The Blasphemous Socinian HERESY Disproved and Confuted, WHEREIN The Doctrinal and Controversial Parts of those Points are handled, and the Adversaries Scripture and School-Arguments answered:  
WITH Animadversions upon a late Book called, Christianity not Mysterious: Humbly Dedicated to Both Houses of PARLIAMENT.  
By J. GAILHARD, Gent.  And many other things blasphemously spoke they against him, Luke 22.65. And we know that the son of God is come, and hath given us understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ, this is the true God and eternal life, 1 John 5.20. 
Textus non fallit, multos speciosa fefellit  
Glossa, Dei verbo nitere, tutus eris.  
LONDON: Printed for R. Wellington at the Lute in S. Paul's Churchyard, and J. Hartley, over against Grays-Inn-Gate in Holborn. 1697.   

TO THE Lords and Commons NOW IN PARLIAMENT Assembled.  
Right Honourable and Honourable,  
AT this time God's Providence hath brought you together, to consult about the great Concerns of the Nation; and the Matter I now do most humbly offer to your serious Consideration, is one of, if not the most important that can be laid before you; for it doth conduce to the Glory of God, the Peace of the Church, as by Law established, the Asserting and Defence of its Doctrine, and to the Welfare of the Kingdom.  
Though I presume to appear upon so high a Stage, and draw upon me the Eyes of as August, and upon every account as famous an Assembly as any in the World: Yet the Subject I go upon holding so near a Proportion with the Station and Dignity wherein God hath placed you, will I hope secure me from being aspersed with Rashness and Vainglory, or accounted a Busybody. I offer you a Field of Honour, and an occasion of exercising your Piety towards God, Love to Truth, your Justice and Wisdom with putting a stop to and a Curb upon a boundless and blasphemous Impiety, which seems openly to defy Heaven and Earth: 
Psal. 111.3.  'Tis God's Work, which, as David saith, is honourable and glorious; 'tis good, necessary, and great; but Time is short and uncertain, therefore must be well improved, for the Opportunity may happen to be lost, never to be recovered, so 'tis wished the thing be done whilst it may, and before it be too late; to time things well is one of the best parts of Prudence, and one of the most Essential Circumstances of our Actions: Among the several Seasons and Times mentioned by Solomon we read of two, 
Eccles. 3.7  a time to keep silence, which I look upon to be over, and a time to speak, which I take now to be fully come.  
There aught to be a proportion between the Distemper and the Remedy, thus extreme Distempers require extreme Remedies, and an extraordinary Necessity doth vindicate an extraordinary Method in the Use thereof: When the Watchman whose immediate Duty is to give warning, doth, through Sluggishness, or other Cause, at the approach of the Enemy, neglect to blow the Trumpet, than every one concerned in the Community hath right to do't for the Preservation of the whole. That Passage of Craesus' dumb Son, who one day perceiving how some went about to, kill his Father, was so much stirred as to cry out Murder; though trivial, may well be admitted upon the present occasion; for no true Christian having before his Eyes the near and great Danger which our holy Religion lies under, upon the account of some damnable Heresies now more than ever brought in again, but must be moved and cry out against it: But what do I talk of danger, when the evil itself, the Philistines are upon us? The Enemy is not only at the Gates, but in the very body of the place, and in the Bowels of the Church, and to speak in Moses' words, 
Num. 16.46.  There is wrath gone out from the Lord, the plague is begun; for blasphemous Socinianism attended by Atheism, Deism, Profaneness, Immorality, yea, and Idolatry, etc. doth bare and brazenfaced walk in our Streets, as much as in it lieth, to deprive us of our blessed Lord and Saviour, so it strikes at no less than the Head and Author of our Salvation: And men are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, 
1 Cor. 5.2.  that they that do this deed, might be taken away from among us. To what purpose is Popery or Idolatry expelled, if Socinianism or Blasphemy be let in?  
But I am not so hasty, as to affirm Popish Idolatry to be turned out, for we know too much of the contrary, witness those Swarms of Priests which are in and about the City, and the many places where, I shall not say in private, for 'tis public enough, the Wafer-Idol-Worship is performed against the Laws of God and of the Land, which some that should, do not mind nor care for; whereupon we have much cause to renew the Apostle's Complaint, All seek their own, 
Phil. 2.21.  not the things that are Jesus Christ's: And in the Country almost every Popish Family of any note, hath a Priest when able to keep it; all this for want of due care to see Laws against them put in execution.  
Upon this account a thing there is which doth so much lie in my way, as that I cannot avoid taking notice of it; and indeed the thing is so public, that many have and do daily with a kind of Indignation wonder at it: As in this World nothing is free from God's Jurisdiction, so when we have an occasion to speak of his Cause, nothing hath Immunity or Privilege to plead for: Here we have an Ambassador, who for himself and Family hath a private Chapel in his own House, and a public one in a Street not far from it, for any one that hath a mind to come to it: We know it to be a Privilege as good as grounded upon the Right of Nations, for every foreign Minister to have within his doors the free Exercise of his Religion for his Person and Household, but a Plurality hath no ground to plead for: Here it hath been unknown and unheard of since the Reformation, that any foreign Minister was at any time allowed two Chapels: In the supernumerary one I and many more besides, to whom it is an Eyesore, have on Mass days seen and still can see Three or Four Hundred People going in and out, not the Ambassador or his Family, if you except the Priest and his Clerk, with, may be, some inferior Servants, but generally all English, and perhaps some few Irish and others. We may well remember, how under a Reign which never was commended for Piety, I mean of Charles II. when the Parliament complained, and the People grumbled about the growth of Popery; that Prince not only said, Gentlemen, offer what you think fit for the Security of your Religion and Liberty, and I will give my Consent to't, but withal, he sent to all foreign Ministers to desire them to receive none of his Subjects within their Chapel Doors; also Men were sent thither to watch who went in and out, to give an account of it: And if we well look into the thing in hand, we may find it is like to be of ill and troublesome Consequence; for the Party in question is of a Nation, which when once they have been in possession of a thing, will willingly never part with, but for ever lay a claim to't; when this Man is gone, his Successor will, according to their Maxim, never fail to pretend to Two Chapels, and this will be a Precedent for other foreign Popish Ministers to lay claim to Two; for if one hath it, why not another? Which may happen to engage us in some Difficulties: Besides that, here common People love not to see unnecessary Popish Monuments, and God knows whether or not at one time or other may not into their Head come some fancy of being rude, besides, those are Meeting-places for Papists to plot against the Government, which Inconveniencies, I humbly conceive, it were both Piety and Prudence betimes to prevent, and upon this Motive only, with Submission to Superiors, I speak of it, though Blasphemy be the thing I now chief aim against.  
Yet both Idolatry and Blasphemy are the two greatest Abominations of all in the sight of God, for which he destroyed the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah, and overturned the Assyrian, Babylonian, and other great Empires: And to come home, to the Toleration of those Two transcendent Wickednesses among others, I think we may chief attribute the cause of the heavy Chastisements which make the Nation uneasy, and he is very blind that doth not see, and insensible that takes no notice of both, I mean Sin and Chastisement; and I most humbly beseech God to avert from us that terrible Threatening by his Prophet, for at least we are as bad as those whom 'tis directed to, 
Isai. 26.11.  Lord when thy hand is lifted up, they will not see, but they shall see and be ashamed. What a matter of unexpressible Grief is it, for true Christians to see in a Nation an Incorrigibleness under great and many Judgements, as we read enumerated by the Prophet, and withal, the greatest of all, a Hardness of Heart; as if the Anvil should say to the Hammer, strike as often and as hard as thou wilt, 
Amos 4. from 6. to 12.  I will never be the softer, Yet have ye not returned unto me, saith the Lord; Men will consider neither God's Work nor his Word, the Dispensations of his Providence nor his Ordinances, the Workings of God nor the Words of Men; the Prophet's Counsel is worth following by every one in his station, Let us search and try our ways, and turn again to the Lord. 
Lament. 3 40.  In comparison of the utter Destruction of Jerusalem and Judah, our Chastisements here are but like Whips, instead of those with Scorpions; but let us have a care lest we hear, 
Isai. 5.25.  for all this his anger is not turned away, but his hand is stretched out still: We have been threatened with Insurrections and Invasions, the danger is not over, we have Enemies at home, and one potent, crafty and faithless at our Doors, a Nation as bitter, hasty, 
Habak. 1.6.  and insolent as ever the Chaldeans were: God hath made use of them to chastise others, and so they are a Rod in his hand, when he pleases against us; and besides, I tremble at the reading of this Threatening, 
Zech. 11.6.  for I will no more pity the inhabitants of the land, saith the Lord; but lo, I will deliver the men, every one, into his neighbour's hand, and into the hand of his late King, who very likely would prove a tearing and furious Lion, broke lose out of his Den, full of Hatred and Vengeance: However, we must fear God more than them; for 'tis usual when Men fear any thing more than God, that very same thing doth befall them; and if they walk contrary unto God, 
Levit. 26.28.  then saith the Lord, I will walk contrary unto them also in fury, which Fury is a consuming Fire, and knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, 
2 Cor. 5.11.  saith S. Paul, out of a consideration of a Judgement to come we would persuade men, who generally act out of fear of Punishment more than out of love to that which is good.  
If Men should hold their peace, the stones, 
Luke 19.40.  saith our blessed Saviour, would immediately cry out; for God never wants Instruments, but can and doth fit them for his Work, and never leaves himself without Witness: We read how he rebuked Balaam for his iniquity, 
2 Pet. 2.16.  the dumb ass speaking with man's voice, forbade the madness of the prophet; much more doth God make use of Men, whom he hath endued with Reason, and the knowledge of himself and of his Grace, whom he will have not to halt between two opinions; if Christ be God, follow him, if he be not, follow him not. To deny the most holy Trinity, and our Saviour's Divinity, is, as much as in a Man lieth, to go about to pull our Religion up by the very root, and quite to overthrow it: Yet Men are concerned to know that Religion is the Basis and Foundation that bears up and supports the Civil Government: The true Church of God shall at last be seen truly to uphold the State, seeing the World itself stands and shall continue only till the Number of the Elect be filled up, and then it will come to an end; in the mean while, without Rewards and Punishments, no Society whether Civil or Ecclesiastical can stand any long time.  
Seeing the most holy Godhead itself is stricken at, all are concerned to know who are the detestable Wretches that made themselves guilty of so impious an Attempt: The Devil hath his Instruments of several sorts which concur with him in that wicked Work, those Achans the Troublers of our Israel, are some among us which upon the account of Novelty, 
Acts 17.21.  always like the Areopagites in Athens, spend their time in nothing else, but either to tell or to hear some new thing: Others out of a vain Glory or Affectation of Singularity and Self conceit of Learning: Others whom the Father of Lie hath disposed ever to oppose the Truth: Some others that have been perverted by the Conversation and Books of such Seducers, wherein that Poison, as I hope I made it clear, is through Sophistry spread in a specious shape and plausible manner, and to suffer such Books stuffed with Blasphemies to be imported and here printed and sold publicly, is dangerous and against Law: Others of a bold and confident Spirit are ready to own any thing, and some others out of different Motives, but all out of ill Principles: But withal here we have a Generation of Men openly allowed, who as much as their Predecessors, are violent and bitter Enemies to the Lord Jesus, I mean the Jews, who are used not to be wanting in their endeavours to promote the Blasphemy; to these modern may in some degree be applied what the Apostle saith of the Ancients, to fill up their sins always, they would not have Christ as Messiah and true Son of God, 
1 Thes. 2.16.  to be spoken of to the Gentiles, for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost: With these and any other Enemies to the Lord Jesus, even with Mahometans, that Socinian Generation of Vipers, are ever ready to join Heads, to promote their common Cause. Besides the Jews, here are other. Foreigners calling themselves Christians, who beyond Sea, for fear of Fire and Faggot, durst not own such Blasphemies, as here they are bold enough to dogmatise about. Tho' in Men there be a freedom of Thoughts and Opinions, yet when they are so saucy as to vent and publish their Impieties, 'twere but just their foul Mouths should be stopped: It makes mine Ears to tingle, and my Heart to ache, when I read a certain place in Scripture, wherein God complains, and as he never doth it in vain, so if there be no Redress, he is sure to punish for't; though the whole Verse be not to my purpose, only the latter part, yet not to leave out any thing thereof, nor to separate that which the Holy Ghost hath joined together, I shall quote it as it is: Now therefore what have I here, 
Isa. 52.5.  saith the Lord, that my people is taken away for nought? they that rule over them, make them to howl, saith the Lord, and my name continually every day is blasphemed; we may add almost every where in the Streets, Men Curse, Swear, and notwithstanding Acts of Parliaments, Blaspheme every way, which often strikes me with horror, and makes one's Hair stand on end. To what purpose are Laws enacted if they be not executed? Only to make contemptible the Legislative Power, instead of that awful Reverence which Men ought to have for it.  
My Lords and Honourable, the Question is not about trivial Matters, 'tis the Cause of the Lord Jesus, from whom your Dignity and Authority are derived, and for whom 'tis expected you would make use of it, for he is the Only Lord and Potentate to whom all Judgement is committed, and for whom ye judge; the Sword is put into your Hands for a terror to evil works, 
Rom. 13.3, 4.  such is Blasphemy, and ye bear it not in vain, for ye are the ministers of God, revengers to execute wrath upon him that doth evil; and as ye are Keepers of both Tables of the Law, God requires of you that when nothing else can serve, ye should punish the transgressors of the first, as well as those of the second; in God's Cause, none ought to be idle, but all must set their helping hand and be active within the sphere of their Station. Thus having laid open the Disease, I leave it for your Piety and Christian Wisdom to find out and apply the true and proper Remedy, I mean such as in Scripture Language may not be called 
* Ezek. 13.10, 11, 14, 15.  daubing with untempered mortar. Solomon saith, 
† Prov. 14.9.  fools make a mock at sin; in his stile, the Sinner is a Fool, and is so indeed; Sin is a great Distemper, and that Wise Man prescribes a fit and proper Remedy for it, when he saith, 
‖ chap. 26.3.  a rod for the fool's back; that is, the Sinner ought to be punished for Sin, and to the Magistrates it belongs to do't. Now there is no greater Sin than Blasphemy, wherefore it deserves the heaviest Punishment to make the Pain hold a proportion with the Offence.  
In the mean while, I humbly beg leave to lay two Things before you; First, God's Precepts do contain Promises and Threaten, which both in his due time shall be performed. Secondly, God sees and knows when Men do or do not observe and execute his Laws, for he knows all Things; as to the first, tho' it be every Man's Duty to obey him, yet to encourage us to't, he is graciously pleased to propose Rewards: Are ye for Honours? We know who said, them that honour me I will honour, 
1 Sam. 2.30.  and they that despise me shall be lightly esteemed. To endeavour to make ourselves precious in God's sight with doing him Service, especially in Things relating to his Glory, is the true and ready way to attain to Honour; for, 
Isa. 43.4.  since thou wast precious in my sight, thou hast been honourable, and not before, saith God, and I have loved thee; wherefore if thou wilt continue so, have a care to preserve thyself in my Love and Favour. Are ye for Riches? 
1 Chron. 29.12.  Both riches and honour come of thee, saith David; and in the case of taking care of God's House, which is what I now am upon, hear what saith the God of Truth, when that's done, 
Malach 2.10.  prove me now therewith, saith the Lord of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing that there shall not be room enough to receive it; and if to Honour and Riches you desire a long Life in the enjoyment thereof to be added, 'tis to be had out of the same Spring, 
Prov. 3.16  for length of days is in the right hand of the Eternal Wisdom, the Son of God, and in her left hand riches and honour, all three put together, 
chap. 22.4. 1 King. 3.13.  by humility and the fear of the Lord, are riches, and honour, and life; and, I also have given thee riches and honour, saith God to Solomon, so are glory, honour and peace, even in abundance, as to 
* 2 Chron. 17.5.  Jehoshaphat; all are God's Gifts, so are 
† Rom. 2.10.  glory, honour and peace; but no true Honour without Virtue or true Piety, which the Heathens were sensible of, when upon their Coins they joined them together, Honos & Virtus; and their Temple of Virtue laid on the way to that of Glory.  
Or do ye desire Pleasures, which is one of the God's of the World? They may be had at God's Hand, not the Pleasures of Sin which are but for a season, but true and solid ones, which the Royal Prophet speaks of, 
Psal. 16.11.  in thy presence is fullness of joy, at thy right hand are pleasures for evermore; if then ye care for Rewards, after which in Man is a natural desire, God to encourage Men to do their Duty towards him, hath promised he will plentifully Reward, both in this Life, and that which is to come. 
Deut. 28.  Blessed shalt thou be in the City and in the field, in the fruit of thy body, of thy ground and of thy , etc. then shall our Enemy fall before us, over whom, as yet, we could get no Advantage; for we must not wonder if God doth not bless us with Successes, nor if hardly any thing we go about doth not prosper, as long as the accursed thing is among us; and if ye will successfully settle your own Houses, after the Example of the good Kings of Judah, begin with God's, purge it of all its Filth, and he will take care of yours, prosper and establish them: If ye mind the Honour of God and the Good of his Church, with keeping out the Ravenous Wolves that would break into it, than he will guide and direct in the weighty Affairs which now are, and hereafter shall be before you, and will preside among you with his Spirit of Wisdom, Knowledge and Understanding, extricate and overcome the greatest Difficulties, and his gracious Providence will be as a Wall of Fire round about you.  
God's Commands are attended not only with Promises to the Observers, but also with Threaten to the Breakers and Neglecters thereof; for this, Scripture is full of Proofs, and therein God hath pronounced a Curse against those who do his work deceitful, 
Jerem. 48.10.  in the case of executing Justice and Judgement, and 'tis but Justice what we now call for: the very same Person, the Eternal Son of God, whose Cause within your Station, I do humbly commend unto you, shall at last come into the World in the glory of his Father with his Angels, 
Matt. 16.27. chap. 25.  to reward every man according to his works; and the unprofitable as well as the wicked servant, which with him is but one and the same, shall be cast into outer darkness where shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. When Men neglect to Secure and Promote the Glory of God, he hath in his Hand ways and means enough to lay their Honour in the Dust: This I speak not of myself, for 'tis God's Language, and indeed it ought to be looked upon as the Voice of God not of Man, because grounded upon God's and not Man's Word; and I could almost be content never to be able to persuade, if at this Time and Occasion, I could effectually do't upon these Considerations, that soon or late we all must die, how soon, God alone knows, not we, for we have no certain Leases of our Lives; then cometh Judgement, and our Works, whether good or bad, shall follow us, which we must give an account of; and indeed, this should make us tremble, as well as Felix, 
Acts 24.25.  when Paul reasoned of judgement to come. The Parable of the Talents shall then actually become matter of fact, and the slothful and careless for want of exercising them, shall be severely dealt withal. Negative Sins, though many mind them not, shall be the cause of Damnation; for we see in the Description of the last Judgement, made by our Saviour, the only Sins named, for which Men shall be damned, are all of omission, ye gave me no meat, ye gave me no drink, ye clothed me not, ye visited me not; ye minded me not, and ye did not for me what ye ought and might have done; 
Matt. 25.  therefore, depart from me ye cursed into everlasting fire, prepared for the Devil and his Angels. This is terrible to hear, and shall be more to feel: O that to prevent this dreadful Doom, in our several Stations we were able with Bernard to say, Wherever I am, and whatsoever I do, it seems to me as if I had heard the voice of the Archangel saying, arise ye dead and come to judgement; this is the ready way to be prepared for it, and to avoid being surprised therewith, and to live every moment as if that same was the last of our Life, and the next, 
Luk. 16.2.  give an account of thy Stewardship; this aught to make every one keep his accounts ready, for though Men are apt to put off till to morrow what can be done to day, there shall then be no procrastination; whilst 'tis time, 
Matt. 24.  let us do our Duty, and blessed, yea, thrice blessed shall that servant be, whom his Lord when he comes shall find so doing, but woe be to him that shall be found doing the contrary, as if because his Lord delayeth his coming, he was never to come and call to an account; David gives us the Character of a wicked Man to say, God will not require it, though he speaks it not with his Tongue, but only saith it in his Heart, and his saying so, is there called a Contempt of God; wherefore doth the wicked contemn God? 
Psal. 10.13.  he hath said in his heart, thou shalt not require it.  
Now the Second thing to be laid before you, 
Heb 4.13.  I shall but name, 'tis this, all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do; he is present every where, 
Psal. 139. and Ezek. 11.5.  all seeing and all knowing; he is acquainted with all our ways, all our words, and he understandeth all our thoughts afar off, so cannot be deceived nor imposed upon; and if Men forsake the Lord's Cause, he will forsake them, then look for nothing but Misery and Calamity, which I think again and again, I now may safely say, for I hope, we at this time have no Amaziah to speak thus, but prophesy not again any more of Bethel, 
Amos 7. 1●.  for it is the King's chapel, and it is the King's court, for in such places they loved not to hear the Truth nor of unpleasant Things, but 'tis spoken of the Court of the Kings of Israel, who after the renting of the Ten Tribes, from first to last proved bad every one, which was not altogether of those of Judah, where was a mixture of some good and some bad.  
Seeing Arguments drawn out of God's Word, the common and general Consent of the Christian Church since the Apostles time, and out of true sound Reason, cannot work upon or prevail with a sort of Men hardened and obstinate in their Opinions, and of whom long ago David said, 
Psal. 64.5.  they encourage themselves in an evil matter; and the Apostle foretell of such false teachers who should privily, 
2 Pet. 2.1.  at first and then openly, bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, that is, the Lord Jesus Saviour of the World, to be true God, natural and consubstantial Son of God; I say, 'tis not improper to apply ourselves unto the Civil Power, that he would make use of the lawful Authority which God for his own Glory hath put into his hands; with some others we have done our part with offering in this Discourse good Arguments to assert and bear Record for the Truth, but remembering the Apostle's Rule, a man that is an heretic, after the first and second admonition, reject knowing that he that is such, is subverted and sinneth, being condemned of himself; we think such may well be condemned by those who have right to do't, thereby to put a stop to the spreading of a mortal Gargrene, in a most corrupt and backsliding Age.  
Herein we go upon Two Heads, Heresy and Blasphemy, against which we have both Gospel and Law, Divine and Human; no Error more fundamental than that which impiously strikes at the Nature and Persons of the Godhead. The Blasphemer was by God's immediate Command, stoned to death by the whole Congregation, 
Levit. 24.24.  because as the Sin and Scandal were public, so was the Punishment to be; and here the Law alloweth the Ecclesiastical Courts to proceed against Offenders in the Capital Cases of Heresy and Blasphemy; Capital I call them, for if in human Things, Treason and Rebellion be so, then fundamental Heresy and Blasphemy are such in those of a Divine Nature, 
* Sir Tho. Ridley's View of the Civil and Ecclesiastical Laws, p. 59 see the Margin.  against such is provided Sentence of Death, which here hath actually been executed upon some; thus one Bartholomew Legat, for these Arian and Socinian Blasphemies, was on the 18th. of March in 1611. burnt in Smithfield; and in the following Month of April, Edward Wightman was for the same burnt at Litchfield. Queen Elizabeth having heard of some of them in her time, said, She was grieved to hear she had such Monsters in her Kingdoms. If Bishop Hall was now alive, how much more cause would he have had to say, 
Irem. Sect. 23. hoc avo, etc.  In this Age the Souls of Christians are seduced, not only by Papists, Anabaptists, Antinomians and Pelagians, sed & per infernalem Socinianorum haeresim, but by means of the hellish Heresy of Socinians, Anti trinitarians, New Arians, we have cause here in England to fear the utmost and last Destruction of Christian Religion. Let upon this account no just Cause be given to renew that Lamentation of Jeremiah, the Law is no more, 
chap. 2.9.  lest out of a just Judgement of God this should follow, the Gospel is no more for us. I tremble to think how at last God will with a witness take notice of those who now take no notice of him, nor of his Concerns: We read the Character of a wicked Man in the Person of Pharaoh, 
Exod. 5.2.  when he said, Who is the Lord that I should obey his voice to let Israel go? I know not the Lord, neither will I let Israel go. Well, saith God, I will make thee know me before I have done with thee; wherefore in Scripture by the Prophets, especially by Ezekiel, in so many places, God's usual Style when either he threateneth or executeth Judgements, is this, and they shall know that I am the Lord; 
Ezek. 30.19. chap. 20.26.  he saith, thus will I execute judgements in Egypt, and they shall know that I am the Lord; and sometimes these Punishments are inflicted, to the end they might know that I am the Lord. God grant none in this Land for want of performing their Duty in his Station, do provoke God in the way of Judgements to make them know he is the Lord, who both acts and speaks with a strong hand. 
Isa. 8.11.   
Whether or not the Ecclesiastical Court hath in this occasion of Socinianism, acted its part according to Laws, I must not take it upon me, but leave it for the World to judge; but this I now do insist upon, that whether or not it be done, in conformity to Law, the Magistrate is about it to be addressed to, for in such cases, he at last is to act his part, as ever 'twas practised by those Christian Emperors, who upon the like occasion, minded the Glory of God: But here we must stop a little for fear of being thought to insinuate to our Superiors any thing relating to the Duty of their place, which we are not so vain as to think of in the least; but one of the Grounds we go upon is out of the Book called the Reformation of the Ecclesiastical Laws; began in the days of Henry VIII. and continued in the time of Edward VI under the Head of Judgement against Heresies; these words are positive, 
Tùm consumptis omnibus aliis remediis ad extremum ad Civiles Magistratus ablegetur puniendus.  Every other Remedy proving useless, the obstinate Heretic must at last be sent to the Civil Magistrate to be punished. De judiciis contra haereses, c. 4. de contumacibus Haereticis; and as to the point of Blasphemy, in the first Chapter under that Head, is pathetically expressed the detestableness of that most wicked, and in some Sense unpardonable Sin; in Chap. 2d. quomodo sit punienda blasphemia, 'tis said, sit igitur hoc à nobis constitutum, ut haec execrabilis blasphemiarum impietas, quàm primùm de eà ritè constiterit ab Episcopis, nulla ratione toleretur sed eodem supplicio confixa sit, quâ pertinax haereticorum insania plectitur, etc. wherefore we order thus, that the execrable Impiety of Blasphemy, assoon as the Bishops have found it out, shall by no means be tolerated, but shall suffer the same Punishment as is inflicted upon obstinate Heretics; the constiterit is not so much in relation to Blasphemy itself, which is easily known when either things belonging to God as Infiniteness, Eternity, Unchangeableness, Holiness, etc. are denied him and attributed to the Creatures, or when things contrary to his Nature as to lie, to deny himself, etc. are fathered upon him, or when Men do curse him; but the constiterit doth regard the Blasphemer and guilty Wretch, when he is found out; according to this, 
Ridley in his View, etc. p. 35, 36.  Bishops are to take Cognizance, inquire into, and declare whether or not the Person or Persons be guilty of Blasphemy, which being clear, he or they are to be delivered into the Civil Magistrates hands, but if through neglect or otherwise, any of the Bishops happen not to act their Part, but stop the Course of Justice, certainly the Magistrate is to look into't, and do his Duty though others do not theirs, 'tis nothing but what is very Just, that every Man's hand should be against those Ishmaels', whose hand is against every Man.  
As to the Laws, I mentioned just before, they were by the Excellent Persons named by the King, collected and finished under Edward VI the Pious Josiah of that Age, and so were then received with great and general Approbation; both Kings, Father and Son, by right of their Supremacy, as we may see't in both their Letters, gave them a Character of Authority, and if they were not passed into an Act; the only Cause was the untimely Death of that young Prince who designed it, and the Business had already been proposed in Parliament, as we see't out of these words of his Epistle to Archbishop Cranmer, etc. Cum vos triginta duos viros, ad leges nostras Ecclesiasticas perlegendas & componendas, juxta vim, formam & effectum cujusdam Acti Parliamenti in tertio regni nostri anno, etc. So that there is something of a Parliament's Authority, and if there be any thing wanting, it lieth in your Power to set a Parliamentary Stamp upon it, especially those Heads that relate to the Divine Moral Law, as do those about Heresy, Blasphemy and Idolatry, wherein God's Honour is immediately concerned; for certainly we are come to the last days and perilous times foretold by the Apostle, 
2 Tim. 3.1, 2.  when amidst other Sins, Men shall be Blasphemers: 
2 Kings 19.3.  And I think I may be allowed in King Hezekiah's Words to say, this is a day of trouble and blasphemy, which, I hope, shall by your lawful Authority be rebuked, as now we do most humbly sue for; and I make bold once to say, what a Prophet said twice, upon the account of neglecting God's House, 
Hagg. 1.5, 7.  Thus saith the Lord God of Hosts, consider your ways; like Mary, keep and ponder these things in your Hearts; for what she heard, and you hear, relate to the same Person, and are the Concerns of the Son of God.  
Out of those Words ariseth in me the Consideration of what our Saviour saith, 
Matt. 12.42.  The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgement with this nation, and shall condemn it: When those that want Light, go farther in a good way than they that have it greater, these shall meet with a harder usage; 
Luke 12.47.  for that servant which knew his lords will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes: 'Tis very sad and afflicting, to think how some Heathens who in some things minded the Glory of God, may at the last day rise up in the Judgement against some Christians for too much neglecting it: One I name, Nabuchadnezzar, 
Ezech. 7.24.  whom God by his Prophet calls one of the worst of the heathen; yet that Man having seen how God had preserved in the fiery Furnace the Three young Men who had refused to fall before and worship his golden Image, how much was he wrought upon? He blessed the Most High God, but stopped not there, for he made use of his Authority; therefore, saith he, I make a decree, that every people, nation, and language which speak any thing amiss against the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, shall be cut in pieces, and their houses be made a dunghill, because there is no other god that can deliver after this sort; this after the sight of a Miracle: And is not the whole Life of Christ the God of Christians, a continual working of Miracles? But as to Belshazzar Nebuchadnezzar's Son, let me take notice of Daniel's words to him, which declare the cause of his Ruin, and of the Loss of his Kingdom and Life, 
Dan. 5.23.  And the God in whose hand thy life is, and whose are all thy ways, hast thou not glorified.  
But I must not omit to take notice of some Canons and Ecclesiastical Constitutions agreed upon in the Convocations of both Provinces, Canterbury and York in 1640. and by Charles the First, for himself, Heirs, and lawful Successors, by virtue of his Prerogative Royal and Supreme Authority in Ecclesiastical Causes, according to the Form of an Act of Parliament in the 25th Year of the Reign of Henry VIII. straightly enjoined and commanded by the said Authority and his Letters Patents, dated at Westminster the 30th day of June, in the Sixteenth Year of his Reign, to be diligently observed and executed. I shall mention only the Fourth Canon, against Socinianism, which is to my purpose to show how at that time they took care to provide against it; thus it beginneth, Whereas much Mischief is already done in the Church of God, by the spreading of the damnable and cursed Heresy of Socinianism, as being a complication of many ancient Heresies condemned by the Four first general Councils, and contrary unto the Articles of Religion now established in the Church of England: And whereas it is too apparent that the said wicked and blasphemous Errors are unhappily dilated by the frequent divulgation and dispersion of dangerous Books written in favour and fartherance of the same— therefore, to provide against this, it is decreed, that no Stationer, Printer, or Importer of the said Books, or any other Person whatsoever, shall print, buy, sell, or disperse any Book broaching or maintaining of the said abominable Doctrine, upon pain of Excommunication ipso facto to be thereupon incurred— and that no Preacher shall presume to vent any such Doctrine in any Sermon, under pain of Excommunication for the first Offence, and Deprivation for the second; and that no Student in either of the Universities of this Land, nor any Person in Holy Orders (excepting Graduates in Divinity, or such as have Episcopal or Archdeaconal Jurisdiction, or Doctors of Law in holy Orders) that is, they who are either able to refute them, or at least in no great danger of being thereby seduced, shall be suffered to have or read any such Socinian Book or Discourses, under pain (if the Offender live in the University) that he shall be punished according to the strictest Statutes provided there against the publishing, reading, or maintaining of false Doctrine; or if be live in the City or Country abroad, of a Suspension for the first Offence, Excommunication for the second, and Deprivation for the third, unless he will absolutely, and in terminis, abjure the same: And if any Layman shall be seduced into this Opinion, and be convicted of it, he shall be excommunicated, and not absolved but upon due Repentance and Abjuration, and that before the Metropolitan, or his own Bishop at least: And we likewise enjoin, that such Books, if they be found in any prohibited hand, shall be immediately burned, and that there be a diligent search made by the appointment of the Ordinary after all such Books, in what Hands soever.— And that all who now have them, except before excepted, be strictly commanded to bring in the said Books, in the Universities to the Vice-Chancellours, and out of the Universities to the Bishops, who shall return them— and shall cause the rest to be burned: And we farther enjoin that diligent enquiry be made after all such that shall maintain and defend the aforesaid Socinianism, and where any such shall be detected, that they be complained of to the several Bishops respectively, who are required to repress them from any such Propagation of the aforesaid wicked and detestable Opinions. Here is the Judgement of the Church against Socinianism called a damnable and cursed Heresy, and contrary to the Articles of Religion now established in the Church of England, which hitherto hath taken care how to suppress it, and 'tis a Precedent for these Times to follow; for our Zeal should be no less than theirs was, now when the Danger is greater and the Poison more spread, thus worse should be prevented: The Skill of a Physician who doth prevent an Evil and Sickness, is more commendable than his who cures it when broken out; however in this last Case Remedies to do't aught to be used, and never despair of a Cure, as long as there is sign of Life, let the Distemper be never so far gone, or by unskilful Doctors be counted uncurable; great Distempers are reserved to be cured by the Skill of great Physicians, and if your Honours be pleased but to mind this, and in earnest go about it, you may, by the Grace of God, find it within your reach, and not to exceed your Skill and Power to heal it, which I pray God to move and inspire you to go upon, now when temporal Concerns are at this time as good as over: And after you hitherto have been working for Men, be pleased with minding God's Work and his Glory, to make a happy end of this Session.  
From the Bench you sit upon as Judges, be pleased first to look down upon the Nation; of one side you may see the generality of it, over Head and Ears in corrupt Principles and evil Practices, wallowing themselves in their great, many and frequent Sins, which cry loud to Heaven for Vengeance; on the other side, you may represent unto yourselves, a very small Number, who upon their Knees mourn for all these Abominations, and pray to God to avert his so justly deserved Judgements; then I beseech you, look up towards Heaven, and observe God with Thunderbolts in one Hand, and Mercies in the other, speaking thus, Hitherto with me Prayers have prevailed over Sins, and withheld my Hand from striking down, but now Mercy and Judgement lie ready, choose which you will have: O for God's sake, whose Hand is lifted up, take pity on the Nation, and as far as God will enable you, purge, wash, and cleanse it from blasphemous Opinions and wicked Practices, or else prepare for the heaviest Judgements; for the slower Vengeance is a coming, the harder it strikes when come; and 'tis a fearful thing, both in this Life and that which is to come, to fall into the hands of the living God, when he is angry; he overtakes Men, Persons, and Nations in every kind of Judgement, 
Hosea 3.12, 14.  therefore, saith God, will I be unto Ephraim as a moth: and to the House of Judah as rottenness; and if that be not enough, I will be unto Ephraim as a lion, and as a young lion to the house of Judah; Men must not make Ciphers of themselves, and insignificant, as if they were thus placed only for a sign or a show, like Blazing Stars and fiery Vapours in the Sky, but rather to have wholesome Influences upon things below their sphere, to answer the end of him who lodged them in those high Stations; no true Friend can patiently suffer, nor no loyal Subject quietly endure his Friend or Prince to be ill spoken of, if he can help it: And shall not Men do for God that which they do one for another? but quietly hear him blasphemed and rob of his due when they ought and can help it.  
My Lords and Honourable,  
I hope the Consideration of these things, will, as I hinted at first, though I be in no public Station either in Church or State, clear me from Blame for the Freedom I now assume, thus openly to appear, and most humbly to address myself to you, that is to what next to Sovereignty, is greatest and most sacred among us, which I may well call the supports of Monarchy, two parts of three of the Legislative Power, the supreme Court of Judicature, and the Representatives of the whole Body of the Nation. One thing indeed there is that needs something of an Apology; I know how short Epistles are usual and proper, especially when so highly addressed as this is, which is long, and may be, tedious, which if it be, I humbly beg Pardon; but I thought the Matter and Nature of the thing, the Greatness and Nearness of the Evil, the Danger of worse, the present Necessity of a Remedy, and several other weighty Circumstances attending the State we now are in, might plead for an Excuse: And as this is the first time that ever I appeared in your sight in this Capacity, and is like to be the last, so about this important Matter, I have longer than ordinary allowed myself the liberty of speaking my mind to the full.  
As I wish, so hope this most humble Request for the Cause of the Lord Jesus, shall not be in vain, however I enjoy the satisfaction to have given in my Evidence for the Truth, whereupon, I call Heaven and Earth for a Record, and by the Grace of God shall ever be ready to do't again in a due and proper manner, without being either ashamed or afraid to own and declare out of what Springs we draw these living Waters, 
Acts 17.2.  with S. Paul, reasoning out of Scriptures; though with a sorrowful Heart let it be spoken, we have among us too many Men unconcerned, who, Gallio like, care for none of those things; 
Chap. 18.17.  for they are very narrow hearted: But I hope that what is wanting abroad as to Piety, Virtue, and Concernedness for the Honour of God, shall by his Grace be found within your Walls, till by your Care and Zeal that great and good Work be brought to its Maturity and full Perfection, which that ye may be able to do, I beseech the only wise God, the Father of Lights, from whom proceedeth every good and perfect Gift, to endue you from above with both Wisdom, which consists in choice, and Prudence in Foresight, that of two Goods you may choose the greatest, and of two Evils the least, and foresee the Advantages of doing him Service, and Dangers for being wanting therein, which is the earnest Desire and hearty Prayer of  
Right Honourable and Honourable, Your Honour's most humble and most obedient Servant, J. GAILHARD.   

THE PREFACE.  
IT is indeed very sad in a Country where the Light of the Gospel hath so clearly shined, to see the Enemies of Christ so brazenfaced, as not only to Print and Publish, but even at the Doors of both Houses of Parliament to Distribute their Books full of Blasphemies, and no other Check put upon them, but burning one Copy, may be of Thousands dispersed abroad, which Impunity is for them an Encouragement to continue in their Crime.  
In Commendation of the Parliament of Scotland, I must take notice of the Act which in one of their last Sessions was passed there against Blasphemy, whereby not only they ratified the Twenty First of the first Session of Charles II. but also Enacted farther, that whosoever in Discourse or Writing shall deny, quarrel, argue or reason against the Being of a God, or any of the Persons of the Blessed Trinity, or against the Authority of the Holy Scripture, or Providence of God in Governing the World, shall for the first time be Imprisoned till he hath in public acknowledged the Offence: For the second Offence, Imprisoned and a Fine besides; and for the third, Death, as obstinate Blasphemers. For indeed, Blasphemy and Idolatry, by God's express Command, aught to be destroyed out of the Land. Every thing hath its proper Centre, heavy things go down, and light fly up; and since the Glory of God is the proper Centre of Man, for he was created to Honour and Serve him, Why then doth he not as well as other Creatures answer that end, and with his Heart and utmost Endeavours, promote his Glory, and prevent any thing that tends to his Dishonour? For want of which, when 'tis his Duty and in his Power so to do, he becomes guilty of, and makes himself accessary to the Crime. Certainly, neither Law nor any Judge ought to spare at all those Creatures who will not at all spare their Creator.  
The Emperor Theodosius decreed that after Death, an Action might lawfully be commenced against a Manichee or a Donatist, to render the Heretics memory infamous: 
C. Cod. 1.2. Tit. 5. de Haeret. & Manic. Leg.  For if Traitors, tho' in their Graves, are yet branded in their Posterity who are deprived of State and Honour, tho' the Father died unimpeached; How much more reasonable is it, that the same course should be taken in Matters of Religion? a Care, I confess, highly commendable in a Christian Magistrate, at least strictly to be practised against alive Socinians as dead Manichees. Here I must not omit giving the University of Oxford their due Commendation for their Decree of 25th. of November, 1695. for appearing in their Station, and justly condemning as false, impious and heretical, the Notions and Expressions of three infinite distinct Minds and Substances in the Trinity, etc. which some had taken upon themselves to speak and write for, there are no more three infinite Minds and Substances, I shall make use of the words in the Athanasian Creed, than there are three Eternals, three Incomprehensibles, three Almighty's, three Infinites and three Gods, which all are a mere Contradiction; and Hierom was very cautious about acknowledging three Hypostases in the Deity, because he thought the word to denote Substance, for fear of owning three Substances; but when I think of such, I remember what I read of a Greek Philosopher, who willing to abound in his own Sense, would not be satisfied with the Definition or Description of Man given by others, how 'tis a Rational Animal, but he scorning to follow the steps of others, forged one of his own, and said, Man is a two footed Animal without Feathers; whereupon another having plucked off a Cock's Feathers, brought it into his School, and setting it before his Disciples, said, behold such a one's Man, and so ridiculed the Philosopher: Thus deserves to be any one, who being wise only in his own Conceit, doth affect singularity, and in things of this nature, leaves the good trodden way to follow his own by paths; whosoever in defence of a Cause refuseth to take up Arms, because once they were made use of by others, either declares himself an Enemy to the Cause, or else hath a mind to betray it; in this case it may be said as that of an Army marching through an Enemy's Country, or towards an Enemy: For Orders sake, and by reason of the Danger, no Soldier ought to straggle out of the way under pain of Death, for every one that doth so, ventures to be knocked in the Head, and as much as in him lieth, hazardeth the whole; so thus acting contrary to Rules and his own Safety, it may well be supposed, he doth so with a Design to desert, the like may be said of stragglers in this Cause and Warfare.  
As formerly, so new in the Christian World we may say, Christ is again crutified between two Malefactors, the Socinian Blasphemy of one side, and the Popish Idolatry on the other. Yet now 'tis worse than at his Death, for one of the Malefactors was converted and became good, but now they both are stark naught; the one strikes at his Person and Grace, the other chief at his Grace; one sets up his Reason, the other his Traditions above and in opposition to his Word; the first believes worse but would seem to practise better; the last believeth somewhat better, but practiseth worse.  
Socinians which hardly have any thing of Christianity besides the bare name, are so puffed up with Pride and Self-conceit, and do so much abound in their own Sense, that they despise all Ancient and Primitive Authority, because indeed therein they find their own Condemnation. I must say how the Consent and Belief of the Primitive Church in their Councils and Writings of their Doctors, ought not to be heard against Scripture, yet not to be slighted or rejected in things wherein they are Orthodox, and when they agree with it.  
They keep a great pother about Reason, but they must explain themselves, or else they do but leave things in a confusion; we know every rational Man ought to be guided by Reason, but even rational Men do often differ about it: sometimes that which is Reason with one, is a Nonsense with another; but to bring a Carnal Reason to be a Judge in Spiritual Things, 
1 Cor. 2.11, 14.  is a very gross mistake, for, the things of God knoweth no man, but the spirit of God, and the natural man receiveth not the things of the spirit of God, for they are foolishness unto him, neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned; if this Reason they mean in Matters of Religion, it must be quite turned out, for Scripture declares it in such things not to be a competent Judge: But if by Reason they mean the Reason of things, than I own nothing aught to be admitted that is contrary to it; yet in this Sense, no reasonable Man but will own Reason in very many things, though in some more or less, to be very lame and weak, but perfect in nothing, for considering the Perfection either of Parts or Degrees, we all may be said to know nothing perfectly, though Learning and Experience do come in to help us, yet still something is wanting; what one said well, Nemo unquam omnes fefellit, neminem unquam omnes fefellere, never one Man deceived all, nor ever all Men together deceived any one, may with some alteration according to the diversity of the Subject be said here, never as yet one Man knew all things, neither did all Men ever know one thing so perfectly, but that it might still admit of some additional Degree of Knowledge and Perfection; yet I will suppose an impossible thing that one Man should by strength of Reason know all things, which is one of God's Attributes; however, when this Reason happeneth to be in competition with a Line or two of Revelation, is not that Man according to true Reason, bound to submit to it? For my part, I declare I shall ever prefer the Authority of one only Text of Scripture before all the Reason of the World, whether laying in one Head or many; and my Reason is, that Scripture is the Word of an Infallible God, when all and every Man in the World are fallible. Alas, how many things in the World are given for Reason, which have only a show and appearance of it: Besides, it must be granted, there are things above Reason, the most thinking and learned, if not much self-conceited, will by their own experience find this to be true, even in natural things, how much more in those of a spiritual and divine Nature, which to Men's understanding are past finding out; wherefore I affirm it to be but reasonable for them in such things to submit Reason to Faith, which is a Mystery to our natural Reason, 
1 Tim. 3.9.  so called by S. Paul, Holding the mystery of Faith in a pure conscience, when he was writing this, Faith with its Object was clearly revealed, yet still he than calls it a Mystery, and I hope no Socinian dares say he knows the Nature of Faith better than that great Apostle did.  
As for Scripture, they pretend to own and do quote it, so also could the Devil, but mis-applyed it: Before him whom he knew to be the Son of God he could say, it is written: And as in the beginning of the Predication of the Gospel, so in the renewing of the Truth of it by Reformation, Tares sprung up with the Grain, some Men would not order and regulate their Opinions according to Scripture, but would bring it to be subservient to their Notions, and of it to make a Nose of Wax to serve their turn; hence it is that they wrist things that therein are so plain, which if we believe Peter, 
2 Pet. 3.16.  must be to their own destruction. I know of no wrong the Son of God hath done them, that in all their Writings they should so slightly speak of and so much below him: Of late one S— among others, 
Page 20.  saith of the Lord Jesus, In that great Instance of Magnanimity, he hath outdone all the mentioned Heroes of Greece and Rome; he would seem to speak much in his Commendation, but latet anguis in herbâ, there is a Malice in the bottom, to enervate the Truth of our Saviour's Life, as if there were in't some of the Tales and fabulous Accounts which are found in the Lives of the Heroes be mentions: They would have him a Man, and nothing more, though upon all occasions, even before that wicked Counsel of the Priests, Scribes, and Elders, 
Matt. 26.63, 64.  being by the High Priest adjured in the Name of the Living God, to tell whether he was the Son of God? He owned himself to be, which he would not have done if it had not been true, and so had died to maintain a Lie, which is the part of an Impostor, and this Confession of his being Son of God, was the very ground of his Accusation, Condemnation, and Execution; we have a law, 
John 19.7.  said they, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God, and at the time of his Death, all their Revile and Injuries against him did run upon this, 
Matt. 27.40, 43, 54.  If thou be the Son of God, come down from the cross, and he said, I am the Son of God; it had been very strange if he had suffered for saying he was that which he was not, in the Sense he spoke it and they took it: To deny this is to be worse than the very Heathens the Roman Soldiers; for the Centurion and they that were with him, having seen the things that were done, said, Truly this was the Son of God, thereby pointing at the Cause of his Death, as if they had said, He was what he affirmed himself to be, and what he died for, that is, Truly the Son of God.  
What S. Paul saith in another Caese about the Resurrection, 
Acts 26.8  Why should it be thought incredible with you, that God should raise the dead? We may say it in that of the Incarnation of the Son of God; for if God, attended by two Angels in the shape of Men, 
Gen. 18.  more familiarly to dine and converse with Abraham, shown how he could assume the Figure of a Man, why might he not in time take upon him our humane Nature? The Scripture being so full of Evidences that he could, he would and hath done it: But what can we say of People, who deny it to be day, though the Sun shineth never so brightly; like the Philosopher's Maid, who being blind would not own it, but said the Room she was in was dark; this is the case of those in whom the God of this World hath so blinded the Minds, that they cannot, and their Hearts that they will not see.  
I wish God may be pleased in this high Concern of his, to stir up the Hearts of every one to act in his Station whether Civil or Ecclesiastical: They which in this last Capacity are Men of Piety and Learning, might, out of Presses and Pulpits, be very instrumental in asserting the Truth, if they were pleased to consult with Scripture preferably before their own Reason; for the Word of God being the Spring of right Reason, will afford Reasons enough to confute and convince Blasphemy and Heresy: Therein lies our strength about these Matters: This aught to be the method and manner of those who engage in the Cause. Let us all well observe what is said of Apollo's, who in this same Subject was concerned against an unbelieving and obstinate Nation, 
Acts 18.24.  that he was mighty in the Scriptures.  
About these Controversies some thing hath already been attempted by Men otherwise of Learning and good Parts, but upon the account of some Principles of theirs, little good is herein to be expected from them; Arminians I mean, whom I look upon as not very sit to write against Socinians, no more than Arminus would not write against Socinus, though they were contemporary; when I am reading Socinian Disputes, I often in my way meet with Worstius, Episcopius, Bertius, Curcelaeus, and such others who favour them, if not in all, yet in too many things wherein they go hand in hand, and they will mince the matter with them; but if after what several Men have written heretofore, some other Persons of Learning, and sound in the doctrinal part of the XXXIX. Articles, would now appear as a Reverend and very able Prelate hath in some Points effectually done, than it might be hoped, through God's Blessing, for us to see those impious and Heterodox Opinions justled out of doors, to the Honour of God, the Peace of his Church, and clearing the Land of such a Generation as in some respect may be called worse than the Devils, 
Matt. 8.29. Mar. 1.24 and 5.7. Luke 4.34, 41. & 8.28. Psal. 119.126.  who publicly owned the Lord Jesus to be the Son of God, of the most high God, the holy one of God, whom they confessed to have the Power not only to command but also to torment and destroy them, whilst these Men deny him truly to be such: With David we must say, It is time for thee, Lord, to work: for they have made void thy law.  
In the mean time, though very sensible of my Weakness and Incapacity, I presume to appear in public, trusting in him whose Cause we defend, that he will make his Virtue perfect in our Weakness, and with the gracious Influence of his holy Spirit, supply that which is wanting in us: Herein I handle not only some things of the Controversy, but also do in some measure bring in the doctrinal part, which is a great help to the Elenctical, and upon which indeed this last must be grounded; for I writ not only to refute, but also to instruct and afford a Preservative against the Poison: And tho' sometimes I bring in things which directly relate to the Jews, yet they reach Socinians as well as Jews, for both are Enemies; the first indeed deny Christ to be the Messiah, though the Ancients owned him to be God, and Socinians own him to be a Messiah, but deny him to be true God. I omit, the Debate about the Divinity of the Holy Ghost, and of the high Point of Christ's Satisfaction, etc. The Meditation on the most holy Trinity and the Lord Jesus his Divinity, affording Matter enough to fill up these Sheets, wherein, I hope, the Truth is cleared and confirmed, and Error refuted: If the Reader findeth good by it, as I pray God be may, as it doth come from God, so from first to last, let him return the whole Praise and Glory to him whom alone it belongeth unto.   

THE CONTENTS OF THE CHAPTERS.  

CHAP. I. OF the Persons of Head Socinians and of their Opinions, page 1.  
Chap. II. Of Divine Essence, p. 13.  
Chap. III. Of the Persons of the Godhead. p. 16.  
Chap. IU. Of the Holy Trinity, p. 22.  
Chap. V Of Christ's Divinity, p. 46.  
Chap. VI Christ is true natural Son of God by Eternal Generation, p. 84.  
Chap. VII. Essential divine Attributes belong to Christ, p. 138.  
Chap. VIII. Works proper to God belong to Christ, page 161.  
Chap. IX. Worship proper and due to the true God belongs to Christ, p. 185.  
Chap. X. The Socinians Objections answered, p. 260.  
Chap. XI. Animadversions upon a Book called Christianity not Mysterious, p. 315.    


CHAP. I. Of the Persons of head Socinians, and of their Opinions.  
OUR blessed Lord and Saviour, in his Parable 
* Mat. 13  of the Sour and the Tares, doth plainly declare and forewarn us of what should befall his Church from his time, which was that of her Birth, unto the end of the World: In general, the Field is the World, but in particular, 'tis his Church; the Sour, as he explains it, is himself, both in person and by means of the Labourers his Disciples, and other Servants of his; the good Seed are the Children of the Kingdom, and the true sound Doctrines thereof, taught by his faithful Ministers; but the Tares are the Children of the wicked one, not only as to Persons, but in relation to false Doctrines, Errors, and Heresies, which whilst Men that ought to have watched, slept, Christ's Enemy, which is the Devil, took that opportunity, for he loses none, and in part, through the fault of the Watchmen, did his work: This Mystery is by S. Paul represented under the notion and name of a Building, whereof the Lord Jesus is the Foundation; for, saith he 
* 1 Cor. 3.11, 12. , other foundation can no man lay; the wise and faithful Builders do upon that Foundation build Gold, Silver, and precious Stones; but the unfaithful and mercenary are not content to raise a Superstructure of their own, which is Wood, Hay, and Stubble, but also attempt to overthrow the Foundation, and in opposition to the City of God, would build a Babel of their own; yet I make no doubt, but through God's just Judgement, it will at last end in their Confusion, as 〈◊〉 happeneth unto all that 
* Acts 5.39.  be found even to fight against God.  
Surely in the superlative degree, they fight against God, who reach, and as far as they can, do strike at divine Nature and at the Godhead itself, which any one doth that speaks or writes against the holy Trinity of Persons, or denies the Divinity of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, as Socinians do: To what I said 
† Serious Advice to a Preservative against, etc.  elsewhere of the Authors of such Blasphemies, I shall add some few Circumstances of their Rise and Progress, whereby it will appear how, as the Devil at our Saviour's coming into the World, was very busy to use means, and by Herod, to destroy his Person, so by the Scribes and Pharisees, to oppose the Preaching and Progress of the Gospel. Thus about the time when God dispersed Popish Errors, Darkness and Ignorance, and through a happy Reformation, caused the Light of the Gospel again to shine, the same Enemy to God and Mankind, stirred up Instruments to stop the Work, or at least to corrupt and hinder it from coming to its due perfection.  
These hellish Instruments were Michael Servetus, born in Artagon, one of the Kingdoms of Spain, who having past his Youth in Africa, amongst Jews and Mahometans, was infected with their Blasphemies; and being come back into Europe, did in 1525. writ Books entitled, The Divine Nature of Christ, and the Errors of the Trinity, etc. that Wretch made such an abominable and hellish Comparison of the most adorable Trinity, that I abhor to think on't, much more to set it down upon Paper. He came to Geneva, where neither the Writings of, nor Conferences with Calvin, could work upon him; so that at last, in the Year 1553. he there was put to death for Blasphemy and Sedition.  
The next is Valentinus Gentilis, of Cosenza in Italy● who forged the Blasphemy of Three Gods, and otherwise corrupted the Doctrine of the Unity of Essence and Trinity of Persons: This Man, after Servetus' death, was in the same Town put in Prison, and recanted; soon after he went away, but returned to his Vomit; for he again asserted it in public, and dispersed it in Poland and Suitzerland, but being taken in the Canton of Bern, in 1566. was there put to death.  
Laelius Socinus, Son to Marius Socinus, a famous Lawyer of Sienna, came also to Geneva, which, at that time, was the great place of refuge for those who went out of Italy and neighbouring Countries to forsake Popery, where he was known to Calvin; and thence he went to Zurich; but Calvin having found him out, did write him two sharp Letters, one in 1552. the other in 1555. at Zurich he did, but under the borrowed Name of Martinus Bellius, writ something to show how Servetus had unjustly been put to death: In his Commentary upon the first Chapter of John, he lays the Foundation of whole Socinianism, which, indeed, is but a Chaos and Confusion of natural and spiritual Ignorance, and a mere Contempt of the Word of God; Zanchius was one of the first that refuted it. This Loelius, all the while he conversed with Zanchius, never opened himself to him, only seemed to propound him Questions according to the Schoolway, to exercise his Parts, but not to be positive; so that indeed he imposed upon him and Melanchton, so cunning was he not to discover his Opinions.  
By'r his Nephew Faustus, born in Sienna in 1538. was a bolder Man, of acute Parts, but a Sophister, and consequently fit to perfect the Heresy which the other was broaching: He, with his Uncle, went first to Geneva, afterwards to Zurich: at Basil he made acquaintance with Sebastian Castellio, of whom he learned something in the Hebrew and Greek Languages, and the 
* That Christ is merely Man, and had no Being till his Incarnation.  Samosatenian Heresy. His Uncle being dead in Zurich in 1562. the 37th of his Age, at which time Faustus was 23 years old, as soon as he heard of his death, he went to the place to secure his Manuscripts (which he had desired him to publish in due time) for fear they should fall into other hands: with these Faustus went into Italy, where for about Twelve Years he lived about the Duke of Florence's Court, whence he returned to Basil in 1574. the 35th of his Age, and there lived Three Years, thence he went into Transylvania, about 1577. lastly into Poland, in 1579. about the 40th of his Age, where he made it his whole business to propagate his Uncle's Opinions: There he published Castellio's Pelagian Dialogues about Predestination, Election, , and Faith, with a Preface of his own, under the Name of Felix Turpio, which Book, Arminians, because it served their turns, caused to be reprinted with Additions at Gouda in Holland, in 1613. He also in the Year 1582. being in Cracovia, published a Tract of his upon a part of the Seventh Chapter to the Romans, wherein he endeavours to prove how in that place S. Paul speaks of himself not as being a regenerate Man; and in that too he disguiseth his Name, as the manner is among pestilent Heresiarks, the more easily and safely to spread the Poison, and wound Souls with an unknown and invisible hand; in that Book he calls himself Prosper Dysidaeus, which answers to his true Name Faustus Socinus, as also doth his other borrowed Name of Felix Turpio; for the three Latin Words Prosper, Felix, and Faustus signify the same; also the Words Dysidaeus, Turpio, and Socinus have the same signification; the first is Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which signifieth filthy and deform, so doth the Latin Turpio, also the Italian Socinus from Sozzo. Thus, though his true and borrowed Christian Names be not proper for him, because such a miserable Wretch may not be called happy, yet his Sur-Names, whether true or borrowed, are to signify his filthy, hellish, and monstrous Blasphemies. Sozzo, whence comes the Word Socinus, as by him owned in the Names which in his Books he calls himself by, in Italian signifies foul, nasty, filthy; and here we may say, conveniunt rebus nomina saepè suis; for in his Opinions he was as impure a Man as ever was born of a Woman. He lived in Cracovia in Poland, whence, towards the latter end of his Life, he removed to a Country Town about Nine Miles distant, called in Latin Luclavicia, and in Polonish, I think Luklow, or Luklowi●z, where he died in 1604. and of his Age 65.  
This I have been the more particular upon, because he is looked upon as the chief Promoter and Publisher of an Heresy, which, of all the rest amongst Christians, is the most unworthy of the Name of Christ, whereof it hath but the shadow, and in some respect, is worse than Heathenism, makes way for Mahometism, Judadaism, and Atheism, and under a false Notion of Piety, laughs at, despiseth, and perverteth all Articles of our Faith, and, in short, goes about to form a new Religion.  
Hereunto I shall add only this, how these Heresies had some other Followers, which made some noise in the World, George Blandrata of Saluzze, and Paul Alciati of Milan, both Italians and Physicians, after Servetus' death and Gentilis' Recantation, fled into Poland: Bernard Ochinus (a true Disciple of Socinus, as the other two were of Gentilis) who, for some impure Dialogues of his, had been expelled out of Zurich and Basil: all of them were in the Year 1565. banished out of Poland, by reason of their Heresy: Alciati went into Turkey and embraced Mahometanism: Ochinus into Moravia to the Anabaptists, and Blandrata fled into Transylvania, where, by the Favour of one Francis David, he was entertained as Physician to the Prince; this David differed from Socinus, in that he denied Jesus Christ should be adored, or any Prayers to be made in his Name. This is that hellish Covey of abominable and pernicious Fowl, and that Generation of Vipers, out of which sprung since, and now more than ever, many of the kind; so that Den is, like Babylon, to speak in Scripture Language 
* Revel. 18.2. , become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird; for the profane, Deists and Atheists, etc. fall into them. But that Poison infected not only those forenamed Parts, it also spread into Hungary and Germany, nay, as far as Heydelberg, where one Neuserus, with two or three more, privately taught those Heresies, yet at last boasted he had Seventy Five unanswerable Arguments against the Trinity; but through the care of Prince Frederick III. the guilty being punished, the Infection ceased there; a Precedent for other Princes and States to follow; And from such Wretches, what else can be expected but Overturnings and Confusions in Church and State?  
Thus, having said something of the Persons, We must name some of their ●hief Opinions, and then speak of the Cause: As to the first, they have much confounded the whole Doctrine of Religion from first to last: They believe that Man, before his Fall, was naturally mortal; so God's threatening, the day that thou eatest thou shalt surely die, was frivolous; then that by the Light of Nature, no Man can have the knowledge of God; that Man before his Fall had no original Righteousness, and that there is in us no original Sin, as it imports Deformity of Nature: They say there is in us free Will to that which is good; that the Causes of Predestination are not in God, but in Men; and that he doth not predestinate to Salvation any particular and certain Person; and that Predestination may be frustrated: As to Providence, they assert that God hath no foreknowledge of Contingencies determinately, but alternatively; and as to most of these Matters of Grace and Providence, they are agreed with Arminians: Further, they say that God could justly pardon our Sins without any Satisfaction; that Christ, by his Death, did not satisfy for us, but only obtained for us Power to satisfy for ourselves by our Faith and Obedience; that Christ died for himself, that is, not for his Sins, but for the Mortality and Infirmities of our Nature which he took upon him; Christ became not our High Priest, nor immortal nor impassable before he ascended into Heaven; that everlasting Death is nothing else but a perpetual Continuance in death or Annihilation; that Eternal Fire is so called from its Effect, which is the eternal extinction or reducing to nothing of the Wicked which shall be found alive at the last Day. They would have Christ's Incarnation to be against Reason and Scripture, they deny him to be truly God; the like of the Holy Ghost: That there is in One God no Trinity of Persons; and that the Old Testament is needless for Christians, etc. All these and other Blasphemies are found in the Works of Socinus, in the Racovian Catechism, whereof Smalcius is the Author, of Ostorodius, Crellius, Wolkelius, Vaydovius, etc. but we shall, by the Grace of God, insist only upon some of their greatest Blasphemies. Now to the Cause:  
Matters of this high Nature and fundamental Concernment to our Holy Religion, must not be prostituted to the captious scanning of Men of corrupt Minds, nor the ways of God be made layable to the Judgement of Men, rather humbly to be adored with Submission of Mind and Obedience of Faith to the Revelation declared in God's Word; and herein we ought the more to be sober and cautious that we know Errors to be linked together, and to have a dependency one upon another; he that strikes at the Grace of the Lord Jesus, will afterwards make no Conscience to fly out against his Person; he who denies him to be a Prophet, will soon disown him to be a King and a Priest; for as one Depth calls to another, so an Arminian can easily become a rank Pelagian and Socinian: Wherefore 'tis necessary, at the very beginning, to oppose Errors, defend every inch of ground against such as will daily grow worse and worse, as do the 
* James 1.8.  double-minded men, that are for their own, more than for the Truth's Interest; for they are unstable in all their ways: and the more Hands orderly employed, the better is the Effect like to be, This Consideration makes me to appear amongst those who heretofore did, and now do, oppose false Teachers, who not only privily, but also in public, bring in again those damnable Heresies, which, of old, Truth and Learning exploded and baffled out of the World.  
The Divinity of Christ was the Stumbling-block to the Jews, who could not endure to hear him call himself the Son of God absolutely and without limitation, and thereat were enraged, which made 'em take up Stones to cast at him, John 8.59. and also at another time, Chap. 10.31. the Doctrines about the Holy Trinity and the Person and Deity of Christ, do stand and fall together. In our Saviour's time it began to be opposed by the Jews, and since from time to time continued to be so by the Devil's Instruments raised to that same purpose, and within the last Age revived by the forenamed Blasphemers against the Rock of the Church, which is built on the Confession that Christ is the Son of the living God, not by any special Favour or any such Restriction, for then there would be only a gradual difference between his and our being Sons of God; but he is simply the Son of God, yea, his only begotten.  
Before we enter upon this important Matter, some things to clear the state of the Question must be premised, so that we must show wherein we agree, before we speak of that wherein we differ, as to the first this Foundation must be laid, there is a God the Cause of all, the Effect of none, who hath made all, and is made by none, who hath given all things their Being, and hath his own of himself: This is not denied, so I shall not go about to prove it, the Light of Nature, the Book of Scripture, and the Testimony of Conscience, do sufficiently convince Men of it. The next thing is, what God is? He being infinite cannot be defined, but imperfectly described, only according to what he hath in his Word revealed of himself, how he is infinite, independent, self-sufficient, eternal, unchangeable. But such is the blindness of some men's Judgements, or the Perverseness of their Hearts, that they will cavil at the Nature, Names, Attributes, and Works of this eternal and infinite Being.  
But about this fundamental Truth, our Faith must be directed by the Revelation which God hath made of it in his holy Word, herein Men must not follow their own fancy; for 
* 〈◊〉 Mat. 〈…〉  no man knoweth the father but the son, and he to whom the son will reveal him: Now the sum of this Revelation in the Word is, that God is One, that this One God is Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; that the Father is the Father of the Son, and the Son the Son of the Father; and the Holy Ghost the Spirit of the Father and of the Son; and that they are distinct one from another in respect of this their mutual Relation; by this Rule we must be guided how to know, believe, worship, love, fear, and obey him, that is the Father One true God, the Son One true God, and the Holy Ghost One true God, to be believed, worshipped, and obeyed.  
Now for our Edification and further Instruction, th●● Doctrine admits of some Enlargement and Explanation to prevent undue Notions of God, which, by reason of the Blindness and Ignorance we are naturally involved in, our Minds are liable unto; thus out of the Revelation that God is One, we easily deduce he is so in respect of his Nature, Essence, or Godhead; and how being. Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, he doth subsist in these Three distinct Persons; thence also is derived the manner of their Subsistence, what are their mutual respects to each other, and such like things by a necessary Consequence from the Revelation: Upon these Grounds were compiled the Nicene, Athanasian, and other Creeds or Articles of Faith, in opposition to the Heresies of those Times; for therein was explained the true Sense of Scripture about those matters, which were wrested by the Enemies of the Truth; and though the Orthodox Doctors and Councils, to oppose the Error, and lay open the Venom, made use of some Words and Expressions which in so many Letters are not set down in the Word of God, yet they were not to blame; for they were drawn out of it by lawful and necessary Consequences; Men may lawfully conceive in their Minds what is the nature of the Things or the sense of the Words according to the scope of the Spirit of God in the Writings of the Prophets and Apostles, and also as to the Analogy of Faith, or else we are no better than Brutes. So that if the chief Assertion contained in the Revelation be true, so must also be whatsoever is therein included, and in the Explication thereof drawn by a true and right Consequence: Wherefore, seeing God hath declared Father, Son, and Holy Ghost to be One God, it necessarily follows they are One in Nature; because therein only they can be One: And this is the ground of any other Unity; and seeing it is also declared they are Three, it must be explained of three distinct Persons or Subsistences wherein only it is possible they can be Three.  
The Revelation is clear, there is One God, this God is Father called God, Son called God, Holy Ghost called God; and here the Enemies of Truth should begin their Opposition, which is the true way and method, yet they do not, but they except against the Explication, which only tends to farther Edifying and Instruction, and quarrel with Words, as Essence, Trinity, Persons, etc. Divine Nature is One, yet common to Three; in the Mystery of the Trinity we must learn the Truth, the Height and Excellency thereof; the Truth doth not depend upon our Apprehension and Understanding of it, but upon the Consent of the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments; and tho', under the first, Men were more in the dark, yet there was Light enough to make 'em believe it with humble Faith and Piety; but under the last, that Truth is clearly apparent, 'tis by 
* John 5.4.  Faith only that we are enabled to overcome the World: so 
† 2 Cor. 5.7.  we walk by faith and not by sight; to show our Religion is matter of Faith more than of Fact, to be attained unto through Belief, and not through Senses, whose Object is visible and temporal, but that of Faith is 
* 2 Cor. 4.18.  spiritual, invisible, and eternal; the holy Mystery of the Trinity cannot be comprehended by the Light of Grace nor of Glory, much less by that of Nature.  
