the Lord God is by the Apostles called Jesus Christ Second Scripture is Zech. 12.10 And I will pour upon the House of David and upon the Inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of Grace and of Supplication and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced and they shall mourn for him c. First The Holy Ghost speaketh of Christ in different Persons viz. Me and Him to betoken his different Natures of God and Man who being both may be differently spoken of as a Person relating to either Nature Secondly This is confirmed by John Rev. 1.7 in apylying the same to Christ only And our Lord himself speaks of this great Mourning When they shall see the sign of the Son of Man in Heaven coming with Power and great Glory Mat. 24.30 So then as it is apparent that the Prophet Zechariah's Jehovah or Lord in ver 1. which stretcheth forth the Heavens and layeth the Foundation of the Earth and formeth the Spirit of Man within him is that Me whom they have pierced and Him they shall look upon and mourn for viz. Jesus Christ in the New Testament we must either admit Christ to be of the Divine Essence or else confound the two Testaments Third Scripture is Isa 8.13 Sanctify the Lord of Hosts himself and let him be your Fear and let him be your Dread Ver. 14. And He shall be for a Sanctuary but for a Stone of Stumbling and for a Rock of Offence to both the Houses of Israel for a Gin and for a Snare to the Inhabitants of Jerusalem This Text is applyed to Jesus Christ in 1 Pet. 2.6 Wherefore also it is contained in the Scriptures Behold I lay in Sion a chief Corner-Stone elect precious and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded And this Corner Stone which is Jesus Christ as the preceding Verses shew is a Stone of Stumbling and a Rock of Offence c. ver 8. So that comparing these two Scriptures together they demonstrate Jesus Christ the Metaphorical Stone of Stumbling and Rock of Offence in the New Testament to be the Lord of Hosts Himself in the Old viz. Jehovah for so is the Word Lord in the Hebrew in all the aforesaid places in the Old Testament which is an Essential Name of God Whose Name alone is Jehovah Psal 83.18 And therefore the Son of God is Co-essential with the Father Thirdly I shall prove the Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ by seven particular Scriptures First is Rev. 22.6 And the Lord God of the Holy Prophets sent his Angel to shew unto his Servants the things which must shortly be done Ver. 16. I Jesus have sent mine Angel to testify unto you these things in the Churches With Chap. 1.1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ which God gave unto him to shew unto his Servants things which must shortly come to pass and he sent and signified it by his Angel unto his Servant John God viz. the Father Rev. chap. 4. and chap. 1.5 6 7. with chap. 3.21 gave the Revelation to Jesus Christ and it s said He not the Father sent his Angel to signify it unto his Servant John and this Jesus Christ is the Lord God of the Holy Prophets And therefore he is the true Supream God by Nature The Second Scripture is Acts 20.28 Take heed therefore unto your selves to feed the Church of God which he hath purchased with his own Blood 1st The Blood that purchased or redeemed us is the precious Blood of Jesus Christ 1 Pet. 1.18 19. 2dly If Jesus Christ were but a Man tho only made of a Woman yet being the Seed the Off-spring of the Flesh of David Acts 2.30 Rev. 22.16 the Person of a Man his Blood would be the own proper Blood of that Person and so it could not have such a special Relation unto God but as he was no Person but by the assumption of the Divine Nature so his Blood hath a special Relation tho not natural unto that Nature as it is part of Christ's Person and without which he did not exist Now this Blood which is the Blood of Christ being the own Blood of God shews the assumption of Humanity by his own Nature and the like may be said of the Life which God laid down for us 1 John 3.16 Third Scripture is Phil. 2.5 6 7 8. Let this Mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus who being in the form of God thought it not robbery to be equal with God But made himself of no Reputation and took upon him the form of a Servant and was made in the likeness of Men. And being found in fashion as a Man he humbled himself and became obedient unto Death even the Death of the Cross First In this Scripture Christ is said to be in the form of God which is not only as Man by Creation who beareth something of his Image in the natural Qualities of the Soul but in equality with God so that in Nature he is not inferior to him and therefore he can be no Creature For there is no Creature that hath its being from God can be equal to God Secondly the Divine Nature of Jesus Christ must be understood by his being in the Form of God because he did pre-exist his Incarnation in that Form his Condescention of mind and his Power in that form to take the form of a Servant went before his actual Condescention in taking our Nature Let this Mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus Who being in the form of God made Himself of no Reputation Which must be understood of our Lord Jesus Christ's subsisting in his Divine Nature before his Incarnation in the form of God and equal to Him 4th Scripture is John 5.26 For as the Father hath Life in Himself so hath he given to the Son to have Life in Himself First For the Son to have Life in Himself is not to receive it from an higher Nature for then he would have it in another as Fellow-Creature with us whose Nature and Personality have their Life and Being in God But to have Life in Himself is to have it in his own Nature which cannot be if he were only Humane Acts 17.28 Secondly For the Son to have Life in Himself given or communicated to Him by the Father denoteth the great Mystery of his eternal Generation in the Divine Nature for else the manner of Speech would be absurd and contradictory in it self for if it were given Him as a Creature he could not have it in Himself and if he have it in Himself though it be given of the Father he cannot be a Creature for that Nature which hath Life in it self must needs be the Nature of God and this is the Nature of the Son Fifthly John 10.30 I and my Father are One. This Text cannot simply be understood as if Christ and the Father were One only even as we are one in Them for Christ speaking of his Sheep in the 27 28 and 29
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
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
Nature is not finite nor the humane Nature infinite and as the forenamed Tree is but one and yet has two different Natures in it and beareth two kinds of Fruits so the Holy Son of God is but one Person and yet hath two different Natures and by them performeth the distinct Operations pertaining to either of them PART II. Wherein the Proof of the Holy Trinunity in the former part of this Treatise is defended against the chiefest Objections and Arguments of the Adversaries THERE are many Objections made and of divers kinds against this Doctrine some against its Scriptural Proofs and others inferred from divers Texts of Scripture besides those which are offered against it as inconsistent to Reason To which I shall make replies in order CHAP. I. In which I shall answer those Objections I find against the Scriptural Proofs of the Deity of Jesus Christ FIRST Objection unto Gen 1.26 and to other Places also which are cited to prove a Plurality of Divine Persons in the Godhead We might by the same kind of arguing conclude that because Christ in Mark 4.30 saith Whereunto shall we liken the Kingdom of God or with what comparison shall we compare it and John 3.11 Verily verily I say unto thee We speak that we do know and testify that we have seen and ye receive not our Witness Therefore there are several Persons in Christ And also in Paul 2 Cor. 10.1 2. The utmost that can be concluded from this passage in Genesis is That there was some other Person with God whom he employed in the Creation which Person had been before mentioned by Moses Ver. 2. with Psal 104.30 Job 26.13 ch 33.4 These Scriptures do plainly intimate that the Spirit was but the Instrument of God in creating Things it was he only which he saith is an Angel For had the Son of God Christ Jesus been also imployed in creating of Adam would he not have been likewise mentioned in the History of the Creation Answer First It doth not from hence follow that because Christ and Paul speak of themselves and others with them in the plural Number that there is the same Reason to conclude that there are several Persons in Christ and in Paul as there is for a Plurality of Persons in the Godhead for those Texts do only shew a Plurality of Persons not in Christ nor in Paul but of Personalities abstracted from their Nature for no created Persons as such do subsist in their common Nature Christ was a humane Substance abstracted from the humane Nature in Conjunction with the Divine Person of the Son and so he became the one Person of Christ and might speak of himself and others as Equals of the Humane Nature not taking notice of the different Subsistence of their Nature Secondly This doth not oppose a Plurality of Divine Persons in the Deity but rather confirm it for it being confessed that Gen. 1.26 c. doth signify a Plurality of Persons it must also be of Equals of the same Nature Thirdly The Omission of the second Person the Son of God by Name is no Exclusion of him from co-operating with the Father and the Holy Spirit in the Creation of the Word because Omission is not always an Exclusion if it were then God the Father would be excluded when only Christ or the Holy Spirit is mentioned as Job 33.4 and Colos 1.16 and in the Text where the Father is as well omitted by Name as the Son and the Holy Spirit is only named because he is the great Agent which proceedeth from the Father and the Son in whom they work so that when it is said In the beginning God a common Name to all three Subsistencies or Almighties which includes all three Persons created we must not limit it only to the Father Son or Spirit but understand it of all three Subsistencies And in ver 2. where the Person of the Spirit is mentioned we must include the other two Divine Subsistencies working in and by him So that notwithstanding these Exceptions against those Scriptures that are brought to prove a Plurality of Divine Persons in the Deity yet they abide as sufficient Testimonies thereof And as for his asserting the Holy Spirit to be an Angel we have but his Word for it which needs no farther Answer Second Objection The Appellations of Christ are no Proof of his Deity because other Persons and Things have the same Names ascribed to them 1st Persons Exod. 4.16 chap. 7.1 Jer. 33.16 2dly Things Gen. 22.14 Exod. 17.15 Judg. 6.24 Ezek. 48.35 Answer First to Exod. 7.1 with chap. 4.16 we say That there is not the same Reason to prove the Deity of Moses as there is of Christ from those peculiar and incommunicable Names of God that are given to him 1st Because that Moses is not absolutely called by this Name as Christ is in some of the aforesaid Places and in Isa 8.13 Zech. 12.1 10. chap. 14.3 4. but it 's only said to him I have made thee a God to Pharaoh that is Moses was inspired with Wisdom and received Commission from God to do Wonders in the Sight of Pharaoh and all his People in his stead The Lord not working so immediately from himself as he did by the Hand of Moses like as Moses was instead of God to Aaron his Brother to put Words into his Mouth chap. 4.15 16. which place doth much open and confirm this Exposition 2dly To Jer. 33.16 And this is the Name wherewith she shall be called The Lord our Righteousness Mr. Estwick in his Answer to Biddle's Catechism page 422. gives us this account of the Words The word Name is not in the Original and to hint this to the Reader it is printed in lesser Letters than the rest which is the sacred Text nor is there any Pronoun in the Hebrew which signifies she nor is there any Necessity to read the word in the passive Signification to translate it thus She shall be called but in the Holy Tongue it is word for word as Arius Montanus doth turn it And he that shall call her is the Lord our Righteousness And then the Name is given to Christ And this is confirmed by the Dutch Translation after the same sense And it is most likely to be the true Interpretation of it for as the aforesaid Author saith who can say of the Church She is the Lord our Righteousness 3dly To Gen. 22.14 And Abraham called the Name of that Place Jehovah jireh that is the Lord will see or provide This place was called so in respect to God who had there provided a Ram for a Burnt-offering instead of Isaac as a Memorial of what he had done there 4thly To Exod. 17.15 And Moses built an Altar and called the Name of it Jehova-Nissi that is the Lord my Banner which was in remembrance of God's appearing for his People against the Amalekites 5thly To Judg. 6.24 Then Gideon built an Altar there unto the Lord and called it Jehovah-Shalom The Lord
