3. If the first Man made himself, how came he to limit himself? If he gave himself being, why did he not give himself all the perfections and Ornaments of being? Nothing that made it self could sit down contented with a little, but would have had as much power to give it self that which is less, as to give it self being, when it was nothing. The excellencies it wanted had not been more difficult to gain than the other which it possessed as belonging to its nature. If the first man had been independent upon another, and had his perfection from himself, he might have acquired that perfection he wanted as well as have bestowed upon himself that perfection he had; and then there would have been no bounds set to him. He would have been Omniscient and Immutable. He might have given himself what he would; if he had had the setting his own bounds, he would have set none at all; For what should restrain him? No man now wants Ambition to be what he is not; and if the first man had not been determined by another, but had given himself being, he would not have remained in that determinate being, no more than a Toad would remain a Toad, if it had power to make it self a man, and that power it would have had, if it had given it self a being. Whatsoever gives it self being, would give it self all degrees of being, and so would have no imperfection, because every imperfection, is a want of some degree of being.* He that could give himself matter and life, might give himself every thing. The giving of life is an act of Omnipotence, and what is Omnipotent in one thing, may be in all. Besides, if the first man had made himself, he would have conveyed himself to all his posterity in the same manner, every man would have had all the perfections of the first man, as every Creature hath the perfections of the same kind, from whence it naturally Issues, all are desirous to communicate what they can to their posterity. Communicative goodness belongs to every nature. Every plant propagates its kind in the same perfection it hath itself; ⟨p. 19⟩and the nearer any thing comes to a rational nature, the greater affection it hath to that which descends from it; therefore this affection belongs to a rational nature much more. The first man therefore, if he had had power to give himself being, and consequently all perfection, he would have had as much power to convey it down to his posterity;
3. If the first Man made himself, how came he to limit himself? If he gave himself being, why did he not give himself all the perfections and Ornaments of being? Nothing that made it self could sit down contented with a little, but would have had as much power to give it self that which is less, as to give it self being, when it was nothing. The exellencies it wanted had not been more difficult to gain than the other which it possessed as belonging to its nature. If the first man had been independent upon another, and had his perfection from himself, he might have acquired that perfection he wanted as well as have bestowed upon himself that perfection he had; and then there would have been no bounds set to him. He would have been Omniscient and Immutable. He might have given himself what he would; if he had had the setting his own bounds, he would have set none at all; For what should restrain him? No man now wants Ambition to be what he is not; and if the first man had not been determined by another, but had given himself being, he would not have remained in that determinate being, no more than a Toad would remain a Toad, if it had power to make it self a man, and that power it would have had, if it had given it self a being. Whatsoever gives it self being, would give it self all degrees of being, and so would have no imperfection, because every imperfection, is a want of some degree of being.* He that could give himself matter and life, might give himself every thing. The giving of life is an act of Omnipotence, and what is Omnipotent in one thing, may be in all. Besides, if the first man had made himself, he would have conveyed himself to all his posterity in the same manner, every man would have had all the perfections of the first man, as every Creature hath the perfections of the same kind, from whence it naturally Issues, all are desirous to communicate what they can to their posterity. Communicative goodness belongs to every nature. Every plant propagates its kind in the same perfection it hath itself; ⟨p. 19⟩and the nearer any thing comes to a rational nature, the greater affection it hath to that which descends from it; therefore this affection belongs to a rational nature much more. The first man therefore, if he had had power to give himself being, and consequently all perfection, he would have had as much power to convey it down to his posterity;
- *Therefore the Heathens called God [Greek or Hebrew] the only Being. Other things were not beings, because they had not all degrees of being.Therefore the Heathens called God 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 the only Being. Other things were not beings, because they had not all degrees of being.
