their Authority I have but briefly toucht them As to my Method having first considered his Preface in the next place I have considered his Apology 3. I have made some general Reflections on the Book and lastly I have discovered what Socinian Doctrines are covertly delivered in each Chapter for I find his Oracles like those of old to carry a doubtful or double Sence to be as a Reserve and Refuge that being driven from the one he might flye to the other and indeed it is more difficult to discover and draw him forth from those Ambushes wherein he lies in wait to deceive than to baffle his greatest Strength in a plain and open Field the first is my chief endeavour though I have not on occasion declined the other what I have attempted was not in confidence of my own Abilities having never been exercised in this spiny Controversie and being now by Age Miles emeritus but only to excite and provoke others to contend for the common Salvation in the Faith once delivered to the Saints and whatever the success be I hope I shall obtain the Pardon of all good Men seeing I have according to my power cast in my Mite into the Church's Treasury AN ANSWER To a Late TREATISE ENTITULED The Naked Gospel THE Author of the Naked Gospel calls himself a true Son of the Church of England now the Doctrine of the Church of England is declared in her Liturgy her Articles and Homilies in her Liturgy she hath inserted the Three Creeds viz. that called the Apostles the Nicene and the Athanasian these two last our Author would have to be restrained to the Letter of the former because that only is used in the Offices for Administration of Baptism and Visitation of the Sick but if he be a true Son of the Church he hath or should ex animo have given his Assent and Consent to all the Doctrines avowed by the Church However it is well that the Doctor seems to approve of the Apostles Creed because I find the Socinians deny the Godhead of the Son and Holy Ghost being it is not expresly affirmed in that Creed yet certainly they had not been made Objects of our Faith if they were not of the Godhead This Creed is but a larger Profession of our Christian Faith which we made at our Baptism where we dedicate ourselves to the Service of that one God who is Father Son and Holy Ghost The Right Reverend Bishop of Chester hath sufficiently proved the Deity of the Son and Holy Ghost in his learned Exposition of that Creed Nor have we ever heard of any of the Fathers that have interpreted it otherwise than as the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds have done yet I have been credibly informed that a Doctor who stiles himself of the Church of England gravely declared That this Creed also might be reformed But in the Church of England we find the reiterated Acknowledgment of the Blessed Trinity Father Son and Holy Ghost so in the Doxology in the Form used in Baptism and in the Litany O Holy Blessed and Glorious Trinity Three Persons and One God c And in that very ancient Hymn after the Communion it is said of our Saviour Thou only art Holy thou only art the Lord thou only O Christ with the Holy Ghost art most high in the Glory of God the Father In the Te Deum Thou art the King of Glory O Christ thou art the Everlasting Son of the Father In the first Article concerning the Trinity the Church of England says That in the Unity of the Divine Nature there are three Persons of the same Essence Power and Eternity Father Son and Holy Ghost In the Homely for Whitsunday she says The Holy Ghost is a Spiritual and Divine Substance the third Person in the Deity distinct from the Father and the Son Which thing may most easily be proved by most plain Testimonies of God's Holy Word Canon 〈◊〉 1640. And in the Canons it is forbidden to read Socinian Books And in the former Book of Canons we are forbid to teach any thing but what is agreeable to the Doctrine of the Old and New Testament and what the ancient Fathers and Bishops have collected out of them It was therefore a Protestatio contra factum to stile himself a true Son c. and under that Title to publish to the World what is so opposite to her Doctrine May not the Church complain of such Sons in the words of the Prophet Isaiah c. 1. I have nourished and brought up children and they have rebelled against me But God be thanked the Church of England doth not want more dutiful Sons such as on all occasions are ready and able to vindicate her Doctrines and assert her Discipline That famous University whereof the Author was a Member seasonably manifested her Detestation of his Heretical Opinions by condemning them to the Flames that there might not be a Spark left to kindle such dangerous Fires in the Church which Decree for the Reader 's satisfaction is here inserted The Judgment and Decree of the Vniversity of Oxford delivered in a Convocation held August 19th 1690. against some Impious and Heretical Propositions transcribed and quoted out of an Infamous Libel of late perfidiously printed within the said Vniversity and published with this Title The Naked Gospel which do Impugne and Assault the principal Mysteries of our Faith alway retained and preserved in the Catholick Church and especially in the Church of England IMPRIMATUR Jonathan Edwards Vice-Can Oxon. WHereas there is lately published an Infamous Libel entituled The Naked Gospel which under that specious Title destroys the Foundation of the Primitive Faith once delivered to the Saints assaults the chief Mysteries of our Religion and