disprove us from being his by the highest Right which is in effect the same Thirdly Nor doth it thence follow that because the Apostle saith we must glorify God in our Body that therefore he not the Spirit is the Proprietor of our Bodies For if the Holy Ghost had a lesser Right to our Body as a Creature only helping with us to worship God our Body could not be properly said to be his Temple for no Temple beareth the Name of the Worshippers which then with us the Spirit would be but of him that dwelleth therein and is worshipped and therefore seeing that our Body is the Temple of the Holy Ghost and it consequently follows that he is to be glorified therein it then agrees with the Apostle's words Glorify God in your Body And to say that the Holy Ghost inhabits the Temple of God 1 Cor. 2.16 and receives the same Worship either defiles and dishonours his Temple and gives his Glory to another or acknowledgeth the Holy Spirit to be God And therefore as we must not presume to think that the Holy Apostle should so dishonour the Temple of God and pollute his Holy Name as to ascribe the name of a Creature to it So we may conclude that our Body which is the Temple of God as appears in 1 Cor. 3.16 would not be asserted to be the Temple of the Holy Ghost unless by his highest Interest as he is God And though our Adversaries would have the words Glorify God in your Body to inforce the Sense of the Text in favour of their opinion yet they have a far different Signification than to bring in God as Proprietor of our Body in opposition to the Holy Ghost's highest Interest to us For the Apostle does not intend by these words either to exclude the Holy Spirit from the highest Interest to our Bodies or to intimate to us that God and the Holy Ghost are two different Essences but he rather designs by the word God indefinitely spoken instead of the Holy Spirit before mentioned to include also the Father and the Son that not only the Holy Ghost but all three Divine Persons should be glorified in our Body and in our Spirit which are God's Now let us sum up the whole and see what our Adversaries gain by these Objections First I have shewed that our being his by Inhabitation excludes not our being his by Interest Nor Secondly does the Donation of the Holy Ghost or his being sent exclude our being his by the highest Right Nor yet Thirdly do these words Glorify God in your Body destroy the primacy of the Holy Spirit to our Bodies And if neither of these disprove that our Body is the Temple of the Holy Ghost by the highest Right and as primarily dedicated to his Glory then nothing yet they have said can disprove his Deity from this Scripture for as it is confessed that to prove the one is to prove the other so not to disprove the one is not to disprove the other Objection to 2 Cor. 3.17 Now the Lord is that Spirit and where the Spirit of the Lord is there is Liberty By that Spirit is not here meant the third Person in the Holy Trinity but the Expression implieth the same Spirit that was before in the 6th Verse opposed to the Letter and consequently the Mystery or hidden Sense of the Law denoted by the Letter for thus the word Spirit is to be taken Rom. 2.29 Circumcision is that of the Heart in the Spirit and not in the Letter And Rom. 7.6 But now we are delivered from the Law that being dead wherein we were held that we should serve in newness of Spirit and not in the oldness of the Letter And Rev. 11.8 where Jerusalem is mystically and spiritually called Sodom and Egypt Wherefore the Sense of the Words of Paul is this namely That the Lord Christ is the Mystery Life Scope and Kernel of the Law as being both foretold therein and prefigured by the Ceremonies thereof Answer First As they say Spirit is not put for his Person in ver 6 8. but for his Effects and Operations or Gospel-Ministration however it cannot from thence follow that Spirit in ver 3 17 18. is put only for his Effects and not his Person 1st Because the Effects of the Spirit viz. his Writing and Gospel-Liberty is joined together with the Spirit and therefore the Spirit here is not put for his Effects but for Himself and so it is in ver 18. where it 's said We are changed into the same Image from glory to glory even as by the Spirit of the Lord. Margent Of the Lord the Spirit Here also the effect of the Spirit to wit our change into the same Image of Christ's Glory being joined together with the Spirit there is a necessity that by Spirit must be meant his Person and not Effect And this is noted to us by the Translators of our Bible in writing Spirit with a great Letter when for his Person and with a little Letter when the Spirit is put for his Effects which may be seen in this Chapter where thrice ver 3 17 18. the Person of the Spirit is understood and thrice his Effects ver 6 8. 2dly That the Lord Christ is the Mystery Life Scope and Kernel of the Law as being both foretold therein and prefigured by the Ceremonies thereof may be granted to them but not that this is properly intended by those Words The Lord is that Spirit as pointing thereby only to his Effects in ver 6 8. 1st Because we may better refer those Words to that Spirit which is put for his Person in ver 3. which as it there appears is the efficient cause of the Epistle of Christ written both in the Hearts of the Apostles and of the Church of Corinth ver 2 3. So that that Spirit is there first put for his Person and the efficient cause of the Effects for which it is put in ver 6 8. and afterwards in ver 17 18. being joined with his effects and thereby differenc'd as the efficient cause and Person of the Spirit is said to be the Lord or as it is exprest the Lord is that Spirit and therefore if they will have these words that Spirit ver 17. to point at Spirit before mentioned in the Chapter it must then be referred to Verse 3d Person to Person and not Person to effect 2dly Nothing is more plain than that Spirit in ver 17. must be taken for his Person because his Effects are so strongly joined to him viz. Liberty which the Gospel it self viz. the Letter of it does not give but by the Power and Efficacy of the Holy Spirit So that it 's clear from the Text that by these words the Lord is that Spirit must be understood the Person of the Spirit in the Unity of Essence with the second Person the Son of God 3dly In Verse 18. We are said with open face to behold as in a Glass viz. of the Gospel 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
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
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
