material world furnishes, are numerous and striking. It is a most
evident and acknowledged truth that a being cannot act where it is not:
if, therefore, actions and effects, which manifest the highest wisdom,
power, and goodness in the author of them, are continually produced
every where, the author of these actions, or God, must be continually
present with us, and wherever he thus acts. The matter which composes
the world is evidently lifeless and thoughtless: it must therefore be
incapable of moving itself, or designing or producing any effects which
require wisdom or power. The matter of our world, or the small parts
which constitute the air, the earth, and the waters, is yet continually
moved, so as to produce effects of this kind; such are the innumerable
herbs, and trees, and fruits which adorn the earth, and support the
countless millions of creatures who inhabit it. There must therefore be
constantly present, all over the earth, a most wise, mighty, and good
Being, the author and director of these motions.
We cannot, it is true, see him with our bodily eyes, because he is a
pure Spirit; yet this is not any proof that he is not present. A
judicious discourse, a series of kind actions, convince us of the
presence of a friend, a person of prudence and benevolence. We cannot
see the present mind, the seat and principle of these qualities; yet the
constant regular motion of the tongue, the hand, and the whole body,
(which are the instruments of our souls, as the material universe and
all the various bodies in it are the instruments of the Deity,) will not
suffer us to doubt that there is an intelligent and benevolent principle
within the body which produces all these skilful motions and kind
actions. The sun, the air, the earth, and the waters, are no more able
to move themselves, and produce all that beautiful and useful variety of
plants, and fruits, and trees, with which our earth is covered, than the
body of a man, when the soul hath left it, is able to move itself, form
an instrument, plough a field, or build a house. If the laying out
judiciously and well cultivating a small estate, sowing it with proper
grain at the best time of the year, watering it in due season and
quantities, and gathering in the fruits when ripe, and laying them up in
the best manner,--if all these effects prove the estate to have a
manager, and the manager possessed of skill and strength,--certainly the
enlightening and warming the whole earth by the sun, and so directing
its motion and the motion of the earth as to produce in a constant
useful succession day and night, summer and winter, seed time and
harvest; the watering the earth continually by the clouds, and thus
bringing forth immense quantities of herbage, grain, and
fruits,--certainly all these effects continually produced, must prove
that a Being of the greatest power, wisdom, and benevolence is
continually present throughout our world, which he thus supports, moves,
actuates, and makes fruitful.
The fire which warms us knows nothing of its serviceableness to this
purpose, nor of the wise laws according to which its particles are moved
to produce this effect. And that it is placed in such a part of the
house, where it may be greatly beneficial and no way hurtful, is
ascribed without hesitation to the contrivance and labour of a person
who knew its proper place and uses. And if we came daily into a house
wherein we saw this was regularly done, though we never saw an
inhabitant in it, we could not doubt that the house was occupied by a
rational inhabitant. That huge globe of fire in the heavens, which we
call the sun, and on the light and influences of which the fertility of
our world, and the life and pleasure of all animals, depend, knows
nothing of its serviceableness to these purposes, nor of the wise laws
according to which its beams are dispensed, nor what place or motions
were requisite for these beneficial purposes. Yet its beams are darted
constantly in infinite numbers, every one according to those well chosen
laws, and its proper place and motion are maintained. Must not, then,
its place be appointed, its motion regulated, and beams darted, by
almighty wisdom and goodness, which prevent the sun’s ever wandering in
the boundless spaces of the heavens, so as to leave us in disconsolate
cold and darkness, or coming so near, or emitting his rays in such a
manner, as to burn us up? Must not the great Being who enlightens and
warms us by the sun, his instrument, who raises and sends down the
vapours, brings forth and ripens the grain and fruits, and who is thus
ever acting around us for our benefit, be always present in the sun,
throughout the air, and all over the earth, which he thus moves and
actuates?
