The Mystery of the Gospel Vindicated and Socinianism Examined, Commentary on text · Chapter 2
CAP. II.
Of the Nature of God.
HIS second Chapter which is concerning God, his Essence, Nature, and Propertyes, is second to none in his whole Booke, §. 1.for Blasphemyes and Reproaches of God and his Word.
The description of God, which he labours to insinuate, is, §. 2.that he is one Person, of a visible shape, and similitude, finite, limited to a certaine place, mutable, comprehensible, and obnoxious to turbulent passions, not knowing the things that are future, and which shall be done by the sonnes of men, whom none can love withall his heart, if he believe him to be one in three distinct Persons.
That this is punctually the Apprehension, and notion concerning God, and his Being, which He labours to beget, by his §. 3.suiting Scripture expressions to the blasphemous insinuations of his Questions, will appeare in the consideration of both Questions and Answers, as they lye in the second Chapter of the greater Catechisme.
His first Question is, How many Gods of Christians are there? And §. 4.his Answer is; One God, Eph. 4. 6. Whereunto he subjoynes, secondly, who is this one God? And Answers, The Father of whom are all things, 1. Cor. 8. 6.
That the Intendment of the connexion of these Queryes, and §. 5.the suiting of words of Scripture to them, is to insinuate some thoughts against the doctrine of the Trinity, is not questionable; especially being the worke of him, that makes it his businesse to oppose it, and laugh it to scorne. With what successe this attempt is mannaged, a little consideration of what is offered will evince. It is true, Paul sayes to us, there is one God: treating of the vanity and nothingnesse of the Idols of the Heathen, whom God hath threatned to deprive of all worship, and to starve out of the world. The Question as here proposed, how many Gods of Christians are there, having no such occasion administred unto it; as that expression of Paul, being no parcell of such a discourse, as he insists upon, sounds pleasantly towards the allowance of many Gods, though Christians have but one. Neither is M. B. so averse to Polutheisme, as not to give occasion (on other accounts) to this supposal. Jesus Christ he allowes to be a God. All his companions, in the undertaking against his truly eternall divine Nature, still affirme him to be bSmalcius de divinit. Jes. Christ. edit. Racov. An. 1608. per Jacob. Sienienskia. Volkel. de vera Relig. lib. 5. cap. 10. pag. 425. p. 468. & anatea. p. 206. Catech. Rae. cap. 1. de cognit. Christ. quaest 3. Confession de foi, des Chrestiens, qui croyent en un seul Dieu le Pere &c. p 18, 19. Ionas Schlictingius, ad Meisner: Artic: de Filio Dei pag: 387. Socin: Res… ad Wiekum p: 8. & passlin reliqui.Homo Deificatus, and Deus Factus, and plead pro verâ deitate Jesu Christi; denying yet with him, that by Nature He is God, of the same Essence with the Father: So indeed grossely and palpably falling into, and closing with that Abomination, which they pretend above all men to avoid, in their opposition to the thrice Holy and Blessed Trinity. Of those monstrous figments in Christian Religion which on this occasion they have introduced, of making a man to be an Eternall God, of worshiping a meere Creature, with the worship due only to the Infinitely blessed God, we shall speak afterwards.
2. We confesse that to us, there is one God, but one God, and let all other be accursed. The Gods that have not made Heaven, and §. 6.the Earth, let them be cIerem. 10. 11.destroyed, according to the word of the Lord from under these heavens. Yet we say moreover, that there are d1 Ioh. 5. 7.Three that beare witnesse in Heaven, the Father, Word, and Spirit, and that these Three are one. And in that very place, whence Mr B. cuts off his first Answer, as it is asserted, that there is one God; so one Lord, and one Spirit, the fountaine of all spirituall distributions are mentioned, which whether they are not also that one God, we shall have farther occasion to consider.
