first1 he dealt with man as an 
innocent creature1 and only left him to 
the mutability of his own will1 having  
before given him a power to retain his  
integrity4 ,but the fallen creature is  
become weak1 and unable to do any thing 
that is good in all its circumstances1  
and afterwards is more and more inclined
 to sin1 by contracting vicious habits1 

and persisting therein4 ,now1 though    
,god's leaving man to himself at first1 
when there was no forfeiture made of his
 preventing grace1 must be reckoned an  
act of mere sovereignty1 his leaving    
sinners to themselves may be reckoned an
 act of justice1 as a punishment of sin 
before committed1 and neither of these  
argue him to be the author of it2       
neither does the purpose of ,god1       
relating thereunto1 give the least      
occasion for such an inference4  ,again1
 we must distinguish between the        
occasion and the cause of sin4 ,god's   
providential dispensations1 though      
unexceptionably holy and righteous1 are 
often-times the occasion thereof3 thus  
his afflictive hand sometimes occasions 
the corruptions of men to break forth1  
in repining at1 and quarrelling with his
 providence2 and his giving outward     
blessings to one1 which he withholds    
from another1 gives occasion1 to some1  
to complain of the injustice of his     
dealings with them2 and the strictness1 

and holiness of his law1 and gives      
occasion1 to corrupt nature to discover 
itself in the blackest colours2 the     
apostle plainly evinces this truth1 when
 he says1 ,sin taking occasion by the   
commandment1 wrought in me all manner of
 concupiscence1 ,rom4 vii4 #h4 and1     
indeed1 there is nothing in the whole   
compass of providence1 or in the methods
 of the divine government therein1 but  
what may be1 and often is1 an occasion  
of sin1 in wicked men4 ,but certainly it
 is not the cause of it2 even as the    
clemency of a prince may occasion a     
rebellion among his subjects2 but it is 
the vile ingratitude1 and wickedness of 
their nature1 that is the spring and    
cause thereof2 so the providence1 and   
consequently the purpose of ,god1 which 
is executed thereby1 may be the occasion
 of sin1 and yet the charge brought in  
this objection1 as though ,god hereby   
was argued to be the author of sin1 is  
altogether groundless4  #d4 ,as to what 
is farther objected1 relating to the    

purpose of ,god1 to blind the minds1 and
 harden the hearts of men1 and that     
final impenitency1 which is the         
consequence thereof1 ,god forbid that we
 should assert that this is a positive  
act in him2 and1 so far as it contains  
nothing else but his determining to deny
 that grace1 which would have had the   
contrary effect1 or his providence      
relating thereunto1 this does not give  
any countenance to the objection1 or    
weaken the force of the arguments that  
we have before laid down1 which is very 
consistent therewith4  ,object4 #g4     
,there is another objection1 which is   
generally laid down in so moving a way1 
that1 whether the argument be just or   
no1 the style is adapted to affect the  
minds of men with prejudice against this
 doctrine1 and that is taken from the   
inconsistency thereof with ,god's       
judicial proceedings against the wicked 
in the day of judgment1 and that it will
 afford the sinner a plea1 in which he  
may say to this effect3 ,lord1 ,i sinned

 by a fatal necessity2 it was impossible
 for me to avoid that which thou art now
 offended with me for2 it was what thou 
didst decree should come to pass4 ,i    
have been told1 that thy decrees are    
unalterable1 and that it is as          
impossible to change the course of      
nature1 or to remove the mountains1     
which thou hast fixed with thy hand1 as 
to alter thy purpose2 wilt thou then    
condemn one1 who sinned and fell        
pursuant to thy will8 ,dost thou will   
that men should sin and perish1 and then
 lay the blame at their door1 as though 
they were culpable for doing what thou  
hast determined should be done8  ,answ4 
,this objection supposes that the decree
 of ,god lays a necessary constraint on1
 and enforces the will of man to sin2   
which1 if they could make it appear that
 it does1 no reply could be made to it4 
,but this is to represent the argument  
we are maintaining in such a way1 in    
which no one1 who has just ideas of this
 doctrine1 would ever understand it1 and

 it is directly contrary to the         
foregoing method of explaining it4 ,we  
have already proved1 in our answer to   
the third objection1 that sin is not    
necessary in that sense1 in which they  
suppose it to be1 or that1 though the   
decree of ,god renders events necessary1
 yet it does not take away the          
efficiency of second causes1 and        
therefore the purpose of ,god1 relating 
thereunto1 is not to be pleaded1 as an  
excuse for it1 or as a ground of        
exemption from punishment4 ,we read of  
the ,jews1 that1 with wicked hands1 they
 crucified our ,saviour2 the crime was  
their own2 but this is expressly said to
 have been done by1 or1 in pursuance of1
 the determinate counsel and            
fore-knowledge of ,god1 ,acts ii4 #bc4  
,he fore-knew what they would do1 and   
purposed not to prevent it2 but yet he  
did not force their will to commit it4  
,and elsewhere ,god says1 concerning    
,israel1 ,thou heardest not2 yea1 thou  
knewest not2 from that time thine ear   

was not opened2 and then he adds1 ,i    
knew that thou wouldest deal very       
treacherously1 ,isa4 xlviii4 #h4 ,israel
 might as well have pleaded1 that ,god  
knew1 before-hand1 how they would behave
 themselves1 and so have thrown the     
blame on him1 for not preventing this   
foreseen event1 but suffering them to go
 on in this destructive way1 with as    
much reason1 as the sinner is supposed1 
in the objection1 to have1 when taking  
occasion so to plead1 as he is          
represented1 as having ground to do1 in 
the day of judgment1 as a consequence   
from the doctrine we are maintaining4   
,again1 whatever has been said          
concerning the immutability of the      
divine purpose1 yet this does not give  
the least countenance to any one's      
charging his sin on ,god2 as we have1 in
 answer to the last objection1 proved   
that it does not render him the author  
of sin2 and therefore man's destruction 
must lie at his own door4 ,it is one    
thing to say1 that it is in the sinner's

 power to save himself1 and another     
thing to say1 that the sin he commits is
 not wilful1 and therefore that guilt is
 not contracted thereby2 and1 if so1    
then this affords no matter of excuse to
 the sinner1 according to the import of 
the objection4  ,,ix4 ,we are now to    
consider some things that may be        
inferred from the doctrine we have been 
insisting on1 and how it is to be       
practically improved by us1 to the glory
 of ,god1 and our spiritual advantage4  
,and1  #a4 ,from the methods taken to   
oppose and decry it1 by                 
misrepresentations1 which contain little
 less than blasphemy1 we infer1 that    
however unjust consequences deduced from
 a doctrine may be an hindrance to its  
obtaining in the world2 yet this method 
of opposition will not render it less   
true1 or defensible2 nor ought it to    
prejudice the minds of men against the  
sacred writings1 or religion in general4
 ,we cannot but observe1 that while     
several scriptures are produced in      

defence of this doctrine and others in  
opposition to it1 and the utmost        
cautions have not been used to reconcile
 the sense given thereof with the       
natural ideas which we have of the      
divine perfections2 and many1 in        
defending one side of the question have 
made use of unguarded expressions1 or   
called that a scripture-doctrine which  
is remote from it2 and others1 in       
opposition hereunto1 have1 with too much
 assurance1 charged the defenders       
thereof with those consequences1 which  
are neither avowed by them1 nor justly  
deduced from their method of reasoning2 
the unthinking and irreligious part of  
mankind have taken occasion1 from hence1
 with the ,deists1 to set themselves    
against revealed religion1 or to give   
way to scepticism1 as though there were 
nothing certain1 or defensible1 in      
religion2 and take occasion to make it  
the subject of satire and ridicule4     
,but1 passing this by1 though it is a   
matter very much to be lamented we will 

consider this doctrine as rendered less 
exceptionable1 or more justly           
represented2 and1 accordingly1  #b4 ,we 
may infer from it1 that as it is        
agreeable to the divine perfections1 so 
it has the greatest tendency to promote 
practical godliness4 ,for1  7#a47 ,since
 ,god has fore-ordained whatever comes  
to pass2 this should lead us to an      
humble submission to his will1 in all   
the dispensations of his providence4    
,when we consider that nothing1 in this 
respect comes by chance2 this should    
have a tendency to quiet our minds1 and 
silence all our murmuring and uneasy    
thoughts1 whatever afflictions we are   
exposed to4 ,we are too apt to complain 
sometimes of second causes1 as though   
all our miseries took their rise from   
thence2 and1 at other times1 to afflict 
ourselves beyond measure1 as            
apprehending that those proper means    
have not been used1 which might have    
prevented them2 as ,martha tells our    
,saviour1 ,if thou hadst been here1 my  

brother had not died1 ,john xi4 #ba4    
whereas we ought rather to consider1    
that all this befalls us in pursuance of
 ,god's purpose3 had he designed to have
 prevented the affliction1 he would have
 directed to other means conducive to   
that end1 or would have attended those  
that have been used1 with their desired 
success4 ,we use the means as not       
knowing what are the secret purposes of 
,god1 with respect to the event of      
things2 but1 when this is made known to 
us1 it should teach us to acquiesce in1 
and be entirely resigned to the divine  
will4  7#b47 ,when we cannot see the    
reason1 or understand the meaning of the
 dispensations of divine providence1 and
 are not able to pass a judgment        
concerning future events1 whether       
relating unto ourselves1 or others2 and1
 when all things look with a very dismal
 aspect1 as to what concerns the        
interest and church of ,god in the      
world1 we must be content to wait till  
he is pleased to discover them to us2   

what he oftentimes does1 we know not    
now1 but shall know hereafter1 as our   
,saviour said to one of his disciples1  
,john xiii4 #g4 ,it is no wonder that we
 are at a loss1 as to ,god's purposes1  
since secret things belong to him2 and  
therefore all that we are to do1 in such
 a case1 is1 to rest satisfied1 that all
 these things shall1 in the end1 appear 
to have a tendency to advance his own   
perfections1 and bring about the        
salvation of his people4  7#c47 ,since  
the purpose of ,god respects the means1 
as well as the end1 this should put us  
upon the use of those proper means1 in  
which we may hope to obtain grace and   
glory2 and therefore this doctrine does 
not lead us to sloth1 and indifference  
in religion2 for that is to suppose1    
that the ends and means are separated in
 ,god's purpose3 and when1 through his  
blessing attending them1 the ordinances1
 or means of grace1 are made effectual  
for the working of faith1 and all other 
graces1 these being connected1 in ,god's

 purpose1 with glory1 it ought to       
encourage our hope relating to the end  
of faith1 even the salvation of our     
souls4  7#d47 ,let us take heed that we 
do not peremptorily1 without ground     
conclude ourselves elected unto eternal 
life1 on the one hand1 or rejected on   
the other4 ,to determine that we are    
chosen to salvation1 before we are      
effectually called1 is presumptuously to
 enter into ,god's secret counsels1     
which we cannot1 at present1 have a     
certain and determinate knowledge of2   
but to lay this as a foundation1 as to  
what concerns the conduct of our lives1 
is oftentimes of a very pernicious      
tendency4 ,if1 as the result of this    
conclusion made1 we take encouragement  
to go on in sin1 this will cut the      
sinews of all religion1 and expose us to
 blindness of mind1 and hardness of     
heart1 and a greater degree of          
impenitency and unbelief1 as the        
consequence of this bold presumption and
 affront to the divine ,majesty4        