Controvertes about Principles are more intricate and difficult than about Conclusions, especially in things relating to God, the Principal of all Being's; and that for two Reasons, the first, because the infinite and incomprehensible Majesty of God, doth far exceed our Understanding; the second, upon the account of the Blindness and Vanity of Man's Mind, which either will not depend upon the Revelation, without which we can never know things of that nature, or else goes about with its wrong Notions to depravate it, not so much as to the Words as in the Sense and Doctrine wherein Heresy doth consist: Now, as 'tis a damnable Presumption in those who in these Matters do pervert the true Sense of the Word of God, so I must say, 'tis a great Imprudence in those who undertake to refute them, to abound in their own Sense, leaving the trodden way, and slighting Arguments made use of by the former Assertors of these Truths, to set up new Notions and Hypotheses of their own, which render those Points more abstruse, and these new Lights of theirs, instead of clearing make them darker, instead of proving they do not so much as illustrate the matter; the Proofs ought to be drawn out of the Revelation, and in the Explanation thereof 'tis no Shame nor Loss of Reputation to follow the Steps and Methods of Learned and Orthodox Men who went before, and, with great Success, opposed Error and Blasphemy; I do not hereby intent to deny a Man the liberty of making use of the Parts and Learning which God hath endued him with above others, and improve them to a further Confirmation of the Truth; but I would not have them to departed from the Foundation laid before them, nor to exercise their wand'ring Thoughts about the adorable and incomprehensible Nature of God, merely to affect Singularity, and thereby to be applauded.  
This very thing hath, of late, led if not tumbled some into strange and horrid Precipices, which, to avoid, they more and more entangled themselves therein, as hath well been observed by others; 'tis no good Consequence for such to say, that if a Person be a Mind, a Spirit, and a Substance, than Three Persons must be Three distinct Minds, Spirits, and Substances, as distinct as Adam and Abel, though not separate: But the Error of the Hypothesis lies in this which openeth the false Ground thereof, namely, because Mind, Spirit, and Substance, in their proper signification, are absolute; but Person, in its proper signification, is a relative Term: because King William is King of England, Scotland, and Ireland, must we argue, that since a King is a Man, an Animal, a Substance, therefore, because of Three distinct, substantial Kingdoms, he is Three distinct Men, Three distinct Animals, and Three distinct Substances; not so, because Man, Animal, and Substance are Terms absolute, but King is relative. Suppose (as one said before, and to the purpose) a Man were Dean of Paul's, of Westminster, and of Windsor, should we thence conclude, that since a Dean is a Man, an Animal, a Substance, therefore because of Three distinct Deaneries, he is Three distinct Substances? I think not, because Man, Animal, Substance are Terms absolute, but Dean is relative. It is very sad now to see the blasphemous Heresy of the Threetheites or of Three Gods revived among us by such as might do better; in every well-ordered Christian State Idolatry and Blasphemy ought not to be tolerated, but severely punished.  
I know there are certain Terms to be explained in the Discussion of these Controversies, especially in the Schools, as, may be, Essence, Existence, Subsistence, Substance, Individuum, Suppositum, Hypostasis, or Person, wherein they agree, and wherein they differ; but I conceive they who writ for a public good, and would make these Points intelligible to most, if not to all Readers, might well avoid too far engaging in Metaphysical Notions; I humbly conceive it were better, because more profitablen, in a Theological way to write and explain that which is most necessary to be understood according to the Pattern of Scripture and the Practice of the Orthodox Primitive Church, and of its Doctors, against Heretics, as we have it in the three Creeds, which are a production of their universal Consent: But for some Men, herein thus far to indulge their fancy, as to let it spatiate as much as it will, and give it a full Latitude to wander, and then express itself in such Terms as one of a Hundred Thousand can hardly understand the meaning thereof: Nay, upon reasonable grounds, it may be doubted whether the Author doth well understand them; this is only to intricate the Matter, to puzzle the Reader, and that which is worse, to want a due respect for the Majesty of God, whose Mysteries ought to be handled with an awful Reverence; no Man may presume to know of him beyond what he hath been pleased to reveal himself; for if we cannot well and perfectly know things created, much less the Creator, neither can the less comprehend the greater; and if 
* Rom. 11.33.  God's Judgements be past finding out, much more is he himself. Besides that, this way of thus managing these Matters doth much prejudice the Cause, and gives the Adversaries thereof ground to say of us, They cannot among themselves agree how to defend it.   

CHAP. II. Of Divine Essence.  
HERETICS Dispute against the Words Essence, Trinity, and Person used in the Primitive Church; but sound Faith contendeth not about Words, when the Truth of the thing is agreed upon: Trinity is the abstract whereof three is the Concrete, expressed 1 John 5.7. as that of Jehovah and Lord signify the Essence rendered by him 
* Revel. 1.8.  Which is, which was, and which is to come: as for Persons, though it be not as to the Letter in Scripture, yet 'tis virtually, first in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, equivalent to that of 
† Heb. 1.3.  Person; then in the very same word, but spoken of 
* 2 Cor. 1.11.  Men, where it signifies an Individuum or a Person, and though just the very word is not used in Scripture, 'tis not material, because in Divinity; not the Word but the Thing, not the Sound but the Sense, are to be minded: And though the word Person be deduced from Stages and things not serious, yet we ought to look to the Use more than to the Etymology or Derivation; and what if it be taken from things created and very unlike to God? So we may say, Are all Words purified from their original Imperfefection? But for the abuse of a Word or a Thing, we must not leave the right use of it.  
When Scripture saith, there is One God, this Oneness can relate to nothing but to the Being, Essence, or Nature of God; for in this respect, God is one; so we have reason thereby to represent the Unity of the Godhead; there is in Scripture mention of God's Godhead 
* Rom. 1.20. , and of his Nature; when they which by nature are no gods 
† Gal. 4.8. , are excluded from being Objects of our Worship: So when Scripture reveals there is Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, it makes a distinction between them, yet calls every one God; have we not cause thereupon to call them Three Persons, and affirm, that in One Essence or Godhead are Three Persons? Do not these Words express the thing, without doing it any Wrong or Injury; for they are neither profane nor unworthy of God; if the Words Essence, Unity, Trinity, be not in so many Letters in Scriptures, no more is the Word Sacrament; yet though the Name be not in, the thing is. But herein they are more peevish than their Father Socinus, who tells Francis David 
* Vol. I. p. 778. , that though the Terms of Essence and Person be not in Scripture, if the Sense be, 'tis no matter, and that they who went upon such Grounds exposed their Cause. The Method which the Enemies to this Truth ought to take, should be this, Whether they own, according to the Revelation, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost to be One God? Which, if they deny, we want no Proofs; but if they own it, then let them proceed to a Debate, whether they are One in Nature and Three in Persons, or how the Case is to be stated; for it is very unreasonable to dispute about Words and Explication of any thing concerning the Relations or Manner, till the thing itself be plainly confessed or denied.  
Now by the Grace of God, we must proceed, and though I love not a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a Dispute about Words, yet as Words do signify Things, so some are so fundamental to the matter in hand, that something I must say about 'em; the first is Essence, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, he which is; what 
* Exod. 3.14.  we call Essence or Nature, is not an imaginary thing, and existing only in the Mind as in an Idea, neither is it a thing separated from the Persons, but always inherent in them, whereby they subsist; so that if there were no Individuum of such a Species, there also would be no Essence of that Species, as in the case of Human Nature, which comprehends a rational Soul, and an organical Body; then Humanity is that whereby every Man is a Man, but this Nature doth not subsist without Men, but is so inherent in Men, that in case there were no Men, there could be no human Nature, or Humanity: Thus in God, the Divine Essence is not a thing Existing without Son, Father, and Holy Ghost, as if it was a fourth thing wherein these Three be contained; but as we say in Philosophy of the Soul, est tota in toto, & tota in qualibet parte, so divine Nature is whole in the Father, whole in the Son, and whole in the Holy Ghost, and that in an infinitely more excellent way than either Nature or the Soul are in us; for they are finitely in Men, but infinitely in every Person of the Trinity, and exactly and perfectly the same; for indeed the Essence of God is nothing else but his Nature, namely the Deity or the Godhead; God is not divided into divers Essences, but distinguished into divers Persons; God cannot be divided into several Natures or Parts, so the Persons which subsist in that One Essence, are only distinct, and not separate one from another: He who saith a Person of the holy Trinity, saith One Essence common to Three Persons. Hereupon we must know how in the most Holy Trinity something is common to the Three Persons, such is the Essence, and something incommunicable and proper to every one in their respective relations: We ought further to know how the Words Essence, Substance, and Nature, though in some respect they may admit of some difference, yet when spoken of the Godhead they are taken for one and the same: Whereunto may be added Deity and God's being, there is in Schools of Divinity and Philosophy but one Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be, to signify Essence and Substance, and therefore let me speak to some by way of warning, that they may multiply Substances no more than Essences, for 'tis but one and the same thing, without running into Tritheism or the Blasphemy of Three Gods; neither may they entertain the Notions of Three Minds, Being's, or Spirits; for as there is but One divine Nature and Being, and but One God, so that same God is but One Spirit: Wherefore in these times Men should follow the Christian Prudence and Moderation of the Doctors of the Church in former Ages, who were very cautious not to rush into new Notions of their own about these Matters, or rashly to run into new fangled Opinions or Hypotheses, as they call them, or Suppositions of their own, when it would be much better for them to follow the Theses of the Text, among Attributes of what we call Essence, Metaphysicians reckon this to be one, that it is to be participatively indivisible, because 'tis equally imparted to those whose Essence it is; for if there was any Addition, Diminution, or Alteration, it would not be the same; much more and upon a better account doth this hold about that Divine Nature by the Apostle in the very words attributed unto God, 2 Pet. 1.4. In the Godhead there is no Division, only Distinction, the Essence and Persons not really but rationally distinct; for the Essence is whole and indivisible in every Person, but the Persons be really distinct one from another, by means of some incommunicable Attribute; for the Father is not the Son, nor the Son the Father, nor the Holy Ghost either Father or Son.  
The Essence is, as Schoolmen say, the Quiddity of the thing, that whereby the thing is what it is; concerning which this is to be observed, the Essence neither begetteth nor is begotten, it neither breatheth nor is breathed; this is the Attribute of the Person not of the Nature; nevertheless, in the Generation and Breathing is the whole Essence, because 'tis indivisible, communicated to the Person begotten, the Son, and to the proceeding, the Holy Ghost, and 'tis true, the Son is begotten of the Essence of the Father, for he is God of God, Light of Light, and to his only begotten Son the Father hath given all things, except to be Father, according to that saying of our blessed Saviour 
* John 5.26. , as the father hath life in himself, so hath he given to the son to have life in himself.   

CHAP. III. Of the Persons of the Godhead.  
BUT this leads me to speak of the Persons, and upon the matter 'tis fit to know in general what a Person is, namely one particular thing indivisible, incommunicable, living, reasonable, subsisting in itself, and not having part of another; the first, because no general Notion is a Person; the second, because a Person may not be divided into many parts; the third, because though one may communicate his Nature, yet his Personality he cannot communicate; the fourth, no Person without Life and Reason; the fifth, because every Person is a Being that hath its own proper subsisting; thus Christ's Humanity is not a Person, because it doth not subsist in itself; the sixth, because that which is part of another is no Person; thus the Soul of Man separated from the Body is no Person. Now the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are of a larger extent than that of Person, for they are spoken of any individual Substance; but a Person is an individual Substance, complete, rational, and as we said, differing from another by means of some incommunicable Property: Hence we say that a Person in the Trinity is whole God, not absolutely or simply considered, but by means of some personal Propriety; 'tis not a Species of God, or of the Deity, nor part, nor a thing different from the Deity, nor a bare relation, or only a manner of being and subsisting, but 'tis the Essence of God with a certain manner of subsisting, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, neither is it a Compound of the Essence or of the manner of subsisting.  
So then a Person of the Deity is usually described to be an incommunicable Subsistence of the divine Essence; for in One and most simple nature of God are several Persons distinct, to whom the infinite and singular Nature of One only God is common; for Scripture doth teach us, that there is but One God, and Three distinct Persons, to whom it doth attribute the Proprieties of God, whence we may conclude, that there is in God Oneness or Unity of Essence and Plurality of Persons: This is matter of Faith to be believed, and not of Fact to be caviled at: Hence we find how in Scripture the word God is sometimes taken for the Essence and Nature of God, and at other times for certain Persons of the Godhead, as we shall have occasion to show; the Father hath his Essence originally in himself, and from none other; the Son and the Holy Ghost have the selfsame increated Essence in themselves, as well as the Father, but not from themselves; the Son and Holy Ghost are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the same nature with the Father, not in the same sense as Men are among themselves, for Men are divided one from another, but the Persons of the blessed Trinity not so, for they be absolutely undivided, so that the Three are but One God. The Greeks call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Person in the same signification as we use when we say the Person of the Son and of the Holy Ghost: Now Scripture names them as things distinguished between themselves, individual, subsisting, etc. as we said just before, if they be, as they are, working and acting, than they are Persons according to the Axiom in Philosophy, actiones sunt suppositorum: Now if the Father be such, if the Son and Holy Ghost be such, what can hinder us from saying, the Father is a Person, the Son is a Person, the Holy Ghost is a Person? The Greek Fathers made use of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which in 
* Heb. 1.3.  Scripture we find in the same sense, that is, Person, as we use it, where Christ is called the express Image of his [the Father's] person: I say, they made use of it against Heretics who denied Father, Son, and Holy Ghost to be Three things, so different as that the one is not and cannot be the other; though as I already said, in Scripture we have not in so many Letters the Words of Unity, Trinity, Essence, and Person, yet we therein have the things themselves whence they be derived, and the very Words we find used by many of the ancient Fathers.  
Now Person and Personality are in divine much different of what they are in human things, because the one is infinite and the other finite; human Nature is One, but in Specie in many Persons, as Peter, James, Paul, but divine Nature is but One and the same in number, existing in Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; as far as we are able to apprehend, the Person differs from the Nature not really but rationally, as the manner. of a thing from the thing itself, as may be a degree of heat from the heat it comes to: Divine Essence is whole in every Person, but not as the whole is in its parts; for 'tis not divided as we said, but indivisible; now the manner of subsisting of the Divine Essence, which is but One in number in Three Persons, is incomprehensible and unexpressible, and the manner how the Godhead is attributed to the Three, is singular and wonderful, which no Reason can demonstrate, nor Example illustrate; to which purpose, saith our Saviour 
* Luk. 10.22.  No man knows who the son is but the father, and who the father is but the son, and to whom the son will reveal him: By virtue of that Revelation, the manner of knowing the Father is not the same as is in the Son; yet Nature doth not produce Nature, nor Nature Person, nor Person Nature; but Person doth Person, not of the Essence, but in unity of the same Nature, common to the Three Persons, neither doth it produce without itself as in corporeal things, because no Penetration of Dimension, but within itself, for 'tis infinite: Now the Father gives Nature to the Son, and both to the Holy Ghost, not by Alienation, but by Communication, which is so imparted to the Receiver, as that it still remains in the Giver, as one Light hath it from another, without any Diminution: Hence it is that one Person doth not subsist without the other, as 'tis in Men, but all Three do, one within another; this made our Saviour say 
* John 10.38. , The father is in me and I in him, and 
† Ch. 14.10.  I am in the father and the father in me: Yet this hinders not but that they are distinct among themselves; for they are not so one in another as the Accident is in its Subject neither is one predicated and spoken of the other, as Man is of John; for the Father is not the Son, nor the Son the Holy Ghost, 'tis enough they are personally distinguished, and in their manner of subsisting, the Father unbegotten begets the Son, the Son begotten of the Father, the Holy Ghost proceeding from both; as this is ad intra, inwardly and among themselves, so outwardly; though the outward Works be common to the Three, yet it seemed good to divine Wisdom, particularly to attribute unto the Father the Work of Creation, to the Son that of Redemption, to the Holy Ghost that of Sanctification; Works of Power in Schools of Divinity are attributed to the Father, of Wisdom to the Son, of Mercy and Goodness to the Holy Ghost. In these Works ad extra, as Creation, Salvation, Sanctification, essentially there is but One Cause and Principle; for there is but One God, but personally there are Three, because Three Persons, which not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do freely cooperate; and as these Persons in subsisting are distinguished in order, so also in their working, one doth not operate without the other, and this Operation follows the Subsistence; the Father is and works from none, the Son from the Father, and the Holy Ghost from both; yet this order of working doth take away the Equality of Persons no more than doth their Order of subsisting.  
Now the Acts whereby the Father hath begotten the Son, and both produced the Holy Ghost, are in several senses voluntary and necessary; the first, because no Violence or Compulsion, but very freely; the second, 'tis not voluntary but necessary, if we take Voluntary in opposition to Natural; for Voluntary signifies Contingent, that which can be or not be; but 'tis so necessary, that the Father could not but beget the Son, and both breath the Holy Ghost; and this from all eternity, otherwise some new thing had befallen divine Nature, which is absurd: And this Generation and Production are not as in human things, where the Father is in time before the Son, but here the Son is coeternal with the Father, and the Holy Ghost with both, not forcibly but necessarily, as Light is from the Sun, and Heat from the Fire; so the Father is no more without the Son and the Holy Ghost, than the Sun is without Light; God is not without his Wisdom and his Virtue, and this from all eternity, I mean that called imparticipata, or à parte ante and à parte post, that is, without beginning or ending, incommunicable to the Creature; and herein indeed doth differ this divine Production from that of the Light of the Sun and Heat of the Fire, wherein is a succession and a difference, the Light of the Sun to day is sometime different from that of yesterday, but the Son is to day the same he was yesterday; 
* Heb. 13 8.  Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.  
There is also an order among the Three Persons, the Father is first, as 
† Matth, 28.19. , Baptise the nations in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; thus the Father is named first, 
* 1 John 5.7.  the Son next, than the Holy Ghost: In the Creed, the Father is also named first, the Son the second, the Holy Ghost the third; the Father of himself, the Son of the Father, and the Holy Ghost, as already said, of both, yet all Three may be called and are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 self God, as we shall by God's Grace speak of more hereafter: Neither doth the divine Nature, though subsisting of itself, as single, and individual, make any fourth Person in the Godhead distinct from the Three, because it subsisteth in a certain manner, and only in the Persons of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; these Three Persons are not of another or different Nature, nor of the like or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, under which word the Arians would have sheltered their Error, nor of a common as Men who have a common Essence but not the same in Number; but this divine Essence in Three Persons is the very same in number. All this is a great Mystery, revealed in the Word of God, professed by the Church from Christ's time to this, though Satan's Rage against the Son of God, 
* 1 John 3.8.  who came to destroy his works, did from time to time raise up Instruments to blaspheme against it, and we ought humbly and devoutly to adore, and not presumptuously and profanely dive into it.   

CHAP. IU. Of the most Holy Trinity.  
ALthough the matter about the divine Nature, and the Three Persons which we have already spoken of, be but one and the same with that of the most adorable Trinity, as indeed they in Discourse are Parts one of another, and so twisted and connexed together that what we speak of one hath a Relation to, and Dependency upon the other, yet before we come to the Polemical or Controversial Part of these Points, we by the Grace of God, shall under the Head of the Blessed Trinity, continue to speak of the Didactical or Doctrinal Part of our Discourse, the more to inculcate into the Minds of the Readers less acquainted with these Disputes, what Grounds they ought to go upon, and to believe concerning these Fundamentals of our Faith, and necessary Doctrines of our Salvation. What we believe about it, is above, not against Reason, for we believe not One God to be many Gods, nor Three Persons to be but One Person: If in Human Things I should say absolutely, I James, am Father and Son, it were a Contradiction indeed, but to speak it relatively, there is none at all; I cannot say, I am Son and Father to my Father, or Father and Son to my Son, but I may very well say I James one Man, am upon a different Account, and in a different Relation, Son and Father, in regard to my Father I am a Son, in relation to my Son, I am a Father; let the great Masters of, or pretenders to Reason, herein show me a Contradiction; no more can they, when I say, in the Godhead is one Essence or Nature, subsisting in Three Persons, and Three Persons existing in One Essence, Unity in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity.  
This great Point is not only very hard and difficult by reason of the Mystery of the Eternal, unspeakable and incomprehensible Generation of the Son of God by the Father, but also of a most high Concernment; First, Upon the Account of God's Glory, for to deny this Doctrine, is to deny the True God, because 
* 1 John 2.23.  whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not thefather. Secondly, Upon the Account of our Salvation, which by no means can be obtained without it, let Arminians say on the contrary what they will. For, 
† John 17.3.  this is eternal life to know thee the only true God and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent: And who is he but 
‖ 1 John 5.20.  the Son of God, the true God, and eternal life.  
We say, Trinity or Triunity not Triplicity, for this last implies a Composition of Three Parts; Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, are alius & alius, not aliud & aliud, other and other, but not other thing and other thing; Three distinct Persons, but One and the same Nature; we distinguish the Persons, saith 
* De Trin. & Vnit. cap. 11.  Austin, but divide not the Deity or Essence; they are not distinct Essentially, for there is but one Essence, but personally, that is, one Person is not the other, the Father not the Son, nor the Son the Father, and the Holy none of the other two: Peter, Paul and John, are not only distinct amongst themselves, but also divided one from another; so they are three Men, though but one specifical Nature, because created and finite; but in an infinite Being 'tis otherwise, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, though distinct, yet not divided; for there is but one numerical Nature, the three are Consubstantial or Coessential in Nature, Coeternal in Time, and Coequal in Power.  
The Knowledge of One God may be had by the Light of Nature, but that of the Holy Trinity, only out of Scripture, for the one is according to Reason, but the other above it; two ways there are to know God, the 1st. Nature, the 2d. Revelation; that, is defectuous, this is perfect to which God tied his Church, which alone knoweth and calleth upon God according to what he manifested of himself in his Holy Word, and thereby her Religion is different from that of all the rest of the World, and there is no other saving way to come to God but by Christ, whose Gospel is preached as the only Doctrine of Salvation; and we must not have of God such Notions as our Fancy or natural Reason suggest unto us, but such as he hath declared in his Word, for he is a voluntary Cause of all, whose Ways and Methods we ought to observe, and be guided by, in our Religion, for 
† Ephes. 1.11. & v. 5.  he works all things according to the counsel of his own will, and according to the good pleasure of his will: Yet this Holy Mystery is a stumbling-block unto the Jews and unto the Greeks foolishness, and both look upon it as Heresy, though if God's Word be the Word of Truth, this, as we hope to show, is certainly the True, Sound Doctrine, because grounded upon it, though unsound Men will neither believe it nor consent about it to the Faith of the Primitive Church and Orthodox Doctors of all Ages nor to the Confessions of Faith of all Christian Reformed Churches, as if the Spirit of God and of Truth was departed from them All, to be only amongst Socinians.  
Second Substances do exist only in the First, Man in general existeth only in James, John, that are individual, and Words are what Use makes them; an Indivisible and most single Essence abstractively considered, may and doth concretively exist in Three Persons; no Man may well say, that an infinite Essence doth not admit of three Modes or Manners of Subsistence, but he only which fancies within his shallow and finite Intellect, to understand perfectly an infinite Nature with her Modes of subsisting, which to pretend to, implieth Absurdity and Impiety: And to affirm that to be One in relation to its Essence, and many as to the Modes, is no more contradictory, than to say the same Man is real in respect of his Essence, and modal as to his Subsistence; wherefore they who would terminate an infinite Essence only to one manner of subsisting, so that it may not be communicated to another Person; either they understand not what an infinite Nature is, or else misTake the meaning of the word Terminate or Confine, which is not to prescribe limits, for that an infinite Nature doth abhor; but the meaning is, that an Essence as may be the Father's, is so the Father's Essence, as may not be the Son's in the same manner, but it may be in a different way.  
Upon this Matter, it ought carefully to be observed how the Divine Essence is considered either Absolutely or Relatively to the manner of existing; in respect to both, the Father is of himself, in relation to the first, the Son also is of himself, but as to the second, he is from the Father, so is the Holy Ghost of himself in respect to the first, that is absolutely considered, but as to the second, he proceedeth from both Father and Son: Wherefore the Father is absolutely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, self God, because both as to his Essence and as to his Person he is not from another, but the Son and Holy Ghost are also Self God, though not as to the Person, the Son being begotten by the Father as the Holy Ghost proceedeth from both; but as to the Nature, because both are by that Essence which is not produced by another, or depend upon another, but that same which of itself and by itself, doth exist from all Eternity; the Three Persons have but One and the same Essence, and they are not essentially distinstinguished. The Son is from the Father by Generation, not as to his Essence, but in relation to his Person; not absolutely as God, but relatively as Son, for the Son hath the same Nature and Substance as the Father, Self God as he, though not in the same manner; the Father may not be called Essentiator, if I may so say, of the Son or Holy Ghost, nor these Essentiated, the Son is God of himself, though not Son of himself; the manner whereby theSon is said to be from the Father is in Scripture described by the word Generation, which is nothing else but a Communication of one and the same Essence or Life that is Eternal and Indivisible, as expressed Psal. 2.7. and John 5. v. 26. which are not to be confounded with, nor measured by physical Generation, there being neither priority nor posteriority of Duration, no mutation or passing from Power to Act, from a not Being to a Being, from a division and multiplication of Essence, from a formal Reason of active and passive Generation, from a dependency of him that is begotten upon him that hath begotten, or from a greater to the lesser; so there is no such Imperfections as are in Natural and Metaphysical in which are priority and posteriority of Nature, though not of Time: So there is no Consequence to be drawn out of one for the other; thus though a natural begetter doth efficiently beget of himself, materially from himself, terminatively out of himself, no such thing is to be conceived of this Generation of the Son of God, for though in Human Things the begetter and the begotten do sometimes differ in the genus, sometimes in the species or kind; in Divine Things they differ only in the modus or manner: This Generation is without any Motion, hath no beginning nor ending, because he that begets and he that is begotten are Coeternal.  
What we say of the Son, may be affirmed of the Holy Ghost, who is from the Father and from the Son by way of procession, not as to the Nature but as to the Person, for the Essence and Self-being of the Holy Ghost is just the same with that of the Father and of the Son, he is Self-God Actually though not Originally, Essentially though not Personally. Now these Three Persons of the Godhead are distinguished by their Names, Orders, Attributes and Workings, which Distinctions do not prejudice either the Unity or Simplicity of Essence, for it is not composed of Persons, which are not before it, either in Time or Order, but, every one hath the whole Essence; neither can the Persons be said to be composed of the Essence, because it is not before the Persons, neither doth the manner of subsisting induce any Composition into the Essence, only a Distinction, and is said to modificate not to multiply it: Now the modus or manner is here improperly taken, for commonly 'tis posterior to the Subject it doth modify: But in this, it is not so, there is not in the Persons of the most Holy Trinity such a real Distinction as is between Things and Things, for the Person is not a different Thing from the Divine Essence, but 'tis the very Essence with the manner of subsisting.  
In some natural Things the manner of them is hard, and sometimes impossible to be understood: Can a Man upon sure Grounds find out how Grass and Corn grows? How the Wind is form? Whence it comes and whither it goes? and several such things in Nature; we no ways doubt but that there are in the World those who pretend to know all things, and pretend for most things to give Reasons, such as they are, But can a Man know how he himself was made and form? How his Soul came to be united to his Body? This Ignorance in common Matters we daily see and feel to be in ourselves; and what must it be in those Spiritual and High Ones which are such as no Eye hath seen, nor Ear hath heard, nor ever entered into the Heart of Man, and which 'tis impossible for the Wit of Man to conceive; which Consideration should curb the Idle Curiosity of vain Men, who as with a little short Line, would with their shallow Brains fathom the bottomless and unsearchable Depths of these adorable Mysteries, when with the Apostle 
* 2 Cor. 12.4.  that was caught up into Paradise, and heard unspeakable Words, they should cry out, 
† Rom. 11.33.  O the depth, that cannot be fathomed.  
Yet to show we are not altogether unacquainted with the Notions and Hypotheses of others about these Matters, in a stammering manner, let us say, that the 
‖ Psal. 147 5.  infinite Understanding of God never is or was Idle, and as it is his very Being, so from all Eternity, it ever was taken up, and this Understanding of God being All in All, it cannot meet with any thing but himself, so it did understand and conceive itself; as in a Looking-Glass, a Man doth conceive and beget a perfect Image of his own Face, so God in beholding and minding of himself, doth in himself beget a most lively and perfect Image of himself, and this in the Blessed Trinity is the Son of God, who is called 
* Heb. 1 3.  the perfect Image of God; just as if we may use such Comparisons, Wax upon a Seal hath the engraven Form of the Seal, so the Son of God whom his Father hath begotten of his own Understanding, is the very Form of his Father's Understanding, and when one is seen, the other is seen also, as he saith to Philip, 
† Joh. 14.9.  he who hath seen me hath seen the Father; and under the Name of Wisdom, he saith, when there were no Depths, and before the Mountains were settled, 
‖ Prov. 8.23, 24, 25.  I was brought forth.  
And as in God's Essence there is an Understanding, so there is 
* Isa. 46.10.  a Will, and by this Will God according to his own Mind, applies his Power, where, when, and how he thinks good; and as his Understanding doth so his Will everlastingly works upon himself, as it hath no other Thing to work upon but itself, it delighteth itself in the Infinite Goodness which it knoweth in itself, and that Delight which God or his Will hath in its own Infinite Goodness, produces a Subsistance in God, which is the Holy Ghost, and that mutual Love whereby the Father takes Delight in his Son, which is his own Image conceived by his Understanding, and the Son likewise rejoiceth in his Father; now this Action of the Will when it is fulfilled, is Liking and Love, as when a Man looketh in a Glass, if he smiles, his Image doth so too, and if it takes Delight in it, it takes the same in him, for they are both One, and from these Two doth result the Third, all Three are in One Face, of One Face, and but One Face: Thus if we will make use of our Reason in these Mysterious and Incomprehensible Matters, we must stutter and stammer; wherefore the best is chief, and only to stand to, and depend upon the Revelation thereof that God hath made in his Word, beyond which. Men ought not to presume, for in Matters of so High a Concernment to speak true and certain Things there is some Danger of the contrary: Herein we can give no Examples, because there is nothing like God; we have no natural Grounds and Principles positively to prove these Truths, all Comparisons from the Sun, the Soul, the Rainbow, a Triangle; and of my speaking as I, my Word, and my Breath are Three several Things different one from another, yet I am but One Man, and such like lame Comparisons fall very short of Illustrating these Mysteries, if we cannot understand how Original Sin is propagated in us, seeing our Soul is not ex traduce, begotten by Parents, how much less can we comprehend that Infinite and Eternal Being of One God in Three Persons.  
After this, is it not Just that Men should own how the Trinity is a High Mystery which falls not under Senses, and is infinitely above our Understanding? rather to be believed than felt or understood, whereof the Revelation ought to be the sufficient and only Rule, as when Scripture saith, 
* 1 Joh. 5.7.  there are three in Heaven, the Father, the Word and Holy Ghost, and these three are one; I must not puzzle my Brain to know how this can be; thus when the Apostle revealeth there is to be a Resurrection of the dead, when some Men will say, 
† 1 Cor. 15.35, 36.  How are the dead raised up, and with what body do they come? This is the rational Man who will dive too far, the Apostle for his pains calls him a Fool, thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened except it die; so in Matter of God's Decrees, thou wilt then say unto me why doth he yet find fault? The Apostle's Answer is, 
* Rom. 9.19, 20.  Nay, but O man, who art thou that repliest against God? This is to curb that idle and presumptuous Curiosity of vain and foolish Men who work their shallow Brains to find out things which can be known no otherwise than by Revelation; wherefore let us stick to that Rule about the Holy Trinity, we can and must know no more than is revealed in Scripture; and herein we must follow the Example of the Doctors of the pure Primitive Church, who borrowed no Arguments of Philosophy against the Heretics that troubled them, but only out of Scripture, the more because in Matters of so great a Concernment as are the Mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation, the Devil hath used his strongest Batteries; but he that trusteth to his own Reason, will fall short of the necessary Knowledge thereof, and in this case, I may say what is spoken in another, that if Men had been satisfied to make use only of their own Eye, without any other help, they could never have found out the magnitude of the Sun, etc. if so in the Secrets of Nature, much less in Things of Divine Concernment and of Deity itself; in human and finite Things we conceive well enough how in the same Nature are many Persons to whom it is communicated, but that that Nature is but one and the same, and that so many Individuals make but one Man in the kind no Mind can conceive; but in Men the Reason of the Multiplication is in the finite Individuals, which are not only distinct one from another, but also have their several Bounds, and that universal Nature is, as if it were, rent into so many Parts; but as God is Infinite, the Father, Son and Holy Ghost is Infinite, the Infinite cannot so much as in thought be separated, wherefore it must not be thought an absurdity if in Divine Things there is no multiplicity of Gods as there is of Men in human Nature; but still after this reasoning I return within the Circle to consult Scripture, more than to stretch our Reason, with Job let us say, 
† Job 11.7, 8, 9  Canst thou by searching find out God? canst thou find out the Almighty unto perfection, etc. O 
‖ Isai. 55.8, 9  my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways saith the Lord. Every Man may in this Matter apply to himself what is said, in the Book of Proverbs 
* Chap. 30.2.3, 4. , Surely I am more brutish than any man, and have not the understanding of a man. I neither learned wisdom, nor have the knowledge of the holy. Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? who hath gathered the winds in his fists? who hath bound the waters in a garment? who hath established all the ends of the earth? what is his name, and what is his son's name, if thou canst tell? This is by way of defiance.  
In this Controversy Three several things are to be taken notice of; first, The truth of the thing, namely, that there is a God, but One God and Three Persons, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, which to hold is necessary to our Faith. Secondly, the Explanation thereof relating to the Doctrine which we already have said several things about, whereunto we now shall in part repeat, and in part add these few things: Divine Essence communicable to Three Persons is neither multiplied nor divided, as 'tis in Men and Angels; for though their Natures be but one and the same in Species, yet 'tis different in Number, but in the Deity not so; for the same Nature in Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, is but one and the same in Number: in the Persons is an order of origine, according to which proceedeth not Essence from Essence absolutely considered, nor Person from Essence, nor one God from another God, but one Person from another Person, and from other Persons very God of very God; for the Three Persons are One God, and every Person is perfect God; in every Person is to be considered the common and the proper Mode; in God we may not conceive any thing besides One Essence and Three Modes, whereby with the Essence are constituted Three Persons, in these Persons one is not before or after the other, only in order and manner of subsisting, whatsoever is essential is common to the Three, and what is personal is proper to every one of the Three; the Mode or Personality is the Abstract, but the Mode with the Nature is the Concrete: Here is no Accident, no Genus, no Species, no Difference, no specific Unity in God, but an essential and individual Nature. The Difference of Hypostases or Persons in Divine Nature is from the different relation and manner of Subsistence, which cannot be confounded. There are essential and relative Properties, the first belong to every Person, because every Person hath the same Nature; but not the second, whereby they are distinguished one from another; the Son is not the Father, nor the Father the Son: This also is to be taken notice of, that a finite Nature is capable of Division, which an infinite is not, or else it were not infinite; therefore in this, God's Nature admits of no Comparison with any created one whatsoever.  
The Third thing to be observed in this Controversy is, the Proof, not to be taken out of Nature or Reason, but out of Scripture, of both Old and New Testaments; and herein we must be very cautious how we draw and press Consequences from the Creature to the Creator, because there is an infinite Disparity and Disproportion between them, as there is between a finite and an infinite Nature; this last filleth all when the other is confined within narrow bounds; for the infinite, as we said, being communicated, is neither divided, multiplied nor alienated: Scripture calls God, the True God, God's own and proper Son; yet Socinians have rather in the Christian Religion to admit two Gods, whereof one is a made, feigned, titular God, than a plurality of Persons in the Unity of Essence, which Opinion of theirs is really more absurd than they would have the Truth we own to seem to be; because it doth quite destroy divine Nature; for a made and secondary God, is absurd and a mere Contradiction, as good as to say, God no God: This is a Notion borrowed from the Heathens who had their Semigods, that is Men, who in their life-time having done some great Actions, were after their death, by Apotheosis, deified and reckoned among their gods: According to this fancy our Saviour may be such a Hero and God, as their Hercules was: This is their good Christian Doctrine. The ground of their Error is, that they think the number of Persons doth multiply the Essence; also they make a Confusion between being and the manner of it: And they ask us, why we do not rather multiply Essences in the plurality of the Persons, than Persons in the Unity of Essence? whereunto we answer, that we therein follow the Doctrine of the Holy Ghost in the word, and he who makes Three Essences doth also make Three Gods, but he that saith there is One divine Nature in Three Persons doth not make Three Gods; now Scripture and Reason teach us there is but One God, and the same Scripture saith also, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are but One God; and 'tis to be observed how the word Father, when used alone, as 'tis in the Lord's Prayer, without relation to the Son, is, as well as that of God, common to the Three Persons, but when it signifies a Person of the Trinity first in order, then 'tis relatively to the Son.  
Now the Plurality of Persons in One divine Essence is proved by Arguments drawn out of Five several Heads, whereof the First doth consist in several clear Testimonies out of Scripture. Secondly, from the relatives or opposite Relations, as Father, Son, Spirit, to beget, to be begotten, and to proceed from the Father and from the Son. Thirdly, by distinguishing Properties, as Creator to the Father, Redeemer to the Son, Sanctifier to the Holy Ghost. Fourthly, by peculiar Apparitions to be read in both the Old and New Testaments. And Fifthly, by different Operations; the Four last I shall not insist upon, only some of them I shall have occasion to speak of in some place of my Discourse; but the first I intent by the Grace of God chief to enlarge upon: These Scripture Proofs are of three kinds, the first speaks of a Plurality of Persons in God, the second of Three Persons, and the third mentions the Son by himself, and the Holy Ghost by himself; for about the Father there is no Dispute, yet to avoid Prolixity, we shall make use only of some few places out of the many which Scripture doth afford.  
We shall begin with that of Genesis 
* Gen. 1.1. , In the beginning God created: in the Hebrew the Word God is in the Plural Number, not Eloah which is the Singular, but Elohim the Plural; surely there must be some reason why a Nominative in the Plural is joined to a Verb in the Singular as Bara is, that signifies created; certainly this shows some kind of Plurality in the divine Nature, we may well say it is not without cause that in a Tongue whereof in a special manner God is the Author, and in which are many Names in the Singular Number, yet this in the Plural is made use of to signify God, not only in this place but very often and in many more: There are many other Names of God; but none more frequently used than this in the Plural: Why then, if in the Godhead there be but One single Person, should God delight so much in being called so often in the Plural? I say farther, that as the History of the Creation could not be written but by help of Revelation, and that God chose Moses a Man of very great Wisdom, so 〈◊〉 being inspired of God, inserted therein nothing 〈◊〉 might be called rash and superfluous; so 'twas 〈◊〉 at a venture that he chose that Word amongst so many others to name God in the great Work of Creation, which being terminated outwardly, is common and belongs to the Three Persons of the Trinity; and a thing very observable is, that in that first Chapter of Genesis, no less than Thirty two times that very same word Elohim in the plural is construed with a Verb in the singular, when in the Second Chapter that of Jehovah, which is a singular, is Eleven times joined to the Verb of a singular Number: What else can the plural Number in God signify but some Plurality?  
The Name Elohim is the first given to God in Scripture, and though it be plural, yet 'tis not personal but essential, and according to the Hebrew Idiom is spoken both of the Nature and of the Persons; hence there is only One Elohim, not Three, as in the Athanasian Creed 'tis well observed, that the Father is Almighty, the Son Almighty, the Holy Ghost Almighty, yet not Three Almighty's but only One; now the Name Elohim being derived from God's Power, there are not Three Elohims, no more than Three Almighty's, wherefore 'tis joined with an Adjective singular, Elohim Zaddik, Deus just, O God, righteous, Psal. 7.10. which they who are for Three Spirits and Three Substances are desired to take notice of, and how their Hypothesis is herein contrary to the Athanasian Creed.  
Farthermore, in the beginning of the 
* Exod. 20.2.  Decalogue, this word Elohim is joined with the Pronoun possessive in the singular thy, though the word God be in the plural; and 
† Josh. 24.19.  elsewhere we have it joined with an Adjective in the plural, and with a Relative in the singular, he is an holy God, he is in the singular, God and holy are in the plural: Nay, we have it also prefixed to a Verb in the plural, where Abraham said 
* Gen. 20.13. , When God caused (this Verb is in the plural) me to wander: So we have it elsewhere 
† 2 Sam. 7.23. ; hence we may conclude, how in the Text in hand, not by chance, but by a special divine direction, the Name God is in the plural Number, and in the place already quoted in the Preface of the Ten Commandments, God makes use of the Lord Jehovah and God Elohim, the one as it seems to declare the Unity of his Nature, and the other the Plurality of the Persons. Adonai a Name of God also in the plural Number, is frequently used either when God speaks of himself, or Men to or of him.  
Another Text to prove the Plurality of Persons in the Godhead is this 
* Gen. 1.26. , Let us make man in our image, and after our likeness, which is an Exhortation to the other Persons that had a hand in the Creation, the Verb and the Pronouns are used in the plural; 'tis not said let me, but let us make; 'tis not said in my but in our image, not after my but after our likeness: This manner of speaking so different from the foregoing, is not in vain, but with a purpose to give us, for whose sake that History was written, a Subject to meditate upon. I know they say, God there speaks, as 'tis usual with Princes, in the plural Number, for Majesty and Greatness sake; and what if great men do so, must this through man's wander be fathered also upon God? Princes do represent their People, and also they comprehend their Counselors; whence it is that in every Proclamation we have that Form, By the Advice of our Privy Council, which God doth not want: Let us more seriously consider this, doth God speak it to no body, (I am necessitated to make use of that Expression) or to some? Surely no man that hath any regard to God can say or think, that in so serious a matter God speaks to nothing; if to some, then either to Angels or to some other Creature, not to Angels for they are not of God's Council, nor to any other of the Creatures which had neither Soul nor Reason, and the next Verse doth decide the thing 
* Vers. 27. , So god created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him, and not after the Image of Angels, or of any other Creature; neither did God speak to the Souls, for as yet they were not created. To what I said of Angels I shall add, that this could not be spoken to them, for they neither principally or instrumentally had any hand in the Creation of Man; for they could not, the Work of Creation requiring an infinite Power, but it must be to the other persons of the most holy Trinity, the Word and the Spirit. As to the Enallage, or that manner of speaking in the plural for Greatness sake, we own it hath place in some Languages, but we deny it ever was in the Hebrew Tongue in the Old Testament, no Man, no person in Authority, no Priest, no Judge, no King ever spoke of himself in the plural Number: Well hath the Prophet said 
† Isai 40.12, 13.7. , Who hath directed the spirit of the Lord, or being his counsellor hath taught him? But for any one, Grotius not excepted, to say that the plural Number is used for Greatness or Majesty sake, is certainly to prevaricate in the Cause of God; for as 'tis contrary to the Idiom of the Hebrew Tongue, so to the practice of all those former times, and it is but a modern Use and Invention, which so support, some Men, contrary to all true Reason, have forged in their imagination. Besides that in these latter times wherein the Use hath been introduced, no Emperor, King, or Prince in any Language useth his Proper Name or Appellative in the plural Number, We Leopolds, Williams, Henrys, Emperors, Kings, etc. but always in the singular, Leopold, William, Emperor, King.  
Well, though no Man of what rank soever spoke after that way, we find God hath in other places, as after Adam's Sin 
* Gen. 3.22. , Behold, the man is become as one of us, not as I, but one of us; then there is more than One person, for God speaks of himself, of the Deity, not of Angels, whom he makes no comparison with, when in the Transfiguration the Voice came from Heaven, saying 
† Mat. 17.5, 8. , This is my beloved son, in whom I am well pleased; 'tis observable the Apostles saw no Man save Jesus only, that it might appear, it was not spoken of Moses or Elias, but only of the Lord Jesus: Another place there is also to the same purpose, where upon the occasion of the building of the Tower of Babel 
† Gen. 11.6, 7. , The Lord said, let us go down and there confound their language; 'tis not said I will, but let us go ●●wn, in the plural Number, as speaking of many, which may not be understood of the Nature which is most singularly One, but of the Persons. Socinians say to this, that though out of this we could prove Plurality, yet we must not conclude for a Trinity; but the Cavil is vain, for 'tis enough that the Name of God is in Scripture attributed only to Three, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, to infer a Trinity, and 'tis well known how Three is the first Number of the plural: Hence Hebrews and Greeks do distinguish the plural Number from the dual; neither do we read of any more Terms or Words than two of divine Emanations, namely of the Son by Generation, and of the Holy Ghost by Procession.  
Our second kind of Arguments consists of those Texts of Scripture, which do expressly declare a Trinity, as is that when our blessed Saviour sends his Apostles to 
* Mat. 28.19.  baptise the Nations in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Hence the Son and Holy Ghost are proved to be Persons, because we are distinctly baptised in their Name; to baptise in one's Name is to make him disciple, or initiate and bring him under the Discipline of him in whose Name he is baptised; now if the Father, in whose Name we are baptised, be a Person, so must the Son, so must the Holy Ghost be, because in every circumstance we are baptised in their Name as well as in the Fathers: And observe, it is not said in the Name of God, whereby the Essence only might absolutely be taken, but of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, to show that relative Equality which is between the Persons that have but one and the same Nature: In this Text our blessed Saviour with his own Mouth declared the Trinity.  
Another place very plain and positive to our purpose is this 
* 1 John 5.7. , There are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the holy Ghost, and these three are one: Here the Trinity of Persons and Unity of Essence are so clear, that the Adversaries have nothing to say, but first to call in question the Verse, as if it had been inserted, because it is not in some Greek Copies, out of which the Enemies of the Truth did formerly take it away, but we have it in so many others, even before the Council of Nice, in Cyprian's time, that there is no just ground left to doubt of its being true and authentic, which place was by Athanasius made use of against Arrius: In this Text the Apostle doth treat of confessing and believing Jesus Christ to be the Son of God, which he to confirm doth bring in the Article of the holy Trinity, whereof he is the second Person, and to any one that doth seriously consider the sense and scope of the place, it will appear, how without that Verse there would be a breach in that part of the Chapter to bear a proportion of Three that bear witness in Heaven, with the Three that bear it on Earth. Their next Cavil upon this place is, upon the latter part of the Verse, and these three are one, that is, say they, not in Nature but in Mind and Consent, which is as absurd as if one would say, when Scripture affirms 
* Deut. 6: 4. Mark 12.29. , O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord; the meaning is only the Consent of many Wills; but doth not this Oneness of Will argue a Unity of Essence? For how can there naturally and essentially be one Will and Consent, if there be not one Essence and Nature? How can it essentially be one Will, if there be not one but many divine Natures? Rather there shall be many different Gods, whose different Wills shall oppose one another, than the which nothing can be more absurd. Again, either those Persons are finite or infinite; if finite, than they have not divine Nature, which is infinite; if infinite, than they do penetrate one another; for they most perfectly and infinitely know and love one another; now Love is an earnest. desire of Union, so than they be most entirely united. The Apostle makes the necessary difference, of the Three on Earth he saith they agree in One, but of the Three in Heaven he saith they are One.  
Moreover, either one knows something which the other doth not, or loves something which the other doth not love, or can do something which the other cannot do, or not; if the former, how are they God? For God knows and can do all; if the last, than not only they have one Will, but also one Mind, one Power, one Knowledge, one Love. Now let Man think upon several Natures of the same kind, which mutually do penetrate themselves, and by a mutual inclination do embrace and unite themselves inseparably, and have the same Thoughts, Will, and Action; doth not all this conclude for one and the same Nature? And that there is no difference but in some manner of Existing, which because they are such, are distinct one from another, without Confusion; all which from Oneness of Will, leads to Oneness of Essence; for the Will of God is not a thing different from his Nature.  
Another Text wherein the most holy Trinity is demonstrated, and not only may be read but also be heard and seen, is that about our Saviour's Baptism, where the Father speaks from Heaven and calls him his Son: Christ the Son is baptised, and the Holy Ghost appears in the shape of a Dove; if Men do believe Scripture, this they must believe to be true: S. Austin looked upon this Text as a strong and convincing Proof of that divine and essential Truth; Vade ad Jordanem, etc. saith he, Go to the River Jordan, and there thou shalt find the holy Trinity, and be convinced of the Verity thereof. Besides these we have a Cloud of other Witnesses to prove this Truth, where the Three Persons are mentioned under their proper Names; and first 
* Acts 2.22, 23. , This Jesus being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, the Three Persons are plainly named: Again, the same Jesus Christ was declared 
† Rom. 1.3, 4.  to be the Son of God, with power according to the Spirit of holiness: Elsewhere the same Apostle saith 
‖ Tit. 3.4, 5, 6. , God saved us by the washing of regeneration and renewing, of the Holy Ghost through Jesus Christ: And in another place 
‡ Gal. 4.6. , God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts; by the word God is meaned the Person of the Father 
* Heb. 9.14. , How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offereth himself without spot to God: Furthermore 
† Ephes. 2.18. , Through him [Christ] we both have an access by one spirit unto the Father. Our blessed Saviour himself out of his own sacred Mouth doth plainly and positively speak to this purpose, when he saith 
* John 14.16.17. , I will pray the Father, and he will give you another comforter, the Father, I the Son, and the comforter, whom he calls the Spirit of Truth, are Three Persons, which in the next Chapter 
† Chap. 15 26.  is by him repeated; But when the Comforter is come whom I will send to you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth. One Text more I shall bring to confirm this 
* 2 Cor. 13.14. , The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God that is the Father, and the communion of the Holy Ghost be with you all. And in the Text of another Apostle 
† 1 Pet. 1.2.  are contained the Workings of the Three Persons in the Trinity; Elect according to the fore knowledge of God the Father, through the sanctification of the Spirit unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ.  
As the New Testament is full of Proofs to confirm this holy Doctrine; for indeed these Mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation are more clearly and fully therein related, so out of the Old Testament we have enough to confute the Enemies of this Truth; and because we look upon Socinians in their Principles to be a sort of Jews, and as well as they, Blasphemers against our holy and blessed Saviour, so we will bring such Arguments against them, as we would if we were disputing against unbelieving Jews, only a few Texts out of many. We begin with the Book of Genesis, Chap. 1. wherein is contained a relation of the History of the Creation, which is a Work common to the Three Persons of the Trinity; and though we may not look upon it as the clearer upon the matter, yet in it is Light enough to show the Truth we now assert. I shall say nothing of the Name God under that of Elohim, which already we have spoken of, as representing the plurality of Persons in the most holy Trinity; but we may say, that though the Name God was there (which it is not) in the singular, and taken for the Person of the Father, yet the Son had a hand in the act of Creation; for it is, God said, here is the word, which is the proper Name of the Son our Lord Jesus Christ, who in Scripture, especially by S. John, is so often called by that Name, the Word: God saying and speaking is that which made the World. We read, God said, when any thing was created, which being compared with what is spoken by John 
* John 1.3. , All things were made by him, that is the Word, the Person of Jesus Christ; for actiones sunt suppositorum, acting is proper to Persons, and without him was not any thing made that was made; now that Word God said, is that which created every thing; so then here is the Person of the Son, but we also find the Person of the Holy Ghost, 
Gen. 1.2.  the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters, by his acting represented by motion, to cherish, give life and motion to things, as a Hen doth when sitting upon her Eggs; for the word in the Original signifies such a thing: This sense is given by a competent Interpreter 
† Psal. 33.6.9. , By the word of the Lord were the heavens made, and all the host thereof by the breath of his mouth: Here we can read distinctly the Lord, if it were to be understood only of the first Person, about which there is no dispute, the Word, and the Breath or Spirit; this, though it be clear, I could set in a greater Light, with comparing it with other places, which I now forbear to do, because I shall have occasion to make use of them in some other branch of my Discourse.  
Another Text is this 
* Isai. 42.1. , Behold my servant whom I uphold, mine elect in whom my soul delighteth: I have put my spirit upon him; besides the Person that speaks, namely the Father, here we have the Son under the name of his Servant, of his elect, in whom his Soul delighteth, whereby none may deny the Lord Jesus to be understood, and the Holy Ghost or Spirit: Nothing better than this can quadrate with the History of our Saviour's Baptism 
‖ Matth. 3.16. . And in another place of the same Prophet 
† I●al 6.3. , when he saw the Vision, and heard that Trisagion, or holy, holy, holy, which long after was also heard by John 
* Rev. 4 8. , that threefold repetition of God's Name compared with the proper Hypotheses of the ancient Jews ', that it signified three things in God, is adapted to the Trinity of Persons; in S. John's Vision we have some enlargement as to the Lord Jesus represented by the Lamb; for the same Twenty four Elders and Four Beasts 
* Rev. 5.8, 9, 13.  fell down before the lamb, and sung a new song: and every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, paid the same Worship to the Lamb as to him that sitteth on the Throne. Again, the same Prophet 
† Isai. 61.1. , The spirit of the Lord is upon me, for he hath anointed me, this to be understood of Christ, as applied, Luke 4.18. and of the Holy Ghost by the anointing, for he was anointed with the Oil of Gladness, that is the Graces of the Spirit. These Three are also to be read amongst the last Words of David 
* 2 Sam. 23.2. , saying, The Spirit of the Lord spoke by me, and the Word was in my tongue; here is the Lord, the Word, and the Spirit. To the same purpose speaks another Prophet 
† Hagg. 2.5. , according to the word that I covenanted with you, when ye came out of Egypt, so my Spirit remaineth among you; the Father, with the Word his Son, and his Spirit made a Covenant with Israel.  
There are several other Texts in the Old Testament, of the Nature of One which I already made use of, I mean of the thrice holy, wherein the Name of God or Lord is thrice repeated; I own I have such a persuasion of the infinite Wisdom of God, as to believe there is nothing at all in his Word but what there is a particular reason for it to be in, and in this belief of mine I am confirmed by what our blessed Saviour saith in earnest, and with a strong Asseveration 
† Matt. 5.18. , Verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled; and I am sufficiently satisfied, that though through the Infirmity of our Nature in the Ignorance of our Mind, we cannot apprehend the Causes of many things in the Word of God, yet therein is nothing without a Cause: So out of that Principle, I dare say, God meaneth something when in the Blessing which he prescribed to be pronounced to the People, the Lord's Name is thrice in it thus, 
* Numb. 6.24, 25, 26.  The Lord bless thee and keep thee, the Lord make his face shine upon thee and be gracious unto thee, the Lord lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace; and when God speaks unto Moses, he dictates what he was to speak to the Children of Israel when he was come to them in his Name, that is, The Lord God of your Fathers, one would have thought this had been enough, but no, for he addeth, 
† Exod. 3.15.  The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob; it was the same God, yet thrice named. So when the Law is given, he saith 
‖ Exod. 20.5.  I the Lord thy God am a jealous God; once Lord and twice God, which is the same; so in another place, the 
* Psalm 136.1, 2, 3.  Psalmist exhorteth thrice to give thanks, to whom? unto the Lord, unto the God of Gods, to the Lord of Lords. One more I shall quote, and 'tis this, 
† Isa. 33.22.  The Lord is our Judge, the Lord is our Lawgiver, the Lord is our King: Why thrice and no more? Surely God aims at something, for as he doth nothing, so he saith nothing in vain, these things are not in by Chance; and seeing with a full assurance, I believe according to Revelation a Trinity of Persons in the Divine Nature, Why should not I also believe that these things relate to it? Now if one would seriously attend upon these quoted places, and compare them with others of the same kind, may be God would impart upon the Matter, greater Discoveries than I for the present am able to give, only this I shall add, how the Name Jehovah, called in Greek, Tetragrammaton, because it originally consists only of four Letters, signifieth both God's Self-existence, for the Root whence 'tis derived doth denote to be, and also his Eternity, for it contains all times, to come, present and past; one, out of the two first Letters draws the Words beginning and to live, and the third having a Virtue of copulating or joining together, is for Love, whereby is denoted the Holy Ghost, as by the two before are Father and Son, and because the second Letter h is twice in, he would have both Natures in the Second Person of the most Holy Trinity to be meaned: tho' I have nothing to say against these mysterious Interpretations which may be well grounded, yet we build not our main Arguments thereupon; however, knowing that essential and incommunicable Holy Name to confist of three different Letters, I can see nothing to hinder me from believing, that that same Nature is communicated to Three Persons, and as the same Letter is twice in, it doth signify Two Natures in One Person, especially it falling upon the Second Letter relating to the Second Person of the most blessed Trinity, and as God is the Author of the Name, Why may not he in his Infinite Wisdom therein denote some Mystery? This I take to be Rational.  
Here I must not omit for Proof of this great Truth, to bring in our Creed called the Apostolical as an Evidence; I meddle not with the others, for the Adversaries will not own them, though they ever were by better, more Learned, more Pious and Sound in all Ages than they are, or I doubt can be: I know the World hath afforded some Men who out of a vainglory, and to seem to be something, through a trial of their Parts, have attempted to enervate with their Criticisms the Strength and Orthodoxy of these Creeds, but as to this, Socinians themselves can except against it, no more than they do against the written Word of God whence this is extracted; Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are all Three named in the Creed, and as the Word God is expressed when joined with the Father, so 'tis understood of Son and Holy Ghost, thus I believe in God his only begotten Son, and I believe in God the Holy Ghost, for to them it also doth belong, and as there we profess to believe in, that is, to put our whole Trust and Confidence, not only in the Father, but also in the Son and in the Holy Ghost, so thereby we own and declare them to be God as the Father; and in the Lord's Prayer which is part of the Worship we render unto God, though we name but One that is the Father, yet we mean all, for the Word is taken Essentially, for Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and not personally, only for the first Person, because the whole Trinity are our Father in respect of Creation, Preservation, and Redemption for every such outward Work, as said before, is common to the Three Persons, and so we address our Prayer to all Three.  
Now I shall lay down some few Arguments to prove the Truth: this is one, he in whose Name we are Baptised, is the True Eternal God, but we are Baptised in the Name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, therefore they Three are True Eternal God, the major is clear, for Baptism is a Covenant not with Man or any Creature, but with God alone, as it appears out of 
* 1 Pet. 3.21.  Peter, where Baptism is called a Stipulation or Answer of a good Conscience towards God. Secondly, They in whose Name we are Baptised, do justify us, but we are Baptised in the Name of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; wherefore they justify us, and consequently they be True Eternal God, for none can justify but 
† Rom. 4.5. & chap. 8.33.  God alone. Thirdly, They who regenerate us are the True Eternal God, but they in whose Name we are baptised do regenerate us. Ergo, They are the True Eternal God, such as Father, Son and Holy Ghost, if they deny those in whose Names we are baptised to justify and regenerate us, we prove it, for the Washing in Baptism signifieth our Justification and Regeneration which is performed by those in whose Names we are baptised, which is clear out of St. Paul's Words, That 
‖ Ephes. 5.26.  be, Christ, might sanctify and cleanse it, the Church, with the washing of water by the word; and in another place, He 
* Tit. 3.5.  saved us by the washing of regeneration; and another Argument is this, they who save us are True Eternal God, but Father. Son and Holy Ghost do, therefore they are the True Eternal God; the major Proposition is proved out of the Prophet, 
† Isa. 45.15, 17, 21.  O God of Israel, the Saviour; also, Israel shall be saved in the Lord with an everlasting salvation; and, I the Lord, and there is no God else besides me, a just God and a Saviour, there is none besides me; the Expression in the Name of the Father, is observable, for the Name signifies 
‖ Malac. 1.6.  Authority; now because the Authority of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, is but one and the same, for we are equally baptised in their Name, so the Dignity is the same, if so then these Three Persons are but One God, for none can have equal Dignity with the Father, except he be God, such a Dignity have the Son and Holy Ghost; against this they object how the Fathers are said 
* 1 Cor. 10.2.  to be baptised unto Moses, but that's not to the purpose, 'tis of a different Nature, in that place the Design is to show the Sacraments of the Jews to be the Types and Figures of ours, but here the Question is about the Name and Authority whereby we are baptised, they were baptised under the Ministry, but not in the Name of Moses, so now Ministers do baptise but not in their own Name or Authority.   

CHAP. V Of Christ's Divinity.  
NOW I must come to the Third Classis of my Proofs out of Scripture, namely those Texts which speak singularly of the Son as True Eternal God, the like of the Holy Ghost. As our Blessed Saviour from the beginning of the World to the time he was manifested in the Flesh, was the Chief Object of Prophecies, because in him through an eternal and unchangeable Decree was the Ground of the greatest of all outward God's Works, for I look upon Redemption on some Account, greater than Creation, so from time to time God took care to renew and confirm the first gracious Promise of the Seed of the Woman, under several Names of Shiloh, Messiah, Emmanuel, the Branch, etc. and to describe him with several Names and Circumstances, that when he was come, there should be no just Cause to mistake or deny him to be he and the same, and withal it was declared what he should be in his Person, and do in his Office, so also what he was before he came, namely God by his Nature and Attributes, all which after his Incarnation was so highly confirmed both by a farther Revelation and many Wonders; but as 
† Luk. 2.34.  he was set for a sign which should be spoken against; so than he was opposed, and so is now by the Enemies to his Person, Offices and Doctrine; but against such detestable Wretches he hath not left himself without Witnesses to make himself known to be what he really is, even God blessed for ever; wherefore our Saviour commands us to 
* John 5.39.  search the Scriptures, for they testify of him, therein we shall find his Deity; this course himself took, when beginning at Moses and all the Prophets he expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the Things concerning himself.  
To this purpose the Word doth afford such a plenty and variety of Matter in such an essential Point of our Faith, and so necessary to be known, that indeed it would go near to run one into some Confusion, except some Method be used to prevent it: the Difficulty lays not in what to say, but how to say it, wherefore our Discourse and Arguments must be reduced under several Heads and Classes, as may be Names, Attributes, Works and Worship of God. Some Words used in this Matter, are in Scripture, as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Godhead, which some would have to differ from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Divinity, as cause an effect, the first the Essence, the last a Gift communicated; though in Scripture they be synonimous, and both translated Godhead; in Scripture are also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 One, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Three; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Subsistance or Person, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is: others are derived, as from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 One, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Three, are derived 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Unity, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Trinity; from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Being or Existing come 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Essence. St. John alone calls the Son 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word, and St. Paul alone, or the Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews calls him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Character of the express Image of the Person of the Father.  
Of the Names of God, some signify the Essence as Jehovah, 
Proved from the Names.  Jah, Ehejah; others the Attributes as Elehim Schaddai, Adonai, etc. and in the New Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lord, are frequent. Jehovah signifies God's Essence in Three manners; First, 
First, Jehovah.  That he is of himself and of no other. Secondly, All other Things are from him, not from themselves, or from any else. Thirdly, That he is true in his Promises and Threaten; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when absolutely attributed to God, answereth that of Jehovah, for he is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Self-Lord and of his Nature. The Name Jehovah is properly, absolutely, and without any adjection attributed to the Son, as it must amongst other places be understood in that wherein 'tis said. 
* Gen. 19.24.  The Lord reigned upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the Lord; the Lord from the Lord is a Tautology, and a gross one too, which God is not capable of, were it not that as the Father hath committed all Judgement to the Son, upon that occasion, the Son executed Judgement against those wicked Cities, and to prove the Truth of this Interpretation we have two undeniable Evidences, the Expressions of one are just as in this place; and of the other, they are to the same purpose, David is the first, 
* Psaim 110.1.  The Lord said unto my Lord, which our Saviour explains of 
† Mat. 22.44.  himself; the other Witness is 
‖ Hos. 1.7.  Hosea by whom God saith, I will save the house of Judah by the Lord their God; not only he calls him their Lord, but also their God. Here we have the True, Eternal, and Infinite God, whose Word came to the Prophet, saying, he will have mercy upon the House of Judah; and I hope hitherto we are agreed, he promiseth to save them, By whom? By the Lord their God, that is the Lord God of Judah, for he speaks to, and of the House of Judah; he then by whom they are to be saved is the True God of Israel, for certainly the God of Judah and Israel is one and the same God, and not two; for their Saviour is their God: the next thing to be known is, who is meaned by this Lord God of theirs; not properly and immediately the Person that speaks, for than he would have said, I will save them by myself, as upon another occasion he said, 
* Gen. 22.16.  By myself have I sworn, and in some other places; wherefore here another Person is to be understood, or else the designation of another had been superfluous and not to the purpose; but here is a visible distinction of Persons, he that speaks and promiseth to save them, and he by whom they shall be saved; according to the whole Analogy of Faith, this Prophecy relateth to the Messiah, the Son of God whom the Father out of his own Bosom was to send into the World to save it; and the Lord Jesus was the Messiah which at that time was to come, and came since, who by the Prophet is called the Lord God of Judah, which was fulfilled when the Angel said unto the Shepherds, 
† Lu. 2.11.  Unto you is born this day in the City of David a Saviour which is Christ the Lord; who came to save his People, the True Judah and Israel of God, not according to the Flesh, but the promise, from their Sins and from the Punishments which thereby they had deserved, so the Lord Jesus is the True Lord God of Israel, for the House of Israel or Judah hath no other Prince and Saviour to 
* Act. 5.31.  give them repentance and forgiveness of sins, but the Lord Jesus who in this same place is called Prince; now the Title of God of Israel, the true, eternal and undoubted God, doth in many places of Scripture appropriate to himself, and communicateth to none besides; 
† Joh. 1.49.  Nathanael called Jesus Christ, the Son of God and the King of Israel, and we know he spoke Truth as did David when he saith, 
‖ Psal. 22.28.  the Kingdom is the Lord's, and he is the governor amongst the nations, and we are sure that Psalm hath a relation to the Lord Jesus, and if any doubt remaineth, it is explained in the Person of the 
* Rev. 12.5.  man child who was to rule all nations with a red of iron; and this is fully interpreted of the Person whom the Lord hath said to, thou art my Son, and hath given to, 
† Psal. 2.7, 8, 9  the heathen for his inheritance, etc. which he shall break with a rod of iron.  
