Chapter and which I hope to demonstrate by the help of other places referring to it And in order thereunto I shall note who the Prophet saw upon his Throne high and lifted up whose Train filled the Temple And this was Jehovah an incommunicable Name of God Psal 83.19 the Lord of Hosts who filleth the whole Earth with his Glory but this was not only the Father but also the Son and the Holy Ghost 1st That it was the Father needs no proof because it is not denied but confessed by our Adversaries in opposition to the other two Divine Persons 2dly That this Vision is applied to the Son we have the Words of the Apostle for it John 12.41 who speaking of Christ from verse 37 to 40. and citing the Prophet Isaiah's Message when he saw this Vision saith These things said Isaias when he saw his Glory and spake of him viz. of Christ whom John was speaking of 3dly This Scripture is also applied to the Holy Ghost in Acts 28.25 26. as hath been said already and will be defended in its proper place So that if we will credit the Holy Apostles who were doubtiess the best Expounders and Appliers of dark Prophecies and have unfolded the Mystery of the Holy Trinity which lay hid in the Words Holy Holy Holy and couched in the Plurality of Persons hinted to us in these Words Who shall go for us ver 8. Then surely we must acknowledg that seeing the Prophets Jehovah and the Apostles Son and Holy Spirit are one and the same that these two are Divine Subsistencies as well as the Father subsisting in the supream Nature of God Thirdly If we couple together John 10.30 and 2 Cor. 3.17 I and my Father are one The Lord is that Spirit we may see that the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit are but one God Fourthly John gives so clear a Testimony to the Unity of the Holy Trinity that I know not how it can be denied 1 John 5.7 For there are three that bear Record in Heaven the Father the Word and the Holy Ghost and these three are one in Essence as was shewed before CHAP. VII Containeth some Explications of the Holy Trinunity FIrst Of the essential Being of God God is one single infinite eternal immense perfect spiritual Being no Compound for Compounds must be either finite or infinite not of Finites for Finites are imperfect temporal and mensurable and so cannot make one infinite perfect Being not of Infinites for more than one infinite Being cannot subsist for one infinite Immensity cannot admit of another infinite Immensity nor is infinite Perfection exclusive but comprehensive of all Perfection Hence it is that we must not imagine God to have any shape because an Infinite Being cannot be any ways limited or subscribed Deut. 4.12 15. John 4.24 Deut. 33.27 Psal 147.5 Psal 90.2 Secondly Of a Divine Person Mr. Chynel in his Divine Trinunity Page 96. describes a Divine Person A Divine Person is a spiritual and infinite Subsistent related indeed to these other uncreated Persons which subsist in the same Divine Nature with it but distinguished from those co-essential Persons by its peculiar manner of Subsistence Order of subsisting singular Relation and incommunicable Property Thirdly Of the Divine Person of the Father The Divine Person of the Father is unbegotten and subsists of himself in the Divine Essence and hath the Divine Nature of none Fourthly Of the Divine Person of the Son The Divine Person of the Son is naturally and necessarily begotten of the Father by eternal Generation for he is Eternal as hath been shewed and is of the Father John 5.26 by eternal Generation and he subsists in the unbegotten Nature of God for the Father did not beget the Divine Nature of the Son but the Son is begotten in the Divine Nature Fifthly Of the Divine Person of the Spirit The Divine Person of the Spirit hath his Subsistence naturally and necessarily both from the Father and the Son by eternal Spiration or Emanation Job 33.4 and therefore the Holy Ghost is called the Spirit of Christ who breathed on his Disciples and bid them receive the Holy Ghost to shew that the Spirit was breathed forth by him as well as from the Father John 20.22 John 15.26 1 Pet. 1.11 2 Pet. 1.21 not from the Father alone or the Son alone for then he might be said to be the Son of the Father or of the Son but by the Father and the Son and not being separated or divided from either he subsists in the same Nature and is co-essential with them both Sixthly Of the Unity of the Holy Trinity The Divine Nature is common to all three Subsistencies and the whole Divine Nature is the Substance of every Person which distinctly subsists in it and all its essential Properties pertain unto each of them and the Divine Nature because it is infinite in Perfection it contains all relative as well as absolute Perfections Seventhly Of the Distinction between the Divine Nature and the Persons I shall cite Mr. Chynel in his Divine Trinunity Page 105 c. First The Father Son and Holy Ghost do all three really positively truly subsist in the Divine Essence and yet these three Subsistencies and the Divine Essence do not make four no nor two things really distinct even as Entity Truth Goodness and Unity do not make four things really distinct as you heard but now but are one real thing and no more Secondly Ens is not compounded of Entity and its three Affections nor is God compounded of the Godhead and three Subsistencies nor is any one Person compounded of the Divine Nature and Subsistence Thirdly As Truth is not Goodness nor Goodness Truth nor either of them Unity and yet all three are Entity So the Father is not the Son nor is the Son the Father nor is either of them the Holy Ghost and yet all three are God for they are all three but one God subsisting with all absolute and relative Perfection as hath been shewed Fourthly Every one of the three Affections of Ens doth connote Entity every one of the three Subsistencies doth connote the Godhead the Divine Nature as hath been proved at large Fifthly Not any one of the three Affections of Ens doth nor do all three together superadd a new Entity not any one of the three Subsistencies doth nor do all three together superadd a new Deity a new Divine Nature or Godhead for Ens is one Ens est trinum non triplex trinum unum Ens trin-unum Deus est trinus non triplex trinus unus Deus trinunus this instance doth in some Measure resemble the Mystery of the Trinunity Sixthly No Affection of Ens can be really separated from Ens nor can one of the Divine Persons be separated from the Divine Nature or the Divine Nature from any one of the Divine Persons or any one of the Persons from either of the other two Seventhly All the Affections of Ens are
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
A TREATISE OF THE HOLY TRINUNITY In Two Parts THE FIRST Asserting the Deity of Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit in the Unity of Essence with God the Father THE SECOND In Defence of the former containeth Answers to the chiefest Objections made against this Doctrine By Isaac Marlow John 1.1 2 3. In the Beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God The same was in the Beginning with God All things were made by him and without him was not any thing made that was made LONDON Printed for the Author and are to be sold by Richard Baldwin in the Old-Baily 1690. To the Reader Christian Reader HAving met with some opposition to the Doctrine of the Holy Trinunity it occasioned my more than ordinary Meditations on this Subject wherein I received great satisfaction of Mind And notwithstanding the Socinians have taken great pains to find out Arguments to support their Error yet I found they had no Foundation in the Holy Scriptures And nothing is more the Duty of every Christian than to inform himself of the Truth as it is in Jesus both in the Doctrinal and Practical Parts of the Christian Faith And tho the Knowledg of every sacred Truth is worth the treasuring up in our Hearts yet there are some more than others conducing to the Glory of God and the mutual Fellowship of Christians Among which the blessed Doctrine of the Holy Trin-unity is the chiefest for to deny the Deity of Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost is a great deprivation not only of the Glory of these two Divine Subsistencies but also of the Father For he that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father Joh. 5.23 And unless we see the Divine Rays of the Son we cannot see the Father chap. 14.9 And if we have not the same Light we cannot walk in the same Fellowship for what Communion hath Light with Darkness 1 Joh. 1.7 2 Cor. 6.14 Moreover seeing that the Fear of the Lord is the beginning of Wisdom and the Knowledg of the Holy is Understanding Prov. 9.10 and that the Welfare of our Souls depends on our knowledg of God and true Faith in him as he is revealed to us in the Holy Scriptures to be our Saviour it is highly necessary and the duty of every Christian to have a true distinct Knowledg of God subsisting in the Father Son and Holy Ghost For as neither an implicit Faith can secure us from being turned aside by every wind of Doctrine and cunning Craftiness of them that lie in wait to deceive so unless we have true Notions of the Holy Trinity we cannot worship God aright To the end therefore that those who have not a good understanding of this Doctrine may be inlightned and more establish'd therein and may have somewhat to answer and stop the mouths of Gainsayers and that others may be convinced of their Error and confirmed in the Truth I have presented this small Treatise to publick view And tho I am sensible of my own Weakness and Incapacity to manage this Inconceivable Mystery so as to suit and correspond with the Grandure and Perfection of it yet there is such Evidence and clear Demonstration given from the Word of Truth of the Deity of our Blessed Lord and the Holy Spirit as might easily gain it credence in the Minds of those that do oppose it if their Imbecillity were not such as to limit the mysterious and transcendent manner of God's Being to their finite Reason and make the Scriptures subservient to it And therefore to those it is my humble Request 1. That with a studious and intentive Spirit they will peruse this little Treatise 2. That no former Prepossessions may hinder their full adherence to what hath Divine Authority stamp'd upon it and then I doubt not of some good Effects of my Labour For this Fundamental Truth hath so firm a Foundation in the Holy Scriptures as will stand the shock of all the Socinian Arguments And tho I have not here undertaken to answer the multitude of them or of their Objections made against this Doctrine or any particular Author on this Subject yet I have taken hold as I conceive of the chiefest Pillars on which their Fabrick depends and those being taken away their whole Building will fall Which that it wholly may and that every Christian may be establish'd in the Truth of God Is the Prayer of him who desires to be a true Worshipper of the Trinune God and is a Well-wisher to all Men. The CONTENTS Chap. I. THE Case is briefly stated Pag. 1. Chap. II. Sheweth that there is but one God the Creator of all things Pag. 6. Chap. III. Asserteth a Plurality of Divine Subsistences Pag. 8. Chap. IV. Proveth the Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ 1. By his Names Pag. 11. 2. That God in the Old Testament in divers Places is Christ in the New Pag. 13. 3. By seven particular Texts of Scriptures Pag. 16. 4. That Christ preexisted his Incarnation in his Divine Nature Pag. 26. And is no Angel incarnate Pag. 30. but is eternal Pag. 32. 5. By his Works Pag. 35.6 By Divine Worship given to him Pag. 38. Chap. V. Proveth the Deity of the Holy Ghost 1. That he is a Divine Person Pag. 43. 2. His Deity is asserted from several Scriptures Pag. 45. 3. By his Works Pag. 48. 4. By Divine Worship Pag. 52. Chap. VI. Proveth the Unity of the Holy Trinity Pag. 54. Chap. VII Containeth some Explications of the Holy Trinuility 1. Of the essential Being of God Pag. 64. 2. Of a Divine Person Pag. 64. 3. Of the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit Pag. 65 66. 4. Of the Unity of the Holy Trinity Pag. 66. 5. Of the Distinctions between the Divine Nature and the Persons and some Shadows by way of Comparison Pag. 67. 6. Of the Union of Christ's two Natures Pag. 74. PART II. Chap. I. Answereth Objections against the Scriptural Proofs of Christ's Deity Page 76. Chap. II. Answers to Objections drawn from several Texts of Scripture Pag. 123. Chap. III. Answers to several Arguments against the Deity of Christ Pag. 128. Chap. IV. Answers to several Objections against the Scriptures that prove the Deity of the Holy Ghost Pag. 132. Chap. V. Answers to some Objections drawn from divers Scriptures to disprove the Deity of the Holy Spirit Pag. 157. Chap. VI. Answers to some Scriptures from whence our Adversaries assert that the Father only is the true God With a general Answer and Conclusion Pag. 169. A TREATISE OF THE Holy Trinunity In Two Parts PART I. CHAP. I. In which after a short Introduction the Case is briefly stated GOD who at sundry Times and in divers Manners spake in Times past unto the Fathers by the Prophets hath in these last Days spoken unto us by his Son Who first in his own Person declared the Father's Will and then by his Holy Apostles through the Spirit more fully opened the Mysteries that had been
