Reformed Covenanter
Cancelled Commissioner
... We must observe that the right of God (as far as regards creatures) is either of dominion (which includes the right of possessing, disposing and using creatures, as a lord of proprietor, who is able to use and enjoy his own property at pleasure); or of government (which properly refers to rational creatures whom he governs as ruler and legislator; to whom belong legislation, judgment and execution, so as to have the power of enacting laws, of judging in accordance with them and of carrying out the sentence pronounced).
This right is normally distinguished into natural and positive: the former, according to which he must prescribe to rational creatures their duties (the opposites of which imply a contradiction because they are not founded simply on the divine will, but on the perfection, eminence, holiness and rectitude of the divine nature); the latter, however, according to which he freely and from his mere good-pleasure prescribes such duties as he either was able not to prescribe, or the opposites of which antecedently to the open intimation of the divine will, he might have willed and enjoined without any prejudice to his perfection and holiness, and without embarrassing contradiction.
V. Therefore, whatever things have so close a connection with the nature, perfection, eminence and holiness of God (that he cannot command their opposites without prejudice to his nature and which involve a contradiction as commanded) belong to that natural right. It is certain that God cannot deny himself, or do or command anything contrary to his own holiness and perfection. So God cannot command the hatred of himself, blasphemy and lying; or relieve man from the dependence and obedience due to him because this would be to say that God is not God (i.e., the first cause and absolute Lord). …
For more, see Francis Turretin on the monstrous absurdities of denying laws of natural right.
This right is normally distinguished into natural and positive: the former, according to which he must prescribe to rational creatures their duties (the opposites of which imply a contradiction because they are not founded simply on the divine will, but on the perfection, eminence, holiness and rectitude of the divine nature); the latter, however, according to which he freely and from his mere good-pleasure prescribes such duties as he either was able not to prescribe, or the opposites of which antecedently to the open intimation of the divine will, he might have willed and enjoined without any prejudice to his perfection and holiness, and without embarrassing contradiction.
V. Therefore, whatever things have so close a connection with the nature, perfection, eminence and holiness of God (that he cannot command their opposites without prejudice to his nature and which involve a contradiction as commanded) belong to that natural right. It is certain that God cannot deny himself, or do or command anything contrary to his own holiness and perfection. So God cannot command the hatred of himself, blasphemy and lying; or relieve man from the dependence and obedience due to him because this would be to say that God is not God (i.e., the first cause and absolute Lord). …
For more, see Francis Turretin on the monstrous absurdities of denying laws of natural right.