In the Old Testament we read of an Angel who appeared at several times, and spoke as to Hagar, he is called the Angel of the Lord, and was the Lord Jehovah himself 
‖ Gen. 16.13.  for she called the Name of the Lord that spoke unto her, thou God seest me; a second time he appeared unto her and said, lift up the lad Ishmael, for I will make him a great nation, this certainly was an increated Angel, namely, the Son of God, for no created Angel could make such a Promise, it being beyond the Power of any creature to perform it, and that Angel is called Jehovah, upon the occasion of sacrificing Isaac, and that he was God himself, it appears not only from the Nature, but also from the Words he spoke, Seeing, said he, 
* Gen. 22.11, 12, 15, 16.17, 18.  thou hast not held thy Son, thine only Son from me; now that Son was to have been sacrificed to God and none else; and this is confirmed beyond all doubt when 'tis said, And the Angel of the Lord called unto Abraham out of Heaven the second time, and said, by myself have I sworn, etc. that in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the Stars of heaven, and as the sand that is upon the sea shore, and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed. This is elsewhere represented under the shape of a Man who 
a Gen. 32.24, 28, 30.  wrestled with Jacob, (might not the Name Man relate to the future Incarnation) however 'tis most certain under what Name soever, that same was God; for he said to Jacob, Thou hast power with God: and when he asked his Name, Jacob received no other Answer but this, Wherefore is it that thou dost ask after my name, which as a Prophet saith 
b Isai 9 6. , is wonderful; Jacob, though he asked his Name, knew who it was; for he saith, I have seen God face to face, and the same is called Man, God, even the Lord God of hosts, Hosea 12.3, 5. and in the same place is called the Angel, verse 4. So the Names Man, Angel, and God Lord of hosts do belong to the same; and as upon that same occasion one of the Names belong to the Son of God, by the same reason must all the rest; and him Jacob remembers, when blessing Joseph's Children he saith 
c Gen. 48.15, 16. , The angel which redeemed me from all evil bless these lads; and just the verse before, he calls him the God of his father's Abraham and Isaac. The better to know who this Angel is, let us hear him speak himself to Jacob 
d Gen. 31.11, 12, 13. , The angel of God, saith Jacob, spoke unto me in a dream, and what saith he? I have seen all that Laban doth unto thee. I am the God of Bethel, where thou anointedst the pillar, and where thou vowedst a vow unto me. Surely this could be no created Angel: The same it was that appeared unto Moses in the Bush, mentioned by Stephen 
e Acts 7.35. , by whose Hands, Authority, and Power, Moses became Ruler and Deliverer of the People out of Egypt. Now in the same Chapter Stephen saith, v. 32. that he that appeared unto Moses in the Bush, was the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob; and that same God he afterwards calls the angel which spoke to him in mount Sinai, v. 38. To be short, this is the Angel of the Lord which appeared unto Moses out of the Bush, which is called Lord and God, and calls himself 
f Exod. 3. ●, 4, 6.  the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. The Adversaries cannot deny this to be the true and proper Character of the true God. Moreover, this is the Angel promised to be sent before the People; let us hear what a Character God gives of him 
* Exodus 23.20, 21. , Beware of him and obey his voice, provoke him not, for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him: If this had been one of his created Angels, would God have spoken of him after this manner? Why God's Name in a most special manner, more in him than in another? Here his Name signifies his Nature; and can any but the true essential God pardon Transgressions, as it depends upon the Will of this Angel to do or not to do? According to promise this same Angel appeared unto Joshuah, under the Name of 
† Josh. 5.14, 15.  captain of the host of the Lord, and of him required the same humble Obedience as before he had received of Moses; and this the Apostle doth point at 
* Heb. 2.10. , when speaking of Christ, he calls him the captain of our salvation, of which the Deliverance out of Egypt was a Type and a Figure; for he was the Rock 
† 1 Cor. 10.4.  that followed them in the Wilderness: He is farther called 
‖ Isai. 63.  the angel of God's presence, God in him is present wheresoever he is, because he is God, but he there is also called their Saviour, he saved them; is there any Saviour besides the Lord Jesus the Son of God? He also is called the Messenger 
* Mal. 3. ●  or Angel of the covenant: Is not God's Covenant with Men made in Christ Jesus? Hath he not procured and published it? It was to strengthen the Faith and confirm the Hopes of his People, that God by the last of his Prophets doth so positively promise he shall come; surely he then was and existed, though he was not yet come: The Prophet addeth, whom ye delight in; would to God this were true in every Christian; but his Enemies can take no delight in him. However it remains true, that no Creature whatsoever could be this Angel, and that seeing it was not the Person of the Father, it must be that of his Son, who is another himself; and I think that to prove the Deity of the Messiah, is to prove the plurality of Persons in the Godhead; for as I said before, Trinity imports the Divinity of the Son, and the Divinity of the Son implys plurality of Persons in the Divine Nature.  
This Angel under the shape of a Man, attended by two Angels, appeared unto Abraham 
* Gen. 18. , and in the same place he is called the Lord or Jehovah, and Man, and behaved himself both as Lord and as Man, and as both was received by Abraham: Thus 'tis neither impossible nor contrary to Scripture, that God should in human Nature appear unto Men, as than he did unto Abraham: In his Promise to Abraham of a Son by Sarah, and as to the Judgements upon Sodom he behaved himself as God, as he did as Man in visibly walking, discoursing, having his Feet washed, resting and eating, and as herein by acting the true part of a Man he was a true Man, so he was a true God; for there he is six or seven times called Jehovah, and five Adonai; and he speaks like the Judge of the World, in whose power it lies to punish or pardon; and the Adversaries can bring nothing against the Union of divine with humane Nature in the Person of Christ, but what this Instance of the appearing can refute; for indeed the personal Union of the divine with human Nature can be no better nor more plainly represented than by this Example; and if this appearing was a sign and forerunner of Christ's dwelling and conversing among Men, certainly it became him to be such as he then appeared, namely God and Man. Now that this was a foresight of his Incarnation, our Saviour himself declares it 
* John 8.56.  relating to this, Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day, and he saw it and was glad: And upon the same account he upbraids them when he saith, 
John 39.40,  If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham, but ye seek to kill me, that did not Abraham; for he never offered to kill as a Blasphemer that Man whom with two others he received into his House, and who carried himself as God; on the contrary, he all the while behaved himself towards him as being God, and at that time the same Person that appeared unto Abrham is not only called the Lord, v. 1. the Lord appeared unto Abraham, but also the judge of all the earth, v 25. a Property belonging to none but the true God; and that Christ is to judge all the Earth, it appears out of Acts 17.31. and 2 Cor. 5.10, as indeed the Destruction of Sodom and Gomorah was a figure of the Destruction of the World and of Christ's second coming: The Father saith Christ hath committed all Judgement to the Son, John 5.22.  
Here I shall add a Text which may have a place in another part of my Discourse; 'tis this, God by the Prophet 
* Isai. 40.9, 10, 11.  speaks to Zion, Jerusalem, and the Cities of Judah, Behold your God, behold the Lord will come with strong hand, etc. here certainly by your God is meant the God of Israel; for the God of Z●on, of Jerusalem, and of the Cities of Judah, is the same with the God of Israel; now who that Person is, here called God, it doth appear out of the scope of the place, wherein the Prophet doth certainly speak of the coming of the Messiah, who is Christ, as 'tis plain out of v. 3. The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, prepare ye the way for the Lord, make strait in the desert a high way for our God: Beyond all doubt this is spoken of John Baptist, for he applieth 
* John 1.23.  it to himself, and if we want other Witnesses, Matthew 
† Chap. 3.3.  will serve for one, and Zacharias, as recorded by S. Luke 
‖ Chap. 1.76.  for another; now I take it to be as unquestionable, that John was the forerunner of Christ, who is the same Lord God for whom he prepared the way: Further, that in this place of Isaiah, Christ is the same Lord God that was to come, it appears by the description therein made of him, He will come with strong hand, and his arm shall rule for him; behold, his reward is with him, and his work before him, v. 10. The Miracles he wrought by his own Power upon the sick, blind, dumb, lame, dead, commanding Wind and Sea, and the Devils themselves which observed him, did convincingly demonstrate him to be the Lord God, if any doubt should remain, 'tis cleared, v. 11. He shall feed his flock like a shepherd, he shall gather the lambs with his arm; the comparison of the Shepherd and Sheep our Saviour doth much insist upon, and several 
* John 10.  times gives himself the Name of Shepherd; and S. Paul calls him 
† Heb. 13.20. , the great shepherd of the sheep; and by another 
‖ 1 Pet. 2.25. Chap. 5.4. , the shepherd of our souls, and the chief shepherd: This being his great Atrribute, as Head of the Church, and Mediator, his Person must necessarily be designed by the Prophet, who to him attributeth the words feeding and gathering; the Person here spoken of by the Prophet Isaiah, called Lord God, is the same mentioned by another, who calls him king of Zion and of Jerusalem; and as he speaks of the same as Isaiah doth, so he speaks to the same 
† Zech. 9.9. , Rejoice greatly. O daughter of Zion, shout O daughter of Jerusalem, behold thy king comes unto thee; both Prophets speak of the same Person's coming to the same place, he is just and having salvation, lowly and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass; these very words of the Prophet are quoted upon the occasion of our Saviour's entering into Jerusalem 
* Matth. 21.4, 5. , and applied unto him, as indeed this same Prophet speaks in several places which I mention in this Discourse of Christ the Son of God as of the great and mighty God, Chap. 2. calls him Lord of Hosts, sent by the Lord of Hosts to the Nations, who was to come and dwell in thee, O Daughter of Zion, who was to speak peace unto the heathen, and his dominion to be even from sea to sea, and unto the ends of the earth, Ch. 9.10. that was to be sold for Thirty pieces of Silver, which were given for the Potter's Field, Chap. 11.12, 13. and that was to pour upon the House of David and Inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of Grace and Supplication, (that same Spirit which was in the Prophet is called the spirit of Christ, 1 Pet. 1.11. or the Holy Ghost, by whom they were moved, 2 Pet. 2.21.) so Chap. 13.7. the Lord of Hosts calls him his fellow; did the Lord of Hosts ever call any mere Man his Fellow, my Companion, that is united to me in Substance, equal with me in Power? Thus God doth honour Christ in this Name to show the Unity of Essence, and the Union of the Will of the Father and of the Son the Mediator, who is in the same Verse called my shepherd, which is spoken of Christ; for unto himself he applieth it, Matth. 26.31.  
Before we fall upon examining other Texts of the Old Testament to prove the essential Names of God to belong to his Son the Lord Jesus, we must compare some places of both Testaments, to show how many things belonging to God are applied unto Christ, as first, that just now quoted of Isaiah 
a Isai. 40.3. , The voice of him that cryeth in the wilderness, prepare ye the way of the Lord, or Jehovah, 
b Luke 1.76. John 1.23.  applied one to John Baptist the other to Jesus Christ there called the Lord: This is another 
c Isai. 6 1, 2, 3, 9, 10. , I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple, above it stood the Seraphims, and said, holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts, the whole earth is full of his glory: this in the 
d John 12.40, 41.  Gospel is applied to the Son. Again 
e Isai. 8.13, 14. , Sanctify the Lord of hosts himself, and let him be your fear, and let him be your dread, and he shall be for a sanctuary; but for a stone of stumbling, and for a rock of offence to both the houses of Israel, for a gin, and for a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem; applied unto Christ 
f Luke 2.34. Rom. 9.33. 1 Pet. 2.8. . David saith 
g Psal. 45.6 , Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever; which is applied unto Christ: 
h Heb. 1.8.  But unto the Son he saith, thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever. The same Royal Prophet saith 
i Psal. 68.17, 18. , The chariots of God are twenty thousand, even thousands of Angels: the Lord is amongst them, as in Sinai in the holy place, thou hast ascended on high, thou hast led captivity captive: thou hast received gifts for men; yea, for the rebellious also; all which is applied 
k Eph. 4 8.  unto Jesus Christ: So is this 
l Ps. 110.1 , The Lord said unto my Lord, sit thou on my right hand; applied to the Son 
m Matth. 22 44. . We read in the Prophet 
n Isai. 45.23. , I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth, that unto me every knee shall bow; which is attributed unto Christ 
o Rom. 14.11. Phil. ●2. 10. . Of old, saith David 
p Ps. 102.25. , hast thou laid the foundations of the earth: and the heavens are the works of thy hands; which is by the Apostle 
q Heb. 1.10.  declared to be meant of the Son. 
r Isai 44.6  Thus saith the Lord the king of Israel and his redeemer the Lord of hosts, I am the first and I am the last: Our blessed Saviour saith the same of himself 
s Rev. 1.17. and 22.13. . God Almighty 
t Ps 26.2. and 7.9.  doth try the reins and the heart; and our glorified Saviour saith 
u Rev. 2.23 , I am he that searcheth the reins and hearts. God saith 
x Zech. 12.10. and Rev. 1.7. , I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem the spirit of grace and of supplication, and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced; the same whom they have pierced saith, he will pour the Spirit of Grace, which none but the true God can do, which is applied to our Saviour. And again another scripture saith, they shall look on him whom they pierced 
y John 19.37. ; they never pierced God the Father. It is said of the Children of Israel 
z Psal. 106 14. Numb. 14.22. , They tempted God in the desert; and S. Paul applieth it to Christ 
a 1 Cor. 10.9. , Neither let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted; they tempted Jehovah, and that Jehovah is Christ, who brought them out of Egypt through the Wilderness into the Land of Canaan, who certainly is the only true God, maker of Heaven and Earth. It is to be observed how in another place. David speaking of the People's tempting God in the Wilderness, useth very strong Expressions, for he saith 
b Psal. 78.41. , They turned back and tempted God, and limited the holy one of Israel, the God whom they tempted is the same holy one of Israel whom they limited, and the same who, vers. 56. is called the Most High God; they tempted and provoked the Most High God. Now the Adversaries must own, that the holy one of Israel, and the most high God is such by Nature; so that wholly to clear this matter we are to find out, who it is whom they tempted in the Wilderness; we can have no better Interpreter than S. Paul in the fore quoted place, who declares 'twas Christ, neither let us tempt Christ as some of them also tempted, and those very same that tempted him were destroyed of Serpents; so than the Consequence is easy and natural, that Christ is the holy one of Israel, and the most high God, 
Ps. 16.10. Acts 2.27. and 3.14. 1 John 2.20.  and the Title of Holy One is spoken of Christ, if we must believe Peter and John; now all these things, as Paul saith, are written for our Admonition and Instruction.  
Furthermore 'tis said, he shall be called Jehovah, 
c Jer. 23.6. and 33.16.  the Lord our righteousness, that is, a righteous branch, a king that shall reign and prosper, in whose days Judah shall be saved; a Prophecy of the Messiah explained of Christ 
d 1 Cor. 1.30. , who is made unto us wisdom and righteousness. If I would go on in this, it were an endless business, for Scripture doth abound in such Evidences, whereof several more may be seen applied in the Book of the Revelation; and what would it be if I should bring in so many Circumstances as there were foretold by the Prophets about the coming and suffering of the Messiah, which are fulfilled in the Life and Death of our blessed Saviour, as in their places they be observed by the Evangelists; but I think I have under this Head said enough to prove Jesus Christ to be Jehovah, the true eternal God; to this only I shall add two places out of another Prophet 
e Hos. 13.14. , I will ransom them from the power of the grave: I will redeem them from death; which S. Paul doth allude unto when he saith 
f 1 Cor. 15 55, 57 , O death, where is thy sting, O grave, where is thy victory? etc. we have the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ: And in another place formerly quoted saith the same Prophet 
g Hos. 1.7. , I will have mercy upon the house of Judah, and will save them by the Lord their God; which was fulfilled in the Person of Christ, who is called and actually is both their Lord and their God in a true and a proper sense; whence we must necessarily conclude him to be the Lord God of Israel, about whom is the question; for they deny him to be the God of Israel; but that 'tis undisputably spoken of our Saviour, it appears by what Peter saith 
h Acts 4.12.11.10. , Neither is there salvation in any other, for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved; we may know whom he speaks of by the Description he makes of him in the foregoing Verse, This is the stone which was set at nought of you bvilders, which is become the head of the corner; which saying of David, Ps. 118.22. is by our Saviour applied unto himself, Matth. 21.42. and in case any doubt should remain, that this of the Prophet is to be understood of Christ, Peter, in that same place, Vers. 10. names who is the Lord their God by whom they are to be saved, Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified; and if the Testimony of this one Apostle be not enough, let us hear the joint Evidence of all the other Apostles, who unanimously said unto the chief Priests 
i Acts 5.29, 30, 31. , God hath exalted with his right hand Jesus to be a prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.  
Whosever shall call upon the name of the Lord, faith another Prophet 
k Joel 2.32. , shall be delivered and saved, which in the same words is by two Apostles 
l Acts 2.21. Rom. 10.13.  applied unto the Lord Jesus; and in that remarkable place of the Prophet 
m Zech. 11.12, 13. , Jehovah, the Lord speaketh of himself, they weighed for my price thirty pieces of silver; and the Lord said unto me, cast it unto the potter; a goodly price that I was prized at of them: And did not Judas 
n Matth. 26.15. & 27.7, 10.  agree with the chief Priests to betray the Lord Jesus for Thirty pieces of Silver? And after that Wretch had returned the Money, did not they with it buy the Potter's Field? How wonderful and plain is the Harmony between the Old and New Testaments, between the Prophecies and the fulfilling thereof, to demonstrate our Saviour to be the Jehovah, the Lord God and Saviour of Israel; whence we may argue, that the Saviour promised is Jehovah, Christ is the promised Saviour, therefore he is Jehovah, which Name not only was known, but also was of great account among the Heathens which were Neighbours to the Jews, as Philistines, Arabians, Idumeans, Egyptians, Syrians, etc. which according to the Idiom of their Languages, with some small alteration they made use of, thus the last named it Jehuvo, whence the Greeks derived their Jevo, and the Romans called it Jove or Jupiter, their chief and great God, whom they named Diuûm hominumque patrem, the Father of the gods and of men, which they made his Proper Name, and never spoke it of any other, but him alone they gave it to; and according as the Jews did in relation to the true God, so they in respect to their false gods, they attributed it only to the Head of them, and to all the rest made it incommunicable.  
Here before we proceed, we must say that the Name Jehovah is not common or appellative, but proper to God, it is derived from Jah, a word which signifies fuit, a Being, for the strength of the word doth betoken the Nature and Essence of God, Exod. 3.14. wherein the Jews observe three different Spaces of time, future, present, and past; whereunto answers that of S. John 
o Rev. 1.8. , which is, which was, and which is to come, which the Son of God there speaks of himself, and in the same place of Exod. v. 15. God, whom we ought to believe, saith, this is my name for ever, which elsewhere he confirmeth 
p Isai. 42. ●. , I am the Lord, that is my name, and my glory will I not give to another: So than that Name God accounts to be his Glory, and that Name he would not give the Angel we have spoken of before, in whom God said was his Name, except he was his true Son, and partaker of his Nature; this is by another Prophet 
q Jer. 16.21.  confirmed, I will cause them to know mine hand and my might, and they shall know that my name is the Lord; and by another 
r Hos. 12.5 , even the Lord God of hosts, the Lord is his memorial; what follows is worthy of a most serious consideration 
s Psal. 83.18. , that men may know, that thou whose name alone is Jehovah, art the most high over all the earth; so than if God speaks truth, Jehovah is his Name alone, and of none else. Another Prophet is not silent upon the matter 
t Amos 5.8. , Seek him that maketh the seven stars and Orion, and turneth the shadow of death into the morning, and makes the day dark with night: that calleth for the waters of the sea, and poureth them out upon the face of the earth, the Lord is his name: One thing more I add, how after the People had seen the Fire of the Lord fall upon Eliah's Sacrifice and consume it, and all round about, they fell on their faces and said, the Lord be is the God, 
1 Kings 18.38, 39  the Lord he is the God: Who after these plain and convincing Evidences can be so much a Child of the Devil, I mean a Liar, as to deny the Name Jehovah to be God's proper Name, and consequently deny Christ, who is Jehovah, to be the true natural God. By Jehovah and Jah is primarily denoted the Essence proper only to God, whereby God is understood to have his Being of himself, and to be efficient, principle in a way of Excellency of all other Being's, and the Name was not altogether unknown before Moses; for in that place 
v Exod. 6.3.  the Question is not properly or formally about the Word, but the Thing, as of the Unchangeableness of the Divine Truth, and of the Deliverance of his People. The Jews are so scrupulous about the Word, that they would not have it pronounced but with some change of Letters; they impiously give a magical Virtue to the Characters, whereunto they attribute all Miracles done by our Saviour; the Name Schaddai signifying God's Self-sufficiency, is also incommunicable, but 'tis of Attribute, as the other of Nature.  
They cannot deny that Christ or the Son is called Jehovah, wherefore they betake themselves to another Shift, which is to deny the Name to be incommunicable; for say they, it is attributed to Angels, and to other things, as unto the Mount where Abraham would have sacrificed his Son; to Jerusalem, and unto the Ark: As to the first, 'tis not to be understood of any created Angel, but of that Angel whom we proved to be God truly and properly, whom the Name doth belong unto in a proper sense: When spoken of the forenamed things, 'tis not to be taken as a Name, but as a Commendation, Testimony, Sign, and a Symbol; as if one should say, There John liveth, there James reigneth, by a kind of Metonimy used in human things, when the thing contained is put for the containing; as to the Ark, when Moses saith 
q Num. 10.35. , Rise up, Lord, and let thine enemies be scattered, he doth not speak to the Ark, a material Creature, unable to hear and of itself to move, but to Jehovah who had his Seat in it: Of this we can have no surer Interpreter than David, who saith 
r Psal. 132 8. , Arise, O Lord, into thy rest: thou and the ark of thy strength; the Prayer is directed to God, not to the Ark, which were Idolatry: the Ark doth neither rise nor return, but after the manner of Men it is attributed unto God: So in another place 
s Ps. 68.1. , Let God arise, let his enemies be scattered; besides, these words of Moses were spoken when the Ark was upon a motion, or at rest, wherefore it had been improper to say to the Ark, Rise, when 'twas going on, and Rest, when it was fixed; so it must be to God, who had appointed it there to manifest his special Grace or Glory. Thus the Name Jehovah is considered either relatively or absolutely; the first, when joined with some thing, as we said of Jerusalem and of the Ark, not to be absolutely but relatively understood, as Jerusalem the City wherein Jehovah dwelleth: God's Worship was tied to the Ark, for there, as promised, he spoke with Moses 
t Exod. 25 22. Levit. 16.2. 1 Sam. 4 4 ; the second, when God takes that Name to himself 
u Exodus 20.2. , I am Jehovah, or the Lord thy God; and 
x Isai. 42.8 , Whose name is Jehovah, the Lord of hosts: Thus Moses and People say in their Song 
y Exodus 15.3. , Jehovah is his name, and that according to the Etymology, which is, as said, from a word that signifies, is, hath been, and herein we can agree with Crellius, shall be, which properly denoteth the Essence not generally, but specially, an infinite eternal Being, existing of itself. Now this figurative way of speaking in this kind is often used in Scripture, whereof the following Text 
* Psal. 24.5, 6.  is a considerable Instance, This is the generation of them that seek him, that seek thy face, O Jacob, where Jacob is put for the God of Jacob; to seek the Face is a Duty relating to God, not to Jacob or any Man, pressed upon us in the Word; for the Psalmist not being satisfied to have said, 
Psal. 105.3, 4.  Let the heart of them rejoice that seek the Lord, he addeth this Command reiterated, Seek the Lord and his strength: seek his face evermore: 'Tis then a Duty which God requireth of us; for he saith 
* Psal. 27.8. , Seek ye my face; and the obedient and dutiful Soul answereth, My heart said unto thee, thy face, Lord, will I seek: Hence it appeareth how this religious Duty, to seek the Face, is not directed to Jacob, but to the God of Jacob, who in the latter end of the foregoing Verse is named the Lord God of our salvation. Thus after this figurative way of speaking the Name Jehovah is spoken of the Mount and of the Ark, which are Jehovah no more than Jacob was; and therefore when God's most holy Name is concerned, Men must not be so rash as to fancy and vent their profane Notions, and attribute unto any Man, or other Creature whatsoever, that which God hath reserved as proper to himself.  
Tertullian tells the Heathens how their Philosophers called the Maker of the World by the Name the Word, 
Second, The Word.  which agrees with what S. John saith 
* John 1.3. , All things were made by him; how they came to that knowledge I shall not be so positive as to determine, but in the Verses fathered upon Orpheus, the Creator of the World is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word, so 'tis in some of the ancient Books of the Chaldeans; but we must draw out of purer Springs than these; for our blessed Saviour the Son of God, is in the New Tewament called 〈◊〉 the Name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word, because, as Speech of Word is the Production of the Mind, so is the Son of his Father; and as a Man declareth the meaning of the Heart by the Words of his Mouth, so God 
* John 1.18. Heb. 1.2.  revealeth his Will and Mind by his Son; and because it is he whom the Father promised to Adam, Abraham, and Patriarches, to make his Promises of Salvation sure unto them: The second Person is the Word of the Father, begotten from all eternity by Communication of a personal Being, from whom, as from the Father, proceeds the Holy Ghost: Here the Word is not a thing such as Speech may be, but 'tis a proper Name of a Person, in a Discourse it ever takes place of the Subject never of the Predicate; 'tis the Name 
* John 1.14, 4. & 13.16. Matth. 2.17. Rom. 14.2 1 Cor. 1.19.  of the Son of God our blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ; he is called the Word in relation both to his Person and Office; as to the first, because he is from God's Mind, and is the Image of the Father, wholly representing the Father; as to the Office, because by him all things were made, and he declares the Father's Will to Angels and to Men; he is known in three Capacities, as God, as Man, and as both, in which last relation he is the Head of the Church; as God and as to his absolute Essence and Being, he is of himself, as to the manner he is from the Father, always he was, is, and ever shall be begotten; for absolute Eternity hath no term before or after, and is always whole without succession; he is called not barely the Word, but Word of Life 
* 1 Joh. 1.1 , because it contains Life in himself; for in him was Life 
† Joh. 1.4. , and is the Author of Life in others.  
Now it becomes an Historian, such as S. John is, who in his Gospel writes the History of Christ, if he will write things clearly and in order, and not make a Romance, to set down the true and proper Name of the Person whose History he doth pen, specially when the Name is not well know nor much in use, or else he will seem to have a design of imposing upon the Reader: To apply this to the matter in hand, if S. John, when he was about giving the World an account of the Life, Actions, and Sufferings of our Saviour, had called him by a Name that was not his own and proper Name, but metaphorical, as Socinians would have it, far from being acted by a real desire to inform his Readers, he might be thought to have intended to mock and deceive them, for if the Name, the Word which had been unknown under the Old Testament, and was not used till by him, was only a figurative, improper and borrowed Name, than not to say worse, the Evangelist had not acted the part of a true and judicious Historian, for in such things, the first to be known is the true Name of the Person whose History is written; and certainly if ever he intended to have informed the Reader, and had his Gospel read, he had thereby fallen into the readiest way to prevent it, for as soon as it had been found out that without Reason and Necessity the Author had with obtruse and intricate Names drawn a curtain over the first Line, then presently the Reader would have laid aside the Book; thus far goes the Opinions of these unreasonable Men, which how injurious it is to the Evangelist, I leave any rational Man to judge; how ever, we must say that seeing of the Four Evangelists, John alone, before he made any mention of the Name of Jesus Christ, in his first Line calls him the Word, and goes on till past the 14 Verse, we must own there was special cause for it, no less than Divine Inspiration, for we find in that part of the Vision he had in the Isle of Patmos, that he who sat upon 
* Rev. 19.11, 13.  the White Horse called faithful and true, representing our blessed Lord and Saviour, 'tis said there his name is called the Word of God, but Socinians make this Opposition and rise all this Dust, because to rob him of what they can, they would have him called the Word, only because he hath declared us the Will of God; that he hath done it, is true, but not the whole Truth. But this relating to the first Chapter of John, we shall have a farther occasion to speak to it; let this be observed how the Name Word signifies a Substance not a Sound in the Air, and also only the Divine Nature in Christ.  
The Name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lord, belongs, and is proper to Christ to show his absolute Dominion; 
Third the Lord.  the Septuagint rendered the Word Jehovah by this, and so in the New Testament, Evangelists and Apostles make use of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signify Jehovah, which both are translated Lord, it is taken either primarily and absolutely or secondarily and relatively; in the first it signifies the infinite and independent Dominion, by reason of Right and Extent, as of Duration: About this, Socinians do mistake, for they would have God's Dominion to be meaned when 'tis with the Article, and without it that of the Creatures, but it appears how the Word when spoken of the Father, hath sometimes the Article, as Matth. 22.44. the Lord said unto my Lord, and sometimes not, as Mark 12.29. and when of the Son, whom they would have to be a Creature, it hath no Article say they, but it hath, John 20.28. so there is no reason to consider the Article in the Word, but rather the Subject: This Word, against Socinus' Opinion, is a Proper Name not an Appellative, because in a strict Sense it is attributed unto God alone, as in Deut. 6. Mark 12.29. The Lord our God is one Lord, and elsewhere, 
* 1 Cor. 8.6.  to us there is but one God and Father of all, and one Lord Jesus Christ, etc. and 
† Ephes. 4.5.  one Lord, one Faith, one Baptism, God alone is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords. 
‖ 1 Tim. 6.15.  When soever the Name Lord and God be absolutely taken, they are reciprocal with one true Lord, one true God: the word Lord in the Subject when joined with God, doth signify the True God, as when Christ says, 
* Matth. 4.7.  Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God; the like Examples we have, Gen 15.2. Isa. 51.22. Mark 12.29. Joh. 20.28. which for brevity's sake, I do but point at; now when this Name is absolutely spoken, or reduplicatively, as 
† Matth. 7.21.  not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, or with an Emphasis, as Lord of Lords in the forequoted place of Timothy, or with an Idiom, and Property as 
‖ Psalm 135.5.  great Lord, or with an Energy, as 
* Rev. 4.11.  Thou art worthy O Lord to receive glory and honour and power; whereby the Worship due to him is expressed, it properly belongs to God alone; in the New Testament it is mostly appropriated to our blessed Saviour, which he owns as the forequoted Text, not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, and when he speaks of the Day of Judgement, when the Son of Man shall come in his Glory, 
† Matth. 25.44.  they will say, Lord, when saw we thee an hungered; and about the time of his washing of his Disciples Feet, he said, 
‖ Joh. 13.13.  ye call me Master and Lord, and ye say well, for so I am: when after his Resurrection he appeared, John said to Peter, it is the Lord, John 21.7. that's the usual Name which the Apostles in their Writings do call him by. 'Tis observable, how after his Ascension there are two Things peculiarly called by the Lord's Name, that is, the 
* 1 Cor. 10.21.  Lord's-Table, and the 
† Rev. 1.10.  Lord's-Day.  
Now we must come to another Thing and show how the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or God, is in Scripture in a true and proper Sense given to Jesus Christ, 
Fourth, GOD.  but something must be premised before we come to the point; in the question what God is, we must distinguish either absolutely or relatively, that is considered either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Essentially, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Personally, the one relates to the Nature and essential Attributes, the other to the Persons of the most Holy Trinity, and to their Attributes: Here we assert two Things against Socinians; First, the Name of God with Attributes, is not a Name of Office, as Emperor, King, Consul, Judge, etc. but of Essence and Nature as are the Names, Spirit, Man, Lion, etc. Secondly, The Name God in its first and proper signification is not appellative but proper, for it signifieth an Essence of a most singular Nature, though we know it to be also improperly used and abused, as the Idols of the Ammonites and of several other Nations, are called their Gods, but there are with it such Circumstances as make us easily know the difference. Commonly there are such Epithets when the True God is mentioned alone with it, as the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Israel, One God, True God, Eternal Life, God blessed for ever, which leave no doubt that the True God by Nature is spoken of.  
The Word God in the New Testament doth properly first and chief signify the True God, and such by Nature, but secondarily and improperly those that are in high Places of Office and Power, which Sense Socinians would restrain it to when 'tis spoken of our blessed Saviour, but 'tis spoken of him not only attributively but subjectively, as 'tis in that place, When 
* ●al. 4.8.  ye knew not God ye did service unto them which by nature are not Gods; for if there that Name had been of Office and Dignity, the Galatians might have excused themselves that they did serve those that were Gods by Dignity and Place, though not by Nature, but the Apostle reproves them for it; so tho' they be called Gods, yet if they are not such by Nature, they are no Gods, according to what the Lord saith by the Prophet, 
† Jerem. 2.11.  Hath a nation changed their Gods which yet are no Gods? The reason is by the same given elsewhere, because 
‖ Chap. 16.20.  man makes them Gods unto himself; the proper Character which another Prophet gives of the True God is, he 
* Isa. 43.10.  before whom there was no God form, neither shall there be after him; for being of himself, he hath no beginning, and shall have no end, such is the Son of God the Saviour of the World, before whom there was no God form, upon which account he is by the Prophet called, the ancient of days, 
Dan. 7.22.  neither shall there be after him; thus he must needs be such by Nature, and every one knows that neither Angels nor Magistrates are Gods, because not such by Nature, as is the Son of God, which by God's Grace we shall demonstrate, and neither the Galatians nor none of the Gentiles, could well know God, and as he ought to be, till God was manifest in the Flesh when this Second Person of the Godhead took Human Nature in the Virgin's Womb. The Word God is either first and properly spoken of the True, Eternal God, or of the Creature, if of the Creature, than the Creature shall properly be called and properly be God, which is Blasphemy; but if it be spoken of the High, True and Eternal God, than it must signify his Essence and Nature, seeing God is such from all Eternity through the perfection of his Nature, not upon the account of any Dignity or Power different from his Nature; the Name of God if absolute, denoteth his Nature and not any Office, but if it be relative, and signifieth only an Office, then from Eternity God was not God. They would have the Word God without an Article, as we observed of the Word Lord, to signify those that are Secondarily such, but with an Article only the True God, both which Notions are false; for first, the True God is sometimes denoted without an Article, as Joh. 1.6.12.13.18. so is the Inscription of the 
* Rom. 1.7.  Epistle to the Romans, and in other places; so is the other Notion false, for the Word God attributed to false Gods, is sometimes with the Article, as Act. 7.43. and 2 Chron. 4.4. both which Examples are joined together in the forequoted place to the Galatians; so than the signification depends not upon the Article but the Nature of the Subject, but to leave off such Criticisms of the Schools, and not to bestow our time upon Words more than upon Things; I say the Word God is Jesus Christ's proper Name, for God and Christ are so unseparably united, that 
† Ephes. 2.12.  they that were without Christ, were also without God in the world.  
So then the Name God signifies the Essence or Nature, not barely the Office and Dignity, for otherwise it would follow it should belong to God only in relation to Creatures; but 'tis most true, it absolutely belongs to him, for he was God before there were any Creature; now our God by Nature is opposed to those that are only called so, the Apostle saith, 
‖ 1. Cor. ●. 5, 6.  Though there be that are called Gods, many, etc. to us there is but one God; and by the Epithet True God is distinguished from them; therefore when the Word God is spoken of the True God, 'tis not appellative or common, but proper, for if it were not so, God would not absolutely be one, for that is common which belongs to many, and proper, that which belongs only to one, and the Name of one only thing must needs be proper, since Scripture teaches us there is but one God, the Name of God must needs be proper: and farther, when a Name doth of itself belong to one, and to others in relation only to that same one, it must be accounted to be that one's proper Name; thus the Name of God of itself belongs to God alone, not in relation to any thing else, but to others it belongs only in relation to the only True God; and as the Word God, spoken of the True God, is, as already said, taken Essentially or personally, so is the Name Father either for the Essence of God or for the first Person of the Trinity; now the Person is taken either abstractively or concretively, when we say the Word God is taken personally, we do not mean abstractively or separately from, but concretively or jointly with the Essence; so the Name Father is taken either essentially or personally, in the first manner when in the Lord's Prayer, we say, our Father, and personally when in the Creed we say, I believe in God the Father.  
Thus far we in these matters do agree with the Adversaries that there is but One God, and that 
* Isai. 42.8.  he gives not his Name and Glory to another; for to whom God doth communicate the Honour of his Name and Titles, to the same he thereby imparts his Glory. Now there is a Name of God proper, and another appellative; this is given to the Creatures, and 'tis either properly or figuratively; in the first Sense the Word is not always to be understood to be the absolute Being but a relative one, as when some Nation doth through Error and Idolatry, name to herself some Divinity or other, in this Sense God and People are relatives, so the Name God taken in the predicament of Relation and not in that of Substance, may properly be spoken of a Creature; thus I speak properly when I say, Chamos is the God of the Moabites, and Malcom of the Ammonites, but when I come to examine the Opinion of those Nations, it is very true that they are the Gods of such Nations, but 'tis not true that they are Gods in Nature and Substance, they are but erroneously looked upon as Gods by such Nations; so this is not a substantial and absolute Truth, only Relative, which the Adversaries may not affirm of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, as being feigned and invented Gods between which the Word of God makes a difference, 
† 1 Thess. 1.9.  Ye turned to God from Idols to serve the living and true God: Now the figurative signification is, when by reason of some likeness, God's Name is attributed to some Creatures, 
‖ Psal. 8.  thus Angels are called Elohim, and 
* Job 1.6.  Sons of God by reason of the Excellency of their Nature, Magistrates are called 
† Psal. 82.6.  Gods and Sons of God upon the account of the Dignity of their Office.  
But here the Case is very different, the question is, Whether the Name of God be properly or improperly, and figuratively attributed to the Son and to the Holy Ghost? I mean the Name taken appellatively, denoting in him that is so called, the Divine Nature and Essence: Socinians, though they be brazenfaced enough, yet not to that degree, as to say, that the Persons of the Son and Holy Ghost, are called God only by way of Figure, but they cavil that the Word signifies not a Nature but an Office, so the proper signification of the Word they extend to Angels and Magistrates, as if the Word God signified Governor, Preserver and Benefactor, etc. but before their Heresy broke out, no Man ever taught so, than no Language gives that Sense to the Word; for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek, signifies the Nature, for some accounted to be Gods, are false ones, 
* Gal. 4.8.  which by nature are not Gods; and Philosophers reckoned the Gods of the Heathens amongst the Animals, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 speaking and rational, and the Hebrew Word Elohah, doth certainly, properly signify the Nature, as being given to the supreme Being, which is so called, not relatively, but absolutely; when to the first Man the common Name is attributed, he is not simply called Adam till that became his proper Name: Now as to the Origin or Etymology of the Word, 'tis falsely deduced from the signification of governing, helping and preserving, but truly from the Notion of the word Worship and Adoration; we must not think that our first Parents were so wanting in their Piety towards their Maker whom they worshipped so devoutly, to call him by a common Name proper to Creatures, as if afterwards it had been attributed to him by way of Excellency; And is it likely that God had been so wanting in what related to his Honour, as being himself the Author of the Hebrew Tongue, the Knowledge whereof he infused into Adam and Eve, as not to provide a Name proper to distinguish his own Nature? For having instituted for himself a Religious Worship and Adoration, he must need also have declared a proper Name incommunicable to any Creature whatsoever.  
Now the Name of God is given the Son, not only attributively, 
† Joh. 1.1.  the word was God; and 
‖ Rom. 9.13.  Christ, God blessed for ever; but also subjectively, 
* 1 Tim 3.16.  God was manifested in the flesh, and 
* Acts 20.28. , God purchased his church with his own blood; even in the Old Testament 
† Psal. 97.6, 7. , The heavens declare his righteousness, and all the people see his glory, etc. Worship him all ye gods. Now the Adversaries do confess that as often as the Name of God is spoken subjectively, as they call it, it signifies a Substance and Person, but of God the Father of Christ; still they own it signifies a Substance and Person of the Godhead; but why only of the Father of Christ? that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, merely their Opinion, without any Proof. As to that which they say about the Article in the Greek, I shown already it is an idle Distinction; for out of some places of Scripture I shown how the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, signifying the true God, is sometimes with an Article and sometimes without, as 
* 1 Tim. 3.16.  God was manifest in the flesh, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the same as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, saith Thomas 
† Joh. 20.28. , my Lord and my God, he spoke to one whom he knew was to be worshipped with religious worship, and he owned it so; yet Scripture commands, and often repeats, that the Lord our God alone is to be worshipped, which our Saviour Christ confirmed 
* Mat. 4.10.  with his own Mouth, and Paul 
† Gal. 4.8.  after him; and the Angel no less than twice doth direct to the true and only Object of worship, when he said 
‖ Rev. 19.10. and 22.9.  worship God: But this belonging to another Head, I now shall proceed no farther in it.  
Now to remove all improper and figurative meaning, when the word God is attributed to Christ, and to prove his Consubstantiality with the Father, Scripture sets down Names and Epithets, which not only distinguish him from and raise him above all and every Creature, but also make him equal with God the Father: Thus he is called 
l 1 John 5.20  the true God, and 
m Tit. 2.13 Re. 19.17. , the great God; so 
n Rom. 9.5 , God over all, blessed for ever; also 
o Judas 4. , the only Lord God, etc. Hence the Name Jehovah is jointly, equally, and comparatively given unto the Son; as 
p Psal. 2.11, 12. , serve the Lord with fear, etc. and 
q Isai. 25.9 , this is our God, we have waited for him, and he will save us: this is the Lord, we have waited for him, we will rejoice in his salvation: Now comparatively, or in a Parallel, Christ is the same 
r Isai. 8.13, 14.  Lord of Hosts which shall be for a Sanctuary, a Stone of stumbling, and for a Rock of Offence to both the Houses of Israel, as confirmed 
s Luke 2.34. and Rom. 9.32. . Christ is he, who being by the Right Hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the Promise of the Holy Ghost upon the day of Pentecost, shed forth those Gifts we read of 
t Act. 2.3.4.33. ; and 'tis the Lord God of Israel, unquestionably the true God, that promiseth 
u Joel 2.28.  in the last days to pour out his spirit, etc. so 'tis the same Lord God of Israel, the Lord Jesus is the same, who is first and last; comparing 
x Isai. 44.6.  Isaiah with S. John 
y Rev. 1.17. . The Son of God saith 
z Isai. 48.12, 16. , He is sent from the Lord God, and from his spirit, after he had said, v. 12. I am the first, and also am the last: So the Titles proper to the true God are given Christ, as King of Kings, and Lord of Lords; as by God's Grace we shall show when we speak about the Attributes.  
So then the Son is true God, as we observed before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, though not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Son of himself, when we speak of the Son simply, and without relation to the Father, we properly call him Jehovah, and self being, for he hath it of himself; but when considered relatively to the Father, than we say he hath his Being from the Father; the Son is by himself not of himself, his Essence hath no Spring, but his Person is from the Father, the Essence is not communicated to the Son, but only the manner of subsisting in the Essence; when the Son is called God personally, than he is not called the manner of subsisting, but an Existence with the manner of being; now the modus or manner is understood with the Essence, because as the manner of Divinity is not Divinity itself, so the mode of Essence is not Essence itself; thus when he is called God personally 'tis in the Concrete not in the Abstract.  
If Christ be not God by Nature, he is not true God, for nothing is really such but what is so by Nature: The Adversaries say, that those things which comparatively are called such in Scripture, are truly such as Christ is called 
* Joh. 1.9. Chap. 18.1 , the true light, and the true vine, though he be so called by way of a Metaphor: But we do not deny, how sometimes the Name true is appropriated to those things that are so called metaphorically, but then the sense of the Metaphor doth not really belong to them; for in every Metaphor there is true and false in the manner of it; thus Christ is called the True Light; for though in a metaphorical way he be a Light, that is, spiritually works the same Effect as a corporal Light doth bodily, in the like manner he is called a True Vine, because that the Metaphor is truly proper to him; but here the question is not about the truth of Words taken metaphorically but properly; for when the word True is joined to those that are properly taken, than it signifieth the very Nature of the thing; so when the word true is joined with that of God, it necessarily signifies the Nature of God; and whensoever the Name of True God is given any thing, thereby is Divine Nature attributed to it: This shows how Socinians do not own Christ to be the true God, because, according to Scripture, there is but one true God, they deny him to be that only true God: When God is called the only Maker of Heaven and Earth, and the only true God, 'tis not said only by way of Excellency, as comparing God with the Creatures, but we thereby exclude all others; for in those places the only true God is opposed to false gods, in relation to which he is not called true by way of Eminency, but because it is the truth; for they are true gods by no means, and the true God is ever opposed to false gods and Idols, wherefore called the Living God, 
Psal. 36.9.  because, saith David, with thee is the fountain of Life.  
He that is God only by Participation and not by Nature, is not true God; for Participation doth import a Likeness, but Likeness of a thing is never the thing itself; and if they would have Christ to be God only by Participation, this in effect is to deny him to be true God, that is, to make him an improper and metaphorical God; and after that way Men and Angels might be called true Gods, which is not only Folly but also Blasphemy to say and think: But they say, if God and Angels be not true Gods, than God doth mock when he calls them so; but 'tis no Mockery to give one some Name in an improper and figurative sense, or else when Christ calls his Apostles 
* Matth. 5.13, 14. , The light of the world, the salt of the earth, and a City that is set on an hill, he would have mocked too; so would Paul calling 
† 1 Cor. 3.11. and Eph. 2.20.  Christ a foundation, and a chief corner stone: Seeing the Apostles are not true Light, only improperly and metaphorically, and Christ a Stone figuratively, they that are Gods only by Likeness and Communication and not by Nature, are not Gods: Every thing is called true, as I hinted before, according to its Nature, a true Man, true Gold, true Silver, from the Nature of Man, Gold, and Silver: Now as to Christ, can he be esteemed as a true God, who first had a Being according to their Principles, and was not God, then was God, and, like the Popish Wafer, God by degrees, was God more and more, till he came to a perfection of the Godhead, and we may say, was accidentally so, for such Accidents have their degrees; for they say, Christ, during his whole Life, was not a perfect God or a perfect Lord, and by these means Christ's Excellency was greater for being Man than for being God; for to be a Man is to be a Substance, but to be a God, is, after that rate, to be an Accident, but every Substance is more excellent than its Accident.  
Nay they grow worse and worse; for as they would not have him to have been a God from the beginning, so at last they will have him to cease from being a God; for if Christ be called true God only by virtue of that Power he hath over Believers, and in that respect only to be worshipped as true God, then after the last day he will be God no longer, for than he shall be deprived of that Power when he shall have delivered up the Kingdom unto God even the Father, which Text I shall elsewhere have occasion to explain; so that he shall be reduced to the common condition of other Believers, and have no Advantage over any of them. O take notice what a God they make Christ to be, for every Believer could be such a God: No Man of sound mind can't but see such an Absurdity, Impiety, and Blasphemy. Here farther we could show, that as Socinians own not Christ to be true God, so they deny him to be true Man, because, they say, the Body he had of the blessed Virgin is gone, under the notion, That Flesh and Blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of God: They also teach, the Soul of Man doth not subsist by itself, as Socinus 
* pag. 79.  taught against Puccius: So, according to them, Christ, such as he was, is gone and perished both in Body and Soul; this I take notice of only by the way, to come to other things.  
The Name God is spoke substantively and subjectively, not only predicatively of Christ; for if it be not necessary it should substantively be taken of him, then neither adjectively; for the Name God is also predicatively taken of the true God, as 
† 1 Kings 18.21. , if the Lord be God follow him, and so in other places: When in Scripture the Name of God is given Christ, we do not mind so much the Word, as the Person signified by the Word, who is God blessed for ever, to be adored, whereby is meaned the true God, though it be spoken by way of Attribute. What Socinus saith is false, how when the word God is spoken subjectively it never signifieth Christ, as it appears out of several Texts; First, The Lord of Hosts is sent by the Lord of hosts, the words of the Lord of Hosts are related thus by the Angel 
* Zech. 2.8, 10, 11. , after the glory hath he sent me to the nations, after his Glorification; and he that says so adds, for lo I come and will dwell in the midst of thee, saith the Lord, which is the proper Character of the Messiah; who to that purpose is called 
† Hagg. 2.7.  the desire of all nations, and only in the time of the Messiah after his Resurrection, all * Nations were by the Apostles called to believe.  
Here out of that place of Haggai one thing I must observe, which is the Comparison made by the Prophet between the first Temple and the second, wherein the Preference is given to the last; for therein 'tis said not only and I will fill this house with glory, saith the Lord of hosts, but also in the next Verse but one, the glory of this latter house shall be greater than of the former: I ask wherein could this greater Glory consist? Not in the Stateliness and Magnificence of the Building, wherein the last was much inferior to the first, as God by the Mouth of the same Prophet declareth it, when he saith, Who is left among you that saw this house in her first glory? And how do you see it now? Is it not in your eyes in comparison of it as nothing? v. 3. in so much that many of the priests and Levites and chief of the Fathers who were ancient men, that had seen the first house, 
Ezra 3.12.  when the foundation of the last was laid before their eyes, wept with a loud voice: As indeed what a proportion could there be between a Temple built by a poor remnant of a long Captivity, who for Means to do't were beholding to Heathenish Princes, and who met with so much Opposition in the carrying on their design from open and secret Enemies, I say, what a Proportion could such a House hold with the Temple of Solomon, towards the building whereof David had for several years before made so rich and great Provisions, which his Son the most glorious King that ever sat upon the Throne of Israel, did so much increase, and erected a Temple, which, for Magnificence and Riches, was a Wonder of the World: So than the Glory of the second Temple could not upon any such account be greater than that of the first; nor in reference to the Manifestation of God's Presence in the Ark, at the Mercy-Seat between the Cherubims, and of the Cloud which filled the whole House, more conspicuous in the first than in the second Temple; wherein then could this Glory consist? Our Prophet declares it, And I will shake all nations, and the desire of all nations shall come, and I will fill this house with glory, saith the Lord of Hosts. I take it to be beyond all Dispute, that by the desire of all Nations, the Messiah, the Lord Jesus is understood, who came whilst the second Temple was yet standing. Christ the Messiah is called the desire of all Nations, he whom all Nations were to desire; because according to the Promise unto Abraham, in him all the Nations of the Earth should be blessed, Blessedness is certainly a thing most : It was then his Presence that made its Glory greater than the former's, for things in the first Temple did but represent him, and were the Shadow and Figures, whereof he was the Body and the Truth: Solomon, though never so glorious, was by no means to be compared with him, as he plainly declared it to the Scribes, 
Mat. 12.22.  Behold a greater than Solomon is here: According to all human appearances, Solomon being every way compassed about with Glory, was beyond expression greater than Christ, a Person persecuted and derided by most Men, chief by the great ones of the World; and if we must speak of Gifts, Solomon was glorious not only in Riches and Honour, but also great in Wisdom; for his wisdom excelled the wisdom of all the children of the East country, 
1 Kings 4.30, 31.  and all the wisdom of Egypt, for he was wiser than all men; yet for all this, Christ saith, in Wisdom, he was greater than he, 
Matt. 12.42.  which could never have been if he had been a mere Man; in that respect every thing was against him, therefore that preference can have no human ground, it must be by virtue of a natural Privilege and of a divine Prerogative, which is the same he had over David, Solomon's Father, whose Lord he was; the same he had over Abraham, Pre-existence, before Abraham was I am, which could not be as to his Humanity, wherefore in him there must be another ground, namely his Divinity, only therein can lay the advantage he had over them all: Not only he was greater than all these, but also than the Temple itself, a place so eminently glorious by reason of God's immediate Presence in it, that it was called not only Holy, but the inner part of it was called the holiest of all, into which none but the High Priest might enter, and that only once a year, not without Blood; yet saith our Saviour, 
Matt. 12.6, 8.  I say unto you, that in this place is one greater than the temple, which can be said of none but of God; there he also calls himself Lord of the Sabbath, not as Man but as God, Temple and Sabbath the two holiest things in Israel.  
The second Text is this 
* Isai. 35.4, 5. , Behold your God will come with vengeance, even God with a recompense he will come and save you; then the Eyes of the blind shall be open, and the Ears of the deaf shall be unstopped, which our Saviour applieth to himself, who when John's Disciples asked him 
† Matt. 11.3, 5. , Art thou he that should come? or do we look for another? Jesus answered them by this, the blind receive their sight, etc. which were the Signs wherewith Isaiah had prophesied God would come; these things he commands them to give John an account of, wherein he looked to the Prophet, who foretold such things should be done by the Messiah, whom in that place Isaiah calleth God, when he saith, God himself will come and save you, which must not be understood of the Father; for first, we never read that God the Father came into the World to save us, but that he sent his Son to do't; he that sends another in his place, cannot properly be said to come himself. Secondly, there is an Energy in the word he himself, whereby is meaned, not that another in God's stead, but God himself, by himself would come, and though God be said to come when he shows some gracious effect of his Power, yet when he is said to send another, 'tis not to be understood in that same manner: And though Socinus denies him at that time to be God, only that he was appointed hereafter so to be, he is refuted by his being in that Text at that time called the God of Israel, your God, whom you worship.  
The third Text is that wherein God saith 
* Mal. 3.1. , Behold I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord whom ye seek shall suddenly come to his temple: Now who that God is before whose face John prepared his way, is clear enough, that he spoke of the Lord Jesus, not of the Father's coming after him, which he pointed at when he said, 
† John 1: 26, 27, 29.30. compared with Act. 13.24  There standeth one among you whom ye know not, he it is that coming after me is preferred before me; and to make it clearer, he points directly at the Person of Christ; for, the next day John seethe Jesus coming unto him, and saith, behold the lamb of God which taketh away the sins of the world, which is he of whom I said, after me comes a man which is preferred before me, for he was before me: Can there be a plainer Designation of a person than this? To him alone, by means of his Preaching, he prepared the way; and that which is remarkable, our Saviour explains of himself the Text of Malachy, This is he of whom it is written, behold 
* Luke 7.27.  I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee; and the word my face in the Prophet he renders thy face, that is, of Christ; so he quoteth the place not according to the Words, but according to the Sense; 
† Luke 1.76.  Thou child, saith Zechariah of John, shalt he called the Prophet of the highest: (a high Name, proper to God) for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways; it is then most certain that John prepared the way for him that was to come after him, and to converse with, and dwell among Men, not the Father but Christ came after John, therefore he is that God that sent his Messenger as in Malachy: Socinus his Phrase, is not where in Scripture to be read, that God came in Christ, he sent Christ his Son, but came not in him, the Father is said to be, and dwéll in Christ, not to come in Christ, he sent him in his own Name.  
Though Christ under the Name Word be called God absolutely, 
* Joh. 1.1.  and without any restriction, in the same manner as the True God is absolutely called God, without any thing to pretext an improper appellation, and the repetition of the Word God in the same Signification, doth sufficiently demonstrate it; 
† 1 Joh. 5.20.  nay, though he be not barely called God, but the True God, whence we must necessarily conclude he is true essential God. Yet they would have the Father alone to be God, and that when the Name of God is absolutely set down, it is to be understood only of the Father, not of the Son, nor of the Holy Ghost, so they conclude Father, Son and Holy not to be One God, to which purpose they wrist some Scripture out of the Old and New Testament, which in due time we shall by the Grace of God take an occasion to answer; but because the Adversaries use their utmost pernicious Endeavours to oppose these Truths, we to make clear these most important Doctrines which our Faith is grounded upon, must somewhat more enlarge upon it, though we take notice of some things we said before, or to the same purpose.  
First, We say God is a Name of the Divine Essence or Nature, as Man is of Human Nature, but whereof there is a different Reason from that of all Names of other Natures; for all Individuals are asunder one from another, their Nature according to the mental Notion is one, but not really so, wherefore in them, Nature is the species or kind which is predicated and spoken of every singular and individual Person as James is a Man, and of many too, as Matthew, John and Luke are Three Men, but as in God the Essence is but One in number, and not only in the mental Notion, but also is really and most simply One, though in Three Persons, this Name of God is not predicated as a species of every Person. but according to the priority or posteriority of their Origin and Order, as thus, the Father is God, but unbegotten, the Son God, begotten, the Holy Ghost proceeding from both. Now if the Name God was as species spoken of the Persons, it would follow that the Persons should make several Gods different in Number and Nature. Secondly, We say where the Name of God is absolutely used, it doth not always as the Heretics would have it, signify the Name of One of the Persons, but sometimes the Person and sometimes the Nature; and herein lays their Mistake, that they suppose the Name of God ever to be taken Personally, and the Comparison is the cause of the Mistake, for the infinite Essence is not multiplied as the finite, now when the Name of God is taken for the Person, either something is added which gives a Notion of the Person, as when God is said, 
* Act. 20.28.  to have purchased the Church with his own blood, which is understood of the Son, or else the Persons are compared among themselves, and then the Name of God is taken for the Person of the Father, for because the Father is the Spring of the Godhead in relation to the Order and Origin of the Persons, so in the comparison of the Persons the Name of God is by Excellency attributed to the Father, especially where mention is made of the Mediator, for whensoever Christ speaks himself, or is spoken of, as, and in the Person of the Mediator, he retains a middle degree between God and Man, and then by the Name of God is understood the Father.  
Thirdly, When the Name of God is put instead of One Person, and it signifies One Father, then is thereby understood the Godhead which is common to Son and Holy Ghost, who are Author and Maker of all Creatures; for though the Son doth exercise the Office of Mediator, yet he hath not thereby lost the Glory of the Divinity with the Father, neither is his Essence inferior or secondary to the Father's or his Godhead Essentiated. Fourthly, When God's Name without any personal Attribute or Comparison of one Person with the other, is simply, indefinitely and absolutely used, than it signifies the Divine Nature and Essence which is Father, Son and Holy Ghost, One God. Besides, in these Texts of Scripture where the Name of God is mentioned in opposition to false Gods or Creatures, it is by no means to be restrained to the Person of the Father only, but is indefinitely spoken of Father, Son and Holy Ghost; as for instance, if when the Law commands to adore One God, the Father alone, and not the Son is to be understood, it would follow that the Son who is to be adored, is another God; likewise when God calls himself the God of Israel, he by this mark distinguisheth himself from all false Gods, How then might it be said of one Personal one, whether Father or Son? 
* 2 Sam. 7.22.  Who is great as thou art, who is like unto thee? for several of the Arians who denied the Consubstantiality or the Sameness of Nature, yet owned a likeness between Father and Son; and in the Prophets where God's Name is absolutely taken, often it addeth an universal Negative or Exclusive; but if the Name of God belongeth only to the Father, and if Father, Son and Holy Ghost be but One God and Saviour, and One Nature, it will follow that Son and Holy Ghost are excluded from Things attributed unto God, for 'tis said of the True God of Israel, that he is the only God and Saviour, and that there is no other God besides and without him. Moreover, seeing the Father alone is One God, and they own also the Son to be God, and the Holy Ghost to be God, though not that One God, than it follows there are Three Gods, which is Blasphemy,  
These Things being premised do afford Matter of answer to their Sophistical Cavils against this Truth, and so show how the Word God absolutely used in Scripture is to be understood, not only of the Father, but also of the Son and Holy Ghost, whence also appeareth the Mystery of these Doctrines one with another, and they are so twisted, that they stand or fall together: So, no wonder if under one Head we say somethings belonging to, and spoken of in another; here they form thus an Argument against us. The God of Israel whom the Israelites ever adored, is that One God whom the Law and the Prophets speak of, but the Father of Christ is that One God mentioned in the Law and the Prophets, therefore he is that One God; but the Argument concludes nothing against us, we altogether grant it, the Father is the One God of Israel, for we do not say that there is another God, another Nature in the Father, than that same, which Law and Prophets call the only God, and God alone; and we on our part do Argue thus, The God of Israel is One God, but Christ is the God of Israel who appeared to the Fathers, and by whose Spirit the Prophets being inspired, spoke; therefore Christ is that only God. For there is in Christ no other Godhead, no other Divine Nature, than what is in the Father, as the Father is One, so is the Son One God, and both together are One God in Nature: But if the meaning of their Argument be that of the Three Persons of the Trinity, only the Father, not the Son, nor Holy Ghost, is the God of Israel, than we deny their minor Proposition, for out of Scripture the Son is the God of Israel whom they adored, for not only under the Name of God they adored the Messiah whom they believed to be God, but even they made a distinct mention of him in their Prayers, as we read when Jacob blessed Joseph's Children. God before whom my Fathers Abraham and Isaac did walk, the God which fed me all my life time to this day 3 the Angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless these Lads; and this is spoken of the true ancient Jews, for as to those that believed not when our Saviour himself spoke to them, who owned only the Father of Christ the Messiah, for their God, we may say, they knew not the True God in a true manner, seeing 
* Joh. 14.6.  none comes to the Father but by the Son, and 
† Mat. 11.  none 〈◊〉 the Father but the Son, and he to whom the Son 〈◊〉 veal him; wherefore since they rejected the Son 〈◊〉 wanted the true Knowledge of the Father, and 〈◊〉 stead of God the Father, they adored the Idol 〈◊〉 their own heart; wherefore when Jesus said to 〈◊〉 
* Matt. 8.44.  If I honour myself, my glory is nothing, 'tis my Father that honoureth me whom you say to be your God; he upbraids them with their Vainglory who boasted to be the People of God, but falsely, by reason they owned him not to be God; in the mean while against their aspersions he asserted his Glory, because they looked upon him as very much below Abraham and other Patriarches; he in his Capacity of Mediator and as a Man, owns a difference between him and God, whom he declareth to be the Author of his Glory, and he often mentioneth his Father, to the end, in this Comparison of Persons all Things may be acceptable unto him; but hence it doth not follow that Christ is not of the same Nature with the Father, seeing they are not compared in relation to the Essen●● but herein he doth condescend to their Capacity, whom not owning his Deity, he would by degrees bring to the knowledge thereof.  
As to the use of the Name of God in Scripture, the remaining Evidences are reduced under two kinds, First, In some the Name of God is absolutely taken for God the Father. Secondly, In others is added an exclusive Particle which is by some joined with the Name of God, and by others with the Things spoken of and attributed unto God. Out of the first, nothing may be deduced contrary to this Doctrine, for in all those places by them quoted, which anon we shall mention, is a Comparison of the Persons, wherein the Name of God is properly attributed to the Father upon the account of Order and Origin, but 'tis inconsequent to say, that in every place where the Name of God is absolutely taken, that is, without Comparison of the Persons, it is to be understood only of the Father, for in several places where the Word God is indefinitely set down, yet it is by no means to be reduced to the Father alone; as to the other sort of Proofs wherein an exclusive Particle is expressed, that exclusive Particle relates to the Creatures, and to every thing which by Nature is not God, whither they be things in Nature, as Sun, Moon and Stars which Heathens worshipped as Gods, or else those which are Effects of Man's fancy and imagination, such are several Idols by foolish Men worshipped as Gods: wherefore, seeing the True and Essential God is opposed to those which by Nature are not Gods, it follows that by the Word God may well be understood Father, Son and Holy Ghost; likewise though sometimes mention be made only of One Person, we must not take it as if thereby the other Persons were excluded, but only that which by Nature is not God, and that this is a right Interpretation, it may well be proved out of several places of Scripture, as for Instance, when God saith by 
* Isa. 43.11.  the Prophet, I, even I, am the Lord and besides me there is no Saviour; and by another, 
† Hos. 13.4.  For there is no Saviour besides me. Here in the Adversaries Opinion, Salvation is attributed to the Father, but that the Son is not excluded, it appears out of several places, amongst the rest, out of this, 
‖ Act. 4.12.10.  Neither is there Salvation in any other, that is, in Jesus Christ who hath been crucified; and we know Scripture doth not contradict itself, and if out of the Prophet's, one would exclude the Son, he might as well out of this exclude the Father. Again, the Lord Jesus saith, No man knows the Father but the Son; now if all but the Son be excluded from knowing the Father, as in the foregoing Text he would be excluded from being a Saviour, so in this from knowing himself, also the Holy Ghost would be excluded from knowing the Father, though he be said, To 
* 1 Cor. 2.10.  search all things, yea the deep things of God; in this very same Sense, Paul said, 
‖ Chap. 2.1, 10.  I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ and him crucified; he doth not thereby deny that he determined to know the Father and the Holy Ghost, but he meaneth, he knows nor owns no way of Salvation out of Christ, and v. ●1. The things of God knows no man, but the spirit of God; but in other places we read how 
* Joh. 5.20.  the Father knows the Son, and the Son knows the Father, and the Father shows the Son all things that himself doth; hence we may conclude how the Apostle speaks exclusively only of Creatures, not of the Son nor of the Holy Ghost.   

CHAP. VI Christ is True Natural Son of God by Eternal Generation.  
BUT we must by the Grace of God come to another Head, as Scripture gives Christ, truly, properly and essentially the Name of God, so it doth give him that of Son of God; the First we shown already; the Second whereby he is declared the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, we must now speak of, as we observed that the Word God in Scripture is spoken in several Senses, as the True God properly, Angels and Magistrates improperly, and 
* Judg. 9.2 l. 46.  Idols, 
† 2 Cor. 4.4.  the Devil, and the 
‖ Phil. 3.19.  Belly abusively. So here I must say how the Name Son of God admits of Three different Significations, for God hath three sorts of Sons, for all others are reduced under these three Heads; the First is by Creation and Preservation which is a continued Creation, for 
* Act. 17.28.  in him we live and move and have our being; thus Adam is called 
† Luke 3.38.  Son of God, and Men 
‖ Gen. 6.2.  Sons of God; on this Account, God is Father of all Creatures, whether in Heaven as Angels, nay, of the Sun, Moon, Stars, of the Birds of the Air, and on Earth, of all Men, Beasts, Plants, etc. and of Fishes under Water, this in relation to Nature, and in general to the whole Creation. The Second kind of God's Sons or Children, is by Adoption and Grace, such are his Elect and People; of these in a special manner God is called the Father.  
In a Third way Scripture speaks of a Son of God, and of none else, thus the only begotten from all Eternity, namely, our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, who is not Son according to the first manner, which being common to all Men, would make no difference between him and others, and bring him into a Crowd of the whole Work of Creation; neither is he Son of God upon the account of Grace and Adoption which they would have him to be, but if he be by Adoption, how can he be the Only Begotten Son, seeing that through Grace God hath adopted so many; adopted Sons once and before their Adoption were not Sons of God, which cannot be said of the Lord Jesus that the time hath been when he was not Son of God; all and every adopted Son of God were once 
* Ephes. 2.  dead in trespasses and sins, and by nature children of wrath even as others, once 
† Colos. 1.13.  under the power of darkness, and 
‖ Rom. 5.10.  enemies to God, none of which things may without Blasphemy, be spoken or thought of the Lord Jesus.  
He is called Son not by Creation, for 
* Colos. 1.16.  all things were created by him, and one cannot be Creator and Creature, nor by Adoption, for 
† Ephes. 1.5.  in him we are adopted; nor by any Dignity or Eminency over inferior Creatures, as are Angels, for the 
‖ Heb. 1.4, 5.  Apostle denies it, nor also upon the account of a personal Union or Incarnation, as he is called Son of Man, because manifested in the Flesh, he is not called Son of God upon any such account, or in any of these Senses as Socinians would have him; 
1 Job. 4.14.15.  for they cannot deny the Lord Jesus to be called God, Son of God, for that Name is given him in so many places of Scripture, and herein they would seem to agree, but not sincerely, for they cavil about the manner, and disagree as to the true Sense; he is called Son of God, by reason of an Eternal Generation by the Father, wherefore he is called God's 
* Rom. 8.3, 32.  own and proper Son, and 
† Joh. 3.16.  only begotten Christ is from the Father by Generation, and the Holy Ghost by Spiration; to be from the Father by Generation, is to be generated or begotten by the Father, long before the fullness of times, and his appearing in the Flesh, God absolutely said to him, 
‖ Psal. 2.7.  thou art my Son this day have unbegotten thee; this represented with Comparisons as when called 
* Prov 8.  Wisdom, for as Wisdom is produced by the Mind, so is the Son by the Father, and in the New Testament by the similitude of 
† Colos. 1.15.  an Image of 〈◊〉 Father's 
‖ Heb 1.3.  Person, and of the brightness of his glory, and of the inward 
* Job. 1.1.  Word in the Mind, for as an Image is not every likeness, but the express Effigy or Representation of that whereof it is the Image, so the Son in his Essence and Essential Attributes is so much the express Image of the Father, that 
* Joh. 14.9.  whosoever sees him, doth see the Father also; as the brightness of the Beam is from the Sun, so the Son is from the Father, as Light from Light, as equally the glorious Image of his Nature, as a Letter doth exactly represent the Character out of which it is drawn; thus the Son doth exactly represent the Father, by whom he is begotten, as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word, is conceived by the Mind, and remains in it, so is the Son begotten by the Father, and remains in him; and as the Wisdom, Image, Brightness, the Word, are one thing from another, so the Son is of the Father from the Father, not as an Essence is from another, but as a Person is from a Person, because he is the Character or express Image of the Person of the Father; all these in created Things are accidents, but in the Son who is in himself and by himself, they are essential; hence appears how in this there is a true distinction of the Persons begetting and begotten.  
So then Christ is called the Son of God, not by reason of any gracious Communication of Existence, or of Power, but upon the account of a secret and incomprehensible Generation of the Father of his Essence, for he is the true, proper, only begotten, highly beloved Son of the Living God, and the prepositive Article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Son, frequently joined to this Subject, doth denote a Filiation or Sonship, altogether of another kind from that of 
† Heb. 1.5.  Angels or Men, which can be no other than an essential one; a True Son is begotten of the Essence of his Father, but the Son of God is a True Son, therefore he is begotten of the Essence of his Father. Again, the proper Son is said to be, and is he that hath his proper Father; now he is the proper Father who hath begotten his Son of his own Essence: Farthermore, the Only Begotten Son, is only he that is begotten of the Substance of his Father, which is demonstrated by the Opposition of natural and adopted Sons, who are loved for the sake of the well beloved natural Son of God; that Confession of Peter in the Name of the Disciples, thou art not 
* Matth. 16.14, 16, 17. repeated  John the Baptist, nor Elias, nor Jeremias who had been great in God's Favour, nor none of the Prophets, they were a mere nothing in Comparison of Christ, but, 
† Joh. 6.68, 69. Ver. 17.  thou art Christ the Son of the living God; is not only in its true Sense approved of by our Saviour, but he also there attributes it to Divine Revelation, as of an incomprehensible Mystery; Blessed art thou Simon Bar-●●●as, for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my father which is in heaven.  
