Lord yet are there not three Lords but one Lord saith the Athanasian Creed I am the Lord and there is none else there is no God besides mee and it shall bee known from East to West that there is none besides mee and there is none else Isa 45. 5 6. ARGUMENT 3. 3 Argum. of M. Bidle Hee that speaketh not of himself is not God The holy Spirit speaketh not of himself Ergò The Minor is clear from John 16. 13. The Major is proved thus God speaketh of himself therefore if there bee any one that speaketh not of himself hee is not God The antecedent is of it self apparant for God is the primarie Author of whatsoever hee doth but should hee not speak of himself hee must speak from another and so not bee the primarie but secondarie author of his speech which is absurd if at least that may bee called absurd which is impossible The consequence is undeniable For further confirmation of this Argument it is to bee observed that to speak or to do any thing not if himself according to the ordinarie phrase of Scripture is to speak or do by the shewing teaching commanding authorising or enabling of another and consequently incompatible with the supreme and self-sufficient Majestie of God Vid. John 5. 19 20 30. ch 7. v. 15 16 17 18 28. ch 8. v. 28. 42. ch 11. v. 50 51. ch 12. v. 49. 50. ch 14. v. 10 24. ch 15. 4. ch 18. 34. Luke 12. 56 57. ch 21. 30. 2 Cor. 3. 5. ANSWER Answ Hee that speaketh not of himself say you is not God I denie this your Major Proposition for though in a sense the Spirit of God speaketh not of himself yet is hee truly and properly God nor will I content my self with a bare denial of it which is enough for an Answerer but I will give you the reason hereof nor need I go far for a proof this Verse in John alledged by you might have taught you this truth for the person here is called by an excellencie the Spirit of truth and which lead's the Apostles and the Faithful into all truth the heavenly truth of eternal salvation This leading into truth is all one for substance with that translation of others shall teach you all truth And that which is in the Hebrew Psal 86. 11. lead mee thy way 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Septuag render it with the same word which the Evangelist useth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now this is properly a work of the great God and that which was long before fore-told They shall bee all taught of God John 5. 45. Can any thing bee more plainly spoken It is not denied but one man is said to bee a teacher of others Matth. 28. Go and teach all Nations And this is don two waies principally if not onely vel proponendo auxilia Aq. 1. 117. q. either by proposing to scholars general helps whereby the scholar is led as it were by the hand to the knowledg of unknown truths as by general rules sensible examples lively similitudes and such like to help the understanding or else by strengthning the understanding of the learner by shewing him how hee should deduce conclusions from principles but when a creature hath don all that hee can to the utmost of his power hee cannot infuse light into his scholars and elevate their minds to apprehend divine truth Let the Sun shine never so bright yet a blind man cannot see it and wee are taught to call no man Master on earth Mat. 23. So God alone is the fountain of illumination hee sitteth in his chair in heaven who teacheth our hearts on earth Object Besides if wee consider the condition of the Apostles to speak onely of them though they bee not the onely persons on whom that promise run's they were to bee dispest over all the known Regions of the world and if so how should a creature bee with them all as you do hold the holy Ghost to bee and assist all their mouths and pens infallibly in every place Sol. Surely to do so require's not onely celeritie but ubiquitie which is a propertie of the true God but incompatible to the condition of a creature which is finite as in essence so likewise in place and operation Nor will that shift serve the turn which is used by this Author in answer as hee saith to that grand Objection touching the Omnipresence of the holy Ghost by comparing this with the Parable of the Sower where Satan is said to snatch the Word of the hearts of hearers in ten thousand places at once for this is fallacia non parium The holy Ghost which dwell's in all the godly and leadeth them into all truth is one individual Spirit but it neither is nor possibly can bee one individual Devil which acteth his wickedness in all the wicked ones at once for there are millions of them dispersed every where in this lower Region of the world full of malice and policie to do mischief and every one of them is a Satan Wee read of the Devil and his Angels but you do not read of the holy Ghost and his Angels though I grant they are his Angels as creäted and commanded by him but not so as the Devil's Angels are his as a superior creature having rule over fellow-creatures I will once again propound your Major Hee that speaketh not of himself is not God This Proposition is not universally true I grant in this sense it is true hee that speaketh not of himself but what hee learn's by revelation and in time and what hee did not know from all eternitie hee is not God but such a kinde of hearing from another hath no place in the holy Ghost and therefore the Proposition if it bee taken generally is denied and the reason of my denying it is this because it is a propertie of the Father as to bee of and from himself the Fountain and the Principle as Divines do usually speak though not properly the cause of the Son of God and of the holy Ghost for then they should bee effects which sound 's harshly the Father is I say of himself and communicate's the Essence and the essential properties to the Son and both Father and Son to the holy Ghost who is eternal infinite omnipotent and omnipresent Our learned Junius hath observed a three-fold consideration of a Person one common in essence as the Person is God the second consideration as it is singular and absolute in Person as saith hee it subsist's in the unitie of the Essence the third is relative in the distinction and order of one Person to another contra Bellar. Controv. 