Chapter and which I hope to demonstrate by the help of other places referring to it And in order thereunto I shall note who the Prophet saw upon his Throne high and lifted up whose Train filled the Temple And this was Jehovah an incommunicable Name of God Psal 83.19 the Lord of Hosts who filleth the whole Earth with his Glory but this was not only the Father but also the Son and the Holy Ghost 1st That it was the Father needs no proof because it is not denied but confessed by our Adversaries in opposition to the other two Divine Persons 2dly That this Vision is applied to the Son we have the Words of the Apostle for it John 12.41 who speaking of Christ from verse 37 to 40. and citing the Prophet Isaiah's Message when he saw this Vision saith These things said Isaias when he saw his Glory and spake of him viz. of Christ whom John was speaking of 3dly This Scripture is also applied to the Holy Ghost in Acts 28.25 26. as hath been said already and will be defended in its proper place So that if we will credit the Holy Apostles who were doubtiess the best Expounders and Appliers of dark Prophecies and have unfolded the Mystery of the Holy Trinity which lay hid in the Words Holy Holy Holy and couched in the Plurality of Persons hinted to us in these Words Who shall go for us ver 8. Then surely we must acknowledg that seeing the Prophets Jehovah and the Apostles Son and Holy Spirit are one and the same that these two are Divine Subsistencies as well as the Father subsisting in the supream Nature of God Thirdly If we couple together John 10.30 and 2 Cor. 3.17 I and my Father are one The Lord is that Spirit we may see that the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit are but one God Fourthly John gives so clear a Testimony to the Unity of the Holy Trinity that I know not how it can be denied 1 John 5.7 For there are three that bear Record in Heaven the Father the Word and the Holy Ghost and these three are one in Essence as was shewed before CHAP. VII Containeth some Explications of the Holy Trinunity FIrst Of the essential Being of God God is one single infinite eternal immense perfect spiritual Being no Compound for Compounds must be either finite or infinite not of Finites for Finites are imperfect temporal and mensurable and so cannot make one infinite perfect Being not of Infinites for more than one infinite Being cannot subsist for one infinite Immensity cannot admit of another infinite Immensity nor is infinite Perfection exclusive but comprehensive of all Perfection Hence it is that we must not imagine God to have any shape because an Infinite Being cannot be any ways limited or subscribed Deut. 4.12 15. John 4.24 Deut. 33.27 Psal 147.5 Psal 90.2 Secondly Of a Divine Person Mr. Chynel in his Divine Trinunity Page 96. describes a Divine Person A Divine Person is a spiritual and infinite Subsistent related indeed to these other uncreated Persons which subsist in the same Divine Nature with it but distinguished from those co-essential Persons by its peculiar manner of Subsistence Order of subsisting singular Relation and incommunicable Property Thirdly Of the Divine Person of the Father The Divine Person of the Father is unbegotten and subsists of himself in the Divine Essence and hath the Divine Nature of none Fourthly Of the Divine Person of the Son The Divine Person of the Son is naturally and necessarily begotten of the Father by eternal Generation for he is Eternal as hath been shewed and is of the Father John 5.26 by eternal Generation and he subsists in the unbegotten Nature of God for the Father did not beget the Divine Nature of the Son but the Son is begotten in the Divine Nature Fifthly Of the Divine Person of the Spirit The Divine Person of the Spirit hath his Subsistence naturally and necessarily both from the Father and the Son by eternal Spiration or Emanation Job 33.4 and therefore the Holy Ghost is called the Spirit of Christ who breathed on his Disciples and bid them receive the Holy Ghost to shew that the Spirit was breathed forth by him as well as from the Father John 20.22 John 15.26 1 Pet. 1.11 2 Pet. 1.21 not from the Father alone or the Son alone for then he might be said to be the Son of the Father or of the Son but by the Father and the Son and not being separated or divided from either he subsists in the same Nature and is co-essential with them both Sixthly Of the Unity of the Holy Trinity The Divine Nature is common to all three Subsistencies and the whole Divine Nature is the Substance of every Person which distinctly subsists in it and all its essential Properties pertain unto each of them and the Divine Nature because it is infinite in Perfection it contains all relative as well as absolute Perfections Seventhly Of the Distinction between the Divine Nature and the Persons I shall cite Mr. Chynel in his Divine Trinunity Page 105 c. First The Father Son and Holy Ghost do all three really positively truly subsist in the Divine Essence and yet these three Subsistencies and the Divine Essence do not make four no nor two things really distinct even as Entity Truth Goodness and Unity do not make four things really distinct as you heard but now but are one real thing and no more Secondly Ens is not compounded of Entity and its three Affections nor is God compounded of the Godhead and three Subsistencies nor is any one Person compounded of the Divine Nature and Subsistence Thirdly As Truth is not Goodness nor Goodness Truth nor either of them Unity and yet all three are Entity So the Father is not the Son nor is the Son the Father nor is either of them the Holy Ghost and yet all three are God for they are all three but one God subsisting with all absolute and relative Perfection as hath been shewed Fourthly Every one of the three Affections of Ens doth connote Entity every one of the three Subsistencies doth connote the Godhead the Divine Nature as hath been proved at large Fifthly Not any one of the three Affections of Ens doth nor do all three together superadd a new Entity not any one of the three Subsistencies doth nor do all three together superadd a new Deity a new Divine Nature or Godhead for Ens is one Ens est trinum non triplex trinum unum Ens trin-unum Deus est trinus non triplex trinus unus Deus trinunus this instance doth in some Measure resemble the Mystery of the Trinunity Sixthly No Affection of Ens can be really separated from Ens nor can one of the Divine Persons be separated from the Divine Nature or the Divine Nature from any one of the Divine Persons or any one of the Persons from either of the other two Seventhly All the Affections of Ens are
