dria; undoubted error. For from the goodness of God, which they did not unfitly conceive necessary, infinite, and eternal1, they collected that whatsoever dependeth of it must be as necessary and eternal, even as light must be as ancient as the sun, and a shadow as an opacous body in that light. If then there be no instant imaginable before which God was not infinitely good, then can there likewise be none conceivable before which the world was not made. And thus they thought the goodness of the Creator must stand or fall with the eternity of the creature. whom though Porphyrius would make an apostate, for the credit of his heathen gods, yet St Hierome* hath sufficiently assured us that he lived and died in the Christian faith. The reason of my conjecture is no more than this: Proclus acknowledgeth that Plutarch and others, though with Plato they maintained the goodness of God to be the cause of the World, yet withal they denied the eternity of it: and when he quotes other expositors for his own opinion, he produceth none but Porphyrius and Iamblichus, the eldest of which was the scholar of Plotinus the disciple of Ammonius. And that he was of the opinion, I collect from him who was his scholar both in philosophyand divinity, that is, Origen, whose judgment, if it were not elsewhere apparent, is sufficiently known by the fragment of Methodius περὶ γεννητῶν, preserved in Photius. [Bibliotheca, cod. 235. p. 302. col. 1.] Ὅτι ὁ Ωριγένης, ὃν κέν ταυρὸν καλεῖ, ἔλεγε συναΐδιον εἶναι τῷ μόνῳ σοφῷ καὶ ἀπροσδεεῖ θεῷ τὸ πᾶν. Being then Porphyrius and Iamblichus cited by Proclus, being Hierocles, Proclus, and Sallustius, were all either ἐκ τῆς ἱερᾶς γενεάς, as they called it, that is, descended successsively from the School of Ammonius (the great conciliator of Plato and Aristotle, and reformer of the ancient philosophy), or at least contemporary to them that were so; it is most probable that they might receive it from his mouth, especially considering that even Origen a Christian confirmed the 1 Ανάγκη διὰ τὴν τοῦ θεοῦ ἀγαθός τητα ὄντος τοῦ κόσμου, ἀεί τε τὸν θεὸν ἀγαθὸν εἶναι, καὶ τὸν κόσμον ὑπάρχειν· ὥσπερ ἡλίῳ μὲν καὶ πυρὶ συνυφίσταται φῶς, σώματι δὲ σκιά. Sallustius de Diis et Mundo, c. 7. Ei yàp äμewov μὴ ποιεῖν, πῶς εἰς τὸ ποιεῖν μεταβέ βηκε; εἰ δὲ τὸ ποιεῖν, τί μὴ ἐξ ἀϊδίου ExpаTTEν; Hierocles de Provid. [p. 248.] Neither doth he mean any less, when in his sense he thus describes the first Cause of all things: 'Eor' av (so I read it, not eσr', av, as the printed copies, or ws dv, as Curterius) τὸ πρῶτον αὐτῶν αἴτιον ἀμετάβλητον πάντη καὶ ἄτρεπτον, καὶ τὴν οὐσίαν τῇ ἐνεργείᾳ τὴν αὐτὴν κεκτημένον, καὶ τὴν ἀγαθότητα οὐκ ἐπίκτητον ἔχον, ἀλλ ̓ οὐσιωμένην καθ' αὐτήν, καὶ δι' aurηy [airs in Needham's edition] τὰ πάντα πρὸς τὸ εἶναι παράγον (50 I read it, not πάντων πρὸς τὸ εὖ eira, as the printed). Hierocl. in Aur. Carm. [ver. 1. p. 20.] Zvvýρτηται ἄρα τῇ μὲν ἀγαθότητι τοῦ πατρὸς ἡ τῆς προνοίας ἐκτένεια· ταύτῃ δὲ ἡ τοῦ δημιουργοῦ διαιώνιος ποίησις· ταύτῃ δὲ ἡ τοῦ παντὸς κατὰ τὸν ἄπειρον χρότον αϊδιότης γιγνομένη οὖσα, καὶ οὐχὶ ἑστῶσα αϊδιότης. καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς λόγος ταύτην τε ἀναιρεῖ, καὶ τὴν ἀγαθότητα τοῦ πεποιηκότος. Proclus in Timæum, 1. ii. p. 111. 1. 