creatures, that does not, admit of increase or diminution. There is nothing, therefore, the same in both. Were it pos sible, that any thing in the creature could be so improved, enlarged, and exalted, as to become infinite; the creature might be transformed into God. Were it possible, that any thing in God could be so lowered and contracted, as to become finite, God might be debased into a finite being. These two impossibilities may be reduced into one; it is utterly impossible to render the distance between God and the creature less than infinite. Now, of all impossibilities, this is unquestionably the greatest. I conclude, therefore, that there is no one thing in God, and in us, the same; for, if there were, we might possibly come to be, in respect to that thing, on a level with him, either by diminishing it in him, or enlarging it in us. We are not of the same nature then with God; but infinitely different, even in our spiritual capacities and thoughts. My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.' Notwithstanding this infinite distance between him and us, he hath laid out a way for us to know him, so far as is necessary to the ends of that knowledge; and that is, by the resemblance of himself, in which he hath been pleased to frame our nature. As a man is but the image of God, so the personality of man is but the image of personality in God; and therefore we can know nothing of this distinction in the Divine Nature, as it is in itself, but only by the shadow of it in our own. Where then is the difficulty of admitting such a distinction in God, since it is only like that among men; when, for ought we can possibly imagine, it may be so different in some unknown, some unknowable, respects, as that, instead of bearing on the unity of his nature, it may be even more consistent with it, than the want of such a distinction could be? If it is strictly true, that in God there is a distinction, so resembling that of person from person among men, as, when revealed to us, may furnish a basis for that knowledge of him, which is necessary to us, this surely is sufficient; and, if we are not excessively vain and presumptuous, we can be under no temptation to the denial of such a distinction in him, while we do not suppose that distinction to be

in itself exactly the same with the personal distinction among ourselves. Now, to suppose any thing in the infinite Being the same with any thing in us, who are creatures and finite, is the wildest flight the distemperature of imagination can take. What makes it still wilder is, that, in the philosophical way, the true idea of our own personality hath not been yet agreed on, some placing it in consciousness, some in the will, and others in the individuality of the soul. How absurdly unphilosophical is he, who, not being able, either to comprehend the Divine Nature, or to penetrate into the internal source and nature of his own personality, will nevertheless presume to pronounce any thing, from his own researches, concerning the sameness or similarity of this distinction in God and men! If he would so far honour the subject, as not to treat it with nonsense, he must take his idea of human personality from common sense and experience, and that of the divine from revelation. If he does this, he will find them similar and analogous throughout.

God

As, therefore, the Divine Being is of no genus or species, that is, of no kind or sort of being, so it is impossible for us to conceive it, as it is in itself, or to give a proper and immediate definition of it, as we do of those things, whose essential differences are known to us. When we say, is the infinite Being, we sufficiently distinguish him from all other beings; although, in so saying, we both think and speak by a negative, which may discriminate, but can never define the nature of any thing. How is it then that we come by the knowledge of God? No doubt, by a revealed similitude or representation. However, as I observed before, this sort of knowledge serves all the purposes of intercourse between him and us, as well as a proper immediate knowledge of him could do; because by this conception of him, we may as deeply reverence that majesty, as gratefully love that goodness, as awfully fear that justice, as dutifully obey that power, in him, which are analogous to the like attributes in us, as we could do, were we capable of it, by the immediate and proper conception of him. In like manner, so far as we are concerned to know the dispensation of his goodness, wisdom, and power, towards ourselves; and so far as the knowledge of a personal distinction in him is necessary to the knowledge of that dispensation, particularly in the

scheme of our redemption; the strict and close resemblance between the personal distinction in him, and the like distinction among men, as effectually answers every end, both in our understandings, and on our affections, as it could do, were the personality precisely the same in both. Were they set forth as actually the very same in both, it would be perfectly senseless and presumptuous to deny the possibility of such a distinction in a nature confessedly incomprehensible. But since there are all the grounds in the world for our believing them to be only analagous, the mystery, which before was reconcilable to reason, although above it, leaves reason now so far behind it, that we too must lose sight of her, before we presume to say, there can be no resemblance of such

a distinction in God.

The gracious Being, foreknowing our utter incapacity of conceiving him, as he is in himself, hath provided such resemblances of himself in the works of his creation, as do aptly and sufficiently represent him to us, as soon as he discovers that resemblance. But that we may not mistake those things for representations which are not, nor miss those that are, he hath pointed them out to us in his word. And, lest any share of our adoration should stop and terminate in the representation, he hath, by two express commandments, the one restraining all worship to himself, and the other absolutely forbidding all representative worship, so limited the use of these resemblances, as to preclude the possibility of a misapplication, while his commandments are at all attended to.