our Nature had been an Eclipse of his Divine Glory Power and Greatness in laying it aside as it were to suffer in his humane Nature for our sakes that now the Father would so translate his humane Nature from that mean Estate and Condition to one more glorious that might better sute with his infinite Perfection and correspond with it But Secondly This Text most properly as it seems to me ought to be understood not of a Deprivation of Glory of the Divine Nature but only of the Exaltation of the humane Nature of Christ as if Christ should have said And now O Father glorify thou me in my humane Nature or glorify my humane Nature in taking of it into that Glory which my Divine Nature had with thee before the World was This I humbly conceive is meant by the words of our blessed Lord but take it in either sense it agrees with the Deity of Jesus Christ Secondly I come more particularly to answer the said Objections 1st Though as it is objected it may be concluded from the Words that because Christ begs this Glory of the Father therefore he had it not in actual Possession before Yet this is only respecting his humane Nature which opposes not the Truth of his Deity for though he was not yet supplied by it or glorified John 7.39 Yet he then had the Divine Nature and was in Union with it 2dly For any to say that that Glory which Christ had before the World was is only meant of God's Decree is an imposing on the Text that which it cannot bear for it doth not run parallel with 2 Tim. 1.9 because it is one thing to say that we are saved and called according to his own Purpose and Grace which was given us in Christ before the World began and another thing to have Glory before the World began the one plainly shews that we were not actually called nor saved before the World was but were then in the purpose of God only and the other is positively spoken of the Glory that Christ had in actual Possession as the sense of the words import And I hope these are sufficient Answers to clear the Text of these Objections Objection to Coloss 1.16 For by him were all things created that are in Heaven and that are in Earth visible and invisible whether they be Thrones or Dominions or Principalities or Powers all things were created by him and for him First They say that this Scripture speaketh of Christ as a second or middle cause that God created all things by Jesus Christ Eph. 3.9 Answer First I do acknowledg that Jesus Christ is two ways to be considered 1st Essentially as he is God and so all things are of him and from him and created by him indifferently with other Divine Persons 2dly Personally as he is the second Person in the Godhead and so is he also in the Works of Creation for all things are of the Father by the Son through the Spirit 1 Cor. 8.6 John 1.3 Gen. 1.2 Psal 104.30 Eph. 2.18 For as the Father is of himself a Divine Subsistent so he worketh from himself and as the Son is of the Father so he worketh from the Father and as the Holy Spirit is of the Father and the Son so he worketh from them both yet neither of them exist or work before each other in time but do naturally and necessarily work together for when we say the Son is the second Person in the Deity we grant the Father to be the first neither in time nor Excellency of Nature to the other Divine Persons but in respect to Preheminence according to his peculiar manner of Subsistence and incommunicable Property So also the Divine Persons have their Order or Preheminence of working according to their Order or Preheminence of Subsistence and incommunicable Property in the Divine Essence Secondly They say that all things in the Heavens and on the Earth are not used for all things simply and absolutely appeareth because the Apostle saith By him God hath reconciled all things in Heaven and on Earth and also in the words themselves it is not said the Heavens and the Earth were created by Christ but all things that are in the Heavens and on the Earth And the Sum of what they understand by the Text is that after God had raised Christ from the dead and had given Glory to him all the things both in the Heavens and on the Earth were by him reformed and reduced to another State and Condition in that he became the head of Angels and Men who before acknowledged God only for their Lord. Secondly To this I answer 1st That if we can reconcile the word Create in ver 16. so as that naturally its Signification doth import but one and the same thing with the word Reconcile in ver 20. then indeed there is some reason to acquiesce with them in their sense But as the words have different Significations so they signify to us different things 2dly Though reconciling all things to God by Jesus Christ whether in Heaven or in Earth must be understood in a limited sense yet there is not the same nor so good reason for all things that were created by Jesus Christ to be so considered For those all things that were reconciled were all things that were reconcileable by the Blood of the Cross whether in Heaven or in Earth and not all things absolutely in Heaven and in Earth for the evil Angels are not reconcilable but in ver 16. the case is much different and is to be understood simply and absolutely that by Jesus Christ all things were created for the words are positive By him were all things created that are in Heaven and that are in Earth and because we should not misapprehend the Apostle's meaning he explains himself more fully to us that they were all things both visible and invisible whether they be Thrones or Dominions or Principalities or Powers And surely this cannot be meant of a Reformation or Renovation of all things in Heaven and Earth because the good Angels never wanted such Reformation neither were all Thrones or Dominions or Principalities or Powers either of evil Angels that are invisible or of wicked Men on Earth then renewed or so reduced by Reformation as that Christ became their Head and was so acknowledged by them For though Christ became the Head of his own Church yet the World did not know him in such a manner as to own him for their Soveraign Lord and to yield true and sincere Obedience to his Laws for under the Conduct of Satan the Dragon Heathen Empire made head against Christ and all that professed his Holy Name And tho something may be said that in the Reign of Constantine the Great there was a mighty Reformation made in the Empire of the World yet this cannot answer the Import of the words For by him were all things already created they were not to make in future times but they were already done
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
the Ending saith the Lord which is and which was and which is to come the Almighty And therefore this Scripture is so far from proving this erronious opinion touching the Holy Spirit that it confirms his Deity for if Jesus Christ be of the Divine Essence and the Holy Spirit is said to speak or say when Christ saith then it is evident that Christ and the Spirit are Coessential CHAP. VI. Wherein are answered three Texts of Scripture from which our Adversaries urge that the Father only is God in opposition to the Doctrine of the Holy Trinunity OBjection from 1 Cor. 8.6 But to us there is but one God the Father of whom are all things and we in him and one Lord Jesus Christ by whom are all things and we by him Say they It could no way come to pass that Paul being about to explain who that one God is should mention the Father only omitting the other Persons if that one God were not the Father only but also the Son and Holy Spirit since those two Persons besides the Father were as necessary to declare who that one God is as the Father himself Answer It might come to pass that Paul should call God Father omitting the Names of the other Divine Persons and yet not exclude them from the Unity of the Godhead First He might call God Father not simply respecting the Person of the Father but indefinitely as he is Creator viz. Father Son and Holy Ghost in opposition to false Gods ver 5 6. 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 the Father of whom are all things which is agreeable to Mal. 2.10 Have we not all one Father Hath not one God created us Secondly It doth not from hence follow that because the Son and the Holy Spirit are here omitted and the Father only is called that one God that therefore the Father only is God because that such omission is no denial nor exclusion For the Father being in the Unity of Essence with the other Divine Persons must not be simply considered when he is called by those Names as are common to all three Sublistencies and the Deity neither must the Son nor the Holy Spirit unless the matter treated of confine us to the Person which in the Text is reconcileable to the Divine Essence for all things are of God indefinitely Father Son and Holy Ghost and therefore the Father may be called that one God essentially comprehending the other Divine Persons Thirdly There is some reason that may be given wherefore the Father is called God and the Son and Holy Spirit are sometimes omitted and left to be included in that common Name and that is because of the preeminence that the Father hath among the Divine Persons For though in excellency of Nature the Father Son and Holy Ghost are neither of them above each other nor any one of these blessed Persons before the other in Time yet the Father hath a preeminence of Order and Subsistence according to his manner of self-subsisting in the Divine Essence For the Father is named first and then the Son and the Holy Spirit 1 Joh. 5.7 Mat. 28.10 and that because the Father is of none the Son is of the Father and the Holy Ghost is of them both And from hence it is that we worship the Father by the Son and through the Spirit Rom. 1.8 Eph. 2.18 21. Phil. 3.3 So then it is proper enough to call the Father that one God essentially considered as he is in the Unity of Essence with the other Divine Persons forasmuch as he hath this preeminence of Order and Subsistence and that the other two divine Subsistences are of and in the Father Secondly they say That if Christ and the Holy Spirit were God it were as necessary to name these two Persons as the Father to declare who that one God is To this I answer That if these Words One God the Father are personally to be considered of the Father yet there was no necessity to mention the Son and the Holy Ghost For I hinted before that when the Father is called that One God the Son and the Holy Spirit must be included in that common Name as being of and in the Father who is essentially so called Now the Apostle having told us who that one God is by naming that Person which most properly and significantly includes the rest it is sufficient seeing that his design was more to tell us in opposition to those many false Gods That to us there is but one God than to give a large Description of him So then let the words One God the Father be taken in either sense as Creator and so common to all three Subsistencies in the Unity of the Godhead or personally of the Father yet they do neither exclude Jesus Christ nor the Holy Spirit from the Godhead Thirdly some do further add that Christ is manifestly distinguished from that one God and so is demonstrated not to be that one God Answer It was necessary that Christ should be distinguished from that one God the Father by those Words One Lord Jesus Christ to betoken his Lordship by Donation as he is Man or Mediator because it is different to his supream and essential Lordship and therefore it requires a different Name to express it by But yet this does not exclude him from the Unity of Essence with the Father But as in ver 5. it is said There were many Gods and many Lords inferiour to those Gods So this is to shew in opposition to them that there is but one God to us Christians and but one Lord and Mediator viz. Jesus Christ that considered as Man was exalted to that Dignity and appointed by God to be our Lord. Objection from Eph. 4.6 One God and Father of all who is above all lest we should understand the Trinity by the Name of that God who is called one two Persons of the Trinity were already mentioned and distinguished from that one God Answer There cannot more be proved from this Scripture than what is granted to wit that the Father hath some Preheminence though not in Nature nor Time to the Son and Holy Spirit First In that he hath his Subsistence neither by being generated nor by Procession but is of himself a Divine Subsistent in the Divine Nature Secondly The Father may be said to be above all and have the Preheminence with respect to the Work and Office of the other Divine Persons in bringing of us to God the Father as the ultimate Object of our Faith and Worship but yet not so as to exclude the Son and Holy Spirit For though we through the help of the Holy Spirit and Intercession of Christ come to the Father who is above all their ministerial Offices and through them in us all viz. the Saints yet the Father Son and Spirit either or all of them
