pose of parade. It was a thing too real and sacred for this. But we have heard him speak on this subject with the clearness and joy of one who had tasted the good word of God. There was uniformly manifested by him a strong and tender conscience, and we have been struck on several occasions, when doubtful cases have been under consideration, at the extent of the sphere of his conscience, and how cheerfully he deferred to its just authority. Your leaders' meeting will have sustained a great loss; there his temper was well controlled, and his judgment sound. I saw him during his affliction, as your note intimates, but only for a few minutes. He then expressed his trust in God and his acquiescence in the Divine dispensations; spoke of the peace and consolation he enjoyed, and seemed to me to realize more of the fulness and elevation of Christian experience than I had before observed. We mingled our tears and prayers together at the footstool of the God and Father of all. He has doubtless entered into rest, and thither we follow him, looking unto Jesus. Yours, &c.

66

"S. HULME."

DISCOURSES, ESSAYS, &c.

THOUGHTS ON THE MODE OF THE DIVINE EXIST. ENCE PRIOR TO THE CREATION OF THE UNIVERSE, FOUNDED ON JOHN XVII. 24.

"Thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world."

EVERY attentive reader of the sacred volume must have been impressed with the dignified calmness and ease with which the Redeemer speaks of truths the most profound, important, and sublime. The perplexity which springs from doubt, the astonishment which arises from limited and imperfect knowledge, and the excitement produced in ordinary minds, by the discovery or revelation of some remarkable fact in science or theology, are never seen in the Great Teacher sent from God. His mind moves through the whole region of truth, with the same ease and familiarity. When he descants on the lilies of the field, the fowls of the air, and the common incidents of life, or when he unfolds some recondite doctrine in relation to the Godhead and the eternal world, he is equally at home. This is remarkable, and argues the majesty of his mind, the dignity and excellence of his intellectual and moral nature; and such a relation to, and intercourse with the Deity, as no created being can claim. Equally remarkable is the pregnant fulness of the Redeemer's teaching. Sometimes a brief sentence is germinant of a volume.

The important passage before us, forms a part of that sublime prayer which the Son offered to the Father, a short time before he suffered as the Saviour of man. While this prayer breathes earnest intercessions for his people, it contains, as might be expected, frequent allusions to his pre-existent glory and felicity in the bosom of the Father. Nothing more simple in style, and nothing so elevated and sublime in meaning, was ever uttered in human language. Here our thoughts are called away from this erratic planet, to that eternity which preceded the birth of time; from the consideration of ourselves to

the contemplation of the Deity as he existed in that eternity which preceded the creation of the universe. Profound and awful subjects! yet they are not forbidden to our meditations; on the contrary, they are placed before us to elicit our prayerful reflection, and they are suggestive of many collateral truths, calculated to invigorate our intellect, establish our faith, and dignify our moral nature.

The great themes placed before us in this passage, may be comprised under one general proposition, namely, The mode of the Divine existence prior to the creation of the universe.

1. This implies that the universe is not eternal, a truth which modern science has demonstrated. Our limited space will not allow us to state the process of this demonstration; nor is it necessary in the present instance, as the argument before us involves an admission of this great truth, and also an acknowledgment of the Divine authority of the sacred volume. Now, as the whole universe owes its existence to the creating energy of God, it must have had a beginning; and if it had a beginning, there was a period when it had no existence; and if there was a period when it had no existence, there must have been an antecedent eternity, during which it had no existence; and if there was an eternity prior to the existence of any created object, then must the Deity have existed absolutely alone through that antecedent eternity. This then is the period referred to in the passage, when it employs the phraseology, "before the foundation of the world," before a sun was lighted up, or a planet revolved, or an atom existed,-when the primitive elements of matter had no being, when no seraph bowed before the eternal throne, when the first created intelligence was unborn, when the whole spiritual world had no created inhabitant, and the boundless regions of space were untenanted and void. It is awful to contemplate those vast ages; our minds are instantly lost in the fathomless abyss. It is in vain to attempt to measure it by imagining the revolution of vast cycles of time, and by multiplying those cycles by millions; all the figures we can enumerate are swallowed up as a drop, and less than a drop, in the ocean of eternity. It matters not how far back we imagine the period when Jehovah first uttered the creative fiat; there was still an eternity in which he existed alone. The period during which the universe has had a being, is as nothing contrasted with those eternal ages during which he existed alone. The one is finite, the other infinite duration. Therefore, in contemplating the nature of the Deity, it cannot be unimportant reverently to inquire, What was the mode of his being during that infinite period which preceded all existence but his own? Our text invites us to this inquiry, and implies that—

