♦“patriarchial” replaced with “patriarchal”Are we not told, that very same thing of the patriarchal generations, which Christ said to those that believed in him, that by eating his flesh, and drinking his blood, they have eternal life?In the eleventh chapter of the epistle to theHebrews, the same spirit, speaking of the patriarchal ages, saith, “All these died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were perswaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed they were strangers and pilgrims on earth,—who desired a better country, that is, an heavenly.”BishopWarburtonis so out of humour with this whole chapter, thus full of patriarchal light and glory, that he gives it the heathenish name of thePalladium of the cause, which he had undertaken to demolish. And he accordingly attacks it with a number of critical inventions, that may as truly be called heathenish; for they are in direct opposition to all Christian theology.He will have it, that the faith set forth in this whole chapter, is concerning a faith in the abstract, and not a specific faith in the Messiah. An invention as little grounded in the gospel, as goodness in the abstract, in opposition to specific goodness. Goodness in the abstract, if it hath any meaning, is all goodness, and therefore must have every species of goodness in it; so faith in the abstract, if it hath any meaning, is all faith, and therefore must have every species of faith in it.His first reason, why this whole chapter is concerning a faith in the abstract, and not a faith in the Messiah, is taken from that definition of faith; “The substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.”And yet this very definition, if it had been intended to give the most distinct idea of the nature of faith in the Messiah, could not have been better expressed, for there is every thing in it that can fully set forth that very faith. For if faith in a Messiah to come, must be a faith in things hoped for, and a reliance upon the certainty of things not seen; if this, and nothing but this, can be a true faith in a Messiah to come, how could it be more directly pointed at, than by making it to bethe substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen?For in this definition, not only the true object, but the true efficacy of faith in the Messiah is set forth, in that it is made to be such a realforetaste, and participation of things hoped for, and not seen, as is justly called, the very substance and evidence of them.Again, the Doctor appeals to the following words, as proof, that the faith described in this chapter, is not a faith in the Messiah, “He that cometh to God, must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of all those that diligently seek him.” Which words contain neither more nor less, than if it had been said, “He that cometh to God, must believe that he is a fulfiller of his promises to all those that truly believe in him, and them: for God cannot be considered as a rewarder of mankind, in any other sense, than as he is a fulfiller of his promises made to mankind in the covenant of a Messiah.” For God could not give, nor man receive any rewards or blessings, but in and through the one Mediator. Therefore to believe in God, as a rewarder, and blesser, is the very truth, and reality of a right faith in the Messiah.The Doctor has another proof, which he says, puts the matter out of all doubt. In this chapter it is said, By faithRahabthe harlot escaped, by faith theIsraelitespassed through the red sea, by faith the walls ofJerichofell down. “But was any of this, a faith in Jesus the Messiah?”Now not to rob this argumentation of any of its strength, it must be allowed to proceed thus.Joshua’s faith could not be in the Messiah, or the promises of God made to his forefathers.But why so? Because by his faith the walls ofJerichofell down.Just as theologically argued, as if it had been said,Abel’s faith could not be a faith in the seed of the woman, promised to his parents; because by his faith “he offered unto God a more acceptable sacrifice thanCain.”Enoch’s faith could not be in a Messiah to come, because by his faith he was taken up to God.Abraham’s faith could not be in the Messiah, because by his faith, “He sojourned in a strange country, chose to dwell in tents, and looked for a city that hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.” His faith could not be in a Messiah to come, because by hisfaith he offered upIsaac,his only begotten son.Having set the Doctor’s argument in its best light, no more need be said about the worth of it.At last comes his invincible argument, which if it was as strong, as he gives out, all that went before might have been spared.“To evince it impossible, says the Doctor, that faith in the Messiah, should be meant by the faith in this chapter, the apostle expressly saith, that all those, to whom he assigns this faith, had not received the promises; therefore they could not have faith in that, which was never proposed to their faith. For how shouldthey believe on him, of whom they had not heard?”Now if this argument has any good logic in it, it must follow, that no one, whether patriarch or prophet, before, or after the law, ever had, or could have faith in the Messiah, for all who died before the birth of Christ, must have died without receiving the promises, which were then first received, when good oldSimeoncould sing, “Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, for mine eyes have seen thy salvation.”ButSt.Paul, speaking to theJews, saith, “Behold, we declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise, which was made unto the fathers, God hath fulfilled the same to us their children.”Here, by the Spirit of God himself, is made known to us, the true difference between receiving, and not receiving the promises. The fathers, who could only see them afar off, are those who died without receiving the promises, that is, without receiving the things promised. And their children who lived to see the promises fulfilled, are they that received the promises, that is, the things promised.Farther, the Spirit of God saith, “all these died in the faith, not having received the promises.”But how could they die in this faith? It was for this only reason, because they had not received the promises, that is, the things promised. Forif they had, they could not have died in faith, but in the enjoyment of things promised.The Doctor therefore has unluckily pitched upon that, as an argument against the possibility of their faith in the Messiah, which is the very reason, why they did die in the faith of him. For the holy Spirit saith, they all died in the faith; and then the reason is added, why they did, namely, because not having received the promises; therefore their not having received the promises, is the reason why they died in the faith of them. And their faith had this foundation, because they had seen the things promised, as afar off, that is, long after their own deaths, and therefore to be fulfilled, or made good in a future life. Consequently, their faith was in a redemption to come in a life after this; which surely may be affirmed to be a true faith in the promised Messiah, or in all that, which had been promised, from the first joyful notice, which God gave of him,in a seed of the woman to bruise the head of the serpent. Which in gospel language is called,destroying the works of the devil, and bringing all that to life again, which died inAdam’s transgression.It is added of these holy men dying in the faith of promisesseen afar off, that they wereperswaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth; now they that say such things, plainly declare, that they seek a better country, that is, an heavenly.What an extravagance is it therefore in the learned Doctor, to say,How should they believe in him of whom they have not heard; as in the least degree applicable to those saints of the old world? For their faith was in promises made to them, but not fulfilled before their deaths, which they beholding as afar off, died in the fullest faith and expectation of a blessed life and heavenly country in virtue of them. Therefore they believed in that, of which they had heard, they knew what it was that they believed,namely, a redemption from all the evil of their pilgrimage on earth, to a life in heaven.Our blessed Lord said to theJews, Your fatherAbrahamrejoiced to see my day, and he saw it, and was glad. Surely thenAbrahamhad faith in the Messiah, and yet he is numbered by the apostle amongst those, who died not having received the promises.But now, thoughAbraham’s rejoicing at the sight of that day, was a sufficient proof, that his faith was in the Messiah, yet theimplicitfaith of the more antient, patriarchal world inthat, which they had not seen, asAbrahamhad, was asrighta faith in the Messiah, asAbraham’s was. This point is determined, in the following words of Christ.Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they, which have not seen, and yet have believed.This, and this alone, is the only real difference between the religion of the faithful before, andafter Christ.Before Christ, the living faith, was in a Messiah to come in some wonderful, but unknown way. By this faith, they stood under the blessed power of theseed of the woman, and from generation to generation were kept in the one true covenant of life, and union with God.After Christ, the same living faith, rejoiced in a Messiah made known by a miraculous birth, in the fallen human nature, redeeming it out of every evil of life, of death, of sin and hell, till it was placed, as God and man in one person, at the right hand of God in heaven.Now when in process of time, the covenant of life between God and man, had lost much of its effect, and the people of God had greatly fallen away from the faith and piety of the first patriarchs, (perhaps not more remarkably than the Christian world is fallen from the truth and faith of the apostolic ages) it pleased God byMoses, to introduce the descendents of the patriarchs into a newcovenant of care, and protection over them.Which covenant was not anew progressive stateof that first one true religion, that alone unites God and fallen man, nor given for its own sake, or because of any intrinsic goodness in its washings and purifications, but granted to thehardness of their hearts, as atemporal meansof keeping a fallen people from falling farther under the blindness and vanity of their earthly minds.The first covenant was so perfect that nothing could be added to it, but the manifestations of that which was promised in it. It was a promise of life and redemption to mankind, to be fulfilled in and by the seed of the woman. Now the promise, and the fulfilling of it, are not (as in human matters) twodistant,separatethings, that begin at different times, nor can the one ever be without the other. They both began together, and must exist together. The end, that is, the fulfilling, grows out of the beginning, goes along with it, and has all its efficacy from it; and the beginning, that is, the promise, is only so much of the end.That which Christ did, suffered, and obtained in our flesh, calling all to turn to God, to deny themselves, to enter into the strictest union with him, giving all divine graces, and yet onlyaccording to their faith in him; that very same, the seed of the woman from the beginning was always doing, yet solelyaccording to their faith in it.* The loss ofthis faithin the first ages of mankind, gave birth to that which is called theheathen, orrationalworld; for they both began together, and brought forth a race of people, full of blindness, wickedness, and idolatry. For so far as they departed from faith, so far they fell from God, under the dominion and government of their reason, passions, and appetites. And thence began the kingdom of this world, and thewisdom of this world, which ever must have full power over every man, as soon as he ceases to live by faith.*Reasoninginstead of faith, brought about the first dreadful change in human nature, no less than a real death to God. And nothing but faith instead of reasoning, can give any one fallen man power to become again a son of God. Now to the end of the world, this will be the unalterable difference between faith in God, and reasoning about the things of God: they can never change their place, or effects; that which they did to the first man, that they will do to the last.