we do whence we conclude he is because he said so which if he were not he had asserted a Lye spoken Blasphemy and the Jews had been in the Right but seeing he said he was the Son of God he spoke the Truth which Socinians denying they bring the Lye and Blasphemy upon themselves and as good as say as the Jews did to Pilate He ought to die because he made himself the Son of God John 19 7. The other Text to prove how the Name Son of God when spoken of Christ signifies God is this Lazarus's Sickness was for the glory of God that the Son of God might be glorified thereby We may see how the word God is explained by that of Son of God So that whether the name God be taken Essentially or Personally still the Person of the Son is God for therein is but One Glory of God and of the Son of God the Father is glorified in the Son if they have one equal and common Glory then they have a common and equal Nature for we know the true and eternal Almighty God hath said My Glory will I not give to another In my Book I at large have asserted this Divine Filiation of the Lord Jesus with the manner of it and thereunto expected an Answer if they had been willing and able to give it That Divine and Proper Sonship and his Godhead John in several places of his Gospel and Epistles both as his own belief and in the very words of our blessed Lord in those Comparisons which he so often makes between himself and the Father lays it so clear that for an unprejudiced mind there is no ground left to doubt of it the Pronoun possessive My in the Singular number joined with Father which so frequently he makes use of doth denote the Singular Nature of his Sonship and distinguish it from every other Kind I shall mention only what when he was but Twelve Years old upon the occasion of his being found in the Temple asking the Doctors of the Law Questions and Mary having said Son why hast thou thus dealt with us He answered Wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business The meaning of which they understood not as the Evangelist observes he thereby signified another kind of Filiation that what had any relation to Mary As according to the Flesh he was her true and proper Son because begotten of her own Substance so in relation to the Spirit and Deity he is God's own and proper Son because begotten of the Substance of the Father If there be any such as certainly there is and in the Chapter about his Eternal Generation I sufficiently proved it then ye Socinians cannot deny the Lord Jesus to be He and if he be not the proper Son of the Father as the Apostle affirms he is then God the Father is not properly a Father for the works of Grace do not properly make one a Father but it must be the work of Nature of Humane in Men of Divine in God Humane Nature may receive some Divine Gifts but only thus much as it is capable of within certain bounds and degrees or else it were to make Humanity to be Deity But Christ hath not the Spirit by Measure or by Grace but by Nature and Infinitely in him which no Finite being such is every Creature is capable of the reason is because in Christ dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily Thus he must necessarily be God primarily and not derivatively or in part only for Divine Nature is indivisible either wholly God with all Attributes of the Godhead or no God at all No Creature Man Angel or Arch-Angel can have all the fulness of the Godhead dwelling in him because none of them is the Infinite God But since all the fulness of the Godhead dwelleth in the Person of Christ he must needs be God Infinite for all this fulness of the Godhead is a fulness of Nature of the Essential Attributes of that same Nature of Immensity Power Eternity and of any thing else proper to that Nature If in the whole Word of God there was no other Text but this to prove the Godhead of our Saviour it were sufficient to do 't it being so positive so full and so plain All is an Absolute word to be taken without any restriction or limitation whatsoever All Fulness What more can be said Of the Godhead What more Divine and Expressive But what upon the matter remains in the same place is this Whether a God and a God and a God do not amount to more than One God To take the thing as I ought and not as some others do I say that your Arithmetick in this doth fail and deceive you wherefore believe Revelation before your Reason which indeed may tell you how in humane and finite things One One and One make Three but Revelation which contradicteth not it self calls the Father God the Son God and the Holy Ghost God the same also saith there is but One God A Divine Nature common to Three Persons doth imply Three Persons but no more than One God which is One Divine Nature subsisting in Three Persons and Three Persons existing in One Nature Must I with Scripture conclude that Father Son and Holy Ghost are but One God or with your Arithmetick and Reason that they are Three Gods make but your Reason first agree with Revelation and then you and I shall agree so that the Dispute is more between your Reason and Scripture than between you and me But surely with me Gods Word is of greater Authority than your Reason ye must not suffer your Reason that Ignis fatuus to wander from the Rule Do you know what Solomon saith He that trusteth in his own heart is a Fool if you know it not I tell you and your Partner he speaks to you when he saith Cease from thine own Wisdom or Reason Now having done with this I must go back where I left and there shall find things of another nature you call Enemies to the common Rights and Liberties of Humane Nature Those who permit not every one a free liberty to make Interpretations and Inferences for themselves from Scriptures and this you ground on a false Supposition that Both the Word of God and the best means of understanding it are Originally and Vncontroulably given to every Man For Scripture and Experience convince us that every Man hath not the Word not Means to understand it and therefore 't is neither Originally nor Uncontroulably given to every Man this is a truth which elsewhere I made good and shall by Gods grace be ready again to do upon occasion But besides that it would require some time this is no place to do 't and I ever avoid going from the Question However this I say that ye go upon a Principle destructive to Order if every one must be allowed to believe and profess what he pleases tho' never so