2. Prior to all created existence Jehovah was absolutely perfect in all the attributes of his nature. Creation has not changed the nature or character of God. He has gained no new attribute by its existence, nor would he have lost any attribute or perfection had creation never had a being. What he is now, he was prior to all creation; what he is now, he would have been at this moment had the universe remained one vast and absolute solitude. If he is absolutely perfect and independent now, so he was from all eternity, and so he would have remained through all future eternity had neither a world nor atom been created: for a being who is independent and eternal in his existence, must be unchangeable in his nature. Here the dictate of reason is established by the most

unequivocal testimony of inspiration, for every part of the sacred volume maintains his unchangeable perfection. This truth derives further confirmation from

3. The words of the Saviour, which assert the existence of Jehovah's benevolence, or love, through all eternity past-"Thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world." Here it is implied, not only that love is a property of Deity, but that his love, as an active principle, has been exercised through all eternity. This is the teaching of the Saviour; and does not reason assent to this as a necessary truth? Are we not compelled to admit it as a conclusion logically drawn from those perfections which the Bible so constantly ascribes to Deity? "God is love," says the apostle John; a declaration which asserts not merely the intensity of his love, but the fact that love is essential to his existence. He means that love is not an adventitious affection, but one inseparable from his being. Every sound philosopher, as well as every theologian, must assent to this proposition. But if love be essential to God's existence, it follows that there never was a period in eternity when love was absent from him. If he has existed from all eternity, he has loved from all eternity. Before there was a creature in existence to receive his love, his love was possessed and exercised. Now this is just the doctrine contained in the text-he loved" before the foundation of the world." Thus reason and revelation are seen to concur in their testimony.

The same great truth necessarily follows from Jehovah's immutability. That Jehovah exercises his love now, is so obvious and so universally acknowledged as to render argument superfluous. What is creation, but an objective manifestation of his perfections, and chiefly of his love? What is providence, but a constant renewal of that manifestation? What is redemption, but the most glorious exhibition of his love? What are affectionate instincts in the inferior animals, and benevolent dispositions inspired in man and angels, but reflected rays of the love that dwells in the Deity? Why is it that love to God and love to man is constituted the essence of experimental and practical religion, but to speak forth the benevolent character of its divine author, and to transform man into a resemblance to his God? Why has the Deity so constituted our moral nature, and so wonderfully adjusted the machinery of his providence and government thereto, that man's happiness is made to flow from the exercise of benevolent affections, and misery in every form to flow from the indulgence of malign feelings? The reason is found in himself—in his benevolent nature-God is love. The universe is the work of God, and wherever benevolence is seen or felt in his works, it is an expression of his own nature. But such as the nature of God is now, or during the existence of the universe, such must have been his nature during the eternity which preceded the existence of the universe. If he exercises a benevolent disposition now, he must have exercised it in some way before the universe had a being, and when he existed alone. As the creation of the universe results from God's benevolent affection, the result itself is a proof of the prior existence and exercise of the affection in God. Besides, it must be constantly remembered that the first act of creation, however ancient, is a recent event compared with God's eternity. It is but of yesterday contrasted with those immeasurable ages which preceded it. To suppose, then, that Jehovah exercises be

nevolence in such a wonderful manner within the limited period of creation, and that he did not exercise it in that vast eternity which preceded creation, is to suppose that he is recently become of a widely different nature and character from what he was through all eternity previous to the existence of the universe. This absurdity is too obvious to be entertained for a moment by any one who has the least claim to sobriety of judgment. The immutability of the Divine nature, as well as its absolute perfection, requires us to believe that, seeing the works and the word of God exhibit him now as a being of boundless love, so he was the same benevolent being before time had its birth and creation its origin. This is the doctrine of our text, "Thou lovedst before the foundation of the world."

