finde that the translation is not true for the verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ver 3. is construed with an Accusative case and with a Dative ver 4. and so it is to bee translated to bely and counterfeit the holy Ghost which is to bear us in hand that thou laidest down the money at the motion of the holy Ghost herein thou hast not lied to men but to God Answ The Adversarie would perswade the Reader that hee by his observation of the text had found out a fault in our common translations whereof the Authors out of their ignorance or inadvertencie took no notice if so hee think's hee is utterly mistaken for all translators ancient and of later days had the text before their eyes and saw the difference which is here noted by this Author and yet did purposely translate the words thou hast lied to the holy Ghost as holding forth the genuine meaning of the Spirit of God som excepted which yet for the point of controversie in hand proved out of this very Scripture are professed Adversaries to you Beza after hee had rendred the words to deceive or mock i. e. endeavor to deceive the holy Ghost I might add what others say hee retract's and go's in the steps of common translators Why I might say from others It 's not unusual amongst the Grecians to understand a preposition which is not expressed Hee saith because the 4th ver where the Dative case is used is an explication of the 3d. ver Besides the Hebrews do somtimes confound these whence these expressions benedico te evangelizo te which the Grecians derived from the Hebrews and the Latine Authors from the Grecians Besides in one manuscript I found the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so have the Syrian and Arabian Interpreters read it Lastly because this interpretation which is followed by Erasmus to say they counterfeited the holy Ghost seem's to mee not to bee full They were indeed notorious hypocrits but Peter by the sequele accuseth them of a far higher crime that when as by the motion of the Spirit they had sold a parcel of ground and consecrated it to the Church they afterward kept back a part thereof as if in that case they had not to deal with God but with men which could not discover this their sacriledg and so they are in this regard said to tempt the Spirit of God Further were it granted that your translation were sound and that the words ought to bee so interpreted as you have don this neither hinder's us nor further's you none ever dreamed by the common translation to correct the meaning of the text that they might have an Argument thence to confute the Adversaries of the holy Ghost hee needeth not our lie to defend his cause But the strength of the Argument is not from the words singly taken ver 3. but from them and the explication of them in the fourth and ninth verses you counterfeit the holy Ghost to bee the Author of this fact and this is expounded to bee a lying to God viz. to God the holy Ghost whom you have counterfeited hee speaking in us and discovering this hypocrisie of your heart which you litle dreamed off And your exposition of the words as they stand in your Book is of that nature that albeit I have perpended it as exactly as I can yet do I conceive nothing in it but I may readily subscribe to it I am sure it nothing crosseth the Argument Thus much for the first Argument Argum. 2 Maj. Hee to whom religious worship is truly exhibited is God Min. The holy Ghost is hee to whom religious worship is exhibited Concl. Ergò The Major is not denied by the Adversarie and is evident of it self and strange it is to mee that any learned men which do acknowledge the Deitie of the holy Ghost should avouch as they do that there is neither precept to worship him nor any clear example in the Word that hee was worshipped 'T is a certain rule the sacred Persons of the Trinitie which are undivided in nature must bee likewise undivided in worship for any one to say the holy Ghost is God and with the same breath to profess their doubting whether hee is to bee worshipped is to speak contradictions and 't is all one as to acknowledg a King and to deny him honor and this is to make him a titular King and in truth no King at all The Minor is proved thus the holy Angels of God do worship him they worshipped the Lord of hosts Esa 6. 3. Holy holy holy is the Lord of hosts Heb. 1. 6. Whether the Prophet Esay understood this mysterie or not 't is not material to the point in hand nor whether their thrice chanting out holy implied the sacred Trinitie Yet why might not that bee intended But the Angels beeing intellectual substances worshipped they knew what and beeing confirmed in holiness they onely worshipped a fit object of worship and had they or sinful men worshipped the highest creature with religious adoration would not hee as the Angel in the revelation have rejected it and said See you do it not I am your fellow-servant but the Angels worshipped the holy Ghost I prove the blessed Apostle and irrefragable Interpreter inform's us that the Lord of hosts who put words into the mouth of Esay was the holy Ghost Act. 28. 25. Well said the holy Ghost by Esaiah the Prophet and as the Son of God is directly prayed unto Lord Jesus said Stephen that blessed martyr receive my Spirit Acts 7. Lord Jesus com quickly Apocal. 22. So is likewise the holy Spirit Awake thou North-winde and com thou South blow upon my garden that the Spices thereof may flow out O blessed Spirit breathe into my heart that by the love of God and my neighbor it may send forth a sweet savor Cant. 4. 