2. l. 1. Praefat. let the Learned judg of these the last is to my purpose Now as the Persons do differ in the manner and order of subsisting so likewise though the outward action bee the same and common to all the Persons yet in the manner of working wee must conceive a difference Give mee leave to clear this
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 OR A TREATISE OF THE HOLY GHOST IN WHICH The God-head of the third Person of the Trinitie is strongly asserted by Scripture-Arguments And defended against the Sophisticall subtleties of JOHN BIDLE BY Mr. Nicolas Estwick B. D. somtime Fellow of Christ-Colledg in Cambridg and now Pastor of Warkton in the Countie of Northampton LONDON Printed by William Du-gard for Ralph Smith and are to bee sold at the Sign of the Bible in Corn-hill neer the Royal-Exchange 1648. THE PREFACE THe sublime Argument touching the unitie of the God-head and the Trinitie of the Persons is of that high concernment that it obligeth Christians to lay themselvs out to the uttermost in the search of the means in the which it hath pleased the Lord to reveal himself that wee might have right apprehensions of him partly because it is very dangerous and attended with sad consequences to have erroneous conceptions in this to-bee-adored subject and partly because no subordinate truths can bee more profitably learned whether wee respect the information of our judgments the reformation of our lives or our sound consolation in every condition In this licentious age wherein Heresies with more boldness the more is the pitie are not onely privately vented but printed and exposed to publick view then in former ages whereby many unwary and ungrounded Readers are infected with leprosie in their heads and their judgments are corrupted as other wicked phancies for want of humilitie knowledg in Scripture Arts and Tongues and due respect to the word of God and the testimonie of ancient and modern Divines have been broached so hath the fundamentall Article touching the Deitie of the holy Ghost been questioned yea plainly contradicted Many months passed before I had a sight of Mr. Bidle's abhorred lines nor did I so much as desire to read them but when I heard by the relation of a very learned man and of much observation touching these times that those twelve Reasons did a great deal of hurt I then used the means to get a sight of the Book and I saw it was Sophistically penned and plausibly contrived to do much mischief and when I could not hear that any of the learned which have far better abilities more leasure and encouraging accommodations then I have would spend their precious time in convincing this Adversarie of God I resolved by the grace of the Spirit of God to vindicate what lie's in mee his honor in shewing partly the weakness partly the blasphemie of his twelve Reasons to shew him if it may bee the danger of his Heresie and to clear the alledged Scriptures from his Sophistrie and to hold forth that little light which the blessed Spirit hath freely imparted to mee to the bettering of the understanding of the simple Readers There have been many erroneous opinions no fewer then six in my knowledg and 't is not unlike but there are many more touching the blessed Spirit the holy Ghost it is not fit nor safe for mee to set down a Catalogue of them lest unawares which is far from my intention som vain and unsound Christians in these unsettled daies should take an occasion to err from the beaten way of truth and others which have tender consciences should bee offended with the stinch of these rotten Heresies when they are presented to them yet necessary it is that I should set down my Adversaries tenet that the Reader may know it and that I may more punctually address myself to answer him and this hee hold's That the holy Ghost is a creature a finite person the prime and chief of all the good Angels as the Divel by an unhappy excellencie is called the chief of all the evill Spirits An ancient Heresie this is in the Church of Christ condemned both by the single testimonie of many famous Doctors and by a generall Synod at Constantinople which hath been alwaies honored and was held by the Summons of Theodosius the first more then twelve hundred and threescore years ago O blessed God! bee not angry with mee I beseech thee who am but sinfull dust and ashes for adventuring to speak of thy glorious Majestie Pardon I humbly pray for my Saviors sake all my sinfull apprehensions of thine unconceivable Greatness accept graciously my sincere intentions to promote thy glorie and guide mee O my God! that I may alwaies as a weak and sinfull creature ought to do both think and speak and write of thy glorious Majestie with holy fear and lowly reverence and instruct mee O thou blessed Spirit of Truth that I may readily untie the Sophistical knots of carnal and humane reason which in pretence are grounded on the truth of thy Word and yet there is no truth in them nor any divine word for them And enable mee to maintain thy Greatness against a wretched man which dare's stand up and both boldly and publickly argue against thine ever to bee adored Deitie The Deitie of the holy Ghost proved by Scripture and Argument True Arguments grounded on the Word of God whereby the Deitie of the holy Ghost is fully proved and such passages of Scriptures which are excepted against by the Adversarie are examined and clearly refuted Argum. 