A Confession of Faith TOUCHING THE Holy Trinity, According to the SCRIPTURE.  Gal. 1. 8, 9. 
But if we, or an angel from heaven, ( how much more, if Fathers, or councils?) preach any thing unto you, besides what we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any one preach any thing unto you, besides what ye have received, let him be accursed.  1 Joh. 2. 24. 
Let that therefore abide in you, which ye have heard from the beginning: if that which ye have heard from the beginning abide in you, ye also shall abide in the Son, and in the Father.  
LONDON, Printed in the year 1648.   

The Preface.  
THough we might justly renew the old complaint, that Truth is a stranger in the earth, even in respect of sundry things exceedingly importing the good of human society, yet shall we find, upon a diligent examination of the matter, that this wayfaring condition of truth hath in nothing more disclosed itself, then in the knowledge of the true God. For to omit the sudden and general revolt of the Nations to Idolatry, how unstable and fleeting was this knowledge even in Israel itself, though God had chosen that Nation above all others to be his people? The History of the Old Covenant everywhere relateth how the Israelites went a whoring after Idols, and could by no means be held close to the Lord their God. And it had been well for us, if this fickleness of retaining God in knowledge had not seized Christians also, as formerly it did the Jews. But not onely the History of bypassed ages, but even the experience of our own times abundantly sheweth, how deeply Christians themselves are guilty of making a defection from the true God, being so thickened on their lees, that( did we not look unto the mighty power of God, who onely doth wondrous works) we should conceive it utterly impossible to clarify them from the filth of their superstition. For though Luther and Calvin deserve much praise for the pains they took in cleansing our Religion from sundry Idolatrous Pollutions of the roman Antichrist, yet are the dregs still left behind, I mean the Gross Opinion touching three Persons in God. Which error not onely made way for those Pollutions, but lying at the bottom corrupteth almost our whole Religion. For first, it introduceth three Gods, and so subverteth the Unity of God, so frequently inculcated in the Scripture. Neither is it enough for the salving of this absurdity, to say with Athanasius, that though the Father be God, the Son God, the holy Spirit God; yet there are not three Gods, but one God: For who is there( if at least he dare make use of Reason in his Religion) who seeth not, that this is as ridiculous, as if one should say, Peter is an Apostle, James an Apostle, John an Apostle; yet there are not three Apostles but one Apostle? If the the word God, taken for the most high God,( as here it is) be predicated of three, it is an Universal( sinoe not onely Aristotle, but common understanding, sheweth that to be an Universal, which may be predicated of many; that a Singular, which cannot so be predicated) and consequently there are three Gods: even as the word Apostle being an Universal, and predicated of three, it unavoidably follows that there are three Apostles. Secondly, it hindereth us from praying according to the prescript of the Gospel. For how can any man pray to God through his Son Jesus Christ, as the Gospel directeth us to do, if God be not the Father onely? Did God consist of the three Persons, would it not, when he invocated God, be all one as if he should say, O Father, Son, and holy Spirit, give me what I ask, through thy Son Iesus Christ; and so Christ be the Son not onely of the Father, but also of the holy Spirit, yea of himself? Again, how can any man ask of God the gift of the holy Spirit, if God be not the Father onely, or at most the Father and the Son? would it not, when he invocated God, be all one as if he should say O Father, Son, and holy Spirit give me your holy Spirit, and so the holy Spirit be the Spirit not only of the Father and the Son, but also of himself? wherefore let him that entereth into any of our Churches to partake of the public worship, but observe, & he shall find that the Ministers in their Prayers do by God mean no other but the Father; for they usually close up their petitions, desi●ing God to grant what they have begged, for the sake or merits of his Son Jesus Christ, thereby plainly giving us to understand, that by God they meant the Father onely. Which very thing, were there nothing else, doth abundantly show the falsity of their opinion touching three Persons in God. Since after they have most virulently cried out both in the Pulpit and Press against the opinion of one God the Father, they do notwithstanding continually make use of the same in their Prayers, and cannot do otherwise. Thus having one while  told men that once in Christ, and ever in Christ, they do another while bid them take heed of backsliding showing them to that purpose the great danger they are in of being drawn away from Christ. Neither let the Adversaries, to evade this great difficulty, say, that when they pray unto God, through his Son, or for his Spirit, by God is meant but one of the three Persons in the Godhead, namely the Father. For first, this is to beg the question; since to say that God is put for one of the three Persons in the Godhead, is to take for granted that there are three Persons in the Godhead. The contrary whereof is proved by the Argument which we have alleged. Neither will it be amiss by the way to give notice, that when the controversy is about the supreme Deity of the Son and Holy Spirit, the Adversaries commonly answer by begging the question. For instance, if it be argued, that the Son cannot be the most high God, because he can do nothing of himself, because all authority in heaven and earth hath been given to him, because the Father is greater then he: it is presently answered, that these things are spoken of Christ according to his human Nature onely. Whereas this is to take for granted that Christ hath another Nature besides his human Nature, namely the nature of the most high God; and so to beg the question. again, when it is urged that the holy Spirit is not the most high God, because he also speaketh not of himself, is sent down from heaven, maketh intercession for the Saints with groans unutterable. The usual answer is, that these things are spoken after the manner of men, or, as the Learned phrase it, 〈◇〉, whereby that is attributed to God, which doth not indeed agree to him, but onely to man. Whereas this also is to take for granted that the holy Spirit is God, and so to beg the question. But secondly, were it true that there are three Persons in the Godhead, yet could not the word God be appropriated to one of them, all appropriation being founded upon some excellency and prerogative that one hath above the rest, who are otherwise of the same sort. Which here cannot have place, because the Adversaries hold that every Person of the Trinity is equally God with the others, and that none of them is either before, or greater then another. And indeed, it is impossible to conceive how any one should any way have any excellency and prerogative above him that is the most high God. Thirdly, were it granted that the word God taken for the most high God, is appropriated to one of the three Persons in the Godhead, yet could it at no hand be made use of to distinguish him from the other Persons. For how should a word, equally common unto three, not only be appropriated to one of them, but also be set to distinguish him from the others; since every one can tell that that which is to distinguish and difference one from another, must not be something common unto both, but peculiar to one above the other? Wherefore I desire the Adversaries to confirm this way of distinguishing, which is so rife amongst them, by a like example taken either out of the Scripture, or out of some approved Author. But if they be destitute of examples, let them at least allege some sufficient reason to evince▪ that though such distinguishing be not usual, yet it is suitable enough.  
In the third place, this Tenet of three Persons in God, prohibiteth us to love and honour him as we ought. For the highest love and honour is due to him who is the most high God. But such love and honour can be exhibited to no more then one Person. For demonstration; the highest love and honour is to be loved and honoured for himself, and all others for him. As the highest good is that which is desired for itself, and all others for it. Suppose now( what I conceive will easily be granted; if not, the Scripture itself will extort it, which giveth the title of most High to the Father, and thereby differenceth him both from Christ and the holy Spirit; see Luke 1. 32, 35.) suppose, I say, that the Father is to be loved and honoured with the highest love and honour; then must he be loved and honoured for himself, and all others for him. If all others, then also the Son and holy Spirit. But if the Son and holy Spirit be loved and honoured for another( as indeed the very appellations of the Son and Spirit of God imply that the one was begotten, the other breathed from God, and so are beholding to another for their being, and consequently for the love and honour given to them) then are they not loved and honoured with the highest love and honour, and so are not the most high God, in that whosoever is the most high God, ought to be loved and honoured in this manner, otherwise some other would have a pre-eminence above him who is the most high God; which every one easily perceiveth to be contradictions. And blessed be God, who hath not left us to an uncertainty herein, having plainly  told us that Christ is therefore to be honoured as the Father( it doth not say, as much as the Father) not because he hath the same Essence, and so is the same God with the Father, but because the Father hath given him all judgement, John 5. 22, 23. and also delivers this as a general rule, that whosoever loveth him that begot, loveth that also which is begotten of him, 1 John 5. 2. making the love to the Father the ground and reason of the love to the Son; and consequently, the love which we bear to Jesus Christ, to spring from the love we bear to God the Father, who hath given to him both his being and dignity, and whatsoever else is lovely in him,( as indeed there is nothing in him but what is very lovely.) As for the holy Spirit though much love and honour is without question due to him, he being the Person to whom under God and Christ we are most beholding, as receiving from him the greatest benefits, yet are we nowhere in the Scripture expressly enjoined to love and honour him,( howbeit many, preferring such a doxology as was devised by men, before that which is p●oposed by God himself in his word, commonly ascribe honour and glory to the holy Spirit together with God; which is the less to be wondered at, inasmuch as others stick not to ascribe honour and glory to the Virgin Mary together with God:) and therefore what love and honour we are to exhibit unto Him, is with great wariness to be collected out of the Scripture, which not onely saith that He is of God, 1 Cor. 2. 12. and so dependant on God for his being; but also glorifieth Christ, in that He receiveth of his, and declareth it to the Apostles, John 16. 14. and so is dependant not onely on God, but also on Christ for his knowledge in the mystery of the Gospel, and therefore is inferior to our Lord Christ Jesus. Which is also further evident by the benefits which we receive from the holy Spirit. For whereas He distributeth to us sundry spiritual gifts, as Tongues, prophecy, Miraculous Cures, &c. 1 Cor. 12. 8, 9, 10. Christ conferreth upon us remission of sins, Act. 10. 43. Col. 3. 13. He is the Earnest( or rather, Pledge) of our heavenly inheritance, Eph. 1. 13, 14. Christ the bestower of the very inheritance itself, Mat. 25. 34. Luke 22. 29. John 17. 2. He assureth us that we are the Children of God, Rom. 8. 16. Christ giveth us the privilege to become the Children of God, Joh. 1. 12. He is given to us upon our repentance, Act. 2. 38. Christ giveth us the very repentance itself, Act. 5. 31.  
In the fourth place, this assertion of three Persons in God, thwarteth the common notion that all men have of God. For our very understanding suggesteth to us, that God is the same with the first cause of all things, he onely being of himself, and all others from him. But if any man, to uphold a prejudicate Opinion, will deny the dictate of his reason, he shall be pressed with the Authority of the Scripture in this behalf; for the Apostle. Rom. 11. 36. saith, that of him,( God) and by him, and for him are all things. This being so, go they not about to deprive us of our understanding, and that in a thing of the greatest importance, even the knowledge of God himself, who bear us in hand that the other two persons besides the Father are also the most high God, when the very appellations that are given to them, do( as we formerly hinted) clearly intimate that they have their being from the Father, and so are caused by him? But can they be the first cause of all things, who have themselves been caused by another? or are not they caused by another, who are begotten from him?  
Fifthly, this Error is the main stumbling-block that keepeth the ancient people of God, the Jews, from entering into the Church of Christ, inasmuch as they conceive it to be the genuine doctrine of the Christian religion itself. For they having formerly smarted for their Idolatry, are now grown exceeding cautious of any Tenet looking that way. But this, as we have shown before, and the Jews well enough perceive,( who therefore, amongst sundry other things, chiefly object against Christians the common doctrine of the Trinity) maketh three Gods. Wherefore though the Jews have been justly punished by God with long blindness and hardness of heart, for not receiving our Lord Jesus, when he was sent unto them; yet is it observable that this hath not come to pass without the great fault of Christians also, who quickly turning aside from the strait and easy way of believing in God, set down in the Scripture, and( according to the inbred curiosity of men) hunting after obscurities, have by the cunning of Satan lost themselves in the endless mazes of error and superstition; and erecting a new Babel, confounded the pure and plain language of the holy Spirit with their Trinunities, Coessentialities, Modalities, eternal Generations, eternal Processions, Incarnations, Hypostatical Unions, and the like monstrous terms, fitter for Conjurers then Christians, especially such as profess to reject the inventions of men, and keep themselves wholly to the word of God.  