already setled by Law you thereby introduce Confusion into the Church which may soon become Anarchy in the Government which to prevent in my humble Address to the Parliament I thought the Laws now in being about such things might be executed and if in their Wisdom they thought fit new ones be enacted What Papists believe or do as to Authority about Interpretation of Scriptures is no Rule nor Precedent for us there is a sad Experience in the World of the nature of the Spirit which they are acted by and of the Methods they have taken to support their spiritual Tyranny over the Consciences and Souls yea Lives of Men they made themselves Parties and Judges and would admit or hear of no Reasons contrary to theirs which were grounded not upon God's Word tho' in some things they pretend it but their own Traditions and Practice to their Church Now among us you find no such thing the Law is open for you if you take Scripture to be it whereof you sadly wrest the Words contrary to their natural Sense without giving any good Reason for it and you stand by your selves in defiance and opposition of the general Consent of the Universal Church which condemned those unsound Men when they appeared against the Person of our Saviour and Lord. And here I must say we no more than you receive the Authority of Antiquity or of Fathers upon their own bottom for we agree they were fallible when they said so and so but whether in so saying they spake truth is well worth enquiry into I will compare them with Scripture and if they agree with it I will agree with them And this is to me a strengthning Evidence that I am not singular seeing others as well as I could in the Word of God find those Truths which I do believe Wo be to him that is alone abounds in his own Sense and thinks he knows more than all the World besides for the application of Scripture Truths it may be every ones Right to direct himself by his own Reason enlightned by the Spirit as to the Explication a very great care ought to be had and still according to the Rule of God's Word with all the help he can get besides but when they have Opinions which they find are generally opposed People so modest so quiet and of the Character they give of themselves not to disturb others should keep it within themselves and not be so servent as ye are to spread it abroad whether your Zeal be without or against Knowledg And if every one who pretends to be a Member of the Church be so busie as ye are to promote their Opinions and no Curb be put upon Interpretations then no end of Heresie Blasphemy or of all sorts of the worst Opinions But before I proceed I think fit to pull down that Strong-hold of theirs as they take it to be tho' rather Sandy Foundation of a free liberty for every one to make what interpretations they please and that I shall the more willingly do tho' as briefly as I can because 't is a Matter controverted between them and us which I had no occasion to meddle with in my Book To begin I say as there is a Right so there is a false Interpretation of Scripture The Right is that which gives the true sense and meaning the False on the contrary Now if every private Man might Interpret Scripture what monstrous Interpretations would there be as we see it too much in the World and this is the ground of Heresy Blasphemy and Fanaticism which to prevent the Lord Jesus as St. Paul saith in those two places where he mentions the Offices in the Church hath settled Prophets and Teachers Every private Man may Read but not Interpret Scripture which in this Case is the first thing to be known For saith the Apostle knowing this first that no Prophecy of the Scripture is of any private Interpretation so the Interpretation must come from whence the Revelation came 't is but one and the same Spring therefore in the next Verse he clears the Matter For Prophecy came not in old time by the Will of Man but holy Men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost which doth exclude as humane private Revelation so also humane private Interpretation And herein Paul joineth with Peter when he puts this Question Do all Interpret Which contains an Exclusive how all do not no more than all are no workers of Miracles Furthermore we must know how Scripture hath a binding Power not only directive but also decisive over the Conscience so that thereby the Conscience far from having that free liberty is tied and bound to the determination of the Word or else no Man that believes an Opinion contrary to sound Doctrine and never so heretical and blasphemous could be guilty of Sin But we are assured of the contrary for they who wrest the Scriptures do so unto their own destruction tho' a man must be very cautious not to go against his Conscience yet where there is a Competition between God and Man