45. Now although this be the constant argumentation of the later Platonists, yet they found no such deduction or consequence in their master Plato: and I something incline to think, though it may seem very strange, that they received it from the Christians, I mean out of the school of Ammonius at Alexan same. * So also Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. vi. 19). Possibly Eusebius confounded Ammonius Saccas with another Ammonius, a Christian writer, the author of a Diatessaron. Psal. xciv. 9, 10. Eph. i. 11. For the clearing of which ancient mistake, we must observe, that as God is essentially and infinitely good without any mixture of deficiency, so is he in respect of all external actions or emanations absolutely free without the least necessity. Those bodies which do act without understanding or pre-conception of what they do, as the sun and fire give light and heat, work always to the utmost of their power, nor are they able at any time to suspend their action. To conceive 57 any such necessity in the divine operations, were to deny all knowledge in God, to reduce him into a condition inferior to some of the works of his own hands, and to fall under the censure contained in the Psalmist's question, He that planted the ear, shall he not hear? he that formed the eye, shall he not see? he that teacheth man knowledge, shall he not know? Those creatures which are endued with understanding, and consequently with a will, may not only be necessitated in their actions by a greater power, but also as necessarily be determined by the proposal of an infinite good: whereas neither of these necessities can be acknowledged in God's actions, without supposing a power beside and above Omnipotency, or a real happiness beside and above All-sufficiency. Indeed if God were a necessary agent in the works of creation, the creatures would be of as necessary being as he is; whereas the necessity of being is the undoubted prerogative of the first cause. He worketh all things after the counsel of his own will, saith the apostle: and wheresoever counsel is, there is election, or else it is vain; where a will, there must be freedom, or else it is weak. We cannot imagine that the all-wise God should act or produce any thing but what he determineth to produce; and all his determinations must flow from the immediate principle of his will. If then his determinations be free, as they must be coming from that principle, then must the actions which follow them be also free. Being then the goodness of God is absolutely perfect of itself, being he is in himself infinitely and eternally happy, and this happiness as little capable of augmentation as of diminution; he cannot be thought to look upon any thing without himself as determining his will to the desire, and necessitating to the production of it. If then we consider God's goodness, he was moved; if his all-sufficiency, he was not necessitated: if we look upon his will, he freely determined; if on his power, by that determination he created the world. Wherefore that ancient conceit of a necessary emanation of God's goodness in the eternal creation of the World will now easily be refuted, if we make a distinction in the equivocal notion of goodness. For if we take it as it signifieth 'a rectitude and excellency of all virtue and holiness, with a negation of all things morally evil, vicious, or unholy,' so God is absolutely and necessarily good: but if we take it in another sense, as indeed they did which made this argument, that is, rather for beneficence, or communicativeness of some good to others; then God is not necessarily, but freely, good, that is to say, profitable and beneficial. For he had not been in the least degree evil or unjust, if he had never made the World or any part thereof, if he had never communicated any of his perfections by framing any thing beside himself. Every proprietary therefore being accounted master of his own, and