hid from Ages and Generations unto his Saints and left them upon Sacred Record for future Ages By which means we come to the knowledg not only of the Grace Office and Operations of the Father Son and Holy Spirit but of the great Mystery of these Three for ever blessed holy and divine Persons subsisting in the Unity of the Godhead from all Eternity But no sooner did the Glory of the Holy Trinity begin to shine in the Ministration of the Gospel of Jesus Christ But Satan the Prince of Darkness lest Men should imbrace the Truth and so his Kingdom should fall did what he could to hinder the Progress of the Gospel in its primitive Purity and in Enmity to the weal of Mankind suggested many pernicious Errours into their Minds as we may find in the Writings of the Apostles of our Blessed Lord which I forbear here to mention And throughout every successive Age he hath not wanted some Instruments to disturb the Peace of the Church with false and erronious Doctrines thereby to weaken the true Interest of Jesus Christ as well as to ruin the Souls of Men. And among others that have been broached in the World this is one viz. That the Son of God and the Holy Spirit are not one infinite and eternal God Coessential with the Father but are so much inferiour in Nature to him as to be but Creatures only But to speak more particularly Some affirm that Jesus Christ is only humane or nothing but Man And though the Racovian Catechism doth acknowledg he is more than a meer Man yet they do not allow Christ to have a divine Nature as we may see in Pag. 27 28. of that Catechism Where by way of Question they say Is the Lord Jesus then a meer Man The Answer is by no means For he was conceived of the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary and therefore is from his very Conception and Birth the Son of God as we read Luke 1.30 and the Answer is closed with these Words That the Lord Jesus ought by no means to be reputed a meer Man Yet the next Question being put Hath he not also a Divine Nature The Answer is At no Hand for that is repugnant not only to sound Reason but also to the Holy Scriptures Now if they will not allow Jesus Christ to have a Divine Nature and yet do say he is more than a meer Man what can he then be unless we suppose either as Biddle saith Article 6. of his Confession of Faith that the Holy Spirit is an Angel and so by Conception he may be said to participate of their Nature or else that His visible and external Exercise of the Power of God is his Divine Nature From the first Socinus whom Biddle reproveth for it and Crellius do dissent for they deny the Spirit to be a Person but the Power and Efficacy of God the Father So that according to their opinion Christ cannot be of the Nature of Angels by conception Nay Biddle himself though he asserts the Holy Ghost to be an Angel and Christ to be conceived by him yet he saith that Christ hath no other than a humane Nature Article the 3d. Secondly If his external and visible Exercise of the Divine Power of God be the external and visible Exercise of his own Nature it is what we are pleading for and if this were but granted the main Controversy would quickly cease for the Power of God as it is in God is his Nature so it must be in Christ But it 's hard to conclude from what these Men do say what Christ and the Holy Spirit are for some are for having Christ nothing but Humane and others that He is more than a Man viz. the Son of God by Conception and yet that he is not God by Nature So likewise Biddle is for having the Holy Ghost to be an Angel others say That he is the Power and Efficacy of God the Father And what they will hammer forth at last or where they will settle who can tell However in this they all agree That neither the Son nor the Holy Ghost are God by Nature or have the supream Divine Nature of God for their own Nature And therefore forasmuch as there hath been great endeavours used to suppress the Doctrine of the Holy Trinunity and to raze out or so besmear the written Word of God that we should not discern the Beauty and Excellency of the Nature of Christ and the Holy Spirit I shall endeavour to demonstrate the Truth of their Deity and in order thereunto First I shall note that on all Hands it is agreed among Christians that the Scriptures do distinguish and make a difference between the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost and that there is but one that is personally called the Father and but one other Chief and only Son of that Father and also a third distinguished from both and called the Holy Ghost besides which there is not another that is so called as may be collected from the following Scriptures Eph. 4.4 5 6. 1 John 4.9 chap. 5.7 2 Pet. 1.16 17. John 6.27 ch 14.26 CHAP. II. Wherein is proved that there is but One God the Creator and Former of all Things TO shew this I shall only give a bare Citation of several Texts of Scripture and not take up our time in that which is so generally believed by all Persons Deut. 6.4 Hear O Israel the Lord our God is one Lord. 1 Sam. 2.2 There is none Holy as the Lord for there is none besides thee c. Isa 46.9 Remember the former Things of old for I am God and there is none else I am God and there is none like me 1 Cor. 4.6 There is none other God but One but to us there is but one God the Father of whom are all things 1 Tim. 2.5 For there is but one God c. Jam. 2.19 Thou believest there is but one God thou dost well Nehem. 9.6 Thou even thou art Lord alone Thou hast made Heaven the Heaven of Heavens with all their Hosts the Earth and all Things that are therein the Sea and all that is therein and thou preservest them all and the Host of Heaven worshippeth thee Psal 86.9 10. All Nations whom thou hast made shall come and worship before thee O Lord and shall glorify thy Name For thou art great and doest wondrous Things thou art God alone Isa 44.6 Thus saith the Lord the King of Israel and his Redeemer the Lord of Hosts I am the first and I am the last and besides me there is no God Ver. 24. I am the Lord that maketh all Things Isa 45.18 For thus saith the Lord that created the Heavens God himself that formed the Earth and made it He hath established it He created it not in vain He formed it to be inhabited I am the Lord and there is none else There are many other Scriptures of like import but these are plain and sufficient
Testimonies to prove that there is but one God the Creatour and Former of all Things CHAP. III. Sheweth that there is a Plurality of Divine Subsistences FIrst from Gen. 1.1 In the Beginning God created the Heaven and the Earth The word in the Hebrew is Elohim Gods or Almighties in the Plural Number I find an Exposition of this Text by Mr. William Streat which because it giveth much Light I shall present the Reader with the material part of it The Author reads 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Almighties and in Page 2. In Mr. William Streat's Book called The dividing of the Hoof. Pag. 1. speaking of the opposition of Elohim Almighties which is a Noun Plural to the word Bara he created says thus God's Phrase in a Dialect of his own transcending all humane Arts purposely to amaze them in the Mystery of the Trinity is one Thing Mans ordinary means of discovering earthly Things by Grammatical Rules in humane Learning is another This Hebraism is not used by Moses the Almighties Secretary Penman of sacred Truth joyning a Verb Singular to a Noun Plural for Contradiction but for Interpretation Therefore the word Bara he created is most fittingly and significantly joyned to a Noun Plural Elohim Almighties because titling himself in a Plural Number he might give us to understand a Plurality of Persons which are the three Persons in the Trinity Father Son and Holy Ghost who wrought together in the Work of Creation And the Author further adds Page 3. that the Holy Trinity is here to be understood and that because the word God is not to be found in the Singular Number El nor in the Dual as Elohaim but in the Plural Elohim as comprehending the three Persons in the Deity But some may say that the word Elohim proves rather three Gods than three Divine Persons in one Godhead But note that this is corrected by the Verb Singular which betokens the Three to be One in Essence And surely there is something in this Hebraism because it answers so well to that which follows ver 26. And God said Let Vs make Man in Our Image after Our Likeness c Mark the words Us and Our signify more than One Person And though some may object that the Angels are here to be understood yet this cannot be for the Works of Creation were never attributed to any Creatures And as there are other Texts Gen. 20.13 and ch 35.7 Josh 24.19 2 Sam. 7.23 see the Dutch-Annotations in which the Hebrew word Elohim Almighties is found in the Plural Number as likewise the word Makers Job 35.10 Eccles 12.1 So also in our English Translation there is a Concurrence in several other places of Scripture with this of Gen. 1.26 as in ch 11.7 where the Lord said Go to let us go down and there confound their Language And Isa 6.8 The Lord said Whom shall I send and who will go for us c. Which places denote a Plurality of Persons in the Godhead CHAP. IV. Asserteth the Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ by his Names THAT the Father is God is universally owned by all Christians And therefore Having made some little Preparation I now come to prove the Deity of the Son of God That our Lord Jesus Christ is not only Humane but that he is also of the very same Spiritual Essence Nature and Substance of God the Father And First I shall take notice of those Names or Appellations which are given to our Lord Jesus Christ in the Holy Scriptures for he is frequently called by those Names which are properly applicable to none but God As Mighty God Isa 9.6 7. applied to Christ Luk. 1.31 32 33. Most Mighty Psal 45.1 to 8. applied to Christ Heb. 1.8 Almighty Rev. 1.8 with ver 17 18. Jehovah Jer. 23.5 6. These are proper Names of God and are applied to Jesus Christ who is often called God in the Holy Scriptures as John 20.28 My Lord and my God and Heb. 1.8 But unto the Son he saith Thy Throne O God is for ever and ever Rom. 9.5 Whose are the Fathers and of whom as concerning the Flesh Christ came who is over all God blessed for ever Amen And though others may be called Gods Yet unto us there is but one God 1 Cor. 8.6 And what ever some may think that would turn the current of Scripture another way yet I cannot conceive that Jesus Christ should be so frequently called by the highest Appellations God hath in a relative Sense only and not as proper Names belonging to him as a Person subsisting in the same Nature nor do I believe that his Name Immanuel which is God with us Matth. 1.23 was given to him but as a suitable and descriptive Name of both his Natures as real God in our Nature He took Flesh upon him Heb. 2.16 and Phil. 2.6 7. He thought it not robbery to be equal with God But made himself of no Reputation and took upon him the form of a Servant c. Here are the two Natures of Christ asserted his Divine Nature which only can be equal with God and his Humane both which do appropriate his Name Immanuel to him and if his Names are proper to the Nature of God we must then either admit of Jesus Christ to be of the same Nature or deny his Names to be proper to him Secondly I shall prove the Deity of the Son of God by three particular Scriptures that relate to God in the Old Testament and which are applied to Jesus Christ in the New whereby it may appear that respecting his Divine Nature he is one and the same with God First Scripture is Zech. 14.3 Then shall the Lord go forth and fight against those Nations as when he fought in the day of Battel Ver. 4. And his Feet shall stand in that day upon the Mount of Olives which is before Jerusalem on the East c. Ver. 5. And the Lord my God shall come and all the Saints with thee This Text for its natural Affinity with the rest of the Chapter cannot be allegorized without gross Absurdity but must be taken in a literal Sense of the coming of Christ with all his Saints And it well agrees with what the Angel told the Disciples saying that this same Jesus which is taken up from you into Heaven shall so come in like manner as you have seen him go into Heaven Then returned they to Jerusalem from the Mount called Olivet This sheweth that Christ ascended into Heaven from the Mount of Olives and that thither he shall descend again and so it agrees with the Prophet And as to the coming of the Saints with the Lord or Jehovah God this also is applied to Jesus Christ 1 Thess 4.14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again even so them also which sleep in Jesus shall God bring with him chap. 3.13 At the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ with all his Saints So that he who is by the Prophet Zechariah called