Sixthly, this Doctrine prohibits the accomplishment of that which God long since promised by the Prophet Zechariah, ch. 14. 9. In that day the LORD shall be one, and his name one( for so ought the words to be rendered, according to the Hebrew.) And I the rather mention this, because our Nation hath by solemn League and Covenant engaged itself to promote this very thing, making use of the Prophets words in the close of the second Article of the Covenant. Go to now, ye that so much inculcate the Covenant, thundring-out in your Pulpits the judgments of God against the breakers thereof; tell me whether ye of all men are not most guilty of infringing it, and that in the most important Article thereof? do not ye stiffly contend that the LORD is three( though there be not so much as one Scripture that saith so) and accordingly call him Deum Trinum; and that his name is not one, but three, even the Father, the Son, and the holy Spirit? And am not I, who on the contrary maintain that the LORD is one, not three, and to that purpose allege most express Scriptures, as namely that, Mark 12. 29. harken, O Israel, the LORD our God, the Lord is one( for so should the place be rendered, both because the word one is in the Greek set after the word LORD, and also because the Hebrew word Jehovah, for which LORD is here put, being a proper name, cannot have the word one construed before it;) and that his Name is one, even the Father, as innumerable places the of Scripture testify: for how often doth the very Apostle Paul wish grace and peace from God the Father? and where doth either he, or any other sacred writer, use such an expression as that of God the Son, or God the holy Spirit? Am not I, I say▪ the object of your hatred for doing thus, and so in effect for keeping the Covenant? & do ye not therefore go about to kill me? Cease therefore any longer to cry, The Covenant, the Covenant, unless ye keep closer to the scope thereof, and using all diligence inquire after the true God, who he is, and how he must be worshipped? To further which enquiry, or or rather to led you directly to the knowledge of the thing itself. I have here presented you with a Confession of Faith touching the holy Trinity, exactly drawn out of the Scriptures, with the texts alleged at large, that so you may the better judge how suitable the same is to the word of God. Neither have I other aim in the publication thereof, then to restore that pure and genuine knowledge of God delivered in the Scripture, and which hath for many hundred yeares been hidden from the eyes of men by the corrupt Glosses and Traditions of Antichrist, who hath in stead thereof obtruded upon them I know not what absurd and uncouth Notions, bearing them in hand that Ignorance is the mother of devotion, and that they then think and speak best of God, when their conceits and words are most irrational and senseless. By which means, having renounced those quiddities and strange terms that have vitiated the simplicity of the Scripture, and having laid asleep the contentations arising from them, we shall at length unanimously with one mouth glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.  
Amen.  
John Biddle.   

A Confession of FAITH touching the Holy Trinity, according to the Scripture.  

Article I.  
I Believe, That there is one most high God, Creator of heaven and earth, and first cause of all things pertaining to our salvation, and consequently the ultimate object of our Faith and Worship; and that this God is none but the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the first Person of the holy TRINITY.  
Joh. 17. 3. This is eternal life, that they know thee( Father) the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent. Observe here in the first place, that our Saviour Christ, setting down those persons, in the knowledge of whom eternal life consisteth, makes no mention of the holy Spirit; whereas, if he were God, the knowledge of him would be as necessary for the attainmment of eternal life, as that of the Father. Secondly, he so describeth the Father, as that he makes him the onely true God, thereby manifestly excluding any other person whatsoever from being the true God. Thirdly, as for himself, he doth not say that it is eternal life to know him as eternally begotten, and coessential to the Father,( both which are contradictious in themselves, and unheard-of in the Scripture) but onely as sent by the Father, and consequently such a one as by his will, and in his name manageth the business of our salvation. 1 Cor. 8. 5, 6. Though there be that are called Gods, whether in heaven, or on earth, as there are many Gods, and many Lords; yet to us there is but one God, even the Father, of whom are all things, and we to him; and one Lord, even Jesus Christ, by whom are are all things, and we through him. In this passage Christ is in express terms excluded from being that one God of Christians, and the holy Spirit in general terms excluded from being that one God, or that one Lord; wherefore if we give such credence to the Apostle as we ought, and had not rather harken to Athanasius then to Paul, we will with Paul confess, that that one God of Christians is no other then the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, Eph. 4. 4, 5, 6. There is one Body, and one Spirit, even as ye have been called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one Faith, one Baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all, and among all, and in you all. Which passage of the same Apostle clearly intimates the different nature, order, and dignity of the three persons of the HOLY TRINITY, and was written for that very end: For when he saith, that there is one Spirit, he must mean either one created,, or one uncreated Spirit, since( whatsoever some talk to the contrary) no other kind of Spirit is conceivable: Not one uncreated Spirit, for so there will be another uncreated Spirit besides God,( which is absurd) since this Spirit here is plainly and purposely distinguished from God; wherefore he meaneth one created Spirit: But if so, then there is simply one created Spirit, or one created Spirit by way of excellency onely; not simply one created Spirit, for the Scripture elsewhere mentions seven Spirits of God attending on him, Rev. 1. 4. which Beza, Drusius and Mead confess to be meant of seven principal Angels; and the Divine Author to the Hebrews saith of the Angels in general, That they are all ministering Spirits, and consequently created Spirits. It remaineth therefore that there is one created Spirit by way of excellency onely, which is the holy Spirit. In like manner, when the Apostle saith, that there is one Lord, he must mean either one made, or one unmade Lord, since by the confession of all, there is no medium; not one unmade Lord, for then there will be another unmade Lord besides God,( which is absurd) since this Lord also is here plainly and purposely distinguished from God; wherefore he meaneth one made Lord: But if so, then there is is ●either simply one made Lord, or else one made Lord by way of Excellency onely; not simply one made Lord, for so there are many Lords, as not onely the Apostle, but experience itself testifieth. It remaineth therefore that there is one made Lord by way of excellency onely, which is Jesus of Nazareth, who after he had been crucified by the Jews, was raised up from the dead, and exalted by the right hand of God, and by him made Lord and Christ; as Peter, in the beginning of the Gospel, when the holy Spirit was fallen on him, plainly testifies, Act. 2. 22, 23, 33, 36. Wherefore since neither the holy Spirit is an uncreated Spirit, nor the Lord Jesus an unmade Lord, neither of them, but the Father onely is God( I mean, with the Apostle Paul himself, God by way of excellency; for otherwise he confesseth that there are many Gods, 1 Cor. 8. 5.) Mat. 24. 36. But of that day, and that hour knoweth none, no not the Angels in heaven, but my Father onely. If the Father onely sometimes knew the day of Judgement, then neither the Son,( who, take him how you will, is not the Father, and therefore openly confesseth himself to be ignorant of it, Mark 13. 32.) nor the holy Spirit knew it, and consequently neither of them is the most high God, since he doth, and ever did know all things. Rom. 15. 6. That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. James 3. 9. Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, who were made after the likeness of God. John 6. 27. Labour not for the meat that perisheth, but for that meat which endureth to eternal life, which the Son of man shall give to you: for him hath the Father sealed, the God,( so the Original hath it.) In these three passages, God( that is, by the confession of all, the most high God) is by the Scripture itself interpnted the Father, and therefore none but he can be God. John. 8. 54. Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my honour is nothing; it is my Father that honoureth me, whom ye say that he is your God, You see here who was the God that the Jews worshipped, namely the Father; and herein there is no difference between them and Christians, since the Apostle Paul testifieth, 2 Tim. 1. 3. That he served God from his fore-fathers; that is, the same God which he had received from the Jews his forefathers. See also Act. 3. 13. and Chap. 5. 30, 31. and Chap. 22. 14. In which three places the Father is called the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob; and by that appellation distinguished from the Son; which could not be, if the Son were the same God with the Father, since common things do not distinguish, but such as are proper: But if the Son be not the same God with the Father, much less the holy Spirit, since the Scripture abundantly witnesseth that he is sent and disposed of by the Son. Neh. 9. 6. Thou, even thou art LORD alone; thou hast made Heaven, the Heaven of Heavens, with all their Host, the earth, and al things therein. Observe here that the Levites do not say, Ye, even ye are Lord, but Thou, even thou art Lord alon●; intimating that one person onely is the most high God, for the word [ thou] denoteth a single person: And this is the perpetual doctrine of the whole Scripture. But if one person onely be the most high God, this person must of necessity be the Father, since he, by the confession of all sides, is the most high God. Neither doth that passage, Gen. 1. 26. wherein God saith, Let us make man, any whit contradict this truth. For doth it follow from thence that there are several Persons in God? Might I not by the same kind of arguing conclude, that because Christ, Mark 4. 30. saith, Whereunto shall we liken the Kingdom of God, and with what comparison shall we compare it? and John 3. 11. Verily, verily I say unto thee, We speak what we know, and testify what we have seen, and ye receive not our testimony: therefore there are several Persons in Christ? And also, because Paul, 2 Cor. 10. 1, 2. saith, Now I Paul myself beseech you, by the meekness and gentleness of Christ, who in presence am base among you, but being absent am bold toward you: I say, I beseech you, that I may not be bold when I am present, with that confidence wherewith I think to be bold against some, who think of us, as if we walked according to the flesh: therefore there are several Persons in Paul? The utmost that can be concluded from this passage of Genesis, is, that there was some other person with God, whom he employed in the Creation, as of other things, so of man. Which Person had been before mentioned by Moses, verse 2. where he saith, The Spirit of God moved upon the face of the Waters. Thus it is said of the Lord, Psal. 104. 30. Thou sendest forth thy Spirit, they are created: and thou renewest the face of the earth: and Job 26. 13. By his Spirit he hath garnished the heavens; his hand hath formed the crooked Serpent. Observe by the way, that these Scriptures plainly intimate that the Spirit was but the instrument of God in creating things, since God is said to have garnished the heavens by him, and that he was sent by God to that purpose, and so ministered unto him. Moreover, the wise Elihu saith, Job 33. 4. The Spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life. Which plainly sheweth that the Spirit had a hand in creating man. It was the Spirit therefore, and he onely, to whom God said, Let us make man. For had the Son of God, Christ Jesus, been also employed in creating Adam, would not he likewise have been mentioned in the history of the Creation? was it not as material, and altogether of as great consequence for Moses and the Jews to have known, that the Son of God, Christ Jesus, was employed by God in creating Adam, as the holy Spirit? But it is well that the holy Scripture, whilst it attribute●h creation unto Christ, doth, what by the nature of the thing itself, what by the circumstances of the places, what by express words, signify that it is meant not of the first and old creation, but of the second and new, consisting in the reduction of things to a new state, condition, or order. Otherwise, had he at first created Adam, how could he himself say, Mat. 19. 4. And he( Jesus) answered and said unto them, Have ye not red, that he which made them( Adam and Eve) at the beginning, made them Male and Female? Is not that description, He that made them, &c. made use of to distinguish God from Christ? And doth not Christ here take it for granted, together with the Pharisees, that not himself, but another created man? Again, how could Peter say, 1 Epist. 1. 20. Who( Christ) verily was foreordained,( Gr. foreknown) before the foundation of the world: had Christ then had a being? Are not those things onely foreknown, that are to come, and not already in being? Thirdly, how could Paul, Rom. 5. 14. say, After the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure( or, type) of him that was to come,( or, that was to be, as the Gr. expression 〈◇〉 doth signify:) had Christ then not onely had a being, but created Adam? was Adam a type of him that created him? was he that created Adam, as yet to be? can it be said of any one, that he is to be, whose person doth already exist?  