This earth is in itself a dead, motionless mass, and void of all
counsel; yet proper parts of it are continually raised through the small
pipes which compose the bodies of plants and trees, and are made to
contribute to their growth, to open and shine in blossoms and leaves,
and to swell and harden into fruit. Could blind, thoughtless particles
thus continually keep on their way, through numberless windings, without
once blundering, if they were not guided by an unerring hand? Can the
most perfect human skill from earth and water form one grain, much more
a variety of beautiful and relishing fruits? Must not the directing
mind, who does all this constantly, be most wise, mighty, and
benevolent? Must not the Being who thus continually exerts his skill and
energy around us, for our benefit, be confessed to be always present and
concerned for our welfare? Can these effects be ascribed to any thing
below an all-wise and almighty cause? And must not this cause be present
wherever he acts? Were God to speak to us every month from heaven, and
with a voice loud as thunder declare that he observes, provides for, and
governs us; this would not be a proof, in the judgment of sound reason,
by many degrees so valid: since much less wisdom and power are required
to form such sounds in the air, than to produce these effects; and to
give, not merely verbal declarations, but substantial evidences of his
presence and care over us. In every part and place of the universe, with
which we are acquainted, we perceive the exertion of a power, which we
believe, mediately or immediately, to proceed from the Deity. For
instance: in what part or point of space, that has ever been explored,
do we not discover attraction? In what regions do we not find light? In
what accessible portion of our globe do we not meet with gravity,
magnetism, electricity; together with the properties also and powers of
organized substances, of vegetable or of animated nature? Nay, farther,
what kingdom is there of nature, what corner of space, in which there is
any thing that can be examined by us, where we do not fall upon
contrivance and design? The only reflection, perhaps, which arises in
our minds from this view of the world around us, is, that the laws of
nature every where prevail; that they are uniform and universal. But
what do we mean by the laws of nature, or by any law? Effects are
produced by power, not by laws. A law cannot execute itself. A law
refers us to an agent.
The usual argument _a priori_, on this attribute of the divine nature,
has been stated as follows; but, amidst such a mass of demonstration of
a much higher kind, it cannot be of any great value:--The First Cause,
the supreme all-perfect Mind, as he could not derive his being from any
other cause, must be independent of all other, and therefore unlimited.
He exists by an absolute necessity of nature; and as all the parts of
infinite space are exactly uniform and alike, for the same reason that
he exists in any one part he must exist in all. No reason can be
assigned for excluding him from one part, which would not exclude him
from all. But that he is present in some parts of space, the evident
effects of his wisdom, power, and benevolence continually produced,
demonstrate beyond all rational doubt. He must therefore be alike
present every where, and fill infinite space with his infinite Being.
Among metaphysicians, it has been matter of dispute, whether God is
present every where by an infinite extension of his essence. This is the
opinion of Newton, Dr. S. Clarke, and their followers; others have
objected to this notion, that it might then be said, God is neither in
heaven nor in earth, but only a part of God in each. The former opinion,
however, appears most in harmony with the Scriptures; though the term
extension, through the inadequacy of language, conveys too material an
idea. The objection just stated is wholly grounded on notions taken from
material objects, and is therefore of little weight, because it is not
applicable to an immaterial substance. It is best to confess with one
who had thought deeply on the subject, There is an incomprehensibleness
in the manner of every thing about which no controversy can or ought to
be concerned.” That we cannot comprehend how God is fully, and
completely, and undividedly present every where, need not surprise us,
when we reflect that the manner in which our own minds are present with
our bodies is as incomprehensible as the manner in which the supreme
Mind is present with every thing in the universe.
OMNISCIENCE. This attribute of God is constantly connected in Scripture
with his omnipresence, and forms a part of almost every description of
that attribute; for, as God is a Spirit, and therefore intelligent, if
he is every where, if nothing can exclude him, not even the most solid
bodies, nor the minds of intelligent beings, then are all things naked
and opened to the eyes of him with whom we have to do. Where he acts, he
is; and where he is, he perceives. He understands and considers things
absolutely, and as they are in their own natures, powers, properties,
differences, together with all the circumstances belonging to them.
Known unto him are all his works from the beginning of the world,”
rather, απ αιωνος, _from, all eternity_; known, before they were made,
in their possible, and known, now they are made, in their actual,
existence. Lord, thou hast searched me and known me; thou knowest my
down-sitting and mine uprising, thou understandest my thought afar off.