Verses says My Father which gave them me is greater than all and none is able to pluck them out of my Father's Hand Here Christ asserteth the greatness of his Father's Power that he was greater than All but yet saith I and my Father are One as if Christ should say As my Father is greater than all So also I am greater than all and his being One in Power shews him to be One in Nature with him And thus the Jews understood our Lord when they took up Stones to stone him ver 31. that he being a Man made himself God v. 34 35 36. But Christ reproves their rashness in charging him with Blasphemy looking on it as great Indignity not to allow him any Supremacy above others they called Gods in that they said of him whom the Father had sanctified Thou blasphemest because he said I am the Son of God I question not but ' the Jews would have born it well enough though he should have assumed the Name of God so it were in the Sense of their Law like other Men ver 34 35. or of a Son of God as they themselves being Children of Abraham claimed God to be their Father But their great quarrel with Christ was that he so affirmed Himself to be the Son of God as one and the same with the Father equal to him in Power and therefore he is of the same Nature Sixth Scripture is 1 John 5.20 And we know that the Son of God is come and hath given us an Vnderstanding that we may know him that is True And we are in him that is True even in his Son Jesus Christ This is the true God and eternal Life What can be more plain to prove that the Son of God is the true God than to have it so asserted of him and can he be the true God and not so by Nature the very God and but a Creature If so we must then acknowledg two Gods the One the true God the Creator the other the true God a Creature which is repugnant to the Scripture for there is none other God but One for though there be that are called Gods whether in Heaven or in Earth as there be Gods many and Lords many But to us there is but one God as before was shewed 1 Cor. 8.4 5 6. And Gal. 4.8 there is an Exclusion of all from Divine Worship that are not God by Nature and therefore if our Lord Jesus Christ be the true God he must then be of the One true Natural Godhead Seventh Scripture is Coloss 2.9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead Bodily First To imagine from this or any other Scripture that the Humane Nature of Christ comprehends the Deity is to conceive in our Minds that of God which is inconsistent with his Immensity and Infinity of Nature Or Secondly To say that the three Divine Persons in the Godhead do personally and equally after the same manner tabernacle in the Humane Nature of Christ makes it common to all the three Subsistencies so that the Father and the Holy Spirit as well as the Son would be incarnate But this is contrary to the written Word of God which declares to us the Son of God who is the brightness of his Glory and the express Image of his Person that laid the Foundation of the Earth c. That He it is that took Flesh upon him Heb. 1.1 2 3 8 10. and ch 2.14 16. And all that Christ did by way of Atonement for us and Reconciliation of God to us is ascribed to him as the Person of the Son of God only and not as the Father or the Holy Ghost though in the Unity of Nature they cannot be excluded But Thirdly If we are neither to understand this Scripture as if the Godhead were comprehended in Christ's humane Nature nor that the three Divine Persons were equally incarnate what then can be further proposed as the meaning of it But that the Person of the Son or the Divine Nature of Christ subsisting in the one whole Nature of God hath all the fulness of that Nature dwelling in him for there is no Division of the whole Nature of God with all its Essential Properties and Perfections from the Divine Persons for then neither the Nature nor the Persons could be Infinite or Immensurable but limited and subscribed and therefore there is a necessity that every Divine Person should have the whole Divine Nature with all the Essential Attributes and Perfections of it whether it be Omnipotency Omnipresency Omnisciency Immensity Eternity Goodness c. the fulness of all is in every Divine Person they differ not in Nature but in personal Properties as the Father is not begotten like the Son neither did the Son beget like the Father nor also did either of them proceed like the Holy Spirit and so also in Office they differ the one from the other but in Nature they are the same and have all the same Essential Properties and Perfections as was said before So then all the fulness of the Godhead dwells bodily or substantially in the Person of the Son that is he hath the whole Spiritual Substance or Essence of the Divine Nature and by his hypostatical Union with the Humane Nature the fulness of the Godhead may be said also to dwell Bodily in the Humane Nature of Christ So then if all the Attributes and Perfections of the Nature of God in their fulness dwell in our Lord Jesus Christ it is a sufficient and undeniable Evidence of his Deity But some may say that the Godhead dwells in Christ after the same manner it dwells in us Answer Tho it 's said that we are the Temple of the Living God and of the Holy Ghost that dwelleth in us and that Jesus Christ is also in us 1 Cor. 6.19 2 Cor. 6.16 Joh. 17.23 Rom. 8.9 10. Yet what is this to that Fulness which dwels in him We indeed have Communion with the Father and the Son through the Spirit and are made partakers of the Divine Nature Eph. 2.22 2 Pet. 1.4 but not after the same manner as Christ is For the Holy Spirit hath his Union with us by way of Fellowship with our Spirits and unites himself in Communion with us Phil. 2.1 2 Cor. 13.14 1 Cor. 2.12 1 Joh. 2.20 whereby we are guided by the teachings of him into all Truth Joh. 16.13 Gal. 5.18 But we have not our existence in the Spirit as the Human Nature of Christ in the Divine Person of the Son for we are distinct human Persons before and after we are regenerated But Christ did not exist but by Conception in the Divine Nature in which he had his Being and thereby a relation by virtue of the Hypostatical Union of the Son of God with his Human Nature to all the Attributes and Perfections of the Divine Nature And tho it 's said that God the Father and Christ and the Holy Spirit dwelleth in us yet I cannot find it was
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
needless for the Holy Ghost to frame the Body of our Lord or else that the Divine Nature of the Son of God was idle Will you grant then which by this your Reason must needs follow because Christ was conceived by the Holy Ghost therefore God the Father was idle and not the prime Worker of this marvellous Conception What is here cited out of this learned Man sufficiently shews the Weakness of this Objection against the Deity of Jesus Christ CHAP. IV. Wherein is answered some Objections against the Scriptures that prove the Deity of the Holy Ghost OBjection to Matth. 28.19 Baptizing them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost It cannot be rightly inferred that because the Holy Spirit is here ranked with the Father and the Son therefore he is equal to them by this account when the Apostle 1 Tim. 5.21 saith I charge thee Gr. I obtest before God and the Lord Jesus Christ and the elect Angels that thou observe these things without Prejudice doing nothing by Partiality joyning the elect Angels with the Father and the Son this would imply that the elect Angels are equal with the Father and the Son Answer There is not the same reason to imply from this of Timothy that the elect Angels are equal to the Father and the Son as there is for the Holy Spirit 's Equality with them from Matth. 28. For if we rightly consider these two Scriptures we may easily see that they are not Parallels but that the Holy Spirit and the elect Angels are joined together with the Father and the Son upon far different accounts the one are ranked together not as Equals with the Father and the Son but because they are ministring Spirits that have their Eyes on the Church of God and behold the Order and Discipline of it whose Work and Office is to attend upon it and be familiar about it 1 Cor. 11.10 Psal 34.7 Insomuch that we ought to be very careful of speaking or doing any unseemly thing that might hinder the Ministration of those blessed and Holy Spirits Now for this cause Paul exhorteth Timothy to observe those things as in the Presence of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ and the Holy Angels and therefore they are ranked together and not as Equals in Nature and Divine Worship for they refuse to assume that Glory which is peculiarly proper to God alone Rev. 22. So that this Text relates to the Inspection of Angels into the Obedience of the Saints in the way of which Protection is ministred to them by the Angels who are said to encamp round about those that fear the Lord Psal 34.7 Or else the Apostle shews by ranking these three together that the Angels are Witnesses to this Charge though in all things else they cannot be unless they could search the Heart and try the Reins And why may not the Apostle take them in as Witnesses as Moses did who called Heaven and Earth viz. God Angels and Men joining them as Witnesses against Israel that he had set before them Life and Death c. Deut. 30.19 But the Holy Spirit Matth. 28. is not ranked together with the Father and the Son only as a ministring Spirit or as one that beareth Witness together with them in any matter but to be equally honoured with them both for in this Ordinance of Baptism wherein we worship God in acknowledging what he hath done for us in order to Salvation we are commanded to ascribe it to the Father Son and Holy Spirit And there is reason for it For though the Father had accepted the Merits of his Son on conditions of true Faith and Repentance yet if the Holy Spirit had not undertaken to work these Conditions in us we had been lost so that we are obliged both from the Work it self and the Command of God to attribute the same Honour to the one as to the other and herein chiefly lies the Difference of this Text from that of Timothy because this commands Divine Worship to be given to the Holy Ghost together with the Father and the Son which declares his Divine Nature Objection to Isa 6.9 10. compared with Acts 28.25 26 27. To these two Scriptures I have met with Biddle's Objections stated and answered ready to my Hand by Mr. Estwick in his Confutation of Biddle's Confession of Faith Page 307. whose Words I shall prefer rather than my own Biddle In the one place the Lord said in the other the Holy Ghost therefore the Adversaries do conclude the Holy Spirit is the Lord. This arguing is very frivolous for at this rate I may conclude that Moses is the Lord compare Exod. 32.11 Israelites are called God's People ver 7. God calls them the People of Moses and Isa 65.1 I am found of them that sought me not Rom. 10.20 Isaiah is more bold and saith I was found of them that asked not after me therefore Isaiah is the Lord. God is said by his Power to save us 2 Tim. 1.8 9. Paul attributes the same to himself 1 Cor. 9.22 and to Timothy 1 Tim. 4.16 therefore Paul yea Timothy is God If the Adversaries say these things are otherwise ascribed unto the Lord than to the Men aforesaid I answer it is more than the Texts themselves hold forth which neither express nor intimate any such thing If they say that if not in these yet other Texts and the Nature of the thing it self doth sufficiently teach it I reply that I can make the same Answer touching the Lord and his Holy Spirit but it is well that there is such an Intimation in the Texts themselves for in the one the Lord spake to Isaiah in a Vision in the other That the Holy Ghost spake them by Isaiah to the Fathers These two are different since Isaiah only heard these Words in the Vision for had the Fathers been there why should God bid Isaiah go and tell them to the People Paul ascribes these Words to the Holy Ghost to intimate only that whatsoever was spoken in the Scripture was recorded by the Inspiration of the Holy Spirit and so spoken by him Answer Your Elusions to avoid the strength of the Argument are vain and your Examples taken out of the Scriptures are fallacia parium are unlike to this in hand Sometimes an Instrument speaks in the Name of the great God that sent him This is your Evasion therefore it must be so taken Isa 6. compared with Acts 28. this is a plain Fallacy Exod. 32. Moses calleth the Israelites God's People in Covenant with him and God calls them the People of Moses being under the Curse of the Law by reason of their Idolatry and because he was God's Instrument to bring them out of Egypt and to conduct them in the Wilderness it is apparent to every one and the Text holds it forth that they were otherwise God's People and otherwise the People of Moses he being a finite distinct and separate Substance from the
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