16. The blessed Spirit of God is compared to the winde that as the winde blow's where it list's so doth the Spirit of God blow where hee will regenerat's whom hee pleaseth John 3. 8. And to this intent it is that S. John prayeth grace and peace not onely from God the Father and from Jesus Christ but also from the seven Spirits Apocal. 1. 4. The Spirit is but one in nature but it is said to bee seven that is manifold in regard of the distribution of many gifts which are from the Spirit and more plainly 2 Corinth 13. 13. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the holy Ghost bee with you all And this Argument is asserted by Justin Martyr as I have shewed in answer to your thirteenth Argument and by Clemens Alexandrinus at the end l. 3. Paedag. used in the ancient Liturgies and practised by the reformed Churches Sancta Trinitas miserere O holy Trinitie have mercie To these I may add this consideration that wee are the Temples of the holy Ghost It 's God onely that hath a Temple and
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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
the Second and Third Persons are not so called by the name of God nor is this concession to your advantage The Father is so called chiefly for these two reasons First because hee is God of himself and from no other Person hee is often stiled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without a principle of beeing so are not the Son and the holy Ghost Secondly because hee is the principle and the fountain communicating the Deitie to the Son and the holy Ghost and yet when it is said Wee have one God and it is immediatly subjoyned the Father this is not spoken by way of exclusion but inclusion of the Son and the holy Ghost for the Son is in the Father and so is the holy Ghost too All creatures and particularly Idol-Gods are excluded from beeing God for God is opposed to Idols in the later place and I suppose you will not take the Son of God and the holy Ghost to bee Idols Besides the text might have lead you to this construction for it is said Wee have one Lord Jesus Christ will you rashly exclude God the Father from beeing our Lord will you deny that hee hath dominion over us And if the Father bee included in this term Christ is our one Lord why should not the Son bee included in the former one God And as for the other places the works recited there do prove the holy Ghost to bee God the the 3d. Argument followeth Argum 3 Maj Hee that hath the incommunicable properties of God is God Min The holy Ghost hath the incommunicable properties of God Concl Ergò The Major is confessedly true and need 's no proof the Minor is confirmed by a few instances and if it can bee proved that but one of them belong's to him it 's virtually proved true of them all for all are but one in truth and nature and one is all First the holy Ghost is omniscient not onely in that hee lead's his servants into all truth Joh. 16. 13. Esa 40. 13. hee is true the Spirit of Truth and the Fountain of Truth but chiefly is this confirmed because hee searcheth all things yea the deep things of God 1 Corin. 2. 10. which no creature can do Secondly because hee is essentially and powerfully present every where The holy Prophet took this as an undeniable truth Psal 139. 7. Whither shall I flee from thy Spirit This Interrogation as appeareth also by the enumeration of places most distant one from another heaven and hell implieth a peremptory assertion that hee could go no where no not in his thoughts but the Spirit of God was present there and yet is hee not included or circumscribed in any places as bodily creatures or limited as the nature of Angels is Basil de Spir. San. c. 22. Advers This beeing a pinching Argument and easily apprehended to bee very forcible by slender capacities must seemingly bee answered and the wound which his cause receive's thereby must have a skin drawn over it though it is not curable by the art of man Thus hee saith By this reason the devil is omnipresent for hee steal's the Word sowen in a thousand places at once hee dwell's in all wicked men Let them answer to these and then I will tell them how the Spirit though hee is not omnipresent may bee in all the faithful at once Answ 1 First I must tell this Disputant that though hee saith much and enough to prove our assertion yet it is not so full as it ought to bee for the Argument holdeth forth this truth That God's Spirit is not onely in the hearts of his children but there and it is their happiness that hee is essentially there where they shall never bee Hee is every where Answ 2 Secondly I observe that though many lines are penned in answer to the question yet positively doth hee assert nothing at all Hee leave 's us to guess at his meaning to prevent absurdities with which hee might have been pressed if hee had told us how the holy Ghost a creature is in all the faithful and how the chief Devil is in all the wicked now possibly hee hath a starting hole and may say hee hath no such meaning It became a plain dealing man desirous to have the truth revealed to him as hee pretend's to bee to have opened his minde clearly and not to have left the Beader in suspence touching this particular You tell us and this is all you say that what wee can answer against the Omnipresence of the Devil you will apply the same Answer to our Objection And will you so indeed Shew mee then out of the Word