Verses says My Father which gave them me is greater than all and none is able to pluck them out of my Father's Hand Here Christ asserteth the greatness of his Father's Power that he was greater than All but yet saith I and my Father are One as if Christ should say As my Father is greater than all So also I am greater than all and his being One in Power shews him to be One in Nature with him And thus the Jews understood our Lord when they took up Stones to stone him ver 31. that he being a Man made himself God v. 34 35 36. But Christ reproves their rashness in charging him with Blasphemy looking on it as great Indignity not to allow him any Supremacy above others they called Gods in that they said of him whom the Father had sanctified Thou blasphemest because he said I am the Son of God I question not but ' the Jews would have born it well enough though he should have assumed the Name of God so it were in the Sense of their Law like other Men ver 34 35. or of a Son of God as they themselves being Children of Abraham claimed God to be their Father But their great quarrel with Christ was that he so affirmed Himself to be the Son of God as one and the same with the Father equal to him in Power and therefore he is of the same Nature Sixth Scripture is 1 John 5.20 And we know that the Son of God is come and hath given us an Vnderstanding that we may know him that is True And we are in him that is True even in his Son Jesus Christ This is the true God and eternal Life What can be more plain to prove that the Son of God is the true God than to have it so asserted of him and can he be the true God and not so by Nature the very God and but a Creature If so we must then acknowledg two Gods the One the true God the Creator the other the true God a Creature which is repugnant to the Scripture for there is none other God but One for though there be that are called Gods whether in Heaven or in Earth as there be Gods many and Lords many But to us there is but one God as before was shewed 1 Cor. 8.4 5 6. And Gal. 4.8 there is an Exclusion of all from Divine Worship that are not God by Nature and therefore if our Lord Jesus Christ be the true God he must then be of the One true Natural Godhead Seventh Scripture is Coloss 2.9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead Bodily First To imagine from this or any other Scripture that the Humane Nature of Christ comprehends the Deity is to conceive in our Minds that of God which is inconsistent with his Immensity and Infinity of Nature Or Secondly To say that the three Divine Persons in the Godhead do personally and equally after the same manner tabernacle in the Humane Nature of Christ makes it common to all the three Subsistencies so that the Father and the Holy Spirit as well as the Son would be incarnate But this is contrary to the written Word of God which declares to us the Son of God who is the brightness of his Glory and the express Image of his Person that laid the Foundation of the Earth c. That He it is that took Flesh upon him Heb. 1.1 2 3 8 10. and ch 2.14 16. And all that Christ did by way of Atonement for us and Reconciliation of God to us is ascribed to him as the Person of the Son of God only and not as the Father or the Holy Ghost though in the Unity of Nature they cannot be excluded But Thirdly If we are neither to understand this Scripture as if the Godhead were comprehended in Christ's humane Nature nor that the three Divine Persons were equally incarnate what then can be further proposed as the meaning of it But that the Person of the Son or the Divine Nature of Christ subsisting in the one whole Nature of God hath all the fulness of that Nature dwelling in him for there is no Division of the whole Nature of God with all its Essential Properties and Perfections from the Divine Persons for then neither the Nature nor the Persons could be Infinite or Immensurable but limited and subscribed and therefore there is a necessity that every Divine Person should have the whole Divine Nature with all the Essential Attributes and Perfections of it whether it be Omnipotency Omnipresency Omnisciency Immensity Eternity Goodness c. the fulness of all is in every Divine Person they differ not in Nature but in personal Properties as the Father is not begotten like the Son neither did the Son beget like the Father nor also did either of them proceed like the Holy Spirit and so also in Office they differ the one from the other but in Nature they are the same and have all the same Essential Properties and Perfections as was said before So then all the fulness of the Godhead dwells bodily or substantially in the Person of the Son that is he hath the whole Spiritual Substance or Essence of the Divine Nature and by his hypostatical Union with the Humane Nature the fulness of the Godhead may be said also to dwell Bodily in the Humane Nature of Christ So then if all the Attributes and Perfections of the Nature of God in their fulness dwell in our Lord Jesus Christ it is a sufficient and undeniable Evidence of his Deity But some may say that the Godhead dwells in Christ after the same manner it dwells in us Answer Tho it 's said that we are the Temple of the Living God and of the Holy Ghost that dwelleth in us and that Jesus Christ is also in us 1 Cor. 6.19 2 Cor. 6.16 Joh. 17.23 Rom. 8.9 10. Yet what is this to that Fulness which dwels in him We indeed have Communion with the Father and the Son through the Spirit and are made partakers of the Divine Nature Eph. 2.22 2 Pet. 1.4 but not after the same manner as Christ is For the Holy Spirit hath his Union with us by way of Fellowship with our Spirits and unites himself in Communion with us Phil. 2.1 2 Cor. 13.14 1 Cor. 2.12 1 Joh. 2.20 whereby we are guided by the teachings of him into all Truth Joh. 16.13 Gal. 5.18 But we have not our existence in the Spirit as the Human Nature of Christ in the Divine Person of the Son for we are distinct human Persons before and after we are regenerated But Christ did not exist but by Conception in the Divine Nature in which he had his Being and thereby a relation by virtue of the Hypostatical Union of the Son of God with his Human Nature to all the Attributes and Perfections of the Divine Nature And tho it 's said that God the Father and Christ and the Holy Spirit dwelleth in us yet I cannot find it was
distinguished but none divided all the three Subsistencies are distinguished but they cannot be divided Eighthly Truth and Goodness which are two of the Affections of Ens are distinguished by their peculiar and several Relations Truth hath Relation to the Understanding and Goodness to the Will The Father Son and Holy Ghost are known to be distinguished by their several and peculiar Relations and if it be not unreasonable to say that there is in Entity three Affections and two Relations in Ente simplissimo without any Composition in or Multiplication of the Entity why should it seem unreasonable or at least why should it seem incredible that there are three Subsistencies and several Relations in the Godhead without any Composition in or Multiplication of the Godhead Ninthly One Affection nay all the Affections in abstracto do but inadequately represent Ens unless you take notice of the Entity it self as well as the three Affections One single Subsistence nay all three Subsistencies in abstracto do but inadequately represent God unless you take notice of the Godhead in which they subsist and therefore this precisive Abstraction of the Subsistencies from the Divine Nature is but an inadequate Conceit of God as hath been demonstrated above in this very Chapter for we must not dream of a Trinity of Modes but assert and believe the glorious and co-essential Trinity The Father is truly God that God who is the only true God but the Father alone doth not adequately represent God to us as he is described in the Holy Scriptures It is true that the Divine Essence is by the Subsistence of the Father adequately the Father but as God is represented by that Divine Subsistence only he is not Deus Trinunus he is not the Father Son