صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

must be viewed as in infinite strict union with himself. In this view it appears that God's respect to the creature in the whole, unites with his respect to himself. Both regards are like two lines which seem at the beginning to be separate, but aim finally to meet in one, both being directed to the same centre. And as to the good of the creature itself, if viewed in its whole duration, and infinite progression, it must be viewed as infinite; and so not only being some communication of God's glory, but as coming nearer and nearer to the same thing in its infinite fulness. The nearer any thing comes to infinite, the nearer it comes to an identity with God. And if any good, as viewed by God, is beheld as infinite, it cannot be viewed as a distinct thing from God's own infinite glory.

The apostle's discourse of the great love of Christ to men, Eph. v. 25, to the end, leads us thus to think of the love of Christ to his church, as coinciding with his love to himself, by virtue of the strict union of the church with him. Thus, "Husbands, love your wives, as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it, that he might present it to himself a glorious church. So ought men to love their wives, as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself, even as the Lord the church; for we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones."

Now I apprehend that there is nothing in this manner of God's seeking the good of the creatures, or in his disposition to communicate of his own fulness to them, that at all derogates from the excellence of it, or the creature's obligation.

God's disposition to communicate good, or to cause his own infinite fulness to flow forth, is not the less properly called God's goodness, because the good that he communicates, is something of himself; a communication of his own glory, and what he delights in as he delights in his own glory. The creature has no less benefit by it; neither has such a disposition less of a direct tendency to the creature's benefit; or the less of a tendency to love to the creature, when the creature comes to exist. Nor is this disposition in

[blocks in formation]

God to communicate of and diffuse his own good, the less excellent, because it is implied in his love and regard to himself. For his love to himself does not imply it any otherwise, than as it implies a love to whatever is worthy and excellent. The emanation of God's glory, is in itself worthy and excellent, and so God delights in it; and his delight in this excellent thing, is implied in his love to himself, or his own fulness; because that is the fountain, and so the sum and comprehension of every thing that is excellent. And the matter standing thus, it is evident that these things cannot derogate from the excellency of this disposition in God, to an emanation of his own fulness, or communication of good to the creature.

Nor does God's inclination to communicate good in this manner, i. e. from regard to himself, or delight in his own glory, at all diminish the freeness of his beneficence in this communication. This will appear, if we consider particularly in what ways doing good to others from selflove, may be inconsistent with the freeness of beneficence. And I conceive there are only these two ways:

1. When any does good to another from confined selflove, that is opposite to a general benevolence. This kind of selflove is properly called selfishness. In some sense, the most benevolent, generous person in the world, seeks his own happiness in doing good to others, because he places his happiness in their good. His mind is so enlarged as to take them, as it were, into himself. Thus, when they are happy, he feels it, he partakes with them, and is happy in their happiness. This is so far from being inconsistent with the freeness of beneficence, that on the contrary, free benevolence and kindness consists in it. The most free beneficence that can be in men, is doing good, not from a confined selfishness, but from a disposition to general benevolence, or love to beings in general.

But now,. with respect to the Divine Being, there is no such thing as such confined selfishness in him, or a love to himself, opposite to general benevolence. It is impossi ble, because he comprehends all entity, and all excellence

in his own essence. The first Being, the eternal and infinite Being, is in effect, BEING IN GENERAL; and comprehends universal existence, as was observed before. God, in his benevolence to his creatures, cannot have his heart enlarged in such a manner as to take in beings that he finds, who are originally out of himself, distinct and independent. This cannot be in an infinite being, who exists alone from eternity. But he, from his goodness, as it were enlarges himself in a more excellent and divine manner, This is by communicating and diffusing himself; and so instead of finding, making objects of his benevolence; not by taking into himself what he finds distinct from himself, and so partaking of their good, and being happy in them, but by flowing forth, and expressing himself in them, and making them to partake of him, and rejoicing in himself expressed in them, and communicated to them.

2. Another thing, in doing good to others from selflove, that derogates from the freeness of the goodness, is doing good to others from dependence on them for the good we need or desire; which dependence obliges. So that in our beneficence we are not selfmoved, but as it were constrained by something without ourselves. But it has been particularly shewn already, that God's making himself his end, in the manner that has been spoken of, argues no dependence, but is consistent with absolute independence and selfsufficience.

And I would here observe, that there is something in that disposition in God to communicate goodness, which shews him to be independent and selfmoved in it, in a manner that is peculiar, and above what is in the beneficence of creatures. Creatures, even the most gracious of them, are not so independent and selfmoved in their goodness, but that in all the exercises of it, they are excited by some object that they find; something appearing good, or in some respect worthy of regard, presents itself, and moves their kindness. But God, being all and alone, is absolutely selfmoved. The exercises of his communicative disposition are absolutely from within himself, not finding any thing, or any

object to excite them or draw them forth; but all that is good and worthy in the object, and the very being of the object, proceeding from the overflowing of his fulness.

These things shew that the supposition of God's making himself his last end, in the manner spoken of, does not at all diminish the creature's obligation to gratitude, for communications of good it receives. For if it lessen its obligation, it must be on one of the following accounts. Either, that the creature has not so much benefit by it, or that the disposition it flows from is not proper goodness, not having so direct a tendency to the creature's benefit, or that the disposition is not so virtuous and excellent in its kind, or that the beneficence is not so free. But it has been observed that none of these things take place, with regard to that disposition, which has been supposed to have excited God to create the world.

I confess there is a degree of indistinctness and obscurity in the close consideration of such subjects, and a great imperfection in the expressions we use concerning them, arising unavoidably from the infinite sublimity of the subject, and the incomprehensibleness of those things that are divine. Hence revelation is the surest guide in these matters, and what that teaches shall in the next place be considered. Nevertheless, the endeavors used to discover what the voice of reason is, so far as it can go, may serve to prepare the way, by obviating cavils insisted on by many; and to satisfy us that what the Word of God says of the matter, is not unreasonable, and thus prepare our minds for a more full acquiescence in the instructions it gives, according to the more natural and genuine sense of words and expressions, we find often used there concerning this subject.

[ocr errors][ocr errors]
[ocr errors][merged small]
[ocr errors]

Wherein it is inquired, what is to be learned from the holy Scriptures cancerning God's last End in the Creation of the World.

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

The scriptures represent · God as making himself his own last end in the creation of the world.

IT is manifest, that the scriptures speak, on all occasions, as though God made himself his end in all his works; and as though the same being, who is the first cause of all things, were the supreme and last end of all things. Thus in Isa. xliv. 6." Thus saith the Lord, the king of Israel, and his redeemer the Lord of Hosts, I am the first, I also am the last, and besides me there is no God." Chap, xlviii, 12. "I am the first, and I am the last." Rev. i. S. "I am alpha and omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and was, and which is to come, the Almighty." Verse 11. "I am alpha and omega, the first and the last." Verse 17. "I am the first and the last.". Chap. xxi. 6. "And he said unto me, it is done, I am alpha and omega, the beginning and the end." Chap. xxii. 13. "I am alpha and omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last."

And when God is so often spoken of as the last as well as the first, and the end as well as the beginning, what is meant (or at least implied) is, that as he is the first efficient cause and fountain from whence all things originate; so he is the last final cause for which they are made; the final term to which they all tend in their ultimate issue. This seems to

« السابقةمتابعة »