not only denies but reproacheth him that bought us the Lord Jesus Christ who is God blessed for ever And whereas it appears that this Libel deserving to be condemned to eternal Flames hath been by an unheard of Persideousness printed and published within this University therefore for the Honour of the Holy and Individual Trinity for Preservation of the Catholick Doctrine in the Church and moreover for the Defence as much as in us lieth of the Reputation and Esteem of this University which with all care we desire to preserve intire and inviolable We the Vice-Chancellor Doctors Proctors the Regent and Non-Regent Masters convocated in a full Senate of Convocation on the 19th of August 1690 in manner and place accustomed certain Propositions in the said Libel contained which we have caused to be transcribed and hereafter recited being first Read have by our Common Suffrages and the Unanimous Consent and Assent of Us all Decreed in manner following I. We do Condemn all and every of these Propositions and others to them belonging which for Brevity's sake are pretermitted as False Impious and Contumelious to the Christian Religion and especially to the Church of England And we Decree and Declare most of them to be Heretical as contrary
itself but the Divine Nature assuming did confer And thus you have as time gave leave in one View the chief Points of this large and intricate Controversie To God the Father to the Son God and Man and to the Holy Ghost be all Honour Praise and Glory now and for ever Amen The CONCLUSION St. Hilary having vindicated the Doctrine of the Trinity l. 6. n. 2. says Lord I believed thy words if I am deceived Moses David Solomon and thy Apostles have deceived me if it be a Fault to believe these pardon me Almighty God for in this belief I can die deny it I cannot We have been baptized in this Faith we have offered up all our Prayers in this Faith and payed all our Thanksgivings to the Blessed Trinity and therefore we cannot dye comfortably in any other And with much more confidence may the Devout Trinitarian say as St. Heirome expresseth it Ecce Crucifixus meus Deus Behold my God which was crucified for me when he sees him coming in Judgment than the Arian or Socinian who proudly deny his Godhead and Satisfaction who may too late complain in the words of St. Augustine in his Confession l. 5. c. 9. I was going towards Hell laden with all my Sins while I believed not that Christ had satisfied for them FINIS ANIMADVERSIONS ON The Naked Gospel As now Published By ARTHVR BVRY D. D. THat this Book is now first published by the Doctor whose Name is prefixed cannot in Justice be denied by them that have read the former for it is quite another Book and it may be true though either one or the other if not both of the former Editions of the Naked Gospel were published by the same Author because they are not the same Books yet the one which he having caused to be printed and dispersed among his Friends in several parts of the Nation and the other wherein he made several Alterations may be affirmed to be published by the same hand the truth whereof needs no farther enquiry after the Oxford Animadversions That this present Copy is another Book appears by its divers Alterations and Additions which are made whether for the better or the worse will appear to every judicious Reader and that there needs no other or severer Reflections on it than what the Author himself hath made He seems so to tumble in the Net which he hath woven as to be more intangled by striving to get out In his Preface to the Reader he confesseth He had not patience to be silent at such a time when the suppression of such Opinions as he hath published would have been greatly advantagious both to Truth and Peace And whether it would not have been a great degree of sauciness by a point blanck Address of such a Present as the Naked Gospel to direct the Venerable Body of the Convocation of the Clergy in what they had to do is put beyond doubt by the Oxford Convocation I cannot find as he says that it was intended that the Convocation of the Clergy was called to make Alterations in Matters of Faith nor that we are to weigh at the same Beam a Rite in the one and a Doctrine in the other Seale The Convocation I believe would have given up all their Rites and Ceremonies rather than the Doctrines of the Trinity and Incarnation which the Doctor on pretence of Charity would have them to abandon He confesseth That his Book was penned with less caution than was necessary for what was to be exposed to every vulgar eye But how could he imagine that so many learned and good Men would be pleased with his questioning or denying the truth and belief of such Doctrines as they themselves believe to be necessary to Salvation He might therefore very well have spared his unbecoming Reflections on that Body That the Doctor was suspected to disbelieve the Doctrine of the Trinity and Incarnation was not because he did not expresly declare his Opinion concerning them which a true Son of the Church of England and one that had been long before suspected as Heterodox writing on that subject was highly concern'd to do but because he hath slily and frequently insinuated divers Arguments against them and his daubing with untempered Mortar in his two new Chapters of the Trinity and Incarnation will render the matter more obscure and defaced As for those words in the conclusion which he conceives some are most offended with wherein he cannot submit to