To the next Query, concerning this one God, who he is, the § 7.words are, the Father from whom are all things; in themselves most true. The Father is the one God, whom we worship in spirit, and in truth; and yet the Sonne also is our Lord, and our God, Ioh. 20. 28. Even God over all blessed for ever: Rom: 9. 5. The spirit also is the God which workes all in all, 1 Cor. 12. 6, 11. And in the name of that one God, who is Father, Sonne, and Holy Ghost, cMatth. 28. 18.are we Baptized, whom we serve, who to us, is the one God over all. Neither is that Assertion, of the Fathers being the one, and only true God, any more prejudiciall to the Sonnes being so also, then that Testimony given to the everlasting Deity of the Son, is to that of the Father, notwithstanding that to us there is but one God. The intendment of our Author in these Questions, is to Answer what he found in the great exemplar of his Catechisme, the Racovian: dExposuisti quae cognitu ad salutem de essentia Dei sunt prorsus necessaria, expone quae adeam rem vehementer utilia esse censeas. R. Id quidem est ut cognoscamus, in essentia Dei unam tantum personam esse. Demonstra hoc ipsum. R: Hoc sane. vel hinc patere potest, quod essentia Dei sit una numero; quapropter plures numero personae, in eâ esse nullo pacto possunt. Quae nam est haec una persona divina? R. Est ille Deus unus, domini nostri Jesu Christi pater. 1 Cor. 8. 6. Catech. Racov. cap. 1. de cognit. Dei. de Dei essentia.two of whose questions are comprehensive of all that is here delivered, and intended by M. Biddle. But of these things more afterwards.
His next inquiry is after the nature of this one God: which he §. 8.Answers, with that of our Saviour, in Ioh: 4. 24. God is a spirit; in this he is somewhat more modest, though not so wary as his great Master, Faustus Socinus, & his disciple (as to his notions about the Nature of God) Vorstius. His acknowledgement of God to be a Spirit, frees him from sharing in impudence, in this particular, with his Master, who will not allow any such thing to be asserted, in these words of our Saviour. His words are, Fragment. Disput. de Adorat. Christi cum Christiano Francken: p. 60. Non est fortasse eorum verborum ea sententia, quam pleri{que} omnes arbitrantur: Deum scilicet esse Spiritum, ne{que} enim subaudiendum esse dicit aliquis verhum foreign, quasi vox foreign, recto casu accipienda sit, sed foreign repetendum verbum foreign, quod paulo ante praecessit, & foreign quarto casu accipiendum, ita ut sententia sit, Deum quaerere & postulare spiritum, Vorstius also followes him, Not. ad Disput. 3. p. 200. because the verbe substantive, [is,] is not in the originall expressed, (then the omission whereof, nothing being more frequent, though I have heard of one, who from the like omission 2 Cor. 5. 17. thought to have proved Christ to be the new Creature there intended) contrary to the Context, and coherence of the Words, designe of the Argument in hand, insisted on by our Saviour, (as he was a bold man) and emphaticallnesse of significancy in the expression as it lies, he will needs thrust in the word seeketh, and render the intention of Christ to be, that God seekes a spirit, that is, the spirits of men to worship him. Herein I say is M. B. more modest then his Master, (as it seemes following eSignificat enim Christus id, quod ratio ipsa dictat, Deum, cum spiritus sit, non nisi spiritualibus revera delectari. Crell. de Deo: seu de vera Rel: lib. 1 c. 15. pag. 108. Spiritus est Deus: animadvetterunt ibi omnes propè S. litorarum interpretes, Dei nomen, quod ar… est in G… atum, subjecti locum tenere: vocem, spiritus, quae articulo caret, praedicati: & … substantiam: Ita perinde est, ac si dictum fuisset, Deus est spiritus, seu spiritua…: … idem ibid. p. 107.Crellius, who in the exposition of that place of Scripture is of an other mind) though in craft, and foresight, he be outgone by him, for if God be a Spirit indeed, one of a pure spirituall Essence; and Substance, the Image, shape, and similitude, which he afterwards ascribes to him, his corporall postures, which he asserts (Qu 4.) will scarcely be found suitable unto him. It is incumbent on some kind of men, to be very wary in what they say: and mindfull of what they have said; falshood hath no consistency in it selfe, no more then with the Truth. Smalcius in the Racovian Catechisme is utterly silent as to this Questions & Answer. But the consideration of this also, will in its due place succeed.