* Itmattersnot, how much therevelationsand precepts of God are increased, since the first single command given toAdam; for no more is offered to our reasoning faculty by the whole bible, than by that single precept. And the benefit of the whole bible is lost to us, as soon as we reason about the nature and necessity of its commands, just as the benefit of that first precept was lost in the same way.Hath God indeed said, ye shall not eat of every tree in the garden?This was the first essay, or beginning of reasoning with God. What it was, and did then, that it will always be, and do. Its nature, and fruits will never be any other, to the end of the world. And though in these last ages, it hath passed through all schools of quibbling, and is arrived at its utmost height of art, and precision of argument, yet as to divine matters, itstands just where it stood, when it first learnt that logic from the serpent, which improved the understanding ofEve. And at this day, it can see no deeper into the things of God; give no better judgment about them, thanthatconclusion it at first made, thatdeathcould not be in the tree which wasso good for food, so pleasant to behold, and to be desired for knowledge.In short, these two, faith and reasoning, have, and always will divide all mankind, from the beginning to the end of the world, into two sorts of men.The faithful, thro’ every age, are of the seed of the woman, the children of God, and heirs of redemption.The reasoners are of the seed of the serpent, they are the Heathens thro’ every age, and heirs of that confusion, which happened to the first builders of the tower ofBabel.* To live by faith, is to be in covenant with God; to live by reasoning, is to be in compact with ourselves, with our own vanity, and blindness.* To live by faith, is to live with God in the spirit and power of prayer, in self-denial, in contempt of the world, in divine love, in foretastes of the world to come, in humility, in patience, long-suffering, obedience, resignation, absolute dependence upon God, with all that is temporal and earthly under our feet.* To live by reasoning, is to be a prey of the old serpent, eating dust with him, groveling in the mire of all earthly passions, devoured with pride, imbittered with envy, tools and dupes to ourselves, tossed up with false hopes, cast down with vain fears, slaves to all the good and evil things of this world, to-day elated with learned praise, to-morrow dejected at the loss of it; yet jogging on year after year, defining words and ideas, dissecting doctrines and opinions, setting all arguments and all objections upon their best legs, sifting and refining all notions, conjectures, and criticisms, till death puts the same full end toall the wondersof the ideal fabric, that the cleansing broom does to the wonders of the spider’s web, so artfully spun at the expence of its own vitals.* This is the unalterable difference between a life offaith, and a life ofreasoningin the things of God; the former is from God, works with God, and therefore all things are possible to it; the latter is from the serpent, and therefore vain opinions, false judgments, errors and delusions are inseparable from it.Every scholar, every disputer of this world, nay every man, has been whereEvewas, and has done what she did, when she sought forwisdomthat didnot comefrom God. All libraries are a full proof of the remaining power of the first sinful thirst after it: they are full of aknowledge that comes not from God, but from the first foundation of subtlety that opened her eyes. For as there cannot be any goodness in man, but so far as the divine goodness works in him, so there cannot be any divine truth, or knowledge in man, but so far as God’s truth and knowledge works in him?Indeed nothing but the one Spirit of Christ, living and working in man, from the beginning to the end of the world, can possibly be the source of any goodness, holiness, or redemption of man.The scriptures abound with proof of this. What can be more decisive than the following words?If any man hath not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. If Christ be not in you, ye are reprobates.And must not this be equally true of every man in the world? As true of all men in the patriarchal as in the gospel ages?If any man, says the apostle; therefore no regard is had to time or place, but where there isany man, there this truth is affirmed of him by the apostle, that unless he hath the Spirit of Christ he is none of his, but is a reprobate. But if none can be Christ’s, but because they have his Spirit living in them, and none can be God’s, but because they are Christ’s, it follows that if Christ was not the Spirit and power ofthatfirst, universal covenant made by God with fallenAdam, if he was not that which was meant by theseed of the woman, if his Spirit was not from that time thereal bruiser of the serpent’s head, bothAdam, and all his posterity, for much more than three thousand years lived and died mere reprobates, and that, by an unavoidable necessity, because they had not the Spirit of Christ living in them.And now, my Lord, I think I have sufficiently proved not only my two propositions, but also that the first covenant withAdam, by the seed of the woman, was the one Christian means of salvation, so wonderfully manifested by the whole process of Christ revealed in the gospel. Therefore it is a truth of the utmost certainty, that from the beginning of the world to the end of it, there never was, nor ever will be any more, or any other, but one and the same true religion of the gospel, which began withAdamandEvethro’ Jesus Christ, the one mediator and reconciler of God to man, who was as certainly the life, strength, and salvation of the faithful in the old world, as he was in after-times, when the Son of the VirginMary, the way, the truth, and the life, to all that have faith in him.And indeed a plurality of religions, or means of salvation, is as gross an imagination as a plurality of gods, and can subsist upon no other foundation.A better religion necessarily supposes a better God, and a change in religion a change in that God that makes it. A partial God, with-holdingtheone true powerof salvation, till the last ages of the world, is as atheistical asEpicurus’s god.In sundry times, and in divers manners, it may please the wisdom of God, to vary that which is only an outward help to the truth of religion; but the inward spirit and truth of salvation, is as unvariable as God himself.The law therefore ofMoses, as consisting of carnal ordinances, not onlymakes nothing perfect, but brings nothing new into the one covenant of redemption, but was only a temporary, provisional help,added because of transgressions, till the promised seed should come; that is, till the whole process of Christ, should in its last and highest degree of evidence manifest itself in all its parts.*This lawthen no more belonged to thetrue religionof the Old Testament, than of the New, neither did it ever standbetweenthese two dispensations, as in their stead. No: it was merely on theoutsideof both, had only a temporary relation to the true religion, either before or after Christ, but was no more apart, orinsteadof themfor a time, than the hand that stands by the road, directing the traveller, is itself a part of the road, or instead of it.Now, tho’ the reason of man ought not to pretend to fathom all the depths of divine wisdom, in the whole of thisadditional covenant, yet two ends of it are apparent.First, To bring this corrupted people ofIsraelinto a new state of such observances, as might preserve them from the gross superstitions and idolatries to which they were too much inclined. And this, by aritualof such condescensions to their carnal minds, as might nevertheless be a school of restraints and discipline, full of such purifications, types, and figures, as gave much spiritual light and instruction, both backwards and forwards. Backwards, as truly significative of their fallen state, daily memorials of their lost purity and perfection:forwards, as variously pointing atthat promisedvictory over the serpent, which had been the constant faith and hope of their forefathers.Secondly, That by a theocracy added to this ritual, which shewed itself in a covenant of continualcare and protection, openly blessing their obedience, and punishing their rebellion, and working all kinds of miracles in the overthrow of their enemies, not only they themselves, but all the rest of the world, might be forced to see and know, that there was no God, that had all power in heaven and on earth, but the one God ofIsrael.As to theIsraelitesthemselves, this temporal covenant was a great instance of God’s goodness towards them. For they were thus called out of idolatry, separated from the rest of the world, built into an holy church of God, put under a most amazing theocracy, indulged for a timewith a ritual of carnal institutions, because of the hardness of their hearts, which ritual was full of every instruction by doctrines, types, figures and miracles, all shewing in the strongest manner, that they were to be heirs of the heavenly promises made to their forefathers.And as to the rest of the world, no particular message or messenger, tho’ new risen from the dead, proclaims to them in so powerful a manner, the vanity of their idols, the knowledge of the one true God of all the world, as this remarkable body of people set up in the midst of the world did. So that the law, tho’ nothing but a temporal covenant ofoutward care and protection, was not only most divinely contrived to preserve the faith of the first holy patriarchs, and guide them to the time and manner of receiving the promises made to their fathers, but it was all mercy to the rest of the world, being no less than one continual, daily, miraculous call to them to receive blessing and protection, life and salvation in the knowledge and worship of the one true God of heaven and earth.Now when the children of the patriarchs, were to be entered into this new covenant, the utmost care was taken by the Spirit of God, that to eyes that could see and ears that could hear, enough should be shewn and said, to prevent allcarnal atheismto temporal and outward things, and bring forth a spiritualIsrael, full of that faith and piety, in which their holy ancestors, as pilgrims onearth, had lived and died devoted to God, in hope of everlasting redemption.To this endMoses, tho’ bringing them under a ritual of bodily washings and purifications, yet that they might use them only as outward confessions and memorials of an inward spiritual pollution, and as types and figures of their being to be delivered from it; is led by the inspiration of God, not only to insert in the books of the law, the most sublime doctrines and heavenly precepts of patriarchal holiness, but to lay before them, for their daily instruction, a history of the most deep and affecting truths: truths that had every thing in them fitted to awaken and keep up that strong hope of an eternal redemption, under the power of which, the holy patriarchs had overlooked every thing in time for the sake of eternity.I mean, the most wonderful history of the creation and curse of this world, of the high origin of man and his dreadful fall from it, his redemption and covenant of life restored in a seed of the woman, the lives and deaths of the holy patriarchs, their patience under all sufferings, their contempt of worldly advantages, their heavenly visions, revelations and speeches from the invisible God, keeping them thereby in an holy intercourse with theinvisible world, full of faith and hope of the good things of eternity.To mention one or two of those great doctrinesofMoses, which set forth the original perfection and heavenly nature of man.God said,Let us make man in our own image and likeness. Is not this as high a doctrine ofimmortality, does it not give the same instruction, raise the same hope, and call for all the same elevation of the heart to God, as whenSt.Johnsaith,Beloved, it does not yet appear what we shall be; but we know that when he shall appear, we shall be LIKE him? Just the same truth, and fitted to have the same effects, as whenMosessaid, God made man in his own LIKENESS.St.Paulsays,God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself. A comfortable doctrine indeed, and full of hope of immortality; yet only the same comfort and hope of immortality which had been openly preached byMoses.WhenMosesbringeth in the Deity, as saying,The seed of the woman shall bruise the head of the serpent; he preachesthatvery same gospel, and in the same manner which the apostle did. For his words plainly teach,that God was in the seed of the woman reconciling the world unto himself; as whenSt.Paulsays,that God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself; the difference is nothing else, but in two different names given to our Redeemer.* Now tho’Moseswas the firstrecorderof the gospel salvation in a written book, yet was he not the firstpreacherof it. For it was proclaimed inAdam’s day, from heaven, as the birth ofChrist in the flesh, in the days of Herod. For when God said,The seed of the woman shall bruise the head of the serpent, the same good tidings of salvation wasproclaimed from heavenby God himself, as when the angel said to the shepherds,Unto you is born this day in the city of David, a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.* But how can we know this? Only by God’s own teaching. For nothing can be truly known of God by the creature, but that which God makes known of himself.