the least compliance Let him enjoy his own Sentiments only I cannot perswade my self that more than his an hundred years experience calls on us to tack about and steer a contrary course to what our Pilots in the greatest part of that time have steered As the number of those Men who are as sick of King William as they were lately of King James is so small that they may be all written in a Ring If he intends as the current of his Discourse would carry it such as were in the late Convocation all which had testified by solemn Oaths and divers of them by their learned Arguments and Exhortations their cheerful Obedience to their present Majesties whom God preserve as the most hopeful Defenders of our established Religion so I heartily pray there may not be one such Prevaricator left among us though even among the Twelve Disciples of our Saviour there was a Judas and I hope there is not one of a thousand among our Clergy that is so ill as the Doctor would represent them such I mean as he says would wish for the cruel French to deliver them from the present Government or that is so unreasonably jealous as to think that his present Majesty designs to make this Church not unlike to that in which himself was educated for which his vile suggestion contrary to His Majesties most gracious Assurances the Doctor is concern'd to beg His Majesty's Pardon and I pray God to pardon him also It is a most invidious and malicious Quere which he adds Which of the two are the truer Church of England-men those who dread the return of King James with his Jesuits or those who wish and labour for it Those who are so stiff as rather to hazard the whole than to part with the least circumstance And cover their stiffness to their own humours and interests with the specious pretence of zeal for the Church To which I answer That as I do not know so if I did know any person so ill affected I should abhor them as the Pests of the Nation To those of the Doctor I shall oppose these Queries Which are the truer Church of England men those who dread the growth and success of the Arian and Socinian Heresies or those who adhere to the established Doctrine of the Trinity and Incarnation of our blessed Saviour Those who would erect a Natural Religion a Jewish or Turkish Faith on the Ruines of that which is truly Christian Ancient and Catholick or those who live in the Communion
more c. 11. speaking of the Divine and Humane Nature of Christ he says That as Nature teacheth that he that is born of Man is Man so it teacheth that he that is born of God is God Theognostus of Alexandria as Athanasius quotes him taught the same Doctrine That the Son was begotten of the Substance of the Father as is Beams from the Sun and as the Sun is not lessened by the effusion of its Beams so neither is the Substance of the Father diminished by begetting the Son the Image of himself Dionisius Romanus wrote an Epistle against the Sabellians wherein he says It is necessary that the Word of God be united to the God of all and that the holy Spirit remains in God and so the holy Trinity doth unite in One as in a certain Head viz. the Omnipotent God of the Universe And he confutes those who hold the Son of God to be made as other Creatures as being contrary to the Scripture Lastly That the Trinity is not to be divided into three Gods nor the Dignity of it to be lessened by the name of a Creature but we are to believe in God the Father Almighty and in Jesus Christ his Son and in the Holy Spirit And that the Son is united to the Father he proves from the words of our Saviour I and the Father are one for thus the Divine Trinity and the preaching of that Holy Monarchy is preserved Dionisius of Alexandria whom the Arians boasted to be of their Party wrote against them in his own defence an Epistle which he calls a Resutation wherein he declares That he never was of the Opinion of Arius but that he alway thought our Lord to be the Word and Wisdom undivided from the Father For saith he under the name of the Father I imply that he hath a Son and when I mention the Son I understand also that he hath a Father and so I joyn them together for from whom should the Son come but from the Father But the Arians will not understand that the Son cannot be separated from the Father the names implying a communion between them and the Holy Ghost is in both and cannot be separated from him that sends him How then can you suspect me who use those Names to have thought that they may be divided or separated wherefore you accuse me falsly as if I had denied that Christ is Consubstantial with God Thus I said that the Plant proceeds from the Seed or Root and is another thing from that from whence it proceeds yet is it of the same nature with that whence it proceeds the River which flows from the Fountain hath another name for we do not call the River the Fountain nor the Fountain the River yet both do exist and the Fountain is as a Father but the River is Water flowing from the Fountain Greg. Thaumaturgus Bishop of Neocesaria hath left us this Confession of his Faith recorded by Eusebius Eccl. Hist l. 7. c. 28. There is one God the Father of the Living Word the Subsisting Wisdom the Eternal Power and Character the perfect Father of him that is perfect the Father of the only Begotten There is one Lord alone from him that is alone God of God the Character and Image of the Deity the efficacious Word the Wisdom comprehending the constitution of all things and the effective Power of all things