Thou compassest my path and my lying down, and art acquainted with all
my ways. For there is not a word in my tongue, but lo, O Lord, thou
knowest it altogether. The darkness hideth not from thee; but the night
shineth as the day. The ways of man are before the eyes of the Lord, and
he pondereth all his goings; he searcheth their hearts, and
understandeth every imagination of their thoughts.” Nor is this perfect
knowledge to be confined to men or angels; it reaches into the state of
the dead, and penetrates the regions of the damned. Hell,” _hades_, is
naked before him; and destruction,” the seats of destruction, hath no
covering.” No limits at all are to be set to this perfection: Great is
the Lord, his understanding is infinite.”
In Psalm xciv, the knowledge of God is argued from the communication of
it to men: Understand, ye brutish among the people; and, ye fools, when
will ye be wise? He that planted the ear, shall he not hear? He that
formed the eye, shall he not see? He that chastiseth the Heathen, shall
not he correct? He that teacheth man knowledge, shall not he know?” This
argument is as easy as it is conclusive, obliging all who acknowledge a
First Cause, to admit his perfect intelligence, or to take refuge in
atheism itself. It fetches not the proof from a distance, but refers us
to our bosoms for the constant demonstration that the Lord is a God of
knowledge, and that by him actions are weighed. We find in ourselves
such qualities as thought and intelligence, power and freedom, &c, for
which we have the evidence of consciousness as much as for our own
existence. Indeed, it is only by our consciousness of these, that our
existence is known to ourselves. We know, likewise, that these are
perfections, and that to have them is better than to be without them. We
find also that they have not been in us from eternity. They must,
therefore, have had a beginning, and consequently some cause, for the
very same reason that a being beginning to exist in time requires a
cause. Now this cause, as it must be superior to its effect, must have
those perfections in a superior degree; and if it be the First Cause it
must have them in an infinite or unlimited degree, since bounds or
limitations, without a limiter, would be an effect without a cause. If
God gives wisdom to the wise, and knowledge to men of understanding; if
he communicates this perfection to his creatures, the inference must be
that he himself is possessed of it in a much more eminent degree than
they; that his knowledge is deep and intimate, reaching to the very
essence of things, theirs but slight and superficial; his clear and
distinct, theirs confused and dark; his certain and infallible, theirs
doubtful and liable to mistake; his easy and permanent, theirs obtained
with much pains, and soon lost again by the defects of memory or age;
his universal and extending to all objects, theirs short and narrow,
reaching only to some few things, while that which is wanting cannot be
numbered; and therefore, as the heavens are higher than the earth, so,
as the prophet has told us, are his ways above our ways, and his
thoughts above our thoughts.
But his understanding is infinite; a doctrine which the sacred writers
not only authoritatively announce, but confirm by referring to the
wisdom displayed in his works. The only difference between wisdom and
knowledge is, that the former always supposes action, and action
directed to an end. But wherever there is wisdom there must be
knowledge; and as the wisdom of God in the creation consists in the
formation of things which, by themselves, or in combination with others,
shall produce certain effects, and that in a variety of operation which
is to us boundless, the previous knowledge of the possible qualities and
effects inevitably supposes a knowledge which can have no limit. For as
creation out of nothing argues a power which is omnipotent; so the
knowledge of the possibilities of things which are not, (a knowledge
which, from the effect, we are sure must exist in God,) argues that such
a Being must be omniscient. For all things being not only present to
him, but also entirely depending upon him, and having received both
their being itself, and all their powers and faculties from him; it is
manifest that, as he knows all things that are, so he must likewise know
all possibilities of things, that is, all effects that can be. For,
being himself alone self-existent, and having alone given to all things
all the powers and faculties they are endued with; it is evident he must
of necessity know perfectly what all and each of those powers and
faculties, which are derived wholly from himself, can possibly produce:
and seeing, at one boundless view, all the possible compositions and
divisions, variations and changes, circumstances and dependencies of
things; all their possible relations one to another, and their
dispositions or fitnesses to certain and respective ends, he must,
without possibility of error, know exactly what is best and properest in
every one of the infinite possible cases or methods of disposing things;
and understand perfectly how to order and direct the respective means,
to bring about what he so knows to be, in its kind, or in the whole, the
best and fittest in the end. This is what we mean by infinite wisdom.