the Ending saith the Lord which is and which was and which is to come the Almighty And therefore this Scripture is so far from proving this erronious opinion touching the Holy Spirit that it confirms his Deity for if Jesus Christ be of the Divine Essence and the Holy Spirit is said to speak or say when Christ saith then it is evident that Christ and the Spirit are Coessential CHAP. VI. Wherein are answered three Texts of Scripture from which our Adversaries urge that the Father only is God in opposition to the Doctrine of the Holy Trinunity OBjection from 1 Cor. 8.6 But to us there is but one God the Father of whom are all things and we in him and one Lord Jesus Christ by whom are all things and we by him Say they It could no way come to pass that Paul being about to explain who that one God is should mention the Father only omitting the other Persons if that one God were not the Father only but also the Son and Holy Spirit since those two Persons besides the Father were as necessary to declare who that one God is as the Father himself Answer It might come to pass that Paul should call God Father omitting the Names of the other Divine Persons and yet not exclude them from the Unity of the Godhead First He might call God Father not simply respecting the Person of the Father but indefinitely as he is Creator viz. Father Son and Holy Ghost in opposition to false Gods ver 5 6. For though there be that are called Gods whether in Heaven or in Earth as there be Gods many and Lords many But to us there is but one God the Father of whom are all things which is agreeable to Mal. 2.10 Have we not all one Father Hath not one God created us Secondly It doth not from hence follow that because the Son and the Holy Spirit are here omitted and the Father only is called that one God that therefore the Father only is God because that such omission is no denial nor exclusion For the Father being in the Unity of Essence with the other Divine Persons must not be simply considered when he is called by those Names as are common to all three Sublistencies and the Deity neither must the Son nor the Holy Spirit unless the matter treated of confine us to the Person which in the Text is reconcileable to the Divine Essence for all things are of God indefinitely Father Son and Holy Ghost and therefore the Father may be called that one God essentially comprehending the other Divine Persons Thirdly There is some reason that may be given wherefore the Father is called God and the Son and Holy Spirit are sometimes omitted and left to be included in that common Name and that is because of the preeminence that the Father hath among the Divine Persons For though in excellency of Nature the Father Son and Holy Ghost are neither of them above each other nor any one of these blessed Persons before the other in Time yet the Father hath a preeminence of Order and Subsistence according to his manner of self-subsisting in the Divine Essence For the Father is named first and then the Son and the Holy Spirit 1 Joh. 5.7 Mat. 28.10 and that because the Father is of none the Son is of the Father and the Holy Ghost is of them both And from hence it is that we worship the Father by the Son and through the Spirit Rom. 1.8 Eph. 2.18 21. Phil. 3.3 So then it is proper enough to call the Father that one God essentially considered as he is in the Unity of Essence with the other Divine Persons forasmuch as he hath this preeminence of Order and Subsistence and that the other two divine Subsistences are of and in the Father Secondly they say That if Christ and the Holy Spirit were God it were as necessary to name these two Persons as the Father to declare who that one God is To this I answer That if these Words One God the Father are personally to be considered of the Father yet there was no necessity to mention the Son and the Holy Ghost For I hinted before that when the Father is called that One God the Son and the Holy Spirit must be included in that common Name as being of and in the Father who is essentially so called Now the Apostle having told us who that one God is by naming that Person which most properly and significantly includes the rest it is sufficient seeing that his design was more to tell us in opposition to those many false Gods That to us there is but one God than to give a large Description of him So then let the words One God the Father be taken in either sense as Creator and so common to all three Subsistencies in the Unity of the Godhead or personally of the Father yet they do neither exclude Jesus Christ nor the Holy Spirit from the Godhead Thirdly some do further add that Christ is manifestly distinguished from that one God and so is demonstrated not to be that one God Answer It was necessary that Christ should be distinguished from that one God the Father by those Words One Lord Jesus Christ to betoken his Lordship by Donation as he is Man or Mediator because it is different to his supream and essential Lordship and therefore it requires a different Name to express it by But yet this does not exclude him from the Unity of Essence with the Father But as in ver 5. it is said There were many Gods and many Lords inferiour to those Gods So this is to shew in opposition to them that there is but one God to us Christians and but one Lord and Mediator viz. Jesus Christ that considered as Man was exalted to that Dignity and appointed by God to be our Lord. Objection from Eph. 4.6 One God and Father of all who is above all lest we should understand the Trinity by the Name of that God who is called one two Persons of the Trinity were already mentioned and distinguished from that one God Answer There cannot more be proved from this Scripture than what is granted to wit that the Father hath some Preheminence though not in Nature nor Time to the Son and Holy Spirit First In that he hath his Subsistence neither by being generated nor by Procession but is of himself a Divine Subsistent in the Divine Nature Secondly The Father may be said to be above all and have the Preheminence with respect to the Work and Office of the other Divine Persons in bringing of us to God the Father as the ultimate Object of our Faith and Worship but yet not so as to exclude the Son and Holy Spirit For though we through the help of the Holy Spirit and Intercession of Christ come to the Father who is above all their ministerial Offices and through them in us all viz. the Saints yet the Father Son and Spirit either or all of them
essentially considered may have equally the same Worship and Adoration given to them but respecting the different Share Work and Office belonging to our Salvation proper to each Divine Person we ought in Divine Worship to make different Attributions accordingly thereunto Thirdly The Apostle's Design was not to make a full Description of God unto us but to shew the calling of the Church that it was but one body in the Unity of one Spirit in one Hope and Faith in one Lord unto one God and Father who is above all the ministerial Offices of Christ and the Holy Spirit who work from him and through them he is in us all And therefore it was needful to use those different Titles otherwise the Union of the Church in one Spirit with one Lord the Mediator and head in our Nature and Order of Faith and Worship could not so distinctly be understood Objection from John 17.3 And this is Life eternal that they might know thee the only true God and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent Since Christ so described the Father as to call him the only true God it is understood that only the Father of Christ is the most high God to exclude them from the true Godhead who were then falsly esteemed and worshipped for Gods and not only them but all others also besides the Father from the most high Godhead for the word only excludeth all others from the Communion of the Predicate viz. the true God besides him viz. the Father to whom it is applied and consequently Christ and the Holy Spirit For if the Gods of the Heathen are by those words of Christ understood to be excluded from the true Godhead because it is apparent that they are different from the Father then it is necessary that all who are apparently different from the Father of Jesus Christ should be excluded from that true Godhead for otherwise the Argument which should from these Words be drawn to exclude the Idols of the Heathen from the true Godhead would be invalid Answer 1st Christ so describeth the Father as the only true God to exclude them from the true Godhead who are falsly so esteemed and worshipped for Gods and that are not God by Nature But it is not to be understood as if the Person of the Father only were the true God for though they say that the Adjective only as often as it is implied to exclude other Subjects from the Communion of the Predicate belongs to the Subject not the Predicate yet this must be only granted where the Subject is not in the Unity of the same Essence with other Subjects but here it is and therefore the word only belongs to the Predicate not the Subject Now then the Question will be whether the word only is here so used as to exclude others that are in the Unity of Essence with the Subject from the Predicate or not If it had been said that the Father only is the true God it had excluded all others from the Unity of Essence with him and consequently Christ and the Holy Spirit But the words are That they might know thee the only true God and thus the word only doth not exclude such from the Communion of the Predicate viz. the true God that are in the Community of the Subject viz. the Father as Christ and the Holy Spirit are but those only that are out of Community with him So that they must first prove that the Son and the Holy Spirit are not in the Unity of Essence coessential with the Father before this Argument can be of use to them 2dly I shall note wherefore Christ did assert his Father's Deity more than his own and that was to inform us what was Life eternal For as the Knowledg of the Father as true God yea as the only true God is essential to Salvation so also is the Knowledg of the Son of God as Mediator in both Natures for to know and believe in the Son as the only true God only will not save us but we must know him also as he is in our Nature in which he purchased eternal Life Rom. 3.25 1 John 4.3 John 6.53 Now seeing that it was necessary to assert the Father to be the only true God and to mention the Son that we should know him as Mediator in both Natures as his Name Jesus Christ sutes unto why then should any imagine that this Text of Scripture opposes the Deity of Jesus Christ To what is before objected concerning the Holy Spirit I shall add what another of our Adversaries saith on this Text viz. That our Saviour Christ setting down those Persons in the Knowledg of whom eternal Life consisteth makes no mention of the Holy Spirit whereas if he were God the Knowledg of him would be as necessary for the Attainment of eternal Life as that of the Father To this I answer First That here to omit the mentioning of the Holy Spirit does not deny the Knowledg of him as God to be essential to Salvation For as was said to know Jesus Christ in both Natures is essential to Salvation for we find that eternal Lise is entailed on the Son of God John 3.18 viz. his Person in our Nature and not in his human Nature alone for that is but an Appendent to his Person and then the Holy Ghost being only omitted by Name he must be included in the Knowledg of the Father and the Son as being the Spirit of the Father and the Son and personally proceeding from them both and subsisting coessentially in them And therefore when the Father and the Son are mentioned the Holy Spirit must be included Secondly All saving Knowledg or Revelation of God depends upon God himself who only can so reveal himself unto his Creatures Matth. 11.25 27. I thank thee O Father because thou hast hid these things from the Wise and Prudent and hast revealed them unto Babes 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 And John 16.15 All things that the Father hath are mine therefore said I He viz. the Spirit shall take of mine and shall shew it unto you And 1 Cor. 2.10 11. But God hath revealed them to us by his Spirit For what Man knoweth the things of a Man save the Spirit of Man which is in him even so the things of God knoweth no Man but the Spirit of God From which Scriptures we find that the Revelation of the Knowledg of God is appropriated to the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit and that none but the Father save the Son and but the Holy Spirit can savingly reveal God or each other personally and essentially unto us And as we cannot exclude our Knowledg of the Father and the Son from the Revelation of the Spirit though it is appropriated to the Father and the Son by those words but the Father and save the Son nor exclude our Knowledg of the Spirit from
his self Revelation to us seeing all Revelation is by the Spirit then surely there is no reason to exclude our Knowledg of the Holy Spirit as essential to Salvation and consequently his Deity though he is not named with the Father and the Son Besides if this should be allowed to disprove the Deity of the Holy Spirit by the same Rule the Deity of the Father would be disproved when eternal Life is appropriated to the Knowledg of the Son only which is more the current of the New Testament 1 John 5.11 12 20. John 3.36 And therefore as all saving-Revelation both of the Father and the Son is by the Holy Spirit who proceedeth from them and is coessential with them both and as we cannot be ignorant of him who is so necessarily included in our Knowledg of the other two Divine Persons so it was not so necessary that he should be named as it was for the Father and the Son secing he is included with them as the Revealer of them both John 16.15 1 Cor. 2.10 11 c. So that from John 17.3 there is no reason to exclude either Jesus Christ or the Holy Spirit from the Unity of the Supream Godhead There are other Objections urged against this Doctrine by our Adversaries which may seem to be very plausible to those that have not weighed them in the Ballance of the Sanctuary Say they how can three be one and one be three This is so absurd and contrary to their Reason as if one should say that three Men are one Man and one Man is three And how can the Son be begotten of the Father and the Holy Spirit proceed from both and yet both of them co-essential and co-eternal with the Father To these and divers others of the like nature I shall give a general Answer May we not say that these Men do savour of a Nicodemus Spirit and therefore the Words of Christ to him may be alluded to them John 3.9 10. Nicodemus said how can these things be Jesus answered If I have told you Earthly things and ye believe not how shall ye believe if I tell you of Heavenly things For those would far more have exceeded his carnal Reason And if we know not what is the way of the Spirit nor how the Bones do grow in the Womb of her that is with Child even so we know not the Works of God who maketh all Eccles 11.5 and if our Faith be limited to carnal Reason we cannot believe the Resurrection of the Body and if the Works of God are too high for us and his Ways are past finding out Rom. 11.33 how much more impossible is it for finite Creatures to conceive the perfect manner of Existence and mysterious Subsistence of an infinite Being We cannot by searching find out God nor the Almighty unto Perfection Job 11.7 God hath been graciously pleased to make known himself unto us in such a manner as that we may rightly worship him and as is sufficient for our Support and Comfort in all our Afflictions here below and perseverance to Salvation And there we must rest for as for those secret