of God in any place that the holy Ghost hath his beeing by creätion and not by eternal procession I can plainly prove and this you will not deny that the Devil and his Angels were creäted of God and were good in the instant of their creätion Shew mee out of the Word of God that it is any where thus spoken the holy Ghost and his Angels as it is said expresly the Devil and his Angels Wee read indeed that Michaël and his Angels did fight with the Dragon and his Angels Revel 12. Whosoever is meant by Michaël and there are several interpretations thereof yet none did so much as dream of the holy Ghost whom you make the Prince of Angels Shew mee out of the Word of God that the Devil and his Angels are every where as it is said expresly of the holy Spirit If you mount up into heaven are they there Are they not thrust headlong from thence never to bee re-admitted to the pure and blessed place Are they in the bottom of the sea or in the places of the earth which are not inhabited unless by restraint If in an instant you were placed there you might truly say that you fled from the Devil's presence and could be som where and the Devil not there Shew mee out of the holy Word that inferior good Spirits which as Guardians and Protectors do lead the servants of God into all truth that they do sanctifie them and that in the Scripture phrase they dwell in them and that it is not one onely holy Ghost that doth all these and as you your self contend The Person of the holy Ghost is given together with his gifts Argum. 7. but I can shew you that it is not one individual Devil but they are innumerable principalities and powers against which God's servants must fight as against enemies with whom they must make no peace and which do damnably seduce guid and hold in woful captivitie all sinners A legion of Devils was cast out of one man every one of these wicked Spirits is a Devil a Satan hee is like a similar bodie as a bone every one is a Devil Advers Whereas you object that one lying Spirit seduced four hundred Prophets 1 King 22. 23. and add that there is the same reason of four hundred and four millions To this I say speak out man doth one wicked
for a sin against the servant against a Person inferior to the Son then for a sin against the greater and against his wel-beloved Son And if a man bee not bereft of common sense hee must need 's conclude against this Disputant and therefore since the sin against the holy Ghost is unpardonable but the sin against the Son of God is not unpardonable as the text sheweth it must of necessitie bee yielded that the holy Ghost is God and superior to Christ as hee is man as hee is Mediator Fourthly if the holy Ghost were not God the sin committed against him could not bee the greatest sin Can a sin immediatly committed against a creature bee greater then that which is directly against the Creätor Doth not the greatness of the Person against whom the sin is committed aggravate the offence and make the sin to be so much the more heinous as the Person wronged by it is the greater Is not a sin against God which is a breach of the first Table greater I mean of an equal comparison then a sin against the 2d Table as this sin whereof wee treat must bee if it bee a sin against the creature I deny not but they that sin against a creature do sin against God whose authoritie and law forbidding it are slighted but shall therefore an immediate sin against the workmanship of God bee as you contend the more heinous then that which is against the great God himself I might tell you that you do onely say that this sin through the holy Ghost doth strike at God himself as a superior object thereof You can never prove that this sin is not terminated in the holy Ghost but for Argument sake grant it At the Assises as I remember malefactors are indicted for sinning against our Soveraign Lord and his Laws but is it as great a sin as that which is immediatly against his Majestie Suppose supreme Authority send 's Ambassadors to a forain Prince and they are disgraced and killed 't is your own comparison Argum 4 this redound's I deny not very much to the wrong of the supreme Authority and 't is don and interpreted to bee don to them not for their own but for his sake Suppose again a King should send more honorable Ambassadors then the former as Balak did to Balaam and joyn in commission with them his chief favorites was not the same sin committed against these later servants greater then the former But suppose a King himself should go in his own Person about the same business and they should e-equally contemn him was not the affront now and sin committed of a deeper die Give me leave Christian Reader to endeavor to explicate in as few words as may bee how the sin is said to bee against the holy Ghost It is an undeniable truth that all the actions of the divine Persons those onely excepted which are ad intra of intrinsecal relation are the joynt and undivided works of the three Persons because there is not a multiplied but one divine essence and the unitie of their working depend's on the unitie of the power which is all one with the essence Gregor Nazianz. Orat. de Theolog. Yet the blessed God is described in Scripture by a gracious condescending to our dull capacities which are unable to conceive the distinction of the Persons in the unitie of the God-head but by a distinction of their operations to us-ward and hence it is that the great works of Redemption Creätion and Sanctification are