the true Son of the true Father invisible of him that is invisible incorruptible from him that is incorruptible immortal and eternal And there is one Holy Spirit that hath its existence of God who by the Son hath appeared unto Men the perfect Image of the perfect Son the Life and Cause of the Living the Holy Fountain Sanctity and Giver of Sanctification in whom God the Father is manifest who is above all and in all and God the Son which is in all The perfect Trinity which is not divided nor separated in Glory Eternity Kingdom and Power so that there is nothing in the Trinity that is created or servile nothing added or superinducted which was not before The Son was never wanting to the Father nor the Spirit to the Son but the Trinity alway remained the same immutable and invariable In the Life-time of this Greg. Thaumaturgus a Synod of Bishops met at Antioch to Censure the Heresie of Paulus Samosatenus who denied the Deity of Christ These Bishops denounced an Anathema against him having first admonished him of his Heresie and in that Epistle they say That they declare the Faith which they received from the beginning and alway held in the Catholick Church from the Apostles to that day even from those that had seen with their eyes and were made Ministers of the Word and which was preached in the Law and Prophets and in the New Testament And the Faith concerning Christ they say is this That he is the Word the Wisdom and Power of God that was before all Ages God the Son of God in substance and subsistance Pierius a Presbyter of Alexandria was of the same Opinion as Photius relates Cod. 119. That the Father and the Son were of one Substance and Equality St. Lucian a Presbyter of Antioch published the same Faith which is to be seen in Socrates l. 2. c. 10. We believe in one God the Father Almighty Maker of all things and in one Lord Jesus Christ his only begotten Son by whom all things were made begotten of the Father before all Ages God of God Whole of Whole Sole of Sole Perfect of Perfect King of King Lord of Lord the Living Word Wisdom Life the true Light Way and Truth the Resurrection Pastor and Gate not obnoxious to Change or Alteration every way the express Image of the Father's Deity Substance Power Counsel and Glory the first Begotten of every Creature who was with God in the beginning God the Word as is said in the Scripture who in the last times came down from Heaven and was born of a Virgin according to the Scripture and in the Holy Ghost which is given to Believers to comfort sanctifie and consummate them as our Lord Christ commanded his Disciples go teach all Nations baptizing them in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost who are three in Person but agree in One. Arnobius gives the like Testimony That Christ without any Instrument Help or Rule but by the power of his own Nature made all things and as it was worthy of God nothing that was hurtful but all beneficial and this is the property of the true God to deny his bounty to none Lastly Lactantius whom the Arians claim to be of their Opinion says thus When we say God the Father and God the Son we do not speak of what is diverse or separated because neither the Father can be so called without the Son nor the Son be begotten without the Father seeing therefore the Father makes the Son and the Son makes him a Father there is in both one Mind one Spirit and
the promise of Eternal Life to the Believer and therefore he says p. 42. Col. 2. Whoever ascribes it to any other Doctrine however true however revealed makes himself equal to Christ in Authority and superiour in Faithfulness If then that Scripture of our Saviour This is life eternal to know thee the only true God and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent Joh. 20.31 And 1 Joh. 5.20 We are in him that is true even his Son Jesus Christ this is the true God and eternal life 1 Joh. 5.20 St. Augustine reads the Text thus To know thee and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent to be the only true God and so doth St. Chrysostom Now if I say Eternal Life be appropriate to this knowledge that Christ is the true God then it is a fundamental Article of Faith P. 43. There can be no need of an Interpreter of Scripture or Determiner of Doubts concerning Matters of Faith saith the Doctor How then comes it to pass that there are so many Controversies concerning Matters of Faith and that each Party denies Salvation to their Adversaries that differ from them His appeal to natural Faith will never be able to determine the Controversies that are yet undecided concerning such Fundamental Doctrines as are necessary to Salvation Socinus de Adoratione Christi says Bonas rationes rectas ex verbo dei consecutiones in sacris disputationibus aspernare nec admittere velle hominis est suae causae parum fidentis He says 3. We need not ought not to be uncharitable to any who differ from us in other Doctrines to the belief whereof the Promise is not appropriate But is Eternal Life any where promised to those that believe that Jesus Christ was only a Creature and a meer Man Can we hope for Salvation without satisfaction to the Divine Justice or can we make satisfaction Is it not good Divinity to say there is no Salvation but in the Name and through the Merits of Jesus Christ who died for our Sins and rose again for our Justification I have shewn you how the Doctor would interpret this latter Scripture Rom. 4. ult Commodius interpretationis as they call them