thought freely to bestow whatever he gives; much more must that one eternal and independent Being be wholly free in the communicating his own perfections without any necessity or obligation. We must then look no farther than the determination of God's will in the creation of the World. For this is the admirable power of God, that with him to will is to effect, to determine is to perform. So the elders speak before him that sitteth upon the throne; Thou hast Rev. iv. 11. created all things, and for thy pleasure (that is, by thy will) they are and were created. Where there is no resistance in the object, where no need of preparation, application, or instrumental advantage in the agent, there the actual determination of the will is a sufficient production. Thus God did make the heavens and the earth by willing them to be'. This was his first command unto the creatures, and their existence was their first obedience. Let there be light, this is the Gen. i. 3. injunction; and there was light, that is the creation. Which 58 two are so intimately and immediately the same, that though in our and other translations those words, let there be, which 1 So Clemens Alexandrinus speaks of God: Ψιλῷ τῷ βούλεσθαι δημιουργεί, καὶ τῷ μόνον ἐθελῆσαι αὐτὸν ἕπεται τὸ yeyevñola Protrept. c. 4. [p. 55.] 2 Γενηθήτω φῶς, καὶ τὸ πρόσταγμα Epyov v. S. Basil. in Hexaem. Homil. ii. § 7. [Vol. 1. p. 19 c.] "Oтav dè φωνὴν ἐπὶ θεοῦ καὶ ῥῆμα καὶ πρόσταγμα λέγωμεν,—τὴν ἐν τῷ θελήματι ροπήν 3 Ας γενηθήτω φῶς, καὶ ἐγένετο express the command of God, differ from the other there was, which denote the present existence of the creature; yet in the original there is no difference at all, neither in point nor letter. And yet even in the diversity of the translation the phrase seems so expressive of God's infinite power, and immediate efficacy of his will, that it hath raised some admiration of Moses in the 'enemies of the religion both of the Jews Psal. cxv. 3. and Christians. God is in the heavens, he hath done whatsoever he pleased, saith David; yea, in the making of the heavens; he therefore created them, because he pleased; nay, more, he thereby created them, even by willing their Heb. xi. 3. creation. Now although some may conceive the creature might have been produced from all eternity by the free determination of God's will, and it is so far certainly true, that there is no instant assignable before which God could not have made the World; yet as this is an Article of our faith, we are bound to believe the heavens and earth are not eternal. Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God. And by that faith we are assured, that whatsoever possibility of an eternal existence of the creature may be imagined, actually it had a temporal beginning; and therefore all the arguments for this World's eternity are nothing but so many erroneous misconceptions. The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old (saith Wisdom). I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was: and the same Wisdom of God being made John xvii. 5. man, reflecteth upon the same priority, saying, Now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self, with the glory which I had Eph. i. 8, 4 with thee before the World was. Yea, in the same Christ are we blessed with all spiritual blessings, according as he hath Prov. viii. 22, 23. pus, Fiat lux, et facta est lux: or as יהי אור ויהי אור,tautology 1 As Dionysius Longinus, Tepl ύψους, Sect. 9. § 9. Ταύτῃ καὶ ὁ τῶν Ιουδαίων θεσμοθέτης, οὐχ ὁ τυχὼν ἀνήρ, ἐπειδὴ τὴν τοῦ θείου δύναμιν κατὰ τὴν ἀξίαν ἐγνώρισε [ἐχώρησε,] καξέφηνεν, εὐθὺς ἐν τῇ εἰσβολῇ γράψας τῶν νόμων, Εἶπεν ὁ θεός, φησί· τί; γενέσθω φῶς, καὶ ἐγένετο γενέσθω γῇ, καὶ ἐγέVETO. Where observe, Longinus made use of the translation of Aquila. 