the Word of God and the Judgment of Man when each challenge of us a Consent we must give it the Word which certainly is true and infallible preferably before the Conscience which may be seduced and erroneous which happens often when 't is guided by humane Reason In Scripture is in matters of Faith a convincing and constraining Power which in Conscience we are bound to submit to in Humane things the Judge is not properly Judge except he Judges according to the Law for he hath no power to alter or corrupt but to declare the true sense of it The Interpretation of the Divine Law which the Question is now about may happen to be mistaken but the Law never for 't is Infallible as being the Word of the True and Infallible God hence is derived its Divine and Undisputable Authority beyond that of any thing else and it should work upon men more than Miracles even than raising from the Dead which may be called the greatest of all for they that hear not Moses and the Prophets will not be perswaded tho' one rose from the Dead The reason is because therein the Spirit of God speaks and thereby leads us into all Truth And indeed if Scripture was not the end of Debates in matters of Religion our Conscience could never be settled nor quiet for that same thing no Humane Reason Power or Judgment is able to effect but we aquiesce to rest and depend upon the Word of the God of Truth and if at the Bar of Conscience there was no such binding Rule but men were left to their own private Judgment none would be bound to believe Scripture but always live amidst Doubts Difficulties and Conjectures not to say singular Notions Fancies and Dreams and so we could never be at a certainty Besides that after this there were no Sin in any man to receive any
and to be incarnate being made Flesh and Incarnation signifie the same May be you will deny it 't is but what some of yours do in a thing of the like nature as that to make and to create the World signifie not the same thing If the Word which as S. John saith was God was made Flesh I think that according to all Rules of Logick out of those Premises we may conclude how God was incarnate or made Flesh and that Act we may well call Incarnation As to the other part that it is only by Deduction you cannot be ignorant how there are such Deductions as are equivalent or next to the Expression for when the chief Assertion contained in Scripture is true so must also be whatsoever is therein included and in the Explication of it drawn by a true and right Consequence Thus tho' in the Sixth Commandment to give one Poyson be not expressed yet by a true and certain Consequence 't is deduce out of these Words Thou shalt not kill so starving one to death is adjudged Murther and punished as such Tho Incest be not expressed in the Seventh yet none will deny it to be forbidden under these Words Thou shalt not commit Adultery so is Fornication and so of every other Precept wherein when a Sin is forbidden all of the same kind are so and also the Virtue contrary to the Sin is prescribed And tho there were some difference in the Nature of the thing yet hence we infer this certain Truth that tho some things be not expresly set down in Scripture yet are therein contained and thence deduced by a true and lawful Consequence Of this sort are the words Trinity and Incarnation and if the Names then also the Things for the Use of Words is to signifie Things As to what is added in Answer to the Assertion that the Son of God was made Man how the Vnitarian will say The Son of God doth not always signifie God 't is thereby implyed that sometimes it doth and that grants what we desire for thus we know that when it is simply and absolutely attributed to Christ which is never so to any Angel or Man we may conclude that then it necessarily signifies God As to what is answered to the other Text The Word was made Flesh that the Word doth not plainly signifie God I only say this how John saith the word was God I leave them in his hands and let them come off as they can As to the Third Text the Vnitarian will say what he said before That God may be manifest in the Flesh without being incarnate he may say what he pleases if he proves nothing nay not so much as go about it surely they claim a Priviledge to be believed in what they say upon their bare word but seeing they give no reason for what they say we may suppose those great Masters of Reason have none to give their Reason fails them and is succeeded by Passion I see they found out a short way to answer all Arguments against them either with not taking notice of them and thus they answer my Book or with denying every thing without giving any Reason for it This puts me in mind of a common Saying when I was in the Philosophy School Plus negabit asinus quà m probabit Philosophus The dullest Fellow in the World can deny more than the greatest Philosopher is able to prove do but always deny and at last the Philosopher will have nothing to say There is no arguing against those who deny Principles now this is a great one for Men to give Reason as for what they affirm so for what they deny this is the part of Rational Men We attack them out of Scripture and they ought in our way to answer us out of the same as their School-Arguments we answer in their way But to return to what the Unitarian saith that The Son of God doth not always signifie God I say 't is not always necessary to our purpose it should And to state the Question well these two things ought to be observed First The Question is not at all about Angels or Men but about the Person of the Lord Jesus The Second The Name