,neither1 on the other hand1 are we to  
conclude that we are not elected2 for   
though we may be in suspense about the  
event of things1 and not know whether we
 are elected or rejected1 this is not   
inconsistent with our using endeavours  
to attain a good hope1 through grace2   
yet to determine that we are not        
elected1 is to conclude1 against        
ourselves that all endeavours will be to
 no purpose2 which we have no ground to 
do1 since it is one thing to conclude   
that we are in a state of unregeneracy1 
and another thing to determine that we  
are not elected4 ,the consequence of our
 concluding that we are in an           
unconverted state1 ought to be our      
praying1 waiting1 and hoping for the    
efficacy of divine grace1 which extends 
itself to the chief of sinners1 as a    
relief against despair1 though such can 
have no ground to say1 they are elected2
 therefore the safest way1 and that     
which is most conducive to the ends of  
religion1 is to be firmly persuaded1    

that though the final state of man be   
certainly determined by ,god1 yet this  
is to be no rule for an unregenerate    
person to take his measures from1 any   
more than if it were a matter of        
uncertainty1 and1 in all respects1      
undetermined by him4  7#e47 ,let us1    
according to the apostle's advice1 ,give
 diligence to make our calling and      
election sure1 #b ,pet4 i4 #aj4 ,it is  
certainly a very great privilege for us1
 not barely to know1 that some were     
chosen to eternal life1 but to be able  
to conclude that we are of that happy   
number2 and1 in order hereunto1 we must 
not expect to have an extraordinary     
revelation thereof1 or to find ourselves
 described by name in scripture1 as     
though this were the way to attain it2  
for the rule by which we are to judge of
 this matter1 is1 our enquiring whether 
we have those marks1 or evidences       
thereof1 which are contained therein2   
and therefore we are1 by a diligent and 
impartial self-examination1 to endeavour

 to know whether we are called1 or      
enabled1 to perform the obedience of    
faith1 which ,god is said to elect his  
people to2 or whether we are holy1 and  
without blame1 before him in love8      
whether we have the temper and          
disposition of the children of ,god1 as 
an evidence of our being chosen to the  
adoption of children1 and as such1 are  
conformed to the image of ,christ8      
7#f47 ,if we have ground to conclude    
that we are chosen to eternal life1 this
 ought to be improved to the glory of   
,god1 and our own spiritual advantage2  
it ought to put us upon admiring and    
adoring the riches of discriminating    
grace1 which is herein eminently        
illustrated2 and such are under the     
highest obligation to walk humbly with  
,god1 as well as thankfully2 for it is  
owing to his grace1 not only that they  
are chosen to eternal life1 but that    
they are enabled to discern their       
interest in this privilege4#bcg         
,footnote #ahc3    8,certainly1 it is   

not to be understood1 in a literal or   
strict sense1   that ,he does1 all that 
is done4 #8,far be it from ,god1' says  
,elihu1   #8that he should do           
wickedness3 and from the ,almighty1 that
 he should   commit iniquity4' ,doing   
wickedness1 and committing iniquity1 are
   synonymous phrases3 but to impute to 
the ,most ,high1 any thing like   what  
is commonly meant by either of these    
phrases1 is evident   blasphemy4        
8,nor are we to imagine1 certainly1 that
 ,god makes his creatures do1   whatever
 is done by them1 in any such manner as 
is inconsistent with   their own proper 
agency4 ,rational creatures certainly   
act2 and act as   freely1 as if there   
were no being above them to direct their
 steps1 or   to govern their actions4   
,when ,god works in men1 to will and to 
do that   which is good2 they1          
nevertheless will and do it themselves2 
and are   really praise-worthy4 ,and he 
does not1 surely1 so influence any to   
evil1 as to render them unactive1       

involuntary1 or undeserving of   blame4 
8,nor do ,i believe it true1 literally  
and strictly speaking1 that ,god        
creates1 whatsoever comes to pass2      
particularly darkness1 and moral   evil4
    8,but this must not be taken for    
granted1 nor hastily passed over3       
because1 however indisputable1 it is    
disputed4 ,there are some among   us1   
and some who are deservedly in          
reputation for wisdom1 and general      
soundness in the faith2 who appear to be
 of opinion1 that ,god is the   direct  
,author--the immediate ,cause--the      
proper ,creator1 of all evil1 as   well 
as of all good--of all sin1 as well as  
holiness1 in heart and   life--in       
thought1 word1 and deed4    8,this      
opinion1 however1 notwithstanding my    
high esteem and particular   friendship 
for some of the holders of it1 ,i am not
 yet ready to adopt1   for several      
reasons4    8#a4 ,to suppose that the   
actions of men1 whether virtuous or     
vicious1   are created1 seems to        

confound all distinction between        
creation and   ,providence2 or rather1  
wholly to exclude the latter4    8,the  
work of creation1 we used to think1 was 
,god's making creatures   and things1 at
 first2 or giving the beginning of      
existence to matter   and minds1 with   
their various properties1 instincts and 
organizations4   ,and that ,god's works 
of ,providence1 were his preserving     
things already   made1 and governing all
 their operations4 ,but according to    
this new   philosophy1 creation is all2 
,providence is nothing4 ,for what       
preserving and governing of creatures or
 actions can there be1 when   every     
creature and every action1 is every     
moment created anew8 ,an   action1 a    
thought1 or volition1 whether good or   
evil1 is a new and   strange kind of    
creature1 or created thing4 ,but1 in a  
theological   view1 the question before 
us is of chief importance1 as it        
respects   moral evil4 ,i add1          
therefore2    8#b4 ,it appears to me1   

that to suppose ,god the ,creator of    
sin1 whether   in principle or action1  
is hardly reconcilable with his perfect 
holiness4 #8,doth a fountain send forth1
 at the same place1 sweet waters   and  
bitter8' ,can darkness proceed from     
,him1 as its proper source1 in   whom   
there is no darkness at all8    8,it is 
true1 ,god has created many things which
 are of a different   nature from       
himself2 as the bodies of men and       
beasts1 and all parts of   the world of 
matter3 but nothing1 ,i conceive1       
directly opposite to   his own nature2  
as is sin4 ,the sun is the immediate    
cause of the   growth of vegetables2    
though these are essentially different  
from the   sun itself3 but it is not    
thus the cause of ice and darkness2     
which   are no more of a contrary nature
 to it1 than sin is to the nature of    
,god4#ahd    8,i am sensible it has been
 said1 there is no more inconsistency   
with   the holiness of ,god1 in         
supposing him the efficient1 immediate  

cause   of sin1 for necessary good      
purposes2 than in supposing he only     
permits   it1 for wise ends1 and so     
orders things that he knows it will be  
committed4    8,but these two ways of   
accounting for the existence of moral   
evil1   appear to me materially         
different4 ,there are supposable cases  
in which   it would be right for a man1 
not to hinder another from sinning1     
when he could hinder him2 and also to   
place him in circumstances of           
temptation1 expecting that he would sin4
 ,for instance1 a parent may   leave    
money in the way of a child suspected of
 being given to theft2   and may conceal
 himself and let the child steal it2    
with a view to   correct him1 in order  
to reclaim him1 or as a warning to his  
other   children4 ,all this might be    
perfectly right in the parent2 however  
certainly he might know1 that the child 
would be guilty of the   expected crime4
 ,but ,i question whether any case can  
be supposed in   which it would not be  

wrong1 directly to influence another to 
do evil1   that good might come4        
,exciting one to sin by power or        
persuasion2 and   placing one in        
circumstances of trial1 wherein he would
 be tempted to   sin1 without           
restraining him from it1 are surely     
different things1   although the        
certainty of his sinning may be the     
same4    8#c4 ,i dare not think that    
,god creates sin1 and all kinds of evil1
   because this seems plainly contrary  
to the general current of the holy      
scriptures4    8,in the first chapter of
 ,genesis1 it is said1 #8,god saw every 
thing   that he had made1 and1 behold1  
it was very good4' ,of his making two   
great lights1 we are told2 and that he  
made the stars also3 but no   account is
 there given of his creating darkness4  
,respecting our own   species1 the      
inspired historian particularly informs 
us1 that #8,god   created man in his own
 image3 in the image of ,god created he 
him3 male   and female created he them4'

 ,nor do we find in that book1 or in all
   the ,bible1 that he hath since ever  
created them otherwise4 ,solomon   three
 thousand years after the fall1 having  
made diligent search among   men and    
women1 to find out their true character1
 and the cause of   their so universal  
depravity1 says2 #8,lo1 this only have  
,i found1 that   ,god made man upright2 
but they have sought out many           
inventions4'   ,wicked practices1 and   
deceitful inventions to conceal their   
criminality1 are ever ascribed in       
scripture to mankind themselves1 or   to
 other fallen creatures1 and never to   
,god1 as their efficient cause4    8,in 
the ,new-,testament1 christians are said
 to be #8created unto good   works3' and
 we read of #8the new man1 which after  
,god1 is created in   righteousness and 
true holiness'4 ,but no where do we read
 of any one   that was created unto evil
 works2 or after ,satan in              
unrighteousness and sin4 ,it is written1
 #a ,cor4 xiv4 #cc1 #8,god is not   the 

author of confusion1 but of peace4' ,and
 ,james i4 #ac-ag1 #8,let no   man say1 
when he is tempted1 ,i am tempted of    
,god3 for ,god cannot be   tempted with 
evil1 neither tempteth he any man3 but  
every man is   tempted when he is led   
away of his own lust and enticed4--,do  
not err1   my beloved brethren4 ,every  
good gift and every perfect gift is from
   above1 and cometh down from the      
,father of lights4' ,can any thing be   
more express to teach us1 that a        
distinction ought carefully to be   made
 between the origin of good and evil2   
and that we should not   conceive them  
both alike to come from ,god8    8,for  
scripture proof that ,god is not the    
efficient author of sin1 ,i   will only 
add1 that the fruits of the ,spirit1 and
 works of the flesh1   are set in       
contrast and spoken of as diametrical   
opposites3 whereas1   did ,god create   
sinful propensities in men1 or directly 
influence them   to evil actions1 the   
works of the flesh would be as real and 

immediate   fruits of the divine        
,spirit1 as the holiest exercises of the
 best   saints4    8#d4 ,i see no       
occasion for the supposition of ,god's  
being thus the   author of all evil3 nor
 any good ends that it can answer4      
8,could it be seen how evils might be   
accounted for1 without supposing   them 
any part of the creation of ,god2 and   
how ,god might have an   absolute       
dominion over all events1 without being 
the immediate cause   of bad things2 no 
good man1 ,i conclude1 would wish to    
conceive of ,him   as being thus the    
proper source of darkness and evil4 ,and
 indeed1 were   it so1 that our weak    
minds were unable to comprehend how ,god
 can work   all things after the counsel
 of his own will1 or how natural and    
moral   evil could ever have been1      
without believing that ,god is as much1 
and   as immediately1 the cause of evil 
as of good2 yet it might be more        
modest1 and more wise1 to leave these   
among other incomprehensibles1   than to

 have recourse to so bold an hypothesis 
for the solution of   them4 ,but1 ,i    
apprehend1 there is no need of this     
hypothesis in order   to account for the
 existence of evil1 or in order to an   
understanding   belief of the universal 
government of the ,most ,high4          
8,evils1 of most if not all kinds1 are  
such negative things--such mere         
defects1 in their origin at least1 as do
 not need creation1 or require   a      
positive omnipotent cause4 ,this is the 
case1 evidently1 with respect   to      
natural darkness3 it is only the want of
 light4 ,this is the case1   also1 with 
respect to natural death3 it is only the
 cessation1 the   loss1 the want of     
life4 ,and this may be the case1 with   
respect to   spiritual darkness1 and    
spiritual death4 ,it has heretofore been
 the   orthodox opinion1 that all moral 
evil consists radically in privation2   
or1 that unholiness1 at bottom1 is the  
mere want of holiness4 ,and1            
notwithstanding all the floods of light1

 from various quarters1 which   have    
come into the world in this age of new  
discoveries1 possibly this   one old    
opinion may yet be true4 #8,god made man
 upright4' ,that is1 ,he   formed him   
with a disposition impartially just and 
good3 ,he created in   him a principle  
of universal righteousness4 ,when man   
fell1 by eating   the forbidding fruit1 
this principle had not been preserved in
 perfect   strength and exercise4 ,in   
consequence of that disobedience1 the   
divine   internal influence was so      
withdrawn1 that this principle was      
entirely   lost4 ,but we are not told1  
nor need it be supposed1 that any       
opposite   principle was then created in
 him4 ,our first parents had1 ,i        
believe1   in their original formation1 
all the radical instincts of nature     
which   they had after the fall2 or     
which any of their posterity now have4  
,such as a principle of                 
self-preservation1 a desire of          
self-promotion1   and a propensity to   

increase and multiply2 together with all
 the more   particular appetites and    
passions1 subservient to these purposes4
 ,all   these are innocent in           
themselves1 though not in themselves    
virtuous4   ,but these private          
instincts1 when left to operate alone1  
without the   governing influence of a  
public spirit1 or a just regard for     
other   beings1 will naturally lead to  
all manner of iniquity1 in heart and    
life4 ,to avarice and ambition2 to envy 
and malice2 to intemperance and         
lewdness2 to frauds and oppressions2 to 
wars and fightings4    8,there is no    
need of supposing any other divine      
agency1 than only to   uphold in        
existence creatures that have lost their
 virtue1 amidst   surrounding           
temptations1 in order to account for all
 the evil   affections which we ever    
feel1 and for all the external          
wickedness   that is ever committed4    
,nor1 in order to the holiest creatures 
losing   their virtue1 need any thing   

more be supposed on ,god's part1 than   
only   his leaving them to themselves2  
or not upholding in them1 and           
constantly invigorating1 a virtuous     
disposition4    8,and as1 in this way1  
we can account for the existence of all 
manner   of evil2 so we can thus        
understand how it is possible for ,god  
to bring   about whatsoever comes to    
pass1 without his being the actor1 or   
maker1   or instigator1 of any thing    
that is not perfectly good4 ,when ,he   
does   not cause light1 there will be   
darkness4 ,when ,he does not make peace1
   there will be evil4 ,the darkness    
takes place according to his            
appointment1 with the same exactness and
 certainty1 as if ,he actually   created
 it2 and so does evil of every kind4    
,what ,he determines to   permit1       
knowing perfectly the circumstances and 
dispositions of every   agent concerned1
 will as infallibly come to pass1 as    
what he   determines to do himself1 or  
to effect by his own positive influence4