To his 4th Query, about a farther description of God, by §. 9.some of his Attributes, I shall not need to sub oyn… any thing in way of Animadversion; for however the Texts he cites, come … of delivering that of God, which the import of the question, to which they are annexed, doth require, yet being not wrested to give countenance to any perverse apprehension of his Nature, I shall not need to insist upon the consideration of them.
Qu. 5. He falls closely to his worke: in these words, Is not God, … current of the Scriptures, in a certaine place, namely in §. 10.Heaven? Whereunto he Answers by many places of Scripture, that make mention of God in Heaven.
That we may not mistake his mind, & intention in this Query, some light may be taken from some other passages in his booke. In the preface he tells you: that God hath a similitude and shape, (of which afterwards) & hath his place in the Heavens. That God is in no certain place, he reckons amongst those errors he opposesin the same Preface. Of the same kind he asserteth the beliefe to be, of Gods being infinite, & incōprehensible: & Cat. les. p. 6. That God glistereth with Glory, & is resident in a certaine place of the Heavens, so that one may distinguish between his right and left hand by bodily sight. This is the Doctrine of the man, with whom we have to do, concerning the Presence of God. He is (saith he) in Heaven, as in a certaine place; That which is in a certaine place, is finite, and limited; as from the nature of a place, and the manner of any things being in a place, shall be instantly evinced. God then is finite, and limited, be it so: (that he is infinite and incomprehensible is yet Scripture Expression) yea he is so limited, as not to be extended to the the whole compasse, and limit of the Heavens; but he is in a certaine place of the Heavens, yea so circumscribed, as that a man may see from his right hand to his left: wherein M. B. comes short of Mahomet, who affirmes, that when he was taken into Heaven, to the sight of God, he found three dayes journey between his eye-browes, which if so, it will be somewhat hard, for any one to see from his right hand to his left, being supposed at an answerable distance to that of his eye-browes. Let us see then on what Testimony, by what Authority, M. B. doth here limit the Almighty, and confine him to a certaine place, shutting up his Essence and being, in some certaine part of the Heavens, cutting him thereby short, as we shall see in the issue, in all those eternall perfections, whereby hitherto he hath been knowne to the sonnes of men.
The proofe of that lyes in the places of Scripture, which making mention of God, say, He is in Heaven, and that He looketh downe from §. 11.Heaven, &c. Of which out of some Concordance, some 20, or 30. are by him repeated. Not to make long worke of a short businesse; The Scriptures say, God is in Heaven; who ever denyed it? But do the Scriptures say he is no where else? Do the Scriptures say he is confined to Heaven, so that he is so there, as not to be in all other places? If M. B. thinks this any argument, God is in Heaven, therefore his Essence is not Infinite, and immense, therefore He is not every where, we are not of his mind. He tells you in his Preface, that He asserts nothing himselfe: I presume his Reason was, least any should call upon him for a proofe of his Assertions. What he intends to insinuate, & what conceptions of God he labours to insnare the minds of unlearned, & unstable soules withall, in this question under consideration, hath been from the evidence of his intendment therein, and the concurrent Testimony of other expressions of his to the same purpose, demonstrated. To propose any thing directly, in way of proofe of the truth of that which he labours insensibly to draw the minds of men unto, He was (doubtlesse) conscious to himselfe of so much disability for its performance, as to wave that kind of procedure. And therefore his whole endeavour is, having filled, animated, and Spirited, the understandings of men, with the notion couched in his Question, to cast in some Scripture expressions, that as they lye, may seeme fitted, to the fixing of the notion before begotten in them. As to any attempt of direct proofe of what he would have confirmed, the man of Reason is utterly silent.