—So far as God operates in the creature, and manifests himself in it, so far it truly knows, andis taught of God.—Any other knowledge of God, however learned, high, or deep it may pretend to be, is as vain and spurious asthat goodnesswhich proceeds from something else, than God’s good Spirit living in us.* Genius, parts and literature, however set forth with wit and rhetoric, have no affinity with divine knowledge; they can no more give it, than the lust of the eyes and the pride of life can generate humility and purity of heart. These accomplishments live and act in a sphere of their own, and have no more power of taking to themselves any living knowledge of God, than the art of painting to the life, can give the power ofcreatinglife.* The blindness, and follies which have over-run both the antient and modern world in matters of religion, are a full proof of the capital doctrine of divine revelation,namely, that man(now the defaced image of God) is so miserably changed and fallen from his first created state, that nothing less than a new birth, can bring him again into the region of divinetruth.And hence it is, that tho’ religion has its deepest ground in the nature of man, tho’ God beessentially, present in the souls of all men, yet from the fall ofAdamto the end of the world, it will be an immutable truth, thatstrait is the gate and narrow is the way that leadethunto divine knowledge; and none but the simple of heart,the poor in spirit, or the real followers of Christ can find it.* But it is time to have done. I shall only trouble your Lordship with the few following remarks.—Dr.Warburtonsays, “He has proved that the doctrine of a future state of rewards and punishments is not to befound in, nor did make apartof the Mosaic dispensation.”¹The Mosaic dispensation means nothing else, but atemporaryritual, and atemporarytheocracy of worldly blessings and curses to support it. These are its fixed bounds within which it is confined.—Therefore, to prove that a statebeyondthis world, was not to befound in, nor did make apartof a state, that is confined to this world, is as easily and as vainly done, as to prove that thegarden of Edenis not to befound in, nor makes apartof a map that is confined toEngland. And to inferthattheIsraelitestherefore had no notionof an immortality, because it was not apartof their ritual, is no better than to infer, that the people ofEnglandcan have no notion of the garden ofEden, because nothing of it is to be seen in the map of this island.—But tho’ not in theritual, yetMosesin other parts of his books written for the instruction of those to whom he gave the ritual, has given them the fullest notice and highest proof of thatgodlikeandimmortalnature they received at their creation, shewing them to be the children of thepatriarchal covenant, heirs of all the promises of eternal redemption made to their fathers from the beginning of the world. Nay, the most heavenly doctrines and precepts given by the apostles to the redeemed of Christ, asheirs of immortality, are to be found in the books ofMoses.¹D. L.Vol. II.page 474.Dr.Warburtontakes much pains to get rid of the only true sense of the following texts ofMoses. Thus,Let us make man in our own image and likeness. From these words, he says,it is inferred, that the soul is immaterial. But he thinksMoses intimated quite another matter. And so do I; for to intimate theimmaterialityof the soul, by saying, that man was made in theimage and likenessof God, is quite short of the sense of the words: to say, that the soul isimmaterial, is saying no more, than that it is not acircleor a piece ofclay, it is saying nothing at all of it but only of something that it is not. ThereforeMosescannot be supposed to intimate such a nothingas this, by the image and likeness of God. But he asserts a much higher matter, namely, that being created in the image of God, he was made a partaker of the divine nature, and therefore had not only immortality, but the riches and perfections of the Deity grounded and growing up. And this is the true ground of our eternal happiness, that is, of thateternal increaseof union, perfection and glory, which the redeemed soul will find in God; it is because the image of God, being as a seed sown into it at itscreation, it will to all eternity, after his admission into heaven, open more and more its divine nature, and spring forth in new and farther fruits ofglory,beatitudeandunionwith God.Every thing that is endless, numberless in the depth of eternity, is endless and numberless in the silence of the soul; whatseeingis, whathearing,feeling,&c.are in their boundless variety, and ever increasing newness of delights in eternity, these, with all their wonders, are the innate birthright and sure inheritance of every immortal godly soul. And on the other hand, the same boundless, numberless depth and growth of every tormenting, painful, frightful sensation, will open itself in every soul,thathas lost its God, and is left to its own immortal life within itself.Vain therefore, is that principle published to the world, by a celebrated philosopher of the last century, that the soul in itsfirst created state,is a mererasa tabula, orblank paper. A fiction, that is contradicted by all that we know of every created thing in nature.For every creature of this world, animate or inanimate, is in its degree, amicrocosmof all the powers, that are in the great world, of which it is a part. And nothing through all this universe, has in its essence, only the nature of arasa tabula, or blank paper, but is in its kind, full of the riches, and powers of all outward nature.In like manner must it be with the eternal world; every thing which comes from it, must be in its degree, amicrocosmof all the powers and glories of eternity.Let it be said, that thematter of this world, was in its first created state, free from all extension, solidity and parts, and this would be as grave a saying, and as much founded in nature, as therasa tabulaof the soul: say again, that by degrees it got a materiality of length, breadth and parts, fromwithout, and this would be no greater a wonder, than that a soul, created inwardly destitute of any principle of knowledge, should from outward causes grow up into a profound philosopher.Again, say that the soul was at first, but ablank paper, till the organs of the body began to act upon it; and may not the enemies of religion, as justly say, that it must be the same blank paper again at the last, when the body shall be broken off from it?If therefore theEssay upon human understanding(which the Doctor calls the most original book that ever was published) has produced a metaphysicks, in many points dangerous to religion, and greatly serviceable to false, and superficial reasoning, it is not to be wondered at, since so eminent an error, is the fundamental principle on which it proceeds.But to return to the Doctor: he says, “The divine image and likeness must consist in something that is peculiar to man,—that the two thingspeculiarto man, are his shape, and his reason; that it cannot be in his shape, therefore it must be in his reason.”¹¹Page 554.The divine image and likeness cannot consist in something that is peculiar to man. It might as well consist in his shape, as in his faculty of makingsyllogisms; but on the contrary, it must consist in that, and only that, which is, peculiar to God. Nor could man possibly be created in the image and likeness of God, unless something peculiar to God, had been the divine glory and perfection of his creaturely life. For the creaturely life, and all that is peculiar to it, is at the utmost distance from God, and can only have a likeness to that, which is to be found in creatures.—God dwelling in a supernatural way in the creature, is the only possible image of God that can be in it. The fallen angels have every thingthatwas creaturelyleftin them, but they are horribledevils, because they have lost their supernatural image of God, which dwelt in them at their creation. They have still reason, craft and subtlety; but because they have nothing, but what is peculiar to the creature, they are all rage, torment and misery.The Doctor therefore, instead of appealing to two things in man, his shape and his reason, as his true distinction from beasts, should have said, by the authority ofMoses, that only one thing was peculiar to man, as his glorious distinction both from fallen angels, and terrestrial animals, andthatone thing is, his being created in the image and likeness of God. As to his outward shape, considered only as different from other animals, there is but little distinction in it; because they are as different in shape from one another, as man is from them all. And if man at his creation had had no higher a guest within him, than his reason, his shape would have been little better, than that of a fox, or a serpent. For reason, when not under the government of a higher principle, is that same craft, and cunning,thatis visible in variety of beasts; and is for the most part, as earthly an instrument of mischievous passions, and lusts in man, as it is in beasts. And what is more, it must be so, till it comes under the government ofthat, which was theimage and likenessof God, in the first creation of man.* What is the difference between reason inSt.Paul, aSpinosa, aHobbes, or aBolingbroke?None at all, or no other than in their outward shape. Therefore if reason be the divine image and likeness of God in man, aHobbesand aBolingbroke, had as much of it asSt.Paul. And a man that is all his life long reasoning himself into atheism, and the wisdom of living according to his own lusts, must be allowed to give daily proof of his having the image and likeness of God, very powerfully manifested in him.The Doctor’s great proof, that reason is the image and likeness of God, is becauseMosesimmediately adds,Let them rule over the fish of the sea, and over the fowls of heaven, and over the beasts of the earth. “For what, says he, could invest man with this dominionde facto, as well asde jure, but his reason?”¹¹D. L. page 554.Our blessed Lord, at leaving the world, saith, “These signs shall follow them that believe; in my name, they shall cast out devils, they shall speak with new tongues, they shall take up serpents, and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them.” Now let it be asked,what could invest the believers in Christ with this dominionde facto,as well asde jure,but their reason? Both this question, and the solution of it, is just as sound, and theological as the Doctor’s.For it was not any thing of their own, but solely the name, that is, power of Christ dwelling, and operating in them, that invested them with the dominion over devils, serpents, diseases,and all outward deadly, or hurtful things. Nowthatwhich gave this power, to the believers in Christ, wasthat very same, which gave to the first perfect man, apower of rulingover all the creatures of this world, and of living in full superiority and dominion over all that was, or could be hurtful, and deadly, in fire, or water, heat or cold, or any elementary things. Sothat Adamwhilst standing in his first state of glory, and power, had the same reason to say of allthathe was, and did, that whichSt.Paulsaid, yetnot I, but Christ that liveth in me.And how the Doctor came to think of any other power, as theabilityof man toruleover the creatures, is very strange, since the gospel has so plainly told him,that they only are the children of God, who are led by the Spirit of God. If therefore the first man, created in the image and likeness of God, may be supposed by his creation, to have been a child of God, then sure is it, that he had theSpirit of God, living and working in him. And that surely may be allowed to have been histrueand his only qualification, to have and exercise a dominion over the rest of the creation.The Doctor, in order to find outthatimage, and likeness of God in man, of whichMoseswrites, looks into the constitution of thattwo-leggedanimal, who is thedisputer of the world. As likely to succeed, as if in order to find outthat paradise,of whichMoseswrites, he should search for it in thehundredsofEssex, or in thewildsofKent.ForMoses, to prevent the folly of looking for the divine image in any thing, that isnaturalto thepresentstate of man, has given us assurance, thatthis firstman, created in the image of God, died the very day that he did eat of the forbidden tree. And that nothing of this divine man remained but terrors within, and such a figure of himself, as filled him with shame and confusion.And a greater thanMoseshas told us,thatman, in his presentnatural state, is so dead to that first divine glory, that he has no possibility of entering into the kingdom of God till he is born again from above. This sufficiently shewsthathe who will find out in what the image of God in man consisted, must as the apostle saith,walk by faith and not by sight.The next text ofMoses, which the Doctor miserably injures, is thus quoted by him, “The Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into him the breath of life, and man became a living soul; that is, say the objectors, had an immortal soul.”Who the objectors are, I know not; but the truth of the text requires us to say, that therefore man had a divine and godlike soul, a true offspring of the divine nature. Because the breath or Spirit of the holy triune God, was that breath by which he was made a living soul.