things which belong to God we are not capable to comprehend them Deut. 29.29 And therefore we do imbrace this mysterious Doctrine because it is revealed to us in the written Word of God But they reject it as inconsistent with natural Reason foreing the Scriptures to comply with that whereby they make it the Rule of Faith rather than to admit of that as a Mystery which God hath declared to be a Mystery 1 Tim. 3.1 6. Col. 2.2 Moreover we cannot conceive that it could consist with the faithful discharge of that great Trust which God had committed to his own Son and Christ to his Holy Apostles If while they were asserting so many things that might give us to understand the supream Deity of the Son and Holy Spirit that they did not intend nor believe the same themselves nor can it be imagined that if they had taught the contrary Doctrine to the Deity of Christ and the Holy Spirit that they should deliver it in such words as that the Common use and sense of them should oppose and destroy their true meaning intended by those Words But to conclude my Discourse on this Subject four Things are necessary to be considered in order to a right Judgment in this point of Doctrine First Consider how firm a Foundation this Doctrine hath in the Holy Scriptures what Number of sacred Texts there are that plainly assert the Deity of Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit 2dly Consider what monsterous work the Socinians make to escape the force of those clear Scripture-Testimonies that assert the Deity of Christ and the Holy Spirit how absurd they are in their Expositions and the violence they use to defend their Heresy by wresting denying and abusing the Holy Scriptures may easily be perceived and what pains they take to squeez out of some few Texts that which is not contained in them and is repugnant to the current of sacred Scripture 3dly Consider how fairly those very Scriptures on which they build are reconciled to this Doctrine of the Holy Trinunity and how our Expositions of them are coherent with it and in themselves as is apparently manifest from what hath been said in answer to them So that their Doctrine is inconsistent with the Infallibility of the Word of God for while they are not able to reconcile so great numbers of sacred Texts that assert the Deity of Christ and the Holy Ghost to their Opinion they render it exceeding ambiguous and full of Discords And therefore there is a necessity that we acknowledg the Holy Trinunity otherwise in effect we reject the Scriptures as insufficient to guide us into Truth and Righteousness and therefore seeing the Authority and the sweet Harmony of the Holy Scriptures depends on the truth of this Doctrine and that the contrary Opinion destroys both and leaves us destitute of a Rule of Faith and Obedience it is the indispensible Duty of every Christian to discard so great an Error and to believe that there are three Divine Subsistencies in the Deity and that these three the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit are but one God To whom be Glory and Praise now and for evermore Amen FINIS
Son he saith thou Lord in the beginning hast laid the Foundation of the Earth c. And therefore he cannot be a Creature but the Creator of all things Sixthly The Deity of Jesus Christ is proved by that Divine Worship and Adoration given to him None but God is to be worshipped with Divine Worship But the Son of God is to be worshipped with Divine Worship therefore he is God First to prove the Major in Matth. 4.10 It is written Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve And Rev. 19.10 ch 20.8 In both which places when John fell down to worship the Holy Angel he was forbidden saying See thou do it not for I am thy fellow-Servant worship God And Gal. 4.8 Howbeit then when ye knew not God ye did Service unto them which by nature are no Gods And Isa 42.8 I am the Lord that is my Name and my Glory will I not give to another c. And chap. 48.11 For my own sake even for my own sake will I do it for how should my Name be polluted and I will not give my Glory unto another Now from these Scriptures there is an Exclusion from Divine Worship of all that are not God by nature and none is to be glorified or worshipped with the same Glory or Worship which belongs to God but Himself only Secondly to prove the Minor That the Son of God is to be worshipped with Divine Worship Matth. 14.33 Then they that were in the Ship came and worshipped him saying Of a truth thou art the Son of God So in ch 2.11 The wise Men worshipped him In chap. 8.2 The Leper worshipped him And in ch 28.17 The Disciples worshipped him and in many other places he was worshipped and he never forbad any And therefore we have good reason to believe that it was due unto him as God For when Cornelius fell down to worship Peter he took him up and said Stand up I my self also am a Man And so also in Rev. 19.10 and ch 20.8 when John fell down to worship the Holy Angel he was forbidden saying See thou do it not for I am thy fellow-Servant and of thy Brethren worship God So likewise if Christ had not been God by nature he would not have suffered his Disciples and others to have worshipped him without rebuke for it But to proceed There are other Scriptures of greater force to prove that the Son of God is to be worshipped with Divine Worship as Heb. 1.6 And again when he bringeth the first-begotten into the World he saith And let all the Angels of God worship him And Rev. 5.8 9. The four Beasts or rather four living Creatures and four and twenty Elders fell down before the Lamb viz. Christ John 1.29 having every one of them Harps and golden Vials full of Odours which are the Prayers of Saints And they sang a new Song saying Thou art worthy to take the Book and to open the Seals thereof For thou wast slain and hast redeemed us to God by thy Blood c. Ver. 13. And every Creature which is in Heaven and on the Earth and under the Earth and such as are in the Sea and all that are in them heard I saying Blessing and Honour and Glory and Power be unto him that sitteth upon the Throne and unto the Lamb for ever and ever Ver. 14. And the four Beasts or living Creatures said Amen even so Amen Ch. 7.9 After this I beheld and lo a great number which no Man could number of all Nations and Kindreds and People and Tongues stood before the Throne and before the Lamb and cryed with a loud Voice saying Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the Throne and unto the Lamb. So that our Lord Jesus Christ is counted worthy of the same Divine Worship by all Creatures in Heaven and Earth as God the Father and hath the same Power as well as Honour and Glory ascribed to him Thus I have proved both the Major and the Minor viz. that none but God is to be worshipped with Divine Worship That the Son of God is to be worshipped with Divine Worship and the Conclusion follows therefore he is God To what I have said by way of positive proof touching the Deity of Christ I shall not further add for there hath been given plentiful and sufficient Evidences from the Word of God that our Lord Jesus Christ has undeniable marks of the Divine Nature upon him so that his Deity cannot be denied without subverting the Holy Scripture which gives him the same Names proves his Eternity renders the same Worship attributes the same Works and asserts him the same as God the Father And if we cannot know him as God by these Marks by what can we know him then And if these be insufficient how shall we know God the Father For if the chiefest Marks of the Divine Nature that are found on our Lord Jesus Christ be no proof of his existing in the same Nature we may then question the Deity of God the Father who is only known and distinguished from all Creatures by these and the like Attributes given to him and Descriptions of him So that I see no way to escape the powerful convincing Testimonies of this Truth if there be but a searching after it unless we deny the Authority of the Holy Scriptures CHAP. V. Wherein is proved the Deity of the Holy Ghost AS the Scriptures have given a clear Testimony to the Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ so also they will afford us sufficient Evidence of the Deity of the Holy Spirit which I intend to demonstrate in this Chapter And First I shall prove that the Holy Spirit is a Divine Person and not a Quality in God First Our Lord Jesus Christ speaks of the Holy Ghost as a Person John 14.16 17. And I will pray the Father and he shall give you another Comforter that he may abide with you for ever Even the Spirit of Truth whom the World cannot receive because it seeth him not neither knoweth him But ye know him for he dwelleth with you and shall be in you Chap. 16.8 And when he is come he will reprove the World of Sin Ver. 13. Howbeit when he the Spirit of Truth is come he will guide you into all Truth for he shall not speak of himself but whatsoever he shall hear that shall he speak and he will shew you things to come In these Scriptures the words He Him and Himself are used to the Holy Spirit and these all do note him to be a Person and not a Quality Secondly He is called the Comforter John 16.7 which is a personal Name Thirdly He is put in the same rank with other Divine Persons as a Person Matth. 28.19 Baptizing them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost 1 John 5.7 For there are Three that bear Record in Heaven The Father the Word and the Holy Ghost and these three are one
Christ saith Where two or three are gathered together in my Name there am I in the midst of them And Lo I am with you always even unto the end of the World Jer. 23.24 Matth. 18.20 chap. 28.20 Psalm 139.7 to 14. Psalm 94.10 11. If any say that Christ means only that his Doctrine shall continue among the Faithful that congregate in his Name or as Ephes 3.17 To dwell in our Hearts by Faith viz. in his Doctrine It is answered That not simply his Doctrine as it is mixt with Faith in its abstract from inward feeling is here to be understood but some other presence of Christ with his People for he saith John 14.23 If a Man love me he will keep my Words and my Father will love him and we will come unto him and make our abode with him Where note that to such as have already received his Word by Faith in the love of it and keep it he hath promised a further Presence And what can it be but the inward sensation or feeling of his Love as sometimes we have Rom 5.1 to 6. tho at other times we have not Job 13.15 ch 23.8 to 11. But they may further say If this be the Presence of Christ you speak of it is not his personal Presence but by the Spirit which is called the Spirit of Faith that sheddeth the Love of God abroad in our Hearts To this I reply True it is not the personal Presence of Christ either as God-Man or of the Divine Person of the Son but as in and through the Spirit which will prove what is denied by them viz. That the Holy Spirit is God yea and the Son also For the Office of the Spirit is universal to all Saints throughout the World at the same instant time which is beyond the power of any finite Creature indeed Satan deceives the World but not by an infinite Presence at the same time in every place but by a finite personal going to and fro and walking up and down in it seeking whom he may devour being assisted by his evil Angels Job 1.7 1 Pet. 5.8 And as the Holy Spirit by his Office must be Omnipresent So also the Son as well as the Father is Omnipresent in and through the Spirit with the Saints in all places and in and with all Persons Places and Things whatsoever though not by the same Ministrations or Operations yet at the same instant Season and as the Father is Omnipresent in and through the Spirit so I see not the least reason why we should deny it to the Son but understand his Presence in the same sense seeing both are present in the Unity of the same Spirit For know ye not that ye are the Temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you As God hath said I will dwell in them and walk in them And he that is joined to the Lord is one Spirit with the Father and the Son for the Holy Ghost is called The Spirit of our Father that speaketh in us and the Spirit of the Son sent forth into our Hearts crying Abba Father And the Spirit which is upon Christ shall not depart out of his Mouth nor out of the Mouth of his Seed nor of his Seed's Seed from henceforth and for ever and if any Man have not the Spirit of Christ he is none of his and by our Communion with the Holy Ghost we have Fellowship with the Father and his Son Jesus Christ and are one in them and they will come and make their abode with us through that one Spirit whereby we are joyned unto the Lord. 1 Cor. 3.16 2 Cor. 6.16 1 Cor. 6.17 Mark 13.11 Matth. 10.20 Gal. 4.6 Isa 59.21 2 Cor. 13.14 1 John 1.3 John 17.21 chap. 14.23 And it is comfortable for us to believe that greater is he that is in us than he that is in the World 1 John 4.4 Otherwise what may the Soul say when he is in trouble Surely I fear that notwithstanding the fulness of the precious Promises and the great Engagements of Christ to me that Christ and the Holy Spirit are far from me and are busied with other Saints and know not my Distress and therefore I may perish before they come to help me But blessed be God that hath laid help upon one that is Mighty Psal 89.19 who is able to save to the uttermost all that come unto God by him Heb. 7.15 that knoweth all our open and secret Wants Rev. 2.23 and makes Intercession for us And as for the Holy Spirit our Bodies are the Temple of the Holy Ghost that dwelleth in us that abides with us for ever though his Operations may sometimes cease when he is grieved by us 1 Cor. 6.19 John 14.16 So that the Holy Ghost is not as one that cometh but now and then to visit our Souls but he makes his constant abode in us and so is always ready to mortify and sanctify our vile Natures and make them meet to have Fellowship with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ 1 Jo. 1.3 And this is a Christian's Mercy that as none is able to pluck him out of Christ's Hands so the greatest Corruptions are not able to withstand the powerful Sanctifyings of the Holy Spirit Satan may withstand an Holy Angel of God for his Fall doth not deprive him of the natural Power of an Angel but yet he cannot withstand Christ nor the Holy Spirit because of the Potency of their Nature John 10.28 and 30. Rom. 8.13 2 Cor. 10.4 to 7. Dan. 10.13 Jude 9. and we may say in this case as John did concerning the sealed Book Rev. 5. That none in Heaven nor on Earth nor under the Earth was found worthy besides the Son and the Holy Spirit to redeem and sanctify the fallen Sons of Adam The Angels could not do it for they are beholden to Christ for their standing 1 Tim. 5.26 But blessed be God our Saviour for in him shall all the Seed of Israel be justified and shall glory Tit. 2.10 Isa 45.25 To whom be Glory and Praise now and for evermore Amen So then if we ascribe and acknowledg the Work of Mans Salvation to the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost which are ranked together as the efficient Cause and therefore receive the Glory of it and seeing both the Father and the Son dwells in us in and through the Holy Spirit whose Office in his Omnipresence bespeaks his unlimited and infinite Nature I cannot conceive but that the great Unity of these three Subsistencies should be in Essence Secondly The Unity of the Holy Trinity is manifest from Isa 6.23 where the Seraphims cried one unto another and said Holy Holy Holy is the Lord of Hosts agreeable to Rev. 4.8 Now here are three Holies viz. Holy Father Holy Son and Holy Ghost and though I do not lay the stress of the proof on the bare repetition of the word Holy yet doubtless it ecchoes to the Truth that is couched in this