A TREATISE OF THE HOLY TRINUNITY In Two Parts THE FIRST Asserting the Deity of Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit in the Unity of Essence with God the Father THE SECOND In Defence of the former containeth Answers to the chiefest Objections made against this Doctrine By Isaac Marlow John 1.1 2 3. In the Beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God The same was in the Beginning with God All things were made by him and without him was not any thing made that was made LONDON Printed for the Author and are to be sold by Richard Baldwin in the Old-Baily 1690. To the Reader Christian Reader HAving met with some opposition to the Doctrine of the Holy Trinunity it occasioned my more than ordinary Meditations on this Subject wherein I received great satisfaction of Mind And notwithstanding the Socinians have taken great pains to find out Arguments to support their Error yet I found they had no Foundation in the Holy Scriptures And nothing is more the Duty of every Christian than to inform himself of the Truth as it is in Jesus both in the Doctrinal and Practical Parts of the Christian Faith And tho the Knowledg of every sacred Truth is worth the treasuring up in our Hearts yet there are some more than others conducing to the Glory of God and the mutual Fellowship of Christians Among which the blessed Doctrine of the Holy Trin-unity is the chiefest for to deny the Deity of Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost is a great deprivation not only of the Glory of these two Divine Subsistencies but also of the Father For he that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father Joh. 5.23 And unless we see the Divine Rays of the Son we cannot see the Father chap. 14.9 And if we have not the same Light we cannot walk in the same Fellowship for what Communion hath Light with Darkness 1 Joh. 1.7 2 Cor. 6.14 Moreover seeing that the Fear of the Lord is the beginning of Wisdom and the Knowledg of the Holy is Understanding Prov. 9.10 and that the Welfare of our Souls depends on our knowledg of God and true Faith in him as he is revealed to us in the Holy Scriptures to be our Saviour it is highly necessary and the duty of every Christian to have a true distinct Knowledg of God subsisting in the Father Son and Holy Ghost For as neither an implicit Faith can secure us from being turned aside by every wind of Doctrine and cunning Craftiness of them that lie in wait to deceive so unless we have true Notions of the Holy Trinity we cannot worship God aright To the end therefore that those who have not a good understanding of this Doctrine may be inlightned and more establish'd therein and may have somewhat to answer and stop the mouths of Gainsayers and that others may be convinced of their Error and confirmed in the Truth I have presented this small Treatise to publick view And tho I am sensible of my own Weakness and Incapacity to manage this Inconceivable Mystery so as to suit and correspond with the Grandure and Perfection of it yet there is such Evidence and clear Demonstration given from the Word of Truth of the Deity of our Blessed Lord and the Holy Spirit as might easily gain it credence in the Minds of those that do oppose it if their Imbecillity were not such as to limit the mysterious and transcendent manner of God's Being to their finite Reason and make the Scriptures subservient to it And therefore to those it is my humble Request 1. That with a studious and intentive Spirit they will peruse this little Treatise 2. That no former Prepossessions may hinder their full adherence to what hath Divine Authority stamp'd upon it and then I doubt not of some good Effects of my Labour For this Fundamental Truth hath so firm a Foundation in the Holy Scriptures as will stand the shock of all the Socinian Arguments And tho I have not here undertaken to answer the multitude of them or of their Objections made against this Doctrine or any particular Author on this Subject yet I have taken hold as I conceive of the chiefest Pillars on which their Fabrick depends and those being taken away their whole Building will fall Which that it wholly may and that every Christian may be establish'd in the Truth of God Is the Prayer of him who desires to be a true Worshipper of the Trinune God and is a Well-wisher to all Men. The CONTENTS Chap. I. THE Case is briefly stated Pag. 1. Chap. II. Sheweth that there is but one God the Creator of all things Pag. 6. Chap. III. Asserteth a Plurality of Divine Subsistences Pag. 8. Chap. IV. Proveth the Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ 1. By his Names Pag. 11. 2. That God in the Old Testament in divers Places is Christ in the New Pag. 13. 3. By seven particular Texts of Scriptures Pag. 16. 4. That Christ preexisted his Incarnation in his Divine Nature Pag. 26. And is no Angel incarnate Pag. 30. but is eternal Pag. 32. 5. By his Works Pag. 35.6 By Divine Worship given to him Pag. 38. Chap. V. Proveth the Deity of the Holy Ghost 1. That he is a Divine Person Pag. 43. 2. His Deity is asserted from several Scriptures Pag. 45. 3. By his Works Pag. 48. 4. By Divine Worship Pag. 52. Chap. VI. Proveth the Unity of the Holy Trinity Pag. 54. Chap. VII Containeth some Explications of the Holy Trinuility 1. Of the essential Being of God Pag. 64. 2. Of a Divine Person Pag. 64. 3. Of the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit Pag. 65 66. 4. Of the Unity of the Holy Trinity Pag. 66. 5. Of the Distinctions between the Divine Nature and the Persons and some Shadows by way of Comparison Pag. 67. 6. Of the Union of Christ's two Natures Pag. 74. PART II. Chap. I. Answereth Objections against the Scriptural Proofs of Christ's Deity Page 76. Chap. II. Answers to Objections drawn from several Texts of Scripture Pag. 123. Chap. III. Answers to several Arguments against the Deity of Christ Pag. 128. Chap. IV. Answers to several Objections against the Scriptures that prove the Deity of the Holy Ghost Pag. 132. Chap. V. Answers to some Objections drawn from divers Scriptures to disprove the Deity of the Holy Spirit Pag. 157. Chap. VI. Answers to some Scriptures from whence our Adversaries assert that the Father only is the true God With a general Answer and Conclusion Pag. 169. A TREATISE OF THE Holy Trinunity In Two Parts PART I. CHAP. I. In which after a short Introduction the Case is briefly stated GOD who at sundry Times and in divers Manners spake in Times past unto the Fathers by the Prophets hath in these last Days spoken unto us by his Son Who first in his own Person declared the Father's Will and then by his Holy Apostles through the Spirit more fully opened the Mysteries that had been
hid from Ages and Generations unto his Saints and left them upon Sacred Record for future Ages By which means we come to the knowledg not only of the Grace Office and Operations of the Father Son and Holy Spirit but of the great Mystery of these Three for ever blessed holy and divine Persons subsisting in the Unity of the Godhead from all Eternity But no sooner did the Glory of the Holy Trinity begin to shine in the Ministration of the Gospel of Jesus Christ But Satan the Prince of Darkness lest Men should imbrace the Truth and so his Kingdom should fall did what he could to hinder the Progress of the Gospel in its primitive Purity and in Enmity to the weal of Mankind suggested many pernicious Errours into their Minds as we may find in the Writings of the Apostles of our Blessed Lord which I forbear here to mention And throughout every successive Age he hath not wanted some Instruments to disturb the Peace of the Church with false and erronious Doctrines thereby to weaken the true Interest of Jesus Christ as well as to ruin the Souls of Men. And among others that have been broached in the World this is one viz. That the Son of God and the Holy Spirit are not one infinite and eternal God Coessential with the Father but are so much inferiour in Nature to him as to be but Creatures only But to speak more particularly Some affirm that Jesus Christ is only humane or nothing but Man And though the Racovian Catechism doth acknowledg he is more than a meer Man yet they do not allow Christ to have a divine Nature as we may see in Pag. 27 28. of that Catechism Where by way of Question they say Is the Lord Jesus then a meer Man The Answer is by no means For he was conceived of the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary and therefore is from his very Conception and Birth the Son of God as we read Luke 1.30 and the Answer is closed with these Words That the Lord Jesus ought by no means to be reputed a meer Man Yet the next Question being put Hath he not also a Divine Nature The Answer is At no Hand for that is repugnant not only to sound Reason but also to the Holy Scriptures Now if they will not allow Jesus Christ to have a Divine Nature and yet do say he is more than a meer Man what can he then be unless we suppose either as Biddle saith Article 6. of his Confession of Faith that the Holy Spirit is an Angel and so by Conception he may be said to participate of their Nature or else that His visible and external Exercise of the Power of God is his Divine Nature From the first Socinus whom Biddle reproveth for it and Crellius do dissent for they deny the Spirit to be a Person but the Power and Efficacy of God the Father So that according to their opinion Christ cannot be of the Nature of Angels by conception Nay Biddle himself though he asserts the Holy Ghost to be an Angel and Christ to be conceived by him yet he saith that Christ hath no other than a humane Nature Article the 3d. Secondly If his external and visible Exercise of the Divine Power of God be the external and visible Exercise of his own Nature it is what we are pleading for and if this were but granted the main Controversy would quickly cease for the Power of God as it is in God is his Nature so it must be in Christ But it 's hard to conclude from what these Men do say what Christ and the Holy Spirit are for some are for having Christ nothing but Humane and others that He is more than a Man viz. the Son of God by Conception and yet that he is not God by Nature So likewise Biddle is for having the Holy Ghost to be an Angel others say That he is the Power and Efficacy of God the Father And what they will hammer forth at last or where they will settle who can tell However in this they all agree That neither the Son nor the Holy Ghost are God by Nature or have the supream Divine Nature of God for their own Nature And therefore forasmuch as there hath been great endeavours used to suppress the Doctrine of the Holy Trinunity and to raze out or so besmear the written Word of God that we should not discern the Beauty and Excellency of the Nature of Christ and the Holy Spirit I shall endeavour to demonstrate the Truth of their Deity and in order thereunto First I shall note that on all Hands it is agreed among Christians that the Scriptures do distinguish and make a difference between the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost and that there is but one that is personally called the Father and but one other Chief and only Son of that Father and also a third distinguished from both and called the Holy Ghost besides which there is not another that is so called as may be collected from the following Scriptures Eph. 4.4 5 6. 1 John 4.9 chap. 5.7 2 Pet. 1.16 17. John 6.27 ch 14.26 CHAP. II. Wherein is proved that there is but One God the Creator and Former of all Things TO shew this I shall only give a bare Citation of several Texts of Scripture and not take up our time in that which is so generally believed by all Persons Deut. 6.4 Hear O Israel the Lord our God is one Lord. 1 Sam. 2.2 There is none Holy as the Lord for there is none besides thee c. Isa 46.9 Remember the former Things of old for I am God and there is none else I am God and there is none like me 1 Cor. 4.6 There is none other God but One but to us there is but one God the Father of whom are all things 1 Tim. 2.5 For there is but one God c. Jam. 2.19 Thou believest there is but one God thou dost well Nehem. 9.6 Thou even thou art Lord alone Thou hast made Heaven the Heaven of Heavens with all their Hosts the Earth and all Things that are therein the Sea and all that is therein and thou preservest them all and the Host of Heaven worshippeth thee Psal 86.9 10. All Nations whom thou hast made shall come and worship before thee O Lord and shall glorify thy Name For thou art great and doest wondrous Things thou art God alone Isa 44.6 Thus saith the Lord the King of Israel and his Redeemer the Lord of Hosts I am the first and I am the last and besides me there is no God Ver. 24. I am the Lord that maketh all Things Isa 45.18 For thus saith the Lord that created the Heavens God himself that formed the Earth and made it He hath established it He created it not in vain He formed it to be inhabited I am the Lord and there is none else There are many other Scriptures of like import but these are plain and sufficient