God is not improperly taken This being premised I say how the words Son of God when spoken of Christ do signifie God which to prove out of many Texts I shall bring only two in S. John's Gospel and if in the whole Bible there was but one yet it would be sufficient for every word therein is Truth and if once the Holy Ghost therein declares the Son of God to signifie God 't is not in the power of Men or Devils to make it otherwise Besides that the two Texts are so plain that there is no ground left to Cavil The first place is about the Interpretation given some words spoken by our blessed Lord whereby said the Jews thou makest thy self God which our Saviour rendered by these I said I am the Son of God So that the words God Son of God signifie just the same The Question between our Lord and the Jews was not about the meaning of what he had said they were agreed about it but the Dispute was whether those words were Blasphemy which they affirmed and he denied Those words in question spoken by our Saviour are in ver 30. I and my Father are One which because they are most material to the Question I shall thereupon observe this How therein Christ expresses Two Persons Himself and the Father the word I he explains by the name Son I said I am the Son of God and as by the first words of the Verse he makes a distinction of Persons so by the last he affirms a Oneness between Him and the Father when he saith they are One. This Oneness cannot be of a Personality which already he hath distinguished what else then can it be but in Nature and consequently in the Attributes thereunto belonging With this Text is to be compared the other I am in the Father and the Father in me It is very idle and frivolous for them to think they are One only in Will and Consent for if our Saviour's meaning had been only so and no farther the Jews would never have branded it with Blasphemy nor offered to have stoned him for it they well knew how by their Law no Man could be guilty of Blasphemy for saying his Will and Consent was one with God's for they were commanded to conform their Will and Mind to the Will of God that thereby might be a perfect agreement between their God and them between his Law and their Obedience Therefore to make this in their opinion to be Blasphemy there must be something of another nature which they declare plainly enough because that thou being a Man makest thy self God So the Question came to this Whether the Lord Jesus was God Which the Jews denied as now Socinians do but our Lord affirmed as after him
Apostles tho they speak loud and plainly enough whence we may well conclude you to be none of his Sheep whereof the great Shepherd himself gives this to be the proper Character that they hear and know his voice only and not the voice of strangers and they follow him when he leads them out but ye follow him not only the Devices and Inventions of your own Heart Thus to return to you who falsly would bring in your selves as Disciples of the Lord Jesus we know that as there is a Church of Christ so there is a Synagogue of Satan and that the Devil hath his Martyrs as well as the Lord Jesus some have been so far hardened as to dye for denying there is a God therefore 't is neither the Manner nor the Place but the Cause of Death which makes the Martyr 't is neither Smithfield in London nor Campo di Fiori in Rome for as the most honest Men so the greatest Villains may happen to be executed in both neither must we believe those who falsly would call themselves Disciples of Christ and insinuate as if they suffer'd for his Cause when 't is for their Heresies and Blasphemies I remember the Apostles words how false Apostles deceitful Workers would transform themselves into the Apostles of Christ and no marvel for Satan himself is transformed into an Angel of Light Do not pretend to say ye are for Christ when ye are against him As to your mis-applying of the Text to me let me advise you to be more conversant with Scripture and therein you may learn how at another time more fitly to adapt your Comparisons and better to apply Texts and not as you would so ingeniously screw out of that how you think me an unfit Writer in behalf of the Trinity which you believe not and therefore did not so much as read over my Book and I to answer ad hominem by a rational and natural Consequence out of your own Words that you have not so much as read over my Book of the Trinity do conclude you to be a rash giddy and unfit Judge whether or not I am an unfit Writer in behalf of the Trinity Thus go you off the Stage like a Snuff I answer you in your way because you answer me not in mine AN ANSWER TO THE Second Letter HAVING done with one Antagonist I must now turn to the other Between them both they shar'd the Task to try which of the two could most wrest and mis-represent things and give a Man ill Language wherein it must be owned this last yields it not to the first for they writ after the same manner and whose steps about my Epistle he follows in his first Page and part of the next wherein he would seem to soar high in his politick Enthusiasms and then falls down right into a Nonsense which he would father upon me certainly a Man hath little to say or do that stumbles at the Threshold and falls a gathering Straws when there are solid and good things to mind and instead of examining high Matters of Divinity offered he to put off the Blow and for Diversion sake turns to be a Grammarian and pittifully falls upon cavilling at Words This like the Dog in the Fable is to snap at the Shadow and leave the Body My words are these To time things well is one