—And therefore the riches of this first life in man, were the riches of the divine nature manifesting itself in the soul.But the Doctor will have it, that only an unlearnedEnglishreader, can collect any thing to be divine in the soul, from the words ofMoses, as not knowing that what is translated a living soul, signifies, in the original, only a living animal. But this, everyEnglishreader may know to be a vain criticism; for no stress is laid upon the expression, a living soul, no more than if it had been said, a living animal. But the full proof of the divine greatness of the human soul, lies solely in this, that the breath or spirit of the holy Trinity was breathed into it, and was that which made it to be a living soul, and therefore the life that arose in it, was the life of God in the soul.The Doctor thus comments upon the words of the text. “God, the great plastic artist, is here represented, as making and shaping out a figure of earth and clay, which he afterwards animates or inspires with life. He breathed into this statue the breath of life, and the lump of clay became a living creature.”Had this elegant and most graphical description been only found in some minor poet, or school declamation, it might have been overlooked; but in a prose treatise of divinity, it ought not to pass uncensured. I know of nothing that can equal it, unless it be supposed that some ingeniousanthropomorphite, reading these words,and the Lord God did unto Adam and Eve make coats of skins, and cloathed them; should thus describe the matter, “Here, God, the great artist, is represented, as having the skins of beasts before him, and with his divine hands, cutting, shaping and joining them together in forms of garments, fitted to the size and distinction of the first man and his wife.”I may defy any one to shew, that this comment does not pay as great a regard to theletter, and do as much honour to the sense of this scripture, as the Doctor’s doth to the other text.The sacred text,God formed manof the dust ofthe ground, and breathed into him the breath of life, is a short and full declaration of a most important truth, namely, that man was brought into being,in a twofold nature, having the nature of this outward world, and the nature of heaven; the former signified by his being formed of the dust of the ground, thelatter, by the breath of God breathed into him. To be formed out of the dust of the ground, is the same thing, as if it had been said, that he was formed out of all theriches,powers, andvirtuesthat are in this whole visible world. For every property of nature is hidden in the earth. And man, so far as he was designed to be a creature of this outward world, is therefore said to be formed out of the earth, because the earth is not only the treasure-house of all that is in outward nature,but is themotherof all the three other elements. And as all things of this world, whether animate or inanimate, are from the earth as their mother, so in the earth is there every power and blessing of life, to sustain every thingthathas its body from it; as appears by that fruitful power, which is continually giving forth itself in all kinds of vegetable food,fittedto the wants of every living creature.* What therefore can it be called, but a most deplorable blindness in learned reason, to consider man as making his first entrance into paradise in nobetter a state than that of dust and clay, formed into a dead lumpish figure of a man, for this reason, because he was said to be formed out of the dust of the ground? Blindness indeed! when it is so evident,thateven now, after the curse is in the earth, yet every thing, even the poorestweedthat comes out of the dust of the ground, is in a much higher state, and enters into this world with a degree of life from its mothertheearth.—Had the Doctor never seen, or heard of any other things formed out of the earth, but such as our potters, and dealers in clay can make out of it, there might have been some sort of excuse for hisAdamof dead clay formed out of the earth. But when every day of his life has shewn him that almost infinite variety, powers, virtues and wonders in the kingdom of vegetables, all coming out of the earth, and nourished by it; when the scripture has told himthatthe beasts and cattle of all kinds were formed out of the earth, and their flesh and blood from it, and their daily sustenance from its fruitful womb: it is strange to a degree of astonishment, that he should hold,thatout of thisrichearth, when in its paradisical state, when man, the glory of the creation, was formed out of it, and God the former, nothing would come forth, but a dead lump of clay in the figure of a man.Again, What a total disregard has the Doctor here shewn to the very letter of scripture? The text saith,God formed man out of the dust of the ground, nothing else is ascribed to God, as his work in this matter; but the Doctor adds quite another matter as the work of God, namely, shaping and forming lumpish clay into a dead figure of a man.And then follows another fiction equally against the letter of scripture. For he says, that AFTERWARDS, God, breathed life into it. But in the scripture account, there is not a syllable of any first, or afterwards.—Two things are spoken of the birth of man, and as they cannot be spoken both at once, so one must come after the other in the relation of them. The scripture mentions them as two distinct things; and the reason of mentioning them thus distinctly, is not to teach us, they were done at two different times, the one first, and the other afterwards, but to give us the assurance, that man came intothe world in a twofold nature, the one from the heavenly breath of God, and the other from this visible world.But the union of these two natures in the formation of man, was owing to one, and the same operation of God.—There is no sooner, or later, in the beginning of the soul, and of the body: the beginning of one, is the beginning of the other.To suppose that man was made a dead image, and afterwards had life breathed into it, is no better philosophy, than to suppose, that God first created the vegetable creature, and afterwards added a vegetable life to it; that he first created the globe of the sun, and afterwards added heat and light to it.God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature.What a folly to suppose, that the creature, and its life, are two separate things, that the one came first, and the other afterwards? No better, than supposing, that a circle and its roundness, are two separate things, that first comes forth the figure, and afterwards its roundness.But the general design of the D. L. is to establish this most horrible doctrine, thatMosesdesignedly and industriously secreted from God’s chosen people, all thought of any eternal relation that they had with God; which is the same as saying, that he designedly suppressed the one only possible foundation of true religion. Forthe immortality of the human nature, is the only ground of homage and regard to an invisible and eternal God. And unless man was by nature essentially related to God, and the eternal world, it would have been as unreasonable for the God of the eternal world to call man to an heavenly adoration of him, as to bid earthly flesh and bloodbe, anddothat which angels are, and do in heaven. Therefore the first notice from an eternal God, given to man of a religious homage due to him, and the bare capacity of man to embrace such notice, is the greatest proofs that man has something of the eternal God in him. For as nothing can hunger, but that which by nature both wants and has a capacity to eat; so nothing can receive a religion relating to the eternal God, but that which has within itself, both a want and capacity to partake of the eternal world. And had not man an eternal spirit in him, as an offspring of the eternal God, he could no more want to have any intercourse with the eternal world, than a fish can want to be out of the water. Nor could any taught adoration of the one eternal God enter any further into his heart, or be of more use to him, than so much religion taught to a parrot. For man being, or believing himself to be, as merely a creature of this world, as the parrot is, could no more regard any thing, but what his earthly nature has a fondness for, than the parrot doth.Let us eat and drink forto-morrow we die, would be the highest and truest philosophy, if there is no more of a divine life, or heavenly nature in man, than in the chattering sparrow. In this case, worldly craft, whether in a fox or a man, is the highest use of its natural powers. For if the earthly life is equallythe allof both, earthly wisdom must beequallythe perfection of them both. For it can no more be the duty of an earthly creature to be heavenly minded, than of a celestial creature to be carnally minded.If therefore theIsraelitesunderMoses, were by him directed to consider themselves merely as creatures of this world, having nothing to enjoy, or hope for, but the good things of this life, it must be said he did all that well could be done, to make them anearthly,covetous,rapacious,stiff-neckedandbrutalpeople. And all the complaints which the prophets have brought against them, on that account, ought to have been made only againstMoseshimself, and the religion that was set up by him. For a religion only offering, and wholly confining people to earthly enjoyments, may surely be said, not only to make, but even require them to be wholly sensual and earthly minded. And every hearty believer of such a religion, is by his very faith called upon, to make the most that he can, of thelust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life.*Mosessaith, “Hear,O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord; and thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength.” Now theseIsraeliteslooking backwards to God’s covenant of redemption, made with their forefathers, of which they were the undoubted heirs; and forwards to this new covenant of a new theocracy, added, as God’s peculiar mercy to them in this life, to keep them to himself, to support them under their afflictions, and to arm them with patience in waiting for that eternal redemption, in the faith of which, their ancestors had died so full of joy and comfort: in this double view of their state under God, whichMoseshad so fully set beforethem, and with the strongest injunctions to be daily teaching them to their children, they had the highest reason to rejoice in God, and to love him with all their heart and soul and strength.But to suppose thatMoses, designedly secreting from them, the knowledge of that eternal relation they had to God, on which the hopes of their forefathers were founded, and on which he himself was made able to chuse the afflictions of Christ, has something very shocking in it. For ifMoseswas so good a man, because he had faith in the eternal redemption promised from the beginning, can there be more cruelty, than in supposing him, designing by his religious system, wholly to obliterate all thought and remembranceof God’s unchangeable covenant of life, and extinguish all sense and hope of a redemption to come? To what purpose is it to say to such a people, shut up in earthly hopes, “Thou shalt love the one God of heaven with all thy heart?” For if he had succeeded in his design, fixed them in the belief, that they had no treasure but in this world, we have Christ’s word for it, that the affections of their hearts could go no where else, saying, as an eternal truth,that where our treasure is, there must be the heart also. So that in this case, no love of God, and therefore no other divine virtue, could have any place in those who conformed to the design ofMoses.The Doctor, with some indignation, tries to evade this unavoidable consequence. “The true foundation of morality is the will of God. But is not the distinction between right and wrong, perpetually enforced by the law ofMoseson this principle? This then is the spring of all virtue, and to give it the greatest efficacy, the love and fear of God is there incessantly inculcated. But how does a long or short existence, a life here, or elsewhere, affect at all the practice of virtue so founded?”¹
♦“patriarchial” replaced with “patriarchal”
♦“patriarchial” replaced with “patriarchal”
♦“patriarchial” replaced with “patriarchal”
Are we not told, that very same thing of the patriarchal generations, which Christ said to those that believed in him, that by eating his flesh, and drinking his blood, they have eternal life?