there but if their little Criticisms and false Punctations should be admitted the Scriptures would indeed be made as he says A Nose of Wax witness their interpretation of John 8.58 Before Abraham was I am i. e. say they Before Abraham was made the Father of the Faithful and of many Nations that were converted by the preaching of the Gospel I am viz. the Light of the World So Eniedinus renders the Confession of St. Thomas as an Exclamation directed to God the Father O my Lord and my God as saith he we are wont to do when we behold any strange sight And Christ's words to the Thief Luke 23.43 are thus pointed I say unto thee this day Thou shalt be with me in Paradise viz. When I shall come to Judgement Thus Francis David on the words of St. Stephen Act. 7.59 makes this Comment O God the Father who art the Lord of Jesus receive my Soul In this ch p. 44. c. 2. the Doctor says that the Remission which the prophets promised reached only to temporal punishments but that by Christ to eternal life How then can a natural Faith secure us of Life eternal when that Faith though greatly improved by the Prophets could not do it Ch. 11. in this Chapter he revives and pleads for another Socinian Tenet for the Resurrection not of the same but another Body He propounds the Question thus Whether any Promise doth necessarily import a restitution of the same numerical Matter and undertakes to prove That it is more honourable to God and more serviceable to the Design of the Gospel to believe the contrary But First This is contrary to the Grammatical Signification of the Word and to the Scripture by him quoted viz. That God gives to every seed his own Body And Ruffinus mentions the word Hujus the Resurrection of this Body which though it shall have a kind of Transfiguration by substraction of the old earthly Qualities and the addition of such as are new and heavenly yet the subject shall continue the same which St. Paul means 1 Cor. 15.53 This corruptible shall put on incorruption that as we have born the image of the earthly we may bear the image of the heavenly and as Job says With these eyes see God Job 19.25 And the Justice of God requires this that as the Faithful have born the Marks of the Lord Jesus Christ in their Bodies wherein they were Partakers of the Sufferings of Christ and were consecrated to him as the Temples of the Holy Ghost may partake of the Reward and Crown of Glory in the same Bodies What he says of our being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 proves as well that we shall have no Bodies as that we shall not have the same The change that shall be made in our vile Bodies doth not alter the form of our Bodies no more than it doth the Body of Christ which though it be now a glorious Body yet is still the same numerical Body and to call that a Load of Carion which the Apostle calls the Temple of the Holy Ghost is not becoming a Christian Doctor As we believe therefore that the same Body our Saviour which suffered is now glorified and that the same Bodies that remain to the last day shall be taken up to meet the Lord in the Air shall be the same Bodies that shall be ever with the Lord. And as we believe that Christ arose from the Grave in the same Body wherein he died so we believe that he carried the same into the heavenly Sanctuary and shall come at last in the same Body to judge both the Quick and Dead that all Eyes may look on their Crucified Saviour and unless it shall be the same Body it cannot properly be called a Resurrection And no doubt but our Resurrection shall be conform with that of Christ's as the Apostle intimates Rom. 8.11 He that raised up Jesus from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies To this purpose St. Augustine Epl. 57. That as Christ glorified his own Body but destroyed not its nature so will he give Glory to our Bodies but not take away the nature of them Nor indeed do other qualities any more alter the nature of our Bodies than of our Souls which for substance shall be the same But lastly if this Enquiry be a matter of Curiosity not of Faith why doth he oppose the Doctrine so long received in the Church to bring in a Socinian Tenet And now p. 50. c. 1. he gives us the Socinian Scheme of the Naked Gospel such as Socinus Crellius Sclichtingius Smalcius and the whole Tribe have fancied and published to the World before him That its business was to reduce the Jews from their Bondage under the Law of Moses and the Gentiles from their worse bondage under the Worship of Devils to the
them that believed not Compare Psal 45. v. 6 7. with Heb. 1.8 Thy throne O God is for ever and ever the scepter of thy kingdom is a right scepter He whose Throne is for ever and ever is God but Christ's Throne is for ever and ever therefore he is God Both these Propositions are express Scripture The next Scripture shall be that of Isai 7.14 A Virgin shall conceive and bring forth a son and his name shall be called Emanuel compared with Mat. 1.23 All this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken viz. Isai 7.14 by the Prophet saying Behold a Virgin shall conceive and bring forth a son and thou shalt call his name Emanuel There is an Objection cast in our way which must be removed before we proceed Object It is said Matth. 