The portraiture of the image of God in man: In his three estates, of creation. Restauration. Glorification. Digested into two parts. The first containing, the image of God both in the body and soule of man, and immortality of both: with a description of the severall members of the body, and the two principall faculties of the soule, the understanding and the will; in which consisteth his knowledge, and liberty of his will. The second containing, the passions of man in the concupiscible and irascible part of the soule: his dominion ouer the creatures; also a description of his active and contemplative life; with his conjunct or married estate. Whereunto is annexed an explication of sundry naturall and morall observations for the clearing of divers Scriptures. All set downe by way of collation, and cleared by sundry distinctions, both out of the schoolemen, and moderne writers. The third edition, corrected and enlarged. By I. Weemse, of Lathocker in Scotland, preacher of Christs Gospel.

CHAP. XII. Of Adams inbred knowledge of God.

MAn before his fall, [Prop.] had an inbred knowledge of God, before he knew him by his creatures, or any other teacher.

As light is the first object of the eye, and not the light of the Sunne or Candle. [Illust. 1] So God is the first object of the mind, but not this or that way revealed, by his crea∣tures, or by his word.

The principles of things, * 1.1 are either manifest in them∣selves onely, or, they are manifest to us; that there is a God, is a principle manifest in it selfe, because there is no neede of a middle to proove it. But it is not a prin∣ciple knowne in it selfe to us, because we must use mid∣dles, that this principles may be stirred up in us.

The first principles which we have of God, are na∣turally inbred within us; [Illust. 2] but the first principles of o∣ther sciences arise without from the senses. Principia de Deo, & principia scientiarum ex opposito differunt; cog∣noscimus deum per extromissionem, cognoscimus scientias per intromissionem. The knowledge of God wee have it by extromission; but the knowledge of the first principles wee have by intermission. The un∣derstanding at the first is voide of all formes, yet it is capable of all formes; as the eye being void of all co∣lours, yet is capable of all colours; * 1.2 the way how the understanding receives these formes into it is thus, the

sense lets in the particular objects to the imagination where they are more refined, than they were in the sense; and by the light of the intellectuall agent, the possible faculty now actually understands. As the wo∣man in the Gospel who lost her groat, could not have found it againe untill the candle was lighted: so this possble power in the understanding, could receive no objects from the imagination, unlesse this light inter∣vened, and thus the first principles of sciences are bred in the minde; For if I had never seene with my eyes, totum, the whole, I could never lay up this first principle in my minde, that, the whole is more than the parts. So that all this knowledge comes from the sense first, and that maxime holds true, Quicquidest in intellectu, pri∣us fuerat in sensu.

Object. * 1.3 If all our knowledge comes from the senses, how are these principles said to be naturally in man.

Answ. They are said to be naturally in him, because they are framed in the minde, without any reasoning or discourse; but the conclusions drawne from these, are made up by discourse, and are not alike amongst all men, as the first principles are.

Ob. If all our knowledge of things come by the sense, how is it then that the man in the Gospel, who was borne blind, when he began to see, said that, he saw men walking a farre off like trees, Matth. 8.24. If hee had not had some notion of trees in his minde without helpe of the senses, how could hee compare men to trees?

Answ. This notion which he had of trees was by other senses, as by feeling and hearing; but if hee had beene both deafe and blind, &c. He could have had no notion of trees, as no blind man can judge of colours.

The principles of sciences, [Consequence.] are not naturally inbred in us, therefore Plato, Origen, and Averrois, erred who

held that the soules were from eternall, and the prin∣ciples of all sciences, were from all eternitie, inbred with them; and to learne was onely to remember, and an actuall knowledge of those imprinted notions. This comparison then, cleares not the purpose well, if a ma∣ster were to seeke his fugitive servant in a multitude, it were in vaine for him to seeke him, unlesse he had some pre-notions of him, in his shape and favour; or carried some picture drawne by others. So unlesse something were drawne within us, wee could never take up those things without; but there is no such principles drawen in our minde at the first, untill they be formed out of the imagination, and laid up in the minde; and by these we may enquire, after that which we understand not. [Conseq. 2]

Wee understand nothing by intromission through the senses to the understanding; then Adams know∣ledge which he had of all the creatures when he awaked out of his sleepe, was an extraordinary infused know∣ledge, and was not naturall to him: But the first know∣ledge of God, is inbred with us, and is inlightened with that first light, which enlightens all men comming in to the world, Ioh. 1.9.