1 Maj. HEe that hath the names of God absolutely attributed to him is God Min. The Holy Ghost hath the names of God absolutely attributed to him Concl. Ergò the holy Ghost is God The Major is clear for albeit the name of God bee given to Angels Psal 8. 6. Heb. 2. 7. and to Magistrates they are Gods to whom the Word of God came Psal 82. 7. that is to whom by divine vocation the office of Magistracie is committed yet either this is not spoken in the singular number I said yee are Gods whereas the true God without contradiction is but one or when it is spoken singularly it is not without limitation Moses I have made thee a God to Pharaoh Exod. 7. 1. Every man may readily conceive that a made God is is not a true God or with such an affixed limitation that a simple man can hardly mistake I have said yee are Gods yet they are but mortal Gods for as is threatned there They must die like mortal men but the true God is immortal So that in all the Scriptures wee shall not finde the names of God asscribed to any creatures without addition limitation or correction of speech nor is this denied by the Adversarie The Minor is proved first more obscurely Gen. 1. 1. God creäted A word not of the singular or dual but plural number and that is also with a word of the singular number God creäted because God is but one in nature but in regard of the manner of beeing there are three Persons And in verse 26. of the same Chapter God saith Let Vs make man after Our image that is in the image of the holy Trinitie these and many like to these are alledged out of the old Testament and justified to bee pertinent to prove this
that a person is distinguished from a Person that the Spirit of God which is a Person and sent of God must needs be a person distinct from God that sent him If you will say you speak in the Person of your Adversaries I denie that any learned man ever expressed himself in that manner if you can name any let him bear his own blame The distinction of God taken essentially and personally differ's much from that which is betwixt the essence and person of God as in due place I will prove Yet because my intention aime's at the benefits of the Readers I will follow you in these your erring steps to treat of the difference betwixt the Essence of God and the Person of God There is a reall distinction and there is a distinction in regard of our rational conception The former is denied the later is asserted touching the nature of God and the Person of the holy Ghost for albeit in creäted things nature is one thing and a person is another thing for a man is not the humane nature Thomas is not the nature of Thomas yet in God by reason of the absolute simplicitie of his nature the divine nature and the Person are the same thing Thom. 1. Sum. q. 3. art 3. yet is there a distinction of reason as they speak for there is one respect of the nature and another of the person for the nature as it is the divine nature is communicated to the person and subsist's in it but the person is the very suppositum in which the nature subsist's and which in this particular consideration is incommunicable as the definition of a person evinceth in which regard it is that neither doth the distinction of the Persons multiply the natures in God nor doth the unitie of the nature confound the Persons I return now to the distinction God is taken either essentially or personally which I shall justifie against his clamors and pretensions for if you demand Hath hee no reasons to write tartly against it No sound ones I am sure but such as they are I will now examine Advers This dlstinction saith hee to omit the mention of Primitive Fathers Sol. And I commend your art for this preterition for no ancient Fathers can truly bee named to favor your Herefie the Fathers you omit are known branded Hereticks These you may name with shame enough but others I am sure you have none to speak for you Advers But yet what ever become's of Fathers it 's unheard of say you in the Scriptures and so it 's presumption to affirm any thing of God which hee hath not first affirmed of himself Answ 1 First my just answer is You are an Opponent now and your bare saying is of no validitie Doubtless if your words may bee taken for oracles you will carrie the cause What is your Nay to a world of Christians that do affirm it It 's as a feather laid in the ballance and weighed against a talent of gold Prove what you say or look for no credit to be given to your words Answ 2 Secondly this distinction is heard of in the Scriptures by necessarie inferences and sound consequences it 's grounded on the word of God as I shall in the sequele demonstrate And I have made good in the positive part by those many arguments which I have alledged to prove the Deitie of the holy Ghost and what is justly so inferred out of the word of God is proved by the word of God Advers Reas 1 This distinction you say is disclaimed by