Testimonies to prove that there is but one God the Creatour and Former of all Things CHAP. III. Sheweth that there is a Plurality of Divine Subsistences FIrst from Gen. 1.1 In the Beginning God created the Heaven and the Earth The word in the Hebrew is Elohim Gods or Almighties in the Plural Number I find an Exposition of this Text by Mr. William Streat which because it giveth much Light I shall present the Reader with the material part of it The Author reads 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Almighties and in Page 2. In Mr. William Streat's Book called The dividing of the Hoof. Pag. 1. speaking of the opposition of Elohim Almighties which is a Noun Plural to the word Bara he created says thus God's Phrase in a Dialect of his own transcending all humane Arts purposely to amaze them in the Mystery of the Trinity is one Thing Mans ordinary means of discovering earthly Things by Grammatical Rules in humane Learning is another This Hebraism is not used by Moses the Almighties Secretary Penman of sacred Truth joyning a Verb Singular to a Noun Plural for Contradiction but for Interpretation Therefore the word Bara he created is most fittingly and significantly joyned to a Noun Plural Elohim Almighties because titling himself in a Plural Number he might give us to understand a Plurality of Persons which are the three Persons in the Trinity Father Son and Holy Ghost who wrought together in the Work of Creation And the Author further adds Page 3. that the Holy Trinity is here to be understood and that because the word God is not to be found in the Singular Number El nor in the Dual as Elohaim but in the Plural Elohim as comprehending the three Persons in the Deity But some may say that the word Elohim proves rather three Gods than three Divine Persons in one Godhead But note that this is corrected by the Verb Singular which betokens the Three to be One in Essence And surely there is something in this Hebraism because it answers so well to that which follows ver 26. And God said Let Vs make Man in Our Image after Our Likeness c Mark the words Us and Our signify more than One Person And though some may object that the Angels are here to be understood yet this cannot be for the Works of Creation were never attributed to any Creatures And as there are other Texts Gen. 20.13 and ch 35.7 Josh 24.19 2 Sam. 7.23 see the Dutch-Annotations in which the Hebrew word Elohim Almighties is found in the Plural Number as likewise the word Makers Job 35.10 Eccles 12.1 So also in our English Translation there is a Concurrence in several other places of Scripture with this of Gen. 1.26 as in ch 11.7 where the Lord said Go to let us go down and there confound their Language And Isa 6.8 The Lord said Whom shall I send and who will go for us c. Which places denote a Plurality of Persons in the Godhead CHAP. IV. Asserteth the Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ by his Names THAT the Father is God is universally owned by all Christians And therefore Having made some little Preparation I now come to prove the Deity of the Son of God That our Lord Jesus Christ is not only Humane but that he is also of the very same Spiritual Essence Nature and Substance of God the Father And First I shall take notice of those Names or Appellations which are given to our Lord Jesus Christ in the Holy Scriptures for he is frequently called by those Names which are properly applicable to none but God As Mighty God Isa 9.6 7. applied to Christ Luk. 1.31 32 33. Most Mighty Psal 45.1 to 8. applied to Christ Heb. 1.8 Almighty Rev. 1.8 with ver 17 18. Jehovah Jer. 23.5 6. These are proper Names of God and are applied to Jesus Christ who is often called God in the Holy Scriptures as John 20.28 My Lord and my God and Heb. 1.8 But unto the Son he saith Thy Throne O God is for ever and ever Rom. 9.5 Whose are the Fathers and of whom as concerning the Flesh Christ came who is over all God blessed for ever Amen And though others may be called Gods Yet unto us there is but one God 1 Cor. 8.6 And what ever some may think that would turn the current of Scripture another way yet I cannot conceive that Jesus Christ should be so frequently called by the highest Appellations God hath in a relative Sense only and not as proper Names belonging to him as a Person subsisting in the same Nature nor do I believe that his Name Immanuel which is God with us Matth. 1.23 was given to him but as a suitable and descriptive Name of both his Natures as real God in our Nature He took Flesh upon him Heb. 2.16 and Phil. 2.6 7. He thought it not robbery to be equal with God But made himself of no Reputation and took upon him the form of a Servant c. Here are the two Natures of Christ asserted his Divine Nature which only can be equal with God and his Humane both which do appropriate his Name Immanuel to him and if his Names are proper to the Nature of God we must then either admit of Jesus Christ to be of the same Nature or deny his Names to be proper to him Secondly I shall prove the Deity of the Son of God by three particular Scriptures that relate to God in the Old Testament and which are applied to Jesus Christ in the New whereby it may appear that respecting his Divine Nature he is one and the same with God First Scripture is Zech. 14.3 Then shall the Lord go forth and fight against those Nations as when he fought in the day of Battel Ver. 4. And his Feet shall stand in that day upon the Mount of Olives which is before Jerusalem on the East c. Ver. 5. And the Lord my God shall come and all the Saints with thee This Text for its natural Affinity with the rest of the Chapter cannot be allegorized without gross Absurdity but must be taken in a literal Sense of the coming of Christ with all his Saints And it well agrees with what the Angel told the Disciples saying that this same Jesus which is taken up from you into Heaven shall so come in like manner as you have seen him go into Heaven Then returned they to Jerusalem from the Mount called Olivet This sheweth that Christ ascended into Heaven from the Mount of Olives and that thither he shall descend again and so it agrees with the Prophet And as to the coming of the Saints with the Lord or Jehovah God this also is applied to Jesus Christ 1 Thess 4.14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again even so them also which sleep in Jesus shall God bring with him chap. 3.13 At the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ with all his Saints So that he who is by the Prophet Zechariah called
ever said that the fullness of the Godhead or of the Nature of God dwelleth in us So that this Objection is of no force to overthrow the sufficiency of this Scripture to prove the Deity of Jesus Christ Fourthly the Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ is proved by his Eternity and as a Preparative hereunto I shall first shew that he preexisted his Incarnation And First from Heb. 2.16 For verily he took not on him the Nature of Angels but he took on him the Seed of Abraham In the Margent of some of our English Bibles it is read He taketh not hold of Angels but of the Seed of Abraham taketh he hold First This could not respect the Spiritual Seed of Abraham for they were not such when he first took hold of them Secondly Nor is this taking hold to be understood only of the Posterity of Abraham or literal People of the Jews because this is but a light thing to the Salvation of the Gentiles Isa 49.6 And besides it is put in opposition to the nature of Angels to that of ours and therefore his taking hold or taking on him the Seed of Abraham is a taking his Flesh upon him ver 14. Forasmuch then as the Children are partakers of Flesh and Blood he also himself likewise took part of the same So that this Text of Scripture hath a special relation to his Incarnation and in that he took on him the Seed or Flesh of Abraham it sheweth that he not only came forth of his Loins but that he did preexist the taking hold of that Seed for he that taketh hold of a thing must needs preexist that act of taking hold The Second Scripture to prove the pre-existency of Jesus Christ to his Incarnation is Dan. 9.17 Now therefore O our God hear the Prayer of thy Servant and cause thy Face to shine upon thy Sanctuary that is desolate for the Lord's sake As we cannot reasonably imagine that this Lord should be any other than David's Lord Psal 45.11 with Matth. 22.42 43 44. viz. the Son of God So also there is as little ground to believe that the Prophet should implore the favour of God for the sake of one not in being Because it would have been more proper for him to have prayed to God for the sake of his own gracious Promise of Mercy than for his sake who was fore-appointed of God to make an Atonement for our Sins if he were not then existing in his Divine Nature For as there could be no Promise on Christ's part to undertake and perform the work of Atonement for us whereby to ingage the Father to shew us Mercy so neither could God be engaged for the sake of one that was not then in being to do or promise the performance of any Mercy And therefore I humbly conceive that from the Prophet's Prayer to God for the Lord's sake we may conclude that the Son of God for whose sake alone our Sins are forgiven did then exist Third Scripture is Phil. 2.6 7. Who being in the form of God thought it not robbery to be equal with God But made himself of no Reputation and took upon him the form of a Servant and was made in the likeness of Men. These Words do shew that Jesus Christ was not made of no reputation by another but that he made himself so Whence note he did preexist his Disreputation and that in the form of God and equal to him For if he was not before he took the form of a Servant in greater Dignity how then could he make himself of no Reputation So that it 's evident our Lord Jesus Christ did preexist his Incarnation Fourth Scripture is John 1.30 where the Evangelist saith This is he of whom I said After me cometh a Man which is preferred before me for he was before me As John was conceived at least six Months before Christ so also he began his Ministry before him for Christ was Baptized by him and he did not preach the Gospel till after John was put in Prison Luk. 1.35 36. Mark 19.14 Mat. 4.12 18. And therefore seeing that John was before Christ both in his Conception and Ministry wherein then was Christ before him but in his Divine Nature But if it should be said that Christ was before John in the Purpose and Decrees of God It may be answered That the Purposes and Decrees of God are as eternal as God Himself and to admit of any real or absolute Precedency of any thing in God is repugnant to his infinite eternal and immutable Perfection and makes Him subject to Accidents So that it 's undeniable our Lord Jesus Christ did preexist his Incarnation But not in the Nature of Angels First For though the Nature of Angels is more excellent than Mans yet neither for their excellency of Nature nor any work it is capable of could the proper Works Attributes and Perfections of God be ascribed to it for no Creature can be equal to the Creator or have equal Attributes and Perfections to him and therefore whatsoever is or may be applied to Christ from the Word of God that is proper to the Holy Deity could not be applied to him if his Nature were not better and more excellent than the Angels Secondly The Apostle Paul in the first and second Chapters to the Hebrews largely discourses this Matter and sufficiently proves that Christ is no Angel First from chap. 1.4 Being made so much better than the Angels as he hath by Inheritance obtained a more excellent Name than they This Text doth not import that only Christ's Name obtained by the Inheritance of his Kingly or Priestly Office is more excellent than the Angels but also that his Nature is different from theirs for the Apostle speaks not of Christ and the Angels in such words or form of Speech as might any ways intimate both Him and Them to be of the same Nature as if he should say that Christ had obtained a more excellent Name than the rest of the Angels had but so as to demonstrate that Christ is no Angel for his Speech is comprehensive of all the Angels of their whole Nature and excludes the Son of God from their Number And this the Apostle insists farther upon in the 5th and 13th Verses of this Chapter For after he had told us what the Son of God is viz. That he is the brightness of his Father's Glory and the express Image of his Person ver 3. and that he is made better than the Angels ver 4. he moreover saith For unto which of the Angels said he at any time Thou art my Son this Day have I begotten Thee And again To which of the Angels said he at any time Sit on my Right Hand until I make thine Enemies thy Footstool No it was to no Angel but to the Son who for his excellent Nature above that of the Angels is called God ver 8. Secondly From chap. 2.16 For verily he took not on Him the Nature of