This which we have spoken of the holy Spirit, that he was present at the Creation of the world, and is included when God said, Let US make man, doth clear those other passages of the Scripture, where the like expression is used; as Gen. 3. 22. And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of Us, to know good and evil. Gen. 11. 6, 7▪ And the Lord said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language: and this they begin to do, and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. Go to, let Us go down, and there confounded their language, that they may not understand one anothers speech. Isai. 6. 8. Also I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, Whom shall I sand, and who will go for Us? For it ought suitably to be understood, that by Us in all these places, is meant the Lord with his Spirit; seeing the Spirit is elsewhere called the Spirit of knowledge, Isa. 11. 2. and said to give diversity of Tongues, 1 Cor. 12. 10. 11. Act. 2. 4. and Isaiah himself testifieth, that both the Lord and his Spirit had sent him, Chap. 48. 16. It is also easy to conceive that by wisdom, Prov. 8. is meant the Spirit of wisdom; for so is the holy Spirit denominated by Isaiah, chap. 11. 2. and whosoever shall exactly consider what is spoken of the holy Spirit in this passage of Isaiah, and in the history of the Creation, and elsewhere in the Scripture, and compare it with what is spoken of wisdom, Prov. 8. especially if he further add what is more amply declared in the 7. 8. and 9. chap. of the wisdom of Solomon, and in the 1. and 24. chap. of Siracides, will perceive that as by wisdom is meant a most excellent creature, so that creature is the holy Spirit.  
Finally, this intimateth to us, why the said Elihu, Job 35. 10. speaketh on this wise, But none saith, Where is God my Maker,( Heb. Makers) who giveth songs in the night? The word Makers implieth that more then one person made man, though in a different order of causality. But inasmuch as God is said to be the Makers, this intimateth that whatsoever power of making was in any other person employed in that work, it proceeded from God; so that upon the matter God was the Makers.   

Article II.  
I believe, That there is one chief Son of the most High God, or spiritual, heavenly, and perpetual Lord and King, set over the Church by God, and second cause of all things pertaining to our salvation, and consequently, the intermediate object of our Faith and Worship: and that this Son of the most High God is none but Jesus Christ, the second Person of the HOLY TRINITY.  
Luke 1. 32. He( Jesus) shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the most High. Where note, that the Son is not equal to the Father, as the very Son himself openly professeth, Joh. 14. 28. where making a comparison, not between any nature of his that was not a person, but between his own very person, and that of the Father, he saith expressly, My Father is greater then I. Note, I say, that the Son is not equal to the Father; otherwise the epithet of Most High could not be appropriated to the Father, and put to distinguish him from the Son,( as neither could it afterwards, vers. 35. be made use of to distinguish Him from the holy Spirit, if the holy Spirit were equal to the Father) for how can an expression alike common to twain, be apt to distinguish one from the other? How is the Father, and that contradistinctly to the Son, the Most High, if the Son be as High as He? Though some from that mistaken text, Phil. 2. 5, 6, 7, 8. would infer the contrary, and so contradict the express words of Christ himself. Whereas, if the place be rightly considered, it maketh against them; the words and sense being thus: Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus; who being in the form of God,( for the exercise and demonstration of divine Power, whereby he wrought Miracles in as free and uncontrolled a manner, as if God himself had been on the earth) thought it not robbery( or, a prey) to be equal with God:( that is, did not esteem this equality of his with God, consisting in the free exercise of Divine Power, to be a prey, by holding it fast, and refusing to let it go, as Robbers are wont to do when they have got a prey, or booty:) but( Gr.) emptied himself,( in making no use of the Divine Power within him, to rescue himself out of the hands of the Officers sent to apprehended him) and took upon him the form of a servant,( in suffering himself to be apprehended, bound, and whipped, as servants are wont to be) being made in the likeness of men,( that is, ordinary and vulgar men, who are endowed with no divine power.) And being found in fashion,( or, habit) as a man,( that is, in his outward quality, condition, and acting no whit differing from a common man,) he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the across. Now that this place doth not speak of an Incarnation, or Assumption of human nature,( as they term it) nor of such an Equality as is commonly conceived, is evident from all the circumstances. For first, the scope of the Apostle is to exhort the Philippians to humility, and that they would do nothing out of vain-glory. To which purpose, he setteth before them the example of Christ Jesus. And therefore the act of Christ which he doth exemplify, must be manifest. Since examples are wont to be taken onely from such things as are manifest. But to whom was or could that Incarnation, which Christians commonly talk of, be manifest, when they themselves say it passeth the understanding of Angels to comprehend it? yea that there was any Incarnation at all made, the Scripture nowhere expressly affirmeth, nor can it be so much as proved by any good consequence from thence, as several learned men have shown. Secondly, the Apostle speaketh of our Lord as a Man, in that he giveth him the titles of Christ Jesus, both which agree to him onely as a man. For he is called Jesus, as he was a child conceived of the holy Spirit in the Virgins womb, and brought forth by her, Luke 1. 27, 30, 31, 35. and Christ signifieth the anointed, John 1. 41. and accordingly Jesus is expressly called the Christ of God, Luke 9. 20. but he was anointed( as the Adversaries themselves will confess) as a man, and not as God. See Act. 10. 38. Thirdly, he doth not say, that the Son thought it not robbery to be equal with the Father, which words would indeed have plainly thwarted those formerly cited out of the 14. of John: but that Christ Jesus thought it not robbery, or a prey, to be equal with God. Which cannot be in respect of Essence; for he must either have the same Essence in number, or a different one. Not the same Essence in number, for then he will not be equal with God in Essence, but the same: for equality must be in respect of two things different at least in number, otherwise it will not be Equality, but Identity. Thus he that is equal to another in stature, must not have the same stature in number with the other, but different in number, though the same in kind. But the Adversaries hold that the Father and the Son have the same Essence in number, not in species or kind. If Christ hath an Essence different in number from that of God, it must needs also be inferior thereunto, there being no Essence equal to his, as every one will confess. Wherefore the Equality aforesaid cannot be in respect of Essence, but of something else. But let it consist in whatsoever you will, it must either be simplo & absolute, or else only in part( since Aristotle, according to the common notion of men, acknowledgeth in his Categories, that Equality admitteth more and less.) Not simplo and absolute, for then God would not be the most High, since he is not the most High, who hath another simply and absoutel●y equal with him. Besides, that description I would be superfluous, which the Apostle useth, saying, Who being in the form of God; for if this description be,( as indeed it ought to be, and is) pertinent to the thing in hand, it intimateth that this Equality of Christ with God is to be extended no farther, then as he was in the form of God. But the form of a thing,( as appeareth from the common acceptation of the word, and from that following clause, He look upon him the form of a servant; and also from those words, Mark 16. 12. After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the Country,) is something visible and outwardly apparent, such as is neither the Essence, nor power of any thing, but onely the exercise and demonstration of power. In the exercise therefore and demonstration of divine power, whereby he did miracles, was Christ in the form of God, and equal to God, as the Apostle John explaineth it, chap. 5. 18. saying, Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not onely had broken the Sabbath, but said also, that God was his Father, making himself equal with God. Which is not so to be understood, as if Christ by calling God his Father, made himself equal with God,( for who seeth not the manifest absurdity hereof, since the very appellation of Father implieth a prerogative above the Son( as Christ himself acknowledgeth in the forequoted 14 of John) in that the Son, as he is the Son, is beholding to the Father for his being? Again, the words would then have run thus, thereby making himself equal with God, not simply, making himself equal with God:) but because by uttering those words, verse 17. My Father worketh hitherto, and I work, he did both say that God was his Father, and in working made himself equal with God. Furthermore, had Christ been simply and absolutely equal with God, how could he be exceedingly exalted by God, since by this reckoning he would become higher then God himself? which is not onely absurd, out blasphemous to imagine. In the fourth place, had the Apostle here spoken of an assumption of the human nature, he would not have said, that Christ became in the likeness of men, and was found in fashion as a man: for if men( as the Adversaries must hold, when they allege this place to prove that Christ assumed a human nature, and became man) be here considered according to their Essence and nature, this would imply that Christ had not the Essence, and Nature, but onely the likeness and fashion of a man, and so was not a true and real man. By men therefore are here meant vulgar and ordinary men, for so this word is elsewhere taken in the Scriptures, as Psal. 82. 6. I have said ye are Gods: and all of you are children of the most High. But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the Princes: and judge. 16. 7. ●hen shall I be weak, and be as one of men( so the Hebrew, ●kadh haadam, signifieth.) See also vers. 11. of the same Chap. Fifthly, when it is said, But emptied himself,( or, as our English Translation hath it, Made himself of no reputation) this implieth, that if Christ had not emptied himself of that divine Form, he had thought it a prey to be equal with God. Which cannot without the implication of a contradiction, or, what is worse, of blasphemy, be affirmed of God. But Christ had thought it robbery, or a prey, to have been equal with God in doing miracles, if he had not laid aside the exercise and demonstration of his divine power, and fallen into the hands of his Adversaries, as a weak and vulgar man. For unless he had done so, he had disobeyed the commandment of God, and consequently thought his divine form to be a prey, not a gift of God; and that it was to be kept on for his own glory, not put off for the glory of God. It is therefore evident by what hath been said, that this place hindereth not, but that we ought to believe that Christ Jesus is simply inferior to God, and so not God. And indeed, I can never sufficiently wonder at the stupidity of men, who because the Apostle saith, That Christ Jesus thought it not robbery to be equal with God, conclude that therefore he is God. For is it possible for any one to be equal with himself? Must not he that is equal with any one, be supposed not to be he with whom he is equal? But let us now proceed to other Scriptures. 1 Cor. 8. 6. To us there is but one Lord, even Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we through him. By all things are not here meant all things simply, but all things pertaining to our salvation, as is evident both in that he speaketh of Christians, and also putteth an article before the word [ all] in the Gr. which implieth a restr●ction. Acts 2. 39. Let all the House of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made this same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, Lord and Christ. Phil. 2. 9, 10. He( Jesus) humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the across: Wherefore God hath also highly exalted him, and given him a name that is above every name, that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in Heaven, and things on earth, and things under the earth, & that every tongue should confess▪ that Jesus is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. 1 Pet. 1. 21. Who through him( Jesus) believe in God that raised him from the dead, & gave him glory, so that your Faith and hope is in God. Joh. 12. 44. He that believeth in me( Jesus) believeth not in me, but in him that sent me, Rom. 1. 8. I thank my God, through Jesus Christ, that your faith is spoken of through the whole world. Rom. 16. 27. To the onely wise God, through Jesus Christ, be glory for ever. These five places last quoted, show, that the glory & thanks that we give to Christ, and the faith and hope that we place in him, do not rest in him, but through him tend to God the Father, and consequently, that the Son is not equal to the Father, but subordinate to him, 1 Cor. 15. 24, 25, 28. Then cometh the end, when he( Christ) shall have delivered up the kingdom to God even the Father( Gr. to the God and Father) when he shall have put down all rule, and all authority, an power,( or force.) For he must reign till he hath put all the enemies under his Feet. And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all. It is here said, that Christ shall reign till he hath put all the enemies under his feet; which done, he shall deliver up the kingdom to God the Father, and become subject unto him. But how could these things come to pass, if Christ were the most High God? Certainly by so doing, Christ would cease to be the most High God; for without controversy, he to whom any one becometh subject, is higher then he that becometh subject. Neither let the Adversaries say, that this is spoken of Christ according to his human nature onely. For( to omit that this goodly distinction is nowhere to be found in Gods word) First, this is to take for granted that Christ hath more then one nature, and so to beg the question, whereas it is a sign of a desperate cause, not to be able to answer objections without taking for granted what is in controversy. Secondly, the Apostle here speaketh of Christ as a person, in that he speaketh of him as reigning, since none can be a King and reign, but a Person, and that as a person, all Offices being proper to persons: wherefore they must grant, either that the Person of Christ, which they hold to be a person of supreme Deity, delivereth up his kingdom, and becometh subject; or that his human nature( as they phrase it) is a person, and consequently, lest there should be two Persons in one and the same subject, and so Christ not be one but two, that he hath no other nature and Person. The latter of which subverteth the opinion of the Adversaries; the first, also itself. Thirdly, it is worth the observing that the Apostle saith, Then shall also the Son himself be subject. But how can the Son himself become subject, if onely a human nature added to the Son, and not the very person of the Son is subjected? Certainly this place( which is so full and clear, that sundry being convinced by the evidence thereof, have abandoned the common gross opinion of two natures in Christ,) seemeth purposely fitted by God to stop their mouths, who should go about to elude what is here spoken to show the subordination and inferiority of Christ to the Father, by saying that the Son shall be subject according to the human nature onely: for the Apostle most emphatically saith, That the Son also himself shall be subject; so that if there be any nature in him better then other, according to which he chiefly is the Son of God, even according to that shall he become subject. Rom. 10. 9. If thou shalt confess with thy mouth, that Jesus is Lord,( so the Original hath it, as will further appear by comparing this place with Phil. 2. 10.) and shalt believe with thy heart, that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. The Apostle here sets down a brief symbol of the Christian Religion, declaring what is to be both believed with the heart, and confessed with the mouth, concerning the dignity of Christ; and which if we believe and confess, we shall obtain salvation. But how could it be, that if Christ were the most High God, the same with the Father, and had raised himself from the dead, and that by his own power, the Apostle should here affirm, That if we onely confess with the mouth, that Jesus is Lord, and believe with the heart,( not that he raised himself, but) that God raised him from the dead, we shall be saved? Certain I am, that Athanasius in his Creed is far more peremptory; for he saith, That unless a man believe that Christ is of one and the same Essence, and consequently one and the same God with the Father, he cannot be saved; whereas the Apostle, speaking of that Faith which is necessary to salvation, intimateth it to be sufficient if we believe that Jesus is Lord. Now whether Paul or Athanasius be rather to be credited, I leave it to all Christians to judge. The like may be said of that passage, Rom. 4. 22, 23, 24. and that John 17. 3. which we also alleged on the former Article; Eph. 4. 4, 5, 6. There is one Body, and one Spirit, even as ye have been called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one Faith, &c.   