reason First because it is impossible for any man if hee will not delude himself with emptie terms to distinguish the essence from the person and not frame two beeings in his minde and consequently two Gods First I observe a palpable and gross error in Divinitie couched in this reason that a man must beleeve nothing touching God but what hee is able to conceive with his minde God's unconceivable truths by way of comprehension in the creature shall bee no truths to Master Bidle when they transcend the sphere of his capacitie whereas it is the honor of our faith to beleeve Gods word when it discover's truths not onely above our apprehensions but contrarie to our corrupted reason Our reason as now it is may bee a good servant but it is an ill master in points of faith Well I see the Deitie of the holy Ghost is impugned by this way not because it is not clearly revealed in Scriptures but because hee think's it a matter impossible and so upon the point hee denie's the omnipotencie and infinite nature of God Secondly if Mr Bidle cannot conceive hereof who besides his natural ignorance is further blinded by the Devil the god of this world for beeing a professed enemie to the blessed Spirit of light I do not marvel but that hee should take upon him to measure all the refined and sublimated apprehensions of the eminent servants of God by his own dull and erroneous conceptions is miserable follie This hath been plentifully don by them insomuch that at the least the foot-steps of the Trinitie are seen in many of the creatures is the common opinion of Divines Lombard lib. 1. dist 3. And those School-men that write on him their Master and hereto accord our learned Doctors who ever at large have handled that common place and most amply that much to bee admired and honored Mornaeus lib. de veritate Christ Relig. cap. 5 6. I will not instance now in any particular examples they are not I grant convincing demonstrations but liable to the exceptions of a captious Adversarie yet the ground-work beeing firmly laid in the word of truth and truly apprehended by faith they are subordinate helps to yield som glimpse and sparks of light to the point in hand and though I do forbear real instances in this place yet I will alledg an imaginarie fiction which hath strength to prove a real truth and it is such a fiction which is recited and approved by som of the Learned of both professions Suppose a father beget's a son and communicate's to him the same soul and bodie which hee hath still himself and both of these should communicate the same soul and bodie to a third here would bee three distinct persons yet the same essence in them all But you will say this is impossible for there must needs bee three souls and three bodies in three persons But now you deny that which I suppose I say if a father could so communicate the same essence to his son and retain it still to himself then would there bee but one nature in them all really I grant this is never don because in finite substances the essence must needs bee finite But if wee speak of God because hee is immaterial infinite and not capable of essential division this is truly don it 's a received Maxim in Logick Ficta similitudo probat fidémque facit fained similitudes prove Advers Reason 2 Secondly
received truth by solving the strongest Objections which are framed against it Objection 1 Neither the Father nor the holy Ghost but onely the Son of God did assume our nature and this is an outward work to this it is answered that onely the Son of God became man yet the whole Trinitie did frame and work to the assumption of the humane nature illustrated thus Three do weave cloth to bee worn of one of them onely inchoativè it belonged to all the Persons terminativè it was personal and proper to the Son of God Objection 2 If it bee said onely the Father spoke from heaven This is my welbeloved Son so it is said not because all the Persons did not frame that voice but because the words were uttered in his Person the Father alone is said to speak those words because they related to the Son of God the thing signified did alone appertain to the Person of the Father nor is this rule crossed by the apparition of a Dove Objection 3 The holy Ghost alone descended and appeared to the Apostles in fiery cloven tongues because those visible Symbols did onely signifie the Person of the holy Ghost which the three Persons by one undivided operation did produce Mark then albeit the work bee the same and 't is from all the Persons yet is there a difference in the manner of working the Father and the Son as they are the Fountain of the Person of the holy Ghost so likewise are they the Fountain of the operations of the holy Ghost When wee read this expression then the holy Ghost speak's not of himself wee must not conceive that phrase to import any diminution of the Majestie of the holy Ghost nor doth it implie that hee is not God that hee is inferior to the first Person of the Trinitie hereby our Savior would teach the Disciples for they are his own words in John that they should not think the holy Ghost to bee greater then the Son of God albeit his works in the hearts of his Apostles should bee greater then those which hee whiles hee visibly conversed with them had wrought in them Nor should they think that the holy Ghost should bring any new Doctrine but the truths taught by him are the truths of God the Father there is a plenary consent of the Doctrine of the holy Ghost and of God the Father that which the holy