In the eleventh chapter of the epistle to theHebrews, the same spirit, speaking of the patriarchal ages, saith, “All these died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were perswaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed they were strangers and pilgrims on earth,—who desired a better country, that is, an heavenly.”
BishopWarburtonis so out of humour with this whole chapter, thus full of patriarchal light and glory, that he gives it the heathenish name of thePalladium of the cause, which he had undertaken to demolish. And he accordingly attacks it with a number of critical inventions, that may as truly be called heathenish; for they are in direct opposition to all Christian theology.
He will have it, that the faith set forth in this whole chapter, is concerning a faith in the abstract, and not a specific faith in the Messiah. An invention as little grounded in the gospel, as goodness in the abstract, in opposition to specific goodness. Goodness in the abstract, if it hath any meaning, is all goodness, and therefore must have every species of goodness in it; so faith in the abstract, if it hath any meaning, is all faith, and therefore must have every species of faith in it.
His first reason, why this whole chapter is concerning a faith in the abstract, and not a faith in the Messiah, is taken from that definition of faith; “The substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.”
And yet this very definition, if it had been intended to give the most distinct idea of the nature of faith in the Messiah, could not have been better expressed, for there is every thing in it that can fully set forth that very faith. For if faith in a Messiah to come, must be a faith in things hoped for, and a reliance upon the certainty of things not seen; if this, and nothing but this, can be a true faith in a Messiah to come, how could it be more directly pointed at, than by making it to bethe substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen?
For in this definition, not only the true object, but the true efficacy of faith in the Messiah is set forth, in that it is made to be such a realforetaste, and participation of things hoped for, and not seen, as is justly called, the very substance and evidence of them.
Again, the Doctor appeals to the following words, as proof, that the faith described in this chapter, is not a faith in the Messiah, “He that cometh to God, must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of all those that diligently seek him.” Which words contain neither more nor less, than if it had been said, “He that cometh to God, must believe that he is a fulfiller of his promises to all those that truly believe in him, and them: for God cannot be considered as a rewarder of mankind, in any other sense, than as he is a fulfiller of his promises made to mankind in the covenant of a Messiah.” For God could not give, nor man receive any rewards or blessings, but in and through the one Mediator. Therefore to believe in God, as a rewarder, and blesser, is the very truth, and reality of a right faith in the Messiah.
The Doctor has another proof, which he says, puts the matter out of all doubt. In this chapter it is said, By faithRahabthe harlot escaped, by faith theIsraelitespassed through the red sea, by faith the walls ofJerichofell down. “But was any of this, a faith in Jesus the Messiah?”
Now not to rob this argumentation of any of its strength, it must be allowed to proceed thus.
Joshua’s faith could not be in the Messiah, or the promises of God made to his forefathers.But why so? Because by his faith the walls ofJerichofell down.
Just as theologically argued, as if it had been said,Abel’s faith could not be a faith in the seed of the woman, promised to his parents; because by his faith “he offered unto God a more acceptable sacrifice thanCain.”
Enoch’s faith could not be in a Messiah to come, because by his faith he was taken up to God.
Abraham’s faith could not be in the Messiah, because by his faith, “He sojourned in a strange country, chose to dwell in tents, and looked for a city that hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.” His faith could not be in a Messiah to come, because by hisfaith he offered upIsaac,his only begotten son.
Having set the Doctor’s argument in its best light, no more need be said about the worth of it.
At last comes his invincible argument, which if it was as strong, as he gives out, all that went before might have been spared.
“To evince it impossible, says the Doctor, that faith in the Messiah, should be meant by the faith in this chapter, the apostle expressly saith, that all those, to whom he assigns this faith, had not received the promises; therefore they could not have faith in that, which was never proposed to their faith. For how shouldthey believe on him, of whom they had not heard?”
Now if this argument has any good logic in it, it must follow, that no one, whether patriarch or prophet, before, or after the law, ever had, or could have faith in the Messiah, for all who died before the birth of Christ, must have died without receiving the promises, which were then first received, when good oldSimeoncould sing, “Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, for mine eyes have seen thy salvation.”
ButSt.Paul, speaking to theJews, saith, “Behold, we declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise, which was made unto the fathers, God hath fulfilled the same to us their children.”
Here, by the Spirit of God himself, is made known to us, the true difference between receiving, and not receiving the promises. The fathers, who could only see them afar off, are those who died without receiving the promises, that is, without receiving the things promised. And their children who lived to see the promises fulfilled, are they that received the promises, that is, the things promised.
Farther, the Spirit of God saith, “all these died in the faith, not having received the promises.”
But how could they die in this faith? It was for this only reason, because they had not received the promises, that is, the things promised. Forif they had, they could not have died in faith, but in the enjoyment of things promised.
The Doctor therefore has unluckily pitched upon that, as an argument against the possibility of their faith in the Messiah, which is the very reason, why they did die in the faith of him. For the holy Spirit saith, they all died in the faith; and then the reason is added, why they did, namely, because not having received the promises; therefore their not having received the promises, is the reason why they died in the faith of them. And their faith had this foundation, because they had seen the things promised, as afar off, that is, long after their own deaths, and therefore to be fulfilled, or made good in a future life. Consequently, their faith was in a redemption to come in a life after this; which surely may be affirmed to be a true faith in the promised Messiah, or in all that, which had been promised, from the first joyful notice, which God gave of him,in a seed of the woman to bruise the head of the serpent. Which in gospel language is called,destroying the works of the devil, and bringing all that to life again, which died inAdam’s transgression.
It is added of these holy men dying in the faith of promisesseen afar off, that they wereperswaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth; now they that say such things, plainly declare, that they seek a better country, that is, an heavenly.
What an extravagance is it therefore in the learned Doctor, to say,How should they believe in him of whom they have not heard; as in the least degree applicable to those saints of the old world? For their faith was in promises made to them, but not fulfilled before their deaths, which they beholding as afar off, died in the fullest faith and expectation of a blessed life and heavenly country in virtue of them. Therefore they believed in that, of which they had heard, they knew what it was that they believed,namely, a redemption from all the evil of their pilgrimage on earth, to a life in heaven.
Our blessed Lord said to theJews, Your fatherAbrahamrejoiced to see my day, and he saw it, and was glad. Surely thenAbrahamhad faith in the Messiah, and yet he is numbered by the apostle amongst those, who died not having received the promises.
But now, thoughAbraham’s rejoicing at the sight of that day, was a sufficient proof, that his faith was in the Messiah, yet theimplicitfaith of the more antient, patriarchal world inthat, which they had not seen, asAbrahamhad, was asrighta faith in the Messiah, asAbraham’s was. This point is determined, in the following words of Christ.Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they, which have not seen, and yet have believed.
This, and this alone, is the only real difference between the religion of the faithful before, andafter Christ.Before Christ, the living faith, was in a Messiah to come in some wonderful, but unknown way. By this faith, they stood under the blessed power of theseed of the woman, and from generation to generation were kept in the one true covenant of life, and union with God.
After Christ, the same living faith, rejoiced in a Messiah made known by a miraculous birth, in the fallen human nature, redeeming it out of every evil of life, of death, of sin and hell, till it was placed, as God and man in one person, at the right hand of God in heaven.
Now when in process of time, the covenant of life between God and man, had lost much of its effect, and the people of God had greatly fallen away from the faith and piety of the first patriarchs, (perhaps not more remarkably than the Christian world is fallen from the truth and faith of the apostolic ages) it pleased God byMoses, to introduce the descendents of the patriarchs into a newcovenant of care, and protection over them.
Which covenant was not anew progressive stateof that first one true religion, that alone unites God and fallen man, nor given for its own sake, or because of any intrinsic goodness in its washings and purifications, but granted to thehardness of their hearts, as atemporal meansof keeping a fallen people from falling farther under the blindness and vanity of their earthly minds.
The first covenant was so perfect that nothing could be added to it, but the manifestations of that which was promised in it. It was a promise of life and redemption to mankind, to be fulfilled in and by the seed of the woman. Now the promise, and the fulfilling of it, are not (as in human matters) twodistant,separatethings, that begin at different times, nor can the one ever be without the other. They both began together, and must exist together. The end, that is, the fulfilling, grows out of the beginning, goes along with it, and has all its efficacy from it; and the beginning, that is, the promise, is only so much of the end.
That which Christ did, suffered, and obtained in our flesh, calling all to turn to God, to deny themselves, to enter into the strictest union with him, giving all divine graces, and yet onlyaccording to their faith in him; that very same, the seed of the woman from the beginning was always doing, yet solelyaccording to their faith in it.
* The loss ofthis faithin the first ages of mankind, gave birth to that which is called theheathen, orrationalworld; for they both began together, and brought forth a race of people, full of blindness, wickedness, and idolatry. For so far as they departed from faith, so far they fell from God, under the dominion and government of their reason, passions, and appetites. And thence began the kingdom of this world, and thewisdom of this world, which ever must have full power over every man, as soon as he ceases to live by faith.
*Reasoninginstead of faith, brought about the first dreadful change in human nature, no less than a real death to God. And nothing but faith instead of reasoning, can give any one fallen man power to become again a son of God. Now to the end of the world, this will be the unalterable difference between faith in God, and reasoning about the things of God: they can never change their place, or effects; that which they did to the first man, that they will do to the last.
* Itmattersnot, how much therevelationsand precepts of God are increased, since the first single command given toAdam; for no more is offered to our reasoning faculty by the whole bible, than by that single precept. And the benefit of the whole bible is lost to us, as soon as we reason about the nature and necessity of its commands, just as the benefit of that first precept was lost in the same way.
Hath God indeed said, ye shall not eat of every tree in the garden?This was the first essay, or beginning of reasoning with God. What it was, and did then, that it will always be, and do. Its nature, and fruits will never be any other, to the end of the world. And though in these last ages, it hath passed through all schools of quibbling, and is arrived at its utmost height of art, and precision of argument, yet as to divine matters, itstands just where it stood, when it first learnt that logic from the serpent, which improved the understanding ofEve. And at this day, it can see no deeper into the things of God; give no better judgment about them, thanthatconclusion it at first made, thatdeathcould not be in the tree which wasso good for food, so pleasant to behold, and to be desired for knowledge.