severally attributed to the several Persons not in a way of opposition but distinction which the School-men call Appropriation Thus power is asscribed to the Father because hee is the principle of the Son and of the holy Ghost and therefore because the mightie power of God is manifested by Creätion the Father is frequently stiled the Creätor Wisedom is asscribed to the Son of God because hee is termed conceptus Sapientiae hence is it that Redemption wherein the manifold wisedom of God is seen is appropriated to the Son hee is called Redeemer Goodness is asscribed to the holy Ghost because hee proceed's from the Father and the Son per modum amoris hence the good things of God which are communicated to us are appropriated to him hee is called our Sanctifier And for the same reason are sins thus distinguished there is a sin of Frailtiness and that is said to bee against the Father who is Power there is a sin of Ignorance and that is said to bee against the Son who is the Wisedom of God and there is a sin of Wilfulness and Malice and that is said to bee against the holy Ghost who is Goodness Bonav p. 1. Quaest 39. Art 8. This is a reason why this sin is unpardonable it 's a sin by appropriation both against his Person and his Gifts 't is not a sin of weakness nor a sin of ignorance no nor every gross sin against knowledg no nor every apostasie from the truth against the known truth for som may fall away either out of fear of the loss of their goods or lives or for preferment nor a few of this kinde have bewailed their follies have obtained pardon and proved glorious Martyrs but this is a sin wittingly and willingly and out of cankred malice committed against God the Father Son and a I said by appropriation against God the holy Ghost and his great work in their hearts and whereby they offer contumelie and despite to the Spirit of Grace and so will hee never give them the grace to repent Adver You say that God useth the Spirit but onely in things of greatest importance By this your saying you give your Reader a hint to suspect that you think every sin committed against God's Spirit is that unpardonable sin against the holy Ghost Speak out is not this your meaning if not so to what purpose should you say God never useth the Spirit but in matters of greatest importance If so I demand then who can be saved For every good man grieveth the blessed Spirit and sinneth against him I add this your Conclusion is such a Paradox which hath searce dropped from the pen of any Christian man You think belike that the Spirit is like to Arch-angels which are said to preside over Kingdoms and great Personages onely but the care of singular mean persons is under God committed to the Angels You think it seem's the Spirit work 's not but to bring forth a male-childe of whom the woman hath been long in travel to bee delivered for whom the Church hath sighed much and made many prayers to God to give her a Christian orthodoxal King or Emperor or to divert the rage of the persecutors of the Saints and to procure rest to the Church to raise up men of heroical spirits and parts to reform the Church or such like Belike then they that have but one talent or two talents or mean men which have but a low degree of sanctifying graces are not
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
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
of your Argument and then will particularly applie it Somtimes the Superior heareth the Inferior thus God is frequently said to hear the praiers of his servants made in faith Somtimes the Inferior hear's the Superior and that is don many waies not onely by his bodily ears but by understanding what formerly was not known or when the judgment is more perfectly informed in a point before not fully known or beleeving what till that voice came was not beleeved or hearkning to the counsell or obeying the will and pleasure of God Somtimes an equall hear's an equall as common experience shew's If wee speak of the first acceptation God's hearing us and answering of us according to the tenor of our praiers then I appeal to your judgment and you must needs give sentence against your self that in this sense your Major is false If you speak of hearing in the second sense I grant your Major is true because so to hear argueth ignorance in whole or in part forgetfulness dulness slackness or plain neglect if not contempt of dutie which wee do all confess are inconsistent with the infinite knowledg and transcendent excellencie of the great God If you take it in the third sense an equal hearing an equal then I denie your Major for God the holy Ghost which heareth from God the Son is equal to him Advers The Minor say you is proved John 16. 13. Answ My answer is by advising that the words of the text may bee well observed the words run not thus Whatsoever the Spirit knoweth hee will speak but whatsoever hee heareth and this is likewise spoken of Christ John 8. 26. and 15. 