Angels but He took on Him the Seed of Abraham This is meant of his Incarnation as the 14th Verse which relates to this more fully shews and then if His assuming our Nature is put in opposition to his taking on Him the Nature of Angels it is a clear Demonstration that he preexisted his Incarnation in some other Nature than either of these And to imagine that the Holy Apostle who wrote by the Holy Ghost should affirm that the Son of God did not assume the Nature of Angels if he had before existed in it would be an Imputation of Absurdity to him yea to the Holy Ghost which is Blasphemy From all which it is apparent that Christ did not preexist his Incarnation in the Nature of Angels but as it must follow in the Divine Nature of God Secondly I come to prove the Deity of the Son of God by his Eternity First Scripture is John 1.1 In the Beginning was the Word First this Text is not to be understood of the preaching of the Gospel by Jesus Christ or John the Baptist for this was not a Mystery fit to be set as a frontice-piece to John's Book nor is there any such Intimation in the Words and therefore it preceded that beginning Secondly He speaks of that Beginning in which all Things were created ver 3. which shews that he did not only precede the preaching of the Gospel but the beginning of the Creation and therefore he was from all Eternity Second Scripture is Isa 9.6 Vnto us a Child is born unto us a Son is given and his Name shall be called Everlasting Father or Father of Eternity as is confessed by our Adversaries See Biddle's Confess Article 3. If we read ver 7. and compare it with Luke 1.31 32 33. we may see that this Text is applied to our Lord Jesus Christ and if he be the Author of Eternity he must Himself be Eternal Third Scripture is Col. 1.17 And he is before all things And so as that in ver 16. All things were created by Him in Heaven and Earth visible and invisible which could not be said of Christ unless he were the Eternal God existing from all Eternity Fourth Scripture is Rev. 1.17 18. Fear not I am the first and the last I am He that liveth and was dead and behold I am alive for evermore This Scripture cannot be applied unto any other but Jesus Christ who was dead and is alive again for though it was the Angel that spake yet it was as representing the Person of Jesus Christ and therefore whatsoever he saith in his own Person must be applied to him and this is manifested in ver 8. I am Alpha and Omega the Beginning and the Ending saith the Lord which is and which was and which is to come the Almighty And in ch 2.8 where the Angel speaks the same words but not in the same Person he did before saying And unto the Angel of the Church in Smyrna write These Things saith the First and the Last which was dead and is alive again Yea and in all the Epistles to the Seven Churches of Asia he doth not only dictate them as from another but also the same Description that John gives of the Angel the Angel applies to the Son of God ch 2.18 So that these Words I am the First and the Last do relate unto Jesus Christ and as nothing can be first or preexist the Creation but the Divine Nature So our Lord Jesus Christ as being the first must preexist all things in the Nature of God Fifth Scripture to prove the Eternity of the Son of God is 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 If the Son were in Glory with the Father before the World was he was then existing before Time and therefore from all Eternity Coessential with the Father Fifthly The Divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ is proved by his Works First from John 2.19 21. Destroy this Temple and in three days I will raise it up But he spake of the Temple of his Body We read of many mighty Works that were wrought by the Holy Apostles but not in their own Names or by their own Power saith Peter Acts 3.12 Why look you so earnestly on us as though by our own Power or Holiness we had made this Man to walk And Moses for saying Must we fetch Water out of this Rock was shut out of the Land of Canaan Num. 20.12 19. For though God had given such power to Men yet he expected the Glory should be given to him alone as the Apostles did to Jesus Christ ver 16. And surely if our Lord Jesus had not been God equal with the Father in Nature he had offended in assuming that Power to Himself which is to be ascribed to none but God Who is said to have raised him the third Day Acts 10.40 So that the same Power which is ascribed to God the same doth our Lord Jesus assume unto himself and this demonstrates him to be of the same Nature Second Scripture is John 1.3 All things were made by Him and without Him was not any thing made that was made And therefore the Word or Son of God ver 14 18. is the Eternal God and Creator of all Things Third Scripture is Col. 1.16 17. For by Him were all things created that are in Heaven and that are in Earth visible and invisible whether they be Thrones or Dominions or Principalities or Powers all things were created by Him and for Him And he is before all things and by Him all things consist It is not neither could it be said that all things were renewed by the Son of God for the good Angels had no need of it and the Devils were not neither were Men save only a select Number in part but not wholly renewed for this cannot be until our Bodies are raised up from the Grave and reunited unto our Souls Nay the whole Creation was never yet renewed but is groaning under the bondage of Corruption and waiting to be delivered into the glorious Liberty of the Sons of God Rom. 8.19 c. And therefore this Scripture as it must of necessity be taken in its literal Sense so fully asserts the eternal Power and Godhead of our Lord Jesus Christ that I know not how its Authority can be evaded for if all things were created and are upheld by him and that because as the Apostle gives the reason that he was before all things then he must be the eternal God Co-creator with the Father Fourth Scripture is Heb. 1.10 And thou Lord in the Beginning hast laid the Foundation of the Earth and the Heavens were the Works of thy Hands The word And connexes this Verse with the preceding Words and makes it relate to ver 8. as if we should read it thus But unto the Son he saith Thy Throne O God is for ever and ever And to the
Son he saith thou Lord in the beginning hast laid the Foundation of the Earth c. And therefore he cannot be a Creature but the Creator of all things Sixthly The Deity of Jesus Christ is proved by that Divine Worship and Adoration given to him None but God is to be worshipped with Divine Worship But the Son of God is to be worshipped with Divine Worship therefore he is God First to prove the Major in Matth. 4.10 It is written Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve And Rev. 19.10 ch 20.8 In both which places when John fell down to worship the Holy Angel he was forbidden saying See thou do it not for I am thy fellow-Servant worship God And Gal. 4.8 Howbeit then when ye knew not God ye did Service unto them which by nature are no Gods And Isa 42.8 I am the Lord that is my Name and my Glory will I not give to another c. And chap. 48.11 For my own sake even for my own sake will I do it for how should my Name be polluted and I will not give my Glory unto another Now from these Scriptures there is an Exclusion from Divine Worship of all that are not God by nature and none is to be glorified or worshipped with the same Glory or Worship which belongs to God but Himself only Secondly to prove the Minor That the Son of God is to be worshipped with Divine Worship Matth. 14.33 Then they that were in the Ship came and worshipped him saying Of a truth thou art the Son of God So in ch 2.11 The wise Men worshipped him In chap. 8.2 The Leper worshipped him And in ch 28.17 The Disciples worshipped him and in many other places he was worshipped and he never forbad any And therefore we have good reason to believe that it was due unto him as God For when Cornelius fell down to worship Peter he took him up and said Stand up I my self also am a Man And so also in Rev. 19.10 and ch 20.8 when John fell down to worship the Holy Angel he was forbidden saying See thou do it not for I am thy fellow-Servant and of thy Brethren worship God So likewise if Christ had not been God by nature he would not have suffered his Disciples and others to have worshipped him without rebuke for it But to proceed There are other Scriptures of greater force to prove that the Son of God is to be worshipped with Divine Worship as Heb. 1.6 And again when he bringeth the first-begotten into the World he saith And let all the Angels of God worship him And Rev. 5.8 9. The four Beasts or rather four living Creatures and four and twenty Elders fell down before the Lamb viz. Christ John 1.29 having every one of them Harps and golden Vials full of Odours which are the Prayers of Saints And they sang a new Song saying Thou art worthy to take the Book and to open the Seals thereof For thou wast slain and hast redeemed us to God by thy Blood c. Ver. 13. And every Creature which is in Heaven and on the Earth and under the Earth and such as are in the Sea and all that are in them heard I saying Blessing and Honour and Glory and Power be unto him that sitteth upon the Throne and unto the Lamb for ever and ever Ver. 14. And the four Beasts or living Creatures said Amen even so Amen Ch. 7.9 After this I beheld and lo a great number which no Man could number of all Nations and Kindreds and People and Tongues stood before the Throne and before the Lamb and cryed with a loud Voice saying Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the Throne and unto the Lamb. So that our Lord Jesus Christ is counted worthy of the same Divine Worship by all Creatures in Heaven and Earth as God the Father and hath the same Power as well as Honour and Glory ascribed to him Thus I have proved both the Major and the Minor viz. that none but God is to be worshipped with Divine Worship That the Son of God is to be worshipped with Divine Worship and the Conclusion follows therefore he is God To what I have said by way of positive proof touching the Deity of Christ I shall not further add for there hath been given plentiful and sufficient Evidences from the Word of God that our Lord Jesus Christ has undeniable marks of the Divine Nature upon him so that his Deity cannot be denied without subverting the Holy Scripture which gives him the same Names proves his Eternity renders the same Worship attributes the same Works and asserts him the same as God the Father And if we cannot know him as God by these Marks by what can we know him then And if these be insufficient how shall we know God the Father For if the chiefest Marks of the Divine Nature that are found on our Lord Jesus Christ be no proof of his existing in the same Nature we may then question the Deity of God the Father who is only known and distinguished from all Creatures by these and the like Attributes given to him and Descriptions of him So that I see no way to escape the powerful convincing Testimonies of this Truth if there be but a searching after it unless we deny the Authority of the Holy Scriptures CHAP. V. Wherein is proved the Deity of the Holy Ghost AS the Scriptures have given a clear Testimony to the Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ so also they will afford us sufficient Evidence of the Deity of the Holy Spirit which I intend to demonstrate in this Chapter And First I shall prove that the Holy Spirit is a Divine Person and not a Quality in God First Our Lord Jesus Christ speaks of the Holy Ghost as a Person John 14.16 17. And I will pray the Father and he shall give you another Comforter that he may abide with you for ever Even the Spirit of Truth whom the World cannot receive because it seeth him not neither knoweth him But ye know him for he dwelleth with you and shall be in you Chap. 16.8 And when he is come he will reprove the World of Sin Ver. 13. Howbeit when he the Spirit of Truth is come he will guide you into all Truth for he shall not speak of himself but whatsoever he shall hear that shall he speak and he will shew you things to come In these Scriptures the words He Him and Himself are used to the Holy Spirit and these all do note him to be a Person and not a Quality Secondly He is called the Comforter John 16.7 which is a personal Name Thirdly He is put in the same rank with other Divine Persons as a Person Matth. 28.19 Baptizing them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost 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