Article III.  
I believe, That Jesus Christ, to the intent he might be our Brother, and have a fellow-feeling of our infirmities, and so become the more ready to help us,( the consideration whereof, is the greatest encouragement to piety that can be imagined) hath no other then a human nature, and therefore in this very nature is not onely a Person,( since none but a human person can be our Brother) but also our Lord, yea our God.  
2 Tim. 2. 5. There is one God, and one Mediator of God and Men, the Man Christ Jesus, John 3. 13. And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that descended from heaven, the Son of man, which is in heaven, or rather, which was in heaven, as the Participle 〈◇〉 in the Greek not onely may( in that it is of the Preterimperfect as well as of the Present tense) but must here be rendered, otherwise these words will contradict those immediately going before: for how could Christ still be in heaven, after he had descended from thence? again, he would as a man( for he here styleth himself the Son of Man) be in heaven and on the earth at the same time, which is confessed to be false) John 6. 62. What if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before( or, had been before?) John 8. 40. But now ye seek to kill me, a man who have  told you the truth, which I have heard from God. Joh. 3. 14, 15. And as Moses lif●ed up the Serpent in the Wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth on him, may not perish, but have eternal life. Mat. 9. 6, 7, 8. But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins,( then he speaketh to the sick of the palsy) Arise, take up thy bed, and go unto thine house. And he arose, and departed to his house. But when the mullitudes saw it, they marveled, and glorified God, which had given such power to men. John 5. 22, 23. The Father judgeth none, but hath given all judgement to the Son: that all should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father: and verse 7. And( the Father) hath given him( the Son) authority to execute judgement also, because he is the Son of Man. Mark 2. 28. Therefore the Son of Man is Lord also of the Sabbath. 1 Cor. 15. 21, 22. For since by man came death, by man came also the Resurrection of the dead: For as in Adam( or, by Adam) all die, even so in Christ( or, by Christ) shall all be made alive: and vers. 45. 47. The first man Adam was made a living soul, the last Adam a quickening Spirit. The first man is from the earth earthly( or, dusty:) the second man is the Lord from heaven. Mat. 24. 30, 31. And they shall see the Son of man come in the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory. And he shall sand his Angels with a trumpet of great sound, and they shall gather together his Elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. Mat. 16. 27, 28. The Son of Man shall come in the glory of his Father, with his Angels; and then shall he reward every man according to his doing. Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, who shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man come in his kingdom. Dan. 17. 13. 14. I saw in the night visions, and behold one like the Son of Man came with the clouds of Heaven, and came to the Ancient of daies, and they brought him near before him( Heb. they offered him before him.) And there was given him dominion and glory, and a kingdom, that all People, Nations and Languages, should serve him: his do●inion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away; and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed. Observe now in the ●●●st place, that the most excellent things that are in the Scripture attributed to Christ, are attributed to him not only under the notion, but also under the very name of a man; as to be a Mediator; to have ascended and been in heaven before his death and Resurrection; to have heard the truth from God; to be believed on unto eternal life; to forgive sins; to have all judgement, and therefore to be honoured as the Father; to be Lord of the Sabbath; to be the Author of the Resurrection; to be a quickening Spirit; to be the Lord from Heaven; to sand his Angels, and gather his Elect; to come in his kingdom, and render a reward to every man according to his doing; to have an everlasting dominion given to him, that all Nations may serve him. Why then should▪ we imagine another nature in him, besides his human, to sustain his great dignity? Observe also, that the Scripture in the aforesaid Quotations, whilst it calleth Christ a man, speaketh of him as a Person, in that it speaketh of him as a Mediator, ambassador, Saviour, Lord, Judge, or King, all which are the names of Persons; all actions and offices belonging to Persons onely, as such. Wherefore Christ according to his human nature is a Person and consequently( unless we will absurdly hold with Nestorius, that he hath two Persons) cannot be a Person in the divine nature. Deut. 18. 15. The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall harken. You see here that Christ( for this is a prophecy concerning him, as Peter testifieth, Acts 3. 22.) was to be a Prophet whom the Lord God of the Israelites should raise up unto them of their brethren, like unto Moses, and therefore did not ●lready exist in the time of Moses, much less was the Lord God, unless any one will be so absurd as to say, that the Lord God can raise up himself for a Prophet. Act. 2. 22, 23, 36. Jesus of Nazareth, a Man approved of God amongst you, by miracles, signs, and wonders, which God did by him in the midst of of you, as ye yourselves know: Him being delivered up by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands crucified and slain, whom God hath raised up from the dead, having loosed the bands( or rather, throes) of death, in that it was impossible he should be held by it. Wherefore being exalted by the right hand of God, and having received the promise of the Holy Spirit form the Father, He hath poured out this which ye now see and hear: Therefore let all the House of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made this very Jesus, whom ye have crucified, Lord and Christ. These words of the Apostle Peter( as well as those of Paul, Eph. 4. which were formerly discussed) give clear and full evidence, touching the several nature, order and dignity of the three Persons of the HOLY TRINITY. For first, in that Peter here calleth Jesus a Man, and saith, that God wrought miracles by him, this sheweth that he was not God himself, nor wrought miracles by his own proper power, which naturally resided in him; but was onely the instrument of God in working them. again, when he saith, that Jesus being exalted by the right hand of God, and having received the promise of the Holy Spirit from the Father, poured him out upon his Disciples; this argueth, that he gave the holy Spirit as a man, since he could neither be exalted by God, not receive the promise of the Holy Spirit from the Father, but as a man,( for according to the supp●sition of the Adversaries themselves, the holy Spirit proceedeth from Christ as he is God, as well as ●rom the Father) and consequently the holy Spirit ●●mself is so far from being God,( inasmuch as it is absurd, yea impossible that God should be received by promise from any one) as that he is not equal to Christ as man, since his exaltation, because he that is given and disposed of by another, must be inferior in dignity to him that giveth him. Finally, whereas he saith that God hath made this very Jesus, whom the Jews had crucified, Lord and Christ; this intimateth, that Jesus, as a man,( for neither could any other but a man be crucified) was made Lord by God, and therefore that his human nature is a Person,( since nothing bu● a Person can be made a Lord) so that we need no● feign to ourselves any other nature in Christ, besides his human nature, to sustain this Lordship of his; wherefore by this passage it plainly appeareth, That the TRINITY which the Apostle Peter believed, consisteth of God the Father, of the Man Jesus Christ our Lord, and of the holy Spirit, the Gift of God through our Lord Jesus Christ. Now shall the Apostle Peter, having before affirmed that Jesus was a man approved of God by miracles, which God did by him, afterwards say, Let all the House of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made him Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom ye have crucified, And shall I nevertheless be induced by I know not what forced consequences of Men, repugnant to reason, and the stream of the Scriptures, in despite of so signal an admonition proceeding from the in●●●lible inspiration of the holy Spirit, to believe that Christ, as to his nature, is not onely a man, but that very God which did those miracles ●y him, and made him Lord and Christ▪ Far and it. Isa. 9. 6. Unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given, and the Government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonder●…( by reason of his Exaltation, which is so strange and wonderful, that even the greatest part of Christians cannot believe it, and therefore imagine another nature in Christ, besides his human nature, as thinking a man uncapable of so transcendent an Exaltation,) Counsello●,( in acquainting us with all the Counsel of God,) a mighty God( by reason of the Divine Empire over all things, both in Heaven and on earth, conferred on him by the Father; agreeable whereunto, Paul called him a God over all, blessed for evermore, Rom. 9. 5.) a Father of the age,( in being the Author of the age to come, as both the Septuagint, and the old latin Interpreter expound it; or else a Father of Eternity, in being the Author of Eternal Life to all that obey him. For to render the words as the English Translators do, who here call Christ the everlasting Father, is to confounded the Person of the Son with that of the Father, and so to introduce Sabellianism,) the Prince of Peace. When the Prophet here saith, That the Child which was to be born to us, and the Son that was to be given to us, shall be called a mighty God, He sufficiently intimateth, that Christ in his human nature should be a mighty God, so that we need not fancy any other nature in him. John 20. 27, 28. Then saith he( Jesus) to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and lo my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side, and be not faithless, but believing▪ And Thomas said unto him, My Lord, and my God. Observe how Thomas here calleth that man Jesus, whom he saw and felt, his Lord, and his God; but directeth not his speech to I know not what second Person o● subsistence of God, which he neither saw nor felt, nor indeed ever was in rerum natura. Joh. 10. 33, 34, 35, 36. The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we ston thee not, but for blasphemy, and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself a God( so it is in the Gr.) Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your Law, I said, Ye are Gods? If he called them Gods unto whom the word of God came, and the Scripture cannot be broken: Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent in●o the world, Thou blasphemest, because I said, I am the Son of God? Had Christ been endowed with a divine nature, besides his human, and did his Godhead consist therein( as the Adversaries affirm) it would have been necessary, for answering the Jews, here to have declared it. They objected unto Christ the crime of blasphemy, for that he being a man, made himself a God; doth he therefore, to decline the imputation of blasphemy, resort to an eternal Generation, or Hypostatical union of natures, saying, If he call them Gods, to whom the word of God came, say ye of him, whom the Father eternally bego● ou● of his substance, so that he is very God of very God, coessential, coeternal, coequal with the Father, and in whom the human nature is Hypostatically united to the divine, Thou blasphemest, because I said, I am the Son of God? Nothing less. But on the contrary, he sheweth that he is therefore the Son of God, and consequently a God, because the Father had sanctified him and sent him into the world, and so not for having the divine Nature united to the human, but for the sanctification of the Father: Mat. 1. 20. Joseph thou Son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her, is of the Holy Spirit. Had Christ had a Divine Nature in being the eternal Son of God, the Angel would not have  told Joseph, that what was conceived in the womb of his Wife, was of the Holy Spirit, otherwise not only the human Nature of the eternal Son of God, but the very eternal Son himself,( for the Adversaries hold that he was conceived and born of the Virgin Mary,) would be of the Holy Spirit, and so Christ not onely as Man, but also as the eternal Son of God, be caused by the Holy Spirit. The latter of which( though flowing from their opinion touching the Nature and Conception of Christ,) is yet denied by the Adversaries; and so should the former too, since he that was the eternal Son of God, coessential with the Father, if he would be incarnated, needed not the assistance of the Holy Spirit to furnish him with a human 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 time idle. This consideration is so forcible, that Justin Martyr, pressed with the difficulty thereof, saith in his Apology to the Roman Emperour, that by the Holy Spirit which came upon the Virgin, and caused her conception, is at no hand to be understood any other then the Word or Son of God; contrary to the perpetual usage of the Scripture, which by the Holy Spirit always meaneth, not the Second but the Third Person of the HOLY TRINITY. Moreover, were the opinion of the Adversaries true, that the Son of God came down and took a human Nature of the Virgin, the Angel Gabriel, when the Virgin demanded of him, how she should conceive, would not have answered, Luke 1. 35. The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall ov●rshadow thee: therefore also that Holy thing which shall be born of thee, shall be called the Son of God: But, the Son of God shall come upon thee, and the eternal Word shall overshadow thee: therefore also that Holy thing which shall be born of thee, being assumed into the unity of the Person of the eternal Word, shall be called the Son of God. Act. 10. 38. God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit, and with power, who went a●out doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil: for God was with him. Luke 22. 48. And there appeared an Angel to him( Christ) from Heaven, strengthening him. Mat. 27. 46. Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, My God, My God, Why hast thou forsaken me? What need was there that the 