In short, these two, faith and reasoning, have, and always will divide all mankind, from the beginning to the end of the world, into two sorts of men.
The faithful, thro’ every age, are of the seed of the woman, the children of God, and heirs of redemption.
The reasoners are of the seed of the serpent, they are the Heathens thro’ every age, and heirs of that confusion, which happened to the first builders of the tower ofBabel.
* To live by faith, is to be in covenant with God; to live by reasoning, is to be in compact with ourselves, with our own vanity, and blindness.
* To live by faith, is to live with God in the spirit and power of prayer, in self-denial, in contempt of the world, in divine love, in foretastes of the world to come, in humility, in patience, long-suffering, obedience, resignation, absolute dependence upon God, with all that is temporal and earthly under our feet.
* To live by reasoning, is to be a prey of the old serpent, eating dust with him, groveling in the mire of all earthly passions, devoured with pride, imbittered with envy, tools and dupes to ourselves, tossed up with false hopes, cast down with vain fears, slaves to all the good and evil things of this world, to-day elated with learned praise, to-morrow dejected at the loss of it; yet jogging on year after year, defining words and ideas, dissecting doctrines and opinions, setting all arguments and all objections upon their best legs, sifting and refining all notions, conjectures, and criticisms, till death puts the same full end toall the wondersof the ideal fabric, that the cleansing broom does to the wonders of the spider’s web, so artfully spun at the expence of its own vitals.
* This is the unalterable difference between a life offaith, and a life ofreasoningin the things of God; the former is from God, works with God, and therefore all things are possible to it; the latter is from the serpent, and therefore vain opinions, false judgments, errors and delusions are inseparable from it.
Every scholar, every disputer of this world, nay every man, has been whereEvewas, and has done what she did, when she sought forwisdomthat didnot comefrom God. All libraries are a full proof of the remaining power of the first sinful thirst after it: they are full of aknowledge that comes not from God, but from the first foundation of subtlety that opened her eyes. For as there cannot be any goodness in man, but so far as the divine goodness works in him, so there cannot be any divine truth, or knowledge in man, but so far as God’s truth and knowledge works in him?
Indeed nothing but the one Spirit of Christ, living and working in man, from the beginning to the end of the world, can possibly be the source of any goodness, holiness, or redemption of man.
The scriptures abound with proof of this. What can be more decisive than the following words?If any man hath not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. If Christ be not in you, ye are reprobates.And must not this be equally true of every man in the world? As true of all men in the patriarchal as in the gospel ages?If any man, says the apostle; therefore no regard is had to time or place, but where there isany man, there this truth is affirmed of him by the apostle, that unless he hath the Spirit of Christ he is none of his, but is a reprobate. But if none can be Christ’s, but because they have his Spirit living in them, and none can be God’s, but because they are Christ’s, it follows that if Christ was not the Spirit and power ofthatfirst, universal covenant made by God with fallenAdam, if he was not that which was meant by theseed of the woman, if his Spirit was not from that time thereal bruiser of the serpent’s head, bothAdam, and all his posterity, for much more than three thousand years lived and died mere reprobates, and that, by an unavoidable necessity, because they had not the Spirit of Christ living in them.
And now, my Lord, I think I have sufficiently proved not only my two propositions, but also that the first covenant withAdam, by the seed of the woman, was the one Christian means of salvation, so wonderfully manifested by the whole process of Christ revealed in the gospel. Therefore it is a truth of the utmost certainty, that from the beginning of the world to the end of it, there never was, nor ever will be any more, or any other, but one and the same true religion of the gospel, which began withAdamandEvethro’ Jesus Christ, the one mediator and reconciler of God to man, who was as certainly the life, strength, and salvation of the faithful in the old world, as he was in after-times, when the Son of the VirginMary, the way, the truth, and the life, to all that have faith in him.
And indeed a plurality of religions, or means of salvation, is as gross an imagination as a plurality of gods, and can subsist upon no other foundation.
A better religion necessarily supposes a better God, and a change in religion a change in that God that makes it. A partial God, with-holdingtheone true powerof salvation, till the last ages of the world, is as atheistical asEpicurus’s god.
In sundry times, and in divers manners, it may please the wisdom of God, to vary that which is only an outward help to the truth of religion; but the inward spirit and truth of salvation, is as unvariable as God himself.
The law therefore ofMoses, as consisting of carnal ordinances, not onlymakes nothing perfect, but brings nothing new into the one covenant of redemption, but was only a temporary, provisional help,added because of transgressions, till the promised seed should come; that is, till the whole process of Christ, should in its last and highest degree of evidence manifest itself in all its parts.
*This lawthen no more belonged to thetrue religionof the Old Testament, than of the New, neither did it ever standbetweenthese two dispensations, as in their stead. No: it was merely on theoutsideof both, had only a temporary relation to the true religion, either before or after Christ, but was no more apart, orinsteadof themfor a time, than the hand that stands by the road, directing the traveller, is itself a part of the road, or instead of it.
Now, tho’ the reason of man ought not to pretend to fathom all the depths of divine wisdom, in the whole of thisadditional covenant, yet two ends of it are apparent.
First, To bring this corrupted people ofIsraelinto a new state of such observances, as might preserve them from the gross superstitions and idolatries to which they were too much inclined. And this, by aritualof such condescensions to their carnal minds, as might nevertheless be a school of restraints and discipline, full of such purifications, types, and figures, as gave much spiritual light and instruction, both backwards and forwards. Backwards, as truly significative of their fallen state, daily memorials of their lost purity and perfection:forwards, as variously pointing atthat promisedvictory over the serpent, which had been the constant faith and hope of their forefathers.
Secondly, That by a theocracy added to this ritual, which shewed itself in a covenant of continualcare and protection, openly blessing their obedience, and punishing their rebellion, and working all kinds of miracles in the overthrow of their enemies, not only they themselves, but all the rest of the world, might be forced to see and know, that there was no God, that had all power in heaven and on earth, but the one God ofIsrael.
As to theIsraelitesthemselves, this temporal covenant was a great instance of God’s goodness towards them. For they were thus called out of idolatry, separated from the rest of the world, built into an holy church of God, put under a most amazing theocracy, indulged for a timewith a ritual of carnal institutions, because of the hardness of their hearts, which ritual was full of every instruction by doctrines, types, figures and miracles, all shewing in the strongest manner, that they were to be heirs of the heavenly promises made to their forefathers.
And as to the rest of the world, no particular message or messenger, tho’ new risen from the dead, proclaims to them in so powerful a manner, the vanity of their idols, the knowledge of the one true God of all the world, as this remarkable body of people set up in the midst of the world did. So that the law, tho’ nothing but a temporal covenant ofoutward care and protection, was not only most divinely contrived to preserve the faith of the first holy patriarchs, and guide them to the time and manner of receiving the promises made to their fathers, but it was all mercy to the rest of the world, being no less than one continual, daily, miraculous call to them to receive blessing and protection, life and salvation in the knowledge and worship of the one true God of heaven and earth.
Now when the children of the patriarchs, were to be entered into this new covenant, the utmost care was taken by the Spirit of God, that to eyes that could see and ears that could hear, enough should be shewn and said, to prevent allcarnal atheismto temporal and outward things, and bring forth a spiritualIsrael, full of that faith and piety, in which their holy ancestors, as pilgrims onearth, had lived and died devoted to God, in hope of everlasting redemption.
To this endMoses, tho’ bringing them under a ritual of bodily washings and purifications, yet that they might use them only as outward confessions and memorials of an inward spiritual pollution, and as types and figures of their being to be delivered from it; is led by the inspiration of God, not only to insert in the books of the law, the most sublime doctrines and heavenly precepts of patriarchal holiness, but to lay before them, for their daily instruction, a history of the most deep and affecting truths: truths that had every thing in them fitted to awaken and keep up that strong hope of an eternal redemption, under the power of which, the holy patriarchs had overlooked every thing in time for the sake of eternity.
I mean, the most wonderful history of the creation and curse of this world, of the high origin of man and his dreadful fall from it, his redemption and covenant of life restored in a seed of the woman, the lives and deaths of the holy patriarchs, their patience under all sufferings, their contempt of worldly advantages, their heavenly visions, revelations and speeches from the invisible God, keeping them thereby in an holy intercourse with theinvisible world, full of faith and hope of the good things of eternity.
To mention one or two of those great doctrinesofMoses, which set forth the original perfection and heavenly nature of man.
God said,Let us make man in our own image and likeness. Is not this as high a doctrine ofimmortality, does it not give the same instruction, raise the same hope, and call for all the same elevation of the heart to God, as whenSt.Johnsaith,Beloved, it does not yet appear what we shall be; but we know that when he shall appear, we shall be LIKE him? Just the same truth, and fitted to have the same effects, as whenMosessaid, God made man in his own LIKENESS.
St.Paulsays,God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself. A comfortable doctrine indeed, and full of hope of immortality; yet only the same comfort and hope of immortality which had been openly preached byMoses.
WhenMosesbringeth in the Deity, as saying,The seed of the woman shall bruise the head of the serpent; he preachesthatvery same gospel, and in the same manner which the apostle did. For his words plainly teach,that God was in the seed of the woman reconciling the world unto himself; as whenSt.Paulsays,that God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself; the difference is nothing else, but in two different names given to our Redeemer.
* Now tho’Moseswas the firstrecorderof the gospel salvation in a written book, yet was he not the firstpreacherof it. For it was proclaimed inAdam’s day, from heaven, as the birth ofChrist in the flesh, in the days of Herod. For when God said,The seed of the woman shall bruise the head of the serpent, the same good tidings of salvation wasproclaimed from heavenby God himself, as when the angel said to the shepherds,Unto you is born this day in the city of David, a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.
* But how can we know this? Only by God’s own teaching. For nothing can be truly known of God by the creature, but that which God makes known of himself.—So far as God operates in the creature, and manifests himself in it, so far it truly knows, andis taught of God.—Any other knowledge of God, however learned, high, or deep it may pretend to be, is as vain and spurious asthat goodnesswhich proceeds from something else, than God’s good Spirit living in us.