2. None of those Texts of Scripture, where mention is made of Gods being in Heaven, are in the coherence, and dependance §. 12.of speech, wherein they lye, suited, or intended at all, to give answer to this Question, or any like it, concerning the Presence of God, or his actuall existence in any place, but only in respect of some dispensations of God, and workes of his, whose fountaine and originall he would have us to consider in himselfe, and to come forth from him there, where in an eminent manner he manifests his Glory. God is I say in none of the places by him urged, said to be in Heaven, in respect of his Essence or being, nor is it the intention of the Holy Ghost, in any of them, to declare the manner of Gods Essentiall presence, and existence, in reference to all, or any places; but only by the way of eminency, in respect of manifestations of himselfe, and operations from his glorious presence, doth he so speak of him. And indeed in those expressions, Heaven, doth not so much signify a place, as a thing, or at least a place, in reference ot the things there done, or the peculiar manifestations of the Glory of God there; so that if these places should be made use of, as to the proofe of the figment insinuated, the Argument from them would be, â non causâ pro causâ. The reason why God is said to be in Heaven, is not because his Essence is included in a certaine place, so called, but because of the more eminent manifestation of his Glory there, and the regard which he requires to be had of him, manifesting his Glory, as the first cause, and Author of all the workes, which outwardly are of him.
3. God is said to be in Heaven in an especiall manner, because §. 13.he hath assigned that as the place of the Saints expectation of that enjoyment of eternall fruition of himselfe, which he hath promised to blesse them withall. But for the limiting of his essence to a certaine place in Heaven, the Scriptures, as we shall see, know nothing, yea expressly, and positively affirme the contrary.
Let all then supply our catechamens, in the Rome of M. B's, with this Question, expressly leading to the things enquired §. 14.after.
What sayes the Scripture concerning the Essence and presence of God, is it confined and limited to a certaine place, or is he infinitely, and equally present every where?
Ans. The Lord your God, he is God in Heaven above, and in earth beneath Josh. 2. 11.
But will God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold the Heavens, and Heaven of Heavens cannot containe thee, how much lesse the House that I have builded. 1 Kings 8. 27.
Whither shall I goe from thy Spirit, or whither shall I flee from thy presence? If I ascended up into Heaven thou art there, if I make my bed in Hell, behold thou art there, &c. Psal. 139. 7, 8, 9, 10. The Heaven is my Throne, and the Earth my footstoole. Isaiah 66. 1. Acts 7. 47, 48.
Am I a God at hand, saith the Lord, and not a God, afarre of, can any hide himselfe in secret places, that I shall not see him, saith the Lord, do not I fill Heaven and Earth saith the Lord? Jerem. 23. 24.
It is of the ubiquity and omnipresence of God, that these places §. 15.expresly treat; and whereas i… was manifested before, that the expression of Gods being in Heaven, doth not at all speak to the abomination, which M. B. would insinuate thereby, the naked rehearsall of those Testimonies, so directly asserting, and ascribing to the Almighty, an Infinite, Unlimited Presence, and that in direct opposition, to the grosse apprehension of his being confined to a certain place in Heaven, is abundantly sufficient, to deliver the thoughts, and minds of men, from any entanglements that M. B's Questions and Answers (for though it be the word of the Scripture he insists upon, yet, male dum recitas incipit esse tnum) might lead them into. On that account no more need be added: but yet this occasion being administred, that Truth it selfe, concerning the Omnipresence, or Ʋbiquity of God, may be farther cleared, and confirmed.
Through the prejudices and ignorances of men, it is enquired, whether God be so present in any certain place, as not to §. 16.be also equally elsewhere, every where.
Place has been commonly defined to be, superficies corporis ambientis; Because of sundry inextricable difficulties, and impossibility of suiting it to every place, this definition is now generally decryed. That now commonly received, is more naturall, suited to the Natures of things, and obvious to the understanding. A place, is, spatium corporis susceptivum; any space wherein a body may be received, and contained. The first consideration of it, is, as to its fitnesse and aptnesse, so to receive any body: so it is in the imagination only. The second, as to its actuall existence, being filled with that body, which it is apt to receive. So may we imagine innumerable spaces in Heaven, which are apt, and able to receive the bodies of the Saints; and which actually shall be filled with them, when they shall be translated thereinto, by the power of God.
Presence in a place, is the actuall existence of a person in its §. 17.place: or as Logicians speak, in its Ʋbi; that is, answering the enquiry after him, where he is. Though all bodies are in certain places, yet Persons only, are said to be present in them; other things have not properly a presence to be ascribed to them: They are in their proper places, but we doe not say, they are present in, or to their places. This being the generall description of a place, and the presence of any therein, it is evident, that properly it cannot be spoken at all of God, that he is in one place or other; for he is not a body, that should fill up the space of its receipt; nor yet in all places, taking the word properly, for so one Essence can be but in one place; and if the word should properly be ascribed to God in any sence, it would deprive him of all his infinite Perfections.