of the best parts of Prudence To say it is the part of a prudent Man to act in due time and Season is there any thing contrary to Sense and Reason By the word Part is not meant any such thing as we call Essential part as the Soul is to Man or what we call Integrant part such are an Arm or a Leg to the Body but 't is an usual way of speaking to say 'T is the part of a Wise Man not to be Hasty 't is the part of a Christian to Forgive to signifie how 't is proper for and belongs to a Wise Man not to be Rash and to a Christian to Forgive I add and one of the most Essential Circumstances of our Actions the meaning is plain how Timing things well is one of the chief and most necessary Circumstances of our Actions This is no just cause for any Man thereupon to entertain such idle and extravagant Fancies as we see him to do Without being a great Philosopher one may know there are several Circumstances belonging to every Action An ordinary Rhetorician can tell the Rule quis quid ubi quibus auxiliis cur quomodo quando I take Agent Time and Place to be three Concomitants of any Action and without the three no Action so then the prudential part of an Agent in the Act and to make it succeed is to chuse a fit and proper Time to apply a Remedy take Physick or be let Blood if done in due time is to observe one of the chief and necessary Circumstances If the word Essential joyned to Circumstance doth disquiet you then by the word most Essential is improperly understood the Circumstance most necessary to be observed we use to say a thing most Essential or most Necessary most to the purpose most Important and most Material to signifie the same thing or near upon 't I take the Essence whether Physically or Metaphysically to be the same with the Nature of the thing And do you not think that Circumstances have their Nature and that there is the Nature of an Accident as of a Substance and that to the end one may Act well there is that which is Necessary and most Necessary God forbid when we speak of Gods Nature or even of matters of Philosophy we should make no difference between Essence and Circumstance but in Discourse 't is usual as you know too well to make use of such improper and figurative Expressions Doth not our Grammar tell us that Nouns Adjectives are compared and that there are three degrees of Comparison have ye so far forgotten it Thus the word Essential is an Adjective whereof the Superlative we call most Essential and we may say Essential more and most Essential Surely ye judicious and acute Sophisters if ever you learned Logick were taught that there is a Predicament called Proprium and that there is a Proprium not only primô but also quartô modô Quod convenit soli semper omni which in Grammar words we may call most proper in the Superlative degree And ye Gentlemen for so I must call you tho' I would have call'd you by your Names if ye had subscrib'd your Letters ye Gentlemen Socinians who are so much for Tropes and Figures might know how 't is usual by an Hyperbole to represent things with exaggeration as whiter than Snow blacker than Pitch and if such manners of speaking with exaggeration be admitted in a common Discourse much more may this improper one now in question So sometimes a thing which we like well we call best of all thus if instead of saying Essential I said most Essential I
did use the Superlative degree instead of the Positive But these are but Quibbles of your own which argues that seeing you stick at such things you have little else to say for your selves ye leave things for Words and like drowning Men lay hold upon any thing that lieth in your way to save a sinking Cause when no serious Man but would think it below himself to stay upon such things all your Observations and Inferences are an effect of a distemper'd Imagination and not of a sound Reason whereby you deserve the name of the Ridiculer ridiculed As well as you we know Essence to be one thing and Circumstance another but that were tolerable if ye did not as ye do jest with Holy things But I think to know where the Sore lieth ye do not like the words Essential nor Essence derivative nor primitive and tho' in the Schools of Divinity and Philosophy they be used yet ye dislike them because in so many Letters not to be found in Scripture but here you might see I use it not in a Religious but Civil account I own I am at a loss to find a way how to please such nice Spirits as ye are for of one side ye would not have us to use the words Essence Trinity Person because you say they are not in the word of God yet ye both find fault with me for making use of Scripture so much as I do against you in my Book So ye Gentlemen prodigies of Learning may now see which if you do not others do how ye sin against very common Rules what then will become of the four things you learned after you put your Wits to the rack to make others pass for Nonsensical Scriblers who hardly can write three words of good Sense Thus if your witty Premises do fall how can your learned Inferences stand These miserable Shifts which every solid Man would scorn to trouble his head with do tend only to shew how in you is an earnest desire but want of power to make others who differ from you to pass for Silly and Ridiculous so take to your selves what you had prepared for others But what 's all this to the Cause but a putting it off and running away from it Having shewed how when I penned my Epistle I thank God I was in my right Senses the next thing I must do is to prove my Charge against Socinianism which he calls false and disagreeing yet I make no doubt but it will stick