* Genius, parts and literature, however set forth with wit and rhetoric, have no affinity with divine knowledge; they can no more give it, than the lust of the eyes and the pride of life can generate humility and purity of heart. These accomplishments live and act in a sphere of their own, and have no more power of taking to themselves any living knowledge of God, than the art of painting to the life, can give the power ofcreatinglife.
* The blindness, and follies which have over-run both the antient and modern world in matters of religion, are a full proof of the capital doctrine of divine revelation,namely, that man(now the defaced image of God) is so miserably changed and fallen from his first created state, that nothing less than a new birth, can bring him again into the region of divinetruth.
And hence it is, that tho’ religion has its deepest ground in the nature of man, tho’ God beessentially, present in the souls of all men, yet from the fall ofAdamto the end of the world, it will be an immutable truth, thatstrait is the gate and narrow is the way that leadethunto divine knowledge; and none but the simple of heart,the poor in spirit, or the real followers of Christ can find it.
* But it is time to have done. I shall only trouble your Lordship with the few following remarks.—Dr.Warburtonsays, “He has proved that the doctrine of a future state of rewards and punishments is not to befound in, nor did make apartof the Mosaic dispensation.”¹The Mosaic dispensation means nothing else, but atemporaryritual, and atemporarytheocracy of worldly blessings and curses to support it. These are its fixed bounds within which it is confined.—Therefore, to prove that a statebeyondthis world, was not to befound in, nor did make apartof a state, that is confined to this world, is as easily and as vainly done, as to prove that thegarden of Edenis not to befound in, nor makes apartof a map that is confined toEngland. And to inferthattheIsraelitestherefore had no notionof an immortality, because it was not apartof their ritual, is no better than to infer, that the people ofEnglandcan have no notion of the garden ofEden, because nothing of it is to be seen in the map of this island.—But tho’ not in theritual, yetMosesin other parts of his books written for the instruction of those to whom he gave the ritual, has given them the fullest notice and highest proof of thatgodlikeandimmortalnature they received at their creation, shewing them to be the children of thepatriarchal covenant, heirs of all the promises of eternal redemption made to their fathers from the beginning of the world. Nay, the most heavenly doctrines and precepts given by the apostles to the redeemed of Christ, asheirs of immortality, are to be found in the books ofMoses.
¹D. L.Vol. II.page 474.
¹D. L.Vol. II.page 474.
¹D. L.Vol. II.page 474.
Dr.Warburtontakes much pains to get rid of the only true sense of the following texts ofMoses. Thus,Let us make man in our own image and likeness. From these words, he says,it is inferred, that the soul is immaterial. But he thinksMoses intimated quite another matter. And so do I; for to intimate theimmaterialityof the soul, by saying, that man was made in theimage and likenessof God, is quite short of the sense of the words: to say, that the soul isimmaterial, is saying no more, than that it is not acircleor a piece ofclay, it is saying nothing at all of it but only of something that it is not. ThereforeMosescannot be supposed to intimate such a nothingas this, by the image and likeness of God. But he asserts a much higher matter, namely, that being created in the image of God, he was made a partaker of the divine nature, and therefore had not only immortality, but the riches and perfections of the Deity grounded and growing up. And this is the true ground of our eternal happiness, that is, of thateternal increaseof union, perfection and glory, which the redeemed soul will find in God; it is because the image of God, being as a seed sown into it at itscreation, it will to all eternity, after his admission into heaven, open more and more its divine nature, and spring forth in new and farther fruits ofglory,beatitudeandunionwith God.
Every thing that is endless, numberless in the depth of eternity, is endless and numberless in the silence of the soul; whatseeingis, whathearing,feeling,&c.are in their boundless variety, and ever increasing newness of delights in eternity, these, with all their wonders, are the innate birthright and sure inheritance of every immortal godly soul. And on the other hand, the same boundless, numberless depth and growth of every tormenting, painful, frightful sensation, will open itself in every soul,thathas lost its God, and is left to its own immortal life within itself.
Vain therefore, is that principle published to the world, by a celebrated philosopher of the last century, that the soul in itsfirst created state,is a mererasa tabula, orblank paper. A fiction, that is contradicted by all that we know of every created thing in nature.
For every creature of this world, animate or inanimate, is in its degree, amicrocosmof all the powers, that are in the great world, of which it is a part. And nothing through all this universe, has in its essence, only the nature of arasa tabula, or blank paper, but is in its kind, full of the riches, and powers of all outward nature.
In like manner must it be with the eternal world; every thing which comes from it, must be in its degree, amicrocosmof all the powers and glories of eternity.
Let it be said, that thematter of this world, was in its first created state, free from all extension, solidity and parts, and this would be as grave a saying, and as much founded in nature, as therasa tabulaof the soul: say again, that by degrees it got a materiality of length, breadth and parts, fromwithout, and this would be no greater a wonder, than that a soul, created inwardly destitute of any principle of knowledge, should from outward causes grow up into a profound philosopher.Again, say that the soul was at first, but ablank paper, till the organs of the body began to act upon it; and may not the enemies of religion, as justly say, that it must be the same blank paper again at the last, when the body shall be broken off from it?
If therefore theEssay upon human understanding(which the Doctor calls the most original book that ever was published) has produced a metaphysicks, in many points dangerous to religion, and greatly serviceable to false, and superficial reasoning, it is not to be wondered at, since so eminent an error, is the fundamental principle on which it proceeds.
But to return to the Doctor: he says, “The divine image and likeness must consist in something that is peculiar to man,—that the two thingspeculiarto man, are his shape, and his reason; that it cannot be in his shape, therefore it must be in his reason.”¹
¹Page 554.
¹Page 554.
¹Page 554.
The divine image and likeness cannot consist in something that is peculiar to man. It might as well consist in his shape, as in his faculty of makingsyllogisms; but on the contrary, it must consist in that, and only that, which is, peculiar to God. Nor could man possibly be created in the image and likeness of God, unless something peculiar to God, had been the divine glory and perfection of his creaturely life. For the creaturely life, and all that is peculiar to it, is at the utmost distance from God, and can only have a likeness to that, which is to be found in creatures.—God dwelling in a supernatural way in the creature, is the only possible image of God that can be in it. The fallen angels have every thingthatwas creaturelyleftin them, but they are horribledevils, because they have lost their supernatural image of God, which dwelt in them at their creation. They have still reason, craft and subtlety; but because they have nothing, but what is peculiar to the creature, they are all rage, torment and misery.
The Doctor therefore, instead of appealing to two things in man, his shape and his reason, as his true distinction from beasts, should have said, by the authority ofMoses, that only one thing was peculiar to man, as his glorious distinction both from fallen angels, and terrestrial animals, andthatone thing is, his being created in the image and likeness of God. As to his outward shape, considered only as different from other animals, there is but little distinction in it; because they are as different in shape from one another, as man is from them all. And if man at his creation had had no higher a guest within him, than his reason, his shape would have been little better, than that of a fox, or a serpent. For reason, when not under the government of a higher principle, is that same craft, and cunning,thatis visible in variety of beasts; and is for the most part, as earthly an instrument of mischievous passions, and lusts in man, as it is in beasts. And what is more, it must be so, till it comes under the government ofthat, which was theimage and likenessof God, in the first creation of man.
* What is the difference between reason inSt.Paul, aSpinosa, aHobbes, or aBolingbroke?None at all, or no other than in their outward shape. Therefore if reason be the divine image and likeness of God in man, aHobbesand aBolingbroke, had as much of it asSt.Paul. And a man that is all his life long reasoning himself into atheism, and the wisdom of living according to his own lusts, must be allowed to give daily proof of his having the image and likeness of God, very powerfully manifested in him.
The Doctor’s great proof, that reason is the image and likeness of God, is becauseMosesimmediately adds,Let them rule over the fish of the sea, and over the fowls of heaven, and over the beasts of the earth. “For what, says he, could invest man with this dominionde facto, as well asde jure, but his reason?”¹
¹D. L. page 554.
¹D. L. page 554.
¹D. L. page 554.
Our blessed Lord, at leaving the world, saith, “These signs shall follow them that believe; in my name, they shall cast out devils, they shall speak with new tongues, they shall take up serpents, and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them.” Now let it be asked,what could invest the believers in Christ with this dominionde facto,as well asde jure,but their reason? Both this question, and the solution of it, is just as sound, and theological as the Doctor’s.
For it was not any thing of their own, but solely the name, that is, power of Christ dwelling, and operating in them, that invested them with the dominion over devils, serpents, diseases,and all outward deadly, or hurtful things. Nowthatwhich gave this power, to the believers in Christ, wasthat very same, which gave to the first perfect man, apower of rulingover all the creatures of this world, and of living in full superiority and dominion over all that was, or could be hurtful, and deadly, in fire, or water, heat or cold, or any elementary things. Sothat Adamwhilst standing in his first state of glory, and power, had the same reason to say of allthathe was, and did, that whichSt.Paulsaid, yetnot I, but Christ that liveth in me.
And how the Doctor came to think of any other power, as theabilityof man toruleover the creatures, is very strange, since the gospel has so plainly told him,that they only are the children of God, who are led by the Spirit of God. If therefore the first man, created in the image and likeness of God, may be supposed by his creation, to have been a child of God, then sure is it, that he had theSpirit of God, living and working in him. And that surely may be allowed to have been histrueand his only qualification, to have and exercise a dominion over the rest of the creation.
The Doctor, in order to find outthatimage, and likeness of God in man, of whichMoseswrites, looks into the constitution of thattwo-leggedanimal, who is thedisputer of the world. As likely to succeed, as if in order to find outthat paradise,of whichMoseswrites, he should search for it in thehundredsofEssex, or in thewildsofKent.
ForMoses, to prevent the folly of looking for the divine image in any thing, that isnaturalto thepresentstate of man, has given us assurance, thatthis firstman, created in the image of God, died the very day that he did eat of the forbidden tree. And that nothing of this divine man remained but terrors within, and such a figure of himself, as filled him with shame and confusion.