16. Obj. This is not to bee understood as if the holy Ghost did hear any thing corporally and thus is hearing properly taken and for such a hearing I suppose you will not contend Sol. Nor secondly is it to bee taken of hearing viz. by revelation by which hearing hee should learn that which formerly hee knew not It 's indeed spoken that hee was that hee is and that hee shall bee if it had been onely said hee was one might have conceived that now hee is not If it had been said hee is onely it might have been thought that hee had not been alwaies If it had been onely said hee shall bee it might bee thought hee is not now Time past present and to come are asscribed to God yet not as to men to denote a beginning continuance and end of time for actions are said to have been which now are not and that they shall bee which now have no existence at all but when they are spoken of God there is no limitation of time at all God so hath been that hee is and shall bee hee shall bee yet so that hee is and hath been and this is to bee applied likewise to the hearing of the holy Ghost Hee hath alwaies heard and hee doth hear And in the future time it 's said in this place hee shall hear This hearing saith S. Austin Tractat. 99. in Joan. is everlasting Hee hath known hee doth know and hee will know His hearing is his knowing and his knowing is his beeing hee hath heard from him hee doth hear from him and hee will hear from him from whom hee proceed's so Austin And hee cal's the opening of this text John 16. arduam nimis arduam quaestionem This bee spoken to prevent that scruple in that it is said Hee shall hear Som of ours clear the words thus Whatsoever the holy Ghost shall hear that shall hee speak which import's thus much those things which the Father will have revealed to us those things and no other will hee reveal to us the truths which the Spirit shall reveal to us are truths received from God the Father the Spirit feign's nothing hee alter's nothing hee pervert's nothing The paraphrase of the text in the former Argument will dispell the foggie mists of this reason Advers The Major saith hee is proved thus Hee that is taught is not God Hee that heareth from another what hee shall speak is taught The Major is proved Esa 40. 13 14. Answ 1 To this I answer if you had not been infatuated you would have omitted that text in Esay for it directly overthroweth your assertion and expresly teacheth us that none have taught the Spirit of God But I answer Secondly hee that is taught properly that is learn's what hee formerly knew not is not God I readily assent for God's knowledg is infinite and cannot bee increased But how can you prove that the holy Ghost is taught by comparing say you John 8. 26 28 together Christ is taught by hearing This is but a very weak bul-rush it hath no strength at all in it This must needs bee your consequence in som places of Scripture and not onely so but even in common reason hee that heareth is taught therefore must it needs bee so taken John 16. 13. Is not this a wild inference That Scripture John 8. 26 28. speaketh not of the holy Ghost but expresly of Christ and then it must bee spoken of him either as God or Mediator man If in the former way then the text furthereth not but marreth your Argument if in the later then it is unfitly alledged for albeit a creäted substance by hearing another may properly bee taught yet far bee it from us to conceive that the Creätor the supreme God can learn what hee knew not Advers But saith hee let a man turn himself every way yet shall hee never bee able to make it out to a wise man that any can hear from another what hee will speak who is the prime Author of his speech Answ Well I see M. Bidle is a wise man in his own eies and all Christian men in the world besides himself and a handful of seduced ones are no better then fools but if hee had well perpended that text quoted by himself out of Esa 40. 13 14 15. hee would not have concluded the great God the three sacred Persons which are one Almightie God within the shallow compass of his brains I perceive hee is alwaies wrapped in the briars and cannot possibly extricate himself because hee apprehendeth not the meaning of that common distinction of God the holy Ghost as God for in this respect hee hath infinite knowledg of himself and of God the holy Ghost as hee is the holy Ghost for so doth hee receive knowledg and wisdom from God the Father and God the Son yet I pray let this bee remembred so as hee was never ignorant and life yet so as hee never wanted life and power yet so as hee was never weak because these persons communicating essence to the holy Ghost did communicate life power and knowledg So that the holy Ghost hath knowledg not by learning but by proceeding and all the creatures which hear and are taught they are taught by the holy Ghost And whereas hee illustrate's as hee think's his Assertion by a comparison taken from
office Saul and the Messengers of Saul prophesied amongst the Prophets 1 Sam. 19. And that hee is yet more fully revealed in the New Testament you cannot denie although you do boldly and wickedly denie his Deitie Well then if these Ephesians never heard of the holy Ghost either it was because they never had sufficient means to instruct them in that profound mysterie and do you think that this is very probable for they had or might have had the writings of the Prophets and if they were baptized by John doth not hee expresly speak of the holy Ghost Christ saith hee should baptize with the holy Ghost Matth. 3. 