Justin Martyr is exceedingly puzzelled with this objection, in his conference with Trypho.  holy Spirit should be given unto Christ, to enable him to do miracles; and an Angel appear from heaven unto him to strengthen him; or why should he so earnestly expostulate with God for forsaking him, if Christ were he, by whom the First Creation was performed, had a Divine Nature, and was God himself? Could not he that first created the World, do miracles without being empowered by another? would it be said of him that had the Divine Nature, that he did miracles, because God was with him, and not rather, because he was God? or needed he in his agony to be strengthened by an Angel? would not the Divine Nature in Christ, at this rate, be in the mean time idle and useless? could he that was very God himself, cry-out, My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me? was he his own God, and had forsaken himself? These things have I here set down, out of Zeal to the true Son of God, the Man Christ Jesus, that the Adversaries may by this means be brought to bethink themselves, and not substitute a false one in his stead, namely an eternal Son begotten out of the substance of God, whereas there is no place in the Scripture that either saith, or intimateth any such thing. But they will say, that if Christ were not God, he could not satisfy for our sins: which reason overthroweth itself, and sheweth their opinion concerning the Divine Nature of Christ to be fictitious. For how can God satisfy God? can any one make satisfaction to himself? Neither will it relieve them, to reply, that there are several Persons in God, and so the Second satisfied the First. For if there be Three Persons to whom we are indebted, and but one of them satisfied, we are in as bad a condition as before, in that we stand in need of some one to make satisfaction to the Second and Third Persons in God. If they further answer, that the Second freely forgiveth us; This will make Him more bountiful then the First, who would not do it without receiving full satisfaction. But this Doctrine of the satisfaction of Christ, as well as that of his two Natures whereon it is( though very ruinously) built, is a mere device of Men, for neither is it expressed in Scripture, nor can solidly be deduced from thence, a● I could quickly show, were it not besides the business in hand.   

Article IV.  
Whence, though he be our God, by reason of his Divine sovereignty over us, and Worship due to such sovereignty, yet is he not the most high God, the same with the Father, but subordinate to Him.  
John 20. 17. I( Jesus) ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. Eph. 1. 17. The God of our Lord Iesus Christ, the Father of glory. Heb. 1. 8, 9. But to the Son( or rather, of the Son) he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever, a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom. Thou lovedst righteousness, and hatedst iniquity, therefore God,( or rather, O God,) thy God, hath anointed thee with oil of gladness above thy Fellows. In these places which we have cited, Christ as he is the Son of God, and Lord, yea God, is said to have a God, and therefore cannot be the most High God. Neither will this seem strange to him that considereth the language of the Scripture, which expressly maketh mention of the most High God, Heb. 7. 1. Melchisedeck King of Salem, Priest of the most High God, and calleth the LORD the God of Gods, Deut. 10. 17. The Lord your God is God of Gods, and Lord of Lords: Both which places show that there is one, by way of Excell●n●y, or in the most perfect manner called God, but others in a way of subordination, or less perfect manner, amongst whom Christ himself,( though otherwise far surpassing the rest,) is notwithstanding ranked, as this place of the Hebrews doth evince beyond all gainsaying, in that it speaketh of Christ as a God, when it saith he hath a God; so that there is no place left for the Adversaries to baffle, telling us that this is spoken of Christ as man, or according to his human Nature. Now for the further clearing of this matter, I will here exactly unfold the Appellation of God, as I find it delineated in the Scripture: for many being ignorant thereof, hold very great and inexplicable errors, touching the Godhead of Christ. First therefore, the Appellation of Go● denoteth him that hath a supernatural liv●ng substance, as Isai. 31. 3. The Egyptians are Men, and no● God, and their Horses Fl●sh, and not spirit. Ezek. 28. 2. 9. Because thy heart is lifted up, and thou( Prince of Tyrus) hast said, I am a God, I sit in the seat of God, in the midst of the seas; yet thou art a Man, and not a God, though thou set thine heart as the heart of God. Wilt thou say before him that slayeth thee, I am a God? But thou shalt be a Man, and no God, in the hand of him that slayeth thee. Which words plainly intimate that by God is here meant a supernatural living substance, that cannot dy, whereas every Natural living substance may be slain. Thus is the LORD called God, and also the Angels, in that they are immortal. Secondly, him that hath a supernatural Dominion, or such a Dominion as is not managed in a natural and Visible way, but in a hidden manner, exceeding the l●mits of nature. As Numb. 27. 16. Let the LORD, the God of the Spirits of all flesh, set a man over the Congregation. Therefore the God of the Spirits of men, because he ruleth over them. But such rule o● dominion is more then natural, for they that exercise a natural or civil dominion, have power over the flesh onely; hence Paul saith, Eph. 6. 5. S●rvants be obedient to your Masters( or, Lords) according to the flesh, opposing them to the Lord of their Spirits. In this sense is the Lord also said to be the God of Gods, Psal. 136. 2. [ O give thanks to the God of Gods: for his m●rcy ●ndureth for ever:] because he exerciseth dominion over the Angels. Psal. 103. 20. [ Bless the LORD ye his Angels that excel in strength, that do his command●m●nts, harkening to the voice of his word:] but Angels,( as we formerly h●nted) are in the Scripture called Gods, as Psal. 97. 7. Worship him, all ye Gods. This cannot be meant of Idols, for then the Psalmist, who everywhere detesteth Idols, should here bid them worship God; wherefore it is meant of Angels: see also Psal. 8. 5. Thou hast made Him( man) a little lower then the Angels( Heb. then the Gods, for so the word Elohim, here used, signifieth.) Now the dominion which the Lord exerciseth over Angels is not natural or civil, but exceeding the limits of nature, in that the very subjects of this dominion are supernatural. Thirdly, him that hath a subl●me dominion conferred on him in a supernatural way; thus Moses is called a God, Exod. 7. 1. [ And the Lord said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a God( Heb. Elohim) to Pharaoh.] and nabuchadnezzar, Ezek. 31. 11. [ I have therefore delivered him ( Pharaoh) into the hand of the mighty one of the Heathen,( Heb. into the hand of the God of the Nations, Bejad El Gojim) meaning, nabuchadnezzar, as appeareth from chap. 30. 24.] for Moses had his dominion bestowed on him immediately by God, as the text itself sheweth, so also had nabuchadnezzar; see Jer. 27. 4, 5, 6. Thus saith the Lord of Hosts, the God of Israel, I have made the earth, the man, and the beast that are upon the ground, by my power, and by my outstretched arm, and have given it to whom it seemed meet to me. And now have I given all these Lands into the hand of nabuchadnezzar the King of Babylon my Servant, and the beasts of the field have I given him also to serve him. Fourthly, him that is a bestower of supernatural benefits. Thus is the LORD called the God of Abraham, the God of Isaak, and the God of Jacob, Exod. 3. 6. because he,( as the divine Author to the Hebrews expoundeth it) hath prepared for them a City, even the heavenly Jerusalem, Heb. 11, 16. Fifthly, him that is a sovereign Benefactor, bestowing benefits,( though in themselves natural) yet in a supernatural way, As Gen. 17. 8. And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the Land wherein thou art a stranger, all the Land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God. Therefore their God, because he gave them the Land of Canaan, which was done in a supernatural way. For they got not the Land in possession by their own sword, neither did their own arm save them: but thy right hand, and thy arm, and the light of thy countenance, because thou hadst a favour to them, Psalm 44. 3. see also Exo. 23. 23. Mine Angel shall go before thee, and bring thee in unto the Amorites, and the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Canaanites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, and I will cut them off. In all these respects is Christ now rightly styled a God, having a supernatural, spiritual, and immortal substance; a sublime dominion conferred on him in a supernatural way, even by God raising him up from the dead, and setting him at his own right hand in the heavenly places; yea a supernatural dominion, even over Angels and the Spirits of men; being also a sovereign benefactor, as bestowing benefits( though in themselves natural, as health, and the like) yet in a supernatural way; yea bestowing supernatural benefits also, as the eternal inheritance, and the pledge thereof, the holy Spirit. Neither was he destitute of supernatural dominion, but was a God even wh●lest he conversed with men upon the earth; for he had not only authority over diseases and devils to cure where, and when, and whom he pleased, but could give authority to his Disciples to cure diseases and cast out devils, and that in his name. See Luke 9. 1. Then he( Christ) called his twelve Disciples together, and gave them power and authority over all Devils, and to cure diseases. Luke 10. 16. And the seventy returned again with joy, saying, Lord, even the Devils are subject unto us through( Gr. in) thy name. Yea some that did not follow him, and so were not his Disciples, could notwithstanding cast out Devils in his name. Luke 9. 49. John answered and said, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and we forbade him, because he followeth not with us. And this( to give a hint by the way to them who are inquisitive after the truth) putteth a manifest difference between the manner wherein Christ gave power to the Disciples to cure and cast out Devils, and the manner wherein the holy Spirit; for we red expressly, 1 Cor. 12. 9, 10. That the holy Spirit gave the gifts of healing, and the operations of miracles,( or, as the Gr. hath it, of mighty works.) Amongst which mighty works, the casting out of Devils is comprehended. For Christ gave them power to cure diseases and cast out Devils, in his name; see Act. 3. 6. Then Peter said( to the Cripple) Silver and Gold have I none, bu● such as I have, I give thee: In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, rise up and walk: and Act. 16. 18. Paul being grieved, turned, and said to the Spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And he came out the same hour. But we never red that any of the Disciples did ever perform cures, or cast out Devils in the name of the holy Spirit. But let us now proceed to other testimonies of the Scripture, from whence it may appear, that though Christ be a God, yet he is not the most high God; see Isa. 9. 6, 7. Unto us a Child is born, and unto us a Son is given, and the Government shall be upon his shoulder; and his name shall be called Wonderful, counselor, a mighty God,( so it is in the Original, which hath simply El Gibbor, not Ha●l Haggibbor, the mighty God, as the Lord of hosts is styled, Jer. 32. 