It is farther said, that there be three wayes of the Presence of any, in reference to a place, or places; some are so in a place, as §. 19.to be circumscribed therein, in respect of their parts, and dimensions, such is their length, breadth, and depth, so doth one part of them fit one part of the place wherein they are, and the whole the whole, so are all solid bodies in a place; so is a man, his whole body in his whole place, his head in one part of it, his armes in another: some are so conceived to be in a place, as that in relation to it, it may be said of them, that they are there in it, so as not to be any where else, though they have not parts, and dimensions filling the place wherein they are, nor are punctually circumscribed with a locall space; such is the presence of Angells, and Spirits, to the places wherein they are, being not infinite or immense; These are so in some certain place, as not to be at the same time, wherein they are so, without it, or elsewhere, or in any other place: And this is proper to all finite, immateriall substances, that are so in a place, as not to occupy and fill up that space wherein they are. In respect of place, God is immense, and indistant to all things, and places, absent from nothing, no place, contained in none; present to all, by and in his infinite Essence, and Being, exerting his power variously, in any, or all places, as he pleaseth, revealing and manifesting his Glory, more or lesse, as it seemeth good to him.
Of this Omnipresence of God, two things are usually enquired after. 1. The thing it selfe, or the Demonstration, that he §. 20.is so Omnipresent. 2. The manner of it, or the Manifestation, and declaring how he is so present. Of this latter perhaps sundry things have been over curiously, and nicely, by some disputed: though upon a through search, their disputes may not appeare altogether uselesse. The Schoolemens distinctions of Gods being in a place, repletivè, immensivè, impletivè, superexcedentèr, conservativè, attinctivè, manifestative, &c. Have, some of them at least, foundation in the Scriptures, and right Reason. That which seemes most obnoxious to exception, is their assertion, of God to be every where present, instar puncti: but the sence of that, and its intendment, is to expresse, how God is not in a place, rather then how he is. He is not in a place as quantative bodyes, that have the dimensions attending them: Neither could his presence in Heaven, by those who shut Him up there, be any otherwise conceived, untill they were relieved by the rare notions of M. B. concerning the distinct places of His right hand and left. But it is not at all about the manner of Gods presence, that I am occasioned to speake, but only of the thing it selfe. They who say, He is in Heaven only, speake as to the thing, and not as to the manner of it; When we say, He is every where, our Assertion is also to be interpreted, as to that only; The manner of His Presence being purely of a Philosophicall consideration: His Presence it selfe divinely revealed, and necessarily attending his Divine perfections; Yea it is an Essentiall property of God. The propertyes of God, are either absolute, or relative. The absolute propertyes of God are such, as may be considered, without the supposition of any thing else whatever, towards which their energy, and efficacy should be exerted. His relative are such, as in their egresse and exercise, respect some things in the Creatures, though they naturally and eternally reside in God. Of the first sort is Gods Immensity; it is an absolute property of his nature and Being; for God to be immense, infinite, unbounded, unlimited, is as necessary to him, as to be God; that is, it is of his Essentiall perfection, so to be. The Ʋbiquity of God, or his presence to all things, and persons, is a relative property of God; for to say, that God is present in, and to all things, supposes those things to be. Indeed the Ubiquity of God, is the Habitude of his Immensity to the Creation; supposing the Creatures, the world that is, God is by reason of his Immensity, indist… to them all: or if more worlds be supposed, (as all things possible to the power of God, without any absurdity may be supposed) on the same account as he is Omnipresent, in reference to the present world, he would be so to them & all that is in them.
Of that which we affirme in this matter, this is the summe; §. 21.God, who in his own being and Essence is Infinite and Immense, is by reason thereof, present in, and to the whole Creation, equally, not by a diffusion of his substance, or mixture with other things, Heaven or Earth; in, or upon them, but by an inconceivable indistancy of Essence to all things, though he exert his power, and manifest his Glory, in one place more then another: as in Heaven, in Sion, at the Arke, &c.