Now the resemblances he hath thus provided, and pointed out to us, are, first, The nature of man; for we are told, Gen. i. 26, that He hath formed us in his own image,' or ' after his likeness;' so that our souls represent his spiritual nature; our reason, his wisdom; our justice, his righteousness; our compassion, his mercy; our dominion over the creatures, his power, &c. Here the Godhead is simply, and without distinction, represented to us. But as some knowledge of the personal distinction in his nature became necessary to us, in order that we might understand the scheme of our redemption, wherein each Divine Person assumed a distinct office, the personal distinction between man and man is made use of to represent the like distinction in

God. And farther, that we may the more readily believe the consistency of this distinction with the unity of God, there are three essences or natures united in that of man; the vegetative, the animal, and the angelic nature, which constitute one individual man. It is true, there is but one nature in God; and therefore this is not a parallel instance, but a partial image. But, if three different natures can be united into one individual essence, why shall we think it impossible, that three persons (person being taken analogically), all of the same nature, should constitute one incomprehensible essence?

And farther still, to figure to us, in a lively and striking manner, the properties peculiarly active in each person for the accomplishment of so glorious a scheme, he hath, in holy Scripture set forth a luminous body as the representation of the divinity, or of God the Father, who is the fountain of the divinity. He hath here also represented Christ by light, and the Holy Ghost by fire, or heat. God was instead of a sun, and Christ, of light, to that New Jerusalem, which St. John saw in the twenty-first of the Revelation. 'The city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it; for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof.' So, Isa. lx. 'The sun shall be no more thy light by day, neither for brightness shall the moon give light unto thee; but the Lord shall be unto thee for an everlasting light, and thy God thy glory.' In pursuance of the same beautiful figure, God is called a sun in the eighty-fourth Psalm. Our Saviour calls himself The light of the world,' John viii. 12. and St. John is so fond of the figure, that he applies it to Christ, and his religion, on all occasions. The Holy Ghost is figured by fire, Matt. iii. 11, where John the Baptist says, Christ shall baptize his disciples with the Holy Ghost, and with fire,' which Isaiah calls the Spirit of burning, ch. iv. 4. Acts ii.3. 'the Holy Ghost descends on the apostles in the appearance of cloven tongues, like as of fire.' Christ seems to be represented by light, and the Holy Ghost by fire, in one and the same place, Isa. x. 17. The light of Israel shall be for a fire, and his Holy One for a flame.' Similitudes of our own adapting to God, or the Trinity, are dangerous things. But this, which the Scriptures themselves have painted out, and the primitive Fa

thers therefore made so frequent use of, is both safe, and highly serviceable in the application. As the luminous body is the source of light and heat, so the Father is the fountain, from whence the Son is generated, and the Holy Spirit proceeds. As light and heat are of the same nature and substance, and coeval, with the luminous body from whence they flow, so Christ and the Holy Ghost are consubstantial and co-eternal with the Father. As light dispels the darkness, cheering and directing us in all the offices of life, so Christ, dispersing the night of superstition and idolatry, sheds the light of true religion on the soul, and guides it in the way of eternal life. As fire or heat prevails against that cold which benumbs the body, so the Holy Ghost, driving out the stupefaction and insensibility of our hearts, revives our pious reflections, quickens our consciences, and gives warmth and vigour to our love of God; and therefore St. Paul saith, 1 Thess. v. 19. 'Quench not the Spirit.' As we neither see the luminous body, nor direct our steps towards it, but by its own light, so Christ saith, John xiv. 6. No man cometh unto the Father, but by me. He that hath seen me, hath seen the Father;' John xiv. 9. As a pleasing warmth both moves and guides us to the fire, it proceeds; so 'have we an access by one Spirit to the Father;' Eph. ii. 18. This glorious similitude might be traced much farther, through the purity, the activity, the immensity, of God; but I forbear, having touched on it only for these two reasons; first, because a great part of the Scriptures will seem to lose their force and beauty to a reader that is not aware of the true application made of it in those holy writings; and, secondly, because it removes all the difficulty of conceiving how Christ could be eternally generated, and the Holy Ghost from all eternity proceed, from the Father; how they can be of the same substance with him, and yet distinct, both from each other, and from him; since we see in this similitude an instance of all these, even in matter.

from whence

Having already thrown together all the reflections I had to make on this subject, it is high time to finish this long Discourse. Let us therefore try whether we can answer the two questions started in my text; Canst thou by searching find out God? Canst thou find out the Almighty