   ,the king's heart1 and the rivers of 
water2 the waves of the sea1 and   the  
tumults of the people1 are in the hand  
of the ,lord1 to all   important intents
 and purposes1 if it be only true that  
,he restrains   them1 or lets them run2 
stilleth them1 or suffereth them to     
rage1 just   as he sees fit4    8,in    
this sense1 ,i conceive1 it is to be    
understood1 that ,god forms the   light1
 and creates darkness2 makes peace1 and 
creates evil4 ,he has the   absolute    
government--the perfect control--the    
entire superintendency1 of   all these  
things4    8,when any folly has been    
committed or any mischief has been done1
 some   are ready to say1 ,it was so    
ordered2 as if therefore nobody was to  
be blamed4 ,but this is a false         
inference1 from just premises4 ,true1 it
   was so ordered of ,god2 and ordered  
righteously and wisely3 but it was   so 
ordered by the doer of the mischief     
also2 and ordered carelessly1   perhaps1
 or wickedly4 ,you will say1 ,it must   

have been so1 and the   actor could not 
have done otherwise3 but1 ,i say1 he    
might have done   otherwise1 if he      
would4 ,it is true1 there is a kind of  
necessity in   the actions of men4 ,they
 necessarily act according to their own 
choice2 and they necessarily choose to  
act according to their own              
disposition4 ,under this kind of        
necessity ,god himself acts4 ,it is     
impossible for him to do1 because it is 
impossible for him to will   that which 
is contrary to his own nature4 ,he      
necessarily wills and   does1 what is   
agreeable to his moral perfections4 ,but
 such a necessity   as this1 is so far  
from being inconsistent with freedom1   
that it is   essential to all free      
agency4 ,actions which can and do take  
place1   contrary to the inclination of 
the agent1 are not his actions4 ,he     
has no command over them2 and therefore 
can deserve no praise or blame   for    
them4    8,the necessity of acting      
according to our own minds1 is all the  

necessity which need be supposed1 when  
we suppose that all our actions   were  
decreed1 and are ordered of ,god4 ,a    
creature that acts according   to any   
laws of nature1 and not at perfect      
random1 without any   self-government1  
acts in such a manner that ,he who knows
 what is in   him1 may fore-know all his
 actions2 and in such a manner that ,he 
in   whose hand his times are1 may      
govern all his volitions4 ,men follow   
their several courses1 as freely as the 
rivers of water1 and with a   higher    
kind of freedom2 yet1 since they run    
agreeably to their own   inclination1   
and cannot do otherwise1 a ,being       
omniscient and   omnipotent1 can        
calculate before hand all their motions2
 can keep them   in the channels decreed
 for them1 and can turn them            
whithersoever he   will4 ,if any do not 
comprehend this1 yet let them not think 
they so   fully comprehend the contrary1
 as to feel certain1 that either man    
cannot be free1 or ,god cannot govern   

the world4 ,certainly the   providential
 government of ,god1 over the hearts and
 ways of men1   though most absolute1 is
 not such but that1 if they do well1    
they are   praise-worthy2 and if they do
 not well1 the sin lieth at their own   
door4    8,neither let it be imagined   
that the criminality of a bad action is 
taken away1 or at all extenuated1       
because it will be over-ruled for       
good4 ,actions are good or evil1        
according to the nature of them1 and    
the intention of the agent1 and not     
according to undesigned   consequences4 
,when we act wickedly1 and with a wicked
 mind1 its being   productive of happy  
effects1 alters nothing in regard to our
   blame-worthiness4 ,in the divine     
decrees1 and in the divine providence1  
#8,whatever is1 is right3' but in the   
conduct of creatures1 many things   that
 are1 are not at all the less wrong4    
,god's governing all things1   so as to 
make them subserve his wise and holy    
designs1 should not lead   us to think  

any more favourably of our own1 or of   
our neighbour's   foolish and sinful    
actions40    ,,smalley',s ,,sermons4    
,footnote #ahd3    8,there is a vast    
difference between the sun's being the  
cause of the   lightsomeness and warmth 
of the atmosphere1 and of the brightness
 of   gold and diamonds1 by its presence
 and positive influence2 and its   being
 the occasion of darkness and frost in  
the night1 by its motion   whereby it   
descends below the horizon4 ,the motion 
of the sun is the   occasion of the     
latter kind of events2 but not the      
proper cause1   efficient1 or producer  
of them4--,no more is any action of the 
divine   ,being1 the cause of the evil  
of men's wills4 ,if the sun were the    
proper cause of cold and darkness1 it   
would be the fountain of these   things1
 as it is the fountain of light and     
heat3 and then something   might be     
argued from the nature of cold and      
darkness1 to a likeness of   nature in  
the sun2 and it might be justly inferred

 that the sun itself   is dark and cold3
 but from its being the cause of these1 
no otherwise   than by its absence1 no  
such thing can be inferred1 but the     
contrary4   ,it may justly be argued    
that the sun is a bright and hot body1  
if cold   and darkness are found to be  
the consequence of its withdrawment2 and
   the more constantly and necessarily  
these effects are connected with   and  
confined to its absence1 the more       
strongly does it argue the sun   to be  
the fountain of light and heat4 ,so1 in 
as much as sin is not the   fruit of any
 positive influence of the ,most ,high1 
but on the contrary1   arises from the  
withdrawment of his action and energy1  
and under   certain circumstances1      
necessarily follows on the want of his  
influence1 this is no argument that he  
is sinful1 or his operation   evil2 but 
on the contrary1 that he and his agency 
are altogether holy1   and that he is   
the fountain of all holiness4 ,it would 
be strange   arguing indeed1 because men

 never commit sin1 but only when ,god   
leaves   them to themselves2 and        
necessarily sin when he does so1 that   
therefore their sin is not from         
themselves1 but from ,god3 as strange   
as it would be to argue1 because it is  
always dark when the sun is   gone1 and 
never dark when he is present1 that     
therefore darkness is   from the sun1   
and that his disk and beams must be     
black40    ,edwards on the ,will4       
,page #bei4 ,boston ,ed4 #aged4         
,footnote #ahe3    ,dr4 ,whitby1 in his 
discourse of election1 c4  ,footnote    
#ahf3    ,see his discourse concerning  
election1 page #cf4 #cg4 c4  ,footnote  
#ahg3    ,see the contrary opinion      
defended by ,whitby in loc4  ,footnote  
#ahh3    ,see ,whitby's discourse1 c4   
page #dj1  seq4  ,footnote #ahi3    ,see
 ,twiss4 ,vind4 ,grat4  de ,prdest4 and 
his riches of ,god's love1   against    
,hord2 and also that part of the        
writings of some others1 in   which they
 treat of predestination1 viz4 ,beza1   

,gomarus1 ,piscator1   ,maccovius1      
,rutherford1 ,whitaker1 and ,perkins4   
,footnote #aij3    ,among these were    
bishop ,davenant1 and other divines1 who
 met in the   synod of ,dort2 also      
,calvin1 ,p4 ,du ,moulin1 ,turrettin1   
and1 indeed1 the   greater number of    
those who have defended the doctrine of 
predestination2 and there are many      
others1 who1 when they treat of it1     
seem to wave the particular matter in   
controversy1 as thinking it of   no     
great importance or that this doctrine  
may be as well defended1   without      
confining themselves to certain modes of
 speaking1 which have   been the ground 
of many prejudices against it1 whose    
prudence and   conduct herein cannot be 
justly blamed4  ,footnote #aia3       4 
non solum ex ,judis2 that is1 those who 
are   called from among the ,jews1 as   
distinguished from the rest of them     
that were rejected4  ,footnote #aib3    
,footnote #aic3    ,see ,questions      
lxvii1 lxviii1 lxxii1 lxxv1 lxxvi4      

,footnote #aid3      4  ,footnote #aie3 
,see ,prov4 viii4 #bc4  ,footnote #aif3 
4  ,footnote #aig3    ,vid4 ,grot4 in   
loc4  ,footnote #aih3    4  ,footnote   
#aii3    ,vid4 ,whitby in loc4          
,footnote #bjj3    ,vid4 ,beza in loc4  
,footnote #bja3    ,the principal text  
that ,dr4 ,whitby refers to1 as         
justifying his sense   of the word1 is  
in ,acts xx4 #ac4 ,we went to ,assos1   
there intending to   take in ,paul1 for 
so had he appointed1 minding himself to 
go afoot2   the words are1       2      
which he understands as though the      
meaning was1 that the apostle was       
disposed1 in his own mind1 to go afoot2 
but that sense is not   agreeable to the
 scope of the text1 for the meaning of  
it seems to be   this3 ,that it was     
determined1 ordered1 or preconcerted by 
them1 before   they set sail2 that ,paul
 should be taken in at ,assos1 since he 
was to   go there afoot2 so that this   
makes nothing to that author's purpose1 
but rather to the sense that we have    

given of the word4  ,footnote #bjb3     
,see ,grot4 in loc4  ,footnote #bjc3    
,see ,dr4 ,whitby in loc4  ,footnote    
#bjd3    ,see ,quest4 xliv1 lxviii4     
,footnote #bje3    ,see ,dr4 ,goodwin1  
vol4 #b4 of election4  ,footnote #bjf3  
4  ,footnote #bjg3    ,see page #acg4   
,footnote #bjh3    ,this is what is     
meant by that axiom1 used by the        
school-men1   ,decretum ,dei1 nihil     
ponit in esse4  ,footnote #bji3    ,thus
 the school-men distinguish between     
necessitas consequentis1   and          
consequenti2 so that that1 which is not 
in itself necessary1   is rendered      
eventually so1 as the consequence of    
,god's purpose1 that   it shall be4     
,footnote #baj3    8,there is no        
necessity for supposing a predestination
 to death1 in the   same sense as unto  
life1 that is to the means and the      
consequent end3   ,for the occurrence of
 sin may be satisfactorily accounted for
 on other   principles2 though without  
pretending to the removal of every      

difficulty in a subject the entire      
comprehension of which is probably      
unsuited to our present state and       
faculties40#baa    ,,smith',s ,,letters 
,,to ,,belsham4  ,footnote #baa3    ,it 
is acknowledged that this view of the   
subject is different from   that which  
most ,calvinistic writers have given4   
,yet several eminent   divines have laid
 down the fundamental principles1 at    
least1 of this   sentiment1 and have    
opened the way to it3 particularly      
,augustine1   ,theophilus ,gale1 and a  
class of ,german ,theologians who may be
 termed   the school of ,leibnitz4 ,a   
short time ago an attempt was made to   
excite   the attention of thinking men  
to his doctrine1 by a ,sermon on the    
,divine glory1 displayed by the         
,permission of ,sin4 ,but1 since the    
publication of that pamphlet1 the       
subject has been more ably and fully    
treated by my reverend tutor1 the ,rev4 
,dr4 ,williams1 in his ,discourse   on  
,predestination to ,life1 published very

 lately4  ,footnote #bab3    4          
,footnote #bac3    ,see ,whitby's       
,paraphrase1 c4 on ,jude1 ver4 #d4      
,footnote #bad3    ,thus ,beza in loc4  
calls them vessels1 because1 as         
creatures1 they   are the workmanship of
 ,god1 the great potter1 but vessels    
prepared for   destruction by           
themselves1 and therefore adds1 ,exitii 
veras causas   minime negem in ipsis    
vasis hrere juxta illud perditio1 tua ex
 te   est4  ,footnote #bae3    ,it ought
 to be observed1 that the word1 here    
used1 is     1 and not 2 nor is there   
any thing added   to the word1 that     
signifies1 that this preparation        
thereunto was   antecedent to their     
being2 or as though it took its rise    
from ,god1 as   the cause of that sin   
for which he designed to punish them2   
whereas1   on the other hand when the   
apostle in the following verse1 speaks  
of   ,god's making known the riches of  
his glory on the vessels of mercy1   to 
wit1 the elect1 they are described as   

those whom he had afore   prepared unto 
glory1    4 ,what should be the   reason
 that the apostle alters the phrase1 but
 that we may hereby be   led to         
consider1 that when ,god chose the elect
 to glory they are   considered in his  
purpose as those whom he designed1 by   
his grace1 to   make meet for it6 ,so   
that the vessels of wrath are considered
 as   fitting themselves for            
destruction2 the vessels of mercy1 as   
persons   whom ,god would first prepare 
for1 and then bring to glory4  ,footnote
 #baf3    ,see ,whitby's ,discourse1 c4 
page #aj4  ,footnote #bag3    ,see his  
,riches of ,god's love1 against ,hord4  
,part ,,ii4 page #ej4  ,footnote #bah3  
,see ,bishop ,patrick in loc4  ,footnote
 #bai3    ,this agrees with the sense   
given of it by ,grot4 in loc4 and       
,whitby in   his discourse1 c4 page #aa4
 and it agrees very well with the sense 
of   the ,hebrew words1   which does not
 so much signify to make1   as to       
dispose1 and adapt one thing to another1

 which the lxx4 render1     1 c4 the    
wicked is reserved to the day of evil4  
,footnote #bbj3    ,see ,quest4 xliv4   
,footnote #bba3    ,the words are1  1   
that is1 all four-footed beasts4        
,footnote #bbb3    ,matt4 iv4 #bc4 ,the 
words are1        1 every sickness1 and 
every disease2 and so the same words    
are translated1 in ,matt4 ix4 #ce4      
,footnote #bbc3    ,it is improper to   
say we have no power1 when we can do the
 thing if we   will2 and criminal to    
take the glory1 which is ,god's4        
,footnote #bbd3    ,see ,whitby of      
,election1 ,chap4 #e4 ,limborch4 ,amic4 
,collat4 page #bdb4  ,footnote #bbe3    
,vid4 ,sixt ,senens4 ,bibliothec4 ,lib4 
,v4 ,annotat #aja4 ,annotavit quidam    
,chrytostomum interdum natur nostr vires
 plus quo extulisse ex   contentione    
disceptandi cum ,manichis  ,gentilibus1 
qui hominem   asserebant1 vel natura    
malum vel fati violentia ad peccandum   
compelli4  ,footnote #bbf3    ,vid4     
,aug4 ,retrac4 ,i4 ,cap4 #be4  ,footnote