2 Πάντα ὅσα ἠθέλησεν ἐποίησεν ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ καὶ ἐν τῇ γῇ· ὁρᾷς ὅτι οὐ πρὸς δημιουργίαν τῶν ἐν τῇ γῇ μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ πρὸς τὴν κτίσιν τῶν ἄνω δυνάμεων ἤρκεσεν ἡ θέλησις αὐτοῦ μόνη. S. Chrysost. 1. ii. περὶ τοῦ ἀκαταλήπε TOU. [§ 4. Vol. I. p. 457 E.] chosen us in him before the foundation of the World. The impossibility of the origination of a circular motion, which we are sure is either in the heaven or earth, and the impropriety of the beginning of time, are so poor exceptions, that they deserve not the least labour of refutation. The actual eternity of this World is so far from being necessary, that it is of itself most improbable; and without the infallible certainty of faith, there is no single person carries more evidences of his youth, than the World of its novelty1. It is true indeed, some ancient accounts there are which would persuade us to imagine a strange antiquity of the World, far beyond the annals of Moses, and account of the same Spirit which made it. The Egyptian priests pretended an exact chronology for some myriads of years, and the Chaldæans or Assyrians far outreckon them, in which they delivered not only a catalogue of their kings, but also a table of the eclipses of the sun and moon. 1 As even Lucretius confesseth, and that out of the principles of Epicurus, 1. v. 330. "Verum, ut opinor, habet novitatem summa recensque Naturast mundi, neque pridem exordia cepit.' 2 Plato tells us of an account which an Egyptian priest gave to Solon, in which the Athenians were nine thousand years old, and those of Sais eight thousand: [Ερῶ τῆς θεοῦ χάριν, ἡ τήν τε ὑμετέραν (πόλιν) καὶ τήνδ' ἔλαχε, καὶ ἔθρεψε, καὶ ἐπαίδευσε] προτέραν μὲν τὴν παρ' ὑμῖν ἔτεσι χιλίοις ἐκ Γῆς τε καὶ Ηφαίστου τὸ σπέρμα παραλαβοῦσα ὑμῶν, τήνδε δὲ ὑστέραν τῆς δὲ ἐνθάδε διακοσμήσεως παρ' ἡμῖν ἐν τοῖς ἱεροῖς γράμμασιν ὀκτακισχιλίων ἐτῶν ἀριθμὸς γέγραπται. In Timæo, [p. 23 D.] Pomponius Mela [Lib. i. c. 9. § 8.] makes a larger account out of Herodotus: 'Ipsi vetustissimi (ut prædicant) hominum trecentos et triginta reges ante Amasim, et supra tredecim millium annorum ætates certis Annalibus, [referunt];' where, as the Egyptians much stretch the truth, so doth Mela stretch the relation of Herodotus, who makes it not thirteen thousand, but eleven thousand three hundred and forty years. [Euterpe, c. 142.] Diodorus Siculus [Lib. i. 26.] tells us of twenty-three thousand years from the reign of the first king of Egypt to the expedition of Alexander; and Diogenes Laertius out of other authors more than doubles that account : Αἰγύπτιοι μὲν γὰρ Νείλου γενέσθαι παῖδα Ηφαιστον, ὃν ἄρξαι φιλοσοφίας, ἧς τοὺς προεστῶτας ἱερέας είναι καὶ προφήτας. ἀπὸ δὲ τούτου εἰς ̓Αλέξ ανδρον τὸν Μακέδονα ἐτῶν εἶναι μυριάδας τέσσαρας, καὶ ὀκτακισχίλια όκτακόσια έτη ἑξήκοντα τρία: forty-eight thousand eight hundred and sixtythree. Proam. [§ 1.] [Cicero autem in libro de Divinatione 1. 9. tradidit Chaldeos CCCCLXX millia annorum monumentis comprehensa se habere dixisse. Quos numeros haud mutandos esse ex aliis auctoribus confirmavit Davisius. M. J. Routh.] 8 Ασσύριοι δέ, φησιν Ιάμβλιχος, οὐχ ἑπτὰ καὶ εἴκοσι μυριάδας ἐτῶν μόνας ἐτήρησαν, ὥς φησιν Ἵππαρχος, ἀλλὰ καὶ ὁλας ἀποκαταστάσεις καὶ περιόδους τῶν ἑπτὰ κοσμοκρατόρων μνήμη Tapédoσav. Proclus in Timæum. [Lib. i. p. 31. 1. 23.] 4 Εν οἷς ἡλίου μὲν ἐκλείψεις γενέσθαι τριακοσίας ἑβδομήκοντα τρεῖς, σε |