And a greater thanMoseshas told us,thatman, in his presentnatural state, is so dead to that first divine glory, that he has no possibility of entering into the kingdom of God till he is born again from above. This sufficiently shewsthathe who will find out in what the image of God in man consisted, must as the apostle saith,walk by faith and not by sight.
The next text ofMoses, which the Doctor miserably injures, is thus quoted by him, “The Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into him the breath of life, and man became a living soul; that is, say the objectors, had an immortal soul.”
Who the objectors are, I know not; but the truth of the text requires us to say, that therefore man had a divine and godlike soul, a true offspring of the divine nature. Because the breath or Spirit of the holy triune God, was that breath by which he was made a living soul.—And therefore the riches of this first life in man, were the riches of the divine nature manifesting itself in the soul.
But the Doctor will have it, that only an unlearnedEnglishreader, can collect any thing to be divine in the soul, from the words ofMoses, as not knowing that what is translated a living soul, signifies, in the original, only a living animal. But this, everyEnglishreader may know to be a vain criticism; for no stress is laid upon the expression, a living soul, no more than if it had been said, a living animal. But the full proof of the divine greatness of the human soul, lies solely in this, that the breath or spirit of the holy Trinity was breathed into it, and was that which made it to be a living soul, and therefore the life that arose in it, was the life of God in the soul.
The Doctor thus comments upon the words of the text. “God, the great plastic artist, is here represented, as making and shaping out a figure of earth and clay, which he afterwards animates or inspires with life. He breathed into this statue the breath of life, and the lump of clay became a living creature.”
Had this elegant and most graphical description been only found in some minor poet, or school declamation, it might have been overlooked; but in a prose treatise of divinity, it ought not to pass uncensured. I know of nothing that can equal it, unless it be supposed that some ingeniousanthropomorphite, reading these words,and the Lord God did unto Adam and Eve make coats of skins, and cloathed them; should thus describe the matter, “Here, God, the great artist, is represented, as having the skins of beasts before him, and with his divine hands, cutting, shaping and joining them together in forms of garments, fitted to the size and distinction of the first man and his wife.”
I may defy any one to shew, that this comment does not pay as great a regard to theletter, and do as much honour to the sense of this scripture, as the Doctor’s doth to the other text.
The sacred text,God formed manof the dust ofthe ground, and breathed into him the breath of life, is a short and full declaration of a most important truth, namely, that man was brought into being,in a twofold nature, having the nature of this outward world, and the nature of heaven; the former signified by his being formed of the dust of the ground, thelatter, by the breath of God breathed into him. To be formed out of the dust of the ground, is the same thing, as if it had been said, that he was formed out of all theriches,powers, andvirtuesthat are in this whole visible world. For every property of nature is hidden in the earth. And man, so far as he was designed to be a creature of this outward world, is therefore said to be formed out of the earth, because the earth is not only the treasure-house of all that is in outward nature,but is themotherof all the three other elements. And as all things of this world, whether animate or inanimate, are from the earth as their mother, so in the earth is there every power and blessing of life, to sustain every thingthathas its body from it; as appears by that fruitful power, which is continually giving forth itself in all kinds of vegetable food,fittedto the wants of every living creature.
* What therefore can it be called, but a most deplorable blindness in learned reason, to consider man as making his first entrance into paradise in nobetter a state than that of dust and clay, formed into a dead lumpish figure of a man, for this reason, because he was said to be formed out of the dust of the ground? Blindness indeed! when it is so evident,thateven now, after the curse is in the earth, yet every thing, even the poorestweedthat comes out of the dust of the ground, is in a much higher state, and enters into this world with a degree of life from its mothertheearth.—Had the Doctor never seen, or heard of any other things formed out of the earth, but such as our potters, and dealers in clay can make out of it, there might have been some sort of excuse for hisAdamof dead clay formed out of the earth. But when every day of his life has shewn him that almost infinite variety, powers, virtues and wonders in the kingdom of vegetables, all coming out of the earth, and nourished by it; when the scripture has told himthatthe beasts and cattle of all kinds were formed out of the earth, and their flesh and blood from it, and their daily sustenance from its fruitful womb: it is strange to a degree of astonishment, that he should hold,thatout of thisrichearth, when in its paradisical state, when man, the glory of the creation, was formed out of it, and God the former, nothing would come forth, but a dead lump of clay in the figure of a man.
Again, What a total disregard has the Doctor here shewn to the very letter of scripture? The text saith,God formed man out of the dust of the ground, nothing else is ascribed to God, as his work in this matter; but the Doctor adds quite another matter as the work of God, namely, shaping and forming lumpish clay into a dead figure of a man.
And then follows another fiction equally against the letter of scripture. For he says, that AFTERWARDS, God, breathed life into it. But in the scripture account, there is not a syllable of any first, or afterwards.—Two things are spoken of the birth of man, and as they cannot be spoken both at once, so one must come after the other in the relation of them. The scripture mentions them as two distinct things; and the reason of mentioning them thus distinctly, is not to teach us, they were done at two different times, the one first, and the other afterwards, but to give us the assurance, that man came intothe world in a twofold nature, the one from the heavenly breath of God, and the other from this visible world.
But the union of these two natures in the formation of man, was owing to one, and the same operation of God.—There is no sooner, or later, in the beginning of the soul, and of the body: the beginning of one, is the beginning of the other.
To suppose that man was made a dead image, and afterwards had life breathed into it, is no better philosophy, than to suppose, that God first created the vegetable creature, and afterwards added a vegetable life to it; that he first created the globe of the sun, and afterwards added heat and light to it.
God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature.What a folly to suppose, that the creature, and its life, are two separate things, that the one came first, and the other afterwards? No better, than supposing, that a circle and its roundness, are two separate things, that first comes forth the figure, and afterwards its roundness.
But the general design of the D. L. is to establish this most horrible doctrine, thatMosesdesignedly and industriously secreted from God’s chosen people, all thought of any eternal relation that they had with God; which is the same as saying, that he designedly suppressed the one only possible foundation of true religion. Forthe immortality of the human nature, is the only ground of homage and regard to an invisible and eternal God. And unless man was by nature essentially related to God, and the eternal world, it would have been as unreasonable for the God of the eternal world to call man to an heavenly adoration of him, as to bid earthly flesh and bloodbe, anddothat which angels are, and do in heaven. Therefore the first notice from an eternal God, given to man of a religious homage due to him, and the bare capacity of man to embrace such notice, is the greatest proofs that man has something of the eternal God in him. For as nothing can hunger, but that which by nature both wants and has a capacity to eat; so nothing can receive a religion relating to the eternal God, but that which has within itself, both a want and capacity to partake of the eternal world. And had not man an eternal spirit in him, as an offspring of the eternal God, he could no more want to have any intercourse with the eternal world, than a fish can want to be out of the water. Nor could any taught adoration of the one eternal God enter any further into his heart, or be of more use to him, than so much religion taught to a parrot. For man being, or believing himself to be, as merely a creature of this world, as the parrot is, could no more regard any thing, but what his earthly nature has a fondness for, than the parrot doth.Let us eat and drink forto-morrow we die, would be the highest and truest philosophy, if there is no more of a divine life, or heavenly nature in man, than in the chattering sparrow. In this case, worldly craft, whether in a fox or a man, is the highest use of its natural powers. For if the earthly life is equallythe allof both, earthly wisdom must beequallythe perfection of them both. For it can no more be the duty of an earthly creature to be heavenly minded, than of a celestial creature to be carnally minded.
If therefore theIsraelitesunderMoses, were by him directed to consider themselves merely as creatures of this world, having nothing to enjoy, or hope for, but the good things of this life, it must be said he did all that well could be done, to make them anearthly,covetous,rapacious,stiff-neckedandbrutalpeople. And all the complaints which the prophets have brought against them, on that account, ought to have been made only againstMoseshimself, and the religion that was set up by him. For a religion only offering, and wholly confining people to earthly enjoyments, may surely be said, not only to make, but even require them to be wholly sensual and earthly minded. And every hearty believer of such a religion, is by his very faith called upon, to make the most that he can, of thelust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life.
*Mosessaith, “Hear,O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord; and thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength.” Now theseIsraeliteslooking backwards to God’s covenant of redemption, made with their forefathers, of which they were the undoubted heirs; and forwards to this new covenant of a new theocracy, added, as God’s peculiar mercy to them in this life, to keep them to himself, to support them under their afflictions, and to arm them with patience in waiting for that eternal redemption, in the faith of which, their ancestors had died so full of joy and comfort: in this double view of their state under God, whichMoseshad so fully set beforethem, and with the strongest injunctions to be daily teaching them to their children, they had the highest reason to rejoice in God, and to love him with all their heart and soul and strength.
But to suppose thatMoses, designedly secreting from them, the knowledge of that eternal relation they had to God, on which the hopes of their forefathers were founded, and on which he himself was made able to chuse the afflictions of Christ, has something very shocking in it. For ifMoseswas so good a man, because he had faith in the eternal redemption promised from the beginning, can there be more cruelty, than in supposing him, designing by his religious system, wholly to obliterate all thought and remembranceof God’s unchangeable covenant of life, and extinguish all sense and hope of a redemption to come? To what purpose is it to say to such a people, shut up in earthly hopes, “Thou shalt love the one God of heaven with all thy heart?” For if he had succeeded in his design, fixed them in the belief, that they had no treasure but in this world, we have Christ’s word for it, that the affections of their hearts could go no where else, saying, as an eternal truth,that where our treasure is, there must be the heart also. So that in this case, no love of God, and therefore no other divine virtue, could have any place in those who conformed to the design ofMoses.
The Doctor, with some indignation, tries to evade this unavoidable consequence. “The true foundation of morality is the will of God. But is not the distinction between right and wrong, perpetually enforced by the law ofMoseson this principle? This then is the spring of all virtue, and to give it the greatest efficacy, the love and fear of God is there incessantly inculcated. But how does a long or short existence, a life here, or elsewhere, affect at all the practice of virtue so founded?”¹