to be Scripture which certainly he would have done if there had been any doubt made of it in the primitive times It is cited by Cyprian in his Book de Vnitate Ecclesiae Paxillus in his Book de Monomachia proves by an Induction of the learned Doctors of the Church both before and since Athanasius that the Doctrine of the coessential Trinunity of these Heavenly Witnesses was generally received by all that were esteemed orthodox and pious in the Church of Christ Calovius also in his Fides patrum ante Concilium Nicenum gives in a Catalogue for the Satisfaction of all that desire Resolution in this weighty point See Mr. Estwick of the Godhead of the Holy Ghost Dr. Alting his Vindication of this Text in his Confutation of the Racovian Catechism CHAP. V. Wherein are answered some Objections inferred by our Adversaries from divers Texts of Scripture to disprove the Deity of the Holy Ghost OBjection from Matth. 11.27 All things are delivered unto me of my Father and no Man knoweth the Son but the Father neither knoweth any Man the Father save the Son and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him How could this be true were the Holy Spirit a Divine Person distinct from the Father and the Son and in all things equal unto both for some other besides the Father would have known the Son and some other besides the Son would have known the Father namely the Holy Spirit Answer First We must not understand this Text in the strictest sense as if Christ the Son of God was not known at that time by any besides the Father 1. He was known as Man John 7.27 We know this Man whence he is 2. He was known as the Son of God John 1.41 49. Said Andrew to Simon Peter We have found the Messias Nathaniel answered and said unto him Rabbi Thou art the Son of God thou art the King of Israel His Disciples believed on him chap. 2.11 and others chap. 4.53 Secondly Neither is this Scripture to be considered as though Christ's Disciples and others then had not some Knowledg of God the Father for in John 6.44 45. it is said No Man can come to me except the Father draw him Every Man therefore that hath heard and hath learned of the Father cometh unto me So that no Man could come to Christ without some Knowledg and Teachings of God the Father Thirdly It then follows that if this Text is not to be understood totally to exclude all Men from some Knowledg of the Father and the Son until afterwards they should be revealed then it intends only to exclude them from some special and peculiar Knowledg which they have and in reference to their revealing of each other The Father knoweth the Son and the Son the Father in a different manner from all Creatures in that they know each other perfectly of their own Self-Knowledg Yet the Words of Christ are not to be taken simply of that peculiar Knowledg but with reference to the Revelation which the Father makes of the Son and Christ of the Father as appears in ver 25. where Christ saith I thank thee O Father Lord of Heaven and Earth because thou hast hid these things from the Wise and Prudent and hast revealed them unto Babes And now it follows that Christ tells us No Man knoweth the Son but the Father neither knoweth any Man the Father save the Son and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him As if he had said No Man knoweth the Son so as to reveal him savingly but the Father neither doth any Man after the same manner know the Father save the Son only And this suits with the following Invitation for burthened Souls to come to Christ as to one that can reveal and open the Father's Heart wherein they may through him have rest for their weary Souls ver 28 c. chap. 1.18 ch 6.41 Fourthly Having opened the Text and shewed that it must not be positively understood I shall now answer directly to what is objected concerning the Holy Spirit And First I shall note that if Men who are named and only intended are but in part excluded then the Holy Ghost who is not named neither intended cannot from these words be excluded from the knowledg of the Father and the Son Secondly We must not conceive that the Holy Spirit is excluded from the Fellowship of this Knowledg which the Father and the Son have of each other because he is not mentioned for the Ministration of the Spirit was not yet come I said before that here we are not to understand Knowledg simply but with reference to Revelation and this was now ministred by the Father and the Son more secretly through the Spirit but apparently to assure his Disciples and convince the Sons of Men that Jesus was the Christ the Son of God that was sent forth from the Bosom of the Father to declare his Will by such sensible visible and external Testimonies as would leave all Men without excuse The Father bearing witness to the Son twice by a Voice from Heaven and the Son by the mighty Works he wrought in the Father's Name bore witness of him and gave undeniable proof of his special Mission from God and that he was the Messiah that was to come John 1.18 chap. 5.17 36 43. chap. 14.10 2 Pet. 1.17 18. Matth. 3.17 And this was the very reason that so little mention was made of the Holy Ghost the Mystery of God being left more fully to be opened and revealed after Christ's Ascension by that Divine Person whose proper Work it was to confirm the Testimony of the Father and the Son that went before So that the Holy Ghost was not omitted by Christ because he was not in the Unity of that Knowledgâ— but because the time for the great work of his ministerial Revelation was not yet come So that no Foundation can be laid on this Scripture in opposition to the Deity of the Holy Ghost Objection from 1 Cor. 2.12 Now we have received not the Spirit of the World but the Spirit which is of God The Spirit which is of God is God's Effect and depends upon him and so is inferiour to him Answer 1 Cor. 2.10 11 12. But God hath revealed them to us by his Spirit For what Man knoweth the things of a Man save the Spirit of a Man which is in him Even so the things of God knoweth no Man but the Spirit of God Now we have received the Spirit which is of God that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God First The Apostle useth this Comparison not to demonstrate the Being of God but to shew that we cannot know the things of God till the Spirit of God reveals them to us Secondly They cannot from thence conclude that the Spirit of God is God's Effect and so is inferiour to him any more than that the Spirit of Man is also the Effect of Man and so inferiour to Man But
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