18.) a Father of the Age,( or, of Eternity) a Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and over his kingdom, to order it and stablish it with judgement and with justice, from henceforth even for ever; the zeal of the Lord of Hosts will perform this. In this passage it is remarkable, that the Prophet, after he had called Christ( for undoubtedly this place doth in the full and perfect sense of the words agree to him, though it might in a restrained manner be applied to Hezekiah) after, I say, he had called Christ a mighty God, and given him other excellent and divine eulogies, he saith in the close of all, that the Zeal of the Lord of Hosts will perform this; thereby distinguishing Christ from the Lord of Hosts, and making his Godhead dependant on the bounty of the Lord of Hosts, who would out of his Zeal cause Christ to become a mighty God: so that Christ is not the most High God, but a God subordinate to him; which shall be further made appear from the other texts of the Scripture, wherein Christ hath the Appellation of God given to him. The first is, Rom. 9. 5. where the Apostle speaketh in this manner; Whose are the Fathers, and of whom according to the flesh Christ came, who is over all a God to be blessed for ●ver. A God, so the Greek hath it, wherein 〈◇〉 is put without an Article; and were it here used as a proper name,( for so it sometimes is in the Scripture) the words over all would be needless( being implyed in it) nor could be construed with the same, for is it congruous to say, Who is Moses, or David over all? Neither let the Adversaries here object that Jehovah is a proper name, and yet it is often said in the Scripture, Jehovah S●baoth, that is, Jehovah, or the Lord of Hosts: for it is evident from the Scripture, that in this expression there is a defect of the word God, as appeareth from 1 Chron. 11. 9. [ so David waxed greater and greater: for the LORD of Hosts was with him.] compared with 2 Sam. 5. 10. And David went on and grew great, and the LORD God of Hosts was with him. Wherefore the foresaid passage of the Romans doth not show that Christ is the most High God, but rather the contrary, especially because the place of the Hebrews; which we formerly discussed, plainly giveth us to understand, that Christ is so a God over all, as that he himself in the mean time hath a God. For that he is not a God over all none excepted, is apparent, for then he would be a God over the Father also, which every one will confess to be most false. But we ourselves readily grant that he is a God over all save the Father, who hath set him at his own right hand in the Heavenly places, for above all Principality, and Authority, and Power, and Dominion, and every name name not only in this world, but also in that to come. And hath put all things in subjection under his feet, and given him head over all things to the Church, and so made him a God over all, such dignity not being civil, but Divine; Eph. 1. 20, 21, 22. and who is therefore not only in the 17 verse of the same chap. but elsewhere frequently styled by the Apostle, the God of our Lord Jesus Christ. Furthermore( that we may add this consideration also, which will not a little clear that passage of the Romans, and confirm our Assertion concerning the Godhead of Christ) when the Apostle saith that Christ came of the Fathers according to the Flesh, who is over all a God to be blessed for ever, the opposition is not entire and exact, as wanting the other member. What that member is, another passage of the Apostle, wherein you have the same opposition in describing Christ, will inform you, It is Rom. 1. 3, 4. Concerning his Son Jesus Christ, our Lord, who was made( or rather, born) of the seed of David according to the Flesh, and declared to be the Son of God with power( Gr. determined, or ordained Son of God in power) according to the Spirit of Holiness, by the resurrection from the Dead. Here you see that to those words, according to the Flesh, are opposed these, according to the Spirit of Holiness. Again, what this Spirit of Holiness is, will be no hard matter to find out, if we consider, that as the Flesh signifieth a constituting part of Christ, namely his Fleshly Body; so also must the Spirit of Holiness, opposed thereunto, signify a constituting part. If so, then it is not the Holy Spirit, as eveone will confess, Nor the Reasonable soul of Christ, because he is intimated to have had this Spirit by means of the Resurrection from the dead, whereas he had a Reasonable Soul before his death. Nor the Divine Nature, for that is nowhere in the Scripture designed by the name of Spirit, or Spirit of Holiness. Besides, the Adversaries hold, that Christ had the Divine Nature whilst he was yet clothed with Flesh. It remaines therefore that by Spirit of Holiness, which Christ had by means of the Resurrection of the dead, and is a constituting part of him, is to be understood his Holy Spiritual Body; whereby he is excepted from other men, being the first-born from the dead, or the first that so rose from the dead, as that he never dyed again, but was clothed with a Spiritual Body, and made like to God, who is a Spirit. And now the sense of that passage beginneth to appear, Heb. 9. 14. How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the Eternal Spirit( Gr: through an Eternal Spirit, for no Article is prefixed,) offered himself without spot to God, purge your consciences from dead works to serve the living God? By Eternal Spirit, is here meant the Spiritual Body of Christ, which lasteth to all Eternity; and this expression is opposed to what the same Divine Author speaketh of Christ; Heb. 5. 7. Who in dayes of his Flesh, &c. for Eternal is contrary to dayes, and Spirit to Flesh. Neither will that which we have here spoken seem strange to him, who having penetrated into that Profound Epistle to the Hebrews, knoweth( what is there frequently intimated) that Christ then made his offering for our sins, when, after his Resurrection, he entred into Heaven, and being endowed with a Sp●ritual and Immortal Body, presented himself before God. For so the Type of the Levitical High Priest making the yearly atonement for the sins of the People ( Levit. 16.) did require. For as the atonement was not then made, when he slay the Beasts, but when, having put on his Linen Robes, he brought their blood into the sanctuary before the mercy-seat: so neither did Christ offer his sacrifice for our sins upon the across; but when after his Resurrection, being clothed with Robes of Glory and Immortality, he entred into Heaven, the true Sanctuary, and presented himself to God. Wherefore( to return to the foresaid passage, Rom. 9. 5) when it is here said, Of whom according to the Fl●sh( for so the Greek hath it) Christ came, who is over all a God to be blessed for ever, we ought( by the Authority of the Apostle himself) to supply in our mind the other member of the opposition, and to understand the place, as if it had been said, who ●cco●ding to the Spirit of Holiness by the Resurrection from the dead, is over all a God blessed for ever. But if Christ be according to the Spirit of Holiness by the Resurrection from the dead,( that is) according to his Holy Spiritual Body which he received by means of the Resurrection from the dead, the Son of God in power, and accordingly a God over all, he is not the Son of God in power, and accordingly a God over all, by having the Divine Nature personally united to his human Nature, but by the Glorification and Exaltation of his very human Nature, and so is not the most High God, but a God subordinate to Him.  
The next place is that, John 20. 28, 29. And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord, and my God. Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed. The words of Christ plainly show that Thomas believed him to be his Lord, and his God, because he had seen him, being raised from the dead. Doth this now argue Christ to be the most High God? Yea it strongly proveth the contrary, in that the Scripture elsewhere calleth the most High God, Invisible, 1 Tim. 1. 17. and saith, that none of men( so the Greek hath it) hath seen, nor can see him, 1 Tim. 6. 14, 15, 16. whereas on the contrary it calleth Christ the Image of the invisible God, Col. 1. 15. But it is impossible for him that is the Invisible God, to be the Image of the Invisible God, unless any man will be so absurd as to say, that he is the Image of himself. John 1. 1. In the beginning( not of the World, but of the Gospel, see Mark. 1. 1. Luke 1. 2. and 1 Joh. 1. 1. and Chap. 2. 7, 13, 14, 24. and 3. 11. and Epist. 2. 5. 6. for these words [ in the beginning] are wont to be restrained to the matter in hand, which here is the Gospel, as appeareth from the very appellation of the Word, which is here given to Christ, in regard of his Prophetical Office, in publishing the Gospel) was the word( that is, the Man Christ Jesus called the Word, in that He was the ●mmediate Interpreter of God, by whom and revealed his Counsel touching our Salvation, as we are wont to disclose our secrets by our words; which reason may not obscurely be collected from the 18. v●rs. o● the same Chapter,) and the Word was wi●● Go●,( being taken up into Heaven, that so that h● might talk with God, and be indeed his Word, or the immediate Interpreter of his Will, and receive the most certain and absolute knowledge of the Kingdom of Heaven, which he was to propose to men: see Joh. 6. 38, 46, 51, 62. where Christ affirmeth, That he came down from Heaven, and had seen God: and that as he was the living bread, which came down from Heaven, whereof whosoever did eat, should live for ever; so the bread which he would give, was his flesh, which he would give for the life of the wo●ld: And afterwards asketh the Jews, What if they should see the Son of Man ascending up where he was before? namely, before he began to preach the Gospel, as he himself intimateth, Joh. 8. 42. where he saith, If God were your Father, ye would love me, for I went out from God, and came; for neither came I of myself, but He sent me. And John 16. 28. where he saith, I came out from the Father, and came into the world: Again( or rather, on the contrary) I leave the world, and go to the Father. Which going forth from the Father, every one may easily perceive, by the opposition of the following clause, is meant of a local Procession of Christ from God; and that before the discharge of his Embassy: for to come, or to come into the world, signifieth to treat with men in the name of God, and to perform a public office among them; See joh. 1. 15, 27. 30. and 1 joh. 5. 20. Mat. 11. 3, 18, 19. Joh. 17. 18. compared with Chap. 16. 21. and Chap. 18. 37. And the word was a God,( as being endowed with divine Power and Empire,) for according to the reasoning of Christ himself, Joh. 10. 35. If the Psalmist call them Gods, to whom the vocal word of God came, and the Scripture cannot be broken,( as it would, if any one should deny them be Gods:) is not he much more a God, who is endowed with so divine a dominion, that he is the very substantial Word of God? This passage also sheweth, that Christ is not the most high God, the same with the Father. For when he is said to have been with God, the word [ God] there, by the confession of all, signifieth the most high God,( since the very article set before it in the Greek, importeth so much) and therefore when He himself is afterwards said to be a God,( with the omission of the foresaid article in the Greek) neither will the words, nor thing itself, suffer Christ to be the same God with Him, with whom he was;( that is, the most High God) for then he would have been said to be with himself, which is ridiculous. So that these words, which are usually brought to prove the supreme Divinity of Christ, being well examined, do quiter overthrow it. Thus have we retorted all the places of the Scripture, wherein the appellation of God is given to Christ, against the Adversaries, showing from them that Christ is not the most High God. But were all that we have said, laid aside, this very thing( if men had not renounced their Reason, and made Nonsense the Mother of their Devotion) is sufficient to decide the controversy, namely, that Christ is called in the Scripture the Son of the most High God. For if he be both the Son of the most High God, and the most High God too, he will be the Son of himself, which is absurd.   

Article V.  
Again, though he be a God, subordinate to the most High God, as having received his Godhead, and whatsoever he hath, from the Father; yet may not any one thence rightly infer, that by this account there will be another God, or two Gods. For though we may, with allowance of the Scripture, say, that there are many Gods, yet neither will the Scripture, nor the thing itself permit us to say, that there is another God, or two Gods: because when a word in its own nature common to many, hath been appropriated, and ascribed to one by way of Excellency,( as that of God hath been to the Father,) albeit this doth not hinder us from saying, that there are many of that name, yet doth it from saying, that there is another, or two, since that would be all one as if we should say, that there is another, or two most Excellent,( which is absurd,) for when two are sogregated in this manner out of many, they claim Excellency to themselves alike. Thus though some faithful man be a Son of God, subordinate to the chief Son of God Christ Iesus, yet may we not thereupon say, that there is another Son of God, or two Sons of God,( since that would be to make another, or two Sons of God by way of Excellency, whereas there can be but one such a Son) howbeit otherwise the Scripture warrant us to say, that there are many Sons of God.  