1. That this is the Doctrine of the Scriptures, in the places §. 22.before mentioned, needs no great pains to evince. In that 1 Kings 8. 27. the designe of Solomon in the words, gives light to the substance of what he asserted, he had newly with labour, cost, charge, and wisdome, none of them to be parallel'd in the world, built a Temple for the worship of God; The house being large, and exceedingly glorious, the apprehensions of all the Nations round about, (that looked on, and considered the worke he had in hand,) concerning the Nature, and Being of God, being grosse, carnall, and superstititous, themselves answerably, worshipping those, who by nature were not God, & his own people of Israel, exceedingly prone to the same abominations, least any should suppose, that he had thoughts of including the Essence of God in the house that he had bulit; he cleares himselfe in this confession of his Faith, from all such imaginations; affirming that though indeed God would dwell on the Earth, yet he was so farre from being limited unto, or circumscribed in the House that he had built, that the Heavens, even the Heaven of Heavens, any space whatever that could be imagined, the highest Heavens, could not, cannot containe Him, so far is he from having a certaine place in Heaven, where he should reside, in distinction from other places, where he is not; He is God in Heaven, and in Earth, Josh. 2. 11. That which the Temple of God was bulit unto, that the Heaven & the Heaven of Heavens cannot containe: Now the Temple was built to the Being of God, to God as God. so Acts. 7. 47. But Solomon built him an House Him v. 48. that is, the most High, who dwelleth not, (is not circumscribed) in Temples made with hands.
That of the 139. Psalme is no lesse evident; The presence, or §. 23.face of God, is expressly affirmed to be every where: Whether shall I goe from thy face, if I ascend up into Heaven … art there, if I goe into hell behold thou art there. As God is affirmed to be in Heaven, so every where else, now that he is in Heaven, in respect of his Essence and being, is nor questioned.
Neither can that of the Prophet Isa. 66. 1. be otherwise understood, § 24.but as …o ascribing an Ʋliquity to God, and a pres…nce in Heaven and Earth: Heaven is my throne, and the Earth is my footstoole; the words are Metaphoricall, and in that way expressive of the Presence of a person; and so God is present in Heaven and Earth. That the Earth should be his foote-stoole, and yet himselfe be so inconceivably distinct frō it, as the Heaven is from the Earth (an expression chosen by himselfe, to set out the greatest distance imaginable) is not readily to be apprehended. He is not farre from any one of us, for in him we live, and move, and have our being. Acts 17. 27, 28,
The Testimony which God gives to this his perfection in Jerem. 23. 23, 24. is not to be avoided; more then what is here spoken by God himselfe, as to his omnipresence, we cannot, we desire not, to speake; can any one lye hid from me? doe not I fill Heaven and Earth saith the Lord? Still where mention is made of the presence of God, thus Heaven and Earth (which two are comprehensive of, and usually put for, the whole creation) are mentioned; and herein he is neither to be thought afarre of, or neere, being equally present every where, in the hidden places, as in Heaven; that is, He is not disti… from any thing or place; though he take up no place, but is nigh all things, by the infinitenesse, and existence of his being.
From what is also known of the Nature of God, His Attributes, §. 26.and perfections; The Truth delivered may be farther argued, and confirmed. As
1. God is absolutely perfect; whatever is of perfection, is to be ascribed to him; otherwise he could neither be absolutely selfe-sufficient, all-sufficient, nor eternally blessed in himselfe; He is absolutely perfect, in as much as no perfection is wanting to hi; and comparatively above all that we can conceive, or apprehend of Perfection. If then Ʋbiquity or omnipresence be a perfection, it no lesse necessarily belongs to God, then it does to be perfectly good and blessed. That this is a perfection, is evident from its contrary. To be limited, to be circumscribed, is an imperfection and argues weakenesse. We commonly say, we would do such a thing in such a place, could we be present unto it; and are grieved and troubled that we cannot be so; that it should be so, is an imperfection attending the limitednesse of our natures. Unlesse we will ascribe the like to God, his Omnipresence is to be acknowledged. If every Perfection then be in God (and if every perfection be not in any, he is not God) this is not to be denyed by Him.