1.21 The Angel of the Lord which appeard to Joseph told him that he should call his name Jesus How then was this of the Prophet fulfilled They shall call his name Emanuel Ans That Names are of two sorts some for distinction of Persons as proper Names others serve for Description of the Nature or Offices of a Person in the first respect he is called Jesus a Saviour there being no other Saviour but he for there is no other name given to man whereby he may be saved The other of Emanuel describes his Nature what he should be viz. God with us God manifested in the flesh So the same Prophet Isai 9.6 His name shall be called Wonderful Counsellor c. And Jer. 23.6 This is his name whereby he shall be called The Lord our Righteousness And Luke 1.35 That which is born of thee shall be called the Son of God And it is observed that both the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Old Testament and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the New do signify to be as well as to be called Justin Martyr Tertullian and other Ancients solved this Objection made by the Jews Venit Emanuel quia venit quod Emanuel significat The Emanuel is come because he is come who was signified by that name God with us not only to reconcile us to God but to be God Incarnate The Argument then is this Emanuel is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God in the Divine Essence Christ is Emanuel therefore he is God in the Divine Essence That the word God is to be understood of the most High God the Socinians grant But Crellius objects that the word est should be added and so the meaning is God is with us But when St. Matthew expounds the name without that Addition there is great Reason to reject it and if that had been the meaning of the Holy Ghost in the name as given by the Prophet St. Matthew would not have omitted it it being of great concern to the Glory of God and the Instruction of the Church The meaning of the Name therefore is not God is with us i. e. as says Crellius to help and assist us but Christ is God with us for the name Emanuel being put into English and applyed unto Christ it will appear whether St. Matthew or Crellius gives the best Interpretation This is St. Matthew's sence Christ is God with us i. e. God and Man And this is Crellius his Nonsence Christ God with Man is Is not this to add to and alter the sence of the Scripture Malach. 3.1 compared with Matth. 11.10 Behold I send my Messenger and he shall prepare the way before me and the Lord whom ye seek shall suddenly come to his temple This is he saith St. Matthew of whom it is written Behold I send my Messenger before thy face c. It is agreed that John the Baptist was this Messenger spoken of and the Argument is this He before whom John Baptist was to be sent to prepare his way is the God of Israel but Christ is he before whom John Baptist was to be sent c. therefore Christ is the God of Israel The first Proposition is proved by Malachy where he that speaks is called the God of Israel and Lord of Hosts This Socinus grants The second Proposition is proved by St. Matthew applying it to Christ This is he of whom it is written c. The Sum of what is objected to this Argument is That the Text in Malachy is corrupted and instead of reading He shall prepare the way before me it should be read He shall prepare the way before thee But then how comes it to pass that no one Copy of that of Malachy or this in St. Matthew reads otherwise than we do He will not say they are all corrupted and we say none are corrupted But they ask How is it that what Malachy reads in the first Person He shall prepare the way before me Christ renders in the second Person He shall prepare the way before thee Ans This Objection will improve our Argument for when Malachy says He shall prepare the way before me which is spoken of the God of Israel and our Saviour renders it He shall prepare the way before thee and applys it to himself this proves that Christ was that God of Israel who spake in Malachy and so proves the Identity of the Essence of God the Father and the Son Moreover by comparing this place of Malachy with the Interpretation which our Saviour gives of it in St. Matthew we infer from Malachy the Unity of the Essence of the God of Israel and Christ and from that in Matthew we learn a distinction of Persons which had not been so intelligible if Christ had not changed the first Person or the word my into the second Person or the word thy in St. Matth. Deut. 6.13 compared with Matth. 4.10 the words are the same Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve The Argument is this He that is to be worshipped and served with Divine Worship is the God of Israel Christ is to be worshipped and served with Divine Worship therefore Christ is the God of Israel The first Proposition is express Scripture the second is granted by the Socinians therefore the Conclusion is undeniable Crellius when he would prove that Christ is not the true God from Joh. 20. This is life eternal to know thee only the â—rue God says That the word only excludes all others from being the true God Schichtingius is of another mind and says That this particle only when it is spoken of God doth not exclude those that depend on God in the thing spoken of Now if Crellius speaks the truth then Christ is not to be worshipped because the word only excludes him If Schichtingius speaks the truth then Christ may be the true God because the word only doth not exclude him Volkelius says That seeing Christ is subordinate to God in worshipping of Christ we worship God who hath given him so great Power and Dignity Ans This is against the Command that excludes all others for if Christ be a Man wholly distinguished