Isaac as they object, is called 
* Gen 23.2. and Heb. 11.17.  Only Begotten Son, but he is not absolutely so called, but relatively secundum quid, because he was the Only Begotten Son of Abraham, by Sarah in a lawful Marriage, and thereby made his only Heir, to the exclusion of Ishmael, whom he had before by Hagar: he was Only Begotten Son in relation to the Promise which is expressed in the following Verse, 
‖ Heb. 11.18.  of whom it was said, that in Isaac shall thy seed be called. The excellency of Filiation is between those who differ in Degrees, but here the Difference is greater than in the whole kind, as Heb. 1.4, 5. Isaac was a Type of Christ in relation to the Sacrifice, but not of the Generation; the Father hath begotten his Son through the Communication of his Nature, and so of a true and proper Generation, but not of a Physical or Natural, such as Man's, and of other animated Creatures, but by a Supernatural, whereby God begets according to the Truth of his Word, for the more Excellent he is that begets, so the more Excellent is the Generation, as it appears by the Example of every thing that doth generate, that which is esteemed a Perfection in natural Generation, is in an infinitely most Eminent Degree attributed unto God, as to beget that which is like unto himself, and by the Communication of his Nature, as to the thing itself the Generation, besides its being asserted in the Word of God, the secundity of God's Nature, is a reason for it, for it requites a Communication to several Persons according to that of the Prophet, 
* Isa. 66.9.  shall I cause to bring forth and not bring forth, or beget myself, saith the Lord, as if he had said, shall I make others fruitful, and be barren myself; that in relation to the Son and to the Holy Ghost may be done in two ways after the manner of Spiritual Substances, namely, begetting the Son by a natural Intellection, and by the same Will or Love breathing the Holy Ghost both consubstantial to himself, and of the same Nature and Perfection, distinguished amongst themselves and one from another, only by their personalities and personal Attributes; this consideration serves to demonstrate, not only the Generation of the Son, but also the Procession of the Holy Ghost, and consequently the whole Trinity, for Scriptures describe Son and Holy Ghost, as existing of themselves as the Father, working, understanding, witnessing, sending, etc. taken not only passively which is of Things, but actively, which is of Persons, for it belongs to none but Persons endued with Reason, and as I said before, to Persons it belongs to act.  
The high Names of God's Own Son, Only Begotten, etc. which in Scripture are given the Lord Jesus, are not upon the account of his miraculous Conception in the Womb of the Virgin, as Socinians would have it, we confess therein God had a special Hand, and it was effected in an extraordinary manner, but this is not enough to entitle him to the Filiation, which the Question is now about, to distinguish him from all others in the World called Sons of God, as anon we shall have occasion to speak of Adam had also a miraculous Birth, yet the Names of Only Begotten, and God's Own and Proper Son do not belong to him; in Christ's Conception and Birth, God did not concur materially, but efficiently with his Power, but not with his Substance, seeing Christ, as to the Flesh, was not of any invisible Seed of God, but of the 
† Rom. 1.3.  Seed of David; what Brothers he had, are quite of another 
‖ Rom. 8.29. Heb. 2.12.  Order and Quality, they are such not by Generation but by Regeneration, by Adoption, not by 
* 1 Job. 1.12. 1 Joh. 3.1. 1 Pet. 1.23. Jam. 1.18.  Nature as the Texts quoted in the Margin which may be perused, do declare; wherefore Christ is Son of God in another manner than men are, so he is called the Image of God, and the Character of his Person in a most different way from that whereby Adam is said to be made according to God's likeness.  
As in Creatures 'tis a perfection to beget their similes, or that which is like unto themselves, that may not be denied God; now as we cannot conceive a communicability of a Nature which is spiritual and ad intra, but by the two Faculties of Understanding and Willing, whose Operations are immanent, so it may well be said, that there can be but two Processions in God, one by way of Intellection, whereby the Son is begotten, who is called the Word, Wisdom, and Image of the Father, and the other by way of Volition whereby is breathed the Holy Ghost, who for that reason is specially called Love; and though the Son doth also understand himself, yet he begets neither himself nor another; for he understands himself not of a notional Intellection to generate, which belongs only to the Father, but with a notional one which is common to the Father and to the Holy Ghost. This is said not to prove our Faith, but only to demonstrate that what we believe is not contrary to Reason, though it be above it; for all these matters, as I observed before, and as all Orthodox and learned Men that writ upon them are agreed, are to be grounded on Scripture, rather than upon human Reason.  
The chief part of our Comfort and Salvation lies in the Belief of this Doctrine; for as in Christ is but one Person, so there are two Natures whereby he is in a capacity of perfecting our Redemption, which otherwise he could not be in; we own he is called Son of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 eminently, and by Excellency; but besides he is also called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, beloved, proper, only begotten, whereby he is distinguished from adopted Sons, and by his being called Son of the living God, distinguished from Elijab, Jeremiah, and such extraordinary Persons that had been in the World, which concludeth his Consubstantiality with the Father; for it had been a monstruous Generation, if out of the Father's Bosom had come a Son of another Nature: He that was to be born of a Virgin, was to be called the Son of the Highest, not by reason of a miraculous Conception, as pretended by Crollius out of Maldonat the Jesuit, but because of an eternal Generation chief, as also by reason afterwards of a personal Union of both Natures; for though upon that account he might also be called the Son of God, yet that could not entitle him to be the only begotten, because he is dear and beloved, but he is dear and beloved because the only begotten of the Father: Christ the first begotten in respect to adopted Brethren, not because their Sonship is of the same Nature with his, but only thus far as Adoption imitateth Nature, as Civilians say, so their Adoption 
* 1 Pet. 1.23.  and Regeneration is a kind of Imitation of his eternal Generation; and to him belong all the Privileges of the Firstborn, and is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the 
† Colos. 1.17, 18. Rev. 3.14.  beginning of the Creature not passively but actively: Christ is called the Beginning of the Creation of God, or of all things by him created, that is the beginner or the first efficient Cause of all Creatures according to a style used in Scripture, when the Thing is set for the Person, as when the Jewish Nation is called by the name of 
‖ Rom. 4.9. Gal. 2.9.  Circumcision, the Act for the Agent, and the Abstract for the Concrete; thus Christ is said, of God made unto us wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, and redemption; that is, he makes us wise unto Salvation, makes us righteous, for he is our Justifier, Sanctifier, and Redeemer; thus he is often called 
* 1 John 2. and 4.2.  the Popitation for our Sins, and our Salvation, for Propitiatour and Saviour.  
Though there be an infinite difference between Christ's and human Generations, yet herein they agree that it imports in him that is begotten a Communication of the Nature of the Begetter; it is said of Adam 
† Gen. 5.3.  that he begat a Son in his own likeness, after his Image; is this to be understood of a like Nature only, and not of the same? Undisputably he begat him out of his own Substance, and his own Nature and no other he communicated unto him, well represented by the words in his own likeness, and after his image; the word Likeness doth not show any Disparity or Difference but an Equality and Sameness of Nature, which here by the by I observe in relation to a thing I shall have occasion to mention about the Honour to be rendered unto Christ, that all men should honour the Son as they honour the Father, for they would have it only to be like but not equal or the same, when here Likeness is taken for Sameness and Equality: Now as of Seth, so we must say of Christ the Son of God as the other was of Adam; for as Seth had not been Adam's Son except he were of the same Nature, so Christ could not truly and properly be God's Son, except he were of the same Nature with the Father; Seth was begotten after his Father's Image, that is, of the same Nature; and the Lord Jesus, more strongly to show the Sameness in Nature with the Father, which he had in a more eminent way than ever Seth had his from Adam, is not said to be after his Father's Image, but in more noble, expressive, and lively Words said to be the express Image of his Father's Person: 'Tis in vain that they cavil out of God's words, Let us make man in our image, and after our likeness; for the Question is about Generation, and not of Creation; God made man, that is, created him, as in that place of Genesis, explained in the following Verse; but 'tis never said that God made but begat his Son, as of Adam, not that he made but begat Seth in his own likeness after his Image. Thus the Son of God is truly and really begotten of the very Substance of the Father, and this by Immanence and Communication. Heathens feigned a Minerva the Goddess of Wisdom and Prudence to be born ex Jovis cerebro, out of Jupiter's Head and Brain, a dark Notion of this high Mystery, as was their cara deûm soboles, magnum Jovis incrementum, as expressed by the Poet.  
The Lord Jesus is called not only 
* Heb. 1.3  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the express Image, but also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Brightness of the Glory of God, by a Metaphor taken from the Sun Beams, which if the Sun was eternal would be eternal too: wherefore in the Nicene Creed is well called God of God, Light of Light, so not only like, but also 
† Phil. 2.6.  equal with God. This eternal Generation to be looked upon with the Eyes of Faith more than of human Reason, is first, not transient but immanent, secondly, terminated (if we may use the word) not in an absolute Existence, but in the Subsistence or manner of subsisting; for the Essence neither begetteth nor is begotten; neither through this Generation is God absolutely constituted, but the Son is relatively. Thirdly, It is eternal without any difference of time, so that the Son may not be said begotten and not begotten, existent and not existent, but always begotten. Fourthly, The Begetter and begotten are always the same in Nature and in Time, or rather Eternity. Fifthly, Through that same Generation the same Divine Nature is communicated to the Son, not in Species but in Number, not in part but wholly, not to be or exist but to subsist in such a manner. Sixthly, The same is natural, and so simply, not voluntary nor involuntary, that is necessary but not forced. But as to the main thing, 'tis enough to know that Christ was before he manifested himself in the Flesh, for therein he appears to be eternal, which Eternity of his we shall have occasion to prove.  
In the Scripture none but the Lord Jesus is in the singular number called God's Son, Abraham is called his Friend, Moses his Servant, and in the Parable of the Vineyard and the Husbandmen 
* Luk. 20.9, 10, etc. , to whom God, under the name of the Lord of the Vineyard, sent his Servants, whom they beat and wounded; then, said he, I will send my beloved son, it may be they will reverence him when they see him; but they said, this is the heir, let us kill him that the inheritance may be ours. I say in that Parable where the Lord Jesus spoke of himself and against them, as they perceived it, v. 19 we may observe what a vast difference he makes between himself and all that came before him, who were all but Servants, but he gives himself the Character of God's beloved Son, whom they ought to have reverenced when they saw him, who was the Heir of all things by his Nature, and not by any Privilege of Dignity by Favour bestowed upon him as upon Men and Angels 
* Heb. 1.4, 5. , Being made so much better than Angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they; what this Name is, is expressed in the next Verse, For unto which of the Angels said he at any time, thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee, etc. We see the difference of the Sonship, a Son not created nor adopted but begotten; for that Name comes to him by inheritance, as in the Text, that is by his own natural Right and Property, and not by Grace.  
Then the Lord Jesus is God's natural Son, because called his own and proper Son 
† Rom. 8.3.32. , every one knoweth how those Sons that are naturally begotten by their Parents are called their own Sons, and on the contrary, those that are not so, are not proper Sons, but Strangers; so that proper and Strangers are so called and distinguished according to Nature only; therefore seeing Scripture doth not indifferently call Christ Son, but God's own Son, thus by this special Attribute distinguishing him from all others, it means natural Son, and of the same Essence; the more because he calls God 
* John 5.18.  his own Father, for which cause the Jews would have stolled him, for they well understood, as expressed in the Text, how thereby he made himself equal with God; thus he is called God's own Son, in opposition to adopted Sons; one may adopt another to be his Son, but can never make him his own natural Son begotten of his Substance; and as Christ is God's own Son, so is God his own Father, then from Eternity, or else there had been in time a new relation in God which had not always been, that might be called a kind of an Accident, so contrary to the simplicity of his Nature, and according to this, God had within these 1700 Years been made that which he was not before, namely, Father of his own Son, whereby Changeableness is fathered upon him, and his Immutability that is an incommunicable Attribute thereby overturned. Now in the same Chapter the Apostle to express own Son, makes use of another word, which fully and clearly doth decide the Question, which is, Whether the Lord Jesus be properly God's Son? for if he be properly so, than all improper Applications are out of doors: Now the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, used by S. Paul 
* Rom. 8.32.  signifies proper; so if the Lord Jesus be God's proper Son, we must properly understand and believe him to be such, although our shallow Brain can neither conceive in its Thoughts nor express in Words the incomprehensible and unexpressible manner of that Generation, which is wonderful 
† Isai. 9.6.  as his name is, yet we must believe it because God in his word hath declared it to be so.  
The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 proper, they misinterpret, and do render by special or peculiar, as if Christ was God's Son only in a special manner above others; but none can be called proper Son to any one except he be begotten of his Blood and Substance, which being not, he may not be called such a one's proper Son: Thus they would confound proper and peculiar, which two words are very different; for one may be a proper Son who hath nothing peculiar above the rest of his natural Brethren, for when a Father hath many, all are his proper and own Sons, begotten of his Substance, yet no one may happen to have any thing particular above the rest; likewise one may happen upon a special account to be called such a Man's Son, yet not be his proper Son; thus an adopted, though he excel never so much above the rest, yet that can never make him to be a proper Son. To refute some Cavils of theirs, one thing more we are again to take notice of upon this matter, how the the word God is in Scripture sometimes taken essentially for the most holy Trinity, and sometimes personally for one of the Persons, as when 'tis said 
* Acts 20.28. , God hath purchased his church with his own blood, which is meaned our Saviour, the second Person of the Godhead: In the first sense must be understood those places of Scripture wherein 'tis said, The name of the Lord is one, and there is none besides him, there is but one God, and others to the same purpose, to show the Oneness of the Nature, which as well as they, we do affirm; but as to teach well, one must distinguish well; so for want of observing this Rule, that which is spoken of the Essence of God, they misapply it to the Persons, and so make a Confusion between things to be distinguished: We already proved, how the Unity of Nature doth not take away the Trinity of Persons, nor the Plurality of Persons destroy the Unity of Nature, which Mistake of theirs doth also hold in the Mystery of the Incarnation, or of the Word being made Flesh, and about our Saviour's Person in whom they confound the Natures; so that which is spoken of his Humanity they misapply to his Divinity.  
The second Argument whereby Christ is proved to be God's natural Son is drawn from the word only begotten, which for greater confirmation is attributed to Christ in several 
* John 1.18.  places, wherefore in Scripture Christ is called the Son of God, to show he is the only begotten, for that's the signification of the word; and 
† Heb. 1.2 vers. 5.  Paul's interpretation of it; for he saith, Such is the Son, to whom only God saith, Thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee, and other places of Scripture: By the words God's only begotten Son, do all mean Christ only: The Adversaries would have him to be called so only in a special manner above the rest, as we already have taken notice of in the instance about Isaac, whereunto here we shall add that of Solomon, which also they made use of, called, say they 
* Prov. 4.3. , only begotten in the sight of his mother; but they must not go about to impose upon us, for in the original the word begotten is not in, but only, which in our Bibles is according to the sense of the place explained by beloved, only beloved; one may be the only, yet not only begotten Son, when of many Children one alone is remaining, and the rest are dead; as to Isaac, we already observed he was the only begotten in relation to Sarab, by Promise, but Christ is so called God's only begotten Son, that it was never said to any one else, Thou art my Son, etc. whence we may conclude him so to be God's Son, as to be the only begotten of him, that is, according to his Nature; in the word he is properly and absolutely called the only begotten 
* John 1.14. , We beheld his glory as of the only begotten of the Father, the Particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as, is not comparative, as only denoting a likeness, but as Chrysostomus observes well is expressive of the truth, as being really, as if one willing to describe a Royal State and Carriage of a King should say, as, that is in a manner becoming and proper for a King, and farther the Evangelist addeth, v. 18. The only begotten son which is in the besom of the Father, he hath declared him, where Christ is called the only begotten, 〈◊〉 it being his own proper Name, signifying how besides him there is no true natural Son of God; again 
‖ John 3.16. , God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, and 
* 1 John 4.9. , God sent his only begotten son into the world: See what a care the Spirit of God hath taken to confirm and make that Truth known, how Christ is properly and absolutely God's only begotten Son; now he is absolutely only begotten, that is, not only so called, looked upon and loved as such, but that is really so, and indeed we know our blessed Saviour is called 
† Joh. 20.17.  Brother of his Disciples, and of 
‖ Heb. 2.17.  Believers, but not in a proper and strict sense: The relation of Brotherhood hath a great latitude; for among the Jews, Persons belonging to any branch of a Family, to a Tribe, or to any of the Tribes, were called Brethren: 
* Gal. 1.19.  James and John were called the Lord's Brothers, and in another sense our Saviour calls 
† Mat. 12.50.  his brother, his sister, and his mother, whosoever shall do the will of God: He is our Brother in that he hath taken upon him our human Nature, all Men are Brothers in human Nature, but Adoption cannot be the ground of his, as 'tis of our being called the Sons of God, he is never called adopted as we are, neither can he be adopted with us, seeing we are adopted in him, we are the Branches of the wild Olive-Tree that have been grafted in him, who is the true natural Olive-Tree, and thereby are become Members of his mystical Body. How can our blessed Saviour be called God's only begotten Son, if he be not partaker of the same Nature? And the more to enforce this in that s●●e Chapter and Verse, John 18. 'tis added, which is in the bosom of the Father; can he be in and from the Bosom of the Father, and not be of the same Nature? All other Children of God are made, but this is begotten and only begotten, none but he is properly begotten.  
Our Third Argument is taken out of our Saviour's Question to the Pharisees 
* Mat. 12.41, 41, 4●, 44. , What think ye of Christ, whose son is he? they say unto him the son of David; he saith unto them, how then doth David in spirit call him Lord? By this way of arguing he shown how in him, besides human Nature, there was another, namely the divine; according to which, he by no means might be called David's Son but David's Lord, which to the Pharisees proved an unanswerable Argument; for upon this same 'tis positively said, v. 46. and no man was able to answer him a word; one would think this should also stop the mouth of Socinians: Indeed there the Lord proposeth the Question about the Nature of Christ or the Son, whose natural Son he was? Whereunto the Pharisees returned an imperfect Answer, for only they said he was the Son of David, but the Lord Jesus, out of Scripture, which they could not deny, concluded that since he was by David's confession his Lord, he must in him have another Nature besides human, according to which he might not be called David's Son; for if only upon some borrowed account or accidental reason he were David's Lord, as may be some Power and Dignity above him, than Christ's Argument would quite lose its strength, which wholly lies in this, if he be his Lord, how can he be his Son? Upon some extraordinary account and relation it may happen that a Son may become a Lord over his Father, but here Christ is certainly asserted to be Lord over David, and in some sense 'tis impossible for David to become Lord over Christ, which can be upon no other account but of his divine Nature; besides that he was David's Lord in David's time and before his Birth of the Virgin Mary: His Son he was according to the F●esh and his Humanity, and his Lord according to the Spirit and his Divinity.  
The Fourth Argument whereby Christ is proved to be God's natural Son, is taken out of the Words whereby he declares himself to be such a Son as is one with the Father, not any other way to be understood than by Nature 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for this the Jews took to be his meaning, and for that same cause called him a Blasphemer, and would have stoned him, and thereupon our Saviour did not go about to show they were mistaken, though his Life was concerned; on the contrary he used Arguments to make 'em believe he was so, though to them it seemed incredible and blasphemous. 
Chap. 5.  And in another Text he affirmeth himself to be such a Son of God as is of an equal Power with and can do the same Works as the Father; so that what things soever the Father doth, this also doth the Son likewise; the Son doth nothing without the Father, nor the Father without the Son, by reason of their Oneness of Nature and Equality of Powe●: Though the Jews out of these words of his, v. 7. My father works hitherto and I work, concluded he made himself equal with God, yet though they were offended at it, and he thereupon did run the hazard of his Life; though he never was so uncharitable as to give any one just ground of offence, nor so rash as unnecessarily to venture his Life, yet he would not deny his Equality with the Father, but on the contrary, with several Arguments he confirms it from v. 19 to 22. and this not to be understood of an Equality only in some respects, for the Unity of natural Power and Operation argueth an absolute Equality, and as in Power so in Nature 
* John 10.30. , I and my Father are one, and v. 38. you may by my works believe that the Father is in me, and not only so, but I in him; as for greater confirmation 
* ch. 14.10  repeated out of that place of John, I and the Father are one: Augustine's 
† Pereant vaniloqui & mentis seductores, etc.  words are to be taken notice of, let vain and Seducers Arrius and Sabellius perish; Christ said not, I and the Father am one, but I and the Father are one; when I say one, let the Arian take notice of it, and what I say; we are, let the Sabellian mind it, let not the Arian divide one, nor the Sabellian take away are; one we refer to Nature, are to the diversity of Persons.  
The Fifth Argument is taken out of the Lord Jesus his own words, and we know him not only to be true, but truth itself 
† John 14.6. , though he beareth record 
* c. 8.14.  of himself; this is when in a legal way, being asked by Caiaphas, and 
‖ Mat. 26.63, 64.  adjured by the living God to tell whether he be the Christ the son of God: 
* Mar. 14.61, 62.  the Christ the son of the blessed, he owned it, and said, Thou hast said, I am: For which Confession he was accused of Blasphemy, and condemned to death; for said they to Pilate 
† Joh. 19.7. , We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the son of God; so he suffered for owning himself to be the Son of God, which Confession of his S. Paul takes special notice of in the Charge he giveth his Disciple 
* 1 Tim. 6.13. ; the meaning is, that he was the true natural Son of God, or else it would not have been accounted a Blasphemy for any Jew to have called himself Son of God, no more than God's People, Abraham's Seed by virtue of the Promises and Privilege of the Covenant and Grace, and God they call their Father, John 8.41. yet thought not they were Blasphemers for that; therefore Christ's Words they took in another, that is, in a strict and proper sense. Indeed the High Priest's Question was a Snare laid for Christ; for though they sought false Witnesses, and many came, yet their Witness did not agree together, wherefore they sought to have something out of his mouth wherewith to accuse him. The Question was amongst other things, grounded upon what our Saviour had said of himself in the Fifth and Tenth Chapters of John, whether he was of the same Nature with God, and in Power equal with him, which is the same as to be natural Son of God, and of the same Essence, which he having affirmatively answered unto and said he was, thereupon having gained their Point, they rend their  and said, What need we any farther Witnesses, and upon this very Confession he was accused, condemned, and executed: Hence I ask Socinians, Did Christ speak the truth when he said he was the Son of God, one with him, or of the same Nature, and to him equal in Power? I farther ask, whether the High Priest and the rest did not well apprehend this to be the true meaning of his words? If so, as certainly both are true; if Socinians had been in the place of the Jews, they would have used him as they did, and would do the like if ever it were in their power; for some of them, when they writ and give a Character of our blessed Saviour's Person, they seem to take a pleasure to say, he was by the Senate or Council of Scribes and Pharisees in Jerusalem condemned and executed for Blasphemy, in that he had said he was the Son of God: that he said so, 'tis most true out of John 10.36. but I ask again, when the Lord said so, did he speak the truth or not? If the truth, why do Men not believe him, that is in the sense the Jews understood it, true, proper, natural Son of God, equal with God? For this they took his meaning to be; but if he was not what he owned himself to be, than he must be supposed to have spoken a lie, which is a Sin: To such Blasphemers our blessed Lord speaks in defiance, as once he did to the Jews 
* John 8.46. , Which of you convinceth me of sin? We know he suffered as a Blasphemer, a Deceiver, and a Transgressor; but was he really so? The Apostle saith 
† 1 Pet. 3.18. , He suffered the just for the unjust, as a Lamb without Blemish and without Spot. It seems these Socinians set their Hand and Seal to his Condemnation; the same Question as was between our Saviour and the Jews is now between Socinians and us; he said he was Son of God, equal and one with the Father, which Socinians no more than Jews are willing to believe, and do flatly deny in the sense for which he was condemned, namely for calling himself the Son of God, and making himself equal with God, when the Devil himself was not so peremptory, for he made it but questionable, when at the time he tempted him he said, if thou be the son of God, yet at several other times those wicked Spirits owned him to be the Son of the living God.  
But Socinians give him the lie when he doth several times call and suffer himself to be called Son of God in the true sense, and contrary to that of Socinians: Surely he who is the Truth would not have spoken against it, nor allowed others to tell a lie: Now 'tis most certain that he calls himself Son of God, not only in the forequoted place of John, where he owns he calls himself the Son of God according to the sense which the Jews had given his words, and had made himself God in opposition to man, that is, God by Nature, which no man is, but also in other places, as when he asked the blind Man, Dost thou believe in the Son of God? Which he declared himself to be, in whom the Man ought to believe and to worship him, as he did; and 'tis certain that Men must believe in and worship the only true God: Also Martha 
* Joh. 11.27.  declareth, she believes him to be the Christ the Son of God, by a gradation from his Office to his Person for the Christ or Messiah which should come into the world. The ancient Jews according to several Prophecies, believed the Messiah to be the true Son of God, and God by Nature, which that Second Psalm doth clearly prove among many others, thou art my Son; wherefore the Psalmist, v. 10. exhorteth kings to be wise, and the judges of the earth to be instructed, and to serve the Lord with fear, and to kiss the Son, to kiss his Feet in token of Obedience and Submission, lest he be angry, and they perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little, a little Wrath is sufficient to break the Heathens and the uttermost parts of the Earth, and to dash them in pieces like a Potter's Vessel: All this is spoken of him, to whom 'tis said, Thou art my Son, and in the latter end of the last Verse, the Prophet declareth blessed are all that put their trust in him; and Men are not to put their trust in any, but in the true God by Nature; in which sense Scripture showeth how Christ is called God and Son of God, not only in that positive Text, I and the Father are one, but also out of this other 
* John 8.19. , Ye neither know me, nor my Father; for if ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also, because we are one, and he that sees me, seethe him that sent me, because he is the express Image of him that sent him: And all this is confirmed in that other notable place 
† John 12.45. ch. 14.9, 10, 11. , He that hath seen me, hath seen the Father, for, I am in the Father, and the Father in me; this truth must needs be very important, for 'tis affirmed in one Verse, and confirmed in the next, which truth appears yet farther, v. 7. If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him and have seen him; the reason must needs be this, because ye have seen me, and in the same Chapter to show that Oneness and Sameness of his in Nature and Power with the Father; he saith, Whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that I will do, which for greater assurance and confirmation, is repeated in the next Verse, If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it, I myself, there being no need for you to go to any one else.  
S. Paul, speaking of the Mystery of Godliness 
* 1 Tim 3.16 , whereof the first part is, that God was manifest in the Flesh, saith it is a great one; by his Expressions the thing is unquestionable and most certain; for he saith, Without controversy great is the mystery of godliness; but Socinians are of another mind, for they make not only a great Controversy, but give a flat denial of God being manifest in the Flesh, and one of them here among us hath lately reprinted and set his Name to a Book with this Title, Christian Religion not mysterious, as it were to give the Apostle the lie, on which I intent by the Grace of God to make some few general Observations towards the latter end of my Discourse; we must do our Duty, though others neglect theirs, and endeavour out of Scripture to convince or confound the Enemies of the Truth, who are suffered with bare face to sow their Tares and spread their Poison and Blasphemies; as if it be only a Problem and a disputable Case, whether or not the Lord Jesus did justly or unjustly suffer for Blasphemy, for having affirmed himself to be Son of God: Good Lord, what times are we come to, and how great a Darkness is the Nation falling into, after so much light?  
And now we are upon the matter of Blasphemy, let me observe how in Scripture there is enough said about it to prove Christ to be the Essential Son of God, let the Etymology and Derivation of the word Blasphemy be what it will, it is most certain, that in Scripture 
* Rev. 13.5, 6.  it is used to express when any thing is said or done against God in his Nature or Attributes, or when one doth assume and arrogate unto himself that which belongs to God alone, in the first sense we read when Hezekiah heard the words of Rabshakeh, 
2 Kings 19.3, 6, 22.  he said, This is a day of Blasphemy, and God called it so within few Verses after, The servants of the king of Assyria have blasphemed me; and again, whom hast thou blasphemed. In the second sense the Jews called our blessed Saviour Blasphemer, We stone thee not, say they to him 
‖ John 10.33. , for a good work, but for blasphemy, and because that thou being a man, makest thyself God, and so after his Confession before the Chief Priests, they said, ye have heard the blasphemy: Wherefore if Blasphemy be against God, truly and essentially taken, may we not conclude the Lord Jesus to be truly essentially God? He calls Blasphemy what the Jews had said against him 
* Mark 3.22, 23. , that be did cast devils by Beelzebub prince of devils; the Evangelist lays upon occasion of the Abuses put upon him after he was brought before the High Priest 
† Luk. 22.65. , And many other things blasphemously spoke they against him, and Paul, what before his Conversion he said or acted against, he for that same calls himself 
‖ 1 Tim. 1.13.  a Blasphemer, and when he made others to do as he did, that he calls 
* Acts 26.11. 2 Tim. 3.2 Act. 18.6.  he compelled them to blaspheme. I believe the Spirit of God pointed at Socinians among others when he said by the Apostle, that in the last days men shall be blasphemers, as were those that opposed Paul when he preached Christ, wherein they blasphemed.  
We have many Heads more, and abundance of Texts of Scripture to prove the Lord Jesus to be true natural Son of God, begotten of the Father from all Eternity, and these places we in the following part of our Discourse shall have occasion to make use of, one of the fullest and plainest we shall begin with, afforded by John 
† Joh. 1.1. , In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God: Which to corrupt, the Heresiarch Socinus used his utmost wicked Endeavours; the word is said to have been in the beginning, not as if he than had begun to be, but that then he was existing, and so from all Eternity, before any Creatures were made, there was no time, only Eternity: Christ is called the Wisdom of God, to show he as well as the Father, is from everlasting; it were Blasphemy to think that ever there was a time when God wanted his Wisdom, which, speaking of himself, saith 
‖ Prov. 8.23. , I was set up from everlasting, and God by him manifested himself in the World in the Creation thereof.  
That Christ the Word is eternal, that is, he was before his Incarnation, before the Virgin Mary, and before the Gospel began to be preached, it appears out of John's Evidence, In the beginning was the word, out of which both his Deity and Eternity are proved; the other Evangelists do write of Christ's Humanity in relation to his Birth or temporal Generation, when he took upon him our human Nature, and in time was born of the blessed Virgin Mary; for in her Womb the word was made flesh, and his Body therein form out of her Substance, without company of Man. But John falls immediately upon his Divinity, and calls him the Word, for he was the Davar promised unto the Fathers; now this was in the beginning, that is, before any thing was, when things began to be made, he then was when the World was not yet made, afterwards he indeed was made Flesh, but had a pre-existing Being: Socinians cavil that by the beginning is meant the preaching of the Gospel, which is clearly false; for that doth not answer the scope of the Evangelist, whose design is to prove the Word to be God, which to do, he draws his Argument from his Being in the beginning; so by the word Beginning that must be understood which concludeth the Word to be God: Their Interpretation agreeth with that of Arius, That time had been when the Word was not; and because it is in that sense taken in some places 
* Mark 1.1 Luke 1.2.  for a temporal Beginning, that is, the time of his Incarnation, it doth not follow that it is so to be taken in S. John, for Mark gins his Book with these words, The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ the Son of God, he writes the Gospel, for he is an Evangelist, and in his very first words he gives the Contents of what he is writing; but herein the Person of Christ is not immediately concerned; he, with other Evangelists, gives an account of his Humanity, but John speaks of his Divinity, he alludes to Moses, who had given the History of the Creation, and gins his Gospel in the words wherewith Moses began his Book of Genesis, In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth, and he his Gospel, In the beginning was the word. But our Evangelist is not satisfied to say the word was with God, but addeth in the next Verse, the same was in the beginning with God, and so v. 3. he falls upon speaking of the Creation, for all things were made by him, etc. we know how in Scripture the word Beginning, as well as several others, hath different Significations, but in this place such a sense destroys the Analogy of Faith, and contradicteth those Texts which affirm the Eternity of God's Son, which hereafter we shall have occasion to mention, as that of the Prophet 
† Isai. 53.8. , Who shall declare his generation, 'tis ab impossibili, as if he had said, no Man can declare it; and elsewhere, under the Type of Solomon 'tis said, 
* Psal. 72.17.  his name shall endure for ever, etc. not only of an Eternity, à parte post, but also à part ante, as without ending so without beginning, as expressed in the Prophetical Psalm of Christ's Kingdom and Priesthood, 
† Psalm 110.3.  from the womb of the morning thou hast the dew of his youth. And now I am upon this first Verse of the first Chapter of St. John, I shall observe three Things much to our purpose, the First that the word Beginning absolutely spoken doth in Scripture relate to the Creation or beginning of the World, out of several places so well known in Scripture, I shall now only quote one and more hereafter, as I shall have occasion for, hath it not been told you from the beginning, have ye 
‖ Isa. 40.21.  not understood from the foundations of the earth; here by Beginning is signified the Foundation of the Earth. The second Thing I observe is this, the Word was with God, here is a personal Distinction between God and the word who was with God, as if he had said, resided till he was made Flesh, and in respect to this Incarnation, he is said to have come down from the Father. The third Thing observed is this, the word was God, the Person called the Word, as it appears by the Article, is the Subject here called and asserted to be God, that is in the same essential Sense, as the God with whom the word Was is said to be God, that is by Nature, for as in this Verse, but one Word, though thrice named, is to be understood, so but one true God in Nature, though thrice named, is meaned in the place: Thus the Essentiality and Eternity of the word who is the Son with the Father, are here evidently set forth, but this is more at large set down in the next Reason.  
But a second Reason is, that John makes the Word equal with God, when he saith, the word was with God, which hath a relation to his Eternity, it was always with God, for here not only he distinguisheth the Persons, but makes the Word equal with God the Father, he saith the Word that was in the beginning was one, and God the Father whom he was with, another; the Persons of the Son and of the Father were distinct indeed, but in making them Coeternal, he makes them Equal; for them to say that the word being with God signifies that the word was known to God, but not to Men, doth them no good; the knowledge of this doth comprehend the whole Mystery of our Redemption which the Son who is in the Bosom of the Father hath revealed unto us; but to the thing, if this imported no more but that Christ was known to the Father, What could he thereby have more than we? No Prerogative at all, for before the Foundation of the World God knew us, and We were present with him: Christ was with the the Father, that is, had a real Existence, did subsist in himself, which cannot be said of us or of any Creature, wherefore the Word must need have been before his Incarnation.  
In the Third place 'tis said, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Word was God, which is properly to be understood, as is 
* 1 Joh. 5.20.  that other place, we are in him that is true, in his Son Jesus Christ, that is the true God and eternal life; and elsewhere, 
† Tit. 1.3.  God hath in due time manifested his word through preaching, which is committed to me according to the commandment of God our Saviour, repeated Chap. 3.4. and Chap. 2. he is called 
† Tit. 2.12. Rev. 19.17.  the great God our Saviour Jesus Christ; and in another place he is named, 
‖ 1 Tim. 1.1.  God our Saviour and Lord Jesus Christ; now this God, Lord and Saviour is but One, and this is Jesus Christ whose Apostle he owns himself to be, and the Gospel he preached, 
* Gal. 1.12.  he was taught by the Revelation of Jesus Christ, who again is called, 
† 1 Tim. 2.3.  God our Saviour. There must be special Cause why the words God and Saviour are so often joined together, and both attributed to One Person, the Lord Jesus, he is God as truly and really, as he is Saviour, which we hope the Adversaries will not have the confidence to deny him to be in the strictest Sense, though otherwise they rob him of what they can, he is then a Saviour by Office, and God by Nature; to save Men from the Dominion of Sin, from the Curse of the Law, from the Devil, Death and Hell, requires a true real Divine Power, which none but a Divine Nature is or can be possessed of. Moses was relatively called God, and Cyrus God's Anointed, or Messiah, but they were but Types of the great Deliverer. Every one knows Moses was not God, nor Cyrus the Messiah; but to say Christ Jesus is called God, though he be not, is the effect of a brazen faced Impudence, of an invincible Ignorance of the Mind, or hellish Perverseness of the Heart; as good as to conclude, that because 'tis said, he is of God made unto us, 
† 1 Cor. 1.30.  Wisdom, righteousness, sanctification and redemption, therefore he is neither; nor God by Nature, when he saith, 
‖ Joh. 15.5.  without me you can do nothing, which may not be said of Men.  
The Fourth Reason out of St. John is this, 
* Joh. 1.3.  all things were made by ●him, and without him was not any thing made that was made; certainly the Work of Creation doth evince the Eternity of the Word, for the Workman must be before his Work, and the Creator before the Creature; now the Word being the Maker must need be before Mary; here they would cavil and confine this making of Things within the Work of the New Creation, or renewing of the Creature, but the following Words, without him was not any thing made that was made, are universal and comprehend every thing Temporal or Spiritual, Creation of the World, or Regeneration of Men; though we own the Creation of the World is the scope of the place compared with Coloss. 1.15. All things were created by him and for him, which doth appear out of ver. 10. the world was made by him; and God created all things by Jesus Christ, Ephes. 3.9. and to remove all grounds of Exception, we have it in the Plural Number, which doth include all, 
† Heb. 11.3.  the worlds were framed by the word of God. Another Reason might be brought out of ver. 14. of this same Gospel, the word was made flesh; but this we shall by the Grace of God bring in under another Head.  
In Scripture we have several places which either do express or imply two Natures in the Person of our blessed Lord and Saviour; the Prophet Isaiah doth among others afford us Two very considerable, the first is this, 
* Isa. 7.14.  Behold a Virgin shall conceive and bear a Son and shall call his name Immanuel; this affords several things seriously, but now briefly to be thought upon; this Prophecy is a sign given Ahaz King of Judah to Comfort him, when the Kings of Israel and of Syria came up against him, with a Promise that they should not prevail, and that he might be confirmed and assured of the performance, he is bidden to ask a Sign, which he refusing to do, gave for Reason, he would not tempt God, whereupon is made this Gospel-Promise, which was performed at the time of the Conception and Birth of our blessed Saviour, whose Mother was a Virgin, and whose Name was Immanuel, a Name given him at that time by the Prophet through God's own appointment, and when the Angel delivered his Message to Mary, he makes use of some of the Words of the Prophet, 
* Luk. 1.31.  thou shalt conceive and bring forth a Son, and shalt call his Name Jesus, because he was to save his People; and when the thing was fulfilled, the Evangelist doth point at, and quote this Prophecy, adding the Interpretation of the Name 
‖ Matt. 1.21.  Immanuel, God with us. So there is no doubt to be made that this wholly and only, related to our Saviour; never any other Virgin did conceive and bring forth, never was the Name Immanuel given any one else, and cannot be wrested so, as to be given to any Son to be born of Ahaz, for some Reason which I presently shall produce; Immanuel is God with a Divine Essence, Christ is the Immanuel, so we must conclude he hath the Divine Essence, for God with us hath the Divine Essence, and God with us is Immanuel; the Name God is not spoken of Angels, of no King or Magistrate, of no Idols, which are the several significations of the Word God used in Scripture; wherefore he whom this Name is given to, must be the true essential God; and this same Evangelical Prophet in the next Chapter but one after this, calls him by the Name used in this place, and the Word El, which makes the latter end of the Name, doth not barely signify God, but the Mighty God; this Word makes part of that of Michael whose signification is, who is like unto thee, thou mighty God; and he that beareth it, is called 
* Jud. 9  Archangel, Prince of Angels, for Angels are called 
† Rev. 12.7.  his and him they Worship: This very Name of Michael is given to the Messiah, 
‖ Dan. 12.1.  and at that time shall Michael stand up, the great Prince which standeth for the children of thy people; which is a Prophecy of Christ's coming, wherein he is called El, Michael, and the Great Prince; to this Emmanuel relates what the Evangelist says of the Word that is Christ, how being made Flesh he dwelled among us, is not this the same as God with us? And this not obscurely, for he adds, 
* Joh. 1.14.  and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the father; he not only had Glory, but is called Lord of Glory, before his Ascension into, and Glorification in Heaven; and for certain, the Name of Lord or King of Glory, is proper to the true essential God, if David 
† Psal. 24.10.  speaks Truth; now this dwelling of God is not said to be in, but with Men, which doth import a Person living and conversing with Men, fully expressed in the following Text, 
‖ Rev. 21 3.  Behold the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God; all this done, not by proxy but in Person, 'tis said, God himself; so that great and infinite God, whom the Heavens of Heavens cannot contain chose our Human Nature, to dwell in as in a Tabernacle, whereof the Tabernacle in the Wilderness was a Type, as the Temple was afterwards; we know there was a Veil, this the Apostle alludeth to, when he saith, 
* Heb. 10.20.  through the vail that is to say the flesh; so that his Body and Human Nature is the place he chose to dwell in, and that same Nature is as a Veil to qualify that Glory which no Man could behold, for as the People could not behold Moses his Face, when he came from God, so that it was necessary he should put on a Veil, How then could Man have beholden the Glory and Brightness of the Son of God; and how could he have dwelled amongst, and conversed with them, except he had put on the Veil of his Flesh? We must then necessarily conclude he was El the Mighty God, before he was Immanuel, God with us.  
As to that great incomprehensible and adorable Mystery of the Incarnation of the Second Person of the most Holy Trinity, whereby the Divine and Human Natures were mediately, and the Person immediately united to the Nature; 'tis to be observed, that 'tis not by a Consubstantial Union, such as the Three Persons of the most Holy Trinity are united one with another; neither is it a Substantial Union only by Essence and Virtue, as the Essence of Christ is present with every thing, not by a presence of Grace only; not Physical as Form and Matter are united, not as one Friend is united to one another, as the Soul of Jovathan was knit with the Soul of 
* 1 Sam. 18.1.  David, not mystical only or in the same manner as Christ dwelleth in Believers; not Sacramental as Christ is in the Bread and Wine of the Lord's Supper, but 'tis a Personal Union, and that without any Change of or in the Divine Person, without a renting of the Natures against the Nestorians, or Confusion of the same against the Eutychians, also without any Change and Separation.  
Now I am upon this high Mystery of the Incarnation by the Evangelist expressed in these words, the word was made flesh; I shall take notice of some few things: doth not the expression which is parallel with this, 
† 1 Joh. 4.2.  that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, mean that Christ the Word was in being before he was made Flesh or came in the Flesh, and that this Being was according to the Spirit, which in Scripture is opposed to the Flesh, and that he had a spiritual Existence before he took our human Nature signified by the word Flesh? for according to Scripture, Flesh signifies human Nature; so to be made Flesh, to assume human Nature, let one place serve instead of many, 
‖ Gal. 2.16.  by the works of the law shall no flesh, that is, no Man be justified. The Son of God was first, afterwards he was manifested; as, to make use of a Comparison in a thing which admits none, in matters of God's Decrees, the Decree is before the Declaration of it, for the Decree is from all Eternity, but the Declaration only in time; what is said of Christ, 
* Gal. 4.4.  that he was made of a woman, is considerable, for it implies that he was made Man, and took upon him our Nature, not out of the Substance of any Man, but only of a Woman; his Body was form in the blessed Virgin's Womb, without any help of Man, so he became Man only by the Woman's side, but he was Son of God before he was made of a Woman, and he must need have had a Being before he was sent forth, he was with God before God sent him, which is opposed to his appearing and being manifested to the World, 
* 1 Joh. 1, 2.  we show unto you that eternal life which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us; he was with the Father, existed and had a Being, before he was manifested unto us, dwelled and pitched his Tabernacle among us; it is observable out of that place where it is said of our blessed Saviour, 
† Heb. 2.16.  he took on him the seed of Abraham; the word took in the Original signifies also to take and lay hold or caught hold as he did of sinking Peter to save him from drowning, so he caught hold of Mankind when it was ready to sink.  
Against this they say there can be no such Union of Divine and Human Nature in one Person, but that such an Union is not impossible, it may be illustrated out of the Union of our Soul with our Body, which are of two different Natures, spiritual and material, invisible and visible, immortal and mortal; and tho' we cannot conceive the Reason, it ought to be no Prejudice, neither can we conceive the manner of their Union, which yet is true and certain; we most certainly believe some things to be, tho' we do not at all comprehend the manner of it; and altho' there be an infinite disproportion between God and Man, yet that is no just Prejudice against the Union of Divinity with Humanity; with harbouring such Notions, Men do too much measure God by themselves, who because they are evil are not capable of so much Goodness, and out of Pride are apt to say, so much Condescension becomes not God; but God knows better than we what becomes him, and what we cannot comprehend of him we ought to admire and adore; God's Ways are not like our Ways, nor his Thoughts like our Thoughts; and tho' he condescends never so low, yet is ever sure of his Greatness, which nothing can take away from him: This Humiliation or Condescension is a wonderful Argument of God's Goodness, which is the greatest Glory of Divine Nature; this is cause of Thankfulness, not of Cavils and Exceptions; he knows what is best and fittest for him to do, and wants not our Counsel; had the Son of God appeared as a great Prince, he probably would thereby have made more Hypocrites than real Converts, and not so well persuaded Men to Holiness and Goodness, for Arguments to do it must not be fetched from the Pomp and Prosperity of this World, but from the great Rewards and Glory of that which is to come. But before I leave this Point I must take notice of that place wherein the Apostle makes the Son of God upon his coming into the World speak thus, 
Heb. 10.5.  but a body hast thou prepared me; the Body was prepared against his coming into the World, and that prepared Body at his coming he took, so than he was before the Body was prepared for him, and before his coming into the World, for nothing can be said to be sitted, as the word implies in the Original, for one who is not; hence we conclude how the Son of God was before his Incarnation and had a Being; but we now return to our Proofs.  
The next place is of the same Prophet, 
Isa. 9.6.  For unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given, and the government shall be upon his shoulders; and his name shall be called wonderful, Counsellor, the mighty God, the everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace; of the increase of his Government and Peace there shall be no end, etc. I ask, Is this appliable to any Son that was to be born of Ahaz? For this is the same Person mentioned in the forequoted place, and may be seen if compared together: Observe how the different Expressions do denote different Natures, the Child is for Humanity, the Son for the Divinity; the Child is born, but the Son not born but given, in relation to Human Nature he had a beginning and a progress, he was a Child before he was a Man, but the Son not so; a Child is not before he be born, but the Son had a being and did exist before he was given, yet both united in one Person, for the Child was not one Person and the Son another; for all along, the Prophet though he had named a Child and a Son, speaks in the singular number, his Shoulder, his Name, his Government; as his Name is wonderful, so is the manner of the Union, these two Natures are in one Person without Confusion, the Divine retained her Proprieties, so hath the Human, and yet these different Proprieties are so united in one Person, that the Person may be called by the Name of both Natures; Christ is God; and Christ is Man in the Concrete, tho' in the Abstract, it may not be said Divinity is Humanity, nor Humanity Divinity, they are united, but without Confusion.  
But to return to our Point, there was never so many glorious Names joined together to describe one Person, as we find to be in this place, to him alone they all belong, because the Spirit of Truth saith so, which if they were not properly his by right, he would not give them: Wonderful in his Name, in his Nature, in his Person, in his Incarnation, Wonderful every way: Counsellor, for he is the Wisdom of the Father, without which the Only Wise God never doth any thing, the Mighty God, most proper to God, and never in the singular number given any Creature, 
* Isa. 10.21.  the remnant, saith our Prophet, shall return, even the remnant of Jacob unto the mighty God, the true essential God, the God of Israel is meaned in the place, 'tis such a Name as is made use of when in a most Eminent way God is described, 
† Deut. 10.17.  your God is God of Gods and the Cord of Lords, a great God, mighty and terrible: And, 
‖ Nehem. 9.32.  now therefore our God, the great, the mighty, and the terrible God; and elsewhere, 
* Jerem; 32.18.  the great, the mighty God, the Lord of hosts is his name; and when the Question is to know, who is the King of Glory? the Answer is, the Lord strong and mighty; this High and Divine Name is here in the place attributed to Jesus Christ the Son of God, about whom is the Prophecy; that which follows is no less considerable or incommunicable, the everlasting Father, or as 〈…〉 Father of Eternity; nothing more Noble or becoming. God can be said, than to call him so; nothing ●ut the True God is Eternal, and nothing more prop●●● to God than Eternity; How can a Child or any meet mortal Man be called everlasting Father? Now what can hinder us hence to argue thus; the mighty God and everlasting Father is true God by Nature, but Christ is such out of this place, therefore Christ is true God by Nature: Two things more are here said of this Son of God, he is the Prince of Peace, for by his Death he made our Peace with God, and procured an inward Peace of Conscience, and reconciled things in Heaven and on the earth; he came into the World in time of universal Peace, when the Roman Empire, the greatest in the World, fully enjoyed it, and for a Sign, the Temple of Janus in Rome was shut up; nay Herod and Pilate, 
Luke 23.12.  both his Enemies, were before his death upon his account reconciled one to another. Secondly, 'tis said of him, The government shall be upon his shoulders, and of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end: After the Father had said to him 
* Psal. 2.7, 8, 9 , Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee, he promiseth to give him the Heathens for his inheritance, and the utmost parts of the Earth for his Possession, thou shalt break them with a Rod of Iron, thou shalt dash them in pieces like a Potter's Vessel; whereunto agreeth another Scripture 
† Rev. 12, 5. , of the Manchild that was to rule all Nations with a Rod of Iron; this he declared unto Pilate 
‖ John 18.37. Rev. 11.15. Luke 1.33 , I am a king, to this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world: So then; the kingdoms of this world are his, and he shall reign for ever and ever, and of his kingdom there shall be no end.  
The New Testament doth also in several places demonstrate two Natures in the Person of Christ, S. John having affirmed the Word to be God, which relates to his eternal Generation, he doth afterwards speak of his Incarnation, when he saith 
* Joh. 1.14 , The word, that was God, was made flesh, that is, the Person called the Word, the Son of God took upon him our human Nature, and so united two Natures, divine and human, in one Person; for this Word is in the whole Chapter spoken of as of a Person, acting, making or creating, coming, all this is the Character of a Person, and what John expresses thus, the word was made flesh, S. Paul calls it 
† 1 Tim. 3.16. , God was manifest in the flesh, if by the word Flesh human Nature be meaned, as certainly it is, than this imports that God appeared, made himself known, and was manifest in assuming our human Nature, and that the God that was thus made Flesh, and was manifest, is Christ Jesus, the second Person of the Godhead, who being in the Form, that is, in the Nature of God, for the Nature is the being of a thing, and the Form gives that Being; well Jesus Christ in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God 
‖ Phil. 2.6, 7. , because it was his right, 〈◊〉 took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men, and being found in fashion as a man; he was God before he was made in that likeness, this is plain, that a God became man, he was made that which he was not, yet ceased not to be that which he was: That this God that was made Flesh, and manifest in the Flesh, and found in the likeness of men (here is explained what we must understand by Flesh) was the Son of God, the second Person of the most holy Trinity, is declared elsewhere 
* Rom. 8.3. , God sending his own Son in likeness of sinful flesh: All these representing Christ as God and as man, doth clearly demonstrate him to be both God and man. Another place there is much to our purpose, 'tis this 
† Rom. 9.5. , of whom (the Israelites) as concerning the flesh, Christ came who is over all God blessed for ever; this restriction, as concerning the Flesh, doth imply, that Christ came not from the Jews concerning some other thing, this settles two Relations in Christ, one according to the Flesh, as expressed Acts 2.30. what must the other be? Scripture usually doth oppose the Spirit to the Flesh, and the Flesh to the Spirit, so in Christ there must be a Principle that is spiritual, or else this restriction, according to the Flesh, were frivolous and not pertinent, one thing cannot be distinguished of itself, a thing is in itself but one thing, and Distinctions are between different things; for no one thing doth differ from itself: Now that as there is in Christ a principle concerning the Flesh, and another according to the Spirit, anon we shall by the Grace of God have occasion to speak of; but now thus far we must say, that as by the Flesh his Humanity is meaned, so is his divine Nature by the Spirit; for 
* 1 Joh. 4.24. 2 Cor. 3.17.  God is a Spirit.  
The Text we now are upon is remarkable upon several accounts, our blessed Saviour, as 'tis very well known, was a Jew born, of the Seed of Abraham, of the Tribe of Judah, and of the Family of David; this is the Apostle's meaning when he saith, of whom, as concerning the flesh, Christ came, which doth necessarily imply, he came not of them, concerning some other thing in him, the Pedigree of his Manhood was indeed derived from thence; but it had been in vain there to have sought for another Genealogy of this Melchisedec: The Article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 joined with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, shows how in him, besides human Nature, there was another; for S. Paul, who troubleth not his Readers with superfluous Expressions, would not have added those words, except in Christ had been another Nature, or to what purpose say, according to the flesh? if he had been a mere man; and herein chief lies the Prerogative of the Jews, that Christ, who is God, was born amongst them: Their Privilege doth not herein consist, that Moses, Jo●huah, Elijah, John Baptist, etc. were born amongst them, they all were but Men, but that Christ was because he is God; for this he addeth as the great reason, and speaketh of his divine Nature, who is over all, God blessed for ever, he saith not is called but is; he is God over all the Fathers of the same stock tha● were born of the Jews, before him, or over all things whatsoever. The words blessed for ever are in Scripture attributed to the true eternal God, and even in our Saviour's time, when the Jews said the blessed, they meaned the true God: Thus the High Priest asked the Lord Jesus 
† Mark 14.61. , Art thou the Christ the son of the blessed? which another Evangelist expresses thus 
‖ Luke 20 70. , Art thou the son of God?  
In another place the same Apostle affords a convincing Proof of this Truth, that in Christ are two Natures, where he speaks of them thus 
* Rom. 1.3, 4. , Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh, and declared to be the son of God, with power, according to the spirit of holiness by the resurrection from the dead: Wherein S. Paul teaches in what respect Christ is the Son of God; not according to the Flesh, for thus he is the Son of man, of the Seed of David, but according to the Spirit of Holiness, which is the Spirit of God's Nature, and according to that Spirit, he hath been declared to be the Son of God with Power: Certainly the Opposition used by the Apostle, showeth he cannot be Son of God upon both accounts, but only upon one; for if he had been according to both, Paul would have said, declared the Son of God as to the Flesh and as to the Spirit, and herein would have made no difference between the Son of God according to the Flesh and according to the Spirit; for as it is contrary to 
* Rom. 9.5  Scripture, to call the Lord Jesus God according to the Flesh, for God and Flesh are opposite, so 'tis contrary to say Christ is Son of God according to the Flesh; for by the same reason one is said to be Son of God, by the same he may be called God, as we see it both joined 
† Psal. 82.6. , I have said ye are God's, and all of you are children of the most high: And we read where the Jews upbraided our Saviour 
‖ Joh. 10.33, 36.  that he made himself God, that is, absolutely, he renders the words thus, I said, I am the son of God.  
Jesus Christ is said 
* Phil. 2.5, 6, 7, 8.  to be in the form of God, and made in the likeness of men; 'tis not said, Made in the form of God, but being, his being is related to God, and made to man, he was God but made man, he was made in the likeness of men, and formed in fashion as a man; certainly here are two Natures asserted, divine and human, whence we say, that as by his Incarnation he was really man, so as surely his being in the form of God; signifies that he was really God before he became man, as he was man after his being born of the Virgin Mary: These Expressions conclude for both his Deity and Humanity, and if there was any difference, the words for the first seem stronger than those for the last; for to be in the form is more than to be in the likeness, because forma dat esse rei, a thing hath being from its Form or Nature; but he gave sufficient and great demonstration of both Natures in him to those among whom he did converse.  
Socinians would wrest the Text of Luke 1.3 〈◊〉 The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the highest shall  thee; therefore that also which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God: They would have the Particle therefore to signify the Cause wherefore Christ was to be called the Son of God, that is that miraculous Conception by the Holy Ghost, but no such thing may be deduced; 'tis not the Cause but the Consequence or Inference which is signified by the words therefore and wherefore, by which Particles we usually draw Conclusions from Premises, whether they be Causes, Effects, or Signs, or that which upon any other account whatsoever may be deduced therefrom: And in this place out of the scope thereof, it cannot be demonstrated out of any Circumstances, that the Conception by the Holy Ghost is the true cause why Christ was to be called the Son of God, 'tis not upon the account of that manner of his Conception; for then for that same cause either Christ would call himself or be called by others Son of God, else the Angel's Prediction should prove false, by which reason he rather should not be called than called the Son of God, even according to their Principles which deny the Holy Ghost to be true God; but the words of the Angel do import, not that he should be called once, or by some few, Son of God, but always and generally by all that should own him to be the Son of God. Besides, this Exposition of theirs, they can bring no Example to confirm it; for in abundance of places we read Christ to be called Son of God, but find none at all wherein he is called Son of God according to the Flesh: And the Angel doth not say, therefore he may happen to be, but absolutely and publicly declareth he shall be called; wherefore seeing he no where is called Son of God according to the Flesh, we may necessarily conclude he is not such in that sense; to be called is sometimes really to be as in that Text 
* 1. John 3.1. , Behold what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the Sons of God, that is, that we should really be owned and declared to be the Sons of God, such as truly we are, being adopted in Christ his true natural Son.  
The word holy, used, gives a strong Evidence that Christ was to be called Son of God for a much better and higher reason than that he was to be born of a Virgin; he shall be called Son of God because he is holy, therefore not upon the account of the Flesh, but by reason of his Holiness, because the Holy Ghost coming upon the Virgin, some holy thing was to be born of her; that makes the Angel say, Therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee, shall be called the Son of God; not as to the manner of Conception, but as to the thing to be conceived, though by the Angel it be not expressed; how great was that Holiness, we may well conceive it to be that highest and infinite Holiness as becomes the Son of God; wherefore Isaiah in his Prophecy of him, calls him, as already observed, the mighty God; Elizabeth calls him 
Luke 1.43.  her Lord; the Angel calls him 
‖ Chap. 2.11.  Saviour, Christ, the Lord; and Daniel 
* Dan. 9.24.  He was anointed the most Holy. Before the wise Men fell down and worshipped him, which they were sent to do, and to that purpose guided by a Star 
† Mat. 2.2, 11. , and according to the Prophecies 
‖ Psal. 72.10. , offered him Gifts and Presents as to a King, for under that Name his Birth was declared to them and promised; therefore the Holiness of Christ is the Holiness of God, and of him who is by Nature Lord and King.  
The Particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and or also which follows therefore, is not in vain, but shows a Comparison, and is related not to the word called but to be born, and the sense is, not only that word which from Eternity is born of God is Son of God, but that holy thing which shall be born of thee, shall be called the Son of God, because that eternal Son of God shall take human Nature, and be born of thee: And this is one of the things which the Holy Ghost coming upon the Virgin was to do, namely, that she should conceive without Man, and conceive a Man, him who from eternity is according to divine Nature the Son of God, which could not otherwise be effected than with the Holy Ghost uniting human Nature, which was to be form out of her own Blood and Substance, sanctified before and preserved from Sin and Corruption, with the Person of the Son: Men must not think there is in Scripture the least tittle or word without cause, for the Holy Ghost doth and saith nothing in vain.  
Another reason is, the Angel saith, Christ shall be called the Son, not of the Holy Ghost, but of God the Father: Now if the manner of this Conception was the cause of his being called Son of God, he should properly be the Son of the Holy Ghost, not of the Father, for he is said to be conceived by the Holy Ghost (but they deny the Holy Ghost to be a Person, yet actiones sunt suppositorum, is a Rule in Philosophy) and this Conceiving being an Act, the Holy Ghost must be a Person; for I defy them to show any thing to be done but by a Person. Scripture in the quoted place, Rom. 1.3. the Question being about Christ's being the Son of God, excludes the Flesh to attribute it to the Spirit; but Socinians would have it according to both, yet S. Paul's scope is to teach how he is Son of God according to the Flesh, and how according to the Spirit; as to the first, he explains himself when he saith, which was made of the seed of David; as to be second, he declareth his meaning when he saith, he was declared Son of God with power, whence we may conclude he saith Christ to be called and really be the Son of God, not according to the Flesh, but to the Spirit, or else he had not sufficiently declared in what sense he is the son of God; and 'tis clear how he opposes the Flesh to the Spirit; according to the first he was made of the Seed of David, according to the last he was declared the Son of God.  
Withal, Scripture would have such a Son of God as is without Father, etc. such as Melchisedec, no mention being made of his Father, Mother, or Genealogy, he seemed not to be born on Earth, but rather fallen from Heaven, having neither beginning of Days nor ending of Life, but made like unto the Son of God, whereof he was a Type, showing these Attributes to be more proper to, and true of the Son of God, which cannot be otherwise understood then thus, either that the Son of God hath such a Nature as doth by no means come and is derived from earthly and carnal Parents, without beginning or end, and so eternal to all eternity, such as is divine Nature, or else that both Natures of Christ, divine and human, are denoted human without Father upon Earth, divine without Mother in Heaven, and either overthrows the imaginary Notion of Socinus of Father according to the Flesh: This must not be understood of the Priesthood, about which the Question is not, but about his Origine and Genealogy; he is said to be without Father or Mother, not but that he had some, only there is no mention nor description made of it; for the Greek word without Genealogy signifieth not the Genealogy itself, but the description of it; besides that, the words without beginning of Days or ending of Life, may by no means be applied to the Priesthood; wherefore he is said to have no beginning of Days, not but that he had, but is brought in as if he had not, to answer him whose Type he was; Days and Life are not referred to a Priesthood, but to a Being, a Person, an Existence, and Life, the beginning or ending whereof absolutely no mention is made at all; so then in this place the Comparison is not about the Priesthood; but about the eternal Person of Christ; for Christ's Priesthood had a beginning, as is expressy set down in Scripture 
* Heb. 5.5, 6. , For he glorified not himself to be made an High Priest, but he that said unto him, thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee; as he saith also in another place, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec: So then in that sense it cannot properly be applied to Christ; 'tis frivolous to say, as if it were to be understood of any Family, for the Apostle absolutely speaks of beginning of Days not of a Priesthood, to speak absolutely of a Beginning, and of a beginning of a Family, are two things, and that is to wrest the Apostle's sense and meaning, and make him say a thing which he never intended: We don't deny but that the Apostle speaks of the Priesthood of Melchisedec and of Christ's, but it must be owned he also speaks of other things, as of Melchisedec's being King of Righteousness, King of Salem, King of Peace, etc. and his being without beginning of Days or ending of Life, relates to his Person and Life, for no mention is made of his Birth or of his Death, though both besel him, but from the Eternity of his Person the Apostle inferreth the Eternity of his Priesthood: So then when the Lord Jesus is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in the Person of Melchisedec, the two last are not to be understood of his temporal Generation and Birth of the Virgin; for two Evangelists have written his Genealogy, but of his eternal Generation; and of this speaks the Prophet 
† Isai. 53.8.  Who shall declare his generation? An Expression equivalent to this, no Man can, it is eternal, incomprehensible. When our Saviour was born of the Virgin, he was born in time, 
‖ Gal. 4.4.  When the fullness of the time was come, as Scripture calls it: Now this Parallel between the Type and Anti-Type, Melchisedec and Christ, doth not run upon our Saviour's Birth, according to the Flesh, and about his human Nature, but about something higher, his Divinity; wherefore the Apostle in the place where he saith Melchisedec to be without Father, etc. doth ascend higher, saying 
* Heb. 7.3  but made like unto the Son of God.  
The more ●o prosecute this Argument, we must say, how Christ in his Childhood, even in the Womb, was God; for he is Immanuel God with us from the Virgin's Womb; the thing is clear out of this that God being not Flesh but Spirit, can have no carnal only spiritual Sons, the true Birth makes the true Sons, and this is of two sorts, those that are born of the Flesh are carnal, those of the Spirit are spiritual; for saith Christ 
Joh. 3.6. , That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the spirit is spirit; now to be born of the Flesh is to be born of a carnal Seed, as to be born of the Spirit is to be born of a spiritual Seed, wherefore Peter 
† Pet. 1.23, 24, 25.  mentioneth two Seeds, one corruptible, the other incorruptible, that of the Flesh, as Grass, withereth away, the spiritual endureth for ever: If then Christ was born of the Spirit, as not long before we took notice the Adversaries would have him to be, because he is said to have been conceived by the Holy Ghost, than that Birth of Christ would be spiritual, but not according to the Flesh. 'Tis not without cause that when Scripture speaks of our Blessed Saviour in several places, it makes a restriction according to the Flesh, and an Opposition to't according to the Spirit; thus 'tis in the forequoted places, Rom. 1.3, 4. and Chap. 9.5. thus, The word was made flesh, the Word and Flesh do signify two different Principles distinguished and in opposition one to another. So the Apostle saith 
* 1 Pet. 3.18. Chap. 4.1.  Christ was put to death in the Flesh, but quickened in the Spirit; and again, He hath suffered for us in the flesh, that is, in his human Nature; then in him is a Nature in which he suffered not, and 
1 Tim. 3.16.  God was manifest in the flesh: In one and the same Subject are two different Natures, divine signified by the word God, and humane by the Flesh: What mean those words of S. Peter 
* Acts 2.30, 31. , how God had sworn unto David? That of the fruit of his loins according to the Flesh he would raise up Christ, and that his Flesh did not see corruption, but to show that in Christ was another Being different from that according to the Flesh, according to which he was not David's Son. Thus S. Paul, as already quoted, said, God sent his Son in likeness of sinful Flesh, there is a difference between being Son of God and being in the likeness of sinful Flesh: And elsewhere 
† Ephes, 2.15. Colos. 1.22 Heb. 5.7. Ch. 10.20. , Having abolished in his Flesh; and, You hath be reconciled in th●●body of his Flesh: again, Who in the days of his Flesh; and, Through the vail, that is to say, his Flesh; that visible Veil did hid some invisible thing. Now, I say, it were in vain in Scripture to see so often mention made of Christ's Flesh, if there was in him no other thing as the ground of the Distinction; thus when we speak of Man's Body, 'tis to distinguish it from the Soul; so of his Soul to distinguish it from the Body; for though in one Man there be Soul and Body, yet the Soul is not the Body, nor the Body the Soul: So in Christ, though he be but one Person, yet that Person consisteth of divine and human Natures, one expressed by Spirit the other by flesh, a necessary Distinction to make us know which Nature in him is spoken of, for they ought not to be confounded, each having its proper Attributes.  
But as their way of arguing is altogether Cavils and Sophistries, so they would put a false Gloss upon our Saviour's forequoted words, That which is born of the Flesh is Flesh, etc. as if he were speaking of that which is naturally done, but Christ's Conception and Birth is supernatural; but see what a wrong Principle they go upon, for the Conception by the Spirit they reckon to be natural, as if the Spirit of God bestowed upon us in a spiritual Generation or Regeneration was natural to us, when 'tis a supernatural Gift of divine Grace: Now seeing the Lord Jesus, according to the Flesh, is not born of any spiritual but a carnal Matter, he is not properly born as of a Seed, and so may not be called Son of God according to the Flesh, though through the Operation of the Spirit he was born of fleshly Matter: But, that one may properly be said to be born of the Spirit, 'tis not enough to have the Holy Ghost be the Author of his Birth, but also he must be born of spiritual Seed, to the end there may be a Proportion between a spiritual and a carnal Birth, or else if to have one to be properly born of God, it be enough for God to create a carnal Seed, than it would follow that all things which at first were created out of the Earth and Water through a Production of Seeds by God, might be said to be properly born of God, which is absurd; so that after that manner, Christ may not be said to be properly born of God, and be his Son.  