Now from these Texts of Scripture I shall make these three Observations First That we may as well say that the Father and the Son are Qualities as the Holy Spirit And Secondly The baptizing in the Name of the Spirit denotes him to be a Person as well as the Name of the Father and the Son by their Names are so denoted Thirdly He cannot be a Quality for if the Word and the Holy Ghost be Qualities and the Father only a Person or else the Father and Word Persons and only the Holy Ghost a Quality yet the three can neither be one Person nor one Quality Fourthly The Holy Ghost is a Person and is so far from being a Quality in God that he hath in himself the Quality of Knowing and Understanding 1 Cor. 2.11 Even so the things of God knoweth no Man but the Spirit of God and also of willing John 16.7 8. 1 Cor. 12.11 But all these worketh that one and the self-same Spirit dividing to every Man severally as he will And therefore the Holy Spirit having personal Qualities is denoted to be a Person and there is not the least reason to believe but that the Holy Ghost is a Person who is so generally treated of as a Person Secondly The Holy Spirit is God from the Testimony of four several Scriptures First is Matth. 28.19 Go ye therefore and teach all Nations baptizing them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost If the Holy Ghost were not God why should we be baptized into his Name and ascribe unto him a share in the Work of Man's Salvation But that as the Father was pleased to elect and ordain the Son to lay our Iniquities upon him and accept us in him and as the Son was willing as it were to disrobe himself of the Glory he had before the World was to bear the Wrath of God that was due to us for our Sins that we might be delivered from it and to reconcile him to us by the precious Blood of his Cross So the Holy Spirit changes our Hearts and reconciles them to God by infusing into us a new Nature with Holy Dispositions and Power against Sin which the good Angels could never do for though they have great Power to communicate to our Spirits and influence our Souls with good things yet the evil Angels having the same Power of Nature and being first in Possession may keep our Souls in Bondage till one that is stronger casts them out Luke 11.22 1 John 4.4 And therefore the Holy Spirit having so great a hand in this glorious Work may rightly receive a share with other Divine Persons of our Acknowledgment of it which demonstrates that the Holy Ghost is God for otherwise we should ascribe that Work unto the Creature which is above the Power of its Nature and is only possible for God himself Second Scripture is 1 Cor. 3.16 Know ye not that ye are the Temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you To have the Spirit of God dwelling in us is to have our Bodies the Temple of the Holy Ghost 1 Cor. 6.19 And the Temple of the Holy Ghost is the same as the Temple of God and to say that the Temple of God is the Temple of a Creature or to give it the Name of a Creature is a Dishonour to it as not sanctified unto God And therefore the same Spirit or Holy Ghost that dwelleth in us is God that dwelleth in us Third Scripture is 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 This Scripture is so clear an Evidence for the Truth I am pleading for that there have been some who would blot it out denying its Authority to be equal with other Scriptures which I shall answer unto in its proper place But whereas it is said and these three are one it must be understood that they are one in Essence for in ver 8. where the Essences differ the manner of speaking also differs as agree in one viz. in Testimony but in the Text it is are one viz. in Essence as the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost are not only one in Agreement of their Testimony as the Blood the Water and the Spirit are but are one in Essence And this Distinction was made in the two Verses that we might not miss of the Truth of God in them Fourth Scripture is 2 Cor. 3.17 Now the Lord is that Spirit and where the Spirit of the Lord is there is Liberty Ver. 18. We are changed into the same Image from Glory to Glory even as by the Spirit of the Lord or as it is in the Margent Of the Lord the Spirit Now if the Holy Spirit were not of the same Divine Essence it could not be said the Lord is that Spirit Thirdly I shall shew that the Holy Spirit is God by the Works of Creation that are ascribed to him 1st Job 33.4 The Spirit of God hath made me and the Breath of the Almighty hath given me Life 2dly Job 26.13 By his Spirit he hath garnished the Heavens his Hand hath formed the crooked Serpent 3dly Psalm 104.30 Thou sendest forth thy Spirit they are Created c. 4thly Gen. 1.1 And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the Waters The Spirit did co-create with other Divine Persons or Subsistences in the Deity And therefore it is said That in the beginning Gods or the Almighties created the Heavens and the Earth Which Words being inclusive of more than one Person and the Spirit of God being said to move upon the Face of the Waters I think we may safely say that the Holy Spirit did co-work with other Divine Persons in the work of Creation and was one of those Persons of whom it 's said Let us make Man in our Image after our Likeness c. So that from these Scriptures it is clear that the Holy Spirit did create and therefore we cannot deny his Deity Fourthly The Deity of the Holy Spirit is demonstrated by what is ascribed to him in the Conception of our Lord Jesus and by the Works that he accomplished through the Power received from him First Jesus Christ was conceived by the Holy Ghost Luke 1.34 Then said Mary unto the Angel How shall this be seeing I know not a Man Vers 35. And the Angel answered and said unto her The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee and the Power of the Highest shall over-shadow thee Therefore also that Holy Thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God And Matth. 1.18 Mary was found with Child of the Holy Ghost From both these Scriptures it appears that our Lord Jesus was conceived by the Holy Ghost the Power of the Highest which is God Not that any should imagine from hence that every particular attribute in God are so many Persons in the Godhead but essential Properties of the One
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
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
send Peace as a Token of the Promise of Peace which God had made in ver 23. 6thly To Ezck. 48.35 And the Name of the City from that Day shall be The Lord is there Which Scripture as well as those foregoing relates to the Presence and Appearance of God in some extraordinary manner in those places and therefore as the Name Jehovah hath no proper Relation to them so it hinders not the Proof of Christ's Deity by those several incommunicable Names of God that are positively given to him as proper Names Objection To those Scriptures that are brought to prove the Deity of the Son of God being such as relate to God in the Old Testament and are applied to Jesus Christ in the New What things are spoken of God under the Law may for another reason be spoken of Christ under the Gospel namely for the great and intimate Conjunction between God and Christ in respect of Dominion Power and Office that Christ hath obtained by the Donation of God Now if the Scriptures deliver the very same things of Moses Exod. 32.7 Acts 7.35 and of others that are elsewhere written of God himself when as neither Moses nor those others had so great Conjunction with God as intervened between him and Christ much more deservedly may those things which are primarily spoken of God be accommodated to Christ by reason of that most singular and strict Conjunction that is between them Answ First It 's true that that which is primarily spoken of God to have brought up Israel out of Egypt or to be their Deliverer is also spoken of Moses and of the Angel Acts 7.35 the same did God send to be a Ruler and a Deliverer by the Hands of the Angel which appeared to him in the Bush Yet how remote this is to the case in hand let the Reader judg for Moses we see plainly by the Text is put as the third cause of Israel's Deliverance out of Egypt as only an Instrument in the Hand of God through the Ministry of the Angel And this agrees with the Old Testament Exod. 33.1 2. And the Lord said unto Moses Depart and go up hence thou and the People that thou hast brought up out of the Land of Egypt And I will send an Angel before thee And Psal 77.20 Thou leddest thy People like a Flock by the Hand of Moses and Aaron But the Case is far different with respect to the Son of God for as in the Old Testament it is absolutely spoken of God so in the New it is positively applied to Jesus Christ without such Restrictions as it is to Moses c. And though Christ hath Preheminence of Dominion and Power c. above others by Donation yet respecting only the Gist of God to him there is no reason that those things that are absolutely spoken of God in the Old Testament should be so positively spoken of Christ in the New unless Regard were had to his Divine Essence Secondly Forasmuch as those things that are primarily spoken of God in the Old Testament are referred to Christ in the New as the proper Subject to whom they belong it is a plain Demonstration of Christ's Divine Essence for otherwise they could not be equally applied to each of them Thirdly If Christ's Supremacy in Dominion and Power were only by Gift of Deputation from God he should not bear the supream Glory equal with him for as it cannot consist with common Right so God will not part with his own Glory to invest a Creature with it equally with himself Isa 42.8 This may suffice here in Answer to those Objections as to the Dominion and Power of Christ received by Donation from the Father I shall speak more distinctly to it elsewhere Objection To Acts 20.28 To feed the Church of God which he hath purchased with his own Blood The Blood which is called the own Blood of God is in such a way of speaking and for such a Cause as the Prophet saith that he which toucheth the People of God toucheth the Apple of God's Eye and it is so called for the exceeding great Conjunction that is between them and as he is the Lamb of God Answer I cannot perceive wherefore either of these Scriptures that are brought as Examples should be an Impediment to the Text that it should not be understood of the Union of both Natures in the Person of Christ seeing there is not the word Own conjoyned with them which intimates the special Affinity and Relation of the Blood of Christ unto God but that the Blood of Christ is called the own Blood of God for the exceeding great Conjunction that is between them not as the Adversaries mean as I suppose of the official Power and Dignity of Christ in subordination unto God but as the Assumption of the humane Nature by the Divine Person of the Son did relate that Nature to the Divine Nature of God Objection To Phil. 2.6 Who being in the form of God thought it not Robbery to be equal with God but made himself of no Reputation and took upon him the form of a Servant and was made in the Likeness of Men. This Equality of Christ with God is to be extended no further than as he was in the form of God But the form of a Thing as appeareth by the common Acceptation of the Word and by that following Clause He took upon him the form of a Servant and also from these words Mark 16.12 After that he appeared in another form unto two of them is something visibly and outwardly apparent such as is neither the Essence nor Power of any Thing but only the Exercise and Demonstration of Power In the Exercise thereof and Demonstration of Divine Power whereby he did Miracles was Christ in the form of God and equal to God And when it is said But emptied himself or as our English Translation hath it made himself of no Reputation this implieth that if Christ had not emptied himself of that Divine Form he had thought it a Prey to be equal with God Which cannot without the Implication of a Contradiction or what is worse of Blaspemy be affirmed of God But Christ had thought it Robbery or a prey to have been equal with God in doing Miracles if he had not laid aside the Exercise and Demonstration of Divine Power and fallen into the Hands of his Adversaries as a weak and vulgar Man For unless he had done so he had disobeyed the Commandment of God and consequently thought his Divine Form to be a Prey not a Gift of God and that it was to be kept on for his own Glory and not put off for the Glory of God Answer First It 's true that this Equality of Christ with God is to be extended no further than as he was in the form of God but yet I do not hold with these Men That his being in the form of God is only the visible outward and apparent Exercise and Demonstration of Divine
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