1 Cor. 8. 4, 5, 6. We know that there is no Idol ( so the Greek hath it) in the world, and that there is no other God but one. For though there be called Gods, ( so the Greek hath it) whether in the Heaven, or on the Earth,( as there are many Gods, and many Lords:) Yet to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all the things, ( so the Greek hath it) and we for him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all the things, and we by him. Heb. 2. 10. It became Him, for whom are all the things, ( so the Greek hath it) and by whom are all the things, ( that is, God) in bringing many Sons to Glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.   

Article VI.  
I believe that there is one principal Minister of God and Christ, peculiarly sent from Heaven to sanctify the Church, who, by reason of his eminency and intimacy with God, is singled out of the number of the other heavenly Ministers or Angels, and comprised in the Holy TRINITY, being the third person thereof; and that this Minister of God and Christ is the holy Spirit.  
John 14. 26. But the Comforter,( or rather, Advocate, as the word in the Greek importeth, and Beza accordingly rendereth it, Advocatus) which is the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will sand in my name, He shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. Where note by the way, that the holy Spirit is called the Advocate( which very appellation sufficiently intimates, that he is not that supreme and independent Monarch Jehovah,) chiefly for two Reasons. 1. Because he instructeth the Saints, especially when they are brought before persecuting Rulers, how to pled their own, and their Master Christs cause: See Mat. 10. 17, 18, &c. John 16. 7. &c. In opposition whereunto, the unclean Spirit Satan is called the adversary, 1 Pet. 5. 8. namely, in that he suggesteth slanders, and false accusations to the men of this world, against Christ and his people; see John 8. 38, 44. Secondly, Because when the Saints sink under some great pressure and affliction, and are at a loss, not knowing which way to turn themselves, nor what to pray for as they ought, then comes in the holy Spirit to their assistance, and intercedeth with most earnest and unexpressible groans to God in their behalf, Rom. 8. 26, 27. In opposition whereunto, the unclean Spirit, Satan, is called the Accuser of the Brethren, in that he accuseth them night and day before the throne of God, Rev. 12. 10. Job 1. 9. and chap. 2. 4, 5. Note also, that the holy Spirit is said to be sent, and that in the name of another, yea of a man( since not onely the thing itself, but also the whole tenor of Christs discourse intimateth, that he speaks of himself as a man,) but it is absurd to say, that the most High God can be sent,( since that is proper to inferiors and Ministers;) more absurd yet to say, that he can be sent in the name of another; but most absurd of all to say, that he can be sent in the name of a man. Joh. 15. 26. But when the Advocate is come, whom I will sand you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, that proceedeth( or, goeth out) from the Father, He shall testify of me. This description of the holy Spirit, namely, that he proceedeth from the Father, serveth to show both the Reason of our Saviours former words, wherein he had said that He would sand the holy Spirit from the Father, and also that the holy Spirit is of most intimate admission with the Father; and as I may so speak, Legatus a later. And indeed, were not men blinded with Romish Tradition, they would never draw such a monstrous conclusion from these words, as they are wont to do, namely, because the holy Spirit is here said to proceed from the Father, that therefore he receiveth the the Divine Essence, and consequently is God, by eternal procession from the Father,( for as for his procession from the Son, though that be rise in mens mouths, yet doth not the Scripture make mention of it anywhere:) Which Essential and Eternal Procession is not onely in itself absurd, but hath also no good footing in this text,( nor pretendeth to have footing in any other,) and is therefore to be rejected, as a bold and senseless figment of mans brain. For observe that it is not here said of the holy Spirit, 〈◇〉, he proceedeth out of the Father,( though even then that Essential Procession could not have solidly been inferred thence, for 〈◇〉, or( which is all one) 〈◇〉, being spoken of a Person, is wont to be understood of a Local Procession; See John 8. 42. Act. 15. 24. 1 John 2. 19.) but 〈◇〉, i. he proceedeth from the Father. Now 〈◇〉, i. to proceed from one, being spoken of a person, every puny in Greek can tell signifieth his going from ones house, or presence, and so intimates onely a Local Procession; which made Beza, in his Annotations on this place, ingenuously confess, that this Description concerneth not the Essence of the holy Spirit. Wherefore this place is so far from proving, that it quiter subverteth the supposed Deity of the holy Spirit, since, if he were God, he could not locally proceed from any one, inasmuch as he would then not onely be in anothers Mansion, but also change place; whereas God, by the confession of all, as he cannot be in any Mansion that is not his own, so neither doth he shift place: John 16. 7, 8, &c. Nevertheless, I tell you the truth; it is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Advocate will not come unto you: but if I depart, I will sand him to you. And when he is come, he shall convince the world of sin, of righteousness, and of Judgement. I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit, when He, the Spirit of truth, is come, he shall led you into all the truth( namely, of those things which Christ had yet to say to them;) for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak,( which words clearly intimate, that the holy Spirit could not led the Disciples into all the truth of those things that Christ had yet to say to them, unless they were first disclosed to the Spirit himself by Christ) and he shall show you things to come. He shall glorify me, for he shall receive of mine, and show it to you. This thing doth indeed set forth the transcendent glory of Christ, namely, that whereas he himself, while he lead a mortal life here on the earth, was wont in many things to be taught by the Spirit; See Isa. 11. 1, 2. yet after his Exaltation, he should not onely sand the holy Spirit, but also give him Instructions concerning what he was to make known unto the Disciples. The fulfilling whereof may be seen in the three first Chapters of the Revelation. For he that there speaketh to John, is not Jesus Christ himself, both because in the entrance of Chap. 1. it is said that Jesus Christ signified the Revelation to his servant John, not by himself, but sending by his Angel; and also because in the 13 verse of the same Chap. John saith that he saw one like to the Son of Man; but if so, then he was not the Son of man himself. Who that Angel therefore is that there speaketh to John, in the person and name of Christ, may easily be gathered from the Epiphonema, or Acclamation, put at the close of every Epistle directed to the seven Asian Churches, where the Angel having before spoken in the person of Christ, now speaketh in his own person, saying, He that hath an ear to hear, let him hear, what the Spirit saith unto the Churches; thereby sufficiently giving us to understand that he was the holy Spirit, who being appointed by Christ to guide and instruct his people, ought to be hearkned to. Eph. 4. 4, 5, 6. There is one Body, and one Spirit, even as ye have been called in one Hope of your calling; One Lord, one Faith, one baptism; One God and Father of all, who is over all, and among all, and in you all, 1 Cor. 12. 4, 5, 6. There are diversities of Gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are diversities of Administrations, but the same Lord. And there are diversities of Operations, but it is the same God that worketh all in all,( namely, as the primary Author; whereas the Lord Jesus worketh them as the secondary efficient; and the holy Spirit as the instrument, to whom, as being a most wise and faithful Steward and Deputy( they are the Expressions of 
* Praescr. Adv. Haeret. chap. 28.  Tertullian, who truly and appositely called the holy Spirit, Patris villicum, Christi vicarium) God and Christ gave leave, for the confirmation of the Gospel, to distribute the spiritual Gifts here specified, according to his own will, as you may see both in the 11 verse of this very chapter, and Heb. 2. 3.) These two passages, though we could produce no others out of the Scripture, are abundantly sufficient to refute the vulgar opinion touching the Deity of the holy Spirit, since the Apostle doth expressly and purposely distinguish him from that one God, and that one Lord of Christians. But if he be neither that one God, nor that one Lord of Christians, certainly he can be no other then a ministering Spirit. Wherefore it is palpably evident from hence, that the TRINITY, which the Apostle Paul believed, consisteth of one God, one Lord, & one Spirit, but not of three persons in one God; otherwise God himself will be one of the three persons in God, which is absurd. So that those Christians that pretend( and indeed they do but pretend) to admit nothing but the Scripture for the rule of their Faith, may be ashamed to swerve from the Apostles doctrine in a thing so plainly and positively delivered by him, and which so nearly concerneth both the glory of God, and the salvation of men; since this very opinion of three Persons in God, is not onely the source of almost all the Errors commonly held amongst Christians, which are many and gross, but also the main stumbling-block that keepeth many thousands from entering into the Church of Christ, in that they apprehended this to be the Error of the Christian Religion itself, whereas it is onely the Error of those that profess it. 1 Cor. 2. 10, 11. But God hath revealed them to us by his Spirit,( mark how the Spirit is not onely distinguished from God, but also made the instrument whereby he revealeth the Mysteries of the Gospel,) for the Spirit searcheth all things( that is, all things pertaining to the salvation of men, for the word [ all] is wont to be restrained to the matter in hand; thus in verse 15. of this very chap. the spiritual man is said to judge or discern all things) even the depths of God:( Thus some men are said to be acquainted with the depths of Satan, Rev. 2. 24.) For who of men knoweth the things of a man, save the Spirit of man that is in him? Even so the things of God knoweth none but the Spirit of God:( He doth not add as before, that is in him.) When the Apostle here saith, That none knoweth the things of God but the Spirit of God, The exclusive particle [ none] is put to exclude some persons; those persons must of necessity be either human, Angelical, or Divine, since no other persons are to be found. Not human Persons, for then the holy Spirit will be in the number of men,( which is absurd,) since that onely is wont to be excepted, which is otherwise comprehended under the general name, and which, if it had not expressly been excepted, would have been thought to be included. Not Divine Persons, for then the second Person, which is commonly held, will be excluded: For if no Divine Person know the things of God,( that is, of the Father, for he, by the confession of all, is here signified by the name of God) but the Spirit, then the second Person would not know them, which overturneth the supposition of the Adversaries, touching the three Persons of God. It remaineth therefore that the exclusive particle [ none] is here made use of to exclude Angelical Persons, and consequently, that the holy Spirit is in the number of Angels, otherwise he needed not to have been by name excepted. Whence we may collect, That of all the heavenly Ministers the holy Spirit was first made acquainted with the secrets of God, touching the Gospel, and accordingly he above others was employed in revealing them to the Apostles, according to the reasoning of Paul himself in this place: which thing argueth his intimacy with God, and eminency above all the rest of the heavenly Host; and likewise affordeth us the reason, why he in the Scripture is sometimes exempted out of the appellation of Angels; it being usual for one to be exempted out of the appellation of those of his kind, by reason of some excellency. Thus Peter is segregated from the Apostles, because he had the pre-eminence among them, 1 Cor. 9. 5. And Saul is distinguished from the Enemies of David, not because he was none of them, but in that he was the chief of them, Psal. 18. 1. And upon the same account Christ Jesus is sometimes in the Scripture distinguished from men; see Gal. 1. 1, 12. Heb. 7. 28. And these things,( Christian Reader) have I urged, supposing the holy Spirit to be a Person, as most of the Adversaries hold. Yet forasmuch as some( who otherwise assent to the truth concerning the holy Spirit) mistake in denying his Personality, I think good here to confirm it. Consider therefore the places which I have cited out of the 14, 15, and 16 of John, and when thou hast seriously, laying aside all prejudice, so done, it will be impossible for thee( especially being thus admonished) to embrace either the opinion of Athanasius, who held the holy Spirit to be a Person of supreme Deity, or that of Socinus, who believed him to be the divine power or efficacy, but no Person. The Error of Athanasius I have already briefly in this Article confuted, but more largely in the foregoing twelve Arguments. As for that of Socinus, tell me, whosoever thou art that adherest thereunto, whether Christ would have called the holy Spirit, the Advocate, if he had not been a Person? can any thing but a Person discharge such an Office, have such a title? Thou wilt say, David calleth the Testimonies of God, his Counsellors, Psa. 119. 