The Knowledge of this matter is of so high a Concernment, that I must somewhat more enlarge upon't: Socinians would have Christ to be truly and properly Son of God according to the Flesh, because, say they, God acted the part of a Man; but we say, how, to the end one may, in point of Generation, act the part of a Man, it is not enough to afford any matter of Generation, but it is necessary it be out of his own Substance; for if he affords another and foreign Matter, that which is born may upon the account of such Matter by no means be called his Son, nor be said to be born of such a one, because he is not of his own Matter and Substance, neither may he be accounted to be true Father to one so born; he that is not born of the Flesh and Blood of a Man, may not be called such a Man's proper Son: Certainly if a Woman should beget a Son of another's and not of her own Substance, she might not be called his true Mother, for she communicated nothing unto him: By the same reason one may not be called a true Father who is Author of Generation not of his own Body and Substance, but of another's; to be a true Son one must be begotten not only by the Father but also of the Father, by the Father efficiently, and of the Father in some manner materially, that is, either of the Father's own Substance, or out of that which is derived therefrom. Hence it appears how in the Generation of Christ, according to the Flesh, the Father acted not properly the part of a Man, because he communicated not his own Substance, but made use of that of another; wherefore Christ may not, according to the Flesh, be properly and absolutely called Son of God, but only secundum quid, and in some respects, as Adam by God form out of Clay is indeed called 
* Luke 3.38.  Son of God, but improperly, for he was not begotten in the manner of a Son; so Christ, according to the Flesh, must not properly be called Son of God, not being begotten of God's Substance in the manner of a Son; to be properly a Father is not to supply the part of a Father, as Socinians say, but really to beget of his own Substance, or else he may not properly be called such a ones Son. Our Saviour indeed, as to his human Nature, is properly Mary's Son, because begotten of her Substance; but in this Generation of Christ, God supplied indeed the part of a Man, as much as relateth to the absolute Generation of a Man, but not as to the Generation of a Son; so that in relation to God it may be called a Production rather than a Generation: A Man by God's Will may be made of nothing, or of any matter, but a Son being a Relative to the Father, with whom he hath a Consanguinity and Unity of Blood, he must be form of the very Substance of his Father. To say that God created a new Matter in the Virgin's Womb, is to talk at random, without the least ground for it in Scripture, neither was it necessary; for God could out of the Virgin's Blood have caused a perfect Generation of a Man: Wherefore we conclude, that since Christ is called God the Father's proper and own Son, he must be begotten of God the Father's own and proper Nature and Substance.  
Hence we do also infer, that the Name of Son of God signifies some essential thing in Christ, and not an Office and Dignity, as appeareth out of the Acts 
† Acts 8.37.  I believe, saith the Eunuch, that Jesus Christ is the Son of God; for if to be Christ and Son of God signifieth the same thing, than the words would contain this Tautology, that Christ is Christ; but upon this solemn occasion of his being about to be baptised, in answer to what Philip had said, that he is to be baptised in the Name of Christ, so he must make a declaration that he believes in Christ, and of what he believes him to be, namely the Son of God; so that the Name Son, is not the Name of an Office, as that of Christ, but the Name of the Person that exerciseth that Office, as good as if he had said, This Jesus Christ whom thou hast preached to me, is not to be considered only as the Son of the Virgin Mary, who died and was crucified, but also as the Son of God who liveth for ever: To be Christ and to be the Son of God is not the same thing, but different relations; the Sonship hath a relation to a Father, as the Patornity hath to a Son; but the relation of the word Christ is either to God who 
* Heb. 1.9.  anointed him, or to the Church over which 
† Zech. 9.9.  he is made King: So then, according to the formal Reason, Son of God and Christ do not denote the same thing, neither could Christ by virtue of his Office, which he received but in time, be properly called Son of God and equal with God, as it appears 
‖ John 10.33, 37, 38. compared with John 5.18.  he made himself and really was.  
No sort of Men more prone to wrest Scripture than Socinus and Socinians, wherefore in the matter now in hand, in that Confession which Peter made of and to our Saviour, Matthew hath these words 
* Mat. 16.16. , Thou art Christ the Son of the living God; and John upon another occasion 
† John. 6.69. , We believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God; but because Mark saith only 
‖ Mark 8.29. , Thou art the Christ; and Luke 
* Luke 9.20. , The Christ of God; wherefore saith he, the Name of Christ contains the full meaning of Son of the living God: But who knoweth not the diversity by the Evangelists used in their Narrations, one more at large, the other more briefly, one sets down all, the other only some part, as 'tis observed between Matthew's and Mark's Relations. If after the Socinian way, from the comparison of words one could conclude all to be but one and the same sense, many Absurdities would arise therefrom; as for instance, Matthew relates that our Saviour said to the man sick of the palsy 
Mat. 9.2 , Son, be of good cheer, thy sins be forgiven thee; but Mark leaves out the words 
† Mark 2.5.  be of good cheer, saying, Son thy sins be forgiven thee; and Luke, instead of the word Son, uses that of Man 
‖ Luke 5.20.  thy sins are forgiven thee; then, according to this way of arguing, it may be concluded how the words Son and Man are but one and the same, and signify but one and the same thing; for whom Matthew and Mark call Son, Luke calls Man; so after this rate Man and Son now do not differ as an absolute Name that denoteth Nature, and a relative signifying a relation to a Father. It is said how in a Vision Cornelius saw an Angel of God, Acts 10.3. and v. 30 he said to Peter, Behold a man stood before me in bright clothing; what he saw in the same Vision is called an Angel and a Man; must we conclude an Angel to be a Man?  
After the same manner they would wrest some other places, as when Matthew saith 
Mat. 26.63. , The high priest said unto him, I abjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ the Son of God; and Mark 
† Mar. 14.61.  Again the high priest asked him, are thou the Christ the Son of the blessed? and Luke 
‖ Luke 26.66, 67. , The chief priests and the scribes led him into their counsel, saying, art thou the Christ? Tell us. Where the Name Son of God is omitted, the Heresiarch doth conclude that the words Son of God and Christ are the same: But we already shown the Falseness of such Consequences, and this is farther to be observed, how though the relations by the Evangelist be not contrary, yet they sometimes differ, and are not expressed in the same words; Matthew useth the Name Son of God, Mark calls him The Son of the blessed, where the words God and blessed signify the same thing, though one expresseth the Nature, the other the Worship: This difference of relating doth farther appear, that Matthew and Mark say the High Priest asked, but Luke saith it of the Chief Priests and Scribes, shall we then concludé that the High Priest and the Scribes are the same? But withal, the word Son of God is not quite left out by Luke; for we find it v. 70. Then said they all, art thou then the Son of God? Here by the by take notice how what our Saviour said of himself under the Name of Son of Man, by reason of what is said of sitting on the right hand of the Power of God, they well took the meaning to be Son of God, which Christ confirmed, and indeed, he often declared himself to be true Son of God, but we read not where that ever he denied it. But to return to our Text, hence appeareth the insignificancy of their Exceptions; for all the Evangelists do join the Names of Christ and Son of God: And we are to take special notice, how after our Saviour had affirmed he was the Son of God, they all concluded he had blasphemed, which there had been no cause for them to say, except thereby had been meaned he who is begotten of the Essence and Nature of God, and therein equal with him.  
It seems they will not be persuaded but that Christ and Son of God are synonimous, to which end they farther make use of other places, whereof the first hath these words 
* 1 Joh. 5.1. vers. 5. , Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ, is born of God; the next is thus, Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God? The last is this 
† ‑ Chap. 4.15.  Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God: Whence they would infer, that the Names of Christ and Son of God are the same, because they are put one for the other; but the Consequence is not good; for, all that followeth is this, that Christ and the Son of God are the same, which we own, and is true, both do meet in the Person of the Lord Jesus, for he is Son of God and Christ, but we deny the Name of Christ to be the same with that of Son of God, because this last is a Name of Nature, and the first of Office; and to say he is Son of God, because he is Christ, is a mere begging of the Question: Christ is called Immanuel, Wonderful, counsellor, Mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace, by Isaiah, and The Lord our Righteousness, by Jeremiah 
‖ Chap. 23.6. , all which Names are given to one and the same Person, yet none may say they do formally signify the same thing, no more than Prudence, Courage, and Liberality can be said to be the same, because they meet in one and the same subject, and the same Person may be prudent, courageous, and liberal. 'Tis bad Logical from the Unity of the Person to argue for the Unity of Names, seeing one and the same Person may be called by several Names; God is merciful and just, yet though Mercy and Justice be in God, they differ one from another between themselves abstractively taken, though we know in God they are one and the same thing. Thus though the Words Son of God and Christ belong to one and the same Person, yet in themselves they differ one from another, as do God and Lord, which in Scripture are often joined together as the Lord God, and put one for another, yet God is a Name of Nature, and Lord signifies his Dominion, they in themselves denote different things, though pertaining to one and the same Subject, or else every Lord were a God; thus a Husband were a God unto his Wife, because Sarah called Abraham her Lord, the Lord of the unfaithful Servant were his God, because he calls him his Lord, the Lord of the Vineyard were the God of the Vineyard, because called its Lord, and many more such Instances: And I shall illustrate the thing by a trivial Saying among us, A Servant may say, his Master is Lord, but not God, at home.  
The Text that saith 
* 1 John 2.22, 23. , Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is Antichrist that denieth the Father and the Son; whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father; these words do import, how he that denyeth Jesus to be the Christ, doth thereby deny the Son, not that Christ and the Son do formally signify the same in themselves, but because to be Christ and Son of God do meet in one Person, so that none but the Son of God is Christ and Redeemer of the World. Withal after this Socinian way of arguing, it would follow in this Text, that the Names Christ, Father, and Son, do signify the same; for here the Apostle offereth two Propositions, the first, He is a Liar that denyeth Jesus to be the Christ; the last, He is Antichrist that denyeth the Father and the Son. The Adversaries make them both equivalent, for in both is the same Object of denial; whence they infer, that Christ and the Son are of the same signification; but according to this Kule it may be concluded, that Christ, the Father, and the Son, signify the same, because in the first Proposition Christ is the Object of the denial, and in the last the Father and Son together. Any one may see the Absurdity of such Consequences.  
But because Christ, to prove himself to be the Son of God, speaks to the Jews about his Sanctification by the Father, which Sanctification is the anointing spoken of by Peter 
† Acts 10.38. , wherefore they would have that to be the cause of his being Son of God; but if there was no other reason of that divine Filiation but the Sanctification and Anointing, than the cause by the Angel given in 
‖ Luke 1.35.  Scripture were false. So then Christ is called the Son of God not only upon the account of his extraordinary Birth and of his kingly Office, as Socinus saith, but for being of the same Nature and Essence with the Father, which that Text of John 10. is not against; for in that place our Saviour doth not give in the cause why he is Son of God, but only goes about to refute the Slander of Blasphemy by the Jews cast upon him, not by an Argument à pari, taken from equal things, but from the lesser to the greater: He had said v. 30. I and my Father are one, thereby expressly asserting his Consubstantiality and Oneness of Nature with the Father, whereupon they took Stones to stone him, because of that pretended Blasphemy, in that he being man made himself God, which Objection he answereth with an Instance from less to greater. Thus, if those are without Blasphemy called Gods who exercise a divine Office in their ruling and judging of Men, much more and upon a better account may Christ the Messiab from eternity begotten by the Father, and in time sent down from Heaven into the World, be called God, wherefore there is no Blasphemy, nor have ye any just cause of stoning me, because I said I am the Son of God, one with the Father: The Name Son of God relates to the eternal Generation by and Consubstantiality with the Father, therefore not a Name of Office but of Nature and Person, and the Names Christ and Son agree as to the material in one Person, but not in the formal; the Name Son is by reason of an eternal Generation, and that of Christ, upon the account of a temporal Anointing to an Office: In the mean while we retain the proper and literal Sense of the word, and not the metaphorical, till we see cause to the contrary. And this we leave for them to prove, how because Magistrates, by reason of their Office, are called Children of the most high, therefore not because of an eternal Generation and Coessentiality with the Father, but for his Royal Dignity the Lord Jesus is called Son of God.  
To be short, we have other Texts to prove how the Name God's Son signifieth some essential thing in Christ, as that heretofore quoted, Christ was made of the seed of David according to the Flesh, etc. the Flesh signifies his Humanity, as doth, Declared the son of God according to the spirit of holiness, his Divinity; for we see 
* Dan. 9.24. , To anoint the most holy, doth denote by the most holy his divine Person, and by to anoint, his Office of Mediator: So we have that of the Angel to the Virgin, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the highest shall overshadow thee, therefore also that holy thing that shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. The Angel's meaning is, that in Christ's Conception the Power of God was necessary, to the end he that was to be born might be called Son of God; but if that Name had related only to the Office, and he that was to be invested with it had been a mere Man, no need of that Power of the Spirit in the Conception; now the Angel calls holy that which it Essential in Christ, he was holy before he should be born, and that essential holy thing is called the Son of God: The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth not that Man that was to be born, not holy in the Concrete, but holy in the Abstract. Withal, seeing in Baptism the word Son doth not in Christ signify his Office but his Nature; for the Names Father and Holy Ghost do not denote any Office but Persons, so in Christ it signifies his divine Nature not his Office: All this may also be proved out of other Texts, as this 
† John 3.16.  God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, etc. compared with 
‖ Rom. 8.32. , He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, wherein God's Love towards the World and us is so highly commended, which if it were only an Office laid upon Christ, would come very short of that inflnite Love of God, which as Paul saith 
* Ephes. 3.19, 18.  Passeth knowledge, and gives it the four Dimensions, breadth, length, depth and height: But to say that God spared not his own beloved and only begotten Son, but delivered him to death, this is Love indeed. The same we may learn out of this 
Heb. 5.8. , that though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered. What Man is he that would sacrifice his Son to the Safety and Preservation of his Enemies? Yet God hath done it, having exposed his Son out of his Bosom to all the Abuses which the Rage and Malice of Devils and Men could invent and to the shameful, painful, and cursed Death of the Cross. Take notice how the same Apostle in the same Chapter, having applied the words of the Psalmist to the Lord Jesus 
* vers. 5. , thou art my Son, he calls the time of these Sufferings 
† vers. 7.  them days of his flesh, to make a difference between his divine and human Natures; and thus such a Son and in such a manner, as his Name to distinguish him from all Men, was never bestowed upon any Person in the singular Number; Abraham, as observed before, was called God's Friend and Moses his Servant, but to neither of them, nor to any one else, it was said, Thou art my Son; 'tis said Christ was faithful to him that appointed him; 
Heb. 3.2, 3, 4, 5, 6.  and Moses also was faithful in all God's house, but with what a vast difference, Moses as a servant, Christ as a Son, over his own house which he had builded himself, but he that built all things is God. Thus much I could not forbear taking notice of those Texts tending to our main purpose and for Christ's Divinity. But to return to the exceeding greatness of God's Love to us, it would be extremely lessened if Christ had been considerable only for his office and not for his Person, but 
* Rom. 5.8  God commendeth his love toward us in that while we were yet Sinners, Christ his own, proper, well beloved and only begotten Son, died for us; that Christ, who according to Peter's confession, is the Son of the living God: which containeth two things, first that Christ is the Messiab, the second, that he is the Son of the living God.  
This they object, 
* Heb. 5.4, 5.  Christ glorified not himself to be made an high Priest, but he that said unto him, thou art my Son this day have I begotten thee; Wherefore, say they, he is called Son in respect to his Office? In answer we say, if by these quoted Words, Christ was constituted Mediator, than he was constituted Mediator only after his Resurrection, for after his Resurrection Paul said, 
† Act. 13.33.  God said, thou art my Son this day, etc. Furthermore, all that can be deduced out of these Words is this, how Christ was by him that begot him called to the Office of Mediator, which we grant, but deny him only by these Words to have been constituted Mediator, 
Rev. 13.8.  for this day have I begotten thee, do not contain the Institution of Christ's being a Mediator, but a Declaration and Manifestation thereof; he was a Mediator from the beginning, being the Lamb slain from the Foundation of the World; he could have been no Mediator except he had a being and subsisted. Out of all that hath been, and many more things that might be said, and of some others which by the Grace of God afterwards I shall add, it may appear how to the Lord Jesus do truly and properly belong the Names proper to the Essential God, as Jehovah, Lord, God, Son of God, God's Own, Proper, Only Begotten Son, the Word, how he was begotten from Eternity, and in him is a Divine as there is a Human Nature, etc.  
Against their wresting the true Sense of the Scriptures which they are so much inclined, apt and study to do; we may consider how several Expressions therein do tend to condescend to our weakness and infirmity, according to the Capacity of some of those whom they were spoken or written to, or afterwards were to read them; thus our Saviour said to the Jews, 
‖ Joh. 5.31.  If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true; and because John was in great esteem among them, he appeals to the Testimony he had given of him: That Argument was good with the Jews, 
* Mat. 21.26.  for all held John as a prophet; however, to show he was above such things, and that his due Glory depended not thereupon, lest it should thereby suffer any Prejudice in their Opinion, he said 
† John 5.34, 41. , I receive not testimony from man, but these things I say that ye might be saved: and I receive no honour from men like a tender Father he had compassion on them, and would help their Weakness and Infirmity, and relieve their Frailty; but when his Right and Due were questioned, than he expresseth himself in another manner; for when the Pharisees had said unto him 
‖ Chap. 8.14. , Thou bearest record of thyself, thy record is not true; then upon such an occasion he is not wanting in asserting his divine Prerogative; for he answered, Though I bear record of myself, yet my record is true; for I know whence I came, and whither I go: He might bear record of himself, and to strengthen his own Evidence, he saith it is not single, for he hath another infinitely above that of John; for 
* Vers. 16.18. compared with chap. 7.32. , If I judge, my judgement is true; for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me, who beareth witness of me; though, as Peter said 
† Acts 10.38. , He went about doing good, yet his Right he asserted when called in question; so no Consequence against his divine Nature, Attributes, or Actions, is to be drawn out of his Humiliation, when in the days of his Flesh, out of his infinite Love and Compassion towards poor lost Sinners, he earnestly did solicit, and as it were beseech Men to come to and believe in him, for that was the proper Work of the day, in the time of his Humiliation, to bring about our Redemption; so what himself, or the Evangelists and Apostles spoke of him in that state of his, ought not to be wrested or mis-applyed to derogate from that Glory and Honour which he had from, and shall have to all Eternity, 'tis neither just nor fair to do it, 'tis an abominable Abuse of his Mercy, and to turn the Grace of our God into Lasciviousness and detestable Unthankfulness.  
Some things in Scripture of a certain Nature, and attended with particular Circumstances, as may be Types and Comparisons, must not be pressed overmuch, 'tis enough they agree in the thing for which they are made use of, or else they will fail, though they agree in many things yet not in every thing; it will be as when a Man blows his Nose, if he presses too hard he will be in danger of squeezing Blood out of it: So in things of the nature of those we now are upon, we must not indulge our own Fancy, or suffer our Minds to wander up and down, and want the Reverence due to such holy Mysteries; we may and must often part with our own Reason, but never with the Revelation, which that Reason, though never so strong, must be ruled by; and therein the Analogy of Faith is to be observed: Thus when between our Adversaries and us there happens a Dispute about the meaning of a Text, and we give an Interpretation different from theirs, this Interpretation of ours ought to be grounded upon some other place of Scripture, and we have reason from them to expect the like; for neither they nor we must be Judges in our own Cause, and Scripture ought to be explained by Scripture: But a great general Fault in them is, to force a sense upon the words that is contrary to the scope of the place and to the Analogy of Faith, and to give unusual Meanings and different from the whole course of Scripture, as we made it appear in several places, and yet give no good reason for it, nay sometimes none at all: They must pardon us if we have no such implicit Faith as to take their bare word, though they boast never so much of their strength of Reason: We now know better than to approve of the old Saying, Magister dixit, ergo verum, the Master said so, therefore 'tis true; indeed in relation to our great Lord and Master we agree to't, but not so when 'tis applied to any Man or Sect whatsoever.  
We see by experience how commonly in these things one Depth calleth to another, and when once Men are fallen in into a wrong way, the longer they go in, the farther from the true one: Hence it is, that Errors in Judgement are attended with others in Practice: That People that think they know all, will also believe they can do all things, as they are of opinion nothing is or can be above their natural Reason, so out of Self-Love and Conceit they will easily be persuaded that nothing is beyond their natural strength: Thus as they can easily know what God is, so as easily they can do what he commands; and such Pharisees will not question but that they may fulfil the Law; they can repent and believe if they please, for all such Free-Willers are of that mind; yet of so many Instances I shall bring but one wherein the word of God doth confute and confound them, indeed 'tis one, if not the main, about men's ordering their Carriage and Conversation in the whole course of their Life, 'tis called Steps; for as we are Pilgrims and Passengers in this World, so our Actings therein are in Scripture expressed by Walking: Now our Adversaries will say their Actions are guided by their Reason, against which I bring two Evidences without exception, Father and Son both great Men, and both in several things Types of Christ the Son of God; for David saith 
* Psal. 37.23. , The steps of a man are ordered by the Lord: And Solomon declares 
† Prov. 16.9. , A man's heart deviseth his way, but the Lord directeth his steps: Reason indeed subservient to Revelation, and guided by Faith, is a good Companion; but postponing, or putting first last and last first, and altering the order of things, is in these contrary to true Religion: The Prophet knew better than so when he said 
‖ Jer. 10.23. , O Lord, I know that the way of man is not in himself, it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps: But these Matters of Grace I elsewhere discussed somewhat at large, 
A Plea for Free grace against .  wherefore now I shall not engage in it.  
Only in relation to what a little before I spoke about Comparisons, I shall say, how though we must lay no stress upon them in Matters of this nature, nor screw up Consequences for divine from human things, by reason of an infinite disproportion between them: Yet notwithstanding that Disparity, to convince some sorts of Men, even among those natural things, God hath not left himself without Witness, in relation to the great Mystery about God the Father and God his Son, grounded upon a Comparison drawn from the Sun and its Beams: First, the Sun in relation to the Beam, is of itself, and the Beam of the Sun; so is the Father of himself, and the Son of the Father. Secondly, as the Sun in order of Nature is before the Beam, but in time they both are co-existent; so is the Father in order of Nature before the Son, though in Existence both coeternal. Thirdly, as the Sun without Diminution or Division of its Substance or change in its Nature, produceth the Beams, so is the Son begotten of the Father. Fourthly, as the Sun cannot be seen but by the Beam, no more can the Father but by and in the Son. Fifthly, as the Beam is never separated from the Sun, nor can the Sun be without the Beam, no more can the Son be from the Father, nor was the Father ever without the Son. Sixthly, as the Beam is distinguished from the Sun, so that the Sun is not the Beam, nor the Beam the Sun; so it is between the Father and the Son. Notwithstanding the infinite Disparity in it, this Comparison I have chosen as the most sit and proper to illustrate that adorable, incomprehensible, and incomparable Mystery, after what the Apostle said of it when alluding to the Sun, he calls the Son 
* Heb. 1.3  The brightness of his Father's Glory. The next thing I am to do, is to show how true divine and incommunicable Attributes do also belong to him.   

CHAP. VII. Essential Divine Attributes belong to Christ.  
OF God's Attributes some are Negative, as Infifinite, Independent, Immortal, Unchangeable, etc. which remove from God all manner of Imperfection, and though these teach not what he is, yet they teach what he is not; others are Affirmative, as Eternal, Almighty, All-knowing, etc. these are not so strong as the others, because they represent Things but imperfectly; other Attributes there be, as Wisdom, Goodness, Mercy, Justice, etc. which in some Degree God is pleased to impart unto the Creature, but these I intent not to speak of, only of those that are essential and incommunicable to the Creature; and this Rule must be laid, that whensoever any of these Attributes are in Scripture given to God essentially taken, they are attributed to Christ, because he is essentially God, as I hope is sufficiently proved.  
But before I proceed, something in general may be spoken about Divine Attributes. The Attributes of God are those Proprieties whereby he makes himself known unto us, and shows the Difference that is between him and the Creature; these Attributes in God are not as Attributes in the Creatures, for they are no Qualities nor Accidents, nor Things different from the Essence, or from one another according to the Rule that nothing is in God but what is God himself; God's Infiniteness and Eternity, are God Infinite and Eternal; wherefore because we cannot comprehend God's Infiniteness, Eternity, Simplicity, etc. we say we cannot comprehend his Essence and Nature. The Knowledge that is in us, comes in by Parts and Degrees, How then can we know one Attribute of God as may be his Simplicity and Absoluteness which hath no Parts? For it doth not consist of any Genus and Difference, Substance and Accident, Power and Act, nor of Ens, being and Essence; and as to his Immensity or Infiniteness according to which he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, wholly, whole, whole in himself, whole in all, whole in every one, and whole out of all; he is neither circumscribed, defined by, included in or excluded out of any place; all these are past Understanding, not only of Men, but of Angels also. Let those who pretend to know all Things, and that to them nothing is a Mystery, take notice of this: Thus much in short of the incommunicable Attributes, or as otherwise called of the first Order. And as to those of the second and communicable to Creatures which yet must be well understood, for a thing may be said to be imparted or communicated in two ways, either when the same thing in Number and Species is imparted to another, or when the same is by Analogy in likeness and proportion. In the first way, no propriety of God can be communicated to the Creature, because all infinite and the same with the Nature, but in the last in some measure and degree they are, in as much as some Effects like unto his Attributes according to their Capacity come out of them.  
The Attributes of this last sort may be reduced under these three Heads Mercy, Wisdom and Power; Mercy moveth and willeth, Wisdom doth contrive and dispose, and Power executes, all three in God Infinite and Eternal, all three to be found in the Son in the Works of Creation, Preservation and Redemption; in relation to the two first absolutely considered, in his Divine Nature, and to the last in both Divine and Human in the Capacity of Mediator, wherein he is both God and Man, for indeed the Office of Mediator required a Person that should be both, to perform those things that were to be done in relation to both; because to suffer and die was the part of human Nature, which the Divine is not capable of, but to overcome Death and our spiritual Enemies, could not be effected but by a Divine Power; withal it became the Majesty of God, that the Mediator should be God, for that Majesty is so great that none but one that is intimate and equal with the Father, could interpose between God and Man: Angels themselves could and dared not undertake it, for they stood in need of Christ to be confirmed in their state of Integrity; besides that, they are not pure in God's sight, much less any Man merely such. I ask, Who but a God could destroy sin, appease God's wrath overcome the Power of Satan, with natural and eternal Death? Who could make expiation for Offences committed against an Infinite God, but he that is Infinite himself? By whose Intercession could God's Anger be pacified, but through him that is his beloved Son? By whose Power could Satan and the whole Power of Darkness be overcome but by him that is stronger than all Devils and Hell? And who could conquer Death, but he that hath destroyed him who hath the Power of Death? And as none but a God could deliver us from all these Evils, under whose Power we were; so none but a God could restore us to the Goods we had lost; Who could have restored us to a perfect Righteousness, but he that is Righteousness itself? Who to God's Image, but he that is the express Image of his Person, and the Brightness of his Glory? Who could make us Children of God, but he that is his natural, only begotten and beloved Son? Who could bestow upon us the Holy Ghost, but he from whom the Holy Ghost proceedeth? And who could give us eternal Life, but he that is Life itself? And by whom could we come to God, but through him that is the way? Out of all this it appears how none but a True and not a made God, could be a Mediator between God and us. 
* 1 Sam. 2.25.  If one man sin against another, saith Eli, the judge shall judge him; but if a man sin against the Lord, who shall entreat for him? No mere Man can, only he that is Lord God himself.  
Divine Essence is necessarily attended with the Divine Attributes, 
First, Eternity.  and it being most simple, they are not otherwise distinguished then after our manner of Conceiving, so that out of the foregoing Evidences they must necessarily be attributed unto the Son; and first Eternity; having already proved Christ's Deity and his eternal Generation, we have spoken many Things belonging to this Head: Eternity is Indivisible, as the begetting Power of the Father is Infinite, so it hath a terminus an Object of Infinite Perfection, namely his Son Coeternal and Coessential, and because the Generation is from Eternity, so is it true that the Son was continually and perpetually begotten, for we must not say God was first God and then Father, but without beginning always God and always Father; and seeing he ever was Father, he ever had a Son: This Reason is much to our purpose, and we could easily farther enlarge upon it; yet in order to prove this Eternity, we must draw Arguments out of Scripture, without which in these Matters, all our Reasons are no Reasons at all.  
Both Testaments do abound in Proofs, but out of many we shall make use of few: First out of the Old, and begin with the place where it speaks of Christ's Kingdom, and of the Glory and Power thereof. He saith, 
* Psal. 110.3.  From the womb of the morning thou hast the dew of thy youth; the Meaning and Sense of the Words is, thou art from Eternity, Morning implies a Day, and the first part of it too, Day imports a Time which began with the Creation; for before, there was no Time, all was Eternity; now Christ whom here David calls his Lord, is not said to have the Dew of his Youth from the Morning, but from the Womb of the Morning, that is, before there was any Morning, any Time at all; for before any Creature be brought forth, 'tis in the Womb, and what is the Womb of Time but Eternity, which is the Day spoken of in another place, 
† Psal. 2.  this day have I begotten thee; with God there is no Time, with Him all is one Day, a Day of Eternity; that saying so to him, is not of a present Generation or Constitution, but the Revelation of a Thing that was before; wherefore in that same Verse it is called a Decree, I will declare the decree; 'tis the declaration of the Decree, not the time of it; now all God's Decrees are Eternal without beginning, consequently the Time therein mentioned is meaned of Eternity, which the Psalmist's manner of speaking doth confirm more, when in that first place he saith, thou hast the dew of thy youth; the Dew falls on the first part of the Morning, so in that beginning of Time he had not his Birth or Childhood, but his Youth not only existed, but had his whole Strength and Vigour; all this way of speaking is with condescending to our weak human Capacity, to make us understand how the Person therein spoken, is from Eternity, as 'tis plainly expressed by 
* Prov. 8.21, 22, 24, 25.  Solomon, when bringing the same Person to speak under the Name of Wisdom, saith, the Lord possessed me in the beginning of his ways, before his works of old; I was set from everlasting, from the beginning or ever the earth was, when there was no depths, when there was no fountains with water, and before the mountains were settled I was brought forth, that is, before there was any Creature; now that Christ is the Wisdom of the Father, 
† 1 Cor. 1.30.  who of God is made unto us wisdom, etc. no Man ought to doubt of.  
Another Text to prove this Eternity, is one of the Names whereby the Prophet calls Christ when he foretelleth his Birth in the place which we had occasion to speak of before 
‖ Isa. 9.6.  the everlasting Father, here is Eternity in the very Spring, he not only is Everlasting, but is the Father of Eternity it-self in the abstract. A farther Proof we draw out of another Prophet, who speaking of the place where the Messiah was to be born saith, 
Micha 5.2.  Out of thee shall he come forth unto me, that is to be ruler in Israel, whose go forth have been of old from everlasting. Upon the occasion of knowing the place where Christ should be born, the 
* Matt. 2.4, 5, 6.  Evangelist saith, how all the Chief Priests and Scribes quoted this very place to Herod; so that as certainly as he was to be born and was actually born there, as certainly his go forth have been from of old from Everlasting; this Prophecy was made several hundreds of years before his Birth, yet at that very time he was said to have gone forth from of old; what is to be understood by this, from of old, he there explains it thus, from everlasting; the Hebrew word signifieth from the Days of Eternity, whence we may surely conclude that the Person spoken of in that place, namely, the Lord Jesus hath been, and is from Eternity; here two go or come forth, be expressed, one passed, from of old, from everlasting, the other to come, out of thee Bethlehem shall he come forth, etc. Daniel calls him the ancient of days, which is the very same Name in ver. 13. of the same Chapter given the True God of Israel, whether taken Essentially or Personally, whereby is denominated the true everlasting God. Now out of the New Testament, on my way, I shall take notice of the place where he is called 
* Colos. 1.15.  the first born of every creature, which (as the Adversaries would have it) doth not include him amongst the Creatures, rather it declares him not to be a Creature, if he was not made with the Creatures in time, than he was before all Creatures were made that is from Eternity; for he that was before all Creatures is not created, so he was first born, because born before any Creature was, far from being a Creature, he is the Creator; for he created all things as anon we shall have occasion to show.  
Before I go on this, I must say how Socinus' unhappy Design and great Mistake is to interpret Scripture merely by Criticisms upon the words, without any regard to the scope of the place, or the analogy of Faith, thus he searches into all the Senses that they are possibly capable of, till he can find one, though never so forced to serve the Opinion he is prepossessed of, and before hand, though never so contrary to the plain and natural Sense of the place. In the Preface to his Explication of the first of John's Gospel, he owns, not wihtout Vanity, how his Interpretation is, new, quorum verus sensus, etc. the true Sense of which words, saith he, seems to have been hid from all the Expositors that ever were extant; how proudly is this to applaud himself, as if he alone had known God's mind, as if the Spirit of God had not assisted, but departed from all Good and Learned Men for 1500 years after Christ, this is an over-affected singularity of his, to turn all into Allegories, such shifts to defend a Cause, do declare it to be bad, for 'tis only to preserve it from sinking,; and if once a Man hath leave to suppose what he pleases, than he may prove what he will; of this, now I shall give but one Instance, if by the word beginning which we read in John 1.1. we must as he doth, contrary to all particulars of the Text, and the scope of the Evangelist, understand the beginning of the Gospel; then according to this way of explaining, by the word beginning which we read in Gen. 1.1. we may understand not the beginning or Creation of the World, but of the beginning of the Mosaical Dispensation, and so the Creation of Heaven and Earth to be the Institution of the Jewish Religion, and so several other things of the same Nature; this misinterpretation of Holy Scripture is very injurious to't and dangerous, for after such Notions and Fancies, no Error, though never so absurd, can want one pretence or other to set up against the scope of Texts and Anology of Faith.  
But now we must go on, 
* Joh. 1.1.  In the beginning was the word, saith St. John, in that beginning the Word was with God, and in the same beginning the same Word was God, it being granted that Christ is signified by the name Word, that the Word is God; the Eternity of Christ may easily and naturally be understood by the Word Beginning, it appears how the Evangelist's Design is to assert the Divinity of Christ, wherewith he abruptly gins his Gospel under that name he speaks of him in the fourteen former Verses of his first Chapter, and then mentions it not more; he saith nothing of his Birth nor of any Circumstance of its Time, Place or Person, but barely when, where, what he was, and what he did; this is plain enough, if some Men of perverse Judgement had not through vain Deceit and Cavils, gone about to darken and wrest that Truth. By this beginning of time, is here, as in other parts of Scripture, when spoken without limitation, understood the beginning of the World, it having here, as I observed before, the same Signification, as in the first Verse of the Book of Genesis, in the beginning God created, etc. and that this is the meaning of this place, it appears out of the second and third Verses; in the second is repeated what is said in the first, the same was in the beginning with God; upon what occasion was he then with God? Certainly, about the Work of Creation. for ver. 3. it is said, All things were made by him, and without him was not any thing made that was made; and what I say is the meaning of the word Beginning, I can make it appear out of Scripture, and that what they say, to reduce it only to the beginning of the Gospel, is a false gloss of theirs put upon the Words to pervert the Sense; 
‖ Prov. 8.23.  the Son of God speaking of himself under the Name of Wisdom, saith, I was from the beginning; the meaning of the Word is there well expressed in two several ways, though but to one and the same end, I was in the beginning or ever the earth was, where it is very plain that the word Beginning is understood before the Earth was, and in the first part of the same, 'tis said, I was set up from everlasting; then by the word Beginning is meaned from Everlasting for indeed before the beginning of the World, it was Eternity; this I am sure doth not agree with the false gloss of the beginning of the Gospel.  
No more do the following; our Saviour speaking of Adam and Eve, saith, 
* Matth. 19.4, 8.  He which made them at the beginning, made them male and female; and somewhat lower, 
† John 8.44.  from the beginning it was not so; and our Evangelist saith, he, the Devil, was a murderer from the beginning. Furthermore, 
‖ Heb. 1.10.  Thou Lord in the beginning hath laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the work of thine hands; and elsewhere, where Christ is spoken of, 
* 1 Joh. 2.13.  ye have known him that is from the beginning; and in the same Epistle, 
† chap. 3.8.  the devil sinneth from the beginning. Now I ask, Are these Texts with others I could produce, to be understood of the beginning of the Gospel, or of the World? Nay, the Gospel is not of so late a Date as they would have it to be, for if we may believe 
‖ Gal. 3.8.  Paul, it was preached unto Abraham; that Word which in time was made Flesh was in the beginning when the World was made, so not to be understood when he took our Human Nature, seeing he was long before, even before Abraham, and to take it of the beginning of the Gospel, as they do, the Sense must be this, in the beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, Jesus Christ was, altogether unbecoming the Wisdom of the Spirit of God; 'tis said in the Praetertense was with God, not hath been, the word was hath its weight to show that he began not to be in the beginning, but that he was already, and shall continue to Eternity without ceasing or interruption according to the place before quoted, this day have I begotten thee; this Day of Eternity, for with God there is no Time nor Succession; it cannot be said of our Saviour's Birth, which happened so long after, but there the Holy Ghost pointed to Eternity, which is ever present; that in that Psalm, Eternity is meaned, the subject Matter doth demonstrate, for the Question is about him in whom we must put our Trust and Confidence which ought to be 
* Jerem. 17.5.  in God alone, now God's Duration is no Time but Eternity, which is an entire and continual perfect possession of an endless Life or an Infiniteness not successive but permanent, wherein three things are to be considered, First, no Beginning; Secondly, it hath no End; Thirdly, admits of no Continuation, 'tis free from any Succession; the two former are agreed on, but the third they Dispute; but as God and Eternity are the same, for nothing in God but what is God himself, so God were not whole, for that Eternity is not whole, which is subject to a continual Succession; Fourthly, God were divisible as is a continual Succession, which hath several Parts; and Fifthly, it would admit access and recess, as doth every Succession: This I set down as necessary to understand what Eternity which we now speak of is.  
Now again to our Text, in the beginning. I say, that though it had been before instead of in, their perverseness in going about to make Scripture subservient to their ill Opinions and Designs, and not to make it the Rule thereof, as they ought to do, in endeavouring to find out the true meaning of it; yet still they would have endeavoured to pervert the true Sense; but what is here said in, is the Description made of God's Eternity, expressed by the word before, 
* Isa. 43.13.  yea before the day was, I am he; the Gospel is the 
† Luke 2.10.  good tidings of great joy of Christ's the Lord being come; and what could the Evangelist have done better than to set in the very front and beginning of his Gospel, how when Christ was announced, that he had been, as indeed he was at the time of the first Promise made of the Messiah when the Gospel was preached and declared to our first Parents, 
‖ Gen. 3.15.  the seed of the woman shall bruise the Serpent's head.  
If by the word Beginning is to be understood the Time when the Gospel was preached, it makes the thing very doubtful Matthew gins it from the Birth of Christ, Luke from the Conception of St. John Baptist, and Mark from the time when John began to preach, Paul from Christ's first preaching, and Peter from the Day of Pentecost, when the Spirit cam● upon the Apostles, so that it would be very uncertain which of these Beginnings is meaned by the Evangelist, for there is nothing in the Text to determine it, every one of these is attended with some incongruity as to say that Christ was when he was born, or when he preached, or that he was fifty Days after his Resurrection, I can find no proper or good Sense in any of these, nor in the other which they declare for, and 'tis that, when John began to preach, which was on the thirtieth of his Age or thereabouts, and between him and Christ, there was but six months' difference, which being so inconsiderable, what need then why the Evangelist should say Christ was, when he was passed twenty nine? And when there was no ground to doubt of it, doth this become the Wisdom of the Apostle inspired by the Holy Ghost? Is it fit to say and cry out as John did, I am sent to prepare the way for the coming of one that is already come, 
* Joh. 1.26.  that standeth among you whom you know not, and whom he doth point at when he saith, 
ver. 29.  this is the lamb of God which taketh away the sins of the world; to speak thus, Doth it become one who hath the right use of his Reason? Besides, it cannot be supposed the time when John began first to preach here to be understood, for he saith, the Word or Christ was before he mentioneth any thing of John's Being or Preaching, for he speaks of him but in Verse 6th. but in the very first he saith the word was, he could not say John had preached before he had said he was; but this needeth no longer being insisted upon.  
Another Text we make use of, is this, 
* Joh. 1.15.  he that comes after me is preferred before me, for he was before me; this precedency may not be understood literally of the Birth and Manhood of Christ, for John was born before him, wherefore it must be upon a nobler Account, he pre-existed before John, so he had another Being, which not being Human nor Angelical, must need be Divine, according to which he was in the beginning of the World, which concludeth for Eternity; this Priority they interpret of Dignity, not of Time, we do not deny that in Gifts and Office Christ was much beyond John, and suppose we should understand the Words preferred before me, of a Dignity, what will they say to the following Words for he was before me? according to their Sense, the meaning will be this, he is preferred before me, for he was preferred before me, which is to prove the same by the same; when will they give over destroying the Analogy of Faith, tearing Scripture in pieces, and pulling it over head and Ears to serve their Turn, and their Ends? If we consider Christ only as a Man, John as to that time had the priority of Gifts, for as he was conceived before the Body of Christ was; so 
† Luke 1.15.  he was filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb; as to his Office he exercised it before Christ did his, for he went not about it till after he had been baptised by John, after which he was forty Days in the Wilderness tempted of the Devil, and he began his Ministry, 
‖ Matt. 4.12.  after he heard that John was cast into prison; wherefore this before me, must be taken in some other Sense than relating to Gifts and Office; for this would not sufficiently commend God's great Love towards us, if only he had endued his Son with excellent Qualities, as doth perfectly his not sparing but delivering him up to be put to Death for us, his own Son whom in four places the 
‖ John 1.14, 18. chap. 3.16, 18.  Evangelist calls God's only begotten Son; it is to be taken notice of, that John doth not say he is preferred before me, because he is, but because he was before me; Why should he make use of the Preterimperfect-Tense but to denote the time when Christ was preferred before him; so that he was before John, when he was made so eminently Excellent; his Office was put upon him when thirty Years old, but he had long before been endued with those heavenly Qualities which he was invested with, and there was never a part of Christ's Life, wherein that Son of God was not more Excellent than John; so his Office could not be the Cause of his being so highly preferred above John.  
The next Verse makes the matter plainer, of his fullness have we all received and grace for grace, wherein John doth attribute unto Christ a priority of Cause as of Dignity, for he thereby owneth that whatsoever Excellency is in him and others, is derived from the Fullness of Christ as the Stream is from the Spring; the Fullness was in Christ first, and thence John and others received it; wherefore he is said to be before John, as the Head-Fountain is before that which flows out of it; How then could that be, that John and every one else he meaned, when he said, we all, had received of Christ's Fullness and Grace for Grace, before he had taught, baptised with the Holy Ghost, or done any Miracle? This is explained in the next Verse, for the Law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ; the Lord being the sole Dispenser of Grace and of Truth; no wonder if we all for the present and in time past, received all we have out of his Fullness; now this Fullness is not only in one but in all kinds, 
* Colos. 1.19.  for it pleased the Father that in him should all fullness dwell; not excepted the Fullness of the Godhead: 
† chap. 2.9.  for in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. But how can this agree with their Opinions? For if Grace and Truth hath not been bestowed by Christ till after he had preached and revealed it; How could John Baptist and others before they heard Christ preach, receive it? if Christ was a mere Man, he could not communicate Grace before he was born, to those that were before him; wherefore he must need have some other Way and Capacity to do't, namely according to his Divinity, which Truth if unreasonable Men would but own and give God Glory, and not wander against Scripture after their own Fancies and Imaginations; this would set all things at Right here; because like a drowning Man, they are content to lay hold upon any thing that lays in their way; out of the thirtieth Verse, they object that John calls him a Man, we never denied Christ to be a Man in which respect he was after John, but we also own him to be the Word God according to which he was before him: We read of Angels under Man's shape by Abraham and Lot received into their House they were both Angels and Men, but under a different Notion, not Angels as Men, otherwise all Men would be Angels, not Men as Angels, for thus all Angels would be Men; wherefore they were Angels in one respect, and Men in another. Somewhat after this manner, John calls our blessed Saviour, sometimes God and sometimes Man, that is now after one Nature, then after the other, for the Person of the Lord Jesus is both God and Man.  
To prove Christ's Eternity, we make use of a third place in the same Gospel, 
* John 8.58.  Verily, verily, I say unto you, before Abraham was I am; the words are very plain, upon the occasion of Christ's saying, that Abraham rejoiced to see his day, which the Jews interpreting of a real Vision, they objected an apparent Contradiction, thou art not fifty years old and hast thou seen Abraham? for they inferred that if Abraham had seen his days, than he had seen Abraham, who lived so long before, and so they looked upon't as an impossible thing; but he confirms what he had said with these words, before Abraham was I am; they fell into a Rage, and took up Stones to cast at him; for they had a right Notion of what he aimed at in his Discourse, namely, to raise himself above all the Men in the World; amongst them they looked upon Abraham, whom they boasted to call their Father, to be the Chief, and they believed none under God was greater than he; wherefore after he had said, if a man keep my saying, he shall never see death; they grew mad against him, and presently said, Abraham is dead, so are the Prophets, and so asked him, Whom makest thou thyself? they concluded it could be no less than God, whereby it appears how all along they had a true apprehension of his meaning, though they were enraged at it, and could not hear it. It is a wonder to see how Socinians go about to corrupt and tear this Text all to pieces with their vain Sophistry; indeed the place is so close upon them, that they will leave nothing unattempted to wrest it; the Question is about Christ's Age, the Jews would measure it by what appears of him, and as he is a Man, in which respect he denieth not what in their Sense they say about his Age, but he will lead them farther, and make them look higher, and consider him for what he was, as he had said to them from the beginning, namely, the Son of God sent by the Father to save the World. To that purpose upon this occasion he mentions that his appearing unto Abraham in the plain of Mamre, for 'tis said, the Lord appeared, 
Gen. 18.1, 2.  and Abraham knew him among the two Angels in the shape of Men, by his addressing himself to him, paying the respect of bowing himself towards the Ground, and calling him my Lord; this Visit under the Figure of a Man, whereby he gave him earnest and assurance, how he would dwell among Men, when of his Seed he would be made Flesh; this, I say, was a notable means whereby Abraham saw his Day and rejoiced, the Day of that Visit he saw with the Eye of his Body, and the Day of his Incarnation, with the Eye of Faith, which our Saviour in this present Text of John lays not upon the Promise of his coming, but upon his pre-existence unto his Incarnation.  
Now contrary to this scope of the place, Socinians do forge this to be the meaning according to a transposition they make of the Words, I before Abraham be made, say to you that I am, that is, Christ, not considering that Abraham was long before, and dead as the Jews said, but then they go farther, with his being made, they understand Father of many Nations. I shall say but very few words as to the Grammatical Construction; for indeed the Matter and true Meaning, is plainly this, I was, existed and had a Being before Abraham was born, but was renders the Sense when be or is doth alter it, because it being spoken of Abraham, doth relate to time past, and not to come. 
* Gen. 17. ●.  Abram had his Name changed into that of Abraham, signifying a Father of Nations, a Thousand and several Hundreds of Years before Christ; yet they would have him to be such, only after the coming of our Saviour into the World, as if he had not been so before; when Paul calls him the Father of us all believers. They rise a Difficulty also about the word I am instead of I was, which is an usual Enallage in Scripture, when the present time is used for the praeterit or past, and here there is a Reason for it, which is this, that the present Tense is more proper than the praeterit, to represent God's permanent Being; besides that, the Evangelist useth the present, lest Christ should seem to speak of a non-perpetual, of a discontinued and interrupted Being and Existence, by reason of the several Opinions about him, as if he was John Baptist raised from the dead, Elijah, Jeremiah, or some other. Now the use of the present Tense was very proper to remove all Grounds of entertaining such Thoughts, and to signify a constant, permanent and unchangeable Being; in Scripture we have Instances of this, how when God is described, the Verb I am in the present Tense, answers together to the Verb of the praeterit, as Psal. 90.2. and Prov. 8.24, 25. this doth most properly express an uninterrupted and immutable Being, which passeth not away; such is God's, such also is Christ's, fully and unquestionably described in all Tenses, which is much to our present purpose; 
† Heb. 13.8,  Jesus Christ the same yesterday, to day, and for ever. Abraham rejoiced at that Day when he invited and entertained in his House the Son of God under the shape of a Man; for tho' there were three, one of them he called my Lord and chief addressed himself to him, 
Gen. 18.  who promised of himself, and in his own Name to give him a Son by Sarah; shall I hid said the Lord, from Abraham that thing which I do, and afterwards communed with him; surely Abraham was glad to see this day. But when our Saviour saith, before Abraham was, I am, he intended thereby to give himself some preference before Abraham; the Name, I am, which on this occasion he makes use of, is observable, for it doth relate to that Name which God gave himself when he sent Moses into Egypt, 
* Exod 3.14.  Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I am hath sent me; which Name is proper to God, whereunto in the New Testament answers that of Alpha and Omega, 
Rev. 18.11. and 12.13.  which the Lord Jesus attributes unto himself; and if he created the World that is made of nothing as by God's Grace, we shall prove in its place, 
Heb. 1.12.  he must need have been before Abraham, and as he made, so he shall destroy or change it, whether as to the Substance, or only as to the Quality, 'tis not material to our purpose; but whilst Heavens and Earth shall wax old and be changed, 'tis said of him, but thou art the same and thy years shall not fail; by these different Expressions, one and the same thing, namely, his absolutely unchangeable and eternal Existence is intended, which being joined with his other Attributes for our good, may prevent all the Fears, and answer all the Doubts of those that trust in him.  
But let us take notice of the Injury which unworthily they attempt to put upon Christ, as if he were only in Jest, and to trick the Jews with not answering the thing in question, which is about the time when Christ was, whether or not before Abraham? What he was? Whether something more Excellent and more Ancient than a Man? The Jews Objection was very specious, How could one whom they looked upon a mere Man, not fifty Years old, have seen Abraham? Well, our Saviour answers directly to the Point, that he was before Abraham, but Socinians with their wicked Sophistry would unworthily make him shuffle the matter, for instead of making him to answer how it could be that within such a vast distance of time he and Abraham could have seen one another, they bring him only as mentioning the time when he was speaking to them to this purpose, before Abram be Abraham, that is, the Father of many Nations, I say unto you, I am the Christ; this quibbling Trick I would think they learned of Papists, (though I take Socinians capable to forge as bad as any Papists) who in the case of the Malefactor upon the Cross with altering a Comma, do quite alter the Sense; our Saviour thus speaking to him, verily I say unto thee, 
* Luk. 23.43.  to day thou shalt be with me in paradise; but to settle their Purgatory instead of, to day thou shalt be, etc. they would have it, I say unto thee to day. I would find to know what a cause Christ hath given them to pass such a Judgement upon him, who ever used to answer to the purpose, to the Words and Mind of those whom he discoursed with? What could in so serious a Matter, and of so high a Concernment as this is, to make him alter his method and differ from himself, when his main Design, was all along to make himself truly known for what he was; yet here as much as in them lays, they make him say nothing to the purpose of the Jew's Question and Objection; as they attempt to rob him of his Divinity, so they would of that Heavenly Wisdom, Gentleness and Readiness to do good which ever appeared in his whole Carriage; here not only they make him not to speak pertinently to the Question, but also they so mangle his answer, that Men cannot tell what to make of it; Is the Etymology or Derivation of Abraham's Name to any purpose here? The Jews looked upon it as very absurd that Christ so young should have been in Abraham's time; the Lord doth plainly and to the purpose answer, before Abraham was, I am, and with this very strong Asseveration by him used only in Matters of the highest Concernment, Verily, verily, I say unto you, not once but twice, Verily; now we know him to be 
† Rev. 3.14.  Amen, Amen, the true and faithful witness.  
Their Brains are fruitful in idle Inventions, for upon this place they say one thing more wherein Arminians join with them: How this before Abraham was I am, is to be understood of a Divine Constitution or Pre-ordination, that is in the foresight and foreknowledge of God, Christ was before Abraham, but not really so in Existence; but Christ here saith not he was fore-ordained, but that he was and existed, I am; we deny not Christ to have been fore-ordained, for 
* 1 Pet. 1.20.  Peter, saith, he was, but we deny that to be the Ground of his Divinity, or that in this place Christ saith so, when the Question is about his Deity; being preordained of God is no Prerogative of Christ, for it is 
† Rom. 8.29.  common to all believers; Is it not ridiculous for one to say he is older than others, because he was fore-ordained of God before they were born? This I shall conclude with one thing more I must say to it, how our Saviour in this place saith clearly and positively before Abraham, was I am; the Jews understood how thereby he made himself to have been before Abraham, which could not be upon that account of his human Birth, our Saviour doth not go about to show they were mistaken, which if it had been, the Evangelist would have spoken of; on the contrary, he did run the hazard of being stoned; and indeed, he not only is before Abraham, but also 
‖ Colos. 1.17.  before all things, and Persons, Adam not excepted.  
One place more I shall speak of, and then shall have done with this Head; I am 
* Rev. 1.8.  Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, which was, and which is to come; the Almighty. As before Alpha there is no other Letter in the Green Alphabet, which Language the Book is written in; so before the Son of God there is nothing, and as of all things that are, Christ existed the first, so he shall exist the last, and herein the Metaphor doth exactly fit, and is explained by the following words, the beginning and the ending, which though v. 4. be spoken of the Father, yet it hinders not, but is here attributed unto the Son, neither is there any thing in the whole Verse, but what is adapted to the Son as well as to the Father; as to the Name Lord, How often is the Son in the New Testament called by that Name? As to the expressions which is, which was, and which is to come, taken out of the 
* Isa. 44.6.  Prophet, which are the explanation of the word Jehovah, they belong to Christ, as we have before proved the Name doth, and so doth the Thing, for in a place already quoted, the Signification is applied to the Lord Jesus, Christ the same yesterday, to day, and for ever; he that is named Alpha, the beginning, and the first, and which is, may well be called he which was; and he who is called Omega, the end and the last, may also be well called he that is to come which is properly and in a special manner spoken of Christ, as it appears out of this 
† Heb. 10.37.  yet a little while and he that shall come, will come; and this is spoken of him in 
‖ Rev. 17. and 3.11. and 16.15. and 22.7, 12, 20.  several places of this Book. Besides that, in this whole Chapter the Apostle's Design is to describe the Son not the Father, as it doth appear by the foregoing and following Verses, so 'tis not likely he would in this v. 8. describe the Father only, and seeing in this first Chapter, he was to dispose the seven Churches to receive the Epistles by the Son to be directed to them, with that Submission and awful Reverence as became them; so to prepare their Spirits, it was a due Course to make an ample and glorious Description of the Son; for the Father doth not immediately in his Person show himself to or speak with Men, but the Son doth, therefore there is a kind of Necessity that he should make his own Description; seeing therefore how the Words and the Things of the Description do belong to Christ; why should not we say that the Description is adapted for him? This Interpretation of ours is natural with the words and scope of the place, it neither altereth, taketh away, or addeth thereunto, as their Interpretation doth, with wresting, forcing and restraining it to the Person of the Father, when the Son absolutely without any limitation or restriction calls himself Alpha and Omega, beginning and ending, first and last; but it seems they would teach the Spirit of God how to speak: though nothing can be said more fully and plainly than this is, he doth not say only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 am, but joins the Person 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I, so when in the several Epistles 
† Rev. 2.7.17.26.  to him that overcometh, he promises, to give to eat of the tree of life, and of the hidden manna, 
Chap. 2.5.12.21.  the white stone, and the new name, with power over the nations, etc. and 
* Chap. 22.17.  the water of life freely to him that is thirsty; he doth not send them to the Father, but offereth it himself as to the 
† John 4.10.  Woman of Samaria; nay, in his state of Humiliation he calls Men 
‖ Chap. 7.37, 38.  to come to himself; much more after his exaltation and glorisition.  
But to conclude this, 
Matt. 11.28.  and at the same time show how this is simply spoken of Christ, not only in this 8 verse, but also in the 11 and 17, it appears out of the 12 and 13, where he turned to see the voice that spoke with him; and in the midst of the seven Candleiticks, he saw one like unto the Son of Man, this could not be the Father, and if any doubt should remain, 'tis cleared ver. 17, 18. for St. John having known him, fell at his Feet, he said not as the Angel, see thou do not, but he said to him, fear not, I am he that liveth and was dead, which cannot be spoken of the Father who never died; and these words, I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end are spoken 
* Rev. 21.6.  again, and all the general Words spoken asunder in this Book, are together repeated, I am Alpha and Omega, 
Chap. 22.13.  the beginning and the end, the first and the last; and here as they began, so they will end; for they will own Christ to be the first, because say they, he is the first that shown Men the way of Salvation; But did not the Prophets and John Baptist, before Christ was manifested and preached the Gospel, show Men the way of Salvation? Which way did Patriarches, Prophets and Miartyrs go to Heaven, and could be saved if they had not known the way to Salvation, before Christ began to preach the Gospel? And were not after his Ascension many things conducing to the way of Salvation, declared by his Apostles? If he be the first, only because he first taught Men the way to Glory and Immortality, he being the last as well as the first, must also be the last to enter into it, which how false it is, let the Enemies themselves be the Judges.  
There is one thing more material to prove the Eternity of Christ, which I must not omit for as what I have said proves him to have been before Abraham and other Patriarches, so what remains will show him to have been before the World itself, the words are plain. 
* 1 John 17.5.  And now O Father glorify thou me with thine own self, with the glory which I had with thee before the world began. Our blessed Saviour never spoke to Men any thing but the Truth, much more to his Father, but most of all upon this occasion when he was about leaving the World and going to him; there is a Glory which Christ desired should be made known to all, namely, that of the Gospel, which is called the glorious Gospel; and this Glory of Christ was effected in the Preaching thereof all the World over. Paul alone published it 
† Rom. 15.19.  from Jerusalem into Illyricum; the Gospel certainly tended to the Glory of God, the Father's Mercy being highly revealed therein, and of this he saith, I have glorified thee on the earth, and as he had glorified the Father, making known his Name and Glory unto Men, which before had never been done to that degree, this work which the Father had given him to do, being over, he now speaks for himself; and now O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self: To be glorified with God, is to be glorified with the same Glory which he hath in Heaven with God, in the Bosom and at the Right Hand of the ●ather, with an equal Majesty and Honour with the Father, served by innumerable Legions of Angels, which is a Glory unknown to the World; this is a Glory which the Son of God had before the World was: This Style of Scripture, before the World was, signifies Eternity; for there was nothing created before the World, seeing in the beginning God created Heaven and Earth, and every thing therein contained; but John saith not, in the beginning the Word was made or began to be, but was had his being, consequently eternal, for beyond the beginning of the World there is nothing but Eternity; time began at the Creation. I say if Christ had a Glory with the Father before the World was, than Christ was before the World, for a Glory he could not have, except he had a Being, but here Christ says he had a Glory with the Father before the World was, and we believe he speaks Truth; therefore Christ was before the World; this cannot be understood of Human Nature, which he took only in time, long after the World was created, therefore it must be spoken of a Divine Nature; for before the Creation of the World there was nothing but God.  
Notwithstanding this positive Truth, they give our blessed Saviour the lie, and say he had no real Glory before the World was, but only by a Decree and Appointment, he was ordained to have a Glory: Good Lord! When will this People let the Son of God have his own? They go about to rob him wholly or in part of every thing he hath. Christ says not, the Glory which thou didst decree or ordain for me, but which I had, was in possession of, and enjoyed. To have a title to and be in possession of a thing are two very different things; we defy them even to give any instance how to have, absolutely taken, signifies to be appointed to have; if after this rate Men allow their Fancies such a latitude as to forge new and unusual Significations to the words of Christ, we can be sure of nothing. Whensoever any one is absolutely said to have a thing, it implys him to be at the same time, for he that is not can have nothing; 'tis true, we are said 
* 2 Cor. 5.1. Heb. 10.34.  to have a building of God, an house not made with hands. eternal, in the heavens, and to have in heaven a better and an enduring substance: Believers are indeed said to have such things, but when are they said so? certainly not before the World was, nor before they were themselves, but after they are. What is said also 
* 2 Tim. 1.9.  of the grace which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began, makes nothing against us, 'tis one thing to have something given us, and another actually to have it, the first is the act of the Giver, the second of the Receiver, we have not now really that which is given us, till after we received it, one may have a Place in Reversion which may be he shall never have; Lands may be given me by a Will which I cannot be laid to have till I am actually in possession thereof, as it never was heard of, that any one gave any thing before he was, so none can receive any thing before he is; besides in the Text now in question 'tis not simply said, that Grace was given us, but given us in Christ Jesus; now this Grace is so given us in Christ, that he must have it before he can communicate it unto us; so than we cannot be said to have a thing when we have it not, though we be appointed to have it: These two things are different: Who may say that Paul was an Apostle of Jesus Christ, had Faith in Christ, Charity and brotherly Love when he was an Unbeliever, 
Contra rationem nemo sobrius cont. scripturam nemo Christianus, count. Ecclesiam nemo pacificus.  a Blasphemer and Persecuter. To Socinians we may apply this Saying, No Man may be called sober that is against Reason, nor Christian that is against Scripture, nor peaceable that is against the Church; for they speak against Reason, Scripture, and the general Consent of the Church.  
If their Exposition be true, Christ might and would have said, Glorify me with the Glory which thou hast decreed for me before the World was; then he had said nothing but what every Believer may say, how that before the World was God fore-ordained them to the Glory which they shall enjoy at the last day; so might every one else say, before the World was I was fore-ordained to have Wife, Children, Lands, Offices, etc. nay, according to their opinion, at the same time when Christ asked that Glory he had it, if to be appointed thereunto be to have it, and if he had it, why should he ask for it? If Christ had said nothing but this, And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self, it had sufficiently declared the Sense of our Adversaries, without saying any thing of the Glory which he had with him; so with thine own self, they explain to be in Heaven, as if he had said, in thy House; but if that had been Christ's intention, he would have said, Glorify me in Heaven; but since he expresses himself otherwise, and makes mention of the Glory which he had with the Father before the World was, if we can believe he well knew what he would have, and was able to express his Thoughts, than we must say he had very good cause for all he said.  
Now we shall proceed to some other of his Attributes: 
Christ's Omnisci-  he knows all things, Omniscience and perfect Knowledge and Wisdom 
‖ Rom. 16.27.  which belongs to God alone, whereby God in a divine manner understands himself and every thing else, doth also belong to the Son, who saith to the exclusion of all Creatures, 
* Mat. 11.27.  No man knows the Son but the Father, neither knows any man the Father save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him. And 
† Rev. 19.12.  no man knoweth his name but himself; thus he hath a perfect knowledge of his Deity and of every thing else, even of the most contingent, whereby the true God is distinguished from all and every Creature; this also belonged to the Lord Jesus, as he sometimes foretold his Disciples, and in the case 
‖ Mat. 21.2.  of the Ass and Colt, and 
* Luk. 22.10, 13.  of preparing the Passover, and to Peter 
† John 21 19  the manner of his Death, and all the Prophets being acted by his Spirit, foretold things to come, that holy Spirit 
‖ Ch. 16.13, 14.  shall receive of mine, and shall show it unto you, and 
‡ Rev. 13.10.  the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy: And to make this the more excellent and conspicuous, he attributes unto himself that which no body will deny to belong unto God alone, 
* Psal 7 9 and 26.2. & 1 Sam. 16.7  The righteous God tryeth the heart and reins, the Heart is unsearchable to any but to God alone, Thou, even thou only, saith Solomon 
† 1 Kings 8, 39 , knowest the hearts of all the children of men; but Christ doth attribute it to himself 
‖ Rev. 2.23 , I am, he which searcheth the reins and hearts, and 
‡ John 2.24, 25.  he knoweth all men, and what was in man, and needed not that any 〈◊〉 should testify of man, for, 
* Mat. 9 4  he knew the thoughts of the Scribes, and 
† 〈◊〉. 12.25.  the thoughts of the Pharisees; 〈◊〉 
‖ John 16.19.  be knew the desires of his disciples; withal 
⁂ Chap. 6.64. and Chap. 18.4.  he 〈◊〉 from the beginning who they were that believed not: and who should betray him, he knew all things that should come upon him, and in few words, he know all things.  
Christ is present every where, 
Christ's Omnipresence.  which argueth his Immensity and Infiniteness, which elsewhere I have spoken of; whereunto I may add, how though absent in the Body he saw 
* Joh. 1.48 49.  Nathanael under the Figtree, whereupon he called him the Son of God, the King of Israel, a Title which Scripture gives the only true God; and also he affirmeth this when he saith, 
† Chap. 3.13.  No man hath ascended up to heaven but he that came down from heaven, even the son of man which is in heaven; by the Son of Man he meaneth himself, who, if we must believe, was in Heaven when to Nicodemus he spoke these words upon Earth, which cannot be understood of his Humanity which he assumed in the Virgin's Womb, but of his Divinity, which alone is infinite. But here they take exception, and say, that by to be in Heaven is meaned only to know and understand heavenly things according to Paul's saying 
* Phil. 3.20. and Ephes. 2.6. , Our conversation is in Heaven: The Conversation of pious Men in Heaven, is said in opposition to worldly mindedness, when they were said to be quickened in Christ, and as expressed, to fit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus, they say, not to be in Heaven, but in and with Christ in heavenly things, 
† Colos. 3.3.  Our life is hid with Christ in God: We do not intent to prove the Divinity of Christ barely, because one who is upon Earth is said upon any account to be in Heaven, but out of this, that Christ is said not only to be descended from Heaven, and is again to go up, and out of this, that though he be come down from Heaven, he is still there, whence we may well conclude for his Omnipresence. Now to descend from Heaven upon Earth, and to ascend from Earth to Heaven, are spoken of Christ only as to his Person, and thereby is meaned his coming upon Earth: There is such another place 
‖ Eph. 4.9.  to the same purpose about ascending and descending. This we must say, that whilst Christ in his human Nature was on Earth, with his divine he filled the Heavens: Elsewhere he explains it as to places, 
Mat. 18.20. and 28.20. Christ's Almightyness.  Where two or three are gathered in my name there I am: As to time, For I am with you always unto the end of the world.  
The Lord Jesus is also almighty: Omnipotency, which is an infinite Power incommunicable to any Creature, for all are uncapable of it, Christ applies it to himself, when he saith 
* Rev. 1.8. , he is the Almighty. I have already shown how every thing in that Verse Christ speaks of himself, only I shall add how the same Name is given him in several other places of the Book, We give thee thanks, 
Ch. 11.17.  O Lord God Almighty, which art, and was, and art to come, which are the same Expressions used in that v. 8. and what is the reason of the Thanksgiving, 'tis in the latter end of this same Verse, Because thou hast taken to thee thy great power, and hast reigned, so who is here said to reign? The Lord God Almighty; but to reign belong to Kings, and if we go back to v. 15. this we shall find, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord and of his Christ, who is called 
* Ch. 19.16. Vers. 6.  King of Kings, and Lord of Lords; and if we go back to v. 6. we may hear Alleluia, the reason is, for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth; and in another place we read of the song of the lamb. which I suppose no Man doubts to be the Lord Jesus, and what is the Song? Great and marvellous are thy works, Lord God Almighty: He is the Almighty God, and certainly we have as many Evidences of his Omnipotency as there be Miracles wrought by him: And if God the Father be Almighty, as they will not deny him to be, the Son must also be Almighty, 
† John 5.19.  for whatsoever things the father doth, these also doth the son likewise.  
Unchangeableness belongs to the true essential God, 
Christ's Immutability.  but thou art the same, saith the Psalmist, 102.27. and Christ is unchangeable in his Words and Promises, 
‖ Matt. 24 35.  Heaven and earth pass away, but my words shall not pass away; for 
* 2 Cor. 1.20.  All the promises of God in him are yea, and in him Amen; and 
† Rev. 19.11.  He is called faithful and true.  