him that is true even in his Son Jesus Christ this is the true God and eternal Life These Words This is the true God cannot be referred unto Christ not as if he were not true God but because he is not the true God that is here spoken of as the Article added in the Greek doth intimate Neither doth it any whit advantage the Adversaries Cause who will have these Words This is the true God referred unto Christ that was mentioned immediately before For Relatives are not always referred to the Antecedent immediately going before but oftentimes to that which is chiefly spoken of as appeareth from these places Acts 7.18 19. chap. 10.6 2 John 6.7 Many Deceivers are entred into the World who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the Flesh This is a Deceiver and an Antichrist Wherefore the meaning of those words is thus This whereof I have last spoken is the true God namely he that for or sent it being as I suppose the Printers Mistake his Son Jesus Christ and it is also eternal Life namely to know Thee the true God and to be in him by his Son Jesus Christ with this accordeth John 7.3 Answer First As to the Article in the Greek it no ways hinders our Sense or Exposition of the Words but is rather a strengthning of it for is it not more emphatical to say This is the true God than to leave out the Article and read it This is true God and Eternal Life 2. Those Words This is the true God are not to be referred unto Christ because Relatives always are not referred to the Antecedent immediately going before as Acts 10.6 chap. 7.18 19. 2 Joh. 7. To this I answer 1st That these words 2 John 7. This is a Deceiver and an Antichrist are no Relative either to Christ or to the many Deceivers entred into the World but as they are connexed to the description of the many Deceivers and of the Antichrist 2dly To those two Texts Acts 7.18 19. chap. 10.6 It is one thing to say that such a one that knew not such a Person did such a thing and that lodgeth with such a Man shall tell thee what thou oughtest to do which points at the Person and is a Description of him and therefore referreth the Relative higher than the immediate Antecedent and another thing to divide and refer the Relative This is the true God from the immediate Antecedent Jesus Christ 1. Because the matter of the verse plainly relateth to the Son of God 2dly The Relative This is the true God must of necessity be referred to Jesus Christ because it is strongly fixed to the immediate Antecedent Jesus Christ by the Words Him that is true Him that we are in as if it were said The Son of God this Him that is true this Him that we are in viz. Jesus Christ is the true God and Eternal Life So that notwithstanding their Opposition to the Evidence of this Scripture it is not weakened but still remains a firm proof of the true Godhead of Jesus Christ Objection to Coloss 2.9 For in him dwelleth all the Fulness of the Godhead bodily This word Godhead may denote the Divine Will Eph. 3.19 and forasmuch as the Apostle doth oppose that Speech not to Persons but to Philosophy and legal Ceremonies it is evident it is meant of the Doctrine of Christ not of his Person But should we take the words as they sound yet could not such a divine Nature as the Adversaries have imagined be thence collected For it is true and manifest that the fulness of the Deity or Godhead doth now dwell in Christ even bodily in that his very Body is altogether Divine as being made both of Divine and Spiritual Matter namely that of the Heavens see 1 Cor. 15.45 47 48. and being endowed with divine Life and divine Splendor and divine Strength Answer First the words Godhead bodily cannot be limited as only denoting the Divine Will of God because the Signification of the Word will not allow of it Godhead is the Nature of God which is not only his Will but his Power Immensity yea all his essential Properties and Perfections Secondly Nor can we confine this Text to the parallel of Ephes 3.19 And to know the Love of Christ which passeth Knowledg that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God viz. of his Love in all its parts because there wants the words Godhead bodily to be filled with all the fulness of the Godhead bodily is to have all the fulness of the Nature and Perfection of God dwelling really perfectly and solidly in him or the whole Spiritual Substance of God Thirdly It is apparently clear that the Person of Christ and not his Doctrine must be understood to have all the fulness of the Godhead dwelling in him For it is said Coloss 2.8 Beware lest any Man spoil you through Philosophy and vain Deceit after the Traditions of Men after the Rudiments of the World and not after Christ For in him viz. in Christ dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead or Nature of God bodily They say indeed that by Him is meant the Doctrine and not the Person of Christ and that by Godhead is meant his Divine Will and so that the fulness of his Divine Will viz. the revealed Will of God otherwise it is incommunicable to the humane Nature dwelleth in the Doctrine of Christ But certain and plain it is that by Him which betokens a Person must be understood the Person it relateth to viz. Christ and the revealed Will of God is the Doctrine of Jesus Christ which their meaning is must dwell in the Doctrine of Christ but how absurd and foolish this is let the Reader judg Fourthly Those words are not simply opposed to Philosophy but with some respect to the Persons in whom it dwelt that we should beware lest any Man spoil us through Philosophy and Vain Deceit and not after Christ viz. his Doctrine in opposition to their Doctrine and his Person in opposition to their Persons and his Fountain viz. the fulness of the Godhead in opposition to their Fountain viz. the Traditions of Men and the Rudiments of the World So that these words In him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily must of necessity be understood of the fulness of the Divine Nature of God in the Person of Jesus Christ through the Union of both his Natures Fifthly For them to say that this fulness of Godhead in Jesus Christ is not of that supream Divine Nature of God as we are treating of but of an inferiour Divine Nature floweth only from the Notions of their own Brains for there is no such thing in 1 Cor. 15. nor in any other part of the Holy Scripture for though Christ as Man and others by way of Gift have had something of Divine Power and Splendor invested in them yet this is not properly another different Godhead but a Demonstration of the same Supream Deity
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
before So that I see not the least grounds wherefore they should impose such an unnatural sense upon the words but that they must of necessity be understood of the Creation of all things in Heaven and Earth by Jesus Christ And though they make this Exception that it is not said the Heavens and the Earth were created by him but only the things contained in them yet this omission cannot be an Exclusion of them nor hinder what is asserted in the Text but that it remains a sufficient proof of the Deity of Jesus Christ Objection to Heb. 1.10 This Author to the Hebrews doth not refer the Creation of Heaven and Earth unto Christ but only the abolishing of them Answer First I do affirm that the Creation of Heaven and Earth must of necessity be applied to Jesus Christ because the word and in the beginning of the Verse is a conjunctive word that joins this Verse to the Words going before which relate to the Son of God so that as in ver 8. we read But unto the Son he saith Thy Throne O God is for ever and ever So also by virtue of the Conjunction with ver 10. it is proper to understand the Text as if the Apostle should instead of the word and have said But unto the Son he said Thou Lord in the Beginning hast laid the Foundation of the Earth c. And this Conjunction is put for the same purpose for in Psal 102.25 from whence this Text is taken there is none of it Secondly There can be no reason assigned wherefore the abolishing of the Heavens should only be referred to Christ when it is not by virtue of a Conjunction immediately annexed but of one annexed to the Creation of them which doth preceed and therefore that of the Creation is primarily to be referred to the Son of God Objection to those Scriptures wherein the Deity of Christ is proved from that Divine Worship and Adoration which is given to him Forasmuch as all the places that testify concerning Christ's divine Honour do also testify that this Divine Honour was given to him at a certain Time and for a certain Cause it is plain that the Divine Nature of Christ cannot thence be collected And whereas it is said Isa 42.8 I will not give my Glory to another it is meant as is presently added nor my Praise to graven Images God speaketh of them who have no Communion with him and to whom if any Glory and Honour be ascribed it redounded not to him But he saith not that he will not communicate his Glory with such a one as Christ which is dependent of him and subordinate to him for by this means no Diminution of his Glory is made since the whole is referred to him Answer First Though some places that testify concerning Christ's Honour do also testify that this Honour was given to him as at the time of his Exaltation and because he had a Name given him above every name Phil. 2.9 10. Yet the Divine Nature of Christ may be collected from his Divine Honour and Worship given to him For the time and cause of the Exaltation and Honour of Christ's humane Nature by Donation doth not hinder the truth of his Divine Essence from the Divine Honour ascribed to him because such Honour and Worship is not nor cannot be simply conferred on Christ as Man but by virtue of his Divine Person and this appears from what is already proved that God only is to be worshipped with Divine Worship even Him only who is God by Nature Secondly To Isa 42.8 they say That God's not giving his Gloty to another is an exclusion of Graven Images but they will not allow it as a total Exclusion of all others Answer It 's true that Graven Images are excluded and so also are all others whatsoever that are created Beings for the words themselves import that besides Graven Images he will not give his Glory to another viz. Nature nor Person So that even the Son himself if he had not an uncreated Existence subsisting in the Nature of God he would be excluded from Divine Glory and therefore the Divine Glory ascribed to him proves him to be a Divine Person As to the rest of those Scriptures that I have cited to prove the Deity of Jesus Christ by the Divine Honour and Adoration given to him I have not met with any that have assailed them and therefore I hope that no material Objection can be made against them CHAP. II. Wherein is answered some Objections that are inferred by our Adversaries from divers Texts of Scripture against the Deity of Jesus Christ OBjection from Mark 13.32 But of that Day and that Hour knoweth no Man no not the Angels which are in Heaven neither the Son but the Father From this Scripture some do conclude that Christ is not God because he knew not all things Answer The Humanity of Christ might not know all things until they were revealed by his Divine Person as it did not know of that Day nor Hour for the Divine Person had not yet revealed it and though the Humanity of Christ which is not the Divine Person of the Son but is only a part of Christ's Person is here called the Son yet this impedes not the Text of this Exposition for the Humanity of Christ is sometimes put for his Divine Nature John 13.13 Objection from Acts 2.36 Therefore let all the House of Israel know assuredly that God hath made that same Jesus whom ye have crucified both Lord and Christ From whence is formed this Syllogism He that was made Lord by another he if he be a God was also made a God by another But Jesus of whom it is certain that he is a God was made Lord by God Therefore he was also made a God by him Answer This Syllogism may be confessed as it is reconcileable to the Human Nature of Christ for as he was Man he had a Name given him above every Name and a Lordship or Kingdom and Authority to execute Judgment and was called Lord Phil. 2.8 9. Isa 53.12 Joh. 17.27 29. And so also as he did officially minister the Power of God and was one to whom the Word of the Lord came he may be called God Joh. 10.35 36. Heb. 1.1 and in this Sense he may be said to be made a God by the Father but as this is not the proper or supream Godhead and Lordship of Christ because it is not natural nor essential so doth it not oppose his natural essential and supream Godhead and Lordship as he was God from all Eternity Objection from Colossians 1.15 where Christ is said to be the First-born of every Creature The First-born must always be contained in the number of them of whom except the Parents it is said to be the First-born and consequently Christ must be comprehended in the Number of Creatures whose First-born he is said to be Answer Christ's being the First-born of every Creature neither includes him