 #bbg3    ,vid4 ,aug4 de ,prdest4       
,sanet4 ,cap4 #ad4 ,quid igitur opus    
est1 ut eorum   scrutemur opuscula1 qui 
prius quam ista hresis oriretur1 non    
habuerunt necessitatem in hac difficili 
ad solvendum qustione   versari3 quod   
proculdubio facerent1 si respondere     
talibus cogerentur4  ,footnote #bbh3    
,vid4 ,forbes4 ,instruct4               
,historico-,theol4 ,lib4 ,,viii4 ,cap4  
#bh4  #af1 c4    ,joh4 ,jacobi          
,hottingeri1 ,fata ,doctrin de          
,prdestinat4 ,lib4 ,i4  #ce1   c4       
,footnote #bbi3    ,vid4 ,g4 ,j4 ,vossii
 ,hist4 ,pelag4 ,lib4 ,,vi4 ,thes4 #h1  
#i1 #aj4  ,footnote #bcj3    ,vid4      
,calv4 ,instit4 ,lib4 ,,iii4 ,cap4 #bb4 
#a4 ,certior est hic ,dei   veritas1    
quam ut concutiatur1 clarior quam ut    
obruatur hominum   authoritate4         
,footnote #bca3    ,see the epistles    
that passed between ,berevov1 a         
physician at ,dort1   and several       
divines at that time1 in ,lib4 de ,term 
vit4  ,footnote #bcb3    ,seneca de     

,consol4 ad ,marciam1 cap4 #bj4 ,nemo   
nimis cito moritur1 qui   victurus      
diutius quam vixit non fuit1 fixus est  
cuique terminus1   manebit semper ubi   
positus est1 nec illum ulterius         
diligentia aut   gratia promovebit4 ,et 
,cicero de ,senect4 ,quod cuique        
temporis ad   vivendum datum1 eo debet  
contentus esse4 ,virg4 n4 ,x4 ,stat sua 
cuique   dies4 ,serv4 ,fixum est tempus 
vit4  ,footnote #bcc3    ,evil as well  
as good actions are links in the chain  
of providence1 and   yet do not impeach 
,divine holiness4  ,footnote #bcd3      
,vid4 ,senac4 de ,prov4 cap4 #e4        
,august1 de ,civ4 ,dei1 ,lib4 ,v4 cap4  
#a1    #h4 ,lips ,phys4 ,stoic4 ,lib4   
,j4 ,diss4 #ab4  ,footnote #bce3    ,see
 ,quest4 ,,xviii4  ,footnote #bcf3      
,see ,quest4 ,,xxi1 ,,xxii4  ,footnote  
#bcg3    ,when we contend for this      
doctrine as a truth1 it should be viewed
 in   connexion with its real           
importance4 ,these two objects are      
extremely   different in things natural1

 civil1 and religious4 ,there are many  
things true in history1 in philosophy1  
in politics1 and even in   theology1    
which no sober person deems important4  
,there are other   things hypothetically
 important1 whether actually true or    
not4 ,and of   this kind is the subject 
before us4 ,such is the nature1 the     
connexion1   and consequences of it1    
that if it be true1 it cannot fail of   
being   of the first importance4    ,but
 how are we more particularly to        
estimate the importance of this         
subject8 ,by the influence which the    
admission or the denial of it has   on  
the very foundations of religion4 ,for  
instance1 if it be ,,not true1   either 
man himself or mere chance has the      
principal share in   effecting our      
actual salvation1 and investing us with 
eternal glory4   ,some indeed are so    
lost to modesty and self-knowledge1 and 
so   unacquainted with the leading      
truths of christianity1 that they do not
   scruple to ascribe the eventual      

difference in our future state1         
whether good or bad1 to man himself1 but
 attended with some verbal1   unmeaning 
compliment to divine mercy4 ,such       
persons should first learn   the        
rudiments of christianity1 before they  
have a right to expect any   deference  
shewn to their opinions4 ,on the other  
hand1 if this ,,be true1   its utility  
is plain2 it will hide pride from man2  
it will exclude   chance from having any
 share in our deliverance2 it will exalt
 the   grace of ,god2 it will render    
salvation a certain1 and not a          
precarious   thing2 and1 in a word1 it  
will secure to them who have the ,spirit
 of   ,christ the greatest consolation4 
,this was the view which our episcopal  
reformers had of the doctrine1   both as
 to its truth1 and the importance of it4
 #8,predestination to   life' say they1 
#8is the everlasting purpose of ,god1   
whereby1 before   the foundations of the
 world were laid1 he hath constantly    
decreed by   his counsel1 secret to us1 

to deliver from curse and damnation     
those   whom he hath chosen in ,christ  
out of mankind1 and to bring them by    
,christ to everlasting salvation1 as    
vessels made to honour4--,the godly     
consideration of ,predestination and our
 election in ,christ is full of   sweet1
 pleasant1 and unspeakable comfort to   
godly persons1 and such as   feel in    
themselves the working of the ,spirit of
 ,christ mortifying the   works of the  
flesh1 and their earthly members1 and   
drawing up their   minds to high and    
heavenly things2 as well because it doth
 greatly   establish and confirm their  
faith of eternal salvation1 to be       
enjoyed   through ,christ1 as because it
 doth fervently kindle their love       
towards   ,god4'--,another observation  
,i would make is1    #b4 ,that it is    
highly proper1 in order to investigate  
the present   subject with success1 to  
keep it perfectly distinct1 and free    
from all   impure mixtures4 ,this is    
what some of our early reformers1 and   

many   of the modern defenders of this  
doctrine have not done4 ,for want of    
this1 many bitter enemies have opposed  
it4 ,dr4 ,,whitby1 for instance1   and  
most who have written on the same side  
of the question since his   time1 place 
predestination to death1 or reprobation 
to misery1 as the   very foundation of  
,calvinism1 and inseparable from        
predestination to   life4 ,but so far is
 predestination to death from being     
true1 that   nothing can be more untrue4
 ,it is but an arbitrary assumption2 a  
foreign1 impure mixture1 having no      
foundation either in the real   meaning 
of holy writ1 or in the nature of       
things2 except indeed we   mean by it1  
what no one questions1 a determination  
to punish the   guilty4#bch ,but is not 
one man's misery as certain as another  
man's   happiness8 ,yes2 equally        
certain4 ,what then2 must they therefore
 be   equally predestinated8 ,no4 ,but  
how can a thing be certain1 if it   be  
not predestinated8 ,have a little       

patience and ,i will tell you4   ,the   
previous question is1 ,does ,god        
predestinate to sin as the means1   and 
to death or misery as the end1 in the   
same way as he predestinates   to       
holiness as the means1 and eternal glory
 as the end8 ,this we deny1   as it     
would be infinitely unworthy of ,god1   
making him the author of   sin1 or doing
 evil that good may come4 ,some indeed  
have distinguished   between being the  
author or the cause of sin1 and being a 
sinner4 ,but   the distinction itself is
 not solid1 nor could it fully satisfy  
those   who have made it in clearing the
 divine character4#bci    ,in fact1 sin 
and holiness are not only different1 but
 opposite   effects1 and their causes   
equally opposite2 but as ,god is the    
sole   cause1 the sole exclusive cause  
of holiness1 the creature1 in some      
way1 must be the sole and exclusive     
cause of sin4 ,if you ask how8 ,i       
reply1 by exercising his liberty1 which 
is a mere natural   instrument1 on      

himself1 rather than on ,god4 ,but how  
came he to do   that8 ,by his passive   
power4 ,what is passive power8 ,in      
general1 it is   that which             
distinguishes the creature from the     
,creator4 ,but more   particularly1 it  
is that tendency to nothing as to being1
 and to   defection as to well being1   
which is essential to every created     
existence4 ,if every creature have1 and 
must of necessity have this   passive   
power1 you will ask1 how came the holy  
angels1 and the spirits   of the just1  
not to sin8 ,the answer is1 because     
divine grace upholds   them4 ,these     
things duly considered1 though briefly  
stated1 will shew1   that as ,god is not
 the author of sin1 so neither has he   
predestinated   sin4 ,he is the author  
and cause of good only4 ,he is the      
author of our   liberty2 but that in    
itself is not evil4 ,and he is the      
author of our   nature as limited2 that 
also of itself is no moral evil4 ,but   
when our   liberty unites with this     

limited nature1 or terminates on passive
   power1 when this latter is not       
controuled by grace1 their offspring is 
imperfect1 or sinfulness attaches to our
 moral acts4    ,hence you may learn1   
that sin and future misery are events   
perfectly   certain1 though not         
predestinated4 ,it has been often       
assumed1 but   without propriety or     
truth1 that an event is foreknown only  
because it   is decreed4 ,in reality all
 good is foreknown1 because it is       
decreed2   for there is no other ground 
of its existence4 ,but sin1 as before   
shewn1 has another ground of existence1 
namely1 passive power1 which   can no   
more be an object of divine             
predestination or decree than its       
perfect opposite1 the all-sufficiency of
 ,jehovah4 ,yet1 observe   attentively1 
this has its proper nature1 and ,god    
sees all things1   and all essences1 in 
their proper nature4 ,what6 ,does not   
,god foreknow   the sinfulness of any   
event in its deficient cause1 as well as

 the   goodness of another in that which
 is efficient8 ,beside1 passive power   
in union with liberty is an adequate1 a 
fully adequate ground of sin   and      
death2 and therefore to introduce a     
predestination of sin and   death1 is to
 ascribe to ,god what is equally impious
 and   needless4#bdj--,let us1          
therefore1 keep this doctrine free from 
all   impure mixtures1 and now proceed  
to a    #crd ,observation1 that is1     
,when the end is maintained to be       
infallibly certain1 the means to promote
 that end are included4 ,thus   you may 
suppose a chain suspended from a great  
height1 and to the   lowest link a      
weight is fixed1 which is borne by it4  
,you do not   suppose that this link is 
unconnected with the next1 and so on    
till   you come to the highest4 ,every  
one of the links is equally necessary   
with that which is next the weight2 and 
the whole is connected with   something 
else which is stronger than the weight1 
including that of   the chain also1     

however long and heavy4    ,thus also in
 the cultivation of our land1 though it 
is decreed that on   such a field there 
shall be this very season a crop of     
wheat1 this was   not independent of    
providential virtue giving the increase1
 the genial   showers1 the solar warmth1
 and the vivifying air4 ,it is not      
unconnected with the proper seed sown1  
needful tillage1 plowing and            
harrowing1 and the quality of the soil4 
,and the same holds true as to   the    
health of the body1 and the prolongation
 of life to an appointed   period4 ,he  
who dies must first have life2 he who   
grows to manhood must   arrive at it    
through the previous stages of youth1   
childhood and   infancy4 ,so likewise an
 the education of our children2 if      
learning be   the end1 that supposes the
 previous means of application2 and if  
it is   determined who shall be the     
first scholar of the age in which he    
lives1 it is equally determined that he 
shall begin with the   rudiments of     

letters1 and diligently prosecute his   
literary studies4   ,and respecting     
religious attainments the matter is     
equally plain2 if   life or eternal     
glory be the end predestinated1 the     
previous steps of   purity of heart1    
justification and a new birth unto      
righteousness1   preservation in        
,christ1 and every individual event and 
circumstance   preceding1 is included in
 the decree1 as far as there is any     
goodness in them4 ,as to the evil with  
which any events or   circumstances are 
blended1 that has been already accounted
 for on   another principle4 ,nothing   
can be more true or plain1 ,god had     
predestinated an everlasting            
righteousness to be brought in by the   
,lord ,jesus ,christ4 ,but is it not    
equally true and plain that the birth   
of ,jesus1 and of his virgin mother1 the
 existence of ,david1 the call   of     
,abraham1 the preservation of ,noah1 and
 the creation of ,adam and ,eve   were  
predestinated8--,let us therefore guard 

against separating the end   and the    
means2 and what ,god joins together in  
his predestinating care   and love1 let 
no man put asunder4--,we now come       
,,ii4 ,to consider some proofs of this  
doctrine4--,that the scriptures1        
especially those of the ,new ,testament1
 appear1 at least1 to maintain   the    
doctrine in question1 no person of      
common modesty will deny4 ,thus1   for  
instance1 ,rom4 viii4 #bi1 #cj4 8,whom  
he did foreknow1 he also did            
predestinate to be conformed to the     
image of his ,son40 ,again1 ,eph4   i4  
#d-f4 8,according as he hath chosen us  
in him1 before the foundation   of the  
world1 that we should be holy and       
without blame before him in   love2     
having predestinated us unto the        
adoption of children by ,jesus   ,christ
 to himself1 according to the good      
pleasure of his will1 to the   praise of
 the glory of his grace40 ,and again1   
ver4 #aa4 8,in whom also   we have      
obtained an inheritance1 being          