and Holy Ghost The Father alone is not all these three Witnesses who are one God And therefore the acute Socinians with their precise Abstractions do but suggest an inadequate Conceit of God That only true God whom we worship doth not subsist only in the Person of the Father We worship God subsisting with all absolute and relative Perfection in Father Son and Holy Ghost for these three are that one God who is the only true God blessed for ever This is the adequate Representation of God in the Scriptures of Truth And we are resolved to regulate all our Metaphysical Notions by the Holy Scriptures that we may make the highest of Sciences to acknowledg the Supremacy of that Divine Science which is no where to be learnt but in the Word of God for the purest Reason must be elevated by the Word and Spirit of God for the discovery of this Mystery Tenthly These Affections of Ens represent the manner of that Being which Ens hath as it is transcendently considered and the three Divine Subsistencies do represent that manner of Being which God hath as he is most transcendently considered namely as subsisting after the most glorious Manner with all absolute and relative Perfection It is the manner of a transcendent Entity to be one and true and good and it is the manner of God's Being to be one God in three Subsistencies these three are one single God there is no Composition or Multiplication imaginable in this single and infinite Being When I read this Similitude and conceived the Light it gave into this Mystery I thought it worth my time to convey it unto others out of this learned Author and I doubt not but if well considered these rare Distinctions of the Divine Nature and the Persons will be profitable For as the Author saith When Divine Revelation hath gone before and we have built upon that as the Ground-work and Foundation by a serious Faith these Metaphysical Notions may be subservient helps in a subordinate way And if there might be so great Simplicity or Singleness in a created and finite Entity notwithstanding there are three Affections and two Relations which do affect that Entity it seemeth to me somewhat easy to believe that there are three Subsistencies in one infinite Godhead without any Composition in or Multiplication of the single Godhead Estwick in his Confutation of Biddle's Confession of Faith Pag. 17. doth give among other Resemblances of the Deity an instance of the Soul and its Faculties saying If they are as Scotus and his Followers Zanchius and Scaliger and others do maintain one thing for then there is not a real Composition betwixt the Soul and the Faculties of it Memory in the Soul is the beginning of the Knowledg begotten in it and so it represents the Father By Intelligence is represented the Son because he is as Knowledg begotten of his Father By Memory and the Will is represented the Holy Ghost This is some over-sight in the Author or Error in the Printer for it should be thus Of Memory and Intelligence proceeds the Will which represents the Holy Spirit and so it agrees with what follows because he is alone produced of the Father and the Son these are distinct yet one in Essence August lib. 15. de Trinitate cap. 20. Radu pag. 2. Controv. 13. Art 2. This Comparison saith he I confess is too short for neither are the Faculties of the Soul Persons nor doth there appear in them such a strange and wonderful manner of Production as in the glorious Persons of the Blessed Trinity This doth our Faith with Admiration apprehend which our Knowledg cannot attain unto To conclude saith he the Premisses shew that this great Mystery is not against Reason though it be above Reason c. Eighthly Of the Union of the Nature of God and of Man in one Person Of this I shall cite Estwick in his Confutation of Biddle's Confession of Faith pag. 115. Suppose an Apple-Tree grow up into which the Branch of another Tree is ingrafted which makes not the Tree to be of a compound or middle Nature but causing the Branch which being set into the Ground might have proved an intire Tree of it self to pertain to the Unity of the Tree into which it is implanted and yet retains its own Nature and bears its own Fruit and as you may truly say this Harvy-Tree is a Pippin-Tree and this Pippin-Tree is a Harvy-Tree and consequently this Harvy-Tree beareth Pippins and this Pippin-Tree brings forth Harvies So may we say of the Person of Christ consisting of the Natures of God and Man The Son of God who was a compleat and perfect Person hath added to it the humane Nature in the Unity of the same Person as the Divine Nature of our Saviour notwithstanding the Personal Union is not capable of any humane Imperfections no more is the humane Nature in that respect a finite Creature capable of any Divine and infinite Perfection the weakness and infirmity of Man was not swallowed up in the Majesty of God nor was God's Majesty in the least diminished really by the Assumption of Man The Union of the Word in regard of the Persons subsistence graciously bestowed on the humane
to be only a Fellow-Creature with others or excludes him from the Deity First Because Christ cannot properly be said to be the First-born of every Creature by Creation for then it could not be said That All things were made by him and without him was not any thing made that was made unless a Creature could preexist its own Creation and give it self a Being John 1.3 Secondly Christ's being call'd the First-born of every Creature cannot be understood of the natural Birth of some kind of Creatures not of Man for there was none created before Adam and Eve was the Mother of all Mankind and Cain was her first-born not Christ neither could he be the first-born of Angels for they do not propagate their kind Mark 12.25 1 Cor. 15.15 Thirdly Christ cannot be the first-born of every Creature in time preceeding all others in the new Creation by Regeneration unless he had existed in his humane Nature before the Patriarchs and Prophets of old and all the holy Men from the Foundation of the World But having spoken in the Negative I shall now endeavour to demonstrate how Christ may be called the first-born of every Creature 1st Christ may be said to be the first-born of every Creature from the Dead in like manner as he is called the first begotten of the Dead and became the first Fruits of them that sleep 1 Cor. 15.20 Rev. 1.5 2dly Christ may also be called the first-born of every Creature as preexisting every Creature in his Divine Nature like as the same Apostle expounds it in the following words ver 16 17. For by him were all things created and he is before all things and by him all things consist As if he should say the very reason wherefore I call him the first-born of every Creature is not because of Creation or natural Birth or spiritual by Regeneration but because he was before all things in respect of time and Creator of them So that it is clearly manifest there is no ground from this Text for any to believe that our Lord Jesus Christ is either excluded from the true Godhead or included as a meer Creature amongst others by his being called the first-born of every Creature Objection from Rev. 3.14 where Christ is called the beginning of the Creation Answer This must not be understood as if Jesus Christ were the first of God's Creatures but that he was the first that gave being or beginning to