First I call it Blasphemous and I shall prove it out of better Authority than that of the Polonian Knight or Bidle's or what the Reasons to the contrary of the Authors of both Letters can come to In order to 't I say there is a twofold Blasphemy one Positive when Men call or otherwise make God a Liar and to deny himself or the like and the other Negative when Men deny him to be Infinite Almighty or Eternal the first when God is made to be what he is not the second when he is deny'd to be what he is That Blasphemy is an abominable Injury directly against God's Nature Attributes or Works is so plainly and frequently set down in Scripture that I think unnecessary for me to prove it and if the same offence committed against God's Nature Attributes and Works be called Blasphemy and that committed against the Lord Jesus's Person be called Blasphemy it follows first that Jesus Christ is true God then secondly that whosoever denies Christ to be God in his Nature Attributes and Works he is a Blasphemer Now Socinianism denieth our Saviour Divine Nature and Essential Attributes of that Nature therefore Socinianism is a Blasphemous Opinion and Doctrine as much for denying Christ to be true God by Nature as by denying Divine Nature Almightiness and Eternity Now that the Sin called Blasphemy is sometimes committed against the Lord Jesus we learn it out of his own mouth upon the occasion of the Pharisees saying he did cast out Devils by Beelzebub the Prince of Devils this he called Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost the chiefest of all And when he was in the hands of the Jews the things by them done and spoken against him were by the Evangelist called Blasphemy and many other things spake they blasphemously against him Thus when the Jews spake against the things that were spoken by Paul and what were those things That Christ was the Son of God which to prove he made use of the words of Psalm 2. Thou art my Son c. in the proper Sense their speaking against this is call'd Contradicting and Blaspheming upon the same account in another place 't is said they opposed and blasphemed Thus Paul saith of himself he was before his Conversion a Blasphemer and compelled others to blaspheme that is to deny and speak ill of Christ so to say that Christ is not God of the same Nature and Power equal with the Father is as great a Blaspemy as to say he was or is a Sinner which any one that hath a religious Honour and Love for him and hopeth for Mercy at his hands when at the last day he shall appear in his Glory cannot and as much as in him lieth must not endure The next Charge against Socinianism is Atheism and Deism he doth couple them thinking to shew a Contradiction but there is none I say to worship the true God not in a true manner is Idolatry as well as to worship a false God Jeroboam for worshipping the true God in an undue manner is branded with Idolatry and provoked God as much as Ahab for worshipping Baal or a false God or else with Papists we must take away the Second Commandment In like manner I say not to know the true God in a true manner is Atheism as well as not to know him at all and the true way to know God is to know him in Christ without whom no true knowledge of God to that purpose the Apostle saith unto the Ephesians that at that time when they were without Christ they also were without God in the world That is they were Atheists and is it truly to know God in Christ only to know him there in a Creature seeing the very Heathens can tell us Praesentemque refert quae libet herba Deum and not rather as in him in whom dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily These fragments of Scripture please not Socinians for they not knowing God in Christ as his Eternal and Natural Father are thereby branded with Atheism As for Deism I take it in the Sense wherein it is taken now adays for a Deist is he who prefers Humane Reason before Faith and Revelation so you own my Charge is not a perfect Nonsense tho' in some degree you would have it still to be a Nonsense for you are pleased thus magisterially to decide Now I confess this sort of Charge is not so perfect a Nonsense as the other however I
Guide it must be first subordinate to Revelation which is the prescribed Rule and from which it ought not to recede no more than a Judge from the Law as Paul told Ananias or else he is in danger of falling into Precipices that 's the Light it must follow and as the Soul is guided by Reason so must Reason be by Revelation neither can Reason and outward Revelation do the Work without inward Revelation whereby Reason is supernaturally endowed and this is Faith a Gift of God this is the ground of our Blessed Saviour's giving his Father thanks for revealing the Mysteries of Faith and Salvation unto Babes that is those who as yet in his Sense were not capable of Reason and plainly tells Peter that if he knew and confessed him to be the Son of the living God Flesh and Blood or his natural Reason had not revealed it unto him but his Father which is in Heaven When the Lord Jesus was upon leaving this World he promised his Disciples a Guide what their own Reason no such thing but the Holy Ghost the Spirit of Truth who should teach them all things and bring to remembrance whatsoever he had said unto them and he was to abide with them for ever this Spirit of God is the right Guide whom true Protestants own to lead and guide us in the way of Salvation and this he doth not according to human Fancies or private Inspirations but according to the Rule of the Word for saith our Saviour he shall receive of mine that