This inbred knowledge, * 1.4 which man had of God be∣fore the fall, is most obscure now since the fall; as hee who writes with the juyce of an onyon, the letters can not be read at the first, unlesse the paper be holden to the fire to dry the letters, and then they appeare legible. So this is written with the point of a diamont (as it were) in the hearts of all men, * 1.5 that (there is God) although they cannot reade it at the first, untill they begin to consider the creatures more nearely, and to waken that which is lurking within them; The Poets say, that Oedipus knew that hee had a father, but hee knew not, that Laius was his father; So man by nature

knoweth that there is a God, but he knoweth not the true God.

Quest. Whether is this imbred knowledge which we have of God; or the knowledge which he have of him by the creatures more cleare?

Answ. * 1.6 This inbred knowledge is more obscure, than the knowledge which wee get by creatures. The first sort of knowledge which we have of God now, is uni∣versale confusum. Example, when we behold a man a farre off: first, we take him up to be a creature, then wee take him up to be a living creature, and then to be a man, and at last to be Peter or Iohn: here wee proceed, from the universall to the particular, from that which is confused, to that which is more cleare and distinct. So the first sight, which our minde doth get of God now, is but an obscure and confused fight, as that which the Athenians had of God, Act. 17. When they worshipped the unknowne God; so that of the Samaritans, Ioh. * 1.7 4. They worshipped they knew not what. Then we are led by the creatures some what more clearely to take them up, which is called universale abstractum. So first we learne particular things by sense, and then uni∣versall things by our understanding; The Philoso∣phers found out a sort of reasoning by induction, ascen∣ding from the particulars to the generall, as Socrates is a living creature; therefore all men are living creatures; Plato is a living creature, therefore all men are living creatures. Here we goe from the particular to the gene∣rall, * 1.8 and so we proceede thus from the creatures to take up what God is. There is a twofold order in disci∣pline; first, the order of invention, as those who finde out Arts, begin at those things that are most knowne to our sense, and most familiar to them; the se∣cond is the order of hearing, * 1.9 as when a master proceeds in teaching his schollers from the cause

to the effect. In the first, * 1.10 wee proceed from the com∣pounds to the simple, from the particulars to the generall; but in the last, we proceede from the simple to the com∣pound, and from the universall to the particular; in the first wee compound, in the second we divide. When we learne by the creatures to take up God, it is ordo in∣ventionis; but when God teacheth us in his schoole, and instructs us by the eare, this is a more perfect kinde of learning, this is called ordo auscultationis.

Man by nature, [Prop.] hath sought out and polished all other sorts of Arts and Sciences since the fall; but the know∣ledge of God, they have detained captive, and more and more obscured it, Rom. 1.18.

First, they found out Physicke, [Illust. 1] and necessitie bred this; then they found out morall Philosophy, * 1.11 civilitie bred this; then they found out Mythologie or fabulous theologie, and delight bred this. This Mythologie againe, they divided three manner of wayes, first, Physically, as Homer brings in the gods fighting, thereby hee meant the fighting of the Elements, winds and raine. Second∣ly, morally when they placed, Virgo Iustitia the daugh∣ter of Iupiter betwixt Leo and libra; they signified that Iustice had a hand both in fortitude and equitie. Third∣ly, Theologically, as Iupiter begat Venus upon the froth of the Sea; whereby they signified, when the gods be∣gat any good motions in the hearts of men, there is no∣thing but vacuitie and froth in them, no preparation nor disposition to goodnesse; but the knowledge of God is more and more obscured in Man since the fall.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Principia de deo velsunt per se nota vel secun∣dum nos.
• * 1.2

  Duplex est intellectus, agens, & possbilis.
• * 1.3

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.4

  A collation betwixt the innocent and old Adam.
• * 1.5

  Rom. 1.20. deum nega∣runt, non ex habitu na∣turae, sed ex affectu malitiae.
• * 1.6

  Duplex est universale, confusum & abstractum
• * 1.7

  Coguoscimus particularia per sensum, ut universa∣lia per intellectum.
• * 1.8

  Duplex ordo, inventio∣nis, & auscultattonis.
• * 1.9

  Fonseca. lib. 2 q 2 S. 8.
• * 1.10

  Ordo compositionis & resolutionis, seu ab uni∣versali, ad particulare, & contra.
• * 1.11

  Necessitas peperit Phy∣sicam, civilitas, mora∣lem philosophiam; de∣lectatio, mythologiam. Triplex mythologia, phy∣sica, moralis, & theolo∣gica.