the Creatures Rev. 22.13 I am Alpha and Omega the beginning and the end the first and the last Beginning here is the first by whom all things had their beginning and not the first of Creatures that had its beginning CHAP. III. Containeth Answers to divers of the Socinian Arguments against the Deity of Jesus Christ OBjection If the Divine Nature of Christ were God one with the Father and the Spirit then the Father and the Spirit would be incarnate Answer The Union of the Divine Persons being in Nature and Essence and not in Person or personal Properties one Person in the same Nature may be said more properly to be incarnate than another Objection If Christ have two Natures then not only that Person that did before exist is the Son of God but the holy Issue of the Virgin also so that that opinion would make two Sons of God and consequently two Persons in one Christ Answer Although the Divine Nature of Christ which preexisted his Incarnation be the Son of God yet the Issue of the Virgin coming out of the Loins of David and receiving its matter from Man cannot be naturally the Son of God but the Son of Man so that as Christ with respect to his Divine Nature is the natural Son of God so likewise though he was not generated after the common way of Mankind yet being deduced out of the same matter so far he is naturally the Son of Man But from hence I see no reason to conclude that there are two Sons of God or that Christ is two Persons for though the matter of Christ's Humanity would have made a distinct Person if it had been generated after the common way yet it was never so because it never had its Being but in Union with the Divine Nature when the Person of the Son was united to it and so together became the second Adam who was made a quickning Spirit in the one Person of Christ 1 Cor. 15.45 So that the Humanity of Christ was but a part of his Person and no distinct Person of it self for Christ took on him the form of a Servant only and not the Person Phil. 2.7 The Scriptures declare no such thing as two Persons but that he took our Nature which became a Person in the Divine Subsistence of the Son so that the Person of Christ was not a Compound of two distinct Persons together but the one Person of the eternal Son of God as it were clothed with Humanity for the whole Person of Christ viz. the Word and Flesh is represented to us as but one only begotten Son of God John 1.14 18. Objection Had Christ had a Divine Nature in being the eternal Son of God he needed not the Assistance of the Holy Spirit to furnish him with a humane Nature from a Virgin being himself able to produce it of her unless you will say that his own Divine Nature was in the mean while idle Answer Estwick on Biddle in page 208 209. answers this Objection he saith The Holy Ghost had no Efficiency or Casualty in the Incarnation of our blessed Saviour which was not common to the Trinity for as Father Son and Holy Ghost are inseparable touching the Divine Essence and Power of working so likewise are they inseparable in their Operations 'T is a common Comparison to illustrate this Truth Three Virgins do jointly make up a Garment for one of them only to wear so all the three Persons as one Cause did produce the humane Nature yet was it taken only into the Person of the Son of God Christ became Man not in regard of the Divine Nature simply which is common to Father Son and Holy Ghost but as it subsists in the Son of God 'T is true if we respect the ‖ The word Original must here be understood according to the Author's sense of the personal Preheminence of the Father according to his personal Subsistence in the Divine Nature and not in respect to Original of time Original of working there is a difference the Father as he is of himself and from no other so doth he work from himself not from the Son and the Son as he is from the Father so doth he also work from the Father but because there is no Distinction of the Persons in regard of the formal essential Principle of working it follows there is no Distinction or Separation of the Divine Persons in the work it self It was therefore both an absurd and blasphemous Inference and that as you say from our Principle either that it was
most high God and as such cannot be separated from him And therefore to ascribe the Conception of Christ to the immediate Power of God is to attribute it unto God for all his Attributes are so many descriptive Appellations of him And therefore seeing that the Power of the Highest is the Highest himself and that the Holy Ghost is this Power which came upon Mary and overshadowed her then the Holy Ghost must be God And he cannot be otherwise understood for no created Spirit could produce a Child in the Womb of the Virgin Mary Secondly It appears that the Holy Ghost is God by the Works that our Lord Jesus accomplished by him First He was anointed with the Holy Ghost to preach the Gospel Luk. 4.18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me because he hath anointed me to preach the Gospel to the poor c. With the Oyl of Gladness above his Fellows for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him Heb. 1.9 John 3.34 Secondly Jesus Christ cast out Devils by the Spirit of God Mat. 12.28 But if I cast 〈◊〉 Devils by the Spirit of God then the Kingdom of God is come unto you Thirdly Our Lord Jesus offered up himself unto God through the Spirit Heb. 9.14 How much more shall the Blood of Christ who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God purge your Consciences from dead Works to serve the living God Now if our Lord Jesus Christ have the same Nature in the Unity of Essence with God the Father why should he then attribute that Power by which he cast out Devils and performed his Ministerial Office in preaching the Gospel and offering himself a Sacrifice to God for us unto the Spirit if he were but a Creature For thus to exalt the Creature would much eclipse his own Power and Glorious Deity And therefore I cannot think that all those glorious Things should be attributed to the Holy Spirit unless he were a Divine Person subsisting in the Nature of God And forasmuch as God hath said that He will not give his Glory to another there cannot be any Colour of reason to deny the Deity of the Holy Ghost unless we deny the Deity of Jesus Christ And seeing that his Deity is so plainly proved that none can deny it if they open their Eyes to the Light of the Holy Scriptures and that the Deity of the Holy Ghost doth so naturally flow from it that none can reject the one without the other there is ground from hence as well as from the preceding Evidence of the Holy Spirit 's Deity to believe that he is a Divine Person in the same Nature and Essence together equal with God the Father and the Son Fifthly The Deity of the Holy Ghost is proved by the Divine Worship that is given to him As the Scriptures do demonstrate the Holy Spirit to be a Divine Person subsisting in the Nature of God so to worship God adequately aright we must include the Holy Spirit for whether we worship God indefinitely yet as the one Nature and Spiritual Substance of God is the Nature and Substance of each Person we therein do worship each Person or whether we worship a Person by peculiar Attributions proper to that Person yet as the one Nature and Substance of the Deity is the Nature and Substance of that Person we therein do worship the Deity So that we can neither exclude any one Person in the worshipping of the Deity or the Deity in the worshipping of any one Divine Person if we know what we worship John 4.22 ch 8.19 ch 14.7 8 9. But 1st To prove that the Holy Ghost is to be worshipped with Divine Worship I shall cite Matth. 