On the subject of the divine omniscience, many fine sentiments are to be
found in the writings of Pagans; for an intelligent First Cause being in
any sense admitted, it was most natural and obvious to ascribe to him a
perfect knowledge of all things. They acknowledge that nothing is hid
from God, who is intimate to our minds, and mingles himself with our
very thoughts; nor were they all unaware of the practical tendency of
such a doctrine, and of the motive it affords to a cautious and virtuous
conduct. But among them it was not held, as by the sacred writers, in
connection with other right views of the divine nature, which are
essential to give to this its full moral effect. Not only on this
subject does the manner in which the Scriptures state the doctrine far
transcend that of the wisest Pagan theists; but the moral of the
sentiment is infinitely more comprehensive and impressive. With them it
is connected with man’s state of trial; with a holy law, all the
violations of which, in thought, word, and deed, are both infallibly
known, and strictly marked; with promises of grace, and of a mild and
protecting government as to all who have sought and found the mercy of
God in forgiving their sins and admitting them into his family. The
wicked are thus reminded, that their hearts are searched, and their sins
noted; that the eyes of the Lord are upon their ways; and that their
most secret works will be brought to light in the day when God the
witness shall become God the judge. But as to the righteous, the eyes of
the Lord are said to be over them; that they are kept by him who never
slumbers or sleeps; that he is never far from them; that his eyes run to
and fro throughout the whole earth, to show himself strong in their
behalf; that foes, to them invisible, are seen by his eye, and
controlled by his arm; and that this great attribute, so appalling to
wicked men, affords to them, not only the most influential reason for a
perfectly holy temper and conduct, but the strongest motive to trust,
and joy, and hope, amidst the changes and afflictions of the present
life. Socrates, as well as other philosophers, could express themselves
well, so long as they expressed themselves generally, on this subject.
The former could say, Let your own frame instruct you. Does the mind
inhabiting your body dispose and govern it with ease? Ought you not then
to conclude, that the universal Mind with equal ease actuates and
governs universal nature; and that, when you can at once consider the
interest of the Athenians at home, in Egypt, and in Sicily, it is not
too much for the divine wisdom to take care of the universe? These
reflections will soon convince you, that the greatness of the divine
mind is such, as at once to see all things, hear all things, be present
every where, and direct all the affairs of the world.” These views are
just, but they wanted that connection with others relative both to the
divine nature and government, which we see only in the Bible, to render
them influential; they neither gave correct moral distinctions nor led
to a virtuous practice, no, not in Socrates, who, on some subjects, and
especially on the personality of the Deity, and his independence on
matter, raised himself far above the rest of his philosophic brethren,
but in moral feeling and practice was perhaps as censurable as they. See
PRESCIENCE.
ON, or AVEN, a city of Egypt, situated in the land of Goshen, on the
east of the Nile, and about five miles from the modern Cairo. It was
called Heliopolis by the Greeks, and Bethshemeth by the Hebrews, Jer.
xliii, 13; both of which names, as well as its Egyptian one of On, imply
the city or house of the sun. The inhabitants of this city are
represented by Herodotus as the wisest of the Egyptians; and here Moses
resided, and received that education which made him learned in all the
wisdom of the Egyptians.” But notwithstanding its being the seat of the
sciences, such were its egregious idolatries, that it was nicknamed
Aven, or Beth-Aven, the house of vanity,” or idolatry, by the Jews. A
village standing on part of its site, at the present day, is called
Matarea; while the spring of excellent water, or fountain of the sun,
which is supposed to have given rise to the city, is still called Ain
Shems, or fountain of the sun, by the Arabs. This is one of the most
ancient cities of the world of which any distinct vestige can now be
traced. It was visited eighteen hundred and fifty years ago by Strabo,
whose description proves it to have been nearly as desolate then as now.
Most of the ruins of this once famous city, described by that
geographer, are buried in the accumulation of the soil: but that which
marks its site, and is, perhaps, the most ancient work at this time
existing in the world, in a perfect state, is a column of red granite,
seventy feet high, and covered with hieroglyphics. Dr. E. D. Clarke has
given a very good representation of this column; to whom, also, the
curious reader is referred for a learned dissertation on the characters
engraved upon it.