2. Againe: If God be now in a certaine place in Heaven, § 27.I aske where he was before these Heavens were made: These Heavens have not alwaies been: God was then where there was nothing but God: no Heaven, no Earth, no Place; in what place was God, when there was no place? When the Heavens were made, did he cease this manner of being in H…mselfe, existing in his owne Infinite Essence, and remove into the New place made for him? Or is not Gods removall out of his existence in Himselfe, into a certain place, a blasphemous imagination? Ante omnia Deus erat, solus ipse sibi, & locus, & mundus, & omnia. Tertul. Is this change of place and posture to be ascribed to God? Moreover, if God be now only in a certain place of the Heavens, if he should destroy the Heavens, and that place, where would he then be? In what place? Should he cease to be in the place wherein he is, and begin to be in, to take up, and possesse another? And are such apprehensions suited to the infinite perfections of God? Yea may we not suppose, that he may create another Heaven? Can be not doe it? How should he be present there? Or must it stand empty? Or must he move himselfe thither? Or make himselfe bigger then he was, to fill that Heaven also?
3. The Omnipresence of God is grounded on the Infinitenesse §. 28.of his Essence. If God be Infinite, he is Omnipresent; suppose him Infinite, and then suppose there is any thing besides himselfe, and his Presence with that Thing, where ever it be, doth necessarily follow; for if he be so bounded, as to be in his Essence distant from any thing, He is not Infinite. To say God is not Infinite in his Essence, denies him to be Infinite, or Unlimited in any of his Essence, denies him to be Infinite, or Unlimited in any of his Perfections or Properties; and therefore indeed upon the matter Socinus denies Gods Power to be Infinite, because he will not grant his Essence to be. (Catech: cap: 11. part. 1.) That which is absolutely Infinite, canot have its residence in that which is finite and limited; so that if the Essence of God be not Immense, and Infinite, his Power, Goodnesse, &c. are also bounded and limited; so that there are, or may be many things, which in their own Natures are capable of Existence, which yet God cannot do, for want of Power. How suitable to the Scriptures & common notions of Mankind, concerning the Nature of God, this is, will bee aside known. It is yet the cōmon Faith of Christians, that God is foreign.
4. Let Reason (which the Author of these Catechisms, pretends to advance and honour, (as some think above its due) & therefore cannot decline its dictates) judge of the consequences of this §. 29.grosse apprehension concerning the confinement of God is the Heavens, yea a certaine place in the Heavens, though He glister never so much in Glory, there where he is. For first, he must be extended as a body is, that so he may fill the place, and have parts as we have, if he be circumscribed in a certain place; which though our Author think no absurdity, yet as we shall afterwards manifest, it is as bold an attempt to make an Idoll of the living God, as ever any of the Sonnes of men engaged into. 2. Then Gods Greatnesse & ours as to Essence, & Substance, differ only gradually, but are still of the same kind God is bigger then a man it is true, but yet with the same kind of greatnesse, differing from us as one man differs from another. A man is in a certaine place of the Earth, which he fills and takes up: and God is in a certaine place of the Heavens, which He fills and takes up; only some graduall difference there is; but how great or little that difference is, as yet we are not taught. 3. I desire to know of M. B what the Throne is made of that God sits on in the Heavens and how farre the Glistering of his Glory doth extend, and whither that Glistering of Glory doth naturally attend his person, as beames doe the sunne, or shining doth fire, or can He make it more or lesse as He pleaseth. …. Doth God fill the whole Heavens, or only some part of them? If the Whole, being of such substance as is imagined, What roome will there be in Heaven for any body else? Can a lesser place hold him? Or could He fill a greater; if not, how came the Heavens so fit for him? Or could he not have made them of other dimensions lesse or greater? If he be only in a fSi spatium vacansuper caput Crealorris, & si Deus ipse in loco est, erit jam locut ille major & Deo & munds; nihil enim non majus est id quod capit, illo quod capitur. Tertul. ad Max. lib. 1. cap. 15.part of Heaven, as is more then insinuated in the expression, that He is in a certaine place in the Heavens: I aske why he dwells in one part of the Heavens rather then another? Or whether he ever removes, or takes a journey, as Elijah speakes of Baal 1 Kings 18. or is eternally, as limited in, so confined unto, the certaine place wherein He is? Againe how doth he work out those effects of Almighty power, which are at so great a distance from Him, as the Earth is from the Heavens, which cannot be effected by the intervenience of any created power: at the Resurrection of the dead, &c. The Power of God doubtlesse followes his Essence: and what this extends not to, that cannot reach. But of that which might be spoken to vindicate the Infinitely Glorious being of God, from the Reproach, which His own Word is wrested to cast upon Him, this that hath been spoken is some what, that to my pres…nt thoughts doth occure.