24. Right. But doth he so call them Counsellors, as Christ calleth the holy Spirit Advocate? doth he put the word Counsellors simply and by itself, or( as the learned phrase it) subjectively, for the Testimonies of God? doth he say, I will speak of the Counsellors, or turn my feet to the Counsellors, or I have kept the Counsellors, thereby intending the Testimones of God? But Christ saith, If I go not away, the Advocate will not come, and I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Advocate, and when the Advocate is come, whom I will sand you from the Father, thereby meaning( as he explains himself) the holy Spirit. Thou wilt reply, that wisdom, Prov. 8. is brought in as a Person, which notwithstanding is no Person. But how can it be made appear that by wisdom in this place is not meant a Person, by a metonymy or transnomination called wisdom? Certainly the circumstances of the place intimate the contrary: for thus wisdom speaketh, I love them that love me, and those that seek me early shall find me. The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. I was set up( or, anointed, as the Hebrew word signifieth) from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was. When there were no depths, I was brought forth( or, formed,) when there were no fountains abounding with water, When he prepared the heavens, I was there, when he appointed the foundations of the earth: Then was I by him, as one brought up with him( Heb. a Foster-child, or( as the Septuagint intimate) an Artist) and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him: rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth, and my delights were with the sons of men. Is it possible for the wit of man, with any probab●lity to device how these things should be applied to that which is no Person? Who this Person is, I have formerly shown, even the Person under contestation, the holy Spirit, who moved on the waters, when God was about to create the world; whose delights are with the sons of men; and he accordingly called the Spirit of grace, for the favour that he beareth towards them; who may aptly be called wisdom, and say, Counsel is mine, I have strength; being the Spirit of Wisdom, counsel, and might, or strength, as Isaiah, chap. 11. testifieth. again, how could Christ say, that the Spirit should not speak of himself, but what he should hear, if he were not a Person? how, that he should receive of his, and declare it to the Disciples? Certainly they that adhere to the doctrine of Socinus touching Christ( wherein without question that man saw the truth) must either renounce it, and return to Athanasius, or embrace this which I hold touching the Person of the holy Spirit. For is it imaginable that the holy Spirit, being the power and efficacy of God, immediately flowing out of his Essence, should hear from Christ, and receive of his, when in the mean time neither is himself a Person, nor hath Christ the same divine Essence? Furthermore, how could the holy Spirit search all things, even the depths of God? 1 Cor. 2. How make intercession for the Saints with groans unutterable? Rom. 8. How could he say to the Christians at Antioch, Separate me Barnabas and Saul, for the work whereunto I have called them? Act. 13. 2. How to Peter, Behold, three men seek thee; Arise therefore, and get thee down, and go with them, doubting nothing; for I have sent them? How could it be said of him, that he distributeth Spiritual Gifts as he will? 1 Cor. 12. 11. How could we be exhorted by the Apostle, not to grieve the holy Spirit? Eph. 4. 30. How finally could Christ command his Apostles to baptize all the discipled Nations into the name as of the Father, and the Son, so also of the holy Spirit? If these things, and sundry more which may be alleged out of the Scripture, do not evince the holy Spirit to be a Person, what can? But the Adversaries, with whom we have now to deal, will object, that several things are in like manner ascribed to the holy Spirit, which agree not to a Person. Thus is he said to be an earnest( or rather, as the Greek word 〈◇〉 signifieth, a Pledge. See Gen. 38. 17, 18. 〈◇〉; that is, according to the English Translation, Wilt thou give me a Pledge till thou sand it? And he said, What Pledge shall I give thee? See also verse 20. 〈◇〉, to receive the Pledge from the womans hand:) and to be  shed upon the faithful; and they said to be anointed, baptized, and sealed with the holy Spirit; and God to give of his Spirit. But it is easy to show that such things as these are in the Scripture, and other approved Writers, attributed to Persons; but such Personal things as we have before rehearsed concerning the holy Spirit, are never in the Scripture, or other approved Authors,( unless Poets, to whom liberty of Fiction is granted, and who consequently may make Persons of what they please) attributed to them that are not Persons. For instance, Terence in Heaut. Act. 3. Sc. 3. calleth a dansel a Pledge, saying,  
Ea mortua est. Reliquit filiam adolescentulam:  
Ea relicta huic arrhaboni est pro illo argento.  
which place further sheweth the true signification of Arrhabo to be that which we formerly assigned. Likewise Paul saith, Put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, Rom. 13. 14. And, My little Chrilden, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you. Gal. 4. 19. And, As ye have received Christ Jesus the Lord, walk ye in him, Col. 2. 6. And, Ye are our Epistle written in our hearts, known and red of all men, 2 Cor. 3. 2. And, The Seal of my Apostleship are ye in the Lord. 1 Cor. 9. 2. And Christ himself, None can come unto me, except it were given( or rather, except there be given) to him of my Father.( the Gr. hath it, 〈◇〉, the same expression that is used, when it is said, that God hath given us of his Spirit, 1 John 4. 13. 〈◇〉.) You see by what hath been alleged, that either the very same Impersonal Expressions, which are attributed to the Holy Spirit, are also attributed to other Persons, or other expressions altogether as far distant from Personality. Wherefore it will be far more suitable, by a metonymy, or Metaphor,( usual enough in such cases) to salue these few Impersonal Expressions, attributed to the Holy Spirit, being a Person, as the tenor of the Scripture exhibiteth him to us; then by a Prosopopoeia,( which must of necessity prove very uncouth and monstrous,) to elude those many personal Expressions, attributed to the Holy Spirit, being no Person, as only some few places seem to hold him forth to us. Having sufficiently asserted the Personality of the Holy Spirit, let us now in the close of all speak briefly of what is peculiar to him. I omit what Siracides saith of the Holy Spirit under the name of wisdom, he being the Spirit of wisdom, namely that hecame out of the mouth of the most High, Chap. 24. 3. and consequently had his production in that manner, being,( as another wise man also speaketh of him under the name aforesaid) a vapour of the power of God, and a sincere emanation( or, efflux) of the Glory of the Almighty; Wisd. Salom. chap. 7. 25. to which accordeth that of Elihu, Job 33. 4. The Spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life. Where( after the manner of the Hebrews) the same thing is repeated in different words, the Breath of the Almighty being put for what had in the former part of the sentence been called, the Spirit of God. And methinks the very appellation of the Spirit of God, doth of itself sufficiently intimate, that what those two forequoted writers speak of wisdom, is applicable to the Holy Spirit. But these things( as I said before) I now omit, inquiring only what are the peculiar privileges, and Operations of the Holy Spirit▪ His peculiar privilege therefore is, that he only of all the ministering Spirits, being of a more pure and penetrating nature, and of more intimate admission, is first acquainted with the depths, or profound secrets of God, as hath been before argued in this very Article, out of 1 Cor. 2. 10, 11. where when the Apostle saith, Who of men knoweth the things of a man, save the Spirit of a man that is in him? Even so the things of God knoweth none, save the Spirit of God: the other member, necessary to make the opposition complete, is to be supplied in our mind, and the place understood, as if the Apostle had said, Even so the things of God knoweth none of the ministering Spirits or Angels, save the Spirit of God; as I before have evinced. Neither let any man take offence, whilst I intimate the Holy Spirit to be an Angel, for though he were not expressly so called in the Scripture,( as I verily believe he is, though the places are not such as to be altogether free from cavil,) yet is the thing itself beyond all controversy ascribed to him. For demonstration, the word Angel Originally Greek, and the Hebrew Malak answering thereunto, signifieth any Messenger whatsoever, but is in Scripture oftentimes appropriated to signify a Spirit or Heavenly Messenger. In both which respects the Holy Spirit is an Angel, being not only a Messenger, but a Spiritual Messenger sent out of Heaven, as Peter testifieth, 1 Pet. 1. 12. As for the Peculiar Operations of the Holy Spirit, the first is sanctification, performed by imparting Spiritual Gifts unto them, whereby they are consecrated and set apart to the service of God, see 1 Cor. 6. 11. But ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of our Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God. By Sanctification cannot here be meant, the cleansing of the Corinthians from the filth of their sins, for that is expressed by washing; but the consecrating of them to God, by conferring on them Spiritual Gifts, see also 1 Cor. 12. 4, 11. There are diversities of Gifts, but the same Spirit. Now all these worketh one and the same Spirit, distributing to every one, as he will. For though other good Spirits are also employed about the faithful, for they are all ministering Spirits, sent out to minister for their sakes, that shall inherit salvation, as the Divine Author to the Hebrews testifieth, cha. 1. 14. and do not only guard, by pitching their tents round about them, Psal. 34. 8. but also inspire them as they prophesy and speak with strange tongues,( which sheweth how the Holy Spirit may inspire divers at the same time) see 1 Cor. 14. 12, 13, 14, 15. Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of Spirits,( so the Greek hath it, as the Translators themselves in the Margin confess, who not understanding the thing itself, did in the text for Spirits put Spiritual Gifts,) seek that you may excel( Gr. abound) to the edifying of the Church. Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue, pray that he may interpret. For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my Spirit prayeth, but my understadding,( or, mind) is unfruitful. What is it then? I will pray with the Spirit, and will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the Spirit, and will sing with the understanding also. See also verse 32. And the Spirits of the Prophets are subject to the Propbets. Behold here in the words which I have cited, there is twice mention made of spirits in the Plural number, whilst the Apostle discourseth of them that spake with strange tongues, and Prophesied. Neither can the Understandings or Minds of the Linguists and Prophets be understood by those Spirits, since the Apostle, verse 14. putteth a manifest difference between the Spirit, and the Understanding or Mind of him that spake in an unknown tongue. Neither are Spiritual Gifts meant, for they are in Greek called 〈◇〉, Spirituals, 1 Cor. 12. 1. not 〈◇〉, Spirits. It remaineth therefore that ministering Spirits are meant, who inspired the several Linguists and Prophets, and are therefore said to be subject to the Prophets, because they could either make use of and utter their Inspirations, or suspend the use of the same, by permitting others to speak, inasmuch as those Spirits did not hurry the Prophets so violently, as evil Spirits are reported to drive false Prophets amongst the Heathen, otherwise God by giving them to the Prophets in the Church, would be the Author of tumult and confusion, but not of order; whilst every one that was inspired at the same time with another, was necessitated to utter his inspiration as well as he. Though other good Spirits,( I say,) are employed about the Faithful, in the exercise of prophesy and strange tongues, yet the assignation and conferring of those Gifts peculiarly belongeth to the Holy Spirit, as the Apostle clearly testifieth. The second peculiar Operation of the Holy Spirit, is to give Believers access through Christ to the Father, Eph. 2. 18. For he being the Spirit of Adoption, doth witness to their Spirits that they are the Children of God, and so maketh them to cry Abba Father, Rom. 8. 15. 16. and consequently is the Pledge of their Inheritance, Eph. 1. 13, 14.( for so I before shewed that the word 〈◇〉 in the Gr. ought to be rendered, and not Earnest, as the English Translators have it,) some other things perhaps there be, as the ordering of matters in the Church, and setting of Officers therein, and also laying of burdens upon Christians,( see Act. 15. 28.) which seem to be peculiar to the Holy Spirit above others, yet since the Scripture doth not say, that none save the Spirit doth these things, or that one and the same Spirit doth them, I dare not so confidently to assert them for peculiar Operations of the Holy Spirit, contenting myself with those which the Scripture doth confessedly point-out for such.   
FINIS.