Ghost speak's from the Father hee had not in time but by eternal procession from the Father and the Son of God There is no diversitie at all in the work in it self considered but the order of externally working answer's to the order of the divine Persons thus is the holy Ghost said not to work from himself but from the Father and Son By this which hath been spoken his reasons are already answered yet a word of them Advers God speak's of himself The holy Ghost speak's not of himself Ergò hee is not God Answ There is nothing but homonymies in both Propositions but I answer to this Objection God essentially taken speak's of himself and thus the holy Ghost as hee is God speak's of and from himself but if you take it thus by a reduplication of the Subject by a specificative limitation the holy Ghost as the holy Ghost is not of himself in regard of his Person but from the Father and the Son and in this regard speak's not from himself yet is a holy true God blessed for ever Advers If God say you speaketh not from himself hee should not bee the primary Author of his speech but the secondary and this is absurd impossible Answ I deny the consequence which is true when wee speak of causes subordinate to superior causes or of instrumental causes but the holy Ghost is not an instrument either separate from or conjunct with the first Person Hee is not inferior in dignitie or power to God the Father and God the Son for there is but one divine Essence subsisting in the three Persons which are not the subject of the Deitie for they are one God in Essence and so the prioritie of the first Person is in regard of the order of working without inferioritie in the third Person whether wee regard the Persons relatively and considered or the work produced by them It is needless for mee to spend time in examining the many particular places alledged by him for som of them do directly speak of the creatures and those are impertinent for what call you this The holy Ghost that speak's not from himself is not God why Because the same phrase is used of a creature or else they speak of Christ as God and then they are already answered I add that som of those expressions are so far from proving Christ not to bee God that they do strongly evince the Deitie of the Son of God I conclude in S. Austin's words Whatsoever the Father is as hee is God as hee is a substance as hee is eternitie the same is the Son of God and the holy Ghost If you will say What riddles are these I answer How litle is it that wee conceive of God Wee can have better apprehensions of God then wee can make expressions of him and hee is transcendently above both our apprehensions and expressions of him ARGUMENT 4. 4 Argum. of M. Bidle Hee that heareth from another what hee shall speak is not God The holy Spirit doth so Ergò The Minor is plain from the fore-cited place John 16. 13. The Major is proved thus Hee that is taught is not God Hee that heareth from another what hee shall speak is taught Ergò The Major is clear by Esay 40. 13 14. compared with Rom. 11. 34. 1 Cor. 2. 16. The Minor is evidenced by John 8. where our Savior having said in the 26. verse Whatsoever I have heard from him the Father these things I speak In the 28. verse hee expresseth the same sense thus According as the Father hath taught mee these things I speak Neither let any man go about to elude so pregnant an Argument by saying that this is spoken of the holy Spirit improperly for let him turn himself every way and scrue the words as hee please yet shall hee never bee able to make it out to a wise and considering man how it can possibly bee said that any one heareth from another what hee will speak who is the prime Author of his speech and into whom it is not at a certain time insinuated by another For this expression plainly intimateth that whatsoever the holy Spirit speaketh to the Disciples is first discovered and committed to him by Christ whose Embassador hee is it being proper to an Embassador to bee the Interpreter not of his own but of anothers will But it is contradictious to imagine that the most high God can have any thing discovered and committed to him by another ANSWER Answ I answer first in general by distinguishing of this word hearing which is the basis and ground
know when hee make's others know Now saith hee to Abraham I know that thou fearest mee Gen. 22. 12. Advers None say you can intercede for himself but this action require's a third person Many Scrip heaped up Answ I denie this assertion To intercede is a general word and of that latitude that somtimes a man intercede's for himself and somtimes for others as the occasion or text will hold out the meaning either to the later or to the former And thus the Spirit interpellat orat or as others translate the word postulat clamat when hee make's us intercede pray and crie to God and those three words as som say are but one thing called by different names 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 praiers when wee lay open to God our wants the same praiers are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because by our praiers wee testifie the desires of our hearts to God and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 intercessions because wee do not pray diffidently and fearfully but in an humble familiaritie wee speak to God and do go boldly to the throne of grace Com. in locum The praiers which 1 Tim. 2. are intended Rom. 8. 