predestinated according to   the purpose
 of him who worketh all things after the
 counsel of his own   will40 ,believers 
are said to be 8called according to     
,god's purpose20   and certain          
discriminations are made between man and
 man1 between   nation and nation1 8that
 the purpose of ,god according to       
election1   might stand1 not of works   
but of him who calleth40 8,the election 
hath obtained it40 8,so then it is not  
of him that willeth1 nor of him   that  
runneth1 but of ,god that sheweth       
mercy40 8,shall the thing formed   say  
to him that formed it1 ,why hast thou   
made me thus80--8,i will have   mercy on
 whom ,i will have mercy1 and ,i will   
have compassion on whom ,i   will have  
compassion40    ,these are some of the  
many passages of holy writ which at     
least seem   to hold this doctrine4 ,but
 it is of importance to observe1 that to
   establish this very doctrine is the  
main drift of the apostle ,paul's       
elaborate argument in a considerable    

part of his epistle to the   ,romans4   
,see ,rom4 ix4-xi4--,but more           
particularly1    #a4 ,it is evidently   
inconsistent with ,god's infinite       
perfection to   suppose that he has no  
purposes1 designs1 or aims in his       
operations2   or1 which is virtually the
 same thing1 to suppose that he decrees 
or   predestinates nothing4 ,wherein    
would he then differ from blind1        
unmeaning chance1 which hath neither    
wisdom1 power1 nor properties8 ,an      
intelligent spirit without any plan or  
purpose1 is inconceivable2   much less  
is the infinitely perfect ,jehovah such 
a being4    ,but if he purposes any     
thing1 what can be conceived of in this 
world   of higher importance1 or more   
worthy of his predestinating care1 than 
the salvation of his people1 that is1 of
 those who are eventually   saved8      
,shall he purpose from eternity to give 
his ,son to appear in the   form of a   
servant1 to suffer an ignominious death1
 and to be head over   all things to the

 church1 at an uncertainty8 ,does he    
bestow his ,holy   ,spirit without      
knowing1 or without intending1 who shall
 be ultimately   changed into the divine
 image from glory to glory1 and made    
meet for   the inheritance of the saints
 in light8 ,truly1 if in time he draws  
with loving-kindness1 it is because he  
has loved with an everlasting   love4   
#b4 ,what scripture and experience teach
 of man's condition as a sinner1        
utterly excludes every other cause of   
salvation but ,god's   predestinating   
love4 ,from our very birth we are       
sinful1 guilty1 and   without strength4 
,the carnal mind is enmity against ,god4
 ,the graceless   heart is a heart of   
stone2 in spiritual concerns unfeeling  
and   impenetrable4 ,well may our ,lord 
say to his disciples1 ,ye have not      
chosen me1 but ,i have chosen you4 ,if  
then those who were dead in   trespasses
 and sins have been quickened1 if       
persecutors have been   arrested and    
alarmed1 if those who were fully bent on

 rebellion have   been instantly        
rendered humble1 meek1 loving and       
obedient1 to what can   we rationally   
ascribe it but to the discriminating and
 sovereign   pleasure of him who worketh
 all things after the counsel of his own
   will8 ,if such are not predestinated1
 how came they to be called1            
converted1 and regenerated8    ,consult 
the good man's experience4 ,will he     
coolly and deliberately   arrogate any  
thing to himself8 ,follow him to the    
throne of grace2 what   is his language 
before ,god8 ,listen to his most holy1  
happy1 and   animated praises in the    
church4 ,attend to him in his happiest  
frames--or1 when emerging from the deep 
waters of affliction--when   restored   
from backslidings--or with faltering    
speech on the brink of   eternity2 and  
you will find him steady to one point2  
8,behold1 ,god is   my salvation40 ,my  
recovery from sin and woe is all of     
grace4 ,yea1   follow him to heaven1    
when he joins the noble army of martyrs1

 and the   countless myriads of the     
redeemed from among men1 and there he   
shouts   aloud in chorus1 8,unto him    
that loved us1 and washed us from our   
sins   in his own blood1 and hath made  
us kings and priests unto ,god and his  
,father2 to him be glory and dominion   
for ever and ever4 ,amen40--8,thou   art
 worthy1 ,o ,lord1 to receive glory1 and
 honour1 and power2 for thou   hast     
created all things1 and for thy pleasure
 they are and were   created40 ,if we   
search eternally into the origin and    
cause of our   deliverance from sin1 and
 our exaltation to happiness and glory1 
none   can be found but ,god's          
predestinating love4    #c4 ,nothing    
short of eternal predestination could   
secure that which is   demonstrably the 
most worthy1 the most glorious1 the most
 real end   of ,god in the salvation of 
man1 that is1 the praise of the glory of
   his grace4 ,no end can be compared to
 this in excellence2 it is   expressly  
the end which ,god has proposed to      

himself in the salvation   of his       
people2 8having predestinated us unto   
the adoption of children   by ,jesus    
,christ to himself1 according to the    
good pleasure of his   will1 to the     
praise of the glory of his grace40 ,if  
there be no   predestination1 how can   
such an end ever be proposed1 and how   
infallibly secured8 ,can there be any   
effect without an adequate cause8   ,or 
can the invention of men or angels      
discover any other cause than           
predestination8    ,on any other        
supposition1 how can divine love1 grace1
 and mercy be   glorified1 infallibly   
glorified8 ,is the honour of these      
glorious and   blessed perfections of   
,jehovah to be suspended on a feeble    
peradventure8 ,or is the spiritual      
temple constructed of some materials    
which come by chance1 or approach of    
themselves1 while others are   brought  
forth by a divine hand out of the quarry
 of nature1 and placed   on the living  
foundation8 ,is the glory of the        

,creator to depend upon   the precarious
 will of man8 ,the supposition is too   
absurd to admit a   thought4--,again1   
#d4 ,predestination to life is          
essentially necessary to secure the full
   end of the death of ,christ and the  
efficacy of divine influence4   ,what   
though he laid down his life for his    
sheep1 if after all he do   not bring   
them into his fold8 ,for him to lay down
 his life a ransom   for many1 and then 
leave it to them whether they should    
come for   life1 and all the benefits of
 his death1 righteousness and grace1 is 
to suppose them possessed of more power 
than ,adam had before the fall4   ,for  
the power he needed was only that which 
might keep him from   falling2 but the  
power which fallen man requires is that 
by which he   may rise from his fallen  
state1 and enter into the favour of     
,god1 into   union with ,christ1 into   
spiritual sensibility and life1 into    
wisdom1   righteousness and holiness1   
and into eternal glory4 ,now what can be

   adequate to this but omnipotent power
 helping our infirmities8    ,if it be  
said1 ,though we cannot of ourselves do 
this1 may we not   through ,christ and  
his holy ,spirit assisting us8 ,i reply1
 assistance   is of two kinds2 it is    
either affording us proper means1 such  
as the   holy scriptures1 the ministry  
of the word1 ordinances of religion1 and
   precious promises by way of          
encouragement2--or1 it is actually to   
influence the mind by supernatural      
agency4 ,if this latter assistance   be 
afforded1 the event is secured2 for     
nothing is requisite to secure   the    
volitions1 and all the exercises of the 
will1 in faith1   repentance1 love1     
hope1 and even perseverance therein unto
 the end1   but this kind of influence  
to a certain degree4 ,but does ,god     
impart   any gracious influence without 
purposing to do so8 ,and does he not    
know what influence is necessary to     
secure the end8 ,without                
predestination to life1 what security   

can there be1 that the death of         
,christ will not prove abortive and     
unavailing8    ,the notion that a       
sufficient degree of grace is given to  
all1 but   that a degree more than      
sufficient is given to the elect2 that  
all   the elect are certainly and       
infallibly saved1 but the others left at
   uncertainty1 with a perhaps that some
 of them may be saved in   addition to  
the elect--this notion is neither       
founded in revealed   truth1 nor capable
 of rational consistency4#bda           
,without predestination to life1 the    
influences of the ,holy ,spirit1        
which1 it is confessed1 are given to    
some1 might be given in vain1 or        
without effecting any saving purpose in 
any one of the human race4   ,where then
 could be the wisdom of a dispensation  
of the ,spirit1 or of   communicating   
the influence of grace8 ,does ,god      
foresee that some will   be so good and 
pliable as to improve a common favour in
 such a way   and to such a degree as to

 constitute the difference between them 
and   others that perish8 ,but where is 
this divinity taught1 and by whom is    
it sanctioned8 ,it is not sanctioned by 
the patriarchs and prophets1 by         
,christ and his apostles1 nor is it     
contained in the words of   inspiration1
 or even in the tablet of               
unsophisticated reason4    #e4 ,setting 
aside this doctrine1 or supposing it not
 true1 what room is   left for a        
covenant of grace between the ,father1  
,son1 and ,spirit8 ,has   not the       
,father given to the ,son a people for  
whom he should be   obedient unto death1
 for whom he should give his life a     
ransom1 for   whom he should rise1 live1
 and reign till all his enemies be      
subdued1   and to whom ,christ has      
engaged to give eternal life8 ,if we    
reject   predestination to life1 what   
meaning is there in his office of       
surety8 ,is not ,jesus a surety for his 
people8 ,but what is a surety8   ,it is 
one who undertakes for another4 ,what   

does ,jesus undertake to do8   ,he      
undertakes not only to become incarnate 
for them1 to obey the law1   to endure  
the contradiction of sinners and cope   
with the rigid demands   of equity1 but 
also to justify many1 to give them life1
 to keep them   from every rapacious    
hand1 to purify them by his blood1 to   
save them   from sin and hell1 and to   
bring them to the beatific vision of his
   glory4    ,in a word1 take away this 
doctrine1 and you take away the         
foundation   of ,god--the foundation of 
his covenant--the foundation of his     
temple1   the church--the foundation of 
the saints' hope and joy4 ,but1 blessed 
be   ,god1 his foundation standeth sure1
 having this seal1 ,the ,lord knoweth   
them that are his4 ,known unto ,god are 
all his ways1 and all his people   from 
the beginning4 ,blind chance and        
impotent free will shall never be   the 
partners of his throne4    ,we next come
 to notice    ,,iii4 ,some objections   
which may be1 and often are1 made to    

this   doctrine4 ,and    #a4 ,if this   
doctrine be true1 it is urged by some1  
,god would then be an   arbitrary and   
partial being4 ,this objection supposes 
that ,god has no   right to be so2 but  
on the contrary1 nothing appears more   
worthy of   him than to exercise        
arbitrary power1 and to manifest        
partiality4 ,no   such right is vested  
in man1 as to do what he pleases1 while 
he   disdains to consult any other will 
than his own4 ,but whose will beside    
his own can the infinitely perfect ,god 
consult8 ,who hath known the   mind of  
the ,lord1 or who hath been his         
counsellor8 ,or1 who hath first   given 
to him1 and it shall be recompensed unto
 him again8 ,for of him1   and through  
him1 and to him are all things2 to whom 
be glory for ever4    ,let us appeal to 
facts4 ,are there not marks of high     
sovereignty and   holy partiality       
through universal nature8 ,are they not 
visible in the   heavens above1 and in  
this lower world8 ,is there not a       

greater light   that rules the day1 and 
the lesser lights that rule the night8  
,and   does not one star differ from    
another star in glory8 ,are not these   
marks visible in the operations of      
providence1 in the persons of men1      
their corporeal forms and mental        
endowments8 ,are they not constantly    
seen in the history of nations1 the     
changes of empires1 and the             
dispensations of grace to different     
tribes of men8 ,how conspicuous is      
this in ,god's conduct towards ,abraham 
and his posterity for a series   of     
ages1 and afterwards in the calling of  
the ,gentiles8 ,and how   becoming in us
 to adopt the same language with the    
apostle ,paul on   that occasion3 8,o   
the depth of the riches both of the     
wisdom and   knowledge of ,god6 how     
unsearchable are his judgments1 and his 
ways   past finding out60 ,and is not   
the same partiality visible at this very
   day8 ,yet is he holy in all his      
works1 and righteous in all his ways4   

#b4 ,it is objected1 ,if this doctrine  
be true1 then is man reduced to a   mere
 machine4 ,no1 a mere machine has no    
sensibility1 no consciousness1   no     
reason1 and no will4 ,but he is acted   
upon1 they say1 and therefore   not an  
agent4 ,is it then essential to an agent
 not to be acted upon8   ,then there is 
but one agent in the universe2 for every
 thing but the   first cause is acted   
upon more or less4 ,the fact is1 there  
is no   contrariety in these two things4
 ,angels and men are acted upon1 yet    
they are moral agents4 ,the holy agency 
upon them respects chiefly   their      
disposition itself1 but the agency they 
exert is the   exercise of their        
faculties1 will1 and disposition4       
,whether their   disposition be good or 
bad1 still they are agents4 ,if this be 
made   good1 it must be by sovereign    
influence2 and then the agency and      
choice will be good3 but if this be bad1
 the agency is bad too4    ,but granting
 to the objector that the objects of    

predestination are1   in the sense now  
mentioned1 machines1 or instruments in  
the hand of   divine sovereignty2 what  
then8 ,i fain would know what better lot
 can   be assigned us than to be        
instruments in the hand of a            
predestinating   ,god8 ,i solemnly      
protest that ,i desire no better1 no    
other lot4 ,and who   can describe the  
nature of this high privilege6 ,this    
people have ,i   formed for myself1 they
 shall shew forth my praise4 ,o the     
blessedness   of being entirely passive 
in the hand of that ,god who            
predestinates   nothing but good8 ,was  
,paul obliged to the ,lord1 or was he   
not1 for   arresting him in the midst of
 his wicked career8 ,has that man any   
reason to complain1 who is restrained   
from wickedness1 but compelled   to     
embrace happiness8 ,then1 say some1 his 
will would be forced4 ,o no6   this by  
no means follows4 ,my people1 saith the 
,lord1 shall be willing   in the day of 
my power4 ,surely ,god can put his ,holy