Other Names and Attributes there are in Scripture, which though not incommunicable, yet are so eminently spoken of the Divinity, that they are almost equivalent to it; so that they be fixed in God as their Spring, and in the Creature but detivatively and as it were a small Drop in comparison with the vast Ocean; and these being attributed unto Christ by way of Excellency, do not only illustrate, but also prove his Divinity: I shall speak but few words about them; the first is the highest, which indeed I find in Scripture never to be spoken of Men in the superlative degree: This is spoken of Christ in the place where it is said 
* Gen. 14.18, 19, 20. , Melchizedec was the Priest of the most high God, equivalent to the word highest, and in the two following Verses 'tis repeated, so that no less than thrice the Name most high is set down, which I conceive to be not without cause, and may be in relation to the most holy and blessed Trinity. Well, this Name is attributed unto the Lord Jesus, as what Zacharias said of his Son John 
† Luke 1.76. , And thou child shalt be called the Prophet of the highest, for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways: So the Attribute is given to the Person therein spoken of, which no Man may question to be the Lord Jesus: This was given him by the Multitude, and approved by him upon his entrance into Jerusa●em, for they cried, saying 
* Mat. 21.9.  Hosanna to the son of David, Hosanna in the highest; and though as I said, this be simply proper to God, and 
† 1 Tim. 6.15.  belonging only to him, yet being joined with the Name of God, is attributed unto Christ 
‖ Acts 16. , These men are the servants of the most high God, which show unto us the way of salvation; Servant of Christ is a Title which Paul doth usually take upon him. Who this Most High God is, we read in the next Verse, Jesus Christ, in whose Name he commanded the Spirit to go out, which he did the same hour. The word the blessed with an Article, doth, as I have had occasion to show, signify the same as God; and 'tis said of the Son of God 
*⁎* Psal. 72 17. , All nations shall call him blessed, and the Multitude, in the forequoted place called him so, blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord; and in that noted place the Apostle joineth both blessed and God, and gives him 
* Rom. 9.5 , who is over all God blessed for ever: Paul saith not, Let him be in a way of Wish and Desire, nor he shall be, as if then the thing was not, but only to come, but he saith, He is God blessed for ever, thereby meaning his Being and Nature. In Scripture 
† Isai. 14. Psal. 71.23.  the Name of holy one is given to the only true God whom Israel doth worship. This also is spoken of Christ 
‖ Psal. 16.10. , Thou wilt not suffer thine holy one to see corruption; and Peter 
*⁎* Acts 2.27. and 3.14.  doth certainly declare those words to have been spoken of Christ. The Angel said to Mary, 
* Luke 1.35.  Therefore also that holy thing, or holy one, for it was a Person, which shall be born of thee, shall be called the Son of God; before he was born Holiness was his Attribute; and 'tis 
† Rom. 1.4  according to the spirit of holiness that he was declared to be Son of God with power; he not only is holy, but also Holiness itself in the abstract: To him sitting upon a Throne the Seraphims 
‖ Isai. 6.1, 2, 3.  cried Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord of hosts, the whole earth is full of his glory, which is by John 
⁂ Joh. 12.41.  applied unto Christ, These things said Esaias, when he saw his glory and spoke of him; and 
* Rev. 4.8. , The four beasts ●est not day and night, saying, holy, holy, holy Lord, God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come; which last is in S. John's stile a Description of the first, these words spoken to him who sits upon the Throne, and I hope none will deny Christ is sitting upon the Throne, as absolutely expressed in several places of this Book: So Daniel 
‖ Dan. 9.24.  called him The most holy.  
Other Names and Titles Scripture doth appropriate unto Christ, which are all strong Demonstrations of what he is, namely, the natural Son of God; which I only shall name; for indeed it would be almost an endless Work to insist upon all Testimonies of Scripture upon the matter: He is then King of Kings and Lord of Lords, Rev. 17.14. and 19.16. King and Lord of glory; Psal. 24.7, 10. compared with 1 Cor. 2.8. Lord of David, Psal. 110. with Matth. 22.44. where 'tis observable, how the same Name given to the Lord spoken ●f, is also given to the Lord spoken to, as equally belonging to both, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and in this sense he is in several places of Scripture called one Lord, 1 Cor. 8.6. and Lord of all, Acts 10.36. because all things were made by him, John 1.3. So the Lord and Saviour, because there is no Salvation in any other, Acts 4.12. Let special notice be taken of Psal. 68 where speaking of Christ according to Paul's interpretation, Ephes, 4.8. he among other high and great Names, is called the Lord God, the God of our salvation, and such more, which certainly do belong only to the true essential God. In Scripture the Names of Lord, God, King, absolutely taken, or with the distinction of Israel, are attributed to one and the same Subject, namely, to the true living God, as Isai. 44.6. Zephan. 3.15. compared with John 1.49. attributed to Christ. We already have demonstrated how the Names of God and Lord are proper to him; so is that of King simply taken, as we have it in the Description made of Christ's Kingdom by the Psalmist 
* Psal. 45.1, 6. , I speak of the things which I have made, touching the king; where in several Verses mention is made of his Glory and Majesty of his Throne, of his Sceptre and Kingdom, and is called God, most mighty Lord; Christ to Pilate owned himself to be King, in the Inscription upon the Cross, he was called King of the Jews, which is equivalent to that of King of Israel; and thus it is interpreted by his Enemies, 
Mark 15.32.  though in derision, Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the cross, and for all their jest he was so in earnest, not only in relation to his ecumenical, but upon the account of his natural Kingdom; for essentially he is King of the whole Earth, he is the King that is set upon the holy hill of Zion, 
Rev. 17.14. and 19.16.  whose dominion is from one sea unto another, who hath the heathen for his inheritance, and the utmost parts of the earth for his possession. The Lamb, that is, Christ, is Lord of Lords and King of Kings.  
The Prophet upon a solemn occasion calls him a King, Rejoice greatly, 
Zech. 9.9.  O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold thy king comes unto thee, he is just, and having salvation, etc. to be compared with Isai. 62.11. and this was literally fulfilled at the time when our blessed Saviour did solemnly enter into Jerusalem, upon which occasion Matthew doth quote the Prophet's words: This I press the more, because the Adversaries would have none to be true God but he who is the God and King of Israel.  
We know, how to do great things is attributed unto God: Thus after the return from Captivity the Heathen said, The Lord hath done great things for them, 
Psal. 126.2, 3.  and they owned it themselves, The Lord hath done great things for us; which great things are also called Wonders, Thou art the God that dost wonders: Nay, he alone, 
Ps. 77.14.  that is, the Lord God of Israel, doth Wonders; for saith David, Blessed be the Lord God of Israel, 
Ps. 72.18.  who only doth wondrous things: Wherefore since the Lord Jesus hath done the Wonders which the Lord God of Israel doth and can do, upon the Evidence of these words, it followeth that he is the Lord God of Israel; for this same in the New Testament is spoken of Christ by himself, under the Name of God subjectively, when he had out of the Man driven a Legion of Devils, he commanded him to return to his own House, 
Luke 8.39  and show how great things God had done unto him; in the latter end of the Verse the Evangelist giveth an account how the Man obeyed, in these words, And he went his way, and published through the whole city, how great things Jesus had done unto him; so him who had done these great things unto the Man our blessed Saviour speaking of himself, called God, and the Evangelist Jesus, making use of the very same words, How great things God, Jesus, had done unto him; whence it appears, that Jesus is the God that doth great things, that is, the great God, chief and primary God, to speak in their Language, though there be no other true God: Also that the Lord Christ is the God that doth Wonders, as spoken of the true God in the forequoted Psalm; for saith Peter 
* Acts 2.22. , Jesus was approved of God among you, by miracles, wonders, and signs.  
But to conclude this Head, hence it appears, how those Attributes of God which he hath declared to make us distinctly conceive the Diversity of his Perfections and Operations, are all applicable and do belong to his Son Jesus Christ, and to none else but him: they without any difference do enjoy the Possession of all things, all mine are thine, and all thine are mine, 
John 17.10.  saith our Saviour to the Father; both have the same infinite Nature and unresistible Power; The Lord God, saith the Psalmist, 
Ps. 104.3. Acts 1.9. Rev. 1.7.  maketh the clouds his chariot, and the Lord Jesus did so, for he went up in a Cloud, and he cometh and will so at the last day come with clouds: in that place where the Prophet foretelleth the coming of Christ, 
Zech. 14.9.  In that day, saith he, the Lord shall be king over all the earth, there shall be one Lord, and his name one, which compared with Ephes. 4.5. and Rev. 11.15. doth show Christ therein to be meaned, 
Colos. 2.10  who is the head of all principality and power, as well as of his Church; and hereupon what is said in the Book of Genesis is observable, 
Ch. 4.26.  Then began men to call upon the name of the Lord; that was the beginning of the Church which was form in Seth's Family; and this Paul seems to point at, when he saith, 
Rom. 10.13.  Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord, shall be saved, which relates to the Christian Church from the Name of Christ, which Name began first in Antioch, 
Acts 11.26.  than Men began to call upon the Name of God Redeemer Jesus Christ. The Church is God's House, for so the Jewish Church, whereof Moses was part, is called by the Apostle; now this Church was built by the Lord Jesus, and thereupon he gives our Saviour that high Preference before Moses, 
Heb. 3.2, 3, 4.  that he who first built the House must be before the House, and before Moses, and the reason is, that he that built all things is God; but the Son of God built not only that Church, but all things besides; so he existed before Moses, and before the Foundation of that Church, yea, before the Foundation of the World too; as under the Name of Wisdom he saith in the place which several times we have occasion to mention, 
Prov. 8.30.  then, that is, before the earth was, I was with him, God, as one brought up with him, and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him; as a Son brought up in his Father's Bosom, of the same Essence, not upon the account of Adoption; a natural Son is opposed to him that is adopted or not begotten of his Father's Substance; 'tis as of a Foreigner that may be called a naturalised, but not a natural Englishman, admitted to the Rights of an Englishman, but never an Englishman born.   

CHAP. VIII. Works proper to God belong to Christ.  
WE now proceed to another argument drawn from the Works. Seeing Christ hath done those things which none but the true Essential God can do, he must be the true Essential God. This kind of Argument is very strong; for our Blessed Saviour doth often use it as a demonstration of what he was, and a proof of his Divinity, which was the same question between him and the Jews, as is now between us and the Socinians, who, though they impiously deny him to be true God by Nature, yet must own him to be a very rational Man, for indeed his works made him equal with the Father, therefore he saith, My Father worketh hitherto, 
John 5.17, 19.33.34, 36.  and I work, and to the end they should not mistake his meaning, as if the Father did work as God and he only as Man, to show there was no disparity between his Father's works and his own, he affirmeth, That whatsoever the Father doth, that also doth the Son likewise: and though John was a great man among them, and had born witness to the Truth, how he was the Son of God; wherein by the by, more and more to show who he was, and that he wanted no such evidences, as being far above them, he declared, But I receive not testimony from man: but these things I say, that ye may be saved. He said it only out of compassion, and to condescend to their weakness, for he had a more considerable Evidence; I have, saith he, greater witness than that of John, and what's that? the works which the father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me that the father hath sent me. And upon all occasions he doth appeal to these works, 
John 10.32, 37, 38.  Many good works have I shown you from my father, for which of those works do ye stone me. And a few verses lower he offereth to be judged by his works, If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not; but if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: And to show how all this tended to prove his Divinity, he saith, at the latter end of the verse; That ye may know and believe that the father is in me, and I in him. And even when he was alone with his Disciples, after he had eaten the Passeover, he taketh notice how their not believing his works, was a sign that they hated both him and the father: And those very works which through hardness of heart and unbelief, they would not be convinced by, should at last be evidences to condemn them: 
John 15.22, 24.  For, if I had not come and spoken unto them, they had had no sin; but now they have no cloak for their sin: and, If I had not done among them the works which no other man did, they had not had sin. O the works of Christ, though sometimes they are not attended with a convincing, shall at last have both a convincing and condemning power against those who refuse to own him to be one with the Father, and the Father to be in him, and he in the Father equally with him God blessed for ever.  
Now these works are of several kinds, attributed to Christ, first in general, what things so ever the Father doth, 
Joh. ●. 19.  these also doth the Son likewise: This is absolutely and simply said, without any limitation and restriction whatsoever, and of whatsoever nature they be, and this he doth without any let or opposition to hinder him, according to the working whereby he is able to subdue all things unto himself, all things without exception: 
Phil. 3.21.  Then divine works are in particular attributed to the Son as Election, for the Elect at the last day to be gathered from the four Winds, 
Matth. 24 31.  from one end of Heaven to the other, are called his Elect, and Election is an act immanent, so are also the acts transient which are of two sorts. First of Nature. Secondly of Grace. Of Nature it is double, either Creation, or Providence which is Preservation.  
Creation is an incommunicable work of God, the power whereof he never imparted to any Creature, but 'tis proper to Christ, who hath been declared the Son of God with power in those works that are truly divine and proper only to God, as Creation is. 
Isal. 44.24. Job 9.6, 7, 8. etc.  I am the Lord that maketh all things by myself, which Job testifieth in several particulars; and this is given as a characteristical mark, to distinguish the true God from all false Gods, 
Jer. 10.11.  The Gods that have not made the Heavens and the Earth, they shall perish from the Earth, and from under the Heavens. But that very same distinguishing character, is by the Apostles attributed unto the Lord Jesus, All things were made by him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. 
John. 1.3.  This is asserted, first by an universal absolute Affirmative, All things were made by him; then by an universal absolute Negative, verse. 10 Without him was not any thing made that was made: According to all rules, nothing can be more positively and clearly expressed than this is, all things, even the world that knew him not, and what other worlds there are, 
Heb. 11.3.  for the worlds were framed by the word of God; in which place the name word is the same as by St. John is used to signify the Son of God, who is also called, the Power of God, and the Wisdom of God; 
1 Cor. 1.24. Psal. ●36. 5. Colos. 1.16.  and by his Power and Wisdom made the Heavens, yea, and all things visible and invisible; under which two heads are comprehended all things whatsoever, Bodies and Spirits, such as Angels, and to show an harmony between the Old and New Testaments, in that as well as in this about the work of Creation, the name word is made use of, 
Psal. 33.6.  for by the word of the Lord were the Heavens made, and to show how all the three Persons of the Holy Trinity had a hand in't, 'tis added, and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth: 
Gen. 1.  This relates to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dixit, God said, and it was so, and the name Word is by St. John interpreted to be the true God even personally: Now as in Genesis and in the Psalm, God made all by his Word, so in John, all things were made by the word, and as in the Psalm 'tis expressly said, 
Psal. 33.6.  by the Word of the Lord were the heavens made, in a literal not allegorical Sense; why should it not, in John be understood of the natural, created, and not of spiritual things? Since he speaks of things in the Creation long before, not of things to be made hereafter at the preaching of the Gospel; so that of Gen. 1. and Psal. 33. with John 1. are three Texts parallel relating to the same thing. Now the same manner of expression devoteth the same thing: The word used in the Creation was not Corporal, because before there was any Creature, but spiritual, and so God, and that word was not directed to Angels but to things themselves, for God called them by his word, that they should be, whereunto answereth that of the Apostle, 
●om. 4.17.  God calleth these things that be not as though they were: And by that very word the Angels were made as every other Creature was, not as by an Instrument; for the particle by is not a sign of an Instrument, but of an order in the Creation. 
Rev. 19.13.  To our purpose, notable is that place, his name is called the word of God, which makes it appear that the name word of God is appropriated to and appliable to none but him as a Person; if the name belongs to him, than also the thing, as indeed every where in Scripture, the Word, Father and Holy Ghost are distinguished one from another, so John calls him the Word, before he was made flesh, and before the Creation. Herein we may observe Socinians to be worse than Ascians, who owned Christ to have been from the time of the Creation, when they would have him to have been only from that of his Birth: But he was in the form of God, before he took upon him the form a Servant, he existed before, 
Phil. 2.6, 7.  as indeed before his Incarnation he governed his people, was with them in the Wilderness, gave them meat and drink, for he was the Manna and the Rock out of which they had Water; he was the Angel whom God promised to send before them, and before his being made flesh he reconciled, regenerated, preserved and interceded for his people: if this be true, as certainly it is according to Scripture, why should he not have been in the beginning of the Creation, and have had a hand in it? For there is the same reason for all these; if he existed but one year before his Incarnation, than we may conclude for a hundred, and thousands, and so to Eternity, upon the same ground on which he existed before he was man; it could not be according to his humanity, for no man can be said to be before he is, but in a different respect from that whereby he is: nothing can resolve this difficulty, or reduce this impossibility into an act, but owning him as he is, the Eternal Son of God, who when all things are said to be made and created, is himself said to be begotten.  
Notwithstanding the clearness of this Truth, they use all means to darken it; first, against the 1. and 3. v. all things were mad● by him, in the beginning say they of the state of the Gopel, but nothing more false, if we ●●●sider every word, and the scope of the 〈…〉 was in the beginning, simply said without 〈◊〉 relation to this or that, but absolu●●●● 〈◊〉 beginning of all things; then the Evangelist will have us to look higher, when he addeth, the word was with God: And if Christ was in the beginning of the Gospel, than he was in the beginning of the world, for as I observed before the Gospel was preached in the beginning of the world, and immediately after the Fall, the Messiah was promised: but as the design of St. John is to assert Christ's divinity, he doth it by degrees, as first In the beginning was the Word, than He was with God: and so to go higher, he saith, He was God: and to show it farther, he comes to the effect, namely, the Creation of the world, All things were made by him, etc. Secondly, they would darken v. 10. the world was made by him, whereby they understand the world to come; but they forge ambiguities where there is no cause for it, here is the world with the Article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without any Epithet, and thus it is usually taken for the work of Creation, and they ought to give a reason why in this place the word world should have a rare and unusual signification? and why the Evangelist should bring in ambiguous terms in a thing which he designeth to make plain and clear. Neither are there instances that the name world signifies an age, or a world to come, which is as absurd as if one would say this world signifieth this Life; and suppose, world meaneth life to come, as to enjoy it, and to be in Heaven denote the same, it would follow that Christ made Heaven, which is part of the work of Creation: If the Evangelist, by the world was made by him, had meant only a new Creation, or renewing of the old, he would have added something to show it is not to be understood of the old Creation, but there is nothing to that purpose; on the contrary he could not more plainly have said that the World spoken of, is the same as was made by the word: So the Apostle saith positively and absolutely, The world was made by him, but they say it was not made by him, but only renewed; in this sense they would have these Texts to be understood, He lighteth every man that cometh into the world, and he is Saviour of the world; but as every man is not enlightened and saved by him, for the world knew him not, it must be understood, say they, that he doth what he can to save and renew the world; but they ought to know there is a great difference between giving Christ the title of Saviour of the world, and saying He renewed the world, saved and enlightened every man in the world: after this manner, we might say, John Baptist, Paul and every Apostle renewed the world, in as much as they desired and laboured after that it might be so, yet it would not sound well to say the world was made by John and the Apostles, which must be inferred from thence, if to make the world be only to do what one can to have it renewed: The world was made by him, expresseth two things, the Thing an● the Cause; the Thing, the world was made; the Cause, by the Word: and if the first proposition be true, so is the second. Now an effect is visibly seen out of this assertion, the world was made.  
Another text to prove the Creation of the World by Christ is this: The first born of every Creature. 
Colos. 〈◊〉 15, 16.  For by him were all things created that are in Heaven; and that are in earth, visible, and invisible, whether they be thrones, or domi●●ons, or principalities, or powers: ●ll things were created by him and for him. This place is clear and full, whence we draw this, he who is the first born of every Creature is in time before every Creature, not that he should thereby be reckoned among the Creatures, only he therein is 〈◊〉 a metaphor denoted to be first of all, that in 〈◊〉 things he may 〈◊〉 the preeminence, and not 〈…〉 accounted of the same kind with others, for 〈…〉 not first created but first born: Ye● 〈◊〉 the first born as to be the only begotten; and he may also be called a Creature according to the Flesh, and as he is a man, but not according to the Spirit: The reason given why Christ is so called, 'tis this, for by him were all things created, which shows plainly that Christ is not a Creature, but the Author of all Creatures, so that he is their Father rather than their Brother, and he by whom all things are created must needs be in time and dignity before all, and he is called the image of the invisible God, not for publishing and preaching the Gospel for that the Apostles had common with him, but because the Son is so like the Father, that he who seethe the Son seethe the Father, and he is the image of the Father, not as he is the Son of Man, but as he is the Son of God. Neither must this be restrained to Angels and Men, because those two kinds do not contain every Creature, and certainly if it be granted that every rational Creature was made by him, we may easily conclude of all the rest, the more because 'tis universally expressed of every Creature: The sixteenth verse doth explain and much enlarge upon the foregoing, and doth first universally and absolutely affirm the whole work of Creation to be the work of Christ, then makes a distribution, as things in Heaven and in Earth, of what nature, rank and degree soever, and this mention of things in Heaven and of things in Earth here expressed, showeth how the Apostles intention is to speak of the first Creation and not of the second; this last or renovation doth not comprehend all things that are in Earth, but the first doth. Wherefore this last is not spoken of in this place, and though elsewhere the word Creation be understood of the new and Spiritual Creation, 
Ephes. 3.9.  it doth not follow it must be so here; for there it is spoken of the revelation and predication of the Gospel, which cannot be proved to be here the scope of the place where is to be seen not only the word to Create or Creation, but also the things created, are expressed as clearly as may be. Furthermore, it cannot be denied, but by invisible things, as Thrones, Dominions, etc. are meant Angels which were created with or before the World, that is very long before Christ his appearing in the Flesh; but I find not where in Scripture, that since the first Creation they were renewed or created again: The good Angels needed it not, for they were never defiled, the bad ones are not, for they continue as bad and wicked as ever; so 'tis very strange that amongst the Creatures renewed by Christ, they reckon the Devils themsenlves, and who besides them could ever have thought that in Scripture the bare word Creature, signifies a new Creature; to Create, to Create a New? This is not at all the stile of the word of God, wherein we believe the Apostles spoke with a design to be understood, and not to clog their Writings with Ambiguities, to cause doubts and difficulties: for on the contrary, here he makes things as intelligible as can be to remove scruples, as when he saith, all things that are in Heaven were by him Created, for fear there should be some doubt about it, he explains it with the words visible and invisible, for in the Heavens are visible things, as Sun, Moon, Stars, and also invisible as Angels.  
Now there is no doubt but the Apostle in that commendation he gives of Christ, aimeth chief to show his Dignity and Excellency, as being first born of every Creature; but the Socinians go about robbing him of that Prerogative, for 'tis spoken generally of every Creature without exception; but say they, not so, only of every new Creature; yet the Lord doth excel above every Creature good or bad, high or low, and is Lord over all. If they say Christ is the first born of every Creature, only as it is a new Creature; than it must be said the Apostle is to blame for omitting the word new, though so necessary to understand his meaning, which is no better than as much as in them lies, to ridicule the Apostles word, how he is the first born of every Creature, in as much as every Creature is subject to his Dominion, for every thing is subjected to him thus far, as God hath subjected every thing unto him. But seeing they own Christ to be in time before every new creatures, what shall they say of some who before his birth of the Virgin, were new Creatures seeing 'tis he that made them all. If thus under the New Testament, we must conclude it to have been so under the Old, for they could not be such, except they were so made by him. Now as the Apostle gins this verse, so he endeth it, by him were all things created, and all things were created by him; that is to confirm this Truth beyond all ground of doubting of it, in the same verse, he doth twice set it down, and in the same words with a most important addition last of all, that as all things were created by, so for him, not as means and a medium, but as an efficient and final cause, to him, 
Psal. 136.5.  saith the Psalmist, that by wisdom made the Heavens; 'tis not said in, but by wisdom as a Person and efficient Cause; for as such is the Son of God represented under the name of Wisdom, Prov. 8. where the Attributes therein mentioned belong to a person, the work of creating the Heavens is a distinguishing Character of the true God by nature, from false God's Idols, 
Psal. 96.5.  all the Gods of the nations are Idols, but the Lord made the heavens: And Christ is the power of God, 
1. Cor. 1.24.  and the wisdom of God, by whom the world was created. Let this be added to prove this truth, God by his Son made also the Worlds, 
Heb. 1.2.10.  and this Text being joined with the two foregoing doth afford this Conclusion, he by whom God made the world, by whom he made all things, and by whom he made the worlds, certainly was before the world, before all things, and before the worlds; now God by his Son Jesus Christ made the world, all things and the worlds, therefore his Son Jesus Christ was before the world, before all things and before the worlds, and so Eternal: The words of this place are as plain, absolute and extensive as of the others, and because some sophistical distinction of the word world might happen to be invented; therefore to prevent it, he saith worlds in the plural, thereby to cut off the ground of any distinction as of this world, and that world, and it seems to leave no place for the distinction by Socinians of the old and of the new world: the original word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ages, wherein are contained all times and temporal things, wherein the world and all things in it are comprehended. But here as in other places they must bring in their own imaginations, for they will have only the new, not the old world to be understood, though the Apostle speaking absolutely, leaves no ground for such notions, and to cavil, they say, that to Make, and to Create, are different things, contrary to the stile of Scripture, which saith, 
Acts 14.15. Chap. 17.24, 26.  in six days the Lord made Heaven and Earth, which is certainly the same as created, so, God made Heaven and Earth, and the Sea, and all things that are therein: And God that made the world and all things therein. Again, and hath made of one blood all Nations of Men, etc. So he is a great stranger to Scripture, who denies to Make the World and to Create the World not to be the same; so, seeing this shift cannot hold they betake themselves to another, which is, that God made the world by Christ, as a●● instrumental cause; but that sort of men will go about overturning Heaven and Earth, rather than to departed from their damnable opinions, for what can they ground upon this instrumentality of Christ? For the preposition by signifieth no such thing, as it appears out of the following places: 
Gal. 1.1. Eph. 1.1.1 Cor. 1.9. Rom. 11.36. Heb. 2.10.  Paul an Apostle, not of men, nor by men, but by Jesus Christ and God the Father: And Paul an Apostle of Jesus, by the will of God. Also God is faithful by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord. Elsewhere, for of him and through or by him, and to him are all things. Furthermore, for it became him for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, etc. No sign in these or many more places, of the word by signifying any instrumental Cause, God by whom are all things, 
Colos. 1.17.  never made the world by and instrument, but by his word: who not only in Dignity but also in nature and time, is before all things.  
The adversaries cannot upon any rational grounds prove that the Apostle meant the world to come, but we want no good reasons to show how the Creation of the world is to be understood: for first, 'tis neither the idiom of the Jews, nor the stile of Scripture by the world to understand the future, for out of these words of verse 10. And thou Lord in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth, 
Heb. 1.10. out of Psal. 102.25.  and the heavens are the work of thine hands. I see no cause why the Creation of the world, should not be understood rather than the beginning of the Gospel; the ancient earth rather than the new one, and the old Heavens rather than the new: The more because when the Apostle intends to speak of the world to come, he plainly saith it when he speaks of those that have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the world to come. 
Chap. 6.5. Chap. 2.5.  So he doth, when he saith unto the Angels hath he not put in subjection the world to come. So when he hath a mind to say a thing he well knows how to express it. Moreover, if he had said in the present, he males, not in the praeter tense, he might have left some thing more of liberty thereby to understand the future, for speaking in the time passed he shows how he doth speak of those ages which the praeter tense doth fit better than the future. Furthermore, the worlds or ages in the plural is more proper for ancient times than for that which is to come, for this world hath had several ages, and shall continue to have till the last day; but after that, the world to come shall last for ever, and be all Eternity without end: And when Scripture doth by the name world signify the future, not only it doth add a distinction, as whosoever shall for Christ's sake leave all, 
Mark 10.29, 30. Luke 18.30.  shall in the world to come have life everlasting. But also, ever speaketh in the singular number, the reason is because this world hath several ages, and that which is to come shall have but one: Besides, I must say how the Apostle understands the world which God already had made, and not that which he was to make by his Son, that which was made had a being, but that which was to be made had none, so we must conclude he spoke of things that were, and not of that which was not.  
Now that the Lord Jesus, as principal and efficient cause made the world, and so that the word beginning is to be understood of the Creation, it appears out of this, 
Heb. 1.1, 2.  God who at sundry times, and in divers manners spoke in time passed unto the Fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken to us by his Son, which our Saviour represented before, by the parable of the Vineyard and the Husbandmen: 
Ma●●. ●1. 33.  This Son he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom he made the worlds; Angels are called only God's Ministers, but Christ is called the Son, the first begotten, not made, upon which account the Author of the Epistle affirms, the Son rea●l● and truly to be God, and proves it out of Psal. 45.6, 7. Thy throne O God is for ever and ever: And this the Apostle still speaking of the same, proves by his having created the world: v. 10. Thou Lord in the beginning hast laid the sound, dation of the earth: Observe how the word beginning is meant of the Creation of the world, which is attributed to the Son; 'tis added, and the heavens are the works of thine hands, which must necessarily be understood in a literal sense of the Creation of the world, and not of the new Creation of things by the Gospel out of what follows, v. 11. They shall perish, etc. and be changed, etc. This shall be the fate of the natural world, which cannot be said of the work of Regeneration or new Creation, The word was in the beginning, 
1 Joh. 1.1.  which is the same with from the beginning, as expressed by the same Apostle; that is, of the time of the Creation when things began to be made, that is, from Eternity; by these phrases before the world was, and before the Foundation of the world, the first born of every Creature, that is, before any thing was created, 
Col. 1.15, 16.  as appears by the reason given in the next words; For by him were all things created, etc. For he could not be before himself, and had created himself, which is absurd: In the place 'tis explained, he is before all things in time or dignity, because the maker is always in time before the thing which he made.  
This head we shall conclude with the following Text: 
1 Cor. 8.6.  But to us there is but one God the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him: and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him. Here the Apostle upon the occasion of eating things offered unto Idols, saith, that an Idol is nothing in the world, though it be called God, as many things are called Gods and Lords, yet in reality are not so, the names of God and Lord do properly belong only to the true God, whom he here opposeth to things falsely so called: As for us, we own but one God, and one Lord, whom he gives proper attributes unto; the one God is the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him, the one Lord is Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him, for as all things are of him, of whom all things are made, so all things are by him, by whom they are made; so then as all things are by Christ, he must be before all, not only in dignity, but also in time. Out of this Text, we learn first, that as there being but one Lord, even Jesus Christ, doth not exclude God the Father from being Lord, so there being but one God even the 〈◊〉 doth not exclude the Lord Jesus from being God also, and the Apostle not only affirms that it is so, but withal, he showeth how it is, by means of the prepositions of and by here used, all things are of God the Father by the Lord Jesus Christ, all things have the same Principle and Cause, but somewhat in a different manner, all things are of the Father but by the Son, which in the work of making all things, showeth a sort of distribution thereof in the way of it, and such a kind of subordination, if I may so call it, between the two persons, as if neither of them was precisely the adequate cause of all things, but the person of one God, by the person of one Lord, and the person of one Lord, of the person of one God, for if all the same things were not of one God by one Lord, but some of one God, others of one Lord, than the strength of the words of and by, with the Order and Coherence between one Lord and one God, would fall, and so the assertion of one God, would be false, because there would be two equally first and immediate principles of all things, than which nothing can be more contrary to Scripture and reason, for the one God is he who is the Supreme Cause, not of somethings only, but of all, and the one Lord is he by whom not only some, but all things were; and what all these things are, it doth appear out of all the Texts, I upon this point have made use of, being compared together, which can make the thing plain enough to any  and unprejudiced man: If here Christ be excluded from being God, by the same reason shall the Father be excluded from being Lord.  
But it seems nothing in the world can stop the boundless impiety of men, who with their restrictions will, as far as they can, confine the Spirit of God within their own Sense: for upon the Text they say by all things we are to understand only those which belong to the Church of Christ and to Christianity as such, which is a mere invention of Socinus' Brain, and not of Christ or of his Apostles: However rather than to be mute, something he will say; that the word all can have no relation to those things that were before him, that is, before he was born of the Virgin, wherein he goes upon his wrong principle, as if he was not at all before he was born of Mary, for though we own that according to the flesh, Christ was not properly before he was born of her, yet according to the Spirit he was, as accordingly hath been sufficiently demonstrated; and as to that Spiritual and Divine Being of his, all things were made by him, and he was Lord over all: But this Dominion of Christ he is endeavouring to reduce, not only within the time of our Saviour's being born of the Virgin, but also within that of his Resurrection: But therein he makes a confusion between Christ's purchased and his natural Dominions, which ought well to be distinguished, the first was indeed after his death and resurrection grounded upon our redemption, as formerly the special Right and Dominion of God over the people of Israel, was entailed upon his having delivered them out of the Egyptian bondage, but though he had not delivered them, yet still he had been their Lord upon another and more ancient account; thus before Christ redeemed us by his death, he had a natural Dominion over all things, he was our Lord because we were the work of his hands, before he was our Lord by a special purchase, for before he humbled himself, and took upon him the form of a Servant, he was in the form of God, Son of, and equal with God, 'tis said indeed, 
Rom. 14.9.  that Christ both died and risen that he might be Lord both of the dead and living, because there the question is about his acquired Dominion; but in this place both are spoken of, for Christ is opposed unto Idols, upon the account of both his Dominions, of which both, the ground is contained in the words, by whom are all things, and all things are said to be by him, not because he is Lord, but rather he is Lord because all things are by him: He is Lord of all. 
Acts 10.36.   
The Apostle saith absolutely, and without restriction, of whom and by whom are all things, yet they would have it reduced only to Christians as such, Because 'tis said to us, but 'tis not said of whom or by whom we have all things, or all things are ours, but barely and generally of whom and by whom are all things, without any particular relation to Christians, but this would follow that if according to the several relations we stand in, we should have some things of one and others of another, namely such as creatures, such as men, and such as Christians, we would divide the supreme cause, so that there should not be only one but many, thus not only one God and one Lord, but many, quite contrary to what the Apostle saith: Besides that if such a restriction be put upon the words, one Lord by whom are all things, the same must be laid upon the former, one God of whom are all things whereby they shall presume upon the Father as well as upon the Son, for there is the same reason for both, so that both aught either generally or particularly to be taken, which how presumptuous an attempt this is, let any impartial man judge.  
Not only the work of Creation, but also that of divine Providence that is preservation and governing of the world, is attributed unto Christ; 
Colos. 1. 1●.  this is of two kinds, Ordinary, and Miraculous: the first spoken of, when 'tis said and by him all things consist, for in the foregoing verse, having said, by him were all things created, in this he addeth, by him all things consist, for he not only created, but also preserveth all things, and as 'tis said else where, all things are upheld by the word of his power, 
Heb 1.3.  in which place, as in the foregoing is showed how he who made the world doth also preserve the same, the two go together, and be inseparable, and in the preservation of this world and works of Nature by him created, he together with the Father, 
John. 5.17.  doth work hitherto: Thus spiritual creatures are preserved in their Individuum, and corporeal in their Species, he gives Food, raiment, and other necessaries unto all, disposes of Times and Seasons, causes his Sun to shine, sends rain, etc. without which concourse of his, the world would soon come to an end, and this is a kind of a second Creation. The exercising of a miraculous Providence, is a kind of work which manifests Christ to be the true Essential God, for such things are beyond and above the power of nature, and a property of the true Lord God of Israel, who only doth wondrous things, and this our Saviour did show upon some extraordinary occasions in matters of nature, 
Psal. 72.18.  and also of grace: As to the first, when he changed water into wine, rebuked the wind and the Sea, gave the blind sight, made the lame to walk, 
Matth. 9.33. John. 9 ●2.  curing diseases, healing distempers, virtue daily issuing out of him, which made people wonder and admire, because such things, had never been so seen in Israel, nor since the world began, and to say that a great Prophet is risen up among us, and that God hath visited his people and the Gospels are filled up with such miracles which he did in all kinds, and of what nature soever were their infirmities and diseases he cured them all, and as Peter said, was approved of God by miracles, 
Acts. 2.22.  wonders and signs: And in this virtue and power of his own, he gave others power to do the like: But they whom he gave that power to, exercised it not in their or any others but in his name, 
Matth. 10, 1. Mark. 16.17, 18. Luke. 10.9.  to show how the power of working miracles was only in and from him: in my name they shall cast out devils, speak with new tongues, etc. And work miracles by my power and authority.  
Thus the seventy disciples being again returned with joy, said, 
Luke 10.17.  Lord even the devils are subject unto us through thy name: Thus Peter having healed the lame man, said to the people which ran greatly wondering, why look ye so earnestly on us, as though by our own power or holiness, 
Acts. 3.12.16.  we had made this man to walk, men being so apt to look upon and fix on second causes and instruments, he first goes about to remove those thoughts out of their heads, he directs them to the cause of the miracle, Christ's name through faith in his name hath made this man strong, which in the next Chapter before the high Priest and Council, they solemnly declared, 
Chap. 4, 10.  be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified; by him doth this man stand here before you whole: And in another place, he said, to a certain man, Aeneas, 
Chap. 9.34.  Jesus Christ maketh thee whole: Hereby I show Christ to have been the spring of miracles, which were done in his name, as before he wrought them himself in his own name, whereby his divinity is evidenced: The disciples could not at all times work miracles but Christ could, Lord, said the man, if thou wilt thou canst mare me clean, 
Matth. 8, 2. John 5.21.  and he quickeneth whom he will; so he answereth the man, I will, be thou clean and immediately he was cleansed: One thing more must be observed upon this, how Christ did miracles for his own glory, which is not lawful to say of any man, be●●ase it belongeth to God alone, 
Prov. 16.4.  to make all things for himself: Thus of the Lord Jesus after his first miracle 'tis said, 
John. 2.11.  This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory: Thus he said himself, that the sickness of Lazarus was yeor the glory of God, 
John. 11.4. Chap. 9.3.  that the son of God might be glorified thereby. And so was the man's being born blind, that the works of God should be made manifest in him; that is, that in giving him his sight, he might therein be glorified.  
As amongst miracles, raising one from the dead, is the most conspicuous, so therein at several times the Lord Jesus highly manifested his own divine power, but in none so much as when he raised himself, for when he by himself had purged our sins, 
Heb. 1.3. John. 10.18.  he not only rose again from the dead, but also, sat down on the right hand of the majesty on high. No man, said he, taketh away my life from me: but I lay it down of myself: I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. I see so much of Majesty in those words, and they are spoken with so much assurance, that therein I perceive the character of his divine Power and Nature, I join them together, for I take them to be inseparable, here is the triumph of the Son of God, 
Colos. 2.14, 15.  when not only, he hath blotted out the hand writing of ordinances, that was against us, and nailed it to his Cross, but also having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in it, for all his evemies and ours received their mortal wound, and laid dead under his Cross, the works of the devil, 
1 John 3.8. Hos. 13.14. 1 Cor. 15.54, 55, 56, etc.  that is sin he destroyed, and invisibly Satan was crucified with him, O death he was thy plagues, O grave he was thy destruction, he conquered them all, and thereby death which is the last enemy, is by his resurrection, swallowed up in victory. After his resurrection, Peter asserted it to be impossible, it should have been otherwise, or that he should be holden of death: Whence Paul exalteth the exceeding greatness of the mighty power of God, 
Acts. 2.14. Ephes. 1.19, 20. Rom. 1.4:  which was wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, which same efficacy, is elsewhere attributed to the spirit of holiness, that is, to the divinity in the Son distinguished from his humanity, all which agreeth with what our Saviour had foretold of the temple of his body, 
John. 2.19.21.  destroy this Temple, and in three days I will raise it up again, understood of the temple of his body, he risen not to be, but because he was God; thus much as to matters of Nature.  
But Christ doth also works of Grace, all understood under the name of redemption, which hath two parts, impetration or purchase and application, through his active and passive obedience he hath fulfiled the Law for us, and redeemed us from the Wrath of God, and the Curse of the Law, having fully satisfied his Justice, and reconciled us unto him, he hath obtained the pardon of our sins, by a sufficient atonement he made for the same, through his Death and sufferings. He by the mouth of the Prophet, shows what he is at the coming out of his Grave, Victorious, as coming from Bozrah in his glorious and red apparel, 
Isa. 63.1, 3.  I that speak in righteousness, mighty to save, I have trodden the wine press alone, and of the people there was none with me: No Angel or any other Creature was joined with him in that work, so that with his own arm he hath gotten himself the Victory: As to the applieation of that purchased redemption, it cometh from him in every part thereof, as Vocation, Adoption, Justification, Sanctification, which contain spiritual life, and every other grace, and at last Glorification, which in Scripture are all attributed to the Lord Jesus: all but the last are wrought in us by the ministry of the word, which ministry himself instituted, 
Ephes 4.8, 11.  by sending Ministers he doth continue it, and with his blessing doth promote, and according to his promise will do so to the end of the world: Resurrection from death is followed with eternal life, 
John. 6.54. 1 John. 5.20.  both attributed to Christ, who is called the true God and eternal life; for not only he give life, but also he is life, nay, eternal life; for whosoever hath him, is sure of eternal life.  
As to the great work of our effectual Calling and Conversion, that we may answer the call, he first openeth our understanding, 
Luke. 24.45. Acts. 16.14.  as he opened the understanding of his disciples, that they might understand the Scriptures: After he openeth our hearts, as he did the heart of Lydia, that she attended unto the things which are spoken by his Servants; he also bestoweth all other means of grace upon us, 
Acts. 5.31. Chap. 11.18. 2 Cor. 7.10. Heb. 12.2.  as repentance, for he is a Prince and Saviour, to give repentance to Israel, such as is called repentance unto life, and unto salvation, without which we cannot be saved: Faith also is his gift so entirely, that he is called the Author and finisher of our Faith; from him comes the beginning, progress and perfecting of it, this made his disciples ask him, Lord increase our faith; 
Luke 17.5. John. 1.16.  what Love, Charity, Meekness, Humility, Temperance, Sobriety, Goodness, Joy, Peace, etc. are in us? Of his fullness have we received it all. 
1 Cor. 1.30.  Moreover, he is made unto us wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, and redemption: In few words, he is our all in all, 
Psal. 87.7. John 15.26.  and in him are all our springs, he gives the Holy Ghost, ruleth, governeth and preserveth his Church: These few things more I must add, how it is clear out of Scripture, that he is true and eternal God, who is the author of Salvation and eternal Life, for this the Lord, the King of Israel attributes to himself, to be his redeemer, 
●●a. 44.6, Chap. 45.15.17.21. and 43. ●●.  the Saviour of Israel, by whom Israel shall be saved with an everlasting salvation; no God else besides him, a just God and a Saviour, all this undisputably spoken of the true essential God. Now Christ is the King of Israel, 
John 1.49. Matth. 1.21. 1 John 1.7. Heb. 12.24. Chap 9.15, 16. Gal. 3.15.  that saveth his people from their sins, and his blood cleanseth us from all sin; he is the mediator of the new Covenant, of the new Testament, being himself the Testator, which the Apostle denyeth to be a man's Covenant; these several places I quoted, to show how under the Old Testament, the true Eternal God delighted to call himself, the God, the Saviour and the Redeemer of his people, which being one of the works proper to God, and not only being attributed, but in a special and singular manner, being applied to Christ, who is no better known by any name, than that of Saviviour of the world, and in him, 
Luke 1. 4●. Acts 4.12. Res. 1.7.  as in her God and Saviour, the spirit of Mary rejoiced, because there is no salvation in any other; for he is the Lord our God, by whom the Lord doth save us: This I say, to me doth evidence how he who under the New Testament is by his proper name called Saviour, or Jesus, must be if not the same person, at least of the same nature with him who under the Old was pleased at several times to call himself the Saviour and Redeemer of his people.  
But now being upon the divine works of grace, proper to the Lord Jesus, I must not omit one highly considerable, and most singularly proper to God; which is to forgive sins, which our blessed Lord appropriated unto himself, 
Luke 7.48. Mark 2.5.  when he said to the woman, thy sins are forgiven, and to the man sick of the Palse, Son thy sins be forgiven thee; whereat the Jews were so startled and offended, as presently to say, Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only: In that thing they were in the right, to say that none but God can forgive sins, but in the other they were in the wrong, not to believe Christ to be God; if they had, all had been set at rights, and their prejudice removed, wherefore to convince them, how they were in an error, and that he had not taken upon him as a man to pardon sins, but as God, he presently proved his divinity by a miracle, and cured the man; he who of himself could work a miracle, had certainly power on earth to forgive sins: And as he is a Prince and Saviour, so he hath right to give forgiveness of sins, 
Acts 5.31.  certainly he declares himself true essential God, when by his authority he forgives sins, and giveth others power in his name to declare the same, as he did. Now if to what hath been said, we add, that he is the resurrection, and the life, 
John 20.23. John 11.25. Chap. 5.26. v. 21. Chap. 6.39.40. Phil. 3.20.21.  and that he that believeth in him, though he were dead, yet shall he live, seeing he hath life in himself, and quickeneth whom he will, also all the Father hath given him, and every one that believeth in him, he will raise up at the last day, wherefore our Conversation is in Heaven, from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, According to the working whereby he is able to subdue all things unto himself. All these and many more, which for brevity's sake we omit, are sufficient evidence to convince any in whom the God of this world hath hot blinded their minds, that Christ is the eternal Son of God, of the same nature; but to unbelievers he saith, if you will not believe me, at least believe me for the works sake, 
John 5.36.1  for the works I do, bear witness of me, but alas, all men have not faith, for faith is a gift of God.   

CHAP. IX. Worship proper and due to the true God, belongs to Christ.  
NOW Christ appropriateth to himself all these and many more works that belong only to the true God, to the end that all men knowing him to be one with the Father, may honour the Son even as they honour the Father, whereby he demonstrates himself to be God, for divine honour belongs to none else, for thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. We must love, honour and worship one person of the Godhead as well as the other, as we love God in the person of the Father, so we must love God in the person of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, for if any man loves not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be an Athema, 
1 Cor. 16.22.  Maran-atha: He who loveth not the Son loveth not the Father, and he who loves not the Holy Ghost, loveth not the Father nor the Son: Here I bring, in point of worship, the instance of love, because without it no true worship. We ought not to worship God otherwise than he hath declared in his word, he that woshipeth not God the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, doth not worship God as he ought, 'tis not enough to worship God as God essentially, but also he must be in the three persons, for all three are the object of worship, or else our Religion is vain; and we are to look not only to the object, but also to the order of worship, the Father through the Son, 
John 16.  and by the Son to go to the Father, and so by the means of the Holy Ghost we go to both, for we know not what we should pray for as we ought, 
Rom. ●. 26. 1 Cor. 12.3.  but the spirit helpeth our infirmities and maketh intercession for us. Neither can one say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost. And in giving glory to God, 'tis not enough to glorify him, except it be in the three persons, Father, Son and Holy Ghost: And the consideration of this Mystery of one God in three persons, which ought to be our guide in worshipping that eternal and infinite Being, aught to teach us modesty and humility, which is so essential in our serving God, to adore the incomprehensibility of these high things, the Majesty of God, and the Mystery of his Son's being made Flesh, and be made sensible of our weakness, and then endeavour to bring into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ: 
2 Cor. 10.5.  Here I cannot forbear inserting the words of two eminent Doctors of the Primitive Church. 
Ambros. de fid. ad gratian. lib. 1. cap. 5.  Mihi impossibile est, saith one, generationis scire secretum, mens deficit, voxsilet, non mea tantum sed & Angelorum licet scire quod natus fit, non licet discutere quomodo natus sit; illud negare mihi non licet, hoc quaerere metus. 'Tis impossible for me to know the secret of that Generation, my understanding faileth me, my mouth is stopped, 'tis lawful not only for me but also for Angels to know He is born, but 'tis not lawful to inquire how he is born, that I cannot deny, but I am afraid to search into this. The other saith, filium esse a deo patre immortali genitum novi, sed quemadmodum ignoro, spiritum ex co procedere scio, 
Chrisost. hom. de incomprehens. dei natura.  sed quemadmodum nescio; I know the Son to be begotten of the immortal Father, but in what manner I cannot tell, I know the Holy Ghost to proceed from him, but how, I know not. These being just come into my thoughts, though they exactly are not belonging to the present part of our discourse, yet being much to the purpose of the whole, I here have set them down: Indeed in things of that nature men ought to yield an obedience of Faith, and believe unity of Nature and Trinity of Persons, for numero deus impare gaudet, so we must worship one God in three persons.  
Our present purpose is to prove Christ to be true Essential Eternal God, because the same worship due, only to the true Eternal God is rendered unto him, as anon we shall by the grace of God make it appear: But now somethings must be premised, which can contribute towards the better understanding of the point; first Christ's enemies are not agreed in this particular, one Valentinus Gentilis, by us named in the beginning of this Discourse and some others do flatly deny Christ this Divine Worship, because they disown him essentially to be God, and no divine worship is to be rendered to the Creature, which to do is Idolatry; but Socinus said, he is to be worshipped, but with such restrictions as such a worship is all most no better than none at all: They would have him to be worshipped only after his resurrection, and that the resurrection was the standing sign, and true reason why one, whom God raised from the dead should be worshipped; but if this be true, than the Son of the Widow of Sarepta, of the Shunamite, 
1 Kings 17.22. 2 Kings 4.34. etc. Chap. 13.21.  and of the dead man that having touched the bones of Elisha was revived, under the Old Testament, and the Son of the Woman of Naim, and the daughter of Jairus, Lazarus, Dorcas and Eutichus under the New, are to be worshipped according to this rule of theirs. Wherefore some other cause than this must be assigned why Christ must be worshipped? they say he ought to be so as he is Mediator: we own that Christ Mediator is to be worshipped, but that honour belongs to him in relation to his Deity, for when God bringeth in the first born into the world, 
Heb. 1.6.  he saith and let all the Angels of God worship him, he is called first begotten, not in relation to his humanity, for many were Children of God before his Birth, but in respect to his eternal generation: He is to be adored by Angels, though he be not their Mediator; when we adore Christ as Mediator, 'tis not in relation to his Office abstracted from his Deity, but as he is true God: In this sense the Lamb that was slain is worthy to receive (as he did by the Angels, 
Rev. 5.12.  the Beasts and the Elders) honour and glory and blessing, because in his humane nature dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. 
Colos. 2.9.  The Ark was not worshipped, but God in the Ark, as, not the Bush, but God in the Bush, not the ground which Moses stood upon, but God in that place sanctified by his special presence; and so in several other places of the Old Testament: Indeed Christ is to be worshipped, 
Phil. 2.7.  though in the form of a Servant, and made a little lower than the Angels, though not as a Servant, or as lower than the Angels, by which all, God would have him to be adored for no other cause, but for his divine nature, 
V 6.  the form of God, whereby he shall remained equal with the Father in his state of humiliation: As Angels are commanded to worship Christ, so is the Church, under the name of his Spouse, 
Psal. 45.11.  worship thou him.  
As Christ is not God, upon the account of any Office and Dignity, so he is not to be worshipped by reason of any Office and Dignity, here that which is cause for one, is cause for the other, no Office can make any one God, who is not so, so none ought to be adored, but because he is God, that is, of the same nature and substance, and not by communication of divine Power, Dignity or Office, for to give the Creature that which is due only to the Creator, is mere Idolatry, which the Apostle fathereth upon the Galatians, 
Gal. 4.8.  when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no Gods, which they might have excused thus: Though we did so to those that were not such by nature, yet they were Gods by Office, Dignity and Power, but the Apostle, as I said before, blameth them for doing so unto those which by nature are not Gods: Wherefore religious worship is due only to such as is God by nature, seeing then divine worship is due to Christ, as by and by I hope to prove, it implies that Christ is God by his nature; and certainly where the name of God and Son of God is absolutely attributed as it is to Christ, it designs Nature more than Office or Dignity, so that the word Lord so often, and specially in the New Testament attributed unto Christ, signifies in the strict sense, the infinite and independent Dominion of the Lord Jesus over all, his being from the Father is by generation, not in relation to his Essence, but to his person, not absolutely, but relatively as he is Son, and if he be begotten, it necessarily follows to be of the Essence or Nature of the Father, which also shows the Eternity of that Generation: These things I here repeat, because when once that persuasion of Christ's being true Essential God is once settled in our minds, then without any scruple or difficulty, we may worship him, else men are at a stand, under fear of worshipping the Creature instead of the Creator, who is God blessed for ever.  
Before we prove that Christ is and aught to be worshipped with a religious worship, for we speak of no other, we intent to show how the true essential God is alone to be worshipped, and though to that effect several arguments might be drawn out of Scripture, we shall in order thereunto examine only two, one is this, 
Isa. 42.8.  I am the Lord, that is my name, and my glory will I not give to another. This is a solemn declaration of the unchangeable God of Truth, who having given that same glory unto Christ must infallibly conclude Christ to be the same Lord Jehovah with him, 
Chap. 48.11.  here the name and the glory of God do signify the same, for sometimes in Scripture, the Name of God signifies his Nature, when essentially taken, and the Attributes of the person when personally taken, never to be understood barely of a name; when we love, fear and serve God, 'tis not the Letters, or a sound in the Air, but either the nature or some of the persons of the Trinity. But the truth of this here asserted, that the name and glory of God signify the same, 
Isai. 42.8. compared with Exod. 33.18, 19  is elsewhere confirmed positively and absolutely, how his glory, God will not give to another, whosoever he be. But as Socinus doth not use to take the words of God, as, and in the sense he saith them, so here he would make God speak otherwise than he doth, for he never wants his limitations, and therewith he limiteth the holy One the God of Israel: God, saith he, doth not say, I will not give my glory to another, that is, dependent upon, and subordinate unto me, such he makes the Lord Jesus, but to graven Images: But do not Images of God, of Christ, of Angels, Apostles, depend upon and are subordinate to God as to the Matter, the form or making of them, the designs of men and all upon the will of God? Surely they do, for every Creature whatsoever is subordinate to, and depends upon his Maker, and suppose God would choose one Creature, as may be an Angel, or any Man or Woman, and heap all the Treasures of his Glory upon such a one, which he yet declares he will not do, yet according to them he might do't, and not act against his solemn protestation that he will not do't, after this no Creature, as a Creature can differ from God, for they make God say he doth not intent to exclude any other wholly dependant upon, and subordinate to him, as is every Creature whatsoever, thus after this, the Effect shall be the same with the Cause, because it depends upon it, this new signification of the word another, deserved well to have been confirmed by some example: in that other place already mentioned, which confirmeth this, there is no mention of Images or any thing else, barely, I will not give my glory unto another, which leaves no ground to Cavil about Images: Thus they would make the strength of these words of God to vanish away, and be resolved into this, God will not give his Glory to Images, but will give it to Angels and Men, even to Satan and Antichrist the worst of them.  
Then by the word to give, they understand only to permit, so if he giveth Money, Bread, , etc. he only permitteth, if to the word give, leave had been joined, they might have pretended to something, though there had been no sense; thus with their altering the sense of words, they would overthrow the use of languages, and so coin one of their own, which none but themselves shall understand, and by those means teach all that went before, to speak; then here according to their interpretation, contrary to what God declareth, he will permit or give graven Images something of his glory, if they do not believe it themselves, others who did worship those Images will, for they thought God had communicated to them something of his glory, or else would not have looked upon them as worthy to be Religiously worshipped. But to come to the thing, since God in this place denyeth the permission for any one to have his glory, much more doth he deny to give it himself to another, and if from the beginning of the world he hath suffered the Devil to usurp Divine Honour to himself, and several Nations religiously to worship Images, as 'tis known he hath, yet to neither he gave that glory of his, and out of this appeareth the true sense of the Text, that he will, not permit, for he hath permitted, but, not give his glory, which he hath never given: 
V 6, 7,  But to come to the scope of the place, 'tis this, God said it, when he spoke of Christ, as it appears by the two foregoing and following verses, which may be perused, therein he is spoken of in such a way, and to him are such things attributed as belong not to one of a different nature, but to him that is one and the same with him; what is added about graven Images is to condemn Idolatry, and to take away all manner of excuse from Idolaters, not only in those times when all Nations were Idolaters and also that abominable sin was gotten in the Land of Judah, but in relation to other Countries after the coming in the flesh of the Son of God.  
The other Text of Scripture is this, 
Matth. 4.10. Deuter. 6.13.  thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve: Which our Saviour quoted out of another place, hence the Conclusion for the essential divinity of Christ is clear, he that is religiously to be worshipped is the true God, but Christ is religiously to be worshipped, therefore he is the true God, no command can be more positive, absolute and plain than this, to worship the Lord thy God, that is, the God of Israel, for the words were directed to Israel, whom Jews and Socinians do allow to be the only true God, the latter part of the verse doth contain a general Negative, him only shalt thou serve, the word only, gives the exclusion to any thing else or person whatsoever, to say as they do, to worship and serve him as God of himself, will not serve their turn, for they say God the Father is only such, but Christ is a made God, and by Grace, by this God of himself, they mean the first Author of all things, but did they ever hear of a second Author of all things? Is there a first Creator and a Second one? Wherefore this restriction is idle and superfluous, whereby all manner of Idolatry may be excused, for both the Heathens, and the Jewish Idolaters worshipped many things, which they never took to be the first Authors and Causes of all, the Devil himself desired not to be worshipped by Christ as if he had been the Author of all things, for he owned the power and glory of the Kingdom of the world were delivered unto him. 
Luke 4.5, 6.  But if the Lord thy God is only to be worshipped and served, and Christ be not that Lord God, why should he be adored? O! say they, when we adore Christ, we adore in him the Father that hath given him so much glory and power, by the same reason the Jews might have worshipped Moses, who was so full of glory when he came down from the Mountain, that they could not behold his face. If they had a right notion of Christ's person it would be well to say, that he that honoureth the Son, doth also honour the Father; but according to their impious opinion they adore a Man of a quite different nature from the Father, the Father is God by Nature, the Son by Grace; the Father is from Eternity, the Son only since the fullness of time; one Creator, the other Creature; one the Highest, the other Subordinate; one God, the other Man, and both to be adored; such a Son, as doth differ from his Father more than any other Son in the world doth from his: whereby they quite overthrow God's nature, and confound the Creator with the Creature: Let Christ be owned either to be true God, or no God at all, for there is no middle between these two: We know God made Men, but now we find, Men, Socinians, as well as Papists, take upon them to make Gods; and worship them as such, whether Wafer or Metaphorical, 'tis all one, as long as they will not own them to be such by nature. To talk of a Secondary and Subordinate God is a mere contradictio in adjecto, a perfect nonsense; the Jews would not deny him to be what he was, being convinced by his works, when Christ cometh will he do more miracles than these which this man hath done, 〈◊〉 7.31. Whence they concluded, This is of a 〈◊〉 that prophet that should come into the world, John 6.14. Therefore they would come and take him by force to make him a King, v. 15. and at another time, They that were in the ship worshipped him, saying, of a truth thou art the Son of God. Matth. 14.33. Yet for all this, they still retained a prejudice, Shall Christ come out of Galilee: John 7.41. Is not this Jesus the Son of Joseph, whose Father and Mother we know? chap. 6.42. Is not this the Carpenter's Son? is not his Mother called Mary; and his brethren James and Joses, Simon and Judas? Matth. 13.55. Thus Socinians cannot deny him to be God but must have him a made God. Doth this hold any proportion, or is there any reason in the case? To come off with this, the Heresiarch saith, that the commandment of worshipping God alone, doth properly relate to the time under the Old Testament, a wide Door open to let in Idolatry, 
1 John 5.21.  but certainly that precept doth oblige Christians, as much as ever it did the Jews, and I think that of all moral Commandments, none belongeth to the times of the Gospel, more than that of worshipping God alone, and we are as much bound to avoid all Idolatry as ever they were: They say when this precept was given, they mean in the time of Moses, than Christ was not, but when it was made use of by Christ, Christ was, and also endued with Divine Power and Authority, though they say the contrary, for before he was tempted in the Wilderness, he had been haptized, and proclaimed from Heaven the Son of God, the Spirit had descended upon him, and when he returned from Jordan he was full of the Holy Ghost. 
Luke 4.1.  He was God worthy of divine worship, when he made use of that Text against the Tempter. Two frivolous things more they say; first, the word only, is not joined to worship, but to serve, as if a religious worship was not meant by this last, as well as by the first; though it had been joined with the former, they had never wanted a pretence to Cavil; but if in the thing there be any difference, 
Acts 10.25, 26.  I think 'tis more binding with to serve than to worship, for to serve may seem of a larger extent than to worship. The other Cavil is, we are forbidden to worship others, that is, say they, after our own Fancy and Pleasure; but Christ you are commanded to worship, but here is no ground for such an interpretation, for 'tis simply said to worship and serve only the Lord thy God, we own that here not only the thing, but also the manner of it was forbidden, but here is nothing to show by what authority and name we are to worship others, only the thing, to do't, is forbidden.  
To the proofs I have given to show how God alone is to be worshipped, I now shall by the grace of God join some examples out of the New Testament, to confirm it with a demonstration of the practice: The first is that of Peter, 
Act. 10.25, 26.  whom Cornelius the Centurion met, and fell down at his feet and worshipped him, but he, though he had excellent gifts, and great authority by his office, yet he refused it, and this he gave for a reason, I myself also am a man, that is, such a thing is not to be offered any man, yet we must not believe Cornelius to have been so besotted as to have taken him for God, but he thought he might do so to such an extraordinary man: 
Chap. 14.13, 14, 1●.  Paul and Barnabas seeing how the people of Lystra would have done Sacrifice, they presently rend their , running and crying, Sirs, why do you do these things? Their reason was, we are also men; 
Rev. 19.10.  hence we conclude how no man ought to be worshipped. Now we shall speak of Angels John, a person of no mean gifts, fell at the Angel's feet, who was a Minister of God and of Christ, to worship him, surely he took him not to be God, for he could not but know the contrary, but may be, he thought he might pay him that respect, but whatsoever he thought, he did amiss, therefore the Angel highly rejected it, when he said, see thou do it not, 
Chap. 2●. 9.  and gave his reason for't, for I am thy fellow servant, and of thy brethren, that have the testimony of Jesus, and not satisfied with this, directed him to the object of worship and adoration, worship God; and this not only once but twice, for it happened a second time.  
We have demonstrated how the true God is alone to be worshipped, now we must show how Christ is religiously to be worshipped, and consequently he is the true God; which last expressions, now when I remember, put me in mind of that excellent place, wherein he is called the true God, which, but in few words, I will take notice of, 
1 John 5.20.  we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ: this is the true God and oternal Life: The Relative this, is refered to Jesus Christ, not only as the nearest, but also as the Subject Orationis, spoken of, besides that with St. John, 'tis usual by Eternal Life to signify the Lord Jesus, and here the true God and Eternal Life are spoken of one and the same Subject: Now when the Lord is here called true God, it cannot be said metaphorically, or improperly, but as to his nature, the reason it this, none is ever called, the true God, specially with the Article, but in relation to his Essence.  
Now to prove that the religious worship belonging to the only true God, is appropriated to christ, we have several places out of Scripture, some do it in general, and others in the particulars, whereof there are several branclies: Of the first Order is this, let all the Angels of God worship him, quoted out of the Psalm: Upon these two unshaken pillars, 
Heb. 1.6. Psal. 37.7.  I mean, the testimonies of a Prophet and of an Apostle, stand these two great Truths, First, how the person whom the Angels here called God's for so the Apostle doth explain the word, are commanded to worship, is the true Essential God: or, to make use of the name which the Adversaries do commonly bring in, namely the God of Israel; Secondly, that the person to be worshipped by Angels, is the Lord Jesus Christ; the first assertion is the Prophet's, the second is the Apostles, out of which both we may surely conclude how the Lord Jesus is the true Essential God of Israel: To examine well this, we shall first begin with the words of the Original, that is, the Psalm, whence they are drawn, and afterwards the Application made of them in the Gospel.  
To remove the weight of this argument which lies so heavy upon them, and finding they cannot deny the Application to belong to Christ, the Adversaries would not have the words to be understood of the true God of Israel; but certainly they ought to be related to him that is named in the next verse but one before, namely the Lord of the whole earth, for indeed, in this Psalm wherein is described the Majesty of God's Kingdom, no other person is spoken of, but that God whose Kingdom it is. Now that the God of the whole Earth is Jehovah, the God of Israel, it appears out of Scripture wherein the attribute of Lord of the whole Earth is given to the true God by nature; amongst others take these few, 
Josh 3.11. Zechar. 14, and 6, 5.  Behold the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord of all the earth, passeth over before you into Jordan: And these are the two anointed ones that stand by the Lord of the whole earth: Again, these are the four spirits of the Heavens, which go forth from standing before the Lord of all the earth. 
Micah. 4.12.  The very same expression is found in another Prophet. I will consecrate their gain unto the Lord, and their substance unto the Lord of the whole earth. I shall add that considerable place where the Prophet for the comfort of the Gentiles prophesied of what a large extent their Church should be, and speaks of their deliverance, heaping several glorious titles upon him that was to be the Author thereof, which no doubt had a relation to the Messiah, who was to effect it. Among other names therein given, that of God of the whole earth is one, 
Isa. 3●. ●.  For thy maker is thine husband, the Lord of hosts is his name, and thy redeemer the holy one of Israel, the God of the whole ●arth shall he be casted, all these glorious names belong to one and the same: I need not to show that the Prophecies about the deliverance, and calling of the Gentiles do relate to Christ, 
Psal. 2.8.  who was to have the heathen for his inheritance, and the utmost parts of the earth for his possession. And this Title of Lord of the whole earth, is by the Psalmist in another place rendered by a great King over all the earth, 
Psal. 47.2.7.  and the King of all the earth, all to signify though same thing and person, the Kingdom of Christ the Messiah. I think this is enough to prove how the God of Israel and the Lord of the whole Earth is the same; as Israel made a part of the Earth, so he that was God of the whole Earth, must need be the God of Israel; so 'tis the same in this Text, for no where in Scripture that title is given to any but the true God: Yet they are so obstinate in their opinions, that Socinus himself, who though he will not have Christ to be the King of Israel, yet being forced by the strength of this reason, he seems content that the Lord Jesus should be here called the Lord of the whole Earth, but if the argument should lie upon this, he would want no Cavils to elude the force of it; for that wretch is so damnably bend against the glory and honour of our Saviour, that in whatsoever he writes about him, 
Acts 8.23.  there appears a gall of bitterness, as well as the bond of iniquity, with a slight and contempt of his person, the Man, that Man, this Man, Man in every case, and all this to lose no occasion of robbing him of his Divinity; 
2 Kings 49.27. and Isai. 3.28.  this calls to my mind God's words, against Sennacherib, another great Blasphemer, which by the Lord, might have been applied to Socinus: I know thy abode, and thy going out and thy coming in, and thy rage against me. And let all his Sectators remember what the Apostle saith, 
Jud. 14.15.  behold the Lord cometh to execute judgement upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them, of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him, that is Christ, when he cometh to judge the world.  
Another thing here to be taken notice of, is this, that in verse 5. where the Lord Jehovah is called the Lord of the whole Earth, it must be spoken of one and the same person, for if they had been two different, the copulative particle and, had not been omitted after the words, 
Psal. 37.5.  the hills melted like wax at the presence of the Lord, there should have been, and, at the presence of the Lord of the whole Earth, the first words of the verse, do sufficiently denote the Lord of the whole Earth, to be the God of Israel, Jehovah named just before, at whose presence only, and of none else, the hills melted like wax, hereunto answereth that place; 
psal. 11.7.  tremble thou earth at the presence of the Lord, at the presence of the God of Jacob, whereby the interpretation of this now in hand is confirmed, and the God of Jacob is put instead of the Lord of the whole earth, in both which places, the repetition of the word, Presence, is very Emphatical, which joined with what I observed before, and with the words, the scope and the thing itself do all together fully show, here is but one person spoken of, which is confirmed more and more, because in what follows, the Prophet speaks but of one as in the singular number, 
vers. 6.7, 8.  as thus the Heavens declare his righteousness, and the people see his glory, and worship him all ye Gods: Also because of thy judgements, whereby it appears 'tis spoken of one and not of two; but rather than to yield, they will sooner give Christ whom otherwise they would rob of any thing he hath but his humane nature, which they cannot do, because they must have an Historical Faith, or else may be they would, and reduce him to nothing. I say, they choose rather to give Christ that title and exclude God Jehovah from being the Lord of the whole earth, than to own Christ to be Jehovah, so what they do, is not out of kindness, they only give him that which they think the least, to rob him of what they account to be the chief, though indeed it be the same. Again, the words of verse 7. do farther confirm this, Confounded be all they that serve graven images, that boast themselves of Idols, therefore worship him all ye Gods. For who is opposed to graven Images and Idols, but he that is by nature the true God? And who is religiously to be worshipped, but the true God Jehovah? And who but he who is the God of Gods, is to be adored by all Gods? 
vers. 9  This is confirmed out of verse 9 Thou Lord art high above all the earth: thou art exalted far above all Gods. The first part contained a proper attribute of the true God, namely, the highest or most high God, for saith, David, 
Psal. 33.18.  that men may know that thou whose name alone is Jehovah, art the most high over all the earth. Is not this the same as to be Lord over all the earth? So that both to be Jehovah and Lord over all the earth are attributed only to one, and if he be the only most high upon the earth, none but he, is Lord over all the earth. The latter part of the verse doth afford a reason and a very good one, why all Gods and Angels ought to worship him, because he is for exalted above all Gods: No less than six times he is in this Psalm called Jehovah, which cannot well be denied to be the same with God of Israel.  