11. Or might they not have repaired to som Christians in som place or other for a further instruction in the faith Or if they never heard of the holy Ghost it is else because albeit they had som means of knowledg this way yet did they not regard them or sufficiently profit by them Take it which way you will and in neither of the waies is there any strength in the Argument to prove your odious assertion but it argue's clearly that you are given up by the just judgment of God to strong delusions to beleeve lies How could it else have entred into your heart to think that the ignorance of a few untaught Christians should bee a sound proof to overthrow a truth which was unanimously imbraced by sounder Christians Shall God's truths bee no truths because som sinfull and ignorant persons do not know them Nay rather you should thus have reasoned since this was a divine truth preached by John the Baptist and afterward more fully taught by Christ and his Apostles therefore without wavering much more without contradicting them I will submit to their better judgment The Argument by this which is already spoken is fully answered yet I will follow the Adversaries steps and gather up his mistakings for the better satisfaction of the Reader Advers If any shall say by the holy Spirit is meant not the Person but the gifts of the Spirit besides that hee speak's without example hee evacuate's the emphasis wee are so far from receiving the holy Ghost that wee have not heard whether there bee an holy Ghost or not Answ First let the Reader observe how the Adversarie is possessed with the spirit of giddiness in contradicting himself It 's without example saith hee to say the Spirit is taken for the gifts of the Spirit and yet within three lines after hee saith wee may grant that this question Have you received the holy Ghost may bee meant of the gifts of the holy Ghost And with the same breath hee saith strangely forgetting himself that it is without example to take the holy Ghost for the gifts of the holy Ghost I add further that it is clearly prophesied that extraordinarie gifts as of prophesying and tongues are called the holy Ghost Joël 2. 28. Acts 2. 17. and in this Chapter Acts 19. 6. the holy Ghost came upon them How this is to bee understood the words following do expound They spoke with tongues and prophesied Ver. 6. So Acts 2. 4. thus John 7. 39. the holy Ghost was not yet you cannot denie but hee was in Person before that time and that hee was as touching sanctifying graces before How then is it said the holy Ghost was not yet Of necessitie it must bee meant as touching miraculous operations which were not yet bestowed on the Disciples What can bee more plainly spoken Nor doth this overthrow the Ephesians arguing and the emphasis of the words for however the holy Ghost bee taken yet your Argument is not good this onely can bee soundly inferred from their words Wee are so far from receiving the miraculous gifts of the holy Ghost that wee have not so much as heard whether there bee any such miraculous gifts of the holy Ghost or not And if the question moved to them was not touching the Person and sanctifying graces of the holy Ghost but onely touching miraculous gifts as 't is most probable for they being Disciples might bee presumed not to bee ignorant that there was an holy Spirit and that hee was a Sanctifier of his servants then either their answer is impertinent to the question or else they must needs return their answer in effect thus Wee have not heard whether there bee such miraculous gifts of the holy Ghost or not Advers S. Paul would have taken the hint which hee did not to have instructed them in the Deitie of the holy Ghost Answ 1 First to this I say that this your pleading make's as strongly against your self as against the truth for do not you also put a difference betwixt that prime creäted Spirit as you do blaspheme and his gifts What then do you say against us which make's not as much against your self also Secondly how prove you that the holy Apostle did not instruct these Ephesians touching the holy Ghost Is not this your pleading It is not written therefore it was not don this is say I inconsequent All that hee preached is not written and do not you see that by this reasoning you wound your own cause For can you shew that S. Paul taught these Ephesians such a doctrine touching the holy Ghost which you do maintain that hee was a creature Thirdly it is not to bee doubted but that hee opened to them the doctrine of the holy Ghost that hee was God and that hee taught them that holy graces are fruits of the holy Spirit which none but God can give Advers Yet now say you wee are made to beleeve that a man is damned that beleeve's not the Deitie of the holy Ghost And so saying you think to aggravate our error Answ To this I answer you are to know that wee make a great difference of times and persons wee do not despair of their salvation which were in the state of these Ephesians or of others now in the like condition if beleeving in one God and that Jesus Christ is a Savior and seeing their own sins and miseries should relie on him for eternall life And then as the converted thief on the Cross presently die though they never heard of the holy Ghost I would charitably judg of them and conceive that God intended mercie to them by these gracious discoveries of himself to them at this time but if God will graciously wink at such ignorance and have mercie on them this will yield no comfort at all to you who have been bred up in the Church of Christ and in our Schools and have read the word of God for you have wilfully shut your eies against the truth which is as clear touching the holy Ghost as if it had been written with the Sun beams and you have stretched your wits to the uttermost to pervert the plain meaning of the Scripture as appear's by your endeavoring to answer Matth. 28. and Acts 5. I may say to you as S. Cyprian de Sacram. Dom. calicis saith of som which