 ,spirit in either   man or child       
without forcing the will4 ,and let there
 be but the   active1 regenerating      
renewing presence of this divine agent1 
the   choice of good will be no more    
compelled1 or the will no more forced1  
than in the most free acts of which the 
human mind is capable4    #c4 ,this     
doctrine1 it is said1 tends to          
licentiousness4--,this is an   assertion
 which has been often made1 but1 ,i     
apprehend1 never fairly   proved2 for it
 is contrary to universal experience4   
,turn your eyes to   a vast army1 headed
 by experienced officers--what is the   
language of   nature and experience8    
,you uniformly find great generals      
anxious to   impress the sentiment on   
the minds of their troops that they are 
destined to victory4 ,what gives rise to
 this kind of oratory8 ,what   is the   
philosophy of such rhetoric8 ,it is     
founded in the nature of   man1 and     
confirmed by the experience of ages1    
that confidence in a   favourable issue 

animates exertion4    ,consult a serious
 christian1 who1 through a long         
pilgrimage1 has   believed this         
doctrine4 ,will he deliberately tell you
 that it has this   tendency1 or that he
 has found this effect in his own       
experience8 ,no1   he will tell you     
nothing gives him more courage and      
vigour against   sin4--,it is not when  
in a dry1 backsliding frame of mind1 or 
when   verging to licentiousness1 that  
he can rest in this doctrine2 but when  
he is most resolved for ,god and        
heaven--when most diligent in the high  
way of holiness4 ,then1 indeed1 he can  
say1 ,i know that all things work       
together for my good--my predestination 
includes conformity to ,christ1   my    
calling1 my justification1 and warfare  
against sin4 ,if ,god be for   me1 who  
can be against me8 ,who shall lay any   
thing to my charge8 ,it is   ,god that  
justifieth4 ,who is he that condemneth8 
,it is ,christ that   died1 is risen1   
and maketh intercession4 ,who shall     

separate me from   the love of ,christ8 
,shall tribulation1 or distress1 or     
famine1 or   persecution1 or nakedness1 
or peril1 or sword8 ,nay1 in all these  
things ,i am more than conqueror through
 him that loved me4 ,for ,i am          
persuaded1 that neither death1 nor life1
 nor angels1 nor   principalities1 nor  
powers1 nor things present1 nor things  
to come1   nor height1 nor depth1 nor   
any other creature1 shall be able to    
separate me from the love of ,god which 
is in ,christ ,jesus my ,lord4    #d4   
,some would insinuate1 that though this 
doctrine be true1 yet it   should not be
 preached1 because it is a secret in the
 mind of ,god4 ,but   ,i hope it has    
been proved1 that as a doctrine it is   
not a secret1   but is revealed in the  
holy scriptures1 and supported by the   
soundest   arguments4 ,the objects1     
indeed1 or the persons who are          
predestinated1   are known to ,god only 
before they bear fruit1 ,by their fruits
 ,,we can   come to know them1 in the   

ordinary course of things2 nor is it any
   part of the doctrine asserted1 that  
it belongs to man to ascertain the      
individual objects any farther than by  
character4    ,but there are other ends 
to be answered by this doctrine4--,to be
 in the   way to eternal glory is an    
unspeakable privilege2 and it is the    
proper   part of a christian to enquire 
into the cause of it4 ,his own humility 
and gratitude are involved in it4 ,the  
honour of ,god1 the wisdom of his       
counsel1 and the lustre of his grace2   
the offices of ,christ1 the   surety of 
a better covenant1 and the good         
,shepherd of the sheep2 his   powerful  
intercession1 and his government over   
all things to the   church--all are     
involved in the proper declaration of   
this truth4--,once   more1    #e4 ,this 
doctrine1 it may be said1 is dangerous1 
in proportion as it is   insisted upon1 
in that it prevents the more needful    
enquiry1 8,am ,i   born again60 ,yes1   
there would be danger1 if all the       

attention of   ministers and people1 or 
even a disproportionate share of it were
   confined to this4 ,but1 thou mistaken
 objector1 because there are some   who 
will take the bread of children and cast
 it away1 are the children   not to be  
fed8 ,because there were corrupt men    
disposed to turn the   grace of ,god    
into lasciviousness1 would you rob any  
child of ,god of   this holy triumph4   
,he will choose our inheritance for us6 
,the ,lord   will not cast off his      
people1 neither will he forsake his     
inheritance4   ,for the ,lord is our    
defence1 the ,holy ,one of ,israel is   
our ,king4 ,i   will trust and not be   
afraid1 for the ,lord ,jehovah is my    
strength and   my song1 he also is      
become my salvation4----,for the same   
reason that we   ought not to be ashamed
 of the gospel of ,christ1 we need not1 
we ought   not to be ashamed of this    
doctrine4    ,i would now offer    ,,iv4
 ,a few practical uses of the subject4  
,and1    #a4 ,this doctrine is a source 

of great comfort1 when contrasted with  
the fickleness of men1 and the perpetual
 vicissitudes of the world4   ,the lot  
may be cast1 but the ,lord is the       
disposer of it4 ,he worketh   all things
 after the counsel of his own will4 ,his
 counsel shall stand1   and he doeth1   
and will do1 all his pleasure4 ,the     
wrath of man shall   praise him1 and the
 remainder of wrath he will restrain4   
,all things   work together for good to 
them who love ,god1 to them who are the 
called according to his purpose4 ,he    
doeth all things well4    ,after viewing
 the present perturbed state of the     
world1 the   revolutions of empire1 the 
devastations of war1 the alarms of      
invasion1 the degradation of some1 and  
the exaltation of other                 
characters--how pleasing and consolatory
 to view a steady hand   over-ruling1   
guiding1 and influencing all6           
,providence is 8as it were a   wheel in 
the middle of a wheel40--,as for their  
rings1 they are so high   that they are 

dreadful1 and are full of eyes round    
about them4 ,but how   delightful to    
reflect1 that within these perpetually  
revolving wheels   there is an          
immoveable centre6 ,god's aim is steady1
 he is of one mind1   who can turn him8 
#b4 ,as the predestination for which we 
contend is only to good1 it   affords   
the most pleasing view of the divine    
character4 ,god is love4   ,in him is no
 such inconsistency as is but too       
frequently found among   men4 ,he is not
 a fountain sending forth at the same   
place both sweet   water and bitter1    
yielding both salt water and fresh4     
,with the utmost   safety and confidence
 may a humble soul commit itself into   
the arms of   such a being4 ,no one has 
any thing to fear from ,god but the     
proud and   rebellious1 the unbelieving 
and impenitent4 ,and surely bad must be 
the   doctrine that speaks peace to the 
wicked4    #c4 ,as in the present case  
the end1 and the way leading to it1 are 
inseparable2 every reason and argument1 

every alarming topic1 every   scriptural
 exhortation1 and every obligation to   
duty1 are in full   force4 ,they who    
represent these things as inconsistent  
with   predestination1 either have a    
wrong view of the subject1 or care not  
what they say nor whereof they affirm4  
,obligation to duty is founded   on     
widely and totally different            
considerations4#bdb    ,god sustains1   
with respect to man1 a twofold          
character1 the one is   that of an      
equitable governor1 the other that of a 
sovereign disposer4   ,answerably to    
this1 man sustains a twofold character  
also2 that of an   accountable agent1   
and that of a disposable subject4 ,as   
passive in   the hand of a sovereign    
,god1 he is necessitated to good1 in    
proportion   as goodness attaches to    
him2 and in the heirs of salvation this 
is   predestination to life4 ,as active1
 or a moral agent1 man is treated       
according to the rules of reason and    
equity1 yet mingled with   undeserved   

favours4 ,so that every man is1 in these
 different respects1   at once the      
subject of liberty and necessity4       
,equally vague and unprofitable1        
therefore1 is all controversy on the    
subject now alluded to while one side   
contends for liberty and the   other for
 necessity to the usual exclusion of the
 opposite4 ,neither   can be wholly     
right4 ,for1 as sure as ,god disposes of
 a man for final   good1 the doctrine of
 necessity is true2 and as sure as a man
 is a   transgressor of divine law1 and 
thus is fitted for destruction1 he is   
free from all decretive necessity4      
,therefore1    #d4 ,here is no room for 
the impious inference1 that when we do  
evil we   are predestinated to it4 ,let 
no man say when he is tempted1 ,i am    
tempted of ,god2 for as ,god cannot be  
tempted with evil1 so neither   tempteth
 he any man2 but every man is tempted   
when he is drawn away of   his own lust1
 and enticed4 ,then when lust hath      
conceived1 it bringeth   forth sin2 and 

sin when it is finished1 bringeth forth 
death4 ,do not   err1 my beloved        
brethren2 every good gift1 and every    
perfect gift is   from above1 and cometh
 down from the ,father of lights1 with  
whom is no   variableness1 neither      
shadow of turning4--,but evil1 in       
whatever person1   in whatever place1 at
 whatever time1 in whatever form or     
degree1 is   from a quarter             
diametrically opposite4--,on the        
contrary1    #e4 ,when at any time we   
are engaged in the work of ,god1 in any 
thing   whatever that is morally good1  
then are we employed in the execution   
of the divine purposes2 for there is no 
good done in time but was   decreed to  
be done1 in all its circumstances1 from 
eternity4 ,even all   the actions of the
 wicked1 except the deformity or        
sinfulness which is   in them1 are also 
worthy of ,god to predestinate4 ,this   
consideration1   every one must allow1  
is a great incentive to virtue and      
holiness4   ,this remark is applicable  

both to ministers and people4 ,are      
ministers   engaged in preaching the law
 for conviction1 the promises for       
encouragement1 and the unsearchable     
riches of ,christ for consolation2   are
 they urging1 according to scripture    
commands and example1   repentance      
towards ,god and faith in our ,lord     
,jesus ,christ2 do they   enforce       
christian duties1 teaching the disciples
 all things whatsoever   our ,lord and  
lawgiver has commanded2 do they warn    
sinners to flee from   the wrath to     
come1 or invite the burdened and heavy  
laden to seek rest   in the meek and    
lowly1 the merciful and loving ,saviour8
 ,they are in   all this only the       
instruments of a sovereign ,god1 or the 
appointed   means whereby he executes   
his eternal purposes4 ,again1 has ,god  
enjoined the necessity of repentance1   
faith1 holiness1 obedience1 and         
perseverance2 poverty of spirit1 holy   
mourning1 purity of heart1 love   to    
enemies1 c8 our personal compliance1    

which is evermore of grace1   is only   
the decreed method of bringing us to    
that eternal glory   which is the end4  
,once more1    #f4 ,this doctrine       
properly guarded1 and rightly           
understood1 shews with   peculiar force 
the true ground of repentance1 and the  
obligations of   gratitude and          
holiness4--,if the sinfulness of no     
action is decreed1 but   proceeds wholly
 from that in us which is opposite to   
,god and his will1   whether secret or  
revealed1 rectoral or decretive1 what   
can be more   binding and reasonable    
than repentance toward ,god8 ,and if all
 good1   whether natural1 supernatural1 
moral or spiritual1 in ourselves and    
others1 in time and to eternity proceed 
from ,god's predestination1   what a    
foundation is there laid for gratitude6 
,put on1 therefore1 as   the elect of   
,god1 holy and beloved1 bowels of       
mercies1 kindness1   humbleness of mind1
 meekness1 long-suffering4 ,give all    
diligence to   make your calling and    

election sure4 ,and let the peace of    
,god rule in   your hearts1 to the which
 also ye are called in one body1 and be 
ye   thankful4 ,and whatsoever ye do in 
word or deed1 do all in the name of     
the ,lord ,jesus1 giving thanks to ,god 
and the ,father by him4 ,amen4    ,,dr4 
,,williams4  ,footnote #bch3            
,predestination to ,death or misery1 as 
the end1 and to sin as the   means1 ,i  
call 8an impure mixture20 a mixture1    
because its connexion   with            
,predestination to life is arbitrary and
 forced2--impure1 because   the         
supposition itself is a foul aspersion  
of the divine character4   ,st4         
,augustine1 ,calvin1 ,perkins1 ,twisse1 
,rutherford1 c4 c4 though   highly      
valuable and excellent men1 upon the    
whole1 were not free from   this impure 
mixture of doctrine4 ,but of all modern 
authors1 if we   except the             
philosophical ,necessarians1 ,hobbes1   
,collins1 ,hume1 ,hartley1   ,priestly1 
c4 ,dr4 ,hopkins1 of ,america seems the 

most open in his   avowal of the        
sentiment1 that sin and misery are      
decreed in the   same manner as holiness
 and happiness1 in order to produce the 
greatest general good4 ,the substance of
 his reasoning is thus   expressed by   
himself3 8,all future existences1       
events1 and actions1   must have a cause
 of their futurition1 or there must be a
 reason why   they are future1 or       
certainly to take place1 rather than    
not4 ,this   cause must be the divine   
decree determining their future         
existence1   or it must be in the future
 existences themselves4 ,but the future 
existences could not he the cause of    
their own futurition2 for this          
supposes them to exist as a cause1 and  
to have influence1 before they   have   
any existence1 even from eternity4--,the
 cause therefore can be   nothing but   
divine decree1 determining their future 
existence1   without which nothing could
 be future1 consequently nothing could  
be   known to be future40--,see his     