I suppose that M. B. knowes, that in this his circumscription of God to a certain place, he transgresses against the common §. 30.consent of Mankind; if not, a few instances of severall sorts, may I hope, suffice for his conviction; I shall promiscuously propose them, as they lye at hand, or occurre to my remembrance. For the Jewes, gforeign. Philo. lib. 2. Alleg. Leg.Philo gives their judgement Heare (saith he) of the Wise God, that which is most true, that God is in no place; for He is not Contained, but containeth all. That which is made, is in a place; for it must be contained, and not containe. And it is the observation of hMaimon: Mor. Neuoch p. 1. c. 8.another of them, that so often as foreign a place, is said of God, the exaltation of his Immense, and Incomparable essence, (as to its manifestation) is to be understood. And the Learned iBuxtorf. in Lexic …verbo foreignBuxtorfe tells us, that when that word is used of God, it is by an Antiphrasis, to signify that he is Infinite, Illocall, received in no place, giving place to all. That know saying of Empedocles passed among the k Heathen, Deus est circulus, cujus centrum ubi{que}, circumferentia nusquam. And of Seneca: Turne which way thou wilt, thou shalt see God meeting thee; nothing is empty of him, he fills his own worke. All things are full of God, saies the lJovis omnia plena. Virg. Eclog. 3.Poet: and mLucan lib. 3.another of them,
Est{que} Dei sedes nisi Terra, & Pontus, & Aer,
Est Coelum, & versus superos, quid quaerimus ultra:
Jupiter est quodcun{que} vides, quocun{que} moveris.
Of this Presence of God (I say) with, and unto all things, of the Infinity of his Essence, the very Heathens themselves, by the light of Nature, (which Mr B. herein opposes) had a knowledge: hence did some of them terme him foreign. a mind framing the Universe: and affirmed him to be Infinite: Primus omnium rerum descriptionem & modum, mentis Infinitae in ratione designari h Quocun{que} re flexeris, ibi illum (Deum) videbis occurrent mtibi, nihil ab illo vacat, opus suum ipse implet. Senec. de benef. lib. 4. cap. 8.& confici voluit. saies Cicero of Anaxagoras: Tull: de nat Deor. lib. 1. all things are disposed of, by the vertue of our Infinite mind: and Plutarch expressing the same thing, saies he is, foreign: a pure & sincere mind, mixing it selfe, and mixed (so they expressed the presence of the Infinite mind) with all things: so Virgil: Jovis omnia plena: all things are full of God: (for God they intended by that name Acts 17. 25, 28. 29. and saies Lactantius, Convicti de uno Deo, cum id negare non possunt, ipsum se colere affirmant, verùm hoc sibi placere, ut Jupiter nominetur. lib. 1. c. 2) Which as Servius on the place observes, he had taken frō Aratus, whose words are. foreign; giving a full description, in his way, of the Omnipresence and Ubiquity of God. The same Virgil, from the Platonicks, tells us in another place.
Spiritus intus alit, totamq infusa per artus
Mens agitat molem.
And much more of this kind might easily be added. The I earned know where to find more for their satisfaction: and for those that are otherwise, the cleare Texts of Scripture, cited before, may suffice.
Of those on the other hand, who have no lesse grossely, and carnally, then he of whom we speake, imagined a nVide Beza. Epist. ad Philip. Marnix.diffusion of §. 31.the substance of God through the whole Creation, and a mixture of it with the Creatures, so as to oVide Virgil. Aenead. lib. 6. principio caelum &c. ex Platonicis.animate, and enliven them in their severall formes, making God an Essentiall part of each creature, or dreame of an assumption of Creatures, into an unity of Essence with God, I am not now to speake.