The city On, according to Josephus, was given to the Israelites to dwell
in, when they first went into Egypt; and it was a daughter of a priest
of the temple of the sun at this place, who was given in marriage to
Joseph by Pharaoh. Here, also, in the time of Ptolemy Philadelphus,
leave was obtained of that king by Onias, high priest of the Jews, to
build a temple, when dispossessed of his office by Antiochus; which was
long used by the Hellenist Jews. It was predicted by Jeremiah, xliii,
13, and by Ezekiel, xxx, 17, that this place, with its temples and
inhabitants, should be destroyed; which was probably fulfilled by
Nebuchadnezzar. See NOPH.
ONESIMUS was a Phrygian by nation, a slave to Philemon, and a disciple
of the Apostle Paul. Onesimus having run away from his master, and also
having robbed him, Philemon v, 18, went to Rome while St. Paul was there
in prison the first time. As Onesimus knew him by repute, (his master
Philemon being a Christian,) he sought him out. St. Paul brought him to
a sense of the greatness of his crime, instructed him, baptized him, and
sent him back to his master Philemon with a letter, inserted among St.
Paul’s epistles, which is universally acknowledged as canonical. This
letter had all the good success he could desire. Philemon not only
received Onesimus as a faithful servant, but rather as a brother and a
friend. A little time after, he sent him back to Rome to St. Paul, that
he might continue to be serviceable to him in his prison. And we see
that after this Onesimus was employed to carry such epistles as the
Apostle wrote at that time. He carried, for example, that which was
written to the Colossians, while St. Paul was yet in his bonds.
ONESIPHORUS is mentioned, 2 Tim. i, 16, 17, and highly commended by St.
Paul.
ONION, בצל, Num. xi, 5; a well known garden plant with a bulbous root.
Onions and garlics were highly esteemed in Egypt; and not without
reason, this country being admirably adapted to their culture. The
_allium cepa_, called by the Arabs _basal_, Hasselquist thinks one of
the species of onions for which the Israelites longed. He would infer
this from the quantities still used in Egypt, and their goodness.
Whoever has tasted onions in Egypt,” says he, “must allow that none can
be had better in any part of the universe. Here they are sweet; in other
countries they are nauseous and strong. Here they are soft; whereas in
the northern and other parts they are hard, and their coats so compact
that they are difficult of digestion. Hence they cannot in any place be
eaten with less prejudice, and more satisfaction, than in Egypt.” The
Egyptians are reproached with swearing by the leeks and onions of their
gardens. Juvenal ridicules some of these superstitious people who did
not dare to eat leeks, garlic, or onions, for fear of injuring their
gods:--
_Quis nescit, Volusi Bythynice, qualia demens
Ægyptus portenta colit?
Porrum et cepe nefas violare aut frangere morsu;
O sanctas gentes quibus hæc nascuntur in hortis Numina!_
_Sat._ xv.
“How Egypt, mad with superstition grown,
Makes gods of monsters, but too well is known.
’Tis mortal sin an onion to devour;
Each clove of garlic has a sacred power.
Religious nation, sure! and blest abodes,
Where ev’ry garden is o’errun with gods!”
So Lucian in his Jupiter, where he is giving an account of the different
deities worshipped by the several inhabitants of Egypt, says,
Πηλουσίωταις δὲ κρόμμυον, those of Pelusium worship the onion.” Hence
arises a question, how the Israelites durst venture to violate the
national worship, by eating those sacred plants. We may answer, in the
first place, that whatever might be the case of the Egyptians in later
ages, it is not probable that they were arrived at such a pitch of
superstition in the time of Moses; for we find no indications of this in
Herodotus, the most ancient of the Greek historians: secondly, the
writers here quoted appear to be mistaken in imagining these plants to
have been generally the objects of religious worship. The priests,
indeed, abstained from the use of them, and several other vegetables;
and this might give rise to the opinion of their being reverenced as
divinities: but the use of them was not prohibited to the people, as is
plain from the testimonies of ancient authors, particularly of Diodorus
Siculus.