,system of doctrines1 #b vol4 #hvo4     
especially ,vol4 i p4 #aaj-bag4    ,on  
the sentiment itself1 by whomsoever     
held1 ,i would offer the   following    
strictures3    #a4 ,it is a mere        
assumption1 that sin1 which the above   
proposition   avowedly includes1 has no 
possible cause of its futurition but    
either the divine decree1 or the future 
existences themselves4 ,for   though    
,god's decrees are the cause of our     
being1 faculties1 and   volitions1 none 
of these1 nor any thing else that can he
 traced to   divine causation1 will     
constitute sin4 ,nor yet is it true that
 sin   is the cause of itself2 for then 
sin would be self-existent4 ,it         
follows therefore that it must have     
another origin than either the   divine 
decree or its own existence4    #b4 ,it 
is equally plain that the cause of sin  
is not itself morally   evil2 ,for this 
would involve a contradiction1 making   
cause and effect   to be the same thing4
 ,nor yet can the cause be morally good4

 ,for as   from truth nothing but truth 
can legitimately proceed1 so from good  
nothing but good can flow4 ,evil1       
indeed1 is related to good1 but not   as
 cause and effect4 ,though evil could   
not follow were there no   infinite     
good1 no creature1 no will1 no freedom1 
yet something else   must be sought as  
the matrix1 where the monster sin is    
generated and   fostered1 and which1    
morally considered1 is neither good nor 
evil4--,therefore1    #c4 ,we assert1   
that the origin of moral evil is to be  
found in the   union of two principles1 
neither of which considered alone       
partakes   of a moral character4 ,these 
two principles are ,liberty and         
,passive ,power4 ,liberty1 it is        
manifest is morally neither good nor    
bad1 but is a mere natural instrument1  
if ,i may so speak1 and may be   termed 
a natural good of which ,god is the     
author and decreer4 ,on the   contrary1 
,passive ,power is a natural evil of    
which ,god is not the   author or       

decreer1 yet morally considered is not  
evil4 ,but this term1   being little    
understood1 requires further            
explanation2 at least it is   incumbent 
on me to shew in what sense ,i use it4  
,my design is not to   vindicate the use
 of it by others1 but ,i adopt it to    
convey a specific   idea1 for which ,i  
find no other word or phrase more       
appropriate4 ,by   #8,passive ,power1'  
then1 ,i mean1 ,that which is of        
unavoidable   necessity found in every  
creature1 as such1 in direct opposition 
to   the self-existence1 independence1  
and all-sufficiency of ,god4 ,in other  
words1 ,it is that tendency to nihility1
 physically considered1 and   to        
defection1 morally considered1 which of 
absolute necessity   belongs to every   
dependent or created nature4 ,that there
 is such a   principle is self-evident1 
nor is it probable that any reasonable  
being will ever controvert its          
existence4 ,now1 it is demonstrable that
   this1 from the definition1 cannot be 

the object of divine decree1 or   of    
will2 for it is stated to be of absolute
 or unavoidable   necessity2 besides1 it
 is absurd to suppose that ,god has     
decreed1 or   produces1 any thing the   
existence of which stands in direct     
contrariety to himself4 ,that it is not 
a moral evil is plain1 for   the holiest
 creatures are subjects of it--,god     
alone is exempt4    #d4 ,let it be      
further observed1 that the ,first       
,cause1 being goodness   itself1 impels1
 whether decretively or efficiently1 to 
good only2   and of this character is   
even our being necessitated to exercise 
our   volitions4 ,yet1 when the exercise
 of liberty1 in itself innocent1        
unites with passive power1 the fruit or 
offspring of this union is   moral evil4
 ,this1 ,i am fully persuaded1 is the   
true solution of this   question1       
,whence cometh moral evil8 ,if any      
person shall think proper   candidly to 
assign his reasons to the contrary1 due 
regard shall be   paid to them1    #e4  

,if it be asked1 where lies the         
difference between decreeing and        
permitting sin to take place8 ,i answer1
 the difference is1 that the   one would
 be an act of injustice1 the other is   
doing nothing4 ,so   that until it can  
be shewn that there is no difference    
between   injustice and doing nothing1  
there is no force in the objection4     
,that   to necessitate sin decretively  
would be an act of injustice1 and       
therefore incompatible with the divine  
character1 is1 ,i think1   demonstrable2
 for1 it would be to decree to          
destruction antecedently   to desert--to
 annihilate the sinfulness of any act1  
making its evil   nature to consist in  
its effects--and to destroy the         
immutable essences   of good and evil4  
,whereas to permit1 or to suffer to take
 place   without prevention1 is not to  
act not to decree4 ,to #8decree to      
permit1' therefore1 is a contradiction  
in terms4    #f4 ,but1 it has been said1
 the event is the same to the sinner1   

whether he hurried on to sin and misery 
by a decretive impulse1 or   these      
effects are not prevented when in the   
power of omnipotence to   interpose4    
,this objection would have some weight1 
if the happiness   of the creature were 
the only1 or even the principal end of  
,god in   creation4 ,but this not being 
the case1 its weight vanishes4 ,to      
illustrate this we may suppose1 that the
 event of a man's execution   is well   
known to a judge2 but1 instead of       
proceeding on the principles   of law   
and equity1 and to effect conviction and
 condemnation according   to legal      
evidence1 he orders the man to be       
executed clandestinely   without any    
equitable process1 under pretence that  
it could make no   difference to the    
sufferer1 for the event of his execution
 was   certain6 ,besides1 the spirit of 
the objection reflects on ,god's        
actual dealings with his creatures1 in  
every instance of their   sufferings2   
because it is in the power of           

omnipotence to interpose4   ,and in     
fact1 it must be allowed1 either that   
the happiness of the   ,creature is not 
the chief end of creation1 or that the  
permission of   sin is an act of        
injustice4 ,but the case is plain1 that 
his own glory   is the chief end of     
creation and government1 and that there 
is no   injustice in the permission of  
sin4    #g4 ,it may be said1 ,if the    
union of liberty with passive power be  
the   origin of moral evil1 and if the  
holiest creatures in heaven are both    
free and the subjects of passive power1 
how is it that they do not   sin6 ,if   
both are united in the same persons1    
does the one never   terminate upon2 or 
unite itself to the other8 ,in answer to
 this   enquiry1 we must distinguish    
between having the principle1 and being 
under its influence without control4    
,though the spirits of the just1   and  
holy angels1 have in them the principle1
 as the condition of their   created    
existence1 yet it is counteracted by    

sovereign favour4 ,they   may say1 as   
well as ,paul1 by the grace of ,god we  
are what we are4 ,the   object of divine
 support is the disposition1 or the seat
 of moral   action2 this being made     
good1 or pure1 or holy1 prior to all    
acts of   the will1 effectually         
counteracts the influence of passive    
power4 ,the   ,liberty and choice of a  
heavenly being therefore1 terminating on
 such   a disposition1 no acts but such 
as are holy can ensue4 ,hence1    #h4   
,if we would know how this is consistent
 with the actual fall of   beings who   
were once in this condition1 we must    
attend to another   important           
consideration2 which is1 that when ,god 
at any time deals in   mere equity with 
a moral agent1 without the counteracting
 influence   of sovereign favour1 the   
inevitable consequence is1 that his     
liberty1   or free choice1 will         
terminate upon his passive power4 ,hence
 the   certainty of the futurition of   
moral evil1 in all possible degrees     

and circumstances1 without any decretive
 efficiency in its   production4--,if it
 be asked1 why the exercise of equity is
 assigned   as the occasion of this     
union1 rather than sovereignty2 or1 why 
leaving a free agent to the influence of
 his passive power should not   be      
considered a sovereign rather than an   
equitable act8 ,the best   answer to    
this enquiry1 is a definition of the two
 terms4 ,by equity   then ,i mean the   
principle that gives to each his due2 by
   sovereignty1 a right to do whatsoever
 is not inconsistent with   equity4 ,and
 from this definition it must appear    
that there may he a   two-fold deviation
 from equity1 viz4 giving more than is  
due1 or   less than is due2 more good   
and less evil1 or more evil and less    
good than is equitable4 ,the former of  
these1 more good and less evil1   must  
needs be for the advantage of the       
creature2 and therefore it may   be     
called a gracious deviation4 ,without   
it1 there would be no room   for either 

mercy or grace4 ,the latter1 more evil  
and less good than is   due1 is properly
 called injustice1 and is such a        
deviation from   equity as is not       
compatible with the divine character4   
,therefore1 to   do us good beyond our  
claim is an act of sovereignty2 but to  
give   us neither more nor less than is 
our due is to deal with us in pure      
equity4    #i4 ,hence it follows1 that  
when ,god deals with angels or men in   
sovereignty1 according to the           
definitions1 he does them good   beyond 
their claim4 ,but to make this to be the
 immediate cause of   the sin of men and
 angels is absurd4 ,on the other hand1  
it is   incompatible with the divine    
character1 as before observed1 to give  
them less good and more evil than is    
their due2 and therefore this   cannot  
be the cause of sin1 as sure as ,god is 
incapable of exercising                 
injustice4--,wherefore1 it remains that 
then alone can moral agents fall   into 
sin when dealt with in pure equity4 ,in 

the act of defection1 or   becoming     
sinful1 they are equally free from being
 impelled by   injustice1 and upheld by 
sovereign favour4    ,,corollaries4     
#a4 ,all the good and happiness in the  
universe of created beings are   the    
fruit of ,sovereignty and ,decree4      
#b4 ,all the moral evil and misery in   
the universe are the offspring   of     
liberty1 a natural good1 terminating or 
acting upon1 or united to   passive     
power1 a natural evil not counteracted  
by sovereignly   gracious acts on the   
disposition1 or the seat of the moral   
principle1   which may be called        
analogically the heart4    #c4 ,as every
 act and degree of liberty is perfectly 
fore-known to ,god1   as the effect of  
his own decree1 and every hypothetical  
tendency of   passive power1 though     
itself not an object of decree1 is      
equally   fore-known1 it follows1 that  
every sin is as accurately fore-known as
   if decreed1 and has an equally       
infallible ground of certain            

futurition4  ,footnote #bci3    ,it is  
allowed that there is a difference      
between the cause of sin1   as a        
principle1 and being a sinner2 but when 
applied to an   agent1 to be the author 
or the cause of sin1 and to be a sinner1
 is   the same thing4 ,therefore1 when  
applied to ,god1 in no proper sense     
whatever can it be said that he is the  
author of sin4--8,if by the   author of 
sin is meant 7says ,president ,edwards7 
the permitter1 or a   not hinderer of   
sin1 and at the same time a disposer of 
the state of   events in such a manner1 
for wise1 holy1 and most excellent ends 
and   purposes1 that sin infallibly     
follows3 ,i say1 if this be all that is 
meant by the author of sin1 ,i do not   
deny that ,god is the author of   sin1  
though ,i dislike and reject the phrase1
 as that which by use and   custom is   
apt to carry another sense40 ,edwards on
 the ,will1 ,part iv4   ,sect4 xi4      
,but though this acute and excellent    
writer disavows the use of the   phrase1

 he no where assigns the true ground why
 it should not be   used4 ,the truth is1
 he does not seem to have been aware of 
any   alternative between the certain   
futurition of sin and its being         
decreed4 ,and his only method of warding
 off the most ruinous   consequences    
appears to have been adopted for want of
 a better1 and   not from the           
satisfactory nature of that method4 ,his
 view1 in brief1   is this3 ,god is a   
being of infinite goodness and wisdom2  
he can will   nothing but good2 the     
system he hath adopted is the best2 now1
 says   he1 8if the will be good1 and   
the object of his will be1 all things   
considered1 good and best1 then the     
choosing and willing it1 is not         
willing evil4 ,and if so1 then his      
ordering according to that will is   not
 doing evil40    ,it is very seldom that
 this eminent author fails in his       
reasoning2 but   here certainly he does 
fail4 ,the phrases willing evil1 and    
doing   evil1 are not used in the same  

sense in both parts of the premises1    
from whence the conclusion is inferred4 
,a system1 all things   considered1     
being best1 is no good reason why each  
individual part of   it is good4 ,and it
 may be forcibly retorted2 a system     
which includes   an infinite evil as a  
part of its institution cannot be from  
,god4 ,nor   can it be said that this is
 arguing against fact1 without begging  
the question1 that ,god has appointed   
the evil which is blended with   the    
good4--,on the subject itself let the   
following things be   considered3    #a4
 ,if choosing and willing a system in   
which sin is a decreed part   is not    
willing evil1 because the system is good
 and best1 all things   considered then 
it would inevitably follow1 that sin1   
because such a   part of that system is 
not an evil4 ,but1 it may be said1 ,it  
is   willing it for a good end4 ,does   
then a good end or intention   destroy  
the nature of sin8 ,was the sin of ,paul
 or any other saint   anihilated because