One thing more I shall say as to this Psalm, which with the foregoing and following, contain an exhortation to all Creatures, with and without life, to sing and rejoice before the Lord, and why? for he cometh, he cometh to judge the earth, he shall judge the world with righteousness, and the people with his truth: which none that hath any sense can deny to be a Prophecy of Christ's coming to judge the world, which he speaks of himself: When the Son of man, shall come in his glory, 
Matth. 25.31.  and all the holy Angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory. Then indeed, in that divine and glorious State, being attended and worshipped by all millions of Angels, he shall reign, fill with joy the hearts of his people, and perform the other things contained in this Psalm. He that is to do all this, if we believe the Psalmist, is the Lord Jehovah, and the Lord Jesus Christ, if we must give faith to the Apostle.  
Now we must draw nearer to the words of the Apostle, who is to be believed as well as the Prophet, preferably to Socinians, who being not able to deny it, own that Angels ought to worship Christ: One would think they at last would yield to the Truth, and give glory to God; 
Phil. 2.7, 8, etc.  but no such thing, for they say, they may worship him as a man, and not upon the consideration of any divinity in him, only upon the account of his Humiliation and Obedience unto Death, even the Death of the Cross, upon which account he was highly exalted. But pray, whence doth arise the value and merit of that Humiliation and Obedience, but from the divinity of the person, which underwent it: If he had been a mere man, it had been no very great matter, no more than what many more could have done: A King's only Son, sacrifices himself for the safety of a whole Kingdom, some among the ordinary people might have done the like, but that which raiseth the merit of the thing, is, not his being a man, for any man else therein is equal with him, but 'tis the Royal Blood running in the Veins of the young Prince, which doth make the act so meritorious, and so considerable; so if I may continue a lame comparison, so defectuous, to represent what I have a mind, the Blood which our Saviour shed upon the Cross doth not receive its unexpressible value for coming out of the Veins of a Man, but because it is the blood of God, wherewith he hath purchased his Church. 
Acts 20.28.  Neither was the Obedience yielded by our Saviour, belonging only to his Humane Nature, which may be due and necessary from one in nature and quality inferior to another, but it was also an undue and merely voluntary obedience, which may be rendered by an Equal, and some times by a Superior, as we read when Joshua said, 
Josn. 10.12, 13.  Sun stand thou still upon Gibeon, and thou Moon in the valley of Ajalon, so the Sun stood; he was obeyed, but there is in it more than this, the Sun of himself could not stand nor alter or stop his Course; a Superior power to do't was required; and indeed we find that in the beginning of the verse, 'tis said, then spook Joshua unto the Lord in the day when, etc. Sun, stand thou still; so, let it be spoken with that awful reverence and to an infinite Majesty, in some kind we may see how in this case the Superior was pleased to obey the Inferior; so we may say, a sort of obedience may belong to Divine Nature, as when God commanded the World should be created, and it was performed by his Son; of this nature is Christ's obedience, as spoken of by the Apostle concerning Christ, 
Phil. 2.6, 7, 8.  who being in the form of God thought it not robbery to be equal with God, he humbled himself. This was a voluntary obedience, for he was not humbled, but humbled himself, he was not made, but made himself of no reputation, thus the obedience is valued according to the dignity of the person which obeyeth: To be in the form of God is to be God, for, forma dat esse rei, the form is the nature of the thing, and makes it to be what it is.  
But what this man granted before, he is now willing to take away, when he would have this worship not to be terminated in Christ, but from him to pass unto God, so this is but a relative worship. Thus Papists say, they worship images; but they are mistaken, for though God hath exalted him, it doth not follow that Adoration should be only Transitory and not fixed; So God hath exalted the Kings of the Earth, but the Civil Worship or respect rendered unto the King is rendered unto a Man, but not in the capacity of a Man, but is terminated in him as he is a King, so when Christ Man is adored, he is not so under the notion of Man, but as he is God of the same nature with the Father, and that he is in the Father and the Father in him; the Father may well be worshipped in him and he in the Father, but making them, as they do, to be of different natures, I see no cause why they may not be worshipped asunder one from another, which yet doth but rend and divide the object of our worship, with this new, as they call it, way of worship to adore God in a Man. But they must say what they understand by him, for both the Prophet and the Apostle make use of the word, Is it one or a different person named by them? if the same, than Christ is the one God; if not the same, than the Apostle hath not well explained the Prophet: If in the Psalm, Christ be not spoken of, but only the God of Israel, of a nature altogether different; then in the Epistle the words are made use of to no purpose, for therein the design is to prove how Christ must be worshipped by all Angels: Now he doth not answer his purpose, when to prove one who is not the God Israel ought to be adored, he brings a Text which commands the Angels to adore him only who is the God of Israel, a great disparagement indeed, not only to the Author of the Epistle, but to the Spirit of God which directed him; he saith, in that worship exhibited unto Christ, the Lord Jesus represents the person of God the Father, how? as an Actor upon the Stage doth represent a King? After this rate Christ with all the worship given him, would be (without blasphemy let it be spoken) but a Stage God. If to reign doth signify the Kingdom of Christ, why shall not also the name Jehovah who reigneth, belong to his person? If he hath the thing, why should he not have the name also, Christ's Kingdom is therein described, Jehovah is the King, why should not Christ be Jehovah? which if he be, it must be properly, for Christ nor no one else was ever figuratively called Jehovah, and the Kingdom of Christ under the name of God is described; then if Christ be not God Jehovah, then 'tis Jehovah that indeed doth represent Christ, so he must be the Type of Christ, thus they unavoidably run into absurdities; but in very deed Christ doth not act the part of the Father, but his own: He doth act the part of three persons upon the account of his three several offices, of a Prophet, of a Priest, and of a King, he therein exerciseth his own office and not that of the Father, he doth what belongeth to him and not to others, 
Joh. 17.10.  and as all things the Father hath, are his; so the Kingdom, Throne, Sceptre, Power, Majesty, Ministry and Subjects are all his; if he received the Kingdom from the Father, he received it as only begotten Son and Heir of all things, not as of another's but as his own, wherefore he doth not reign as a Servant or a Minister of the Farther, so then, when he reigneth, he doth not represent the Father's person but his own, not as his Vicar or Lieutenant, but as God equal with him. The first part of the verse, 
Matth. 1.20. Luke 2.9, 13. Matth. 28.2, 5.  and again when he bringeth in the first begotten into the world, showeth how at his first coming into the world he was worshipped and served by Angels for his Conception, Birth and Resurrection were published by Angels, and then it demonstrates there are two persons, one that bringeth, the other that is brought in; the one is the Father, the other the Son; the first commanding the last to be adored, for he saith not worship me, but him: There is an Emphasis in the word first begotten, simply spoken, to be understood of every Creature; 
Col. 1.15.  for 'tis very just he should be worshipped by Angels as his Creatures; and indeed in Scripture I cannot find any truth more clearly and fully proved than this is, he was worshipped not only by Angels but also by Devils, 
Mark 5.6, 7.  the Legion in the Body of the man possessed.  
But as we proved the Lord Jesus ought to be worshipped by Angels, so we now must show he ought to be by men; and the place is this, That all men should honour the Son even as they honour the Father, he that honoureth not the Son, 
John 5.23.  honoureth not the Father that sent him. To understand the place well, we must go up higher, and take notice how from verse 17. to 23. our Saviour speaks of his equality with the Father (as well understood by the Jews) in his Nature and Power, with making a parallel between the Father and himself, the more because he useth not a pronoun relative, but possessive, not the Father, but my Father; my father worketh hitherto and I work, not the Father that is a Common Father as God is to all, but my Father, in a most special and true manner, who hath communicated his nature unto me: Now that equality with the Father, he on another account doth insist upon, but he doth not in the least go about to show that he made not himself equal with the Father, which certainly he would have done, if it had not been true and only a mistake in them, and thereby he could have calmed their rage: on the contrary he speaks to confirm this equality of his with the Father, upon the account of his divine power, manifested in his works, one whereof upon occasion was the restoring the impotent Man that had the infirmity for 38 years, to the use of his Limbs and perfect Health, which none could deny to have been done by a divine Power: Now none but God can have a power equal with God, for God's power is infinite, but that of any Creature is finite, and so there is no equality between finite and infinite, this equality of Power and Working is here clearly demonstrated, For what things soever the Father doth, these also doth the Son likewise: That is, the Father doth nothing but what the Son doth also; and this he instanceth in the case of raising the dead, which none but a Divine and Infinite Power can Effect, For as the Father raiseth up the dead and quickeneth them, even so the Son quickeneth whom he will: That is, without exception he can do what he will, now 'tis an Attribute of God, 
Psal. 115.3. and 135.6.  to do what it pleaseth him in Heaven, in Earth, and in the Sea. Because the Jews believed not our Saviour to be more than a Man, he in the exercise of his Prophetical Office, went often about, both in his Discourses and Works, to insinuate into them that he was God, and in this place he presses it much upon them, both by what I already said, and by what he addeth in v. 22. The Father judgeth no man: but hath committed all judgement unto the Son, and the end which in so doing, the Father, and he in declaring it, proposed unto themselves, is this, that all men should honour the Son even as they honour the Father, as the Son in Nature and Power is equal with the Father, so he ought equally to be honoured or worshipped as the Father is, and this Divine Honour is so equally due to both, that he which honoureth not the Son, honoureth not the Father, for the Father cannot and will not be honoured, that is, worshipped without him, for honour rendered unto God is the same as religious worship: The Son must be honoured in the same nature, manner and degree as the Father is.  
One would think this to be plain and clear enough beyond all exception, yet they Cavil thus, the word as doth not import an equal honour, but only a likeness, and this they go about to confirm out of two places, the first, is every man that hath this hope in him, 
1 Joh. 3.3. 1 Pet. 1.15.  purifieth himself, even as he is pure, the other is, but as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation: We answer first in the Text of Peter, the word as is not sicut, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but secundum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 'tis a Preposition not an Adverb; The word as doth not always signify a similitude, but some times is a Particle of Causality thus in the Gospel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Joh. 1.14  the glory as of the only begotten, That is, because he is the only begotten of the Father: So in another place, 
2 Cor. 3.18.  We all are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the same spirit of the Lord. Sometimes the word like signifies equality; 
2 Pet. 1.1  thus, the like precious faith, not only of similitude, but of the same nature equally precious.  
In the two objected places, and in our Text, there are indeed duties expressed but different, in that of John here, 'tis in relation to God, in the others as to ourselves, the first doth regard the worship of God, the other holiness in ourselves; in our Text a parity and equality is implied, which is not in the others, the difference of the sense is grounded upon two things; First, of the scope of the spirit of God in those places; Secondly, of the Analogy of Faith: To know the scope of the Text we now are upon, one must go back to verse 18. the cause of the Jews hatred and seeking to kill our Saviour, was because he made himself equal with God, which he to show they had no cause to take exceptions against it, as we said before, proves it by an equality of power, in raising the Dead, and of judging the world. As to this last he goeth further, for he saith the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgement unto him; but what doth all this aim at? The scope is, to the end that all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father, God the Father will have all men to honour his Son, as they honour him, without any difference, because his Son is equal with him, and this affirmative is strengthened with a negative, for he that honoureth not the Son, 
Josn 14.1.  honoureth not the Father, so that to honour one is to honour the other, and one cannot well honour the Father, except he equally honoureth the Son: this is the true sense of the place. We ought to honour the Son in the same sense and manner as we must believe in him, that is, as much and as well as we are to believe in the Father, that is, to put our whole trust and confidence in the Son as in the Father, so all the honour both in quantity and quality, which we render to the Father must be given to the Son.  
Now as to the Analogy of Faith, that is, that this sense doth not contradict, but well agree with other Scriptures, it appears out of this: the Great Commandment and Duty of Man, is, as our Saviour saith, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God, 
Matth. 22.37. Mark 10.27.  with all thy heart, and with all thy Soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: None but the true God the God of Israel is so to be loved, obeyed and honoured: And is not our Blessed Saviour thus to be beloved and honoured? Love is the true Ground of honour: We ought to love Christ before all things that are near and dear unto us: 
Matth. 10.37, 38, 39  He that loveth father or mother more than me, is not worthy of me, and he that loveth son or daughter more than me● is not worthy of me, he that findeth his life shall lose it, and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it. 
Luke 14.26.  Nay, If any man come to me and hate not his father and mother, and wife and children, and brethren yea and his own life, he cannot be my disciple: Is not this the manner of love which God requireth of us, and doth not this lay upon us a duty to love Christ, with all our heart, with all our soul, with all our mind, and with all our strength, thus this honour is proper for, and ought equally to be rendered to the Father and to the Son, for all men ought to honour the Son as they honour the Father: I hope the sense we give the Text is sufficiently proved, how all men without distinction or exceptionare bound to honour the Son as they honour the Father, and the manner is by our Saviour prescribed, in spirit and truth. 
Joh. 4.24.   
Now I must show how the Texts they bring against us cannot admit of the sense which ours doth, because 'tis contrary to the Scope of the Apostles and to the Analogy of Faith: First, to the scope, for the end of both Apostles, 
1 Thes. 4.7. Luk. 1.74, 75. Psal. 93.5. Heb. 11.6. Heb. 12.14.  is to exhort Christians to study and labour after Purity and Holiness, which they are called unto: All that are adopted Children ought to walk in holiness, because holiness becomes the house of God, and as without faith 'tis impossible to please God, so without holiness no man shall see the Lord. This great and necessary duty, I say, the two Apostles in these Texts, do exhort men to strive and labour after, not as to attain to such a perfection of holiness as is in God, which is impossible for any Man; for all that we can desire, is that we may be partakers of his holiness, 
Heb. 12.10. Mat. 5.48.  and receive some degrees of it. In the same sense is to be understood that other place, Be ye therefore perfect, as your father which is in heaven is perfect; a duty we ought to study after, because as much as we can we must be conformable unto God.  
Secondly, Such an interpretation would destroy the Analogy of Faith, as contrary to the truth set down in other places of Scripture: For though holiness be a communicable Attribute of God, yet there cannot be so much as thought to be an equality between Purity and Holiness in God, and those small portions he is graciously pleased to impart unto us. Holiness is Essentially, and Originatively in God; nay, Holiness is God infinitely and most simply holy, and we are naturally unclean, transgressors from the Womb, conceived in Sin, brought forth in Iniquity, wallowing in our own Blood, till God be pleased to wash and cleanse us, to derive from himself, and by his holy spirit to work some small degree of holiness in us; God is most holy, 
Luke 6.36.  thrice Holy: In the same sense, we are commanded to be merciful, as our Father also is merciful, that is, as far as God will be pleased to enable us: we ought to follow and imitate that Pattern, but not pretend or hope to arrive to the perfection of it, which, in both Mercy and Holiness, were no less than Blasphemy; wherefore such interpretations God's word doth abhor; and in that place St. John saith not, Every man that hath this hope hath purified in the Praetertense, but in the Present purifieth himself, to show how he doth but aim at it and by degrees: And St. Peter in the 16. v. explains the sense of the foregoing verse, because it is written, saith he, be ye holy, for I am holy, he shows no equality or parity of holiness. The word as, which he used before, he now renders by for, as a motive and a cause, why we ought to be holy? Because God is holy.  
To what I said before, I shall now add at last how the word as doth in other places denote an equality, as the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father, 
John 10.15.  which in the Greek word is taken for to love; he equally knows and loves the Father, with an Eternal and perfect Love, as the Father knoweth and loveth him: The words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, when spoken of the Father and the Son, denote an equality, not a similitude; as the Father hath life in himself, so hath the Son life in himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Original: Now to understand the foregoing places of an equality, 
Chap 5. 26.  is not contrary to other Scriptures, nor to the Analogy of Faith, but doth tend to the glory of both Father and Son; for the rule is most true in the Text now in question, he that honoureth not the Son, honoureth not the Father that sent him; but he that honoureth the Son, honoureth the Father also, which is a natural inference out of the place. But that people who pretend to honour the Father, have taken a quite contrary way to do't, which is dishonouring the Son, 
Joh. 8.49.  as he said to the Jews, I honour my Father, and ye dishonour me, with robbing him, if they could, of his divine Nature and Attributes, when 'tis most true that he that honoureth not the Son, 
Chap. 5.23. Chap. 12. We are baptised in Christ's name.  honoureth not the Father, and the Father beareth witness from Heaven that he is glorified in the Son.  
Having thus proved in general that divine worship belongs to Christ, we must now come to the places which demonstrate it in the particulars: As first, we are baptised in his name: Baptism is a divine ordinance, whereby being admitted to be members of Christ's mystical body, we take an Oath of Allegiance to him, whereby we own him to be our God and Redeemer, this is the seal of the Covenant. Now no Covenant is in force till it be passed the Seal; this Seal in Baptism is not only instituted by Christ, but also administered in his name and authority, whereby it doth appear that this is his Right, which Right of his, 
Matth. 28.19.  he would make use of when he commanded all Nations to be baptised in his name. None but God can institute Sacraments, for none but he can bestow the grace therein represented; none but the Lord of the House hath right to make Laws in his House; now the Church is God's House, and seeing the preaching of the Word, and administration of both Sacraments therein, is done by Christ's authority and in his name, he is thereby not only owned, but also worshipped as God and Lord of it, wherefore the Church is called Christ's own house. 
Heb. 3.6.  I find indeed there was a subordination between God and Moses, this being but a Servant, but the same subordination between God and Moses was between the Son of God and Moses, as is now of all Ministers of the Gospel under Christ, 
Mal. 3. ●.  for he is the Lord of the Temple, who by the Prophet was foretold should come to his Temple: how the Temple is the place for Adoration, and the Lord of the Temple is to be adored, and the worship proper for God is due to him. We are equally baptised in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost; for in the words of the Institution and form of Administration, there is no other difference but of order, the names are jointly used, without any sign of distinction, as to Nature or Power, all three are therein called upon, there being in them an equal Majesty and Authority. I read how in the heavenly Jerusalem, 
Rev. 21.22.  the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the Temple of it, yet but one Temple, as they are but one God.  
But that men were in the practice, as by the institution they ought to be, baptised in the name of Christ, it appears out of what Peter said to the new Converts, be baptised every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, 
Acts 2.38.  where we see he takes notice only of Jesus Christ, not to exclude either Father or Holy Ghost, but strongly to insinuate into their minds and hearts, how Christ was their God, Lord and Saviour, which to Preach and persuade was his great end, and this he would have them to make open profession of in their being baptised in his name, whereby he shows the necessity and comprehensiveness of Christ's name used in the administration of that holy Sacrament, and the end thereof is for the remission of sins, that is to obtain pardon of sins, yea, and to receive the gift of the holy ghost. So when the Centurion's family was baptised, 
Acts 10.43. chap. 19.5. 1 Cor. 1.13.  'tis said only they were baptised in the name of the Lord. The name signifies the authority of the Lord, which in this case Paul was so much concerned for upon the occasion of the contentions that were among the Corinthians, which makes him so sharply expostulate with them, were ye baptised in the name of Paul? This point must needs be one of the highest importance in our Religion, seeing, he is so earnestly concerned as to say, I thank God I baptised none of you, etc. and he gives his reason for't, lest any should say, I baptised in my name. Whence we may conclude that to baptise in the name of Christ is one of the most fundamental points of Christian Religion, and I think it a rule and practice highly commendable in those Churches where in baptism, the word name is prefixed before every one of the three persons thus, I baptise thee in the name of the Father, in the name of the Son, and in the name of the Holy Ghost, distinctly pronounced, to prevent the abuse of some wretched Socinians, which by reason of the affinity which in some Languages, the words name and none or not, have, do confound them, and to baptise in the name of the Father, not of the Son, not of the Holy Ghost: Then it is Essential in baptism to have it administered in the name of the Son, as well as of the Father, wherefore John who by reason of this office is called Baptist, did it, not in his own name, on the contrary declared himself but a Minister when he pointed at Christ and said, I indeed baptise you with water, but he that comes after me and is mighter than I, he shall baptise you with the holy ghost and with fire; as if he had said, his Servant can administer only the outward sign, but the thing and grace signified, he alone can give. Hence I conclude that Christ in our being baptised in his name, is by us therein worshipped as our God equally with the Father: Here they make a difficulty, because 'tis said the Fathers were baptised unto Moses in the Cloud, but that signifieth not to be baptised in the name and authority of Moses, but to be settled in the faith to be given to God's word spoken by the Ministry of Moses, 
Exod. 14.31. Joh. 5.45, 46.  so they are said to have believed the Lord and his Servant Moses: Thus our Saviour saith, Moses in whom ye trust and believe; so they have Moses and the Prophets, that is, the Law and Doctrine of Moses: When God saith a thing, though but once, we ought to believe him, as if he had confirmed it many times, because in some places things are said which seemed to have been left out in others.  
Another particular is, we hope and trust in Christ, 
Matth. 12.21. We hope in Christ. Isa. 11.10. Rom. 15.12. Ephs. 1.12, 13. 1 Cor. 15.19.  in his name; and in his name shall the gentiles trust, as it had been Prophesied of long before, in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the people, to it shall the Gentiles seck, hope and trust in him for mercy. As 'tis by St. Paul explained, in him shall the gentiles trust; among others such were the Ephesians, for saith the Apostle to them, That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ; if we must believe the same Apostle not only in this life, but also in another to come, we must and do hope in Christ, or else we are of all men most miserable, that is, we cannot he happy except we hope in Christ, for indeed that hope is the ground of all our Comforts, and in that hope whereby we manifest our dependency upon him, we own him to be he from whom we expect all manner of help and relief in our necessities, for in him are all our Springs, we hope in him for all, and from him we expect all manner of good, and therein we worship him as the Author and Fountain of all the good we receive and hope for: now to trust in him is not only our duty, but also our blessedness and happiness; 
Psal. 2.12.  for blessed are all they that put their trust in him, which is spoken of Christ the Messiah: Now if he was a mere man, far from being Blessed, they would be Cursed, for a dreadful Curse is thundered against any that trusteth in man, Thus saith the Lord, cursed be the man that trusteth in man, 
Jerem. 17.6.  and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the Lord. These three several expressions signify the same, and go together, for to depend upon the Arm of Flesh for Wisdom, Strength and Help, is to must in Man, and whosoever trusteth in Man, his heart departeth from the Lord; it is incompatible to trust in God and in Man, and the heart is not to be divided, one of the two it must adhere to, for to both it is impossible: Wherefore in this same place, as we see a Curse against Man-Trusters, so there is a blessing for those who trust in God; verse 7 Blessed is the man that trusteth in the Lord, and whose hope the Lord is. Here again we meet with detestable Socinus and his juggle; God, saith, he proclaimeth a Curse against Man that trusteth in Man, not in every Man, or upon every account, but against him that trusteth in Man not appointed by God to give help and relief, that is, which is not endued with divine gifts: but if to be endued with divine gifts, had been a sufficient ground to secure men from this Curse, than we might have trusted in Moses, Elias, Daniel, etc. persons endued with divine and extraordinary gifts; but God here makes it a general rule which admitteth of no exception, for he simply saith in man: it is a most abominable presumption for a man so often to attempt to make the spirit of God to speak in his own Language, but suppose there be a man appointed of God to help, yet we are not to trust in him, for though a man hath divine Gifts and Power, yet ceaseth not to be, but still remains a man, and if God speaketh truth, whoever trusteth in man departeth from God: though we should happen to know a man endued with divine power, and appointed of God to the end he should help us, yet we might not trust in him, which if we do, we become liable altogether to this Sentence of the Curse of God.  
In the third place we do and must believe in him, which not to do is sin, 
We believe in Christ. Joh. 16.8, 9 1 Joh. 3.23. Chap. 5.1, 5, 10.  yet such an one as the Holy Ghost reproveth the world for: It is our duty, for there is a precept for it, and this is his commandment, that we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, which is a sign we are born of God, and whereby we overcome the world, and have the witness in ourselves, for this end God sent him into the world, 
1 Joh. 3.16, 17, 18, 36.  that we should believe in him, that we should not be condemned nor perish, but be saved and have everlasting life, now to believe is to do the work of God, for this is the work of God that ye believe on him whom he hath sent: 
Chap. 6.29.  all our hope for glory is grounded upon the promise which is not perfectly made sure to us, till it be sealed; now the Seal is the Holy Spirit of Promise which is the earnest of our inheritance, until the redemption of the purchased possession, but we cannot be sealed in Christ with the spirit till we have believed, 
Eph. 1.13, 14.  for so saith the Apostle, in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed, etc. after and not before. No man is the true proper object of our faith, for to believe in one, is to put in him his whole trust and confidence, which we may not in any mere man whatsoever, so though we believe in Christ, except we believe him to be God, our faith is vain, and not true. This makes the Apostle writ his Epistles, to whom? and unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God, 
Joh. 5 13.  but for what end doth he write those things? that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God, reduplicative, as he is Son of God, true natural Son of God, by whom all things were created, in him aught our faith to be terminated, for if he was only a medium and not the Object of it, than we should believe in him only Ministerially, not Principally, but in Faith there is no subordination, for 'tis a Theological Virtue which as it comes only from God, so it hath God alone for its object; it cannot have two such different and infinitely distant Objects as are the Creator and the Creature: To believe in Christ, was the chief thing which the Apostles ever exhorted men to do: For indeed 'tis the whole end and substance of the Gospel, but not as an imperfect Christ, a mere man, but as the true Son of God, of the same nature, this thing he always commanded men to do, namely to believe in him; about the time of his leaving this world, he charged his Disciples to do't, whereby they should find a present remedy and comfort to those troubles of heart that might happen to befall them; this he doth with a great Emphasis, he doth not barely say, believe in me, 
Joh. 17.1.  but he goes higher, to show what manner of Faith they ought to repose in him: Ye believe in God believe also in me, have in me the same Faith as you have in God, if here the word God be taken for the person of the Father, the Lord Jesus maketh himself equal with him, seeing he will have us to believe in him no less than in the Father, if the word God be Essentially taken, than he doth affirm himself to be God while he attributes unto himself the same faith which all Believers have and repose in God alone, for this fiducial honour God doth not communicate to another; no other reason can be assigned why the Son would have us to believe in him as in the Father, but because in Nature, Power and Honour he is equal with the Father, and consequently the primary object of Faith, that in matter of worship he owned himself such, it doth clearly appear in some instances, the first of the man in the Gospel, whose eyes he had opened, whom our Saviour far from forbidding him to worship him, he encouraged to it, not under the notion of Son of Man, but of Son of God, for he asked, dost thou believe on the Son of God? 
Chap. 9.35, 36, 37, 38.  The man answered, who is he, Lord? Christ replied, thou hast both seen him, and it is he that talketh with thee, and the man said, Lord, I believe; and he worshipped him: If he had not been the true Son of ●od by nature, I maintain this had been Idolatry, which he was no savourer to: The other instance is of Thomas, who for calling Christ my Lord and my God, in the Sense he did, after his conviction that he was actually raised from the dead, had spoken blasphemy in case he had not truly been Lord and God, which far from being reproved for it, what our Saviour after said unto him, and the manner how he said it import an approbation of what Thomas had said and done, and at another time all the Disciples together did perform the same, for they came and held him by the feet, 
Matth. 28.9. Luke 24.52. Act. 10.43. Luke 24.47. We pray to Christ.  and worshipped him: In few words, whosoever believeth on Christ shall have remission of his sins, and he commanded his Disciples, that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations.  
Now we come to the fourth part of that religious worship which is due and paid unto him: Namely Prayer, this floweth from the foregoing, for every Prayer should be made in Faith, according to what the Apostle saith, 
Rom. 10.10.  how shall they call on him in whom they have not believed. That to call upon and pray to God is a duty by men to be performed, is expressed in Scripture, the omission whereof is looked upon as a most heinous sin, deserving the heaviest judgements, see what character is given of those who neglect it. The workers of iniquity have not called upon God. 
Psal. 53.4.  'Tis such a sin as deserveth no less than the wrath of God. Pour out thy wrath upon the Kingdoms that have not called upon thy name. And as for me, 
Psal. 79.6.  saith David in another place, and all that truly fear God with him, I give myself unto prayer: 
Psal. 109.4.  So that the best commendation under the Old and New Testaments, that can be given of a man, is what the Lord said to Ananias of Paul, 
Acts 9.11.  Behold he prayeth, and how good a success Cornclius his prayers were crowned withal, the Angel declared it unto him, thy prayers are come up for a memorial before God. 
Chap. 10.4.  And it would prove a long work for one to demonstrate the necessity and excellency of that duty, which, I may say, doth in some respect include every other thing which men own God, and hence we may conclude what a transcendent Eminency there is in Christ, no less than his divinity, seeing he is the proper object of a duty to be rendered to the only true God: Unto the Lord Jesus as his due, it is ascribed in the two branches thereof, namely Prayer and Praise, by Prayer we ask of Christ or of God through Christ the things we want, and by Praise or Thanksgiving we return him thanks for what we received, Call upon me in time of trouble, 
Psal. 50.15.  I will deliver thee, and thou shalt glorify me, wherein both parts are contained, how many Prayers doth that chosen Vessel Paul put up to God and to Christ? and how often in his Epistles doth he give thanks.  
With us Prayer and Adoration differ not formally only as to the Manner, Order and like Circumstances; but are the same in Nature, diversified only according to occasion; but still remaining the same as to the Essence, Eyes, Hands, and Hearts, not being lifted up upon any thing under Heaven, where Christ sitteth at the right hand of the Father: Socinians do thus distinguish between Adoration and Invocation, the first signifieth only a reverend bowing to any one, the last includeth a religious suing for help, that is to be performed even by all Angels, as being commanded and necessary; but this only by men voluntarily, yet lawful and expedient, the ground of the first in Christ, is Majesty, as Power is of the last: Thus they always clip one thing or other of his Prerogatives, as if Men and Angels were not equally bound to adore and worship him, for where we find, let all the Angels of God worship him, there 'tis also written, let all men honour the Son even as they honour the Father, and men are as well commanded to act their part as Angels are to do theirs. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the original, to worship, is in the New Testament no where used, but for the Religious Worship due to God alone, and when 'tis mentioned as done unto any but God, it is remembered as their Idolatry, as Rev. 13.12, 15. or to forbid it; as chap. 19.10. and 22.9. So the worship which God commanded Angels to render his Son, is Religious by Virtue of his Authority which alone can make 〈◊〉 worship Religious. Christ at his very first coming into the world, and not only after his ascension, was a fit object of adoration.  
Now out of Scripture we prove how Christ was called upon and prayed to, 
Acts 7.59.  they stoned Stephen, calling upon God and saying, Lord Jesus receive my spirit. He calls him Lord and God, he was not the only one that called upon him, though the circumstance of his being a dying, when no help in men, makes it very considerable: many others called upon him, for this description is made of Christians and Believers, 
Acts 9.13.14.  that they called upon him: Thus Ananias, Lord he hath authority, Saul, from the chief Priests to bind all that call on thy name, all that made a profession of the Gospel. Most of his Epistles Paul gins with wishing Grace, Peace and Mercy, not only from God the Father, but also from the Lord Jesus Christ, and often the same Epistles he concludeth thus: the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all, which is nothing else but to call upon him for Favour and Mercy; for whosoever wisheth any one Grace and Peace from Christ, thereby prayeth to Christ to bestow grace and favour upon such an one; 
2 Cor. 12.8, 9  and in plain and clear terms he called upon and prayed to Christ; For this thing I besought the Lord thrice, and he said unto me, my grace is sufficient for thee, for my strength is made perfect in weakness: This is to speak as God doth, not only Paul called upon the Lord Jesus, but saith there were some in every place that call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, 
1 Cor. 1.2.  to whom all as to the Church in Corinth he directed his Epistle: And no wonder if they who are desirous of their spiritual welfare, do call upon the name of the Lord, for he is so rich unto all that call upon him, that he hath entailed Salvation upon the performance of that duty, which I speak not as of myself, 
Rom. 10.12, 13. Acts 2.21.  but two Apostles will be bound for it; For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord, shall be saved; saith one. And it shall come to pass that whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved, saith another: 
Joel. 2.32.  and both have a Prophet for security of what they say. Now Prayer is a religious duty to be directed to none but to God; all this is example: But the reason is this, he without whom we cannot call upon the Father, must also be called upon, but the Father we cannot call upon without Christ, 
John 14.6.  because none can come unto the Father but by him, and he is the way: But here is a command besides; 
Chap. 16.24.  hitherto have ye asked nothing in my name, ask and ye shall receive. There is a place in Scripture where three parts of worship due to Christ, 
Acts 22.16.  are contained: and now, saith Ananias unto Paul, why tarriest thou, be baptised, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord, in all three is the name of the Lord, the first and last are plain, but Faith is meant by washing away sins, which are washed when forgiven, now our sins are forgiven when we are justified through faith in Christ, 
Chap. 26.18.  or when we are sanctified by faith that is in him.  
Against this 'tis argued out of the Preface of the Lord's Prayer, our Father, that there 'tis spoken of the Father exclusively to the Son: But in that place as in several others, the word Father is not taken Personally, but Essentially, exclusively not to Son and Holy Ghost, but to Idols and Creatures; the word Father is here taken for God, as 'tis when said, one God and Father of all, and Abba-Father: 
Ephes. 4.6. Rom. 8.15.  Also the Father of Spirits: The words our Father are often taken for our God and Lord: In those places the word Father is said relatively not to the Son, 
Heb. 12.9. Matth. 10.21, 29. Luke 30.32. John 14.13. Chap. 3.13  but to men whose Father God is. The things in the Lord's Prayer asked and prayed for, are asked of the Son as well as of the Father, as the coming of his Kingdom, the forgiveness of our Sins, whence saith our Lord, Whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that I will do: And the words, which are in Heaven, do belong to the Son as to the Father, and the Holy Ghost too, as appeareth out of Psal. 139.7, 8. and Matth. 3.16. Nay as we said before, the Son is called the everlasting Father: And if we consider the Etymology of the word, which in the Original signifieth, to preserve all things, we shall find he is a Father indeed, by whom all things are upheld and preserved, which the Holy Spirit within us beareth witness unto, when our heart laying under the sense of some trouble or mercy, doth on a sudden by means of an Ejaculatory Prayer, either in thoughts, words or both, pour itself before him, begging for help or giving thanks, breaking out upon occasion into these or the like expressions, Lord Jesus have pity on me, or, Lord Jesus make me thankful.  
Thus I, through the grace of God, have under those several heads brought in proofs for our blessed Lord and Saviour's divinity: of many more which Scripture affords, I shall take notice but of few, wherein he is properly and truly called God, which to assert is the main drift of the word, as it is the foundation of the whole Gospel; for it was absolutely necessary he should be God by nature, or else any man might have preached, taught, prayed, given good example, and made intercession as well as Christ, and if he came into the world and died only to teach us good doctrine and give us good example, he had done for us no more than the Apostles and Martyrs, who taught good doctrine and gave good example, so might as well be called our Mediators and Saviour's. If this had, as they say, been the whole work of the Mediator, our redemption had been no hard matter to be performed: But I say that his threefold office of Mediatorship, Prophecy, Kingship, and Priesthood, demonstrate him to be true Essential God, for none of the three could perfectly have been performed but by a God himself: As to the Prophetical, to enlighten the understanding, and effectually to turn the heart; as to the Regal, to defend Believers against the Power of Satan; and as to the Priestly to obtain forgiveness of Sins, favour of God and glory, none of these could be obtained, but by him who is infinite as in Power so in Nature, there is an infinite distance between God who is infinite and every finite Creature, no proportion between Infinite and Finite. Scripture owneth nothing but God to be higher than Angels; now Christ is higher and above all Angels. Besides, that the necessity of satisfaction to be given to Divine Justice doth argue a necessity for Christ to be God, for the satisfaction could not have been adequate, as it ought to be, except he was God, and this divinity in him, doth prove the plurality of persons in the Godhead, which is the whole of the difficulty alleged against the most holy Trinity. Certainly the great design of the Apostles and others, was to preach Christ to be truly and really God, Son of God whereby their Ministry was exalted, this was the foundation they were to build upon: 
Acts 8.37.  The Eunuch must make this Confession, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, before he could be baptised, so did every one else being converted to the Faith, this in our Religion is the first thing to be known and preached, thus Paul, after his Conversion, 
Chap. 9.20.  the first thing he did, was to preach that Christ is the Son of God, for that was the great question; the Jews denied him not to be Man, Son of Man, but he went about to convince them how also he was God, Son of God, and he was by Nature God, as certainly as by nature he was Man: Wherefore he would raise the thoughts of the Corinthians from the consideration of Christ's humanity to that of his Deity, when he saith, 
2 Cor. 5.16.  though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more after the flesh, but according to the spirit, not in the humane but in the divine nature: according to which he is called by the glorious names of the holy one, 
Act. 3.14, 15. 1 Cor. 2.8.  and the just, the prince of life, and the Lord of glory, our Blessed Saviour, who when he was in the world had so often declared himself to be the Son of God in a proper sense, after his Ascension, when he had a full possession of that glory, as it were to confirm from Heaven what he had declared upon Earth, in the Revelation he made to that disciple of his, who doth so eminently bear witness of his divinity, 
1 Joh. 4.14, 15.  when he saith, we have seen and do testify, that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world; and whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God, and not otherwise; I say, on that occasion, the Lord Jesus from Heaven proclaims himself to be Son of God in the letter to the Angel of the Church in Thiatira, with this glorious description, 
Rev. 2.18. compared with chap. 1.14, 15.  These things saith the Son of God, who hath his eyes like unto a flame of fire, and his feet like unto fine brass. Tho his enemies would not hear him upon earth, during the time of his humiliation, when through his Passive Obedience he was about performing the first part of his Priestly Office, to satisfy divine Justice, and make expiation for our sins, I think now they should when he speaks from Heaven whence he exercises his Royal Office: I know well enough how what I say about his satisfying Divine Justice through his death, doth not affect his enemies, who deny he hath given satisfaction for us, but what can his intercession on in Heaven which is the second part of his Priesthood be grounded upon, but his own merits, through his Sufferings and Death, he thereby hath paid our Debts, and by virtue of that payment, he asks we should be released: but that point I intent not to meddle with in this place.  
In the New Testament, the name Saviour is as proper to him as that of Christ, as indeed that of Jesus, the same with Saviour, was given him by the Angel; and by St. Paul, the name Saviour is often joined with that of God, 
Tit. 1.3.  according to the commandment of God our Saviour, both names belong to one and the same person, as truly, really, and actually God, as he is Saviour, and in another place all these names God, Saviour, and Lord are given to Jesus Christ, by the commandment of God our Saviour, and Lord Jesus Christ. 
1 Tim. 1.1.  As he is Jesus Christ, so as certainly he is God, Lord and Saviour, not only his Offices but also his divine Nature is therein contained, and in the same Chapter he calls him the Blessed God, ver. 11 as in another place, God Blessed for ever. That Christ is thereby meant it appears by his saying, the glorious Gospel of the Blessed God. Now 'tis in several places called the Gospel of Christ, wherefore in almost every Epistle of his, he calleth himself an Apostle of Jesus Christ, 
Mark 1.1. Rom. 1.16 1 Cor. 9.12 18. Gal. 1.7. Rom. 8.9.  sent by him to preach the Gospel. So elsewhere, he saith, if so be that the spirit of God dwell in you, now if any man have not the spirit of Christ, he is none of his. That which in the beginning of the verse, Paul calls the spirit of God in the latter end he calls the Spirit of Christ, whereby he makes God and Christ to be but one and the same person.  
Under another Head our Blessed Saviour doth in many places afford us an argument for his divinity, consisting in a certain divine manner of speaking with Authority, not as subordinate or delegate, but original in him as the Head and Spring, not as by Favour and Courtesy derived upon him, but out of his own natural Right, which is above what any Man ever did or could pretend to; as when in his Sermon upon the Mount, he reformeth the abuses crept in against the Law, wherein he asserteth his Legislative Power at several times, 
Matth. 5.20, 22, 28, 32, 34, 39, 44. Chap. 7.29.  but I say unto you: And the people that heard him could take notice how he taught them as one having authority; and not as the Scribes. And he said unto his Disciples when he sent them, receive ye the holy ghost, whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted, and whosesoever sins ye retain they are retained, and to Peter, Feed my Sheep: go and teach all Nations. All these are words of Command. Further let us observe how no Man's Will is absolutely the rule of another's: one Man's Will is free and independent from that of another; no Man is bound absolutely to follow the will of another, because every Man's Will is fallible, and so may led us into error, but the will of God alone is infallible, and so alone to be followed; wherefore in our Prayer simply we say, thy will be done, and when Man's Will is to be obeyed, 'tis relatively and only in conformity to that of God. But Christ's Will is the Law, without Dispute or Exception, thus when he calls those that are heavy laden, 
Matth. 11.27, 28.  he positively saith, I will give you rest, having in the foregoing verse affirmed how none knoweth the Father, but he to whom the Son will reveal him: Thus when he cured the Leper, he said, I will, be thou clean; so he saith, The Son quickeneth whom he will, and him that believeth on me I will raise up at the last day. 
Joh. 6.40, 44.  Herein is his own Power set forth. So 'tis when speaking with the Samaritan Woman, that the water he will give shall be in him that receives it a Well of water springing up into everlasting life: and in that other place, If any man thirst let him come unto me and drink. He doth not say, I will pray the Father, that he may have everlasting life, or that out of his belly may flow rivers of living water, but let him come to me, and without going for this farther to any, he shall certainly drink and be satisfied, for that I will do for him; this is to speak like Lord, Master and God. But it may be said, Men he may speak to after that rate, being so graciously exalted above them all: well but I will go higher and say something more than hath been hitherto: when the Lord Jesus speaks to the Father, 
Joh. 17.24.  he sometimes saith, I will, as in the Prayer which before his leaving the World in the capacity of Mediator, he puts up to him for the Elect, Father, I will that they also whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am to behold my glory, thus according to his own will he disposeth of Glory: Did any Man merely such, ever speak to God in that way? Elijah and John Baptist were the two most fervent Men in spirit that we read of in Scripture, but can we ever find any thing like this, that ever they did or said? No, none but God the Son can be so familiar with God the Father, and we must believe that he well knew both God the Father and himself when he spoke thus, & except he had been sure he might, he would not have done it; but it had been as a most unsufferable Presumption, nay Blasphemy in any Man to have said so, we must conclude he was more than a Man, and that he thus spoke upon another account, even upon the same he had said before, I and the Father are one, and had made himself equal with God.  
We read how our Saviour took on him, 
Heb. 2.16.  not the nature of Angels, but he took on him the seed of Abraham, the reduplication, took not, and took denotes the voluntary Act of a person who made a choice, which he had not been in a capacity to do, except he had praeexisted before he took the Seed of Abraham, so that before he was made of the Seed of Abraham, he must need have had another Being, and before he was made he must really have been God, he could not have been an Angel, because he took not upon him the nature of Angels. Again, our Saviour saith, I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God; why not to our Father, as he said, when he taught them to pray for themselves? For if they had been brethren upon the same bottom of Grace, though in different degrees, he would have spoken of him as of their common Father, but speaking disjunctively and in different numbers, seeing he said, and did nothing without good cause, there must be a particular reason for it, which is naturally and easily insinuated to be this, That God was their Father and His, not upon a common, one and the same, but upon a much different account their Father by Grace, and his by Nature. Furthermore, Christ so often speaketh of his being sent by the Father, as I seek not my own will, 
John 5.3 & 6 38. Chap. 7.16. Mark 9.37.  but the will of him that sent me, I came down from Heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me; my Doctrine in not mine, but his that sent me; he that receiveth me, receiveth not me, but him that sent me; he that believeth in me, believeth not in me, but in him that sent me; all this to condescend to the Hypotheses of the Jews, and the opinion they had of him; namely, that he was a mere man, but seeing he was not come of himself, but was sent by the Father, he thereby would intimate unto them how they ought to look upon him to be more than a man, since he had a being before he was born amongst them, and was sent by the Father, whereby they all understood well enough how he meant, and so called himself the Son of God; This Argument did his Apostles after his ascension, so strongly and so often prosecute, to prove him to be the true, proper and natural Son of God: Thus we see that as the first Person the Father is in relation to the second the Son, called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, so also the second Person is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Joh. 5.18. Rom. 8.32.  proper or own Son, as the other is proper and own Father: and to show this is not a Physical, but Superphysical, or Supernatural Generation, not a partial communication of corporeal Substance, but a spiritual one of an indivisible Essence, therefore 'tis called wisdom and understanding, 
Prov. 8.1. Joh. 1.14. Col. 1.15. Heb. 1.6.  and the word: So this second Person is called the image of the first, of the same Essence and Essential perfection; in relation to this eternal generation, called not only the first born of every Creature, so no Creature himself, but also absolutely the first born: And he being also called the only begotten, it showeth that to him alone doth belong the generation we speak of; he is the only begotten of the Substance of the Father, and the first begotten, not as if the Father begat any after, but because he begat none before: He is also called the Image and the Brightness of his Father's Glory, because the glory of the Father is expressed in the Son.  
Another weighty Text about this matter is of the same Apostle who saith Looking for that blessed hope and the glorious appearing of the great God, and our Saviour Jesus Christ: 
Tit. 2.13.  Not only God, but the great God, the Infinite Being; that is, of Infinite Nature and Power, for as life when attributed to God signifieth Immortality, Wealth and Riches all Sufficiency, Age, Eternity, and Strength Omnipotency, so doth greatness Immensity. This Text all Expositors whether Greek or Latin, Ambrose excepted did unanimously quote as formal and clear against Arrians. The word Epiphany or glorious appearing, is in no place of the New Testament attributed to any but to the Son, and this glory is not in respect of Christ, for he hath it already, but in relation to the manifestation thereof unto us. These expressions the great God and our Saviour is referred not to two persons, but only to one, as that wherein 'tis said, 
Ephes. 1.3.  the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is the idiom of the Greek Tongue, seeing here is but one article, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the great God and Saviour, it doth clearly demonstrate it to be spoken only of one person, for both predicates are referred to the same Subject, as we have it so in other places; as first, by the commandment of God our Saviour and Lord Jesus Christ, 
1 Tim. 1.1.  the same person Jesus Christ, is our Lord, Saviour and God, who verse 11. is called the Blessed God, 
Tim. 1.3. & 3.4.  so he is called God our Saviour. Now here the same person is spoken of, as in these other places, so he that is our Saviour the proper title of the Lord Jesus, is the great God: Besides that as I already observed what is said of his glorious appearing gives a true Character of his person, for thereby is meant his coming to judge the world at the last day, and that this glorious appearing is meant of Jesus Christ, 'tis clearly demonstrated out of 2 Thes. 2.8.1 Tim. 6.14. and 2 Tim. 4.1, 8. To what I have said already, how the Apostle by the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ, speaks only of one person. I shall add, that this is the stile of Scripture in other Texts as well as in this; as for instance, this, To the acknowledgement of the mystery of God, and of the Father, 
Celos. 2.2  and of Christ, after their way of interpreting, here the Father is one person, and God another; so the Father is not God no more than Christ, and the Father must differ from God as much as Christ doth from the Father: So here three different persons must be asserted Take notice how in this place the copulative particle and, which they would have to denote different things or persons is here after the word God, and in the other, after the great God, so that I see no reason, if in that of Titus the great God and Saviour Jesus Christ be different persons, why in this, God and the Father should not be so too? This and many other difficulties might easily be removed if men would but give God glory to the acknowledgement of the truth, how Christ is the great God and Saviour, and the Father is God, which name in this place to the Colos. is taken essentially, but the persons of Father and Son are named, to the end that the hearts of Believers might be comforted, being knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding to the acknowledgement of the mystery: For all these are the words of the Text, for certainly 'tis a matter of unspeakable comfort when we are to come to God, whereof the Father is the Spring and first Person, to hear Christ the Mediator named, through whom in our approaches to the Throne of Grace we hope to obtain Mercy and find Grace to help in time of need.  
These deduced out of Scriptures and the reasons thereupon grounded, to avoid Prolixity I have only pointed at, though they might admit of great enlargements: Some thing more there is remaining, which must not be omitted, as being very material, I mean the Texts wherein our Saviour speaks of his coming down from and going up again to Heaven; whereupon we must observe how the coming or sending of God's own Son, doth not signify any local motion from Heaven to Earth, but a manifestation of him in the flesh: God sent his own Son out of his Bosom, without our Counsel, we desired it not, we inquired not after it, much less deserved it.  
I must not omit to take notice of a false inference they make out of the Text quoted just before, wherein our Saviour is called the first born of every Creature, whence they would conclude him to be a Creature when the true inference is this, that he was born before any thing was created, seeing he was the Creator of all, which is the reason given in the next verse, why he calls him the first born of every Creature: For by him were all things created that are in heaven and that are in earth. And which is more, at the later end of the verse, all things were created by him, and for him. He created all things for himself, which may not be said of any Creature, for if he were a Creature, he had been before himself: And if we desire a farther explanation we have it in the following verse, 
heb. 1.2.6.  and he is before all things. And if we compare this place with another, we shall find a sweet harmony, in both, he is called God's Son, 
Col. 1.13.  yea his dear Son in the first, in both Creator or maker of the World, saith the last, by whom also God made the worlds. As to Creation so as to preservation, for one saith, by him all things consist; and the other, by him all things are upheld, and the phrase in the Colossians, the first born of every Creature, is in the Epistle to the Heb. interpreted by this, appointed heir of all things, That is, to be Lord of every Creature or whole Creation; the first born is the Heir and Lord: The Elder Brother or First Born is loco parentis, 
Heb. 12.13.  as a Father, and so in the same Epistle, behold I and the children which God hath given me: Now the reason is clear, and the consequence obvious, Christ is before all things, because all things were created by him, upon which account he calls himself the beginning of the Creation of God, That is the efficient cause, which expressions are both joined together, as being of the same importance, the beginning and first born from the dead; 
Rev. 3.14 Col. 1.13.  that is the efficient cause of the Resurrection from the Dead: These two places out of Colos. and Heb. ought to be looked upon as parallel one with another. Now by the Son of Gods or the word's making the worlds, we have an eminent Testimony of his Eternal Godhead and Power, for saith the Apostle, he that made all things is God. 
Heb. 3.4.  So since all things were made by the Son, he must be God: Here I must take notice of their cavil against the place, where it is said God made the world by his Son, they would have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by whom, to be taken for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, for whom, as if God had made them for his Son, for his sake, which is a downright corruption of the Text, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not with an accusative, to signify propter, but in the Genitive, which never denoteth a final but always an efficient cause: In the New Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by, is used about 600 times with a Genitive Case, and in no one may be rendered propter, for, and so cannot be here; and suppose it could, yet it would be against the constant use of the word, for which some particular reason ought to be given why such a sense should be admitted, for which there is none in this place; it also must be taken notice of, how the case is not the same, where Things as where Persons are spoken of.  
What now I am by the grace of God entering upon, is to show how our Blessed Saviour had a real being, before he was conceived in the Womb of the Virgin, and my reasons shall be drawn out of the 6. chap. of St. John's Gospel, where the matter conducing to our purpose, is spoken of at large, ●●r Christ doth in several places thereof, speak of his being come from Heaven, and shall begin with the last verse, wherein he discourseth upon the point, because it will by degrees lead us back to the rest, 
Joh. 6.6.  What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? which words he spoke of himself, to remove the offence which what he said about the eating of his flesh and drinking of his blood had given many of his disciples, for he saith, his words are not literally or corporally but spiritually to be understood, for he was to leave the Earth, and go up into Heaven where he was before, out of which words we may easily conclude how Christ was in Heaven before he was upon earth, this seems to be clear.  
But however they will not agree to it, 
Vers. 32.33, 38, 50.51. Ver. 41.42.  first they cavil about the place, saying that by where he was before, Heaven is not meant, when in this very chapter no less than five times, he saith he came down from Heaven, which the Jews took special notice of and murmured at: which truth our Saviour had before declared to Nicodemns, and No man hath ascended up to Heaven but he that came down from Heaven, even the Son of Man, 
Joh. 3.13.  which is in Heaven; so that although in this verse, the word Heaven be not named, yet is so plainly described, that there is not the least ground left for any one to doubt of it, either for his Disciples or others, for what need of his naming again, that which he named so many times before. There is a Text parallel with this, 
Joh. 16.28.  which doth explain it. I came forth from the father, and am come into the world; again I leave the world and go to the Father. To say he shall ascend up where he was before, and to return to the place whence he came, is it not the same? and had he not declared at several times that his Father is in Heaven? And if any doubt should remain, 'tis wholly cleared by the execution, and when the thing was fulfilled at his ascension, for, while they beheld, he was taken up, 
Acts 1.9.  and a cloud received him out of their sight.  
But this not serving their turn, but by these Texts being pinched to the quick, to hold out they take another way, which is figuratively to explain the words where he was before, and wrest their proper signification into a Metaphor, that is, Christ in his mind and thoughts conversed in Heaven, being taken up in Meditation with those heavenly mysteries that are there; which were so present unto him, that although he was upon Earth, yet he might be said to be in Heaven; this indeed is a way of perverting the sense of Scriptures, but not a fair one: But if so, our Saviour would have spoken in the present is, and not in time past was, for as they say, he continually was taken up with such thoughts; if continually, than not discontinued when at that time he discoursed with them: But the word before, doth import a relative opposition between the time wherein our Saviour was in Heaven, and that when he spoke upon Earth, besides that actually and really he was upon Earth when they make him to have been in Heaven, merely in Thoughts and Meditation, which holds no proportion between his being in Heaven and upon Earth, so then Christ was really in Heaven, before he came down upon Earth; and as he really and actually ascended up into it, so he really and actually descended from thence upon Earth, here are two terms a quo and ad quem, as he could not go up to Heaven but from the Earth, so he could not come down upon the Earth but from Heaven: and is there the least ground in the whole Chapter to think Christ's intention was to entertain them with his having been in Heaven in Idea and Meditation? when his design was to show, how, what he had said of being the Author of Resurrection and Life, and the manner of it by means of eating his flesh was a thing not to give them offence, nor impossible: Considering what he was, originally from Heaven, therefore not to be considered as a mere man, but such a one as was far more divine and powerful than any man.  
They finding this will not do, yet to dispute the ground as long as they can, they forged in a Dream, for otherwise it cannot be, a very strange adventure; that Christ was in Heaven before he was upon Earth, seemeth undeniable; therefore because they dare not give him the lie, they would mince the matter thus; how Christ between his Birth and Death, and before he preached went up into Heaven, where for a while he remained to be better instructed by the Father, in the things which he was to teach mankind, after which he came down again; but there is not the least ground but only fancy for it: The Evangelists do give us an account of most passages of Christ's Life, and how could they all four have forgotten this which is one of the most important that might have befallen him in that kind. The Evangelists Matthew and Luke, in their four first Chapters, relate many things belonging to that time, as not only his birth, but also his Circumcision on the eighth day, and his being carried to the Temple to be presented to the Lord, received by Simeon, spoken of by Anna a Prophetess, adored by the Wise Men, carried into Egypt, his return to Nazareth, his being found in the Temple sitting in the midst of the Doctors, ask them questions; his being subject to Joseph and Mary; baptised of John; tempted in the Wilderness, etc. and not one word about this pretended ascension. How came it that he was not miss by any? This they would to have been in imitation of Moses, whom God called up to the Mount: That it was so with Moses, we read in the word, but nothing like it of our Saviour: And when God is silent our mouth should be stopped, and nothing allowed to fancy or imagination: besides when Moses was called up, the people had public notice given them of it, and by God's command, he took Aaron's Sons and Seventy of the Elders, all the people saw the glory of God upon the Mount; and when Moses came back, all Israel saw him with his face shining, none of which things can be said of this pretended Ascension of christs, whereof there are no witnesses, not so much as any of his Disciples, as he had in his Trassiguration, which three Evangelists give an exact account of. Which though important, yet not so considerable as this which could not be performed without a great Miracle whether he had been carried up only in Soul, for then his Soul had been separated from the Body, so death must have followed, or whether in Body and Soul, the Body could not have been sustained in the Air without a Miracle: And during that time, where were his Disciples? This certainly should have made a great Gap in the History of his Life; which we cannot perceive in any of the Evangelists, no, nor in those that have written his Life, from his Birth to his Death, Resurrection, and Ascension. St. Luke saith of the Gospel he had written, how he had made a Treatise of all that Jesus begun both to do and to teach: Yet not a word of this, 
Acts 1.1.  as indeed there was no necessity for Christ to go up to Know, as they say, his Father's Will, which might have been communicated unto him, as to Moses, John Baptist, without going up to Heaven, in case he had not known it; but he knew it before: At his Baptism the Heavens were opened unto him; the Father had highly owned him; the Holy Ghost was descended upon him, so that he returned from, Jordan full of the Holy Ghost; 
Luke 4.1.  wherefore there was no need of his going, and so the Cause ceasing, so must the Effect; so that also it had been preposterous, after what happened in his Baptism, for him to have gone up into Heaven upon such an Errand: Besides that, we are assured he entered but once into the holy place, 
Heb. 9.12.  Hereby we see how, if we were willing to take it, that sort of Men would be ready to put upon us every Suggestion of theirs for an Argument, every Argument for a Law, yea, and every Dream for a Revelation. Tho' our Saviour here calls himself Son of Man, and not Son of God, it doth not in the least prejudice what we say; for if he had called himself Son of God, it had been a begging of the Question, for they would not own him to be such: And this showeth the better the Oneness of the Person, when there is a Communication of the Idioms, when in the Person, that which is proper to one Nature is spoken of the other. Christ, according to the Flesh, was never in Heaven before his Ascension, but according to the Spirit, that is his Divine Nature, he was. Here our blessed Saviour calling himself Son of Man, may allude to, with intent to make Men take notice of what is spoken of himself by the Prophet; 
Dan. 7.13, 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 days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, etc. This is an exact Prophecy of his Ascension.  
One thing more they have to say, and 'tis the Example of Paul's having been caught up to the third Heaven; but must it, from what hath happened to Paul, 
2 Cor. 12.2.  follow, that the same must needs have befallen the Lord Jesus? That indeed we read of Paul, therefore we ought to believe; but of Christ we read no such thing: Yet for all that we never read that either Paul was from Heaven, or came down, as we read it of Christ very often. Paul speaks of that with the greatest modesty in the World, for fear he should seem to exalt himself; but our Lord, without any ambiguity or fear that Men would think, he takes too much upon himself, doth speak loud, highly declares and often proclaims himself to be the Son of God, equal with him, sent by the Father, descended from Heaven, where he is again to return, etc. This he owned openly, and when he had said to the man sick of the Palsy, Thy sins are forgiven thee, some of the Scribes having, said within themselves, This man blasphemeth. Christ called evil these Thoughts of theirs; 
Mat. 9.4.  Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts?  
Another place in this same Chapter already mentioned, 
Joh. 6.38.  and to our purpose, is this: I came down from Heaven not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. The words, taken in their natural signification, are plain enough, and admit of no difficulty. Christ speaks of himself; what Heaven is we know 'tis as his natural place, whence he came down into a state of Humiliation, in taking upon him our human Nature; the End of his coming down was to do his Father's Will, not his; tho' we must not think that when he did his Father's Will, he acted any thing against his own, for whatsoever he did and suffered was voluntarily, as he had said long before by the Prophet, I delight to do thy will: 
Psal. 40.5, 6, 7.  Sacrifice and Offering thou didst not desire. Then said I, Lo, I come. And when the Will of his Father was executed, and the Work he gave him to do finished, he went back, if we may so say, home again, into Heaven. The Difficulty than lies not in the words, but about the sense: Christ, who spoke the words, is true; tho' every sense that is attempted to be given to the words be not true, yet a true sense there is. He makes mention of his Person, and of his Flesh; his Person is that which came down from Heaven; his Flesh is that which was form in the Virgin's Womb, that indeed did not come from Heaven; however he speaks of his Flesh and Blood to intimate his Death, and that Life which he promiseth to those that eat his Flesh: He procureth it in two ways, by Merit or Impetration, and by Efficacy or Application: The Merit by his Death consists in the Dignity of the Person which suffered it; the Application and Efficacy, in the Spirit which is in the Person. By the Opposition he makes between himself and the Manna, he sufficiently declares, that he really came down from Heaven.  
The Adversaries would have the coming down from Heaven to signify no more than to proceed from God, which to confirm they make use of some Texts, as when our Saviour asked the Chief Priests, whence was the Baptism of John, 
Matth. 21.25.  was it from Heaven, or of Men? Thus every good and perfect Gift is said to be from above, and to come down from the Father of light. Again, This Wisdom descendeth not from above. Thus John saith, 
Jam. 1.17. & 3.15. Rev. 21.2.  he saw the new Jerusalem coming down from God out of Heaven: But none of these places is to the purpose, for they are about Things, and the Question is about Persons: Scripture makes no dissiculty to say, that Things whereof God is immediate Author come down from Heaven, there being no danger to say so, but it never saith it of Persons. In the Word of God, none besides Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and Angels, none, tho' never created or born, in so eminent a manner, is said to be come down from Heaven; neither Adam, nor Eve, nor Isaac the Son of a Special promise, and whose Birth, considering the age of Abraham and of sarah, was very extraordinary. But that Christ came down from Heaven in a manner different from what is expressed in those places, it appeareth out of the forequoted place, What and if ye shall see the Son ascend up where he was before? whereby is implied, that he was in Heaven before he came down from it; which he confirmeth in that other place, No Man hath ascended up to Heaven but he that came down from Heaven, even the Son of Man, which is in Heaven; whereof the sense is made known by the design of Christ, who speaking to Nicodemus about being born again and Regeneration, saith, If I have told you earthly things, and of such as are done in earth, which by your own experience you may see and know, yet ye believe me not, how shall ye believe if I tell you of heavenly things, that is, such as are or be done in Heaven, which ye neither can know of yourselves nor by any one else? but by me, for I have been in Heaven, and none else? Besides that, if what the Adversaries say in their sense were true, it would follow, that Christ is said to be come down from Heaven either in relation to his Person or to his Office. As to the first, it cannot well be said, I mean as to his miraculous Conception, or else the same might have been said of John Baptist, who only by a Divine Power was born of an old and barren Mother, an Angel having foretold his Birth, and given his Name beforehand; yet he, far from saying he came or descended from Heaven, speaks quite the contrary of himself, when he affirms this of Christ, 
John 3.31.  He that cometh from above is above all: he that is of the earth is tarthly, and speaketh of the earth; he that cometh from Heaven is above all. And further; Christ may not be said to be come down from I seven upon the account of his miraculous Conception; no, neither by reason of his being born without the help of Man; for this may also be said of Adam, born not only without the help of Man, but of Woman also, yet for all that, he is never said to be come down from Heaven, on the contrary he is said to be of the Earth, in opposition to Christ; 
1 Cor. 15.47.  The first man is of the earth, ca●thy; the second man is the Lord, from Heaven. As to the Office of Christ, it is certainly from Heaven in that sense, but it followeth not that because the Office is, the Person must be so; for neither 〈◊〉, whose Baptism was from Heaven, nor none of the Prophets or Apostles, were ever said to be descended from Heaven. Now; according to this Opinion of theirs, Christ would have had no Advantage over the Manna, which was every day miraculously created and reigned upon the People; yet our Saviour takes this Preference over the Manna, 
John 4.31, 33.  that he was come down from Heaven, the Manna not so. Why doth our Lord deny that Manna was come down from Heaven, but that himself was the Bread of God, which came down from Heaven?  
Our Lord's words, I came down from Heaven to do the will of him that sent me, do certainly contain more than barely, I am created by the wonderful Counsel and Power of God; herein he speaks as would an Ambassador sent by his Prince, wherefore the words imply, first, that Christ was in Heaven; 2dly. That he was sent from thence; 3dly, To do the Will and perform the Work of him that sent him. And if it had not been in this sense, the Jews would not have murmured as they did; as indeed there had been no cause for it: And we do not in the least perceive he goes about to show they were mistaken to give his words such as sense, but on the contrary he goeth on to confirm what he had said, according to the sense they gave it, and that without any ambiguity, but plainly and downright, tho' he knew he thereby did run into a great danger, 
Matth. 13.55, 56, & John 6.42.  for the Jews did not know how to reconcile what they knew of him: Is not this the Carpenter's Son? Is not his Mother called Mary, and his Brothers, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? and his Sisters, are they not all with us? How then can he say I am descended from Heaven? To have his Extraction from thence, and be equal with God, this made them look upon him as a Blasphemer, who, according to their Laws, was to be stoned: They allowed him to be a very extraordinary man, who had done such things as had never been done before among them; but to hear him say he was come down from Heaven, as his natural place, that they could not endure: Yet we must take it to be true, since neither he nor the Evangelist ever denied it.  
They were so pleased with the Miracle of the five Barley Loaves and two small Fishes, that they would have taken him by force, and made him a King; and after he was gone, they could not be at rest till they again had found him out, and then he said, they followed him only out of love to their Belly, because they had eaten and were filled; whereupon out of his earnest desire for their good, he takes occasion to exhort them, to mind not that Meat that perisheth, but that which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man, said he, shall give unto you: And then he presseth the Argument, and shows how he, and none else can give it; and in order to't, declareth first who he is, namely, the Son of God, whom he calleth his Father four times, then addeth, 
V 40.44, 45, 45.  he is from God, afterwards he attributes unto himself a quickening Power, and to give everlasting Life, for he doth not say, he that believeth in God, but on me; neither doth he say God. 
V 47.  but I will raise him up at the last day. Can the Father have more highly and stately spoken of himself, 
V 40.  or assumed a greater Power than he doth? whereby we see, this he saith to draw Men, not to the Father, but to himself, as the Spring of Eternal Life, whereby he insinuates himself to be such a one as is far more potent and excellent than Man, upon which account he is truly and properly said to be come down from Heaven, or else he had not answered the Jews Objection to the purpose: Which 'tis very unworthy for any one to say.  
This matter we shall conclude with one Argument more out of these words: I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world: 
John 16.28.  again I leave the world, and go to the Father. Where is the Father? In Heaven. Where is the World? On Earth. So then Christ was with the Father in Heaven before he was in the World on Earth. This last Text I join with the two foregoing, being to the same purpose, because a threefold Knot is not easily untied. The words are so clear, 
V 29.  that thereupon his Disciples said, Lo, now speakest thou plainly. 'Tis to be wished every one was of their opinion, as there is cause for it: 
V 30.  By this we believe (said they) that thou camest forth from God. This they said themselves, and the Lord saith so of them, They have known surely that I came out from thee, and that thou didst send me: But neither Socinus, nor none of his Kidney, can say and prove that they believed not there was a Divine Nature in Christ: They explain the words, I came forth from the Father, only to signify that Christ was a Man sent from God upon some special Errand, just as he sent his Disciples into the World, 
1 Joh. 4.1  or as false Prophets are said to be gone into the world. We know the Faith of his Apostles was weak, but true, and was increased by degrees; they sometimes doubted of things, as may be Christ's Resurrection, but this doth not argue that there was no Faith in them, for there was, tho' staggering and imperfect, which our Saviour strengthened and themselves were sensible of, when they said unto him, Lord, increase our Faith; which we read so actually effected in Thomas, who more than any one else doubted of this Resurrection, that at last he gave an authentic Testimony of his Faith concerning it when he called him, my Lord, and my God; and before that time, Peter, in their name, had given eminent evidence of their Faith about him, when he said, 
John 6.68, 69.  Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hest the words of eternal life: and we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God. After so solemn a Declaration, how dare any man say his Disciples did not believe any thing of Divine Nature in him? As to his Disciples, he sent them into the World, but he dwelled upon Earth, but his Father sent him upon Earth when himself was in Heaven: And this we may say, that as the Disciples were with Christ before he sent them, so he was with the Father before he sent him. As to the false Prophets, they were gone out into the World, but whence? Out of the Charch; 
John 2.15.  of whom 'tis said before, They went out from us, but they were not of us.  