needless for the Holy Ghost to frame the Body of our Lord or else that the Divine Nature of the Son of God was idle Will you grant then which by this your Reason must needs follow because Christ was conceived by the Holy Ghost therefore God the Father was idle and not the prime Worker of this marvellous Conception What is here cited out of this learned Man sufficiently shews the Weakness of this Objection against the Deity of Jesus Christ CHAP. IV. Wherein is answered some Objections against the Scriptures that prove the Deity of the Holy Ghost OBjection to Matth. 28.19 Baptizing them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost It cannot be rightly inferred that because the Holy Spirit is here ranked with the Father and the Son therefore he is equal to them by this account when the Apostle 1 Tim. 5.21 saith I charge thee Gr. I obtest before God and the Lord Jesus Christ and the elect Angels that thou observe these things without Prejudice doing nothing by Partiality joyning the elect Angels with the Father and the Son this would imply that the elect Angels are equal with the Father and the Son Answer There is not the same reason to imply from this of Timothy that the elect Angels are equal to the Father and the Son as there is for the Holy Spirit 's Equality with them from Matth. 28. For if we rightly consider these two Scriptures we may easily see that they are not Parallels but that the Holy Spirit and the elect Angels are joined together with the Father and the Son upon far different accounts the one are ranked together not as Equals with the Father and the Son but because they are ministring Spirits that have their Eyes on the Church of God and behold the Order and Discipline of it whose Work and Office is to attend upon it and be familiar about it 1 Cor. 11.10 Psal 34.7 Insomuch that we ought to be very careful of speaking or doing any unseemly thing that might hinder the Ministration of those blessed and Holy Spirits Now for this cause Paul exhorteth Timothy to observe those things as in the Presence of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ and the Holy Angels and therefore they are ranked together and not as Equals in Nature and Divine Worship for they refuse to assume that Glory which is peculiarly proper to God alone Rev. 22. So that this Text relates to the Inspection of Angels into the Obedience of the Saints in the way of which Protection is ministred to them by the Angels who are said to encamp round about those that fear the Lord Psal 34.7 Or else the Apostle shews by ranking these three together that the Angels are Witnesses to this Charge though in all things else they cannot be unless they could search the Heart and try the Reins And why may not the Apostle take them in as Witnesses as Moses did who called Heaven and Earth viz. God Angels and Men joining them as Witnesses against Israel that he had set before them Life and Death c. Deut. 30.19 But the Holy Spirit Matth. 28. is not ranked together with the Father and the Son only as a ministring Spirit or as one that beareth Witness together with them in any matter but to be equally honoured with them both for in this Ordinance of Baptism wherein we worship God in acknowledging what he hath done for us in order to Salvation we are commanded to ascribe it to the Father Son and Holy Spirit And there is reason for it For though the Father had accepted the Merits of his Son on conditions of true Faith and Repentance yet if the Holy Spirit had not undertaken to work these Conditions in us we had been lost so that we are obliged both from the Work it self and the Command of God to attribute the same Honour to the one as to the other and herein chiefly lies the Difference of this Text from that of Timothy because this commands Divine Worship to be given to the Holy Ghost together with the Father and the Son which declares his Divine Nature Objection to Isa 6.9 10. compared with Acts 28.25 26 27. To these two Scriptures I have met with Biddle's Objections stated and answered ready to my Hand by Mr. Estwick in his Confutation of Biddle's Confession of Faith Page 307. whose Words I shall prefer rather than my own Biddle In the one place the Lord said in the other the Holy Ghost therefore the Adversaries do conclude the Holy Spirit is the Lord. This arguing is very frivolous for at this rate I may conclude that Moses is the Lord compare Exod. 32.11 Israelites are called God's People ver 7. God calls them the People of Moses and Isa 65.1 I am found of them that sought me not Rom. 10.20 Isaiah is more bold and saith I was found of them that asked not after me therefore Isaiah is the Lord. God is said by his Power to save us 2 Tim. 1.8 9. Paul attributes the same to himself 1 Cor. 9.22 and to Timothy 1 Tim. 4.16 therefore Paul yea Timothy is God If the Adversaries say these things are otherwise ascribed unto the Lord than to the Men aforesaid I answer it is more than the Texts themselves hold forth which neither express nor intimate any such thing If they say that if not in these yet other Texts and the Nature of the thing it self doth sufficiently teach it I reply that I can make the same Answer touching the Lord and his Holy Spirit but it is well that there is such an Intimation in the Texts themselves for in the one the Lord spake to Isaiah in a Vision in the other That the Holy Ghost spake them by Isaiah to the Fathers These two are different since Isaiah only heard these Words in the Vision for had the Fathers been there why should God bid Isaiah go and tell them to the People Paul ascribes these Words to the Holy Ghost to intimate only that whatsoever was spoken in the Scripture was recorded by the Inspiration of the Holy Spirit and so spoken by him Answer Your Elusions to avoid the strength of the Argument are vain and your Examples taken out of the Scriptures are fallacia parium are unlike to this in hand Sometimes an Instrument speaks in the Name of the great God that sent him This is your Evasion therefore it must be so taken Isa 6. compared with Acts 28. this is a plain Fallacy Exod. 32. Moses calleth the Israelites God's People in Covenant with him and God calls them the People of Moses being under the Curse of the Law by reason of their Idolatry and because he was God's Instrument to bring them out of Egypt and to conduct them in the Wilderness it is apparent to every one and the Text holds it forth that they were otherwise God's People and otherwise the People of Moses he being a finite distinct and separate Substance from the
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
if they will run the Comparison to demonstrate the Being of God we must then conclude that as the Spirit or Soul of Man being the most excellent part of his Nature is essential to his Being so by this Rule is the Spirit of God also which proves his Deity Objection from John 1.32 And John bare Record saying I saw the Spirit descending from Heaven like a Dove and it abode upon him The Spirit is not God because he changed place and descended in a bodily Shape Answer First This Descension of the Holy Ghost disproveth not his Deity because the like hath been said of God in Gen. 11.5 And the Lord came down to see the City and the Tower And in Gen. 18.21 I will go down now and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it And the Lord descended on Mount Sinai Exod. 34.5 Secondly Although the most High God hath no shape yet he appeared to Abraham in the Shape of a Man representing his Assumption of that Nature Gen. 18.2 22. chap. 19.1 and therefore this Objection against the Deity of the Holy Ghost is of no weight and not only from the aforesaid Example but also because we find that when the Holy Ghost fell on the Disciples that there were cloven Tongues which was an outward and visible sign of the Gifts and Operation of the Holy Spirit and did neither betoken his corporal Substance nor was a description of his Shape In like manner the Holy Spirit 's descending in the bodily shape of a Dove did neither betoken his corporal Substance nor change of place but like Noah's Dove Peace and Glad-tidings towards Men. For Peter in his first Epistle chap. 3.20 21. makes the Waters of Noah a Type of Gospel-Baptism and then as after Noah's Ark did rest upon dry Ground a Dove was the minister of glad-tidings to him and all his House so God was pleased in answer to that Type and as was fittest to represent the Innocency of Christ after his Baptism and Salvation from the Water to send the Holy Ghost to him in the same shape and afterwards to his Disciples to minister such divine Power and Comfort as might strengthen comfort and incourage them to that work which God had appointed for them so that there is not the least reason from this Scripture to deny the Deity of the Holy Spirit Objection from John 16.13 Howbeit when He the Spirit of Truth is come he will guide you into all Truth for he shall not speak of himself but whatsoever he shall hear that shall he speak and he will shew you things to come Ver. 14. He shall glorify me for he shall receive of mine and shall shew it unto you Ver. 15. All things that the Father hath are mine therefore said I that he shall take of mine and shall shew it unto you The Holy Spirit is here said not to speak of himself but what he hears which sheweth that he receiveth those things by Commission from another and therefore he is not God for God cannot be said to receive any thing from another which he had not before Answer First The Holy Spirit must be two ways considered 1. Essentially as he is essentially God 2. Personally as he is a Divine Person in the Godhead First As he is essentially God he can neither receive Commission or be under the direction of any other of what he should either do or speak 2dly As he is a Divine Person or Subsistent in the Godhead and proceedeth from the Father and the Son and hath his peculiar Office he may be said to receive to speak and be sent by Comission from another he may be inferiour in Office though not in Nature to the other Divine Persons And hence it is that some times the Holy Ghost is said to be sent in another's Name and given to us John 14.26 and at other times it is spoken as of his Power in himself to work according to his Will John 16.7 8. 1 Cor. 12.11 Now each of these are proper to the Holy Ghost viz. to be given sent to receive and speak from another or to have Power in himself to work as he will The first they respect his Office according to his Personal Subsistence by procession from the Father and the Son and not that he had not the Knowledg of those things before and the other takes in the Divine Essence too Secondly It may be further said That the Disciples of our Lord had much darkness on them and were ignorant of many things contained in the Holy Scriptures till Christ did enlighten their Understandings and therefore they might not have fully understood and digested this sacred Truth for we read of some which said We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost Luke 24.45 Acts 1.6 Acts. 19.2 This being premised our Lord Jesus might speak this to assure them of the Holy Ghost's infallible Conduct into all Truth not only because he is the Spirit of Truth himself which cannot err but also because he should not speak only as a single voluntary Act of his own but with the mutual concurrence of the Father and the Son So that whatsoever he should hear actually interceded for by Christ and assented to by God the Father which should be needful for us to know that the Holy Spirit should shew unto us So that this Scripture wherein the Holy Ghost is said not to speak of himself but what he hears c. hath a peculiar relation unto his Ministerial Office which cannot be repugnant to his Divine Nature for one Person may be inferiour to another in Office and yet of the same Nature as hath been said Objection from Rev. 1.1 13. ch 2.7 where it appears that the Spirit which the seven Churches of Asia were required to hearken unto was none other but the Angel that was sent to John and did personate Jesus Christ and therefore the Holy Spirit cannot be God equal with the Father Answer The Angel that personated Jesus Christ the same bid the Apostle John to write to the seven Churches of Asia But in all the Epistles he did not speak to him in his own Name or first Person nor dictate the Epistles as from himself but from the Person of Jesus Christ saying unto John Write these things saith he viz. the Son of God the First and the Last which was Dead and is Alive c. So that when the Angel in the conclusive part of the Epistles saith to John He that hath an Ear let him hear what the Spirit saith to the Churches he speaks not of and from himself but of Jesus Christ who is that Spirit whom they are bid to hear And this agrees with 2 Cor. 3.17 The Lord is that Spirit and is farther confirmed and laid as a Foundation-Truth in the Beginning of this Vision viz. that what the Angel said must be referred to the Almighty Lord ver 8. I am Alpha and Omega the Beginning and