distinguished but none divided all the three Subsistencies are distinguished but they cannot be divided Eighthly Truth and Goodness which are two of the Affections of Ens are distinguished by their peculiar and several Relations Truth hath Relation to the Understanding and Goodness to the Will The Father Son and Holy Ghost are known to be distinguished by their several and peculiar Relations and if it be not unreasonable to say that there is in Entity three Affections and two Relations in Ente simplissimo without any Composition in or Multiplication of the Entity why should it seem unreasonable or at least why should it seem incredible that there are three Subsistencies and several Relations in the Godhead without any Composition in or Multiplication of the Godhead Ninthly One Affection nay all the Affections in abstracto do but inadequately represent Ens unless you take notice of the Entity it self as well as the three Affections One single Subsistence nay all three Subsistencies in abstracto do but inadequately represent God unless you take notice of the Godhead in which they subsist and therefore this precisive Abstraction of the Subsistencies from the Divine Nature is but an inadequate Conceit of God as hath been demonstrated above in this very Chapter for we must not dream of a Trinity of Modes but assert and believe the glorious and co-essential Trinity The Father is truly God that God who is the only true God but the Father alone doth not adequately represent God to us as he is described in the Holy Scriptures It is true that the Divine Essence is by the Subsistence of the Father adequately the Father but as God is represented by that Divine Subsistence only he is not Deus Trinunus he is not the Father Son and Holy Ghost The Father alone is not all these three Witnesses who are one God And therefore the acute Socinians with their precise Abstractions do but suggest an inadequate Conceit of God That only true God whom we worship doth not subsist only in the Person of the Father We worship God subsisting with all absolute and relative Perfection in Father Son and Holy Ghost for these three are that one God who is the only true God blessed for ever This is the adequate Representation of God in the Scriptures of Truth And we are resolved to regulate all our Metaphysical Notions by the Holy Scriptures that we may make the highest of Sciences to acknowledg the Supremacy of that Divine Science which is no where to be learnt but in the Word of God for the purest Reason must be elevated by the Word and Spirit of God for the discovery of this Mystery Tenthly These Affections of Ens represent the manner of that Being which Ens hath as it is transcendently considered and the three Divine Subsistencies do represent that manner of Being which God hath as he is most transcendently considered namely as subsisting after the most glorious Manner with all absolute and relative Perfection It is the manner of a transcendent Entity to be one and true and good and it is the manner of God's Being to be one God in three Subsistencies these three are one single God there is no Composition or Multiplication imaginable in this single and infinite Being When I read this Similitude and conceived the Light it gave into this Mystery I thought it worth my time to convey it unto others out of this learned Author and I doubt not but if well considered these rare Distinctions of the Divine Nature and the Persons will be profitable For as the Author saith When Divine Revelation hath gone before and we have built upon that as the Ground-work and Foundation by a serious Faith these Metaphysical Notions may be subservient helps in a subordinate way And if there might be so great Simplicity or Singleness in a created and finite Entity notwithstanding there are three Affections and two Relations which do affect that Entity it seemeth to me somewhat easy to believe that there are three Subsistencies in one infinite Godhead without any Composition in or Multiplication of the single Godhead Estwick in his Confutation of Biddle's Confession of Faith Pag. 17. doth give among other Resemblances of the Deity an instance of the Soul and its Faculties saying If they are as Scotus and his Followers Zanchius and Scaliger and others do maintain one thing for then there is not a real Composition betwixt the Soul and the Faculties of it Memory in the Soul is the beginning of the Knowledg begotten in it and so it represents the Father By Intelligence is represented the Son because he is as Knowledg begotten of his Father By Memory and the Will is represented the Holy Ghost This is some over-sight in the Author or Error in the Printer for it should be thus Of Memory and Intelligence proceeds the Will which represents the Holy Spirit and so it agrees with what follows because he is alone produced of the Father and the Son these are distinct yet one in Essence August lib. 15. de Trinitate cap. 20. Radu pag. 2. Controv. 13. Art 2. This Comparison saith he I confess is too short for neither are the Faculties of the Soul Persons nor doth there appear in them such a strange and wonderful manner of Production as in the glorious Persons of the Blessed Trinity This doth our Faith with Admiration apprehend which our Knowledg cannot attain unto To conclude saith he the Premisses shew that this great Mystery is not against Reason though it be above Reason c. Eighthly Of the Union of the Nature of God and of Man in one Person Of this I shall cite Estwick in his Confutation of Biddle's Confession of Faith pag. 115. Suppose an Apple-Tree grow up into which the Branch of another Tree is ingrafted which makes not the Tree to be of a compound or middle Nature but causing the Branch which being set into the Ground might have proved an intire Tree of it self to pertain to the Unity of the Tree into which it is implanted and yet retains its own Nature and bears its own Fruit and as you may truly say this Harvy-Tree is a Pippin-Tree and this Pippin-Tree is a Harvy-Tree and consequently this Harvy-Tree beareth Pippins and this Pippin-Tree brings forth Harvies So may we say of the Person of Christ consisting of the Natures of God and Man The Son of God who was a compleat and perfect Person hath added to it the humane Nature in the Unity of the same Person as the Divine Nature of our Saviour notwithstanding the Personal Union is not capable of any humane Imperfections no more is the humane Nature in that respect a finite Creature capable of any Divine and infinite Perfection the weakness and infirmity of Man was not swallowed up in the Majesty of God nor was God's Majesty in the least diminished really by the Assumption of Man The Union of the Word in regard of the Persons subsistence graciously bestowed on the humane
through their Official Ministration and in all those 3 Scriptures Acts 17.29 Rom. 1.20 and Coloss 2.9 wherein Godhead is mentioned it must of necessity be understood of the Supream and Eternal Godhead only So that I see not the least reason why the corrupt Notions of our Adversaries should weaken our Faith in this Doctrine which is so clearly asserted in this as well as in many other Scriptures Objection to John 1.1 2 3 10. In the Beginning was the Word Nothing is here concerning Christ's being from Eternity since mention is here made of the beginning whereas a Beginning is opposite to Eternity Answ 1. If Christ were in the beginning of the Creation and so as that all Things were made by him ver 3. then he did preexist the Creation and it is not said he began to be in or with the Beginning but then he was which denotes his being before the Beginning and nothing could preexist the beginning of the Creation but God alone Secondly They say that the word Beginning is every where in the Scripture referred to the subject Matter which is here the Gospel which John undertook to describe as will appear if you compare this of John with Mark 1.1 Luke 1.2 chap. 3.23 where according to the Greek it ought to be rendred thus And Jesus was about thirty years of Age when he began c. Answer First Mark in chap. 1.1 declares unto us what he knew only from the beginning of the preaching of the Gospel 1st Hinting to that of John's Ministration and then immediately comes to Christ ver 9. Second Luke's beginning is said in ver 3. to be from the very first and he begins higher than Mark did and gives us an account of the Conception and Birth of John and then of Christ and after these that at Christ's Baptism he began to be about thirty years of Age or as they will have the Greek that he was thirty years of Age when he began viz. to preach the Gospel for so it must be understood so that as they say Beginning is to be referred to the subject Matter treated of And therefore Beginning in John 1.1 must not be limited to either of these but referred to its own proper subject Matter as the others were to theirs Now that this subject Matter to which it must be referred is not the Gospel as they affirm doth appear because he is speaking of the Creation of the World by the Word which is confessed by them to be Jesus Christ But here as they think they have a Salvo for though all Things are said to be made by him in the Beginning yet they say it is not simply and absolutely All but all Things belonging to the Gospel like that in 2 Cor. 5.17 All Things are become new And that the next words Without Him was not any Thing made that was made must be understood that all Things were not done by him for so the Greek will bear it as they say for though they acknowledg they were begun by him yet they were not brought to an issue by himself but by his Apostles in his Name and by his Authority and so not done without Him And they further object that it is not said that the World was created but made by him not that he made it but it was made by him as the second Cause and that the word World doth not only denote the Heaven and Earth but besides other Significations designeth either Mankind as the present place sheweth or the World to come as appeareth by Heb. 1.6 which they draw from chap. 2.5 and by chap. 10.5 which also they affirm to be spoken not of this World but of that which is to come since it 's said in chap. 8.4 For if he were on Earth he would not so much as be a Priest From all which they give us the sense of the words two ways First That Mankind was reformed and as it were made again by Christ because he brought Life and Immortality to Men who were lost and subject to Eternal Death 2 d. The latter Sense is That the World to come which we expect by Christ is by him made as to us as the same is said to become in respect of us although it be already present to Christ and the Angels To these I shall give particular Answers First All things that were made by Christ cannot be here understood of the all things of the Gospel but of the Creation of the World And this I shall endeavour to demonstrate by shewing the great difference between the Text of John and that of Paul to the Corinthians and how little relation they have to each other In 2 Cor. 5.17 Therefore if any Man be in Christ he is a new Creature Old things are past away behold all things are become new The Words all things become new must of necessity imply a Renovation for tho the Graces of the Spirit are created in us yet the Man is not created but renewed and restored by them So that in the same Sense that the Man is a new Creature all things may be said to become new and this agrees with other Scriptures as in Ephes 2.8 9 10. That which is said to be by Creation in Christ Jesus is in Titus 3.5 by the Renewings of the Holy Ghost but in John 1.3 it is said that all Things were made by him which is not only a different mode of Speech to that of Paul but does imply a different thing for as I have shewed the words of Paul import a Restauration or Renovation of the Creature as they also do affirm but this of John hath peculiar relation to the Creation of the World 1st Because the words All Things are made by him are plain and positive and therefore it is dangerous and presumptuous to restrain their Sense to other Scriptures whose subject Matter is foreign to it and to impose such an uncouth Sense which cannot naturally be drawn from it and which is incoherent with other Scriptures that mutually concur with its plain and proper Sense as Coloss 1.16 to which place I may say something hereafter 2dly Those words All Things were made by him is meant of the Creation and not of the Gospel appears from ver 10 11. He was in the World and the World was made by him and the World knew him not He came unto his own and his own received him not c. Now to assert as they do That these words The World was made by him must be understood of Mankind that was reformed by Jesus Christ is a squeezing forth such a Sense as they cannot possibly bear and it is unusual and improper in such a form of Words to express the Reformation of Mankind and I do not know of any such absolute Text that asserts the new Creation or Gospel-Renovation but that there is some adjunct to explain it from the Creation of the World as to be created in Christ Jesus to become new or the