One thing more I shall observe upon this Text, that if Christ really ascended up into Heaven, as he did unquestionably after his Resurrection, so he really descended from thence before his Incarnation; and if he descended, than he was before he descended; this, as said just before, his Disciples believed literally, not in a Metaphor or Figure; and that they well understood his meaning, our Saviour confirms, when he saith, v. 31, Do ye now believe, and what? That I came from the Father, and must return to him; and that I know all thing, which none but God can. Here I must give a general and necessary Warning against Socinian far-fetched, and false glosses. Indeed, if admittance be given to all their Allegories, there can be no room left for literal and proper sense: So the deliverance out of Egypt, possession of Canaan, carrying into Captivity, shall not be Matters of Fact, and we may doubt whether there was ever a Noah, a Flood, or an Ark, such men as Aaron, Moses, Joshua, for 'tis possible to turn all these into Allegories. We know in Scripture there are some, but to turn every thing into't is a great Abuse: When a Text expresses plainly a literal sense, we must not trouble our heads to screw it up into an Allegory; nor when the Discourse is doctrinal, and the words in it usual, proper, and suited to the things intended to be expressed, this indeed is what Peter calls a resting the Scriptures to their own destruction.  
The later part of the Verse doth explain the first, for the words signify Christ's Ascension into Heaven; they were spoken upon the occasion of Christ's instructing, encouraging, and disposing his Disciples to that Separation which was suddenly to happen by his Death; after which, tho' he shown himself alive by many infallible Proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the Kingdom of God, yet he conversed not with them in the same manner as before his Passion. 
Acts 1.2  Now this occasion which they were spoken upon, sheweth how he discoursed about leaving the World, going to his Father, and ascending into Heaven, which reaily and visibly happened forty days after his Resurrection. By these Expressions, which were familiar with him, of going up or ascending to the Father, he signified the same thing; and tho' the Father doth fill up Heaven, which is his Throne, and Earth his Footstool, yet in Scripture he is said to sit and dwell in Heaven, as in his home; 
Joh. 14.2.  wherefore our Saviour calls Heaven his Father's House. Now, as this later part of the verse signifieth Christ's Ascension from the Earth to the Father, so the first signifieth his coming down from Heaven upon Earth. Again, the Opposition which is seen between both parts, as, I came forth from the Father, with, and go to the Father; and, I am come into the World, with, again I leave the World; do show, that if to come from the Father doth denote to be sent from Heaven to Earth by the Father; so to go to the Father signifieth the contrary to that, namely, to go from Earth up to Heaven to the Father. Christ leaving the World, is gone to the Father; and going to the Father, he hath left the World: wherefore to go to the Father, and leave the World, are the same. So likewise, Christ coming forth from the Father, came into the World, and coming into the World, he came forth from the Father: And these two kinds of Expressions signify the same thing; 
Chap. 13.3.  and as he was come from God, so he went to God.  
This coming from the Father, and coming into the World, do imply, first, a sending, as the Lord declareth it; 
John 8.42.  I proceeded forth, and came from God: neither came I of myself, but he sent me. And than something posterior to the Mission, and as it were belonging to the execution thereof, for if one should ask, Wherefore came Christ into the World? it would be well answered to say, Because the Father sent him: So that he who is sent, must come from him that sent him, to the place whereunto he is sent. Then the words, I came from the Father, must be understood of the execution of the sending, rather than the sending itself. It is a wrong sense given, as to apply them to a divine production; I came from the Father, that is, I am miraculously produced by the Father: This Exposition doth confound things that are different, for none can be sent before he hath a Being, but that's produced which hath no Being; Production is before Sending: Thus the words must signify, that Christ returned to the place whence he came, and ascended into that whence he descended before. This he went about to inculcate into the Mind of the Jews, in the opposition he makes of his Origin with theirs; Ye are from benedth, 
V 23.  I am from above: ye are of this world, I am not of this world, but from the Father, not from Earth, but from Heaven: He was not in the World by a natural necessity, but voluntarily, and by a determined counsel, he came into't as Ambassador from his Father, to reveal unto Men the Doctrine and Means of Salvation, and for Judgement; 
Chap. 9.39.  For judgement am I come into this world; and all the while he was here, even very betimes, he minded what he came about: Unto his Mother, after she found him in the Temple, and ask him, Why hast thou thus dealt with us? he answered, How is it that ye sought me? witted ye not that I must be about my Father's business? 
Luke 2.48, 49.  So that he continued upon Earth till that was over, before which time he would not go back; 
John 17.4.  but before his departure he declared, I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do; whereupon he returned back to his Father, from whom he was come before, leaving Earth, a place so disproportionate and inferior to Heaven, whence he had his extraction, and consequently unworthy to contain him any longer: This Reason he gives his Disciples, whose Heart, upon his declaring he was about leaving of them, had been filled with Sorrow, how it was not just he should always be among those that had used him so unworthily; and withal, it was expedient for them that he should go away, or else the Comforter, 
Chap. 16. ●, 7.  who was to be with them after his departure, would not come.  
After all that hither to hath been said, may not I ask concerning the method and carriage of the Adversaries. Is it fair, about these fundamental points, to turn the whole Scripture into an Allegory, and make, the Spirit of God never to speak properly? to force upon and wrest out of the Word of God such Senses and Expositions as are contrary to the scope of the Spirit, to the Deigns of the holy Writers, and to the Analogy of Faith; and if this cannot serve the turn, to screw up and work their B●●ing, how to contrive and forge an imaginary After son of Christ into Heaven, about the 〈◊〉 of his Ministry, and consequently a ceasing ●●wn from thence after it; yet at the same time deny that true and real descending of ●is upon Earth, which is so much and so often assorted in Scripture; which is as good as to say, Tho' Truth and Scripture do not bear it, yet we I now how to supply it of our own: Flectere si nequco saperos, A eroma movebo.  
Now, to strengthen what I have said to prove our Lord's Divinity, before I proceed to answer Objecting, I shall add what followeth upon the forementioned Head of the Angel in the Old Testament, I mean, the increated Angel, whose Person in appearance is Man, in office Angel, in nature God, the second Person of the most holy Trinity. I shall somewhat insist upon a most notable place, and much to our purpose, though I already said something about it, for I can not willing to lay aside a strong and very useful weapon because I made use of it before, for when once it hath been tried, we are the surer of, and may better depend upon it. On the occasion of the abominable Idolatry of the golden Calf, God refused to go up with the People, but being appeased by Moses, promised to send an Angel before them, which Moses and the People were fully satisfied with. Who and what this Angel was, 
Chap. 23.20, 21, 22.  we have it in the Book of Exodus, with the End for which he was to go before, namely, to guide them; and 'tis thus expressed: Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. But hear the Charge he gives them concerning this Angel; Beware of him, and obey his voice: provoke him not, for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him. Such terms doth the God of Israel use when he speaks, of himself. Two things here we must observe; first, what is here spoken belongs only to the true essential God of Israel; the second is, the Angel or Person here spoken of, is the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, out of which Premises we may well conclude, he is the true God of Israel.  
The Caution here given to take heed, have a care and beware of him, as if he had said, take heed to thyself in thy Carriage before him; this, I say, joined with the Command to obey his Voice, is very remarkable: The absolute Obedience which God requires them to yield unto the Angel, is due to God alone, and is never related to the Creature, only to himself, for his Voice is God's Voice, and when he speaketh, God speaketh, as the words of v. 22. do intimate; If thou shalt indeed obey his voice, and do all that I speak, than I will be an enemy unto thine enemies. The Angel's Voice, and all that God speaketh, is the fa●●e, and upon their obedience to his Voice depended the performance of the Promises. The Lord never so expressly charged any People or Person not to provoke any created Angel or Man as here he doth, Provoke him not, offend and displease him not; why? For he will not pardon your Transgressions, Rebellions or Sins in Scripture Phrase, for Sin is the transgression of the law. So then, to disobey and to provoke this Angel, is to sin; and this very same Angel hath right and power, if he will, to pardon Sin, which none but the true God hath power to take upon him to do, and 'tis Blasphemy for any Creature whatsoever to pretend to't. Another great and unanswerable reason is, For my Name is in him; a more excellent Name than any of the Angels do enjoy: 
Heb. 1.4.  The Name is that appellation by which one thing is distinctly known from another; so God's Name signifieth God himself, as to call upon God's name, 
Gen. 4.26. Exod. 33.19. 2 Chron. 7.20.  'tis his Titles, God, Jehovah, Elohim, Lord. I will proclaim the name of the Lord before thee, said God to Moses, compared with Chap. 34.3, 6. in the former Verse 'tis called, to proclaim the name of the Lord, and in the later, to proclaim the Lord, the Lord. And in Scripture Phrase the Name of the Lord is taken for God himself, that is, all in him, Majesty, Almightiness, Psal. 29.2. & 33.21. & 34.3. & 61.5. This house, saith God, which I have sanctified for my name, for myself, my honour and worship: So here, when God saith of that Angel, my name is in him, he meaneth his Nature, Titles, Attributes, Authority, Power, and Glory. In a word, I myself am in him; which afterwards was well interpreted by the Lord Jesus, The Father is in me, and I in the Father: Now this by the God of Israel being attributed unto another, it must be to another himself, for his Name is his Glory, and he hath solemnly declared, my glory will I not give to another. 
Isa. 42.8. Exod. 3.2.   
The Angel spoken of in this place is, as already observed, the same as before had appeared unto Moses in a flame of Fire, out of the midst of a Bush, who, v. 4, is called Lord and God; who out of the same place called unto and required of him divine Honour; Draw not nigh hither, but put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground. And if any doubt should remain, 'tis cleared v. 6, Moreover be, the same Angel, said, I am the God of thy Father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. This very same Angel or Person, upon the People's entering into the Land of Promise, under the shape of a Man appeared unto Joshua, under the name of Captain of the host of the Lord, and in the posture, for it was with a drawn Sword, 
Josh. 5.13, 14, 15.  to execute his Office of General, as God had promised, to bring them into the place he had prepared, for then the People were just entering upon the Siege of Jericho, and this same Angel or Son of God, under the shape of a Man, exacted of Joshua the same Worship as he before had required of Moses; and of him afterwards Joshua said to the People, He is a holy God, he is a jealous God: 
Josh. 24.19.  he will not forgive your transgressions, nor your sins. These last words are the same which God said to Moses in the forequoted place, and so belong to one and the same.  
Now, I say, this Angel, who appeared unto Moses out of the Bush, who through the Wilderness went before the People into the Land of Promise, and appeared unto Joshua, is the Son of God, the second Person of the most holy Trinity, the same who afterwards took on him our human Nature, and was born of the Virgin Mary; and, among other reasons, this I take to be a very good one, 
Acts 7.30, 35.  because Stephen the first Martyr for this glorious Cause, and a good Interpreter of the place, makes mention of the Angel of the Lord, which appeared unto Moses, and this Moses God sent to be a ruler and a deliverer by the hands or power of the Angel which appeared to him in the bush. Moses was the Minister or Servant, 
Heb. 3.6.  but Christ, as a Son over his own house, saith the Apostle. So things were done by the power of the Angel. Moses was in the Church in the Wilderness, but the Angel was with him: Stephen's mentioning the Church and the Angel, doth relate to Christ our Lord, the Son of God, who is the only Head thereof, and by whose Directions Moses took care of it, as also Moses spoke of him under the name of a Prophet whom God would raise up unto them: 
Acts 3.22, 23.  and It shall come to pass, that every soul which will not hear that Prophet shall be destroyed from among the people, saith Peter. And tho' from the beginning the Son of God was not made Flesh, yet as Head of the Church he took care of his People, exercised his Mediatorship, and administered his spiritual Kingdom of Grace, which the bringing out of Egypt, and introducing into Canaan was a Figure of; and we may easily perceive the sweet harmony between the Old and New Testaments, about Christ's governing his Church under both, as to Names as well as to Things, for he is called Captain of the Lord's Host, as in the forequoted place; and God is a man of war, and Lord of hosts is one of God's Titles, not only 1 Sam. 1.1, but in a hundred places more: So Christ is in the New Testament called the Captain of our salvation, 
Exod 15.3 Heb. 2.10.  to be completed in Heaven, whereof the Promised Land was a Type.  
This Angel the People were commanded to take care not to provoke him, yet they did. In this case the Question may be put to our Socinian Rabshakehs, which in another, God did concerning Sennacherib, 
2 Kin. 19.22.  Whom hast thou reproached and blasphemed? and the same Answer returned, Even against the holy one of Israel. So here, if it be asked, Whom did the Children of Israel provoke, tempt, and limit in the Wilderness? the Psalmist will say, 
Psal. ●8. 40, 41, 56.  God, the holy one of Israel, and the most high God: compared with Psal. 95. c. And if of St. paul we ask, Whom did the People tempt in the Wilderness? he will answer, They tempted Christ; 1 Cor. 10 9 compared with Heb. 3.9, for there he speaks of Christ as Son of God: it may not be understood that Christ was tempted after he was born of the Virgin Mary, tho' after his Baptism he was, by the Devil in the Wilderness; which indeed may point at the Temptation by the People in the Wilderdess, which we read of in the old Testament. However, I say, that Temptation after the coming out of Egypt, which was so long before he was born, cannot be meaned of any thing after his Birth; yet, if Scripture saith truth, Christ was by the People tempted in the Wilderness, the same Person, tho' not in the same Nature which he took afterwards. Now, the Person of the Word, in his divine nature, existed before he was made Flesh, or else how was it possible it should be tempted at that time? So I can see nothing to the contrary, but that we may well conclude the Lord Jesus, Son of God, to be the Angel that went before them, whom they were forbidden to provoke, and the most high God, the holy one of Israel, whom they tempted and provoked; he is called the Angel of God's Presence, or of God's Face, for the Lord said to Moses, Mypresence shall go: 
Exod 33.14.  It donoteth a distinct Person in the Godhead, from him whose Angel and whose Face he is. We must understand, where the Angel was, God was present, because that same Angel and Person was God; and what in v. ●● is named Presence, in v. 18 'tis called Glory, to be compared with what John saith, And we beheld his glory, 
Chap. 1.14.  as the glory of the only begotten of the Father. He also is called, the Angel of the Covenant, for 'tis plain how the Covenant of Grace between God and man is grounded only in Christ, and none else; 
Isa 63.9.  for Scripture saith, in him we are chosen and adopted, and only by him we shall be saved.  
This Truth, that the Angel who went before the People was the true God, the Spirit of God hath judged so important and necessary to be known, that at several times and in many places he declared it. Among others, the following is very considerable, if we mind time, place, and the very words compared together; I send an Angel before thee, saith the Lord; 
Psal. 68.7, 8.  and David, O God, when thou goest before thy people, when thou didst march through the wilderness; compared with that before quoted of the Church in the Wilderness: and the same who went before the People, is by the Psalmist in the same place called God, the God of Israel, of whom, v. 18, 'tis said, Thou hast ascended on high: thou hast led captivity captive, etc. for here is certainly a Prophecy of Christ's Ascension, as to that purpose this place is quoted by St. Paul, 
Ephes. 4.8, 9, 10.  for indeed here mention is made of the Figure and Type, namely, the Ark; as we see in the words of v. 1, & 2, taken out of Numb. 10.35, when the Ark was setting forward, and of the Antitype, the truth and body of the Type, Jesus Christ; and upon good ground, namely, that of Ephes. 4, many are of opinion, that this is a triumphant Psalm of our Saviour's Resurrection and Ascension into Heaven; for David, who was a Prophet, as a King, and knew himself in some things to be a Type of the Messiah, among things relating to his Kingdom, used to mix and comprehend some belonging to Christ, which is the chief scope of the Psalm: So Jah, Jehovah, God and Lord, are to be understood of the Angel or Christ; for, as a little before we observed the Deliverance out of Egypt, leading through the Wilderness, and bringing into the Land of Promise, was a Figure of the great Salvation of God's People, and of the deliverance of the Church, which is the proper work committed unto the Son of God the Lord Jesus, as King, Head, and Preserver of it. When David speaks of ascending, he acts not the Part of an Historian, but of a Prophet, and this is of an Ascension joined with a Triumph, and leading of Captives, which doth not belong to that of Sinai: Neither do we read any where that God ascended into Heaven from Sinai; but Christ having obtained victory over Death, the Grave, and all his and our Enemies, went up to Heaven; which cannot be said of the Ark: But the Ascension here spoken of, as Paul to the Ephesians doth interpret it, relateth to him who descended first into the lower parts of the earth, that is, to Christ, who ascended far above all Heavens, that he might fit all things, if we may take an Apostle's Interpretation of a Prophet; and it was Christ's or the Son of God's Voice that shook the Earth or Mount Sinai, as we may read it, Heb. 12.26.  
Before I leave this matter, to what I said upon another Text, which is much to our purpose about this Angel, concerning Jacob, I shall farther add, how the same person that appeared unto him was in the shape of a man; There wrestled a man with him, Gen. 32.24. 2ly, That same when Jacob was about blessing Joseph's Children, 
Gen. 48.16.  he called an Angel. The 3d thing is, That he is expressly said to be God Lord of Hosts, by Hosea, for the Prophet speaking of Jacob, said, He had power with God, upon the occasion of his wrestleing, and added, Yea, he had power over the Angel, and prevailed; he wept and made supplication unto him; he found him in Bethel, and there he spoke with us, even the Lord God of hosts: the Lord is his memorial, Hos. 12.3, 4, 5. So hence it appears how the Person who at Bethel appeared to him, when he fled from the Face of his Brother Esau, Gen. 28.13, compared with Chap. 35.1, and wrestled with him, when coming from Lanban he had passed over the Ford Jabbock; that same, I say, was God, the Angel, and the Lord of Hosts. This happened when Jacob and his Family were going into Canaan, whereof the possession had been promised him and his Posterity; upon the very borders he is met by his Adversary his Brother Esau, who had a pretence to that Inheritance, and therefore came against him with a power which of himself he was not able to resist, which made him afraid, as we read v. 11, wherefore upon such a trial, to strengthen his Faith, and make him lay hold the faster on the Promise, 
2 Cor. 1.20.  he in whom all the promises are yea and Amen, the Son of God, Jesus Christ, appeared unto him in the shape of a man, because in his Seed were the Promises made; but this man in appearance, was God in effect and nature, therefore Jacob did solemnly pray to him for his Blessing in the time of the wrestling, and would not rest till he had blessed him, which he obtained v. 29, and in remembrance of this, Jacob called the name of the place Peniel, because he had seen God face to face. This solemn meeting with much Comfort and Thankfulness Jacob remembered when he blessed Joseph and his two Sons, in these most remarkable words, God, before whom my Fathers Abraham and Isaac did walk, the God which fed me all my life long unto this day, the Angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless the Lads. The God of his Fathers the God that said him all his life-time, and the Angel which redeemed him from all evil, is but one and the same: And the Name Redeemer is proper to Christ, the second Person of the holy Trinity. All these are irrefragable Truths, which Socinians can effectually say nothing against, tho' out of the Rabbis or Jewish Doctors Writings they have been screwing up whatsoever they thought might serve their turn; thus they were not ashamed to borrow Weapons from Christ's sworn Enemies.  
But before I leave off this Point about Angels, whether the Creator or created ones, for the glory of the Son of God, I must say how, tho' these be called Sons of God, mighty in Power, and excellent in created Glory, yet when compared with God, 
Job 15.15. & 4.18. Isa. 6.3. John 12.40.  'tis said, they are not pure in his sight, and he chargeth them with folly, and they cover their faces at the brightness of his glory, as not being able nor worthy to look upon t. And that place about Divine Glory, as I already observed, we know to belong to our Saviour, who is called Lord and King of Glory, because all Glory is in and from him, as its true Spring and proper Centre; Psal. 24, compared with 1 Cor. 2.8. Hence it is that at his coming into the World all Angels were commanded to worship him, which was performed in their attendance on his Birth, proclamation of his Nativity, and celebrating the Glory of God on that account, and afterwards declaring his Resurrection, and confirming his Ascension, even ministering unto him after the Temptation, and when he was in his Agony: And whilst Angels are called God's Ministers, who ought to worship Christ the Son as their Maker, Unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever; to show that there is as much and as great a difference between the Son and Angels as there is between God and Angels, between the Creator and the Creature; for indeed, in that same place the Heavens are said to be the work of his hands; so no comparison to be made between the Son and Angels, the noblest of all Creatures. The Name Elohim, absolutely used, is never in Scripture given to any singular Angel or Man, which is the same as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the Article by the Apostle given the Son; so he is denoted by that Name as the true God by Nature:; And this same hath a Kingdom, signified by the Royal Marks of a Sceptre and a Throne, whereunto Eternity is annexed, for 'tis for ever and ever, whereby its duration or lasting is expressed; so is his manner of administration with righteousness, His sceptre is a sceptre of righteousness; and, to show his preparation for that administration of his, 'tis said, He loved righteousness and hated iniquity. Now the Throne is not for the Servants, but for the Son, because the Kingdom thereby denoted is not theirs but his, who indeed is graciously pleased to promise his Apostles, that at the last day they shall sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel; that is, they shall participate only at the last day with him in his Kingly Power, 
Mat. 19.28.  and in some degree be made partakers of his Glory, with an Interest in his Kingdom, which he is pleased to give them: in the mean time the Throne is not theirs, but his.  
Here I must take notice how, for preventing many Errors, rash and false Opinions, 'tis to be wished men would follow the Apostles Practise in this place, who abounding in quotations, gives us a Rule and an Example to do so, for with comparing Scriptures one with another, we come to be acquainted with God's Mind and Will in them, for by what is spoken of Angels in one place, and of the Son in another, we are taught what to believe of him and of them: They who follow not this Rule, are apt to frame in their Heads hasty, wrong, and false notions about God's Mind, especially in the matters we are now upon. And what is it that gives the Throne of the Lord Jesus Unchangeableness and Eternity, but his divine Nature? The words of the Psalmist, whence the Apostle draws his Argument, do not belong to Solomon, for the words, O God, do not relate to him, nor these, Thy throne is for ever and ever, for he reigned but forty years; nor to his Successors, who went off the Stage at or about the time of the Babylonian Captivity. We know how in some things Solomon was a Type of Christ, but it doth not follow that every thing relating to the Antitype should belong unto the Type, for 'tis enough for the Type so to represent and shadow out the Lord Jesus, that what the Prophet would teach concerning him should be spoken of the Type, whereby he was represented; for the Antitype is what the Spirit of God ever chief aimed at: So, though the Type and Antitype agreed in some things, in others there was a vast difference between them. But, that in this place the Apostle doth interpret those words of the Son of God Jesus Christ, it appears out of v. 8, but unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, etc. And 'tis in that Party but vain and idle words, to go about to persuade us, that the Apostle did not say what he said, and which is written for our instruction: And with us they should take notice how it is said, When he bringeth in his firstborn into the world, let all the Angels of God worship him; before he was set upon his Throne after his Ascension: So the Command was antecedent to that Session of his upon the Throne in Heaven. And this sitting at the right hand of God, puts me in mind now to add something to what I said upon that Text, and it is this, how we and our Adversaries ought to consider the usefulness and importance of that Testimony, 
Psal. 110.1.  The Lord said unto my Lord, Sat thou at my right hand; for the confirmation of the Dignity and Authority of Christ the Messiah is evidenced by the frequent quotations of it in the New Testament, as by our Saviour himself, Matth. 22.42; by Peter, in Acts 2.34, 35; and by Paul, in 1 Cor. 55.28. And Heb. 1.13, David was the Penman of the Psalm, not about himself, for him whom he therein doth treat of, he calls my Lord; as indeed, the things therein spoken of belong not to him. God did never swear unto David, that he should be a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedek; and the Jews knew well how David had nothing to do with the Priesthood, as being not of the Tribe of Levi, but of Judah. We read, That David was a King and a Prophet, Jeremiah a Priest and a Prophet; but the three Offices, Prophet, Priest, and King, never met in one Person, but in the Lord Jesus.   

CHAP. X. Objections Answered.  
THough now and then, on our way, we refuted some of their Cavils, yet now we must, by the Grace of God, come to the last part but one of our Discourse, hear what they say against these Divine Truths, and answer their chief Objections against the most holy Trinity, the Divinity of Christ, his eternal Generation, etc. As, first, They would have this Doctrine of the Trinity to be contrary to Reason, Because it gives Turks and Jews an aversion against the Christian Religion: But it must not be concluded, that a Doctrine is contrary to Reason, because some men, by reason of the corruption of their Nature, do not receive it. When the Gospel was preached by our blessed Saviour, and by his Apostles, many refused to receive and believe it, though it was very good, and not contrary to Reason: They that are Servants to their carnal Reason, do not receive that which is above it; and in this matter there are other Causes of the blindness and hatred of Jews and Turks. Heretics ought to be ashamed to join with Infidels, to overthrow a Doctrine which in all Ages hath by general Consent been looked upon as the Foundation of our Religion. In four things they would have it to be contrary to Reason; the first, One is not Three, yet, say they, we affirm God to be One, yet Father, Son, and Holy Ghost to be God, and yet the Person of the Son not to be that of the Father, nor of the Holy Ghost. The second, A thing is or is not: But, say they, you say the Paternity or Fatherhood really to be the same with the Essence, and the Essence really with the Filiation; therefore the Paternity is the same with the Filiation or Sonship, and is not the same. Thirdly, By the Rule of the Tertium, the things that are the same in another, or in a third, are the same among themselves. Fourthly, 'Tis contrary to the Principle of the expository Syllogism, which is this; The Essence is the Father, the Essence is the Son, therefore the Father is the Son. In these four things, say they, your Doctrine is contrary to Reason.  
In answer to this, First, in general we say, that such things as gainsay the Principles of true Reason are contrary to it, but not those which exceed and are far above Reason. Now things objected against by Antitrinitarians do neither fight against nor contradict Reason, only are above it; then these Principles or Rules are ill applied, because they compare God, the Author of Nature, with natural things. Now we answer in particular, as to the First Axiom, It is not overthrown, inasmuch as there is no opposition according to the same thing; nothing that is one, as it is one, and in the same respect may be called three, but God is one in Nature and three in Persons; the manner of subsisting doth distinguish the Persons, but multiplieth not the Essence. In the Second there is no Contradiction, for the Paternity and Filiation are distinguished among themselves in one way, and from the Essence in another; it is only a modal distinction between Paternity and Filiation, the least degree of distinction is between the thing and the manner of it, between the Essence and the Paternity or Filiation, wherefore Essence, Paternity and Filiation are distinct, but not different things: We never said 'tis the same, but 'tis of the same, and because they are of the same, they differ not as thing and thing. And if the Adversaries would argue thus, the Father is the same with the Essence, the Essence is the same with the Son, therefore the Father is the same with the Son, they would thereby conclude nothing against us; for we affirm the Father and Son not at all to differ as to the Essence: but the self-being of the Essence doth not conclude for the self-being of the Person; wherefore we say it is and it is not in a different respect, upon a different account. As to the Third, the Paternity and the Filiation are not the same with the Essence, but Father and Son have the same Essence. Now their Rule doth not here fit their Purpose; for, if they say Pa●●●ity and Filiation are the same with or in the Essence, it is incongruous; for Paternity and Filiation are modes or manners of the thing, that is, in the Essence are not the same with the Essence, because the thing and manner of it are not altogether the same: But if they say Father and Son are the same in uno tortio in●● third, we agree they are the same in this third, the Essence, though not altogether. As to the Fourth, they are mistaken, for this is no expository Syllogism, for in that way of arguing the middle term must be singular and incommunicable: But here the term Essence is not simply, but instead of an universal, and is communicable; so than the strength of the major Proposition lies in this, Some who is or hath divine Essence, is the Father; Some that hath divine Essence, is the Son: Ergo, if it be universally construed, the proposition is false, as thus, Every one that hath the divine Essence is the Father; or else they are mere particulars: Besides that there are four terms, for in the major the word Essence is understood in relation to an active generation; in the minor, to a passive. They would forge Contradictions where are none at all, and the ground of their Error is, that they would judge of an infinite Nature by a finite one, when the reason of both is very different: here the infinite Essence is individual, because infinite, communicable without being multiplied in many persons.  
To the same purpose they object in another manner; God is One, therefore cannot be Three: so there is none but the Father. The Answer is easy, and we already have said something to it; that which is one cannot be two or three in the same respect, it cannot be one and many in the same sense: What Christ says, 
John. 10.30.  I and my Father are one, is most true; so that One is related to the Nature, and I and Father to the Persons; so then God is one as to the Nature, and three as to the Persons. Seeing the Nature or Godhead cannot be multiplied, it follows, that the Persons and Subsistences only are multiplied. They say farther, A simple Essence cannot be of three Persons, otherwise it will be divided or multiplied: But though this be true of finite, it is not so of an infinite Essence; neither doth it follow, that because the Essence is common to three Persons, it may be common to more, for it were contrary to divine Revelation, which only mentioneth one Father, one Son, and one Holy ghost; the Father God, the Son God, the Holy Ghost God, yet not three Gods, but only one God. Neither doth it follow, that because divine Essence is common to three Persons, therefore every Person shall be common, and because the Persons are not common, therefore the Nature must not be. This is the cause of their Mistake, that they do not mind the distinction of the Person from the Essence; for though they differ not really, yet rationally they be distinguished: It doth follow to say, if the Essence be common to three Persons, therefore the Persons are common, no more than to say, if Abel hath his Nature from Adam, and is a Man, therefore he hath his Posterity, and is a Father from him. The things, say they, that are separately numbered are not one in number and essence; but the Father and the Son are separately numbered, and are by themselves called one, as one God, one Mediator, one God and Father, one Lord; wherefore Father and Son are not one only God or one Essence. But I say, Numeration doth not import a distinction of Essence; for in finite things Essences being multiplied, they are reckoned individual, not in relation to the Essence, but to the Persons; that which is numbered is one, neither is it one without the Essence, yet for all that it is not one essentially, or by his own Essence separated from any other whatsoever: so then, when the Father and Son are numbered, they are not so essentially, but personally; also they are the same in number and essence, (contrary to what is objected) whereof one is said to be with the other, as the word was with God, for in God to be one with another, is only an hypostatical or personal distinction; for as to be one with another doth import a distinction, so the same Evangelist showeth the Essence of both to be but one and the same, when he addeth, the word was God.  
Furthermore they argue thus; The Father and the Son are really distinguished, for the Father is absolutely God, that is the divine Essence; for, say they, the words Father and God are synonimous, or the same, because the word God is explained by the word Father, 
1 Thes. 1.3.  therefore the Essence of the Son is distinct from that of the Father. Our Answer is, Tho' the Persons of the Father and of the Son be really distinct, it doth not follow that their Essences are so, as if the Essence of one was not that of another, seeing the names of Father and Son are relatives, which indeed signify different Persons in the same Nature, but rationally distinguished from the same. If Father and Essence be synonimous, what remaineth for the Son besides a shadow of the Deity? For as the Paternity and Innascibility, or not being begotten, which are proper only to the Father, are incommunicable, that Essence, if it be the same thing as is the Father, cannot be communicated unto the Son: It doth not follow neither that the Names God and Father are the same, because the first is sometimes used for the last, seeing it is attributed unto the Father, in his Person to constitute the Deity, by reason of the Spring, and in the comparison and order of Persons, and not because the Person of the Father is in no wise distinguished from the divine Essence. Paul doth congratulate with the Thessalonians, for their Work of Faith, Labour of Love, and Patience of Hope; and because their Hope was in the Coming of the Lord Jesus, these three he referreth in God, whom he calls Father, because he already had made mention of the Mediator: But if the Names God and Father be the same, by reason that Paul had to the word God joined Father, by way of explication, 
Tit. 2.13. 2 Pet. 1.2.  than the Names Great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ are also the same, because two Apostles explain the name of Christ by that of God our Saviour. Besides, the Argument is faulty, for it hath four terms: to the end that both Propositions be true, in the major the Person of the Father, in the minor his Essence, are to be understood. To this Argument answereth another, The eternal Father is not the Son, whom John calls the Word, but the Essence of the Divinity, or that one God of Israel, is the eternal Father of the only begotten Son, therefore the Essence, or the God of Israel, is not the Son called the Word: The major is false, for to have it true the sense ought to be this; That Essence, or that God, which is the Father is not the Son, that is, the Person of the Father is not the Person of the Son. This farther they say, The Essence and one God are convertible, but according to us, in the Unity of God there is Trinity, therefore in the Essence there is also Trinity. But we say, God, who is one in Nature, is three in Persons; so in that only Essence there is a Trinity, that is, wholly and indivisibly subsisteth in three Persons; there are not three Essences: The minor Proposition must be understood of a Trinity of Persons, and not of Essences.  
I observed before how they quarrel much with several expressions used in this matter, as Trinity, Essence, Person, etc. which are neither profane nor unworthy of God, seeing in Scripture there are words which answer to them; 
Rom. 1.20 Col. 2.9. Phil. 2.6. 2 Pet. 1.4.  as, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, both signifying Godhead, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Form of God, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Divine Nature. Also the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which in Latin is translated sometimes Substance, sometimes Essence, showeth the quiddity or nature of the thing. As for the word Person, Clastical Authors, as well as Divines, in this holy Mystery, take it for a rational Subsistence, or Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; however out of these they take matter of Argument against us, for they say thus; The Doctrine of God ought to be taught according to Scripture, but those Names are not to be found therein, therefore not to be used. I answer the major Proposition, with a distinction; If they mean it of the sense of Scripture, we own we ought not to departed from it; but if of the letter and bare words, we deny it, for in the Church is the gift of Prophecy, and of explaining the word: And whereas Heretics are apt to wrest the sense, and under variety of words to involve and disguise the Truth, it is sometimes necessary to make use of new words to hit and refute their false glosses and interpretations, in defence of the Truth. As to the minor, about the several words we say Scripture speaks of one God, whence cometh Oneness or Unity, and Divinity is attributed to three, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; hence is Trinity. Jah and Jehovah signify 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, him that is; so from Esse we derive Essence: all which words we are not Authors of, but received them from the Primitive Church, which by a public consent used them almost from the Apostles time to these, which they reject when themselves would bring in barbarian words to signify their erroneous notions, as, God Essentiating and Essentiated, Apostolical God, Emphatical and articulated, God Author, and God Executor, and the like. Thus they make themselves really guilty of such things as unreasonably they would charge us with: They must needs have a very great opinion of their own abilities, seeing they would make us forbear the expressions used by the Church for so many Ages, and impose their new-fangled words upon the World: 'Tis in them a blasphemous Impiety, and a damnable Slander, to charge us with bringing in new Gods under such words as are made use of to explain Scripture; and they know well enough our meaning thereof, as we so often explained it: these different words do not change the sense, so may not be called erroneous; and tho' sometimes there be Variety in words and expressions, the sense still remaineth the same, so we do not consider them as Popish or Antichristian Forgeries. Indeed they make a ridiculous Objection, Jehovah the Essentiator Father, is of the masculine Gender, but Essence is of the feminine, therefore not to be used. But to say something to the purpose, they must prove, that in the nature of things, according to the Rules of Grammar, there is a difference of Sex: Of the like nature is this, no abstract Name signifieth a Substance; but Trinity is an abstract Name, therefore, etc. But the first proposition is false; for when we call Deity or Divine Nature, we understand a Substance, seeing in God all things are Substance and no Accident: So by the word Trinity we understand three Persons really subsisting. 
2 Sam. 23.  We find David's mighty Men of Valour to be distinguished by three and three. But as to their exception against the forenamed words, once for all I say to them, Tho' every Truth asserted be not in Scripture, in so many Letters, yet if it be therein implied, and by a good and necessary consequence thence derived, 'tis to be esteemed the Word of God as if expressed, because in it contained. Thus Preaching is the Word of God, because deduced out of it, not as to the words, but as to the sense: hence it is that Preaching produces the effects attributed to the the Word, as to quicken, convert, regenerate, and sanctify, when sometimes in a whole Sermon few Sentences are repeated word by word. And in several places of the New Testament the Evangelists and Apostles do quote out of the Old, not in the very words, but according to the sense and scope of the place: upon such a ground our Translators do render the word Hypostasis by that of Person; and so 'twas among the Primitive Church; which word we find used in the New Testament only four times, thrice in the Epistle to the Hebrews, Chap. 1.3, Chap. 3.14, Chap. 11.1, and 2 Cor. 9.4. yet every where in a different sense.  
Some few words more I shall add, to answer some other Objections; in order thereunto, I say, In the Deity there is an Essence which is but one; in that Essence do subsist three Persons really distinguished one from another, but only modally from the Essence, which doth not make any fourth thing in the Godhead. As there is but one Essence, so these three Persons are but one God, which Name God is spoken not only of the Essence, but also of every one of the three Persons, Unity in relation to the Nature, and Trinity in respect to the Persons. One Essence there is, without which there is no God, but the three Persons are this one God in Essence, who subsist in that Essence, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. The Adversaries are in an Error when they think there is no real difference, except there be some difference in number and Essence; they would have a Thing and a Substance to be the same, when that which differeth by reason of the definition from another, doth also really differ from it: God in one number and essence, admitteth of no renting or division, and they are not three bare Names; the Essence doth not, as the Genus, contain three Species, but it doth subsist in three Persons, in which all and in every one is the same Nature and Godhead: To own three Essences, were to assert three Gods; and we say that Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, as to the Nature, are of themselves, tho' not as to the Personality, for on this last account we own the Son to be from the Father, and the Holy Ghost from both. I say again, how the Essence maketh no fourth thing in the Godhead, as if the three Persons were derived from it as from a thing pre-existing, or as if it being common to the three, was really distinguished from the three; these we never said, but are against: The Essence is wholly and entirely common to every Person; these Persons do not proceed from the Essence, but we say, they from all Eternity subsist in the Essence: and tho' we own a distinction between Essence and Persons, yet they are not as a thing abstracted from the Essence.  
The great difficulty arising about this, is in the case of the Incarnation, which is justly called, The wisdom of God in a mystery, 
1 Cor. 2.7.  even the hidden wisdom which God ordained before the world unto our glory. The Son was incarnated or made Flesh, took upon him our human Nature; now the Father and Holy Ghost having the same Essence with the Son, how were not they both incarnated? We know the Person and not the Nature was incarnated, but how the Nature, which is wholly in the Son, as wholly in the Father and in the Holy Ghost, was not made Flesh, 'tis a Mystery that passeth all understanding: This is one of the secret things that belong to God, which we must never attempt to pry into; this is a Mystery which most humbly and with an awful reverence we ought to adore and believe, without any farther enquiry into it; because God hath revealed it, it is so, namely, that the Son, not the Father, nor the Holy Ghost, was made Flesh. In Religion there are several other things which we do simply believe, though it be impossible for our Reason to comprehend them, as, the Infiniteness, Immensity, and Eternity of God, whereof the former is every where, within and without, the greatest and least things: So is that union of both Natures in one Person incomprehensible. Thus that which is spoken of the divine Essence may be attributed to the three Persons, but to be understood of things which of themselves are competent to the nature of the Creator, Almightiness, Eternity, and suchlike Attributes; but not so in the things which belong to the Essence only upon the account of one Person, for such things belong only to that Person for whose sake they are spoken of the Essence, as the Incarnation of the Son, the Voice of the Father from Heaven, and the appearing of the Holy Ghost under the shape of a Dove. We know how the Works ad extra, or outward, are undivided and common to the three Persons, always excepting that wherein they destroy the proper Attributes of the Persons: Thus the Son and Holy Ghost, not the Father, are sent; the Son, not the Father nor Holy Ghost, was made Flesh, tho' the Father and Holy Ghost had a hand in the Incarnation, for the Angel said, 
Luk. 1.35.  The power of the highest shall overshadow thee, and the Holy Ghost shall come upon thee: 
Prov. 9.1. Rev. 21.3.  and Wisdom, whereby the Son is represented, hath builded her House, otherwise called the Tabernacle of God. So then the work of the Incarnation is common to the three Persons, but in the effect is terminatively only in the Son.  
When the Apostle speaks of the Mystery of our Salvation in the adorable and incomprehensible Incarnation of the Son of God, or his taking ●ur human Nature, he saith, 
1 Pet. 1.12 Exod. 25.20.22.  which things the Angels desire to look into, alluding to the two Cherubims on the Mercy Seat, towards which their Faces were, as desirous to see into't. In th' Tabernacle was the Ark, and above upon the Art was the Mercy Seat, as the most holy part of he whole, for there God met with Moses, and from thence he communed with him, all which was disposed according to God's own appointment, for the Mercy Seat was a Type of Jesus Christ, in whom and by whom alone God doth neat and common with Men in the way of Mercy: and as the Ceremonial Law was as a Schoolmaster, to bring us to Christ, as to him that was the end of the Law, so all Figures and Prophecies aimed at him. After God had sent all his Servants, and he would have no more Burnt-offerings and Sacrifices, than he sent his only Son to offer up himself a Sacrifice unto him for Sin. This most holy and blessed Son, by the Mouth of the Prophet David long before his coming, said, Lo, I come to do thy will, 
Psal. 40.6, 7. Heb. 10.7, 9  O God: He knew the Will of God, and declared he would come to do't. The words contain a particular emphasis, different from any thing of that nature expressed in Scripture. When the Prophets foretold Josiah's Birth, 
1 Kin. 13 2. Isa. 44. & 45.  and Cyrus' Empire, they are not introduced as saying any thing themselves, only one was to be born, the other to be holden and supported, because at that time they were not. But here the Son of God speaks as one who then was in being, and as a person who delighted to execute his Father's Will, as he effectually did, both actively and passively, and this he declared when come, 
Joh. 6.38.  I came down from Heaven not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me: and when upon the approach of the Hour wherein that Will was to be, 
Joh. 12.27.  his Soul was troubled, he said, For this cause came I unto this hour; and when the bitter Cup, which caused in him some Horror, was put into his hand, 
Luk. 22.42.  he said, Not my will. but thine be done. Let these words in the Evangelists, with those in the Psalm, be compared, an● there will appear such a divine harmony, as wi● convince they both came out of the same Pers●● only with this difference, that in the Psalmis seen a steady resolution, such as became a divine Person, and in the Gospel something of human Frailty; the reason is, because the first is expressed by a Prophet inspired by his Spirit and the last by himself, in the days of his Flesh: However coming is meant of a Person who pre-existed before that coming, and in the time of the Prophecy: And the circumstances o● God's having no more pleasure in Sacrifices and Burnt-offerings, and his saying, Lo, I come, which preceded his coming, do demonstrate in him a Choice and Resolution, which is the act of a Person; as the quoted place out of St. Peter's doth denote Christ's coming into the World to be such a Mystery as the Angels, so excellent and knowing Creatures desire to know and look into. But I return to my Answer to their Objections.  
These things being seriously considered, will afford matter enough to answer and refute the Cavils of the Enemies to this Truth: Before I proceed farther in answering some more Objections of theirs, I think it will not be amiss for me, because they make a scandalous Exception against that common place of the Apostle, which proves the most holy Trinity, There are three that bear record in Heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost. To add something more to what in the beginning I said about it; They say it is wanting in some Greek Copies, and in the Syriack, but through the Fraud of the Arrians, as saith Jerome, and Erasmus, 
Praefat. in Epist. Can.  whom Socinians would seem to appeal unto, confesseth it to be in the most ancient Manuscripts of Britain, Spain, and Rhodes; and it is clear, out of the Connexion of the Text, 
V 4, 5, 6.  that it cannot be taken away without making a palpable breach and interruption of the sense, for he hath just before spoken of God the Father, of Christ, and of the Spirit; and to agree with what he saith v. 8, there are three that bear witness in Earth, there must also be three that bear record in Heaven; there must be Witnesses in Heaven, as there are in Earth; the three in Earth agree in one; the three in Heaven are one: We read it quoted by 
* Ad Theoph. lib. 1. & in disp. contra Atrium in Conc. Nic.  Athanasius, so doth 
† Contra Varimadum.  Idacius, so 
* Contra Arrian.  Fulgentius; also it is quoted before the times of Athanasius, in the Controversy against the Arrians, by 
† De Vnit. Eccles.  Cyprian, and also by Tertullian, Ignatius, etc. This Text doth so well agree with that of the Evangelist, to baptise all Nations in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, which it doth allude unto, that none may doubt but it was suggested by the same Spirit; and the name word particular to St. John doth sufficiently witness, how those lines, together with the rest, came out of his Pen; Non unus, sed unum, saith one of the forequoted Fathers, Not one Person, sed unum, etc. one Nature; not only the unity of Testimony, as they are three distinct Witnesses, not only the unity of Consent and Will, but also of Nature, as, I and the Father are one; 
Joh 10.30  which the Jews understood very well, for thereupon they accused him of Blasphemy, and took up Stones to have cast at him; the reason they give for't is this; Because thou being a man, 
V 33.  makest thyself God. In few words, we cannot be baptised in the name of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, except the names of these three, equal in Authority, Dignity, and Essence, be called upon on our behalf; and, as I observed before, 'tis unlawful to be baptised in the name of any man: The Israelites were baptised by the Wor●● or Ministry, or, as the Syriack hath it, in the Hand of Moses, but not in his Name.  
Before we leave off these Objections against the most adorable Trinity, for the better understanding of the matter, I shall speak some few words more, for indeed the point is of so high a concernment, and affords such a plenty and variety of Discourse, that we can never say enough of what is to be known in the case: Tho', as we said, they be the same in Essence, yet they differ, first, in personal Names, as Father, Son, and Holy Ghost: Secondly, in their Order, Father first as the Spring, than Son, thirdly, Holy Ghost. Thirdly, In their manner of Operation; the Father doth act of himself, the Son from the Father, and the Holy Ghost from both: 
Gal. 4.4. John 14.26. & 15.26.  so the Son is sent by the Father, the Holy Ghost from both Father and Son, but we never read the Father was sent. So there is a difference in the outward Works, for tho' they be common to the three Persons, yet Creation is properly attributed to the Father, Redemption to the Son, and Sanctification to the Holy Ghost: Thus these three Persons have every one their personal unity, in number they are distinguished, yet are but one God in number, of Essential and natural unity; wherefore in God are not three Being's, three Infinites, or three Things.  
Yet they object, the names of Trinity, Personality, and Essence were not heard of before the Apostles time, nor the Doctrine of the Trinity. I answer to the first, that tho' the Names were not, yet the Things were, and Words are to signify Things; that there is one God, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, as it appears out of the places quoted to prove the Divinity of the Son and Holy Ghost, which here I need not to repeat; and if the things be true, why should Men dispute about words which do not in the least prejudice the Analogy of Faith, on the contrary do explain and confirm it? As to the Second, I say, that the Doctrine of the Trinity was mentioned of old, as I proved it already out of several places of Scripture, the Question is not about the Father, but the Son, concerning whom is the clear Testimony of Psal. 2, whose coming as Jehovah, and God of Israel, for the Prophet speaks to Israel when he calls him your God, was foretold, Behold, 
Isa. 35 4 5. Mat. 11.4, 5. Psal. 51.10, 11.  your God will come with vengeance; even God with a recompense, he will come and save you: which is applied unto Christ. Of the Holy Ghost mention is made by David, and in other places, but that which under the Old Testament was under a Veil, is clearly revealed under the New, for the Persons are plainly named, and their number expressed, as in the places already made use of, not only in the Baptism of our Saviour, but in his Commission given his Apostles to baptise, etc. which, as I shown, is unlawful to be done in any man's name: As there is truth in Jesus, so this is the truth of his Gospel, which also hath, in conformity thereunto, been the sense of the general Orthodox Councils, and of the Doctors of the Primitive Church; however this must be said, that tho' this Mystery of the holy Trinity be expressed in Scripture, yet 'tis such a one as exceedeth our understanding and capacity.  
Again they say, In most places of Scripture 'tis said there is but one God, and that this God is the Father of Jesus Christ. I answer, The Name God, when properly spoken, and of the true God, is taken either essentially for Divine Nature, or personalty for some of the Persons: when taken in the first sense, it doth not exclude but include the Persons, only it is set down in opposition to Idols and false Gods, which by Nature are not Gods; the things absolutely spoken of the Oneness of God do not at all prejudice the Persons which are that only God: hence it is that not only the Father, but also Son and Holy Ghost are called God. In this Essential sense are taken the places they quote out of the Old and New Testament; as for instance, 
Mark 2.7. Luk. 5.21.  that of Mark and of Luke, which among others they make use of, Who can forgive sins but God only? The word God belongs to the Essence, yet that power doth belong to the Son as to the Father, for there Christ assumeth it to himself; which same power is also attributed unto the Holy Ghost; Receive ye the Holy Ghost; 
John 20.21, 22.  whosoever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them. When the word God is to be understood personally, then there is a note of distinction joined, to know what Person is spoken of, whether Father, Son, or Holy Ghost. What we say of the word God, the same we affirm of the name Father; which doth not always signify the first Person, but also the Nature and three Persons. Thus when God is said to be Father of all, and in the Lord's Prayer we call him Our Father, when we cry Abba Father, etc. in all Texts of that nature, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are understood. As to the Particle besides me, sometimes used, it excepts nothing within, tho' every thing without the Deity, or that hath not the Divine Nature.  
But one of the Arguments which most of all they ground themselves upon is this; 
Joh. 17.3.  And this is eternal life, to know thee the only true God, and whom thou hast sent, Jesus Christ. They would have Christ to be excluded from being the only true God, which they restrain only to the Father; but herein they are much mistaken, for the word alone, or only, which they lay the stress upon, doth not belong to the Subject thee, but to the Predicate; not to thee, but to true God; not to that which goes before, but to that which followeth after: 'Tis not said to know only thee to be, but know thee to be the only true God. This we may look upon as one of their usual pieces of Sophistry: our Saviour makes it appear, that this is the true God whom Scriptures mention, namely, the Father who sent, and the Son that was sent; for the true sense of the place we cannot have a better Interpreter of than the Evangelist himself; 
1 John 5.20.  here the true God and eternal Life are joined in the same; the same that is eternal Life is also the true God, only eternal Life, and only true God. Now Christ is called true God and eternal Life; His Son Jesus Christ, 
John 10.28.  this is the true God and eternal life: And if here we consider eternal Life as the Gift of the only true God, doth not Scripture say in several places how eternal Life is the gift of Christ? Let of many this one serve for all, I give unto them, his Sheep, eternal life: If the Son was not that only true God, why should he join himself with the Father? And whom thou hast sent, Jesus Christ, to know thee, and whom thou hast sent Jesus Christ, to be the only true God. This is the true order of the words, whereof the true sense is resolved into this, The Father is the only true God, and not the only or Father alone is the true God. The words in the original are not thus; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to know thee only the true God; but thus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to know thee the only true God: where any one may see how the Particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not belong to the Pronoun thee, but to the true God; and tho' the Particle was removed, yet thereby Christ would not be excluded, for the true God is said, as I already observed, not in opposition to Christ, but to false Gods; according to the stile of Scripture, the word alone or only doth not always give a general exclusion, as we see it under the Old Testament, when Jacob said unto Reuben, My Son shall not go down with you, 
Gen. 42.38.  for his brother is dead, and he is left alone; he meaneth by the Mother's side, and not by the Father's, for all the rest were his Brethren: And in the New, in the Transfiguration, 
Luk. 9.36.  'tis said, And when the voice was past Jesus was left alone: Certainly Peter, James, and John were not excluded, for they were with him, but Moses and Elias. In the same sense are taken Martha's words to our Saviour, Lord, dost thou not care that my sister hath left me to serve alone? 
Luk. 10.40  only meant of Mary, and not of the Servants of the House. And to the matter now in hand, let it be known that Scripture never saith the Father only is the true God, tho' it says the Father is the only true God; so is the Son, and so is the Holy Ghost: Here Christ would not deny himself the honour of being the true God, which in other places he attributes unto himself, for the two words, alone and true, go with God, not with thee; and his meaning is, how true eternal Life consists in this, 
Gal. 4.8. 1 Thes. 1.9. 1 Cor. 8.6.  that men may detest Idols and false Gods, and be converted to thee, O Father, who art the only true God by nature, which Idols are not. Thus when the name One Lord is given the Son, 'tis not to exclude the Father, who also is Lord; and the name Spirit given the third Person doth not exclude Father or Son, who also are Spirit: so this Text doth admit of the same construction as this, when Paul saith, 
1 Cor. 9.6.  I only, and Barnabas, have we not power to forbear working? where it is plain, that Barnabas, far from being excluded, is joined and included in the same power with Paul: And here the thing requireth it, seeing eternal Life is made to consist in the knowledge of Christ, as of the Father, wherefore both are equally said to be the true God.  
Those men who pretend to know better than God himself what becomes his glory, are very apt to lay hold upon any thing like to favour their notions; wherefore because 'tis said, God hath appointed his Son heir of all things, 
Heb. 1.2. John 5.22.  and hath committed all judgement unto him, with other things to the same purpose, they with the Jews do therewith entangle themselves, and form this Argument: It cannot consist with the Majesty of the God of Israel, of the most high God, to be appointed Heir by any one, but God hath appointed his Son Heir of all things, therefore his Son is not the God of Israel, nor the most high God. In answer to this Objection, I say, first, that the Person of the God of Israel, etc. is not the Person of his Father, but the same Dignity, Nature and Authority he hath, as already demonstrated, common with the Father: he is not made Heir of all things in reference to his Nature, for he is such of himself by his own right and inheritance, not by favour, but in relation to his Office of Mediator; in which sense he is not only God, but God and Man, and upon this account is all Judgement committed unto him by the Father, but otherwise he is the God of Israel, and the most high. But, secondly, this Argument contains two branches, which before I have spoken about, yet to what hath already been said this I shall add, to the first part, That the Son of God, the Lord Jesus, above 3400 years before his being manifested in the Flesh, 
Numb. 24.17. Micah 5.2. Luk. 2.32. John 1.49. Acts 5.31.  was called the Star of Jacob, and the Sceptre of Israel, and long after the ruler in Israel; after his birth, the glory of Israel; and after his Baptism, the King of Israel, which in that sense and place is as good as God of Israel; as indeed in the same Verse he is called the Son of God, that is, of the God of Israel; a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.  
As to the other part, That he is not the most high God, we must in the first place take notice how they set up a high God, that is, Christ; and a most high God, the Father, which is by such a comparative difference to make two Gods; and they would have the Son of the highest not to be highest himself, as to Essence and Power: The word most high or highest is an Hebraism, for in that Language God is called Helion, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  that is, Supreme; whence the Greeks borrowed the Name they call the Sun by, because the chief of all Stars and Planets in the Firmament. But to show the falsehood of their Assertion, that the Son is not the most high God, let us consider the following things: The Angel said to the Virgin, He shall be great, 
Luk. 1.32.  upon every account, and absolutely so, according to the Character long before given of him by the Prophet, and Son of the highest, that is, of the true God; v. 35, compared with v. 76: 
Isa. 9.6.  and so according to that Divine Nature the highest himself, it ought to be observed how the word of the Angel, he shall be called the Son of the Highest, is the same as used by the Prophet, His name shall be called wonderful Counsellor, the mighty God, etc. As in the Prophet, by being called is understood, ●e shall really be: so it must be in the Evangelist, he shall be manifested, owned, and really be. Thus Zecharias said of John, And thou child shalt be called, really and truly be the Prophet of the highest: and when he spoke thus he was filled with the Holy Ghost, and prophesied, v. 67, as Elizabeth was when she said of the blessed Virgin, Whence is this to me, that the Mother of my Lord should come to me? v. 41, 43. How could he, according to the flesh, be her Lord before he was born? In the second place, seeing I already proved Jesus Christ to be Jehovah, it necessarily follows, he is the most high God, 
Psal. 33.18  for he whose name alone is Jehovah, is the most high over all the earth. Also I proved him to be he whom the People provoked in the Wilderness; and Scripture calls him the most high, whom they provoked in the wilderness. The proper Son of God is God, the Son of the Highest is the Highest: And the words of Psal. 107.11, 
Psal. 78.17, 56.  do belong to the People in the Wilderness, who rebelled against the word of God, and contemned the counsel of the most high. They would make use against us of that place where when Melchisedes blessed Abraham God is called the most high God, whereby they would confine that Title only to the Person of the Father, which before I refute, I must by the by take notice how the word most high is thrice mentioned in three Verses, 
Gen. 14.18, 19, 20.  to show how the Blessing upon Abraham was the Work of the three Persons in the Godhead, as all three meet in the Conception of Christ, in the blessed Virgin's Womb, and in his Baptism. The same high God, in whose name Melchisedec blessed Abraham, is the same who called Abraham, received him into favour, and at that time had given him Victory over four Kings, as it appears out of the place. Now, that most high God who called Abraham is the same as made a Covenant with him, who afterwards commanded him to sacrifice his Son to himself; who is that same Angel, as before we have taken notice of, who is called the Lord himself, and upon that occasion said to him, 
Gen. 22.  By myself have I sworn, saith the Lord, that in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed. Now the Apostle teaches that not only the Father, but also the Son, is Author of that Covenant, when he saith, The Testament, or Covenant, 
Heb. 9.16:  was confirmed by the death of the Testator: And I would have them to tell me, who besides Christ hath with his Death and Blood sealed and confirmed that Covenant; certainly none but that God that was manifest in the flesh, 
Act. 20 28.  that same God who hath purchased his Church with his own blood: So that Melchisedec, by the name of most high, meant the Son as well as the Father, who cannot be separated; for, as Scriptures bear witness, the Son is always in the Father; therefore every where in the Word of God, the name most high is spoken of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, which with that of God of Gods and Lord of Lords is essentially taken, and excludes indeed Creatures, but never Son and Holy Ghost, whom it doth truly and properly belong to.  
Now we are come to the Objections that are directly against the Divinity of the Person of Christ, which must be answered; and in order to it we must here premise something which before we gave a hint of, how the word God is taken in two senses, first, properly, then metaphorically, and the name God doth properly signify the true God. Now he is the only true God, who essentially and by nature is such, for every thing is called true by its nature, as true Man, true Gold, true Silver, etc. as said before, from the nature of Man, of Gold, and of Silver, so that if only it be like a Man, and like Gold, then 'tis neither true Man nor true Gold, for simile non est idem, the thing like is not the same. If the true God be he that hath God's Nature and Essence, certainly he is the high and independent God, seeing Divine Essence is in itself Chief and Independent. Now secondly and improperly, or metaphorically, are they called Gods that in something are like God by participation and likeness, as Moses was to Pharaoh, so Angels and Men; but these metaphorical Gods may not be called true God, nor worshipped as such: that which is somewhat like a thing may never be called the same thing. Thus I do premise in opposition to Socinus' Notion, how in Scripture the word God is taken for the high God, independent from any other, and for him who by the chief God is in some manner made partaker of the Divinity. In the first sense God is God the Father, called one; in the second is Christ, and some other Men; he, because of his Sanctification, and being sent into the World, where Christ, as he would have it, doth not affirm himself to be God, but with dependency, that is, a titular, a made and coined God, as by virtue of that Sanctification and Mission: when that very Sanctification and sending into the World show him to be true God, 
Joh 10.36  for in the place is meant that Sanctification which preceded his coming into the World, for the Father sanctified first, and then sent him, which belonged to him, not as a Man, but had it before he was Man, and before he came into the World; for he saith, first he was sanctified by the Father, and then afterwards sent into the World; that is, he became Man; for before he was made flesh he had been sanctified by the Father, that is, appointed and constituted Mediator and Head of the Church, but Mediator he could not be, except he were true eternal God: As to his being sent into the World, that also showeth, that his Being is not of this World, but from above, from Heaven, whence he was sent into the World from the Bosom of the Father; which argueth him to be above Man, and to have had a Being before he was made Man, for he was the Son of God; in Heaven he was not Man, but was made so upon Earth. We speak of the rising of the Sun, which hath a Being before he riseth on our Hemisphere, but only at such a time he appeareth unto us, like the Star that guided the Wisemen to the place where he was born; and of Christ it is said, Thou hast the dew of thy youth from the womb of the morning. As to what Socinus saith, That Christ is said to be God, but not that only God, we answer, how Christ is not upon every account said to be God, but only he is said to be such a God as true divine Worship is due unto, who alone is to be worshipped and served, as he saith: 
Mat. 4.10.  So he is no other but the only God in Scripture, called the true God.  
They object the place where the Holy Ghost saith, 
1 Cor. 8.6.  But to us there is but one God the Father, of whom are all things; who is distinguished from Christ, who is one Lord, by whom are all things: But the Adversaries Prejudice makes, that they either will not or cannot see how in the place St. Paul doth not separate one God from Christ, nor one Lord from the Father, for his scope is to teach us Christians, how there are not many Gods nor many Lords, but only one God and one Lord: Now if the Father was one God and one Lord separately from Christ, then there would be two Gods and two Lords, which wholly overturns the Apostle's design; so that of necessity we must say the Father and Christ are one God and one Lord, consequently that God and the Lord are the same, for there is no doubt but that God is the Lord, and he who by Divine Reason is Lord, and opposed to Idols, as 'tis the true sense of the place, he also for certain must needs be God: So then when Paul saith that only God to be the Father, he also owns him to be the only Lord; and when he saith the one Lord is Christ, he owns him to be one God; and as he excludeth not the Father from being Lord, so he excludeth not Christ from being God. 'Tis a weak notion grounded upon these Particles of whom and by whom are all things, for both the same in Scripture are attributed to God, 
Rom. 11.36.  Of him, and through him, and to him are all things: so there is in them nothing to exclude Christ from being God, for both belong to Father and Christ, only one is chief attributed to one, the other chief to the other. 'Tis an Error in the Adversaries to say the words by whom to signify a second Cause, seeing that very same Particle is elsewhere attributed unto God, which in the same place we must also believe to be attributed unto Christ, seeing the Apostle's mind is to show there is only one God and one Lord: But in Socinus' sense there would be two Gods, and two Lords, one, of whom are all things; the other, by whom are all things; tho' the same Apostle doth without any such Particles absolutely affirm, There is one Lord, one God and Father of all: 
Ephes. 4 5, 6.  wherefore Men must conceive no Mystery to be in those Particles, to make a distinction between God and Lord; one and the same Nature or Person is certainly God and Lord. Thus David saith, 
Psal. 85.8.  I will hear what God the Lord will speak. And if two be so, one is no prejudice to the other. Hence I conclude, how no stress is to be laid upon these Particles of and by, as if there were two different Natures and Principles; as also in another place already quoted, they would upon the Particle and, where 'tis said, To know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, where they would have the copulative Particle to join different Natures and Persons to exclude him from being the true God: but after this manner of interpreting, the words God and Father must import two different Subjects and Natures; so that God shall be one, and Father the other; for 'tis said, 
Gal. 1.4.  according to the will of God and our Father; which contradicts their Opinion of one only God, namely, the Father; but in that place the words God and Father are essentially taken for Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, one only God.  
Farther they argue thus; If Christ be the Son of that only God, he is not the only God himself, or else he would be his own Son; but he is not his own Son, therefore he is not the only God. But I answer, the Son is distinguished from that one God, not as to the Nature, but as to the Person, for the Essence cannot be distinguished, because the Son hath not part of the Nature, but wholly, together with the Father, the Person must be distinguished, for he is not Son of himself, but of another, tho' he be God of himself. Hence followeth, that as to the Nature the Son is that one God, not as to the Person, seeing in Nature it doth agree, but must be distinguished as to the Person.  
Another Objection is this; If Christ be the Son of that only God, then that one is not God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, but only the Father, so that only God is not in three Persons. We answer, When Christ is called the Son of one God, one God is there taken for the Person of the Father, or as it subsisteth in the Person of the Father, for Christ is the Son only of God the Father; but when Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are said to be one God, than one God is taken essentially. They need not say, where are one and three there are four, as if the Essence and three Persons were four things really distinct. But we answer, Where are one Being and three Being's, there indeed are four, but not where are one Being and three manners of being. This may be illustrated by an Example of Metaphysic, where is one Ens or Being, and three as properties or qualities unum, verum, and bonum, one must not conclude there are four, but unum, verum, bonum to be simply one Being: Wherefore seeing in this most simple Essence the Persons are Subsistences, or Manners of subsisting, it follows that three Persons and one Nature do not make four in God. As to the Rule of the tertium, which I have taken notice of before, it faileth here, because the Essence is communicable, for Divine Nature being infinite, is so.  
Now we come to some Objections relating to the Son of God's eternal generation; The Father alone, say they, is not begotten, but the Son and Holy Ghost are begotten and made, so cannot be the true God. We know how the relative Property of the Father is to beget, of the Son to be begotten, and of the Holy Ghost to proceed, so the word God is attributed to Son and Holy Ghost; that the Son is called only begotten, because he is the natural Son and the first born as Mediator, because he hath many Brethren; he is called the brightness of the Father's glory, to show that as from a lightful Body proceeds Light, so the Son as naturally comes from the Father: and 'tis one thing to be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Image of God, 
Col. 1.15. Heb. 1.3.  and another 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the express Image of the Father, but Christ is called both. He who is called the Image of God, is thereby distinguished from God, but he which is called the Character of the Father, is distinguished from the Father, not from God; wherefore we say Christ, as Mediator, may be and is called the Image of God. But this comes short of what is intended, to express the eternal generation of the Son of God; tho' our Adversaries would have that Filiation to be grounded upon his Mediatorship. These few things, which may have a place in our Discourse, being premised, I now directly answer the Objection: To be begotten is to be understood, as becomes God; to be begotten in God, doth not imply to have a beginning, or to be made in time. Secondly, they say, Divine Nature admitteth of no renting or division, wherefore nothing doth proceed that is different in number from it. I answer, There is no Comparison between the Finite and Infinite Essence, for this last is communicated to the Persons without multiplication, separation, or division. Thirdly, they go on, That which is begotten hath a beginning. I answer; 'Tis true in the Creatures, but not in God. Fourthly, Nothing, say they, is wanting in the Father, so it is superfluous to give him a Son. I answer; The Father is perfect, therefore he hath a Son, God's fecundity makes the Persons, but borroweth nothing from without. 5thly, Whatsoever cometh from unity to plurality cannot be perfect, except the substance be multiplied. I answer; God doth not come nor go, with God there is no terminus a quo, not ad quem, no place from which and to which, but God is always God, is not divided, but begets indivisibly. 6thly, If the Son be from the Father, it followeth that all the Father hath is divided, because it passeth into the Son; so the Father hath given the Son part of himself, and so the Son hath deprived the Father of something. The Answer is, The Son is not asunder from the Father, for the Essence is the same: There is no renting, the Father with giving loseth nothing, but retains all, the Nature is whole in the Father, and whole in the Son, as one Candle lighteth another without any dimunition of its own light. 7thly, They say, a man hath no Son before he hath begotten. I answer, Nor God neither; but this I must say, 'tis a gross mistake to draw Consequences from human things to divine, which is to measure God by Men: God always begetteth, as the Sun doth produce its brightness. 8thly, If God begets, 'tis either according to his Nature or to his Will; not the first, for than he would beget without consideration; if according to his Will, than the Father's Will was before the generation of the Son. I answer; He begets according to his Nature, and that freely. 9thly, If the Son be born he had a beginning, so is not from Eternity. I answer; The Father is eternal, the Son eternal, and the Generation eternal: in things created, to beget, is indeed to produce that which is not; but in divine and uncreated 'tis otherwise. 10thly, A spiritual Nature doth not beget. We say, a Spirit created doth not, but the Creator exceedeth the Reason of the Spiritual Creature. 11thly, If the Father hath begotten the Word, either he hath begotten Himself, or another, but neither of these, therefore He hath not begotten; Himself He hath not begotten as granted, nor another neither, because there is no other God, and so not begotten at all. I answer the word, he hath begotten, alium non aliud, another Person, but not another thing; He hath begotten another, who is God, but not another God. 12ly, If God hath begotten the Word, either the whole Divine Essence hath begotten, or only the Father's Person; if the Essence, than it hath begotten Himself, or another; both which be absurd, if the Father's Person hath begotten, either he is the only true God, or else the word is not that Son of the only true God, wherefore the Father hath not begotten the Son from Eternity: We answer, the Father hath of Himself begotten from Eternity, there is no necessity for the Father only, to be the true God, 'tis enough he is the only true God, therefore the Son is the Son of the only true God, not of two Persons, but of the Father.  
These Objections which I have set down in short, and answered as briefly, I look not upon as material, because not taken out of the word of God, the only Judge of those Controversies, but herein they show how they affect Sophistry, to impose upon some sort of People; but however, some Advantage we get by it, for out of all these it appears, how this true Heavenly Doctrine is not contrary to the Principles of Reason. They have three or four Cavils or Questions more, which, by the Grace of God, we shall answer in few words: First, Whether the Father begat the Son when he was already a Son, or before he was the Son? I answer, the Father is Eternal, the Son Eternal, and begotten from