is my Word and shall shew it unto you for he shall not speak of himself he teaches and applies the Word and his working is by the Apostle called the Spirit of a sound Mind which God hath given us so that a sound Mind an Orthodoxy in the Faith is an Effect of God's Gift not of our Reason or of any thing else in us wherefore David saith give me Vnderstanding according to thy Word But these things Socinians have been told over and over and in the Preface and latter end of my Book I think I said enough to satisfie unbyassed Persons so have others too this is the sure and infallible Guide which God hath given us and not any human Authority different from or contrary to it the Pope we cannot own for he is a Party and sets up for himself nor the antient Writers if they deviate from the Rule but 't is a good Argument for the things wherein they follow it Men must not be so selfish and wilful as to despise others who may have the Spirit of God as well as themselves and being Witnesses of those Times are able to inform us how things stood in their time and cannot be partial for this wherein we live The Author of the first Letter hath a touch upon the matter and that 's all 't is about the interpretation of what S. John saith the Word was made Flesh I confess there is a great difference in the interpretation we say according to the natural Signification the Word or Son of God took upon him our human Nature they say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we translate the Word signifies Reason rather than Word and they infer that the Reason or Wisdom of God was communicated unto Jesus Christ this is a very much forced Interpretation and fetch'd afar off for all along the Word is spoken of as a Subject and they would make a shift to turn it into the Predicate Now what shall we do of these two Opinions to find out the true one for if every Person or Party be allowed such a Latitude as to interpret things after their own Fancy there will be no end of false Glosses and wrong Interpretations how doth the Goldsmith do to know true Gold or Silver from that which is false he brings it to the Touch-stone so must we in this case between them and us is a Difference the Party must not be the Judge 't is not just they should be Judges in their own cause nor we in ours then we must agree about a Judge such as is impartial and infallible and none but God is such now God doth not immediatly speak from Heaven for he doth it in his Word that is his Will and ought to be our Law and Rule in matters of Faith I will believe no Man's Assertion except out of Scripture he proves it to me the like he may justly expect from me but in case of that Text of Scripture he and I give different Interpretations what 's to be done we ought still to keep in the same Court and wait for a Decision from the same Judge then I must prove my Interpretation by some other place of Scripture or else he must not believe me nor I him except he doth the like and if Men will but lay aside Prejudices and be acted by a real and sincere desire to find out the Truth God will not leave them but therein afford such Helps as shall answer their Good for all Scripture is given by Inspiration of God and is profitable for Doctrine for Reproof for Correction for Instruction in Righteousness that the Man of God may be perfect Now let us come to our Point and reduce the Rule to a Practice the Question is Whether by the Word is meant a Person as we say or a Quality as they would have it there is a great Difference between Persons and Things now to find out the Truth this Text must be compared with others we need not to go far for in the first Verse of the Chapter we read thrice the same Name in the beginning was the Word was signifieth existed had a Being which relateth to a Person and not to a Thing the same Word was with God and was God what a Quality with God and a Thing God doth the Evangelist begin his Gospel in so high a strain only to tell us how Reason was in the beginning how Reason was with God and Reason was God or in plain Words that God was Reasonable which is a Truth known to every one so no need to tell it but he would acquaint the Readers with things before unknown to them besides doth this hold any proportion with the Nature and Excellency of the Gospel and great Tidings of Salvation this indeed is to exalt Reason and because they make a God of their Reason therefore for Name 's sake Reason must be deified then according to their Principle this Reason must be an efficient Cause of all for all things were made by him and without him was not any thing made that was made to create and make things is the Property and Act of a Person and not of a Thing in him as in a Person and not as in a Thing was Life and the same Apostle calls him the Word of Life that Life which was manifested and that Eternal Life which was with the Father first and then was manifested unto us as if