new Man which is created and the like and therefore such as force the Text contrary to the genuine sense of it to comply with a Gospel-Reformation do greatly subvert the Word of God nor is there any Agreement in those words to such an Exposition for the World was so far from being reformed by Christ that it knew him not and his own received him not viz. his own Nation was not reformed by him 3dly I shall make some reply to their latter Sense of those words ver 10. The World was made by him which say they is That the World to come which we expect by Christ is by him made as to us that is if I mistake them not it is made by a partial Reformation which if they would but speak out is not made but only making And they say further that this World to come is already present to Christ and the Angels that is as I imagine to be their meaning it is fully come to them by their pre-knowledg and assurance of it having laid its Foundation What else they should intend by these and the like words doth not at present occur to mind But this is presumptuously asserted by them for there is no mention made of the World to come neither is there any thing in the Text that relates to it neither is there any reason wherefore they should go about to prove that because there is mention made of a World to come in Heb. 2.5 therefore this in John 1.10 is of the World to come also Nor do I yet perceive why Heb. 1.6 chap. 10.5 and 8.4 should be understood of the World to come or what ground they have to impose from thence their Sense on John 1.10 For though the Apostle speaks of something which relates to the World to come in Heb. 1. yet he doth not begin with it until ver 8. and therefore as the matter in ver 6. plainly shews the World there is not the World to come but the present World But if it were yet John 1.10 must not be confined to this or any other Text any further than the concurrence of the Texts and Contexts and the Signification of their words will bear But now let us take notice how little difference the Socinians here make between the time past and the time to come The World that was with them was the World to come that was made was yet to make What a monstrous way they have of expounding the Holy Scriptures by all things say they is only meant Gospel-things were made by Christ the rest were made by his Apostles and that not in the beginning as the Text asserts but after even their own prefixt beginning But if this may pass for truth at this rate 't is not to be found in the Holy Scriptures But these Exceptions are groundless and so are of no effect to weaken the proof of the Deity of Jesus Christ from this Scripture Objection to Isa 9.6 Where Christ is called The everlasting Father or Fa-Father of Eternity as it is admitted by the Adversaries who nevertheless say it quite subverteth the Common Doctrine by confounding the first and second Persons of the Trinity He is the Everlasting Father both because he is the Author of eternal Life to them that obey him and liveth for ever to shelter and protect and cherish Christians who are elsewhere called his Seed see Isa 5.3 10. Answer First The words in the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Father of Eternity do not so much subvert the Common Doctrine of the Trinity or confound the Persons to understand them of the Divine Nature of our Lord Jesus Christ than of him as only humane For though Christ is said to be the Author of eternal Salvation Heb. 5.9 Yet it cannot be as Man only either in the Ministration of it or being the prime Author For there being a Ministration of Salvation under the Old Testament Christ as Man could not be the prime Author of it but God who elected and fore-ordained Christ and us in him unto Salvation before the Foundation of the World Isa 42.1 Eph. 1.4 1 Pet. 1.20 So then as Christ did not then exist in his humane Nature as Man he could not be the prime Author or Administrator of eternal Salvation And when he was come considered as Man he could only bear a greater Testimony of the purpose and good-Will of God towards us than any of the Prophets did before him But to acknowledg the Son of God to be of the same Divine Nature co-essential with the Father makes the name Father of Eternity to have relation to him not personally but as he is essentially God and his being called by it is an evident Demonstration of his Unity of Essence co-eternally with the Father wherein only he can be the Author of eternal Salvation to us his Spiritual Seed Objection to John 17.5 And now O Father glorify thou me with thy own self with the Glory which I had with thee before the World was Christ doth beg this Glory of the Father which sheweth that neither he was formerly in actual Possession thereof for then he would have been in possession of it still nor had a Divine Nature for that would have supplied him with such Glory as he wanted wherefore the Sense is that Christ beseeches the Father to grant unto him that Glory which he had with him in his Decree before the World was As we are said to be saved according to the Grace which was given us in Christ Jesus before the World began Answer First The better to clear this Text from these Objections I shall expound it 1st If it should be understood that these words denote a Deprivation of Glory yet it must not be absolutely considered for the Divine Nature of Christ ever was is and shall be in it self infinitely Glorious without the least Diminution Alteration or Change But we are to take it with respect to the great Humility and Condescension of his infinite glorious Nature in uniting himself with our Nature It is said Phil. 2.6 7 8. Who being in the Form of God thought it not Robbery to be equal with God but made himself of no Reputation He humbled himself and became obedient unto Death The Divine Nature of Christ consented to the exposing of his humane Nature that was in so great a Conjunction with it to Sufferings as an ordinary Man And if God is said to humble himself to behold the things that are in Heaven and in the Earth Psal 113.5 6. Then surely this must be a far greater piece of Condescension for the Son of God to disrobe himself as it were of that Power and Majesty which he had with the Father in subjecting his humane Nature to suffer the Revilings and Scourgings of wicked Men and to be put to Death by them Now if the Text must be understood of a Deprivation of Christ's former Glory then the meaning of Christ's Prayer is that as his Condescension in taking
our Nature had been an Eclipse of his Divine Glory Power and Greatness in laying it aside as it were to suffer in his humane Nature for our sakes that now the Father would so translate his humane Nature from that mean Estate and Condition to one more glorious that might better sute with his infinite Perfection and correspond with it But Secondly This Text most properly as it seems to me ought to be understood not of a Deprivation of Glory of the Divine Nature but only of the Exaltation of the humane Nature of Christ as if Christ should have said And now O Father glorify thou me in my humane Nature or glorify my humane Nature in taking of it into that Glory which my Divine Nature had with thee before the World was This I humbly conceive is meant by the words of our blessed Lord but take it in either sense it agrees with the Deity of Jesus Christ Secondly I come more particularly to answer the said Objections 1st Though as it is objected it may be concluded from the Words that because Christ begs this Glory of the Father therefore he had it not in actual Possession before Yet this is only respecting his humane Nature which opposes not the Truth of his Deity for though he was not yet supplied by it or glorified John 7.39 Yet he then had the Divine Nature and was in Union with it 2dly For any to say that that Glory which Christ had before the World was is only meant of God's Decree is an imposing on the Text that which it cannot bear for it doth not run parallel with 2 Tim. 1.9 because it is one thing to say that we are saved and called according to his own Purpose and Grace which was given us in Christ before the World began and another thing to have Glory before the World began the one plainly shews that we were not actually called nor saved before the World was but were then in the purpose of God only and the other is positively spoken of the Glory that Christ had in actual Possession as the sense of the words import And I hope these are sufficient Answers to clear the Text of these Objections Objection to Coloss 1.16 For by him were all things created that are in Heaven and that are in Earth visible and invisible whether they be Thrones or Dominions or Principalities or Powers all things were created by him and for him First They say that this Scripture speaketh of Christ as a second or middle cause that God created all things by Jesus Christ Eph. 3.9 Answer First I do acknowledg that Jesus Christ is two ways to be considered 1st Essentially as he is God and so all things are of him and from him and created by him indifferently with other Divine Persons 2dly Personally as he is the second Person in the Godhead and so is he also in the Works of Creation for all things are of the Father by the Son through the Spirit 1 Cor. 8.6 John 1.3 Gen. 1.2 Psal 104.30 Eph. 2.18 For as the Father is of himself a Divine Subsistent so he worketh from himself and as the Son is of the Father so he worketh from the Father and as the Holy Spirit is of the Father and the Son so he worketh from them both yet neither of them exist or work before each other in time but do naturally and necessarily work together for when we say the Son is the second Person in the Deity we grant the Father to be the first neither in time nor Excellency of Nature to the other Divine Persons but in respect to Preheminence according to his peculiar manner of Subsistence and incommunicable Property So also the Divine Persons have their Order or Preheminence of working according to their Order or Preheminence of Subsistence and incommunicable Property in the Divine Essence Secondly They say that all things in the Heavens and on the Earth are not used for all things simply and absolutely appeareth because the Apostle saith By him God hath reconciled all things in Heaven and on Earth and also in the words themselves it is not said the Heavens and the Earth were created by Christ but all things that are in the Heavens and on the Earth And the Sum of what they understand by the Text is that after God had raised Christ from the dead and had given Glory to him all the things both in the Heavens and on the Earth were by him reformed and reduced to another State and Condition in that he became the head of Angels and Men who before acknowledged God only for their Lord. Secondly To this I answer 1st That if we can reconcile the word Create in ver 16. so as that naturally its Signification doth import but one and the same thing with the word Reconcile in ver 20. then indeed there is some reason to acquiesce with them in their sense But as the words have different Significations so they signify to us different things 2dly Though reconciling all things to God by Jesus Christ whether in Heaven or in Earth must be understood in a limited sense yet there is not the same nor so good reason for all things that were created by Jesus Christ to be so considered For those all things that were reconciled were all things that were reconcileable by the Blood of the Cross whether in Heaven or in Earth and not all things absolutely in Heaven and in Earth for the evil Angels are not reconcilable but in ver 16. the case is much different and is to be understood simply and absolutely that by Jesus Christ all things were created for the words are positive By him were all things created that are in Heaven and that are in Earth and because we should not misapprehend the Apostle's meaning he explains himself more fully to us that they were all things both visible and invisible whether they be Thrones or Dominions or Principalities or Powers And surely this cannot be meant of a Reformation or Renovation of all things in Heaven and Earth because the good Angels never wanted such Reformation neither were all Thrones or Dominions or Principalities or Powers either of evil Angels that are invisible or of wicked Men on Earth then renewed or so reduced by Reformation as that Christ became their Head and was so acknowledged by them For though Christ became the Head of his own Church yet the World did not know him in such a manner as to own him for their Soveraign Lord and to yield true and sincere Obedience to his Laws for under the Conduct of Satan the Dragon Heathen Empire made head against Christ and all that professed his Holy Name And tho something may be said that in the Reign of Constantine the Great there was a mighty Reformation made in the Empire of the World yet this cannot answer the Import of the words For by him were all things already created they were not to make in future times but they were already done