 he sincerely aimed at the ,glory of    
,god8 ,or has   any design1 however     
comprehensive1 exalted or sincere1 the  
least   tendency to alter the nature of 
sin8    #b4 ,allowing as                
incontrovertible that the present system
 of things is   the best1 all things    
considered1 and that sin is actually    
blended with   it1 it does not thence   
follow that the sin itself is decreed1  
or is   any part of divine appointment4 
,for not to hinder sin1 is extremely    
different from being the cause or author
 of it4 ,the one is perfectly           
consistent with equity1 the other would 
be an act of injustice4    #c4 ,it is a 
sentiment so repugnant to all analogical
 propriety1 to do   evil that good may  
come1 that it cannot be supposed a man  
of ,mr4   ,edwards' piety would have    
adopted any thing like it1 but from what
   appeared to him an inevitable        
necessity4 ,and indeed whoever assumes  
the principle1 that every event comes to
 pass from decretive   necessity1 sin   

not excepted1 must of course be driven  
to his   conclusion4 ,but this valuable 
author had no need to recur to that     
opinion1 in order to establish his      
theory of hypothetical necessity2   for 
this will stand on a rock1 immoveably1  
without such aid4    #d4 ,in reality1   
the certain futurition of good1 and that
 of evil1   arises from different1 yea  
from diametrically opposite causes4 ,the
   one flows from the operative will of 
,god1 and is fore-known to be   future  
because decreed1 the other flows from a 
deficient or privative   cause1 passive 
power1 when united to liberty1 as before
 explained1   which exists only in      
created beings1 and in all these1 as a  
contrast   to self-existence1           
independence1 and all-sufficiency4 ,yet 
this is   the subject of hypothetical   
tendencies and results no less than the 
good to which it stands opposed1 in all 
the boundless varieties of its          
blendings2 therefore no case can be so  
complicated1 but to infinite            

prescience the event must appear with   
equal certainty as if decreed4          
,footnote #bdj3    8,equally impious and
 needless40 ,needless1 because the      
existence of   sin is fairly and fully  
accounted for on another principle2     
impious1   because it ascribes to ,god  
the worst of all principles1 the        
causation   of sin4 ,that ,god          
superintends1 directs1 and over-rules   
the actions of   men is worthy of him2  
and equally so that he does not hinder  
the   existence of moral evil2 but that 
he is a positive and efficacious   cause
 of moral evil1 or that this is         
consistent with either his   justice or 
holiness can never be proved4 ,dr4      
,hopkins1 indeed1 says1   that 8the     
attempt to distinguish between the      
sinful volitions or   actions of men as 
natural and moral actions2 and making   
,god the origin   and cause of them     
considered as natural actions1 and men  
the cause and   authors of the depravity
 and sin which is in them1 is1 it is    

believed1 unintelligible--unless by     
making this distinction it be   meant1  
that in every sinful action1 ,god is not
 the sinful cause of   it40 ,the author1
 however1 candidly adds1 8,but if the   
contrary can be   made to appear1 this  
doctrine1 with all that is implied in   
it1 shall   be given up and renounced40 
,as the removal of this principle1 and  
the   establishment of the other1 appear
 to me of the highest importance in     
theology1 a few remarks1 in addition to 
those already made1 may not be          
superfluous1 as tending to exhibit the  
principle here maintained in   different
 lights and connexions2 and when all are
 properly examined1   it is probable    
they will not be wholly                 
8unintelligible40    #a4 ,god1          
,,jehovah1 is the infinite and eternal  
,essence1 which is of   absolute        
necessity--the self-existent1           
independent1 and   all-sufficient       
,being--from eternity to eternity       
generating his own   light and joy1     

called his only begotten ,son2 not from 
mere will1 but   of the same necessity4 
#b4 ,god in his boundless               
all-sufficiency views all possibles with
 all   their positive and privative     
tendencies4 ,that all possibles have    
their positive tendencies is as plain as
 that two added to three   make five4   
,were there no positive tendencies1     
there could be no   hypothetical        
certainty1 no law of nature1 no         
connexion between cause   and effect4   
,and it is equally true1 though not     
equally plain1 that   there are         
privative tendencies in all beings but  
that one who exists   of absolute       
necessity4 ,to suppose the contrary1 is 
the same as to   suppose that a creature
 may be made independent1 and           
all-sufficient4   ,but that is1 every   
reasonable being must allow1 absolutely 
impossible1 as implying the grossest    
contradiction4 ,on this   demonstrated  
fact rests unavoidably the existence of 
that principle in   every created nature

 which ,i call ,passive ,power4 ,yet4   
#c4 ,it does not follow that the mere   
collateral existence of these two       
principles in the same subject must     
needs produce moral evil4 ,then   alone 
does this take place when the one       
terminates upon1 or is united   to the  
other1 without the interposition of     
sovereign favour4 ,it is not   in the   
power of equity to assist4 ,for the     
exercise of equity is to   give each his
 due2 but to prevent sin is not due to  
the subject of   it1 otherwise no one   
could ever sin but on condition of      
injustice   in ,god4    #d4 ,after all1 
it may be objected1 that the scriptures 
ascribe to ,god   the causation of moral
 evil2 as1 hardening the heart of       
,pharaoh--hardening whom he will--making
 the wicked for the day of              
evil--appointing to                     
destruction--determining the death of   
,christ--delivering him by determinate  
counsel--doing all evil in a            
city--making vessels to                 

dishonour--fitting them for destruction1
 c4--,in   reply to this objection it   
must be considered1 that whatever the   
import of such representations may be1  
no interpretation which is   unworthy of
 ,god can be the true meaning--that the 
idioms of the   sacred languages        
ascribing cause or operation to ,god    
must be   understood according to the   
nature of the subject--and1 what is     
particularly to our purpose1 that active
 verbs which denote making1   doing1    
causing1 and the like1 often denote a   
declaration of the   thing done1 or that
 shall take place2 or a permission of   
it4    ,take a few specimens4 ,thus     
,acts x4 #ae4 8,what ,god hath          
cleansed10   means1 what ,god hath      
declared to be clean4--,isai4 vi4 #i1   
#aj4 ,the   prophet is commanded to tell
 the people1 8understand not1 perceive  
not20 and he is ordered to 8make the    
heart of this people fat1 to   make     
their ears heavy1 and to shut their     
eyes40 ,and what can this   mean more   

than to declare a fact1 either what they
 then were1 or   what they would        
be8--,so ,jer4 i4 #aj4 ,the ,prophet's  
declaration of what   should be1 is     
called his rooting out pulling down1    
c4--,ezek4   xliii4 #c4 ,the prophet    
says1 8when ,i came to destroy the      
city20 his   meaning undoubtedly is1    
,when ,i came to prophecy or declare    
that the   city should be               
destroyed4--,exod4 v4 #bb4 8,lord1      
wherefore hast thou   evil entreated    
this people80 ,moses means1 ,wherefore  
hast thou   permitted them to be evil   
entreated8--,jer4 iv4 #aj4 8,lord ,god1 
thou   hast greatly deceived this       
people20 that is1 permitted or not      
hindered them to be deceived by the     
false ,prophets4--,ezek4 xiv4 #i4 8,i   
the ,lord have deceived that prophet40  
,can any thing else be meant   than     
suffering him to deceive                
himself8--,matt4 xi4 #be4 8,thou hast   
hid   these things0 i4 e4 not           
revealed4----,thus also1 ,rom4 ix4 #ah4 

8,whom   he will he hardeneth10 he      
suffereth to be hardened4--,rom4 xi4 #h4
 8,god   gave them a spirit of slumber10
 i4 e4 permitted them to slumber4 #b    
,thes4 ii4 #aa4 8,god shall send them   
strong delusion1 that they should       
believe a lie20 i4 e4 shall permit them 
to be deluded so that they   shall      
believe a lie4--,exod4 vii4 #c4 c4 8,and
 ,i will harden ,pharaoh's   heart10 i4 
e4 ,i will suffer it to be hardened4    
,matt4 x4 #cd1 #ce4 8,i   am not come to
 send peace1 but a sword2 ,for ,i am    
come to set a   man at variance against 
his father10 ,that is1 my coming shall  
be the   innocent occasion of wars and  
variance4--,jude #d4 8,who were before  
of   old ordained to this condemnation20
 i4 e4 foretold1 or   forewritten1 as   
the word signifies2 announced in the    
sacred pages1   and proscribed by divine
 law4    ,but the passage above all     
others1 which appears to countenance the
   notion1 that ,god is the cause of    
sin1 is #a ,pet4 ii4 #h4 8,a stone of   

stumbling1 and a rock of offence1 even  
in them which stumble at the   word1    
being disobedient1 whereunto also they  
were appointed40 i4   e4 unto which     
thing1 their stumbling1 they were       
appointed because   disobedient4 ,the   
,greek participle includes the cause of 
their   falling2 as ,heb4 ii4 #c4       
,neglecting so great salvation1 how     
shall we   escape8 ,to which not        
escaping1 they were appointed1 for      
neglecting   so great salvation4 ,a     
striking contrast to this we have1 ,john
 vii4   #ag4 8,if any man will do his   
will1 he shall know of the doctrine20   
but the disobedient shall1 according to 
an awful but equitable   appointment1   
8stumble1 and fall1 and be broken1 and  
be snared1 and   be taken40--7,isa4     
viii4 #ae47 ,we have a further          
illustration of this   meaning in ,heb4 
iii4 #ah4 8,to whom sware he that they  
should not enter   into his rest1 but to
 them that believe not80 i4 e4 ,who were
   appointed to destruction8 ,the answer

 is1 the disobedient2 for the   original
 word is the same here as in ,peter1    
under a different   inflection4 ,and it 
is added1 ver4 #ai4 8,so they could not 
enter in   because of unbelief40--,thus 
also ,rom4 xi4 #g4 8,the rest were      
blinded1 or hardened20 i4 e4 were       
suffered to be blind or hard4   ,and    
that this is the meaning is decided by  
ver4 #bj4 8,because of   unbelief they  
were broken off40    ,upon the whole1   
,peter intimates1 that none should be   
offended at such   characters1 men of   
learning and eminence rejecting the     
,messiah and his   gospel4 ,their end is
 what might be expected1 as foretold by 
the   prophets1 according to ,god's     
righteous government1 and his eternal   
appointment1 or determination1          
respecting all such offenders4   ,their 
habitual unbelieving disobedience was   
the cause1 but their   actual stumbling 
at the word to their destruction was the
 natural1 the   righteous1 the appointed
 effect4 ,to this they were appointed1  

placed1 or set forth 7as ,pharaoh was   
raised up7 by the righteous   judgment  
of ,god1 who resisteth the proud and    
disobedient2 in order to   shew forth   
the glory of his justice in them4 ,they 
were personally   appointed to exalted  
situations1 being civil and             
ecclesiastical   builders2 they were    
suffered to reject ,christ1 in pure     
equity2 and   thus were deservedly      
constituted awful warnings to others4   
,footnote #bda3    ,this notion1 perhaps
 more than any other1 has been termed   
,baxterianism1 and yet it is not easy to
 say that ,mr4 ,baxter ever   maintained
 it4 ,he says indeed 8all have so much  
7grace7 as bringeth   and leaveth the   
success to man's will20 and this in a   
discourse   wherein he allows that ,god 
hath 8positively elected certain persons
 by   an absolute decree to overcome all
 their resistances of his ,spirit1   and
 to draw them to ,christ1 and by ,christ
 to himself1 by such a power   and way  
as shall infallibly convert and save    

them40 ,he moreover   says1 8,what if   
men cannot here tell how to resolve the 
question1   whether any or how many are 
ever converted or saved by that mere    
grace which we call sufficient1 or      
rather necessary1 and common   to those 
that are not converted2 and whether     
man's will ever make a   saving         
determining improvement of it80--8,and  
yet10 he adds1 8this   question itself  
is formed on false suppositions and is  
capable of a   satisfactory solution40  
,baxter's ,works1 ,vol4 ii4 p4          
#ibi4--,on the   subject of this ,note  
the author begs leave to refer his      
readers to   ,doddridge's ,works1 ,vol4 
v4 p4 #bch1 #bci1 ,notes4  ,footnote    
#bdb3    ,the nature of ,god1 his holy  
will1 and our peculiar relation to him1 
form an adamantine chain of obligation  
to duty which cannot with   impunity be 
broken2 from which predestination is so 
far from releasing   us1 that it forms  
another chain of gold that shall finally
 prevail2   and divine grace personally 

experienced is a silken cord to draw the
   soul along in the path of duty4 ,but 
do these powerful ties render   useless 
,god's reasoning with sinners1 his      
exhortations to   repentance1 to        
believing1 to obedience1 and to every   
particular branch   of duty8 ,no3 for   
these methods are the very means to     
attain the end1   and form a part of the
 decree itself4  ,,end ,,of ,,the       
,,first ,,volume4     ,transcriber's    
,notes3  ,missing or obscured           
punctuation was corrected4 ,the author's
 archaic punctuation and spellings have 
been retained4