he had said the living God according to an usual way of speaking in Scripture when the Abstract is put for the Concrete thus God is called the Lord our Righteousness that same Word that was God was made Flesh and dwelt among us to dwell denotes a Person and we Beheld his Glory not the Glory of Reason or Wisdom but the Glory as of the only begotten of the Father here is a Relation of a Son to a Father and surely a Son is a Person not a Thing and of this same John bare witness of him saying this was he of whom I spake he that cometh after me is preferred before me read on till ver 19. all along the Word is spoken as of a Person and in ver 17. he declares who that Word is by a Comparison between Persons the Law was given by Moses but Grace and Truth came by Jesus Christ This Jesus Christ he hath been speaking of all this while and his Design is to shew that Jesus Christ is the Word so often by him mentioned and to that effect he speaks of John's Evidence about him if the Word be a Thing and not a Person Christ was so and so Moses who was a Person and Christ after he was made Flesh is compared to him O the Perverseness of some Mens Judgment who read Scripture not to find out Truth or be guided by it but out of it to wrest some things to support their Prejudices Papists to set up the Pope's Supremacy think after much seeking to have found a Text to serve their turn he that is spiritual judgeth all things yet he himself is judged of no Man with them the Pope is that Spiritual Man the Socinians whose Design is not to set up one as Papists do but to pull down and destroy the great Work of Incarnation say because it serves their turn no Word or Divine Person but only the Reason of God was made Flesh Out of what I have said I think it plainly appears how the Scope of the Place and the Design of the Evangelist is to speak of a Person and not of a Thing But to prove our Interpretation let us further search into Scriptures Paul speaks to our purpose for as John saith the Word that was God was made Flesh so he declares that God was manifest in the Flesh which he calls the great Mystery of Godliness and the whole Verse tho in different Branches as preached unto the Gentiles believed on in the World received up into Glory do plainly demonstrate the Lord Jesus to be that God or Person of the Godhead manifest in the Flesh and in another Place he saith when the Fulness of the time was come God sent forth his Son made of a Woman that Person which in another place is called God in this is called the Son of God and in another God's own Son or proper Son in these several Texts mention is made of an Incarnation or of being made Flesh manifest in the Flesh made of a Woman and God sent his own Son in the Likeness of sinful Flesh and the Subject is called the Word God Son of God God's own and proper Son is there in all this any Metaphor or any Ground to say that the Word made Flesh signifieth Reason communicated to Jesus all this proves that our Interpretation is according to the Analogy of Faith and shews a sweet Harmony of several Texts of Scripture to demonstrate the adorable Mystery of the Incarnation of the Son God Thus far we proved our Interpretation of that Text of Scripture we do not perceive they are in a Condition to do the like for theirs for if they could we should hear of it they have not one Text to do it Magister dixit is no Reason with us the Vnitarian may say but that is not enough what he saith he must prove upon true Grounds and to the purpose well for want of Scripture the Author of the Letter gives a Reason of his own which is this And we all know that Divine Wisdom may be communicated to Man without the Incarnation of God Did ever any one read such a pitiful coming off in so weighty a matter as this is how sawcy with God are some Men in the World in setting out their foolish and wandering Fancies and where is a due Respect for his Holy Word hath not God made foolish the Wisdom of these Men if ever they had any doth this Interpretation hold any proportion with that high and noble Idea which the Evangelist would give us of the Person whose History he writes first of all we defy them to shew that this is the Sense of any Text concerning this Matter Secondly suppose they could yet it being against the usual Meaning they ought to shew reason why in this place it should be taken otherwise and then must such a silly Reason weigh down the Authority of so many Texts of Scripture what will become of all the glorious Attributes and Prerogative of the Lord Jesus over Angels and Men what of that Name which is above every Name God's own only begotten Son in whom he is well pleased if all comes only to this God's Reason and Wisdom were communicated to him which God in a high degree did to Solomon and to others of his eminent Servants whereby he must make them equal with his Son and he with them we all know that God if he pleases can create another World must we conclude therefore he hath not created this God if he had pleased could have delivered his People out of Egypt otherwise than by the hand of Moses must we say therefore he delivered them not by his hand Out of what God can do we must not infer that he hath not done what he hath done because God can communicate Reason to Man therefore the Word the Son of God was not made Flesh Ye great Logicians is this a good Consequence risum teneatis I could almost say if the thing in question was not of the highest importance Before I leave this Point I shall skip over to another place of the Letter for tho' he there speaks not to me but to another whose Notions I am not concerned for yet what he saith relating to the Cause I ought to take notice of the more because it belongs to that Text of John which hitherto we were upon 't is said Tke Incarnation of God is no where expressed in Scripture it can be no more than meerly a deduction from thence 'T is well you are so kind as to grant 't is in 't in some way As to the first part if you say in so many Letters according to your cavilling way we know 't for the word Incarnation is Latin and so none of the Books of Scripture being originally written in that Language we must not think to find it in 't but we say a word altogether equivalent and which signifies the same thing is in 't Doth not to be made Flesh