28.19 Baptizing them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost What is our being Baptized in the Name of the Holy Ghost but our Acknowledgment of our Faith in him and our yielding of due Obedience and Worship to him as well as to the Father and the Son 2dly The Holy Ghost is worshipped with Divine Worship Isa 6.1 2 3 8 9 10. compared with Acts 28.25 26 27. The Prophet saw the Lord sitting upon his Throne high and lifted up and his Train filled the Temple Ver. 2. About it stood the Seraphims Ver. 3. And one cryed unto another and said Holy Holy Holy is the Lord of Hosts the whole Earth is full of his Glory And the Lord bad the Prophet ver 9. Go and tell this People Hear ye indeed but understand not and see ye indeed but perceive not Now the same Lord that spake to the Prophet and was worshipped by the Seraphims is said to be the Holy Ghost in Acts 28. and from thence it appears that the Holy Ghost is to be worshipped with Divine Worship and therefore he is God CHAP. VI. Wherein is proved the Vnity of the Holy Trinity FOrasmuch as it is manifestly declared in the Holy Scriptures of Truth that there is but one God and that the Father is God the Son is God and the Holy Ghost is God it must then consequently follow that these three are but one God And first this is farther shewed and declared to us by our being Baptized in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost Matth. 28.19 for as these three are ranked together as Divine Persons so there is no reason to think that they should differ in their Nature seeing we ascribe the great work of Salvation to all of them And surely if Christ and the Holy Spirit were instrumental in our Salvation only as Creatures under God the Father they would not be ranked together with him as the efficient Cause For the Holy Angels though they are all Ministring Spirits sent forth to minister for them who shall be Heirs of Salvation yet are we not required in any Church-Ordinance to acknowledg their Service in honour to them Heb. 1.14 1 Cor. 11.10 For though we are exhorted to such a Holy Behaviour as that we might not prevent or disturb them in their Ministerial Work and Office yet the Glory of all is to be given to God alone viz. to Father Son and Holy Ghost and the reason to me is plain because the Angels are of a lower Nature otherwise it were not irrational to believe that if the Angels were equal in Nature to Christ and the Holy Spirit though lower in Office they should have a share proportionable in the Attributions of Protection and Salvation Besides the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit are ranked together because these three only are Omniscient and Omnipresent Do not I fill Heaven and Earth saith the Lord not only the Father but also the Son and the Holy Spirit For they created all things as hath been shewed and therefore they know all things He that teacheth Man Knowledg shall not he know And whither shall I go from thy Spirit c. Or whither shall I flee from thy Presence c. And
Christ saith Where two or three are gathered together in my Name there am I in the midst of them And Lo I am with you always even unto the end of the World Jer. 23.24 Matth. 18.20 chap. 28.20 Psalm 139.7 to 14. Psalm 94.10 11. If any say that Christ means only that his Doctrine shall continue among the Faithful that congregate in his Name or as Ephes 3.17 To dwell in our Hearts by Faith viz. in his Doctrine It is answered That not simply his Doctrine as it is mixt with Faith in its abstract from inward feeling is here to be understood but some other presence of Christ with his People for he saith John 14.23 If a Man love me he will keep my Words and my Father will love him and we will come unto him and make our abode with him Where note that to such as have already received his Word by Faith in the love of it and keep it he hath promised a further Presence And what can it be but the inward sensation or feeling of his Love as sometimes we have Rom 5.1 to 6. tho at other times we have not Job 13.15 ch 23.8 to 11. But they may further say If this be the Presence of Christ you speak of it is not his personal Presence but by the Spirit which is called the Spirit of Faith that sheddeth the Love of God abroad in our Hearts To this I reply True it is not the personal Presence of Christ either as God-Man or of the Divine Person of the Son but as in and through the Spirit which will prove what is denied by them viz. That the Holy Spirit is God yea and the Son also For the Office of the Spirit is universal to all Saints throughout the World at the same instant time which is beyond the power of any finite Creature indeed Satan deceives the World but not by an infinite Presence at the same time in every place but by a finite personal going to and fro and walking up and down in it seeking whom he may devour being assisted by his evil Angels Job 1.7 1 Pet. 5.8 And as the Holy Spirit by his Office must be Omnipresent So also the Son as well as the Father is Omnipresent in and through the Spirit with the Saints in all places and in and with all Persons Places and Things whatsoever though not by the same Ministrations or Operations yet at the same instant Season and as the Father is Omnipresent in and through the Spirit so I see not the least reason why we should deny it to the Son but understand his Presence in the same sense seeing both are present in the Unity of the same Spirit For know ye not that ye are the Temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you As God hath said I will dwell in them and walk in them And he that is joined to the Lord is one Spirit with the Father and the Son for the Holy Ghost is called The Spirit of our Father that speaketh in us and the Spirit of the Son sent forth into our Hearts crying Abba Father And the Spirit which is upon Christ shall not depart out of his Mouth nor out of the Mouth of his Seed nor of his Seed's Seed from henceforth and for ever and if any Man have not the Spirit of Christ he is none of his and by our Communion with the Holy Ghost we have Fellowship with the Father and his Son Jesus Christ and are one in them and they will come and make their abode with us through that one Spirit whereby we are joyned unto the Lord. 1 Cor. 3.16 2 Cor. 6.16 1 Cor. 6.17 Mark 13.11 Matth. 