4. The exercise of love implies the existence of an object, as well as an agent. This truth is so obvious, that scarcely a word is necessary to prove it. It is a self-evident proposition. Every one of common understanding will see at a glance that, if the existence of love, as an active principle, implies an agent who exercises that benevolent affection, it necessarily implies an object towards which or towards whom it is exercised. Our text clearly speaks of both agent and object. Of one who loves, and of one who is loved. Any remarks descriptive of that object must be reserved for another part of our argument. We have merely to call attention now to the obvious truth, that both agent and object are necessarily implied in the exercise of love.

5. There must be some distinction between the agent and the object —that is, though they may possess the same nature and essence, yet they cannot be numerically and personally the same. In the love which the Father exercised before a creature existed, the object he loved is here set forth as not himself, but another—an object, in some sense at least, distinct from himself. A glance at the passage before us makes this manifest. We grant that a being may love himself, but this admission does not neutralize either the plain fact or the argument before us. The obvious fact is, that the love of which our text speaks was not self-love, but benevolence, or love directed to another distinct from self; and the argument is, that benevolence, being distinct from selflove, is and must be, as our text represents it, a feeling of approbation and delight in another. When we exercise the affection of love or benevolent regard, we are conscious of an affection of approbation and delight, not being concentrated within and upon ourselves, but directed towards another person. Such is the love or benevolence of the Deity as displayed in the universe, in Providence, and most gloriously in redemption. Such is the love of which the apostle speaks when he says, "God is love." He is not speaking of self-love, but of benevolence; and such is the love spoken of in our text. The love which the Deity exercised before the foundation of the world. was of the same nature as that he exercises now; it was delight in an object distinct from self-" Thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world." This is too plain, we think, to be misunderstood.

6. The love of God, before the foundation of the world, was directed to a person-a conscious, intelligent existence. "Thou lovedst me," says the Saviour, "before the foundation of the world." It would be premature to inquire just now into the nature of this person whom God loved during that eternity which preceded the existence of any creature.

All we have at present claiming our attention is the fact, that the object of the Father's love was a person, a conscious, intelligent existence. Now, does not reason say that the fact must necessarily be as it is here stated that the object of the Divine benevolence must be a person? We think it does, most unequivocally. When there was not a creature yet brought into being, what can be conceived of as an object of the Divine love but a person? The object of his love must be worthy of it; and worthy of it either on account of created properties or moral excellencies; but as no creature was then in existence, there could be no created properties, and therefore the object in question must have possessed moral excellencies, rendering him worthy of the Divine complacency and delight. But moral excellencies can exist only in a conscious and intelligent being, or, in other words, in a person. Now, such is the teaching of the passage before us. The object beloved before the foundation of the world was a person -a conscious and intelligent being,

here denominated The Son of God.

Therefore he whom

7. The object whom God loved before the foundation of the world must have been one of absolute moral excellence. The love of God is not an ignorant but an intelligent affection-directed by omniscience and infinite wisdom; and, therefore, the object beloved must be in every sense worthy of his affection. His love could not be directed towards a being whose moral qualities were repugnant to his own. the Father loved from all eternity, before a creature existed to share his regards, must necessarily have been one of spotless holiness, and of infinite moral excellence. Holy Scripture confirms the decisions of reason. Purity, truth, justice, holiness, and goodness, in their absolute form, and in infinite degree, are ascribed to the Divine Word who became incarnate for the world's salvation. He is described as "the brightness of the Father's glory and the express image of his person."

8. The object of God's eternal love must himself have existed from all eternity. The period mentioned in the text-"before the foundation of the world"-carries us back to that eternity which preceded the existence of any creature, therefore he whom the Father loved at that period could not be a creature; and if not a creature, his existence was uncreated; and if uncreated, he was eternal. Moreover, as the object of the Father's love, we cannot suppose a beginning to his existence, without, at the same time, supposing a beginning to the Father's love; and if there was a beginning to the Father's love, there was a period prior to his love; and if a period prior to his love, then there was an eternity during which he was without love. This is absurd, and contradictory. The immutability, independence, and absolute perfection of his nature, necessarily imply that his love, like his existence, has been eternal; and the text declares that the Son of God was the object of his love through that eternity-therefore the existence of the Divine Word has been eternal:-"Thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world." The same great truth is elsewhere abundantly declared in the sacred volume. "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God." "And he is before all things, and by him all things consist." "I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty." "His goings forth have been from of old, even from eternity."