to be only a Fellow-Creature with others or excludes him from the Deity First Because Christ cannot properly be said to be the First-born of every Creature by Creation for then it could not be said That All things were made by him and without him was not any thing made that was made unless a Creature could preexist its own Creation and give it self a Being John 1.3 Secondly Christ's being call'd the First-born of every Creature cannot be understood of the natural Birth of some kind of Creatures not of Man for there was none created before Adam and Eve was the Mother of all Mankind and Cain was her first-born not Christ neither could he be the first-born of Angels for they do not propagate their kind Mark 12.25 1 Cor. 15.15 Thirdly Christ cannot be the first-born of every Creature in time preceeding all others in the new Creation by Regeneration unless he had existed in his humane Nature before the Patriarchs and Prophets of old and all the holy Men from the Foundation of the World But having spoken in the Negative I shall now endeavour to demonstrate how Christ may be called the first-born of every Creature 1st Christ may be said to be the first-born of every Creature from the Dead in like manner as he is called the first begotten of the Dead and became the first Fruits of them that sleep 1 Cor. 15.20 Rev. 1.5 2dly Christ may also be called the first-born of every Creature as preexisting every Creature in his Divine Nature like as the same Apostle expounds it in the following words ver 16 17. For by him were all things created and he is before all things and by him all things consist As if he should say the very reason wherefore I call him the first-born of every Creature is not because of Creation or natural Birth or spiritual by Regeneration but because he was before all things in respect of time and Creator of them So that it is clearly manifest there is no ground from this Text for any to believe that our Lord Jesus Christ is either excluded from the true Godhead or included as a meer Creature amongst others by his being called the first-born of every Creature Objection from Rev. 3.14 where Christ is called the beginning of the Creation Answer This must not be understood as if Jesus Christ were the first of God's Creatures but that he was the first that gave being or beginning to the Creatures Rev. 22.13 I am Alpha and Omega the beginning and the end the first and the last Beginning here is the first by whom all things had their beginning and not the first of Creatures that had its beginning CHAP. III. Containeth Answers to divers of the Socinian Arguments against the Deity of Jesus Christ OBjection If the Divine Nature of Christ were God one with the Father and the Spirit then the Father and the Spirit would be incarnate Answer The Union of the Divine Persons being in Nature and Essence and not in Person or personal Properties one Person in the same Nature may be said more properly to be incarnate than another Objection If Christ have two Natures then not only that Person that did before exist is the Son of God but the holy Issue of the Virgin also so that that opinion would make two Sons of God and consequently two Persons in one Christ Answer Although the Divine Nature of Christ which preexisted his Incarnation be the Son of God yet the Issue of the Virgin coming out of the Loins of David and receiving its matter from Man cannot be naturally the Son of God but the Son of Man so that as Christ with respect to his Divine Nature is the natural Son of God so likewise though he was not generated after the common way of Mankind yet being deduced out of the same matter so far he is naturally the Son of Man But from hence I see no reason to conclude that there are two Sons of God or that Christ is two Persons for though the matter of Christ's Humanity would have made a distinct Person if it had been generated after the common way yet it was never so because it never had its Being but in Union with the Divine Nature when the Person of the Son was united to it and so together became the second Adam who was made a quickning Spirit in the one Person of Christ 1 Cor. 15.45 So that the Humanity of Christ was but a part of his Person and no distinct Person of it self for Christ took on him the form of a Servant only and not the Person Phil. 2.7 The Scriptures declare no such thing as two Persons but that he took our Nature which became a Person in the Divine Subsistence of the Son so that the Person of Christ was not a Compound of two distinct Persons together but the one Person of the eternal Son of God as it were clothed with Humanity for the whole Person of Christ viz. the Word and Flesh is represented to us as but one only begotten Son of God John 1.14 18. Objection Had Christ had a Divine Nature in being the eternal Son of God he needed not the Assistance of the Holy Spirit to furnish him with a humane Nature from a Virgin being himself able to produce it of her unless you will say that his own Divine Nature was in the mean while idle Answer Estwick on Biddle in page 208 209. answers this Objection he saith The Holy Ghost had no Efficiency or Casualty in the Incarnation of our blessed Saviour which was not common to the Trinity for as Father Son and Holy Ghost are inseparable touching the Divine Essence and Power of working so likewise are they inseparable in their Operations 'T is a common Comparison to illustrate this Truth Three Virgins do jointly make up a Garment for one of them only to wear so all the three Persons as one Cause did produce the humane Nature yet was it taken only into the Person of the Son of God Christ became Man not in regard of the Divine Nature simply which is common to Father Son and Holy Ghost but as it subsists in the Son of God 'T is true if we respect the ‖ The word Original must here be understood according to the Author's sense of the personal Preheminence of the Father according to his personal Subsistence in the Divine Nature and not in respect to Original of time Original of working there is a difference the Father as he is of himself and from no other so doth he work from himself not from the Son and the Son as he is from the Father so doth he also work from the Father but because there is no Distinction of the Persons in regard of the formal essential Principle of working it follows there is no Distinction or Separation of the Divine Persons in the work it self It was therefore both an absurd and blasphemous Inference and that as you say from our Principle either that it was
Lord God Almighty We grant that because these are different therefore it would be absurd to infer that Moses is the Lord where is the Holy Ghost called God's Servant or God's Instrument The second place Isa 65. 1. with Rom. 10.20 in the one place it is said I am found of those that sought me not so saith God in another place Isaiah saith the same Words therefore Isaiah is the Lord. It is clear the Lord by Isaiah foretold the Conversion of the Gentiles and that he by his Grace moved them to seek him before they looked for Salvation by Christ St. Paul relating the same Text sheweth that Isaiah freely spake of the calling of the Gentiles Who is so blind as not to see clearly that Isaiah used those Words as God's Messenger in the Name of the Lord and what is more usual with the Prophets than to use such Words to gain due respect to their Words Thus saith the Lord. This Example then is not parallel to that under Debate it is not agreeable to the Scripture-Language for the Holy Ghost to speak in the Name of the Lord. The third touching God's saving and Paul's saving is as unfit and as far from the Mark as the former for evident it is that Paul himself could not plant except God gave the Blessing and he always ascribes Salvation to God as the principal cause thereof and confesseth that he is but God's Instrument by whose Ministry he saved much People A Creature cannot be properly called God nor doth any other Scripture or the nature of the thing it self teach any such thing nor doth the New Testament unless by quoting Texts out of the old Shadows being gone use such Expressions lest we should conceive Gods subordinate to the High God This you grant but you add withal That you can make the same answer touching the Lord and the Holy Ghost You have the Face not to blush at strange Answers What is it that you cannot write But if you should be peremptory in such an Answer you cannot make it good What Line in God's Words yea what probability can you produce for this Parallel It is great Reason that if a Man will forsake the Common Road that he should give a good account of his going into By-Ways not trodden by Passengers many hundred years together It is well that by your own Confession the other alledged-Scriptures do clearly distinguish betwixt the principal Cause and Instrument and it will be requisite if you look to be credited that you demonstrate by the Circumstances of the Text Isa 6. or by some other convincing Proof that the Holy Spirit is a created Angel and that he is in a proper Notion God's Ambassador and his Instrument to inspire the Holy Prophets to discharge their Embassy which is a Task I know impossible to be performed by you There is say you an intimation in the Texts themselves for Isaiah only heard the words in a Vision and was to tell them to the People not present with him But Paul ascribes them to the Holy Ghost because whatsoever was spoken in the Scriptures is recorded by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost and so spoken by him This is then his meaning These Words were from the Lord as first delivered by him to Isaiah and from the Holy Ghost as they were penn'd in the Scripture This is a sensless and groundless Figment as though the Holy Ghost spoke not as well to Isaiah in that Vision to deliver his Message to the People as to inspire him to write infallibly what he had heard in that Divine Vision Is there any intimation of difference in these to be distinguished Actions and as tho the Lord himself did not both The Current of the Scripture is to this purpose without a shadow of Contradiction Take that one place 2 Pet. 1.20 21. No Prophecy of Scripture is of any private Interpretation Prophets prophesied not to their Auditors their own Sense but God's Mind For Prophecy came not at any time by the Will of Man but holy Men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost So that they were acted by the Spirit not only in writing but in speaking yea those Prophets which were not God's Pen-men as Elias and Elisha yet were inspired by the Holy Ghost Such vain Fancies as yours are Mr. Biddle can please none but vain and unsetled Heads To this I add that the Lord 's speaking to Isaiah in the Vision chap. 6. and the Holy Ghost speaking by him to the Fathers Acts 28. cannot be understood that at two different times the Lord and the Holy Ghost speake to the Prophet 1. Because the Holy Ghost did not only inspire the Prophet afterwards to record in writing his Message to the Fathers but by Word sent the Prophet saying Go unto this People and say c. So that the Prophet was to say to the Fathers what the Holy Ghost had said by word to him in the Vision 2dly Because John tells us Joh. 12.41 that Isaiah said these things when he saw his Glory and spake of him whereby it is manifest that the Prophet spake these things unto the Fathers from the Mouth of the Lord and the Holy Ghost in the Vision And forasmuch as the Apostle tells us that it was the Holy Ghost which spake in that Vision it shews that he is the same Lord and Jehovah that the Seraphims worshipped Objection to 1 Cor. 3.16 Know ye not that ye are the Temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you It is objected by some from this place that the Holy Spirit is God in that our Body is said to be his Temple I answer That it would follow could it be proved that our Body is so the Temple of the Holy Spirit as to be his by the highest Interest and primarily dedicated to his Honour they are his by Inhabitation The Spirit is disposed of and given by God to us and consequently he is ours by Interest not we his And accordingly the Apostle concludeth from thence that we ought with our Body to glorify not the Spirit but God who is openly distinguished from the Spirit and declared to be the Proprietor of our Body Answer First They say indeed that our Body is not the Temple of the Holy Ghost by Interest but they cannot prove it for our being his by Inhabitation excludes not our being his by Interest any more than God's dwelling in the Temple which Solomon built did exclude his highest Interest to it and its chief Dedication to his Glory but our being his first by Interest makes us his by Inhabitation Secondly Though the Holy Spirit be given of God and so by donation becometh ours yet neither doth this exclude us from being his by the highest Right for the Holy Spirit 's being sent and given to us sheweth his Office and not his Essence of which I shall speak hereafter and if his being sent doth not disprove his Divine Essence it cannot