10.20 Gal. 4.6 Isa 59.21 2 Cor. 13.14 1 John 1.3 John 17.21 chap. 14.23 And it is comfortable for us to believe that greater is he that is in us than he that is in the World 1 John 4.4 Otherwise what may the Soul say when he is in trouble Surely I fear that notwithstanding the fulness of the precious Promises and the great Engagements of Christ to me that Christ and the Holy Spirit are far from me and are busied with other Saints and know not my Distress and therefore I may perish before they come to help me But blessed be God that hath laid help upon one that is Mighty Psal 89.19 who is able to save to the uttermost all that come unto God by him Heb. 7.15 that knoweth all our open and secret Wants Rev. 2.23 and makes Intercession for us And as for the Holy Spirit our Bodies are the Temple of the Holy Ghost that dwelleth in us that abides with us for ever though his Operations may sometimes cease when he is grieved by us 1 Cor. 6.19 John 14.16 So that the Holy Ghost is not as one that cometh but now and then to visit our Souls but he makes his constant abode in us and so is always ready to mortify and sanctify our vile Natures and make them meet to have Fellowship with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ 1 Jo. 1.3 And this is a Christian's Mercy that as none is able to pluck him out of Christ's Hands so the greatest Corruptions are not able to withstand the powerful Sanctifyings of the Holy Spirit Satan may withstand an Holy Angel of God for his Fall doth not deprive him of the natural Power of an Angel but yet he cannot withstand Christ nor the Holy Spirit because of the Potency of their Nature John 10.28 and 30. Rom. 8.13 2 Cor. 10.4 to 7. Dan. 10.13 Jude 9. and we may say in this case as John did concerning the sealed Book Rev. 5. That none in Heaven nor on Earth nor under the Earth was found worthy besides the Son and the Holy Spirit to redeem and sanctify the fallen Sons of Adam The Angels could not do it for they are beholden to Christ for their standing 1 Tim. 5.26 But blessed be God our Saviour for in him shall all the Seed of Israel be justified and shall glory Tit. 2.10 Isa 45.25 To whom be Glory and Praise now and for evermore Amen So then if we ascribe and acknowledg the Work of Mans Salvation to the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost which are ranked together as the efficient Cause and therefore receive the Glory of it and seeing both the Father and the Son dwells in us in and through the Holy Spirit whose Office in his Omnipresence bespeaks his unlimited and infinite Nature I cannot conceive but that the great Unity of these three Subsistencies should be in Essence Secondly The Unity of the Holy Trinity is manifest from Isa 6.23 where the Seraphims cried one unto another and said Holy Holy Holy is the Lord of Hosts agreeable to Rev. 4.8 Now here are three Holies viz. Holy Father Holy Son and Holy Ghost and though I do not lay the stress of the proof on the bare repetition of the word Holy yet doubtless it ecchoes to the Truth that is couched in this
Power and not the Divine Essence or Power it self for the common Acceptation of the word Form cannot be limited to denote only the Exercise and Demonstration of Power without the Essence as they would have it or only an artisicial Figure Draught or Shadow of any thing whereby its Likeness is represented but also the Likeness of one Person or thing to another of the same Nature which may have the like natural Power and Properties in its own Essence as Adam who begat a Son in his own Likeness after his Image Gen. 5.3 And as Christ is said to be in the Form of a Servant which was not only in outward Appearance but in Nature and Substance having the same natural Properties So that if the word Form Likeness or Image which are equivalent in their Significations are used to express the Likeness of Essence of one created Person or Nature to the Essence of another created Person why may it not signify the Likeness of uncreated Persons in their essential Being and Power For though the one is a Personal Likeness in their personal abstracted Being or only natural and the other is different to it in that it is not in personal Properties because the Divine Persons are not alike in Properties but essential as subsisting in the Unity of the same Essence yet this hinders not the word Form of its proper Signification when it is used to either of them because it is extensive to represent any manner of Likeness whatsoever And therefore as visible outward and apparent things have such forms so the Subsistence of any one Divine Person in the Godhead can only be likened to another subsisting in the same Nature Secondly To Mark 16.12 Where Christ is said to appear in another Form I reply That it shews the Power of the Divine Nature in representing Christ in another Form than what he was in before but there is no reason wherefore this outward form should limit the Form of Christ in the other Text to be only outward and visible seeing the Word is common to signify any Form and that the two Texts have no Relation to each other Thirdly We cannot conclude from those Words He made himself of no Reputation That if Christ had not emptied himself of that Divine Form he had thought it Robbery or a Prey to be equal with God because the Apostle neither in this nor in any other place of Scripture assigns it as the Reason And therefore seeing their Exposition of these Words hath no other Foundation than what is imaginary in their own Conceit we are not obliged to hearken to it Fourthly Christ's emptying himself of that Divine Form or making himself of no Reputation was not his laying aside of the Exercise and Demonstration of Divine Power which he had by Donation as Man 1st Because as Man Christ was not in the Exercise of it when first he made himself of no Reputation but was afterwards invested with it when he took upon him his ministerial Office and therefore could not lay aside the Demonstration of the Divine Power before he was in the Exercise of it 2dly Nor can it be meant of his Sufferings as a vulgar Man because his making himself of no Reputation in assuming our Nature and taking on him the Form of a Servant preceded his Sufferings 3dly Nor did he properly empty himself of the Divine Nature as God or as the Son of God the second Person in the Trinity for this could not be without his Annihilation And therefore we must inquire after some other sense that may better suit with this and other Scriptures 1. In this sense the Son of God may be said to empty himself or make himself of no Reputation to wit in derogating from his own Glory by his wonderful and inexpressible Condescension in stooping so low to save Man as to take our Nature into such an extraordinary Relation and Conjunction with himself and that in the former Habit of a Servant This was that which made Christ pray unto the Father saying Glorify thou me with thine own self with the Glory which I had with thee before the World was It was so beneath the infinite and glorious God to take our Nature into Community with his Nature that his very Assumpsion of it was as it were a debasing of his Divine Nature 2. Christ may be said to make himself of no Reputation or to empty himself in respect to that Manifestation which he made of himself to the Sons of Men by his Works The Son of God did not appear to us in the essential Glory of his Divine Nature for so he dwelleth in the Light which no Man can approach unto whom no Man hath seen nor can see but in the Vail of Flesh through which he was emptied to our Appearance from those Divine Rays that would have dazled the Sons of Men and have made them afraid to look upon him lest they should be consumed Exod. 20.19 1 Tim. 6.16 But yet there is something further objected against this Text of Scripture ver 6. He thought it not Robbery to be equal with God That which is equal hath always a different Essence from that which it is equal unto otherwise the same thing would be equal unto it self Equals are Relatives and consequently Opposites If therefore Christ be equal to God in respect of