26. are of that nature that whether they bee directed to God for ourselvs or for others as wee are bound to pray both for our selvs and others are intercessions interpellations or appellations but yet they are not formally as School-men speak the praiers of the holy Ghost but they are his as an efficient cause thereof they are the praiers which the holy Ghost enableth his servants to make both for themselvs and others Touching the many Scriptures which you have unconscionably heaped up together to prove that intercession is alwaies for another I briefly answer by freely yielding that in those places which you have recited The praiers are made or intreated to bee made for other men but will it therefore follow that in all other texts which mention praier the Scripture is to bee so expounded Nothing less And if by virtue of those words in the texts fore-named a Christian had no ground to pray for himself hee must not then follow that maxim and approved rule Charitie begin's at home hee must onely pray for others never for himself for in som texts you have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 15. 30. Colos 4. 12. and in som other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as 2 Corinth 1. 11. Ephes 6. 18. which is such a dotage as never entred into the brains of an advised Christian Advers Albeit say you the Scripture speake's many things after the manner of men yet never what argueth inferioritie and dependencie on another Answ I grant this is a truth when rightly expounded it 's but a begging of the question or but a vain supposition to take for granted that the holy Ghost doth truly pray which is constantly denied Your Conclusion is proved by a false medium although it cannot bee denied but the Lord not out of any power of ours but out of a gracious condescension to us out of his free goodness doth somtimes in the Scripture speak as if wee base and feeble creatures were able to encounter with God yea and to overcom him as Jacob wrastled with God and hee could not prevail over him Gen. 32. Jacob as a Prince had power not onely with men but with God and let mee alone saith the Lord to Moses that I may consume transgressing Israël Exod. 32. The praiers of Moses did as it were binde the hands of the Almightie that hee could not smite his people and that is yet a higher expression Esa 45. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Lord is as it were at the command of the praiers of his servants and many the like gracious expressions might bee named so that neither head nor foot neither Argument nor Inference hath any soundness in it ARGUMENT 10. 10 Argum. of M. Bidle Hee in whom men have not beleeved and yet have been Disciples and Beleevers is not God Men have not beleeved in the holy Spirit and yet have been so Ergò The Major is plain for how can any bee Disciples Beleevers according to the phrase of Scripture and yet not beleeve in him that is God The Minor is proved thus Men have not so much as heard whether there were an holy Spirit and yet have been Disciples and Beleevers Ergò They have not beleeved in the holy Spirit and yet have been Disciples and Beleevers The Antecedent is apparant from Acts 19. 2. The Consequence is grounded on that of the Apostle Rom. 10. 14. How shall they beleeve on him of whom they have not heard Now if any man to decline the dint of this Argument shall say that by holy Spirit in these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is meant not the Person but the Gifts of the holy Spirit Hee besides that hee perverteth the plain and genuine meaning of the words and speaketh without example doth also evacuate the emphasis of the Particles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which imply that these Disciples were so far from having received the Gifts of the holy Spirit whereof wee may grant that the question made mention that they had not so much as heard whether there were an holy Spirit or not Again that the holy Spirit is not God doth further appear by this very instance since the Apostle when there was so ample an occasion offered to declare it if it been so doth quite decline it For it is incredible that hee who was so intent and vigilant in propagating the Truth as that casually seeing an Altar at Athens inscribed to the unknown God hee presently took a hint from thence to preach unto the Heathens the true God yet here being told by Disciples that they had not so much as heard whether there were an holy Spirit or not should not make use of the opportunity to discover unto them and in them to us the Deitie of the holy Spirit but suffer them to remain in ignorance touching a point of such consequence that without the knowledg thereof if wee beleeve many now adaies men cannot bee saved Certainly the Apostle had greater care both of the truth of God and the salvation of men then to do so ANSWER Answ This Argument as the rest is so captiously and ambiguously propounded that I judg it expedient before I do punctually answer it to put down as I take it three undeniable Conclusions the one of them is touching the predicate or later part the other two touching the subject or antecedent of the Proposition Conclus 1 The first Conclusion wee are to consider of God absolutely as hee is plainly revealed in the Word and accordingly acknowledged by all those which are in outward covenant with him that hee is true God the ever-living God the onely wise and powerful God c. Thus in the Chaldean language in Jer. 10. 10 11. both for a caution and instruction to the Jews when they should bee captives there 't is said The gods that