Essence and essential Properties the Essence of Christ must of necessity be different from the Essence of God wherefore they must either hold two Divine independent Essences or two most high Gods or that Christ is not the most high God Answer First If it 's meant that Equals have always a different Essence respecting their Singularity or Personality as being abstracted from their common Nature This I do readily grant of created personal Beings because such Singularities or Personalities cannot exist but by Abstraction from their common Nature and so must have different singular and personal Essences the one to the other and as Relates of the same Nature are Equals But what is this to the Deity of the Son of God must we limit Divine Persons in the uncreated Nature and confine them to the Parallel of created Beings Surely the Scriptures teach us otherwise that the Divine Persons are not abstracted from the Divine Nature but are coessential yet differing in personal Properties Christ is equal to God viz. the Father not respecting the same personal Properties as to beget c. But essentially considered as subsisting in the Unity of the same Nature and having all the essential Properties of that Nature coequal with him And thus there is neither two Divine independent Essences nor most high Gods but one only subsisting in three Divine Persons each of which subsisting in the Divine Nature and mutually in one another is the most high God Objection To 1 John 5.20 And we know that the Son of God is come and hath given us an Vnderstanding that we may know him that is true and we are in
new Man which is created and the like and therefore such as force the Text contrary to the genuine sense of it to comply with a Gospel-Reformation do greatly subvert the Word of God nor is there any Agreement in those words to such an Exposition for the World was so far from being reformed by Christ that it knew him not and his own received him not viz. his own Nation was not reformed by him 3dly I shall make some reply to their latter Sense of those words ver 10. The World was made by him which say they is That the World to come which we expect by Christ is by him made as to us that is if I mistake them not it is made by a partial Reformation which if they would but speak out is not made but only making And they say further that this World to come is already present to Christ and the Angels that is as I imagine to be their meaning it is fully come to them by their pre-knowledg and assurance of it having laid its Foundation What else they should intend by these and the like words doth not at present occur to mind But this is presumptuously asserted by them for there is no mention made of the World to come neither is there any thing in the Text that relates to it neither is there any reason wherefore they should go about to prove that because there is mention made of a World to come in Heb. 2.5 therefore this in John 1.10 is of the World to come also Nor do I yet perceive why Heb. 1.6 chap. 10.5 and 8.4 should be understood of the World to come or what ground they have to impose from thence their Sense on John 1.10 For though the Apostle speaks of something which relates to the World to come in Heb. 1. yet he doth not begin with it until ver 8. and therefore as the matter in ver 6. plainly shews the World there is not the World to come but the present World But if it were yet John 1.10 must not be confined to this or any other Text any further than the concurrence of the Texts and Contexts and the Signification of their words will bear But now let us take notice how little difference the Socinians here make between the time past and the time to come The World that was with them was the World to come that was made was yet to make What a monstrous way they have of expounding the Holy Scriptures by all things say they is only meant Gospel-things were made by Christ the rest were made by his Apostles and that not in the beginning as the Text asserts but after even their own prefixt beginning But if this may pass for truth at this rate 't is not to be found in the Holy Scriptures But these Exceptions are groundless and so are of no effect to weaken the proof of the Deity of Jesus Christ from this Scripture Objection to Isa 9.6 Where Christ is called The everlasting Father or Fa-Father of Eternity as it is admitted by the Adversaries who nevertheless say it quite subverteth the Common Doctrine by confounding the first and second Persons of the Trinity He is the Everlasting Father both because he is the Author of eternal Life to them that obey him and liveth for ever to shelter and protect and cherish Christians who are elsewhere called his Seed see Isa 5.3 10. Answer First The words in the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Father of Eternity do not so much subvert the Common Doctrine of the Trinity or confound the Persons to understand them of the Divine Nature of our Lord Jesus Christ than of him as only humane For though Christ is said to be the Author of eternal Salvation Heb. 5.9 Yet it cannot be as Man only either in the Ministration of it or being the prime Author For there being a Ministration of Salvation under the Old Testament Christ as Man could not be the prime Author of it but God who elected and fore-ordained Christ and us in him unto Salvation before the Foundation of the World Isa 42.1 Eph. 1.4 1 Pet. 1.20 So then as Christ did not then exist in his humane Nature as Man he could not be the prime Author or Administrator of eternal Salvation And when he was come considered as Man he could only bear a greater Testimony of the purpose and good-Will of God towards us than any of the Prophets did before him But to acknowledg the Son of God to be of the same Divine Nature co-essential with the Father makes the name Father of Eternity to have relation to him not personally but as he is essentially God and his being called by it is an evident Demonstration of his Unity of Essence co-eternally with the Father wherein only he can be the Author of eternal Salvation to us his Spiritual Seed Objection to John 17.5 And now O Father glorify thou me with thy own self with the Glory which I had with thee before the World was Christ doth beg this Glory of the Father which sheweth that neither he was formerly in actual Possession thereof for then he would have been in possession of it still nor had a Divine Nature for that would have supplied him with such Glory as he wanted wherefore the Sense is that Christ beseeches the Father to grant unto him that Glory which he had with him in his Decree before the World was As we are said to be saved according to the Grace which was given us in Christ Jesus before the World began Answer First The better to clear this Text from these Objections I shall expound it 1st If it should be understood that these words denote a Deprivation of Glory yet it must not be absolutely considered for the Divine Nature of Christ ever was is and shall be in it self infinitely Glorious without the least Diminution Alteration or Change But we are to take it with respect to the great Humility and Condescension of his infinite glorious Nature in uniting himself with our Nature It is said Phil. 2.6 7 8. Who being in the Form of God thought it not Robbery to be equal with God but made himself of no Reputation He humbled himself and became obedient unto Death The Divine Nature of Christ consented to the exposing of his humane Nature that was in so great a Conjunction with it to Sufferings as an ordinary Man And if God is said to humble himself to behold the things that are in Heaven and in the Earth Psal 113.5 6. Then surely this must be a far greater piece of Condescension for the Son of God to disrobe himself as it were of that Power and Majesty which he had with the Father in subjecting his humane Nature to suffer the Revilings and Scourgings of wicked Men and to be put to Death by them Now if the Text must be understood of a Deprivation of Christ's former Glory then the meaning of Christ's Prayer is that as his Condescension in taking
Glory of the Lord by whom we are changed into the same Image from Glory to Glory even as by the Spirit of the Lord or the Lord the Spirit Which whither it be meant of our being more and more renewed in the Spirits of our Minds in this World or as I rather take it from the Glory of the Lord which we behold in the Glass of the Gospel to our eternal Glory yet it is by the Lord the Spirit the efficient Cause of this change and therefore it is not the Effect or Grace of the Spirit only but his Person 4ly The Dutch Translators read ver 17. The Lord is the Spirit and not that Spirit and so it does not point to Spirit before-named but is to be understood as the Words lie in themselves and thus it cuts off the Relation and is not governed by what is meant by Spirit going before So that I see no reason wherefore these Objections should weaken the Proof of the Deity of the Holy Spirit from this Scripture Objection to 1 John 5.7 For there are three that bear Record in Heaven the Father the Word and the Holy Ghost and these three are one The Sum of what is objected against this Scripture being laid down and learnedly as well as largely confuted by Mr. Francis Chinell in his Book of the Divine Trinunity I shall make a Recital of his Words so far as it is needful to our purpose from page 251 to Page 256. It is objected by some that the words These three are one 1 John 5.7 are not to be found in some ancient Copies and therefore it will not be safe to build a Point of such Weight and Consequence upon such a weak Foundation Answer It is true that these Words are not to be * Si Syrum ceterosque sequimur vel hiatus admittitur vel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quae imprimis elegans turbatur Mihi qui talem primò usurparunt in sacris licentiam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 videntur Heinsius in locum found in the Syriac Edition but they who speak most modestly do acknowledg that the Syriac Edition is not authentick Learned Heinsius is much offended with that Edition as appears by his Annotations upon 1 John 5.7 And if we consult the Scriptures and compare this Text with the following Verses and with some other places of Scripture which are more plain and then add the Testimony and Interpretations of the ancient and reverend Doctors of the Church concerning the Words in question we shall beable to pass a right Judgment upon the point in hand First The Equality of the number of Witnesses sutes very right three Witnesses on Earth and three in Heaven Secondly The opposition between the Quality of the Witnesses on Earth and Witnesses in Heaven and yet their sweet Harmony and Agreement in one Testimony all six bear Witness to one and the same Truth Thirdly The Diversity of the very Nature of those three who bear Witness on Earth and the Unity of their Divine Nature who bear Witness in Heaven is very considerable and it is excellently expressed in the Variation of the Phrase These three are one ver 7. and these three agree in one namely in one Testimony ver 8. Though their Nature be different yet their Testimony is the same But it is objected that the Complutensian Bible saith of the Heavenly Witnesses that these three agree in one ver 7. I humbly offer this Satisfaction to pious and learned Men That we have good reason to believe that there is an imprudent Addition in the Complutensian Bible rather than an Omission of so many ancient and approved Bibles and therefore it is fit that that Addition should be expunged out of that one Copy by the concurrent Testimony of so many Copies Moreover it is clear by the joint Testimony of other Copies that the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are omitted in ver 7. and the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 belong to ver 8. and therefore there is an inexcusable Omission and an imprudent Transposition in that corrupt †Merces satis fallaces vendit officina Chr. Plantini Antverpiae in editione 1584. excusa cum Bib. Ar. Mont. Vulgat Joh. 8.17 18. Edition But then it is further objected that these Words These three are one are wanting in some other Greek Copies For Answer I proceed in my Observations Fourthly If we look upon the Scripture-Account in other places we shall find it exactly agreeable to the Account in this place 1 John 5.7 In John 8. our Saviour pleads that two Witnesses in Law were sufficient for the Proof of any Point John 8.17 and in ver 10. saith he I am one and my Father that sent me is another they are two Witnesses and yet but one God I and my Father are one John 10.30 One in Power and therefore one in Nature He speaks not of the Spirit because Christ was not yet glorified nor was the Spirit yet manifested by that eminent and glorious Mission and Effusion which was to follow after the Ascension of our blessed Lord. But he did foretel that the third Witness was to be sent from the Father by the Son John 15.26 But when the Comforter is come whom I will send unto you from the Father even the Spirits of Truth which proceedeth from the Father He shall testify of me I might add to these Testimonies all other places of Scripture wherein all the three Witnesses are named together and then produce all the places which have been formerly cited in this Book to prove the coessential Trinunity of those Heavenly Witnesses Fifthly The Copulative and in the beginning of the verse 1 John 5.8 doth very fitly connect the whole seventh Verse with the eight as they are printed in our ordinary Translation Sixthly Hierom doth assure us that the Words in question were expunged by the Arians because the few Words do hold forth an undeniable Proof of the Divine and Coessential Trinunity of those Heavenly Witnesses And divers other learned and judicious Men conceive that these Words were blotted out in the time of Constantius and Valens the Emperors who were sworn Enemies of the blessed Trinity and professed Patrons of Arianism Seventhly The Hereticks did blot out those Words ‖ Vide Ambros lib. 3. de spiritu sancto cap. 11. jurati veritatis hostes lucem banc non tulerunt ideoque eraserunt Vide Heinsium in 1 Job 5.7 John 4.24 God is a Spirit as Ambrose assures us and therefore this Practice of repugning such Words in the Scripture as did refute their Errors was too common amongst the Hereticks of old as we might prove by Witnesses enough if that were our Business Eighthly These Words 1 John 5.7 are to be found in Copies of great Antiquity and best Credit * Athanas Tom. 1. Pag. 91 92 93. Ninthly This Text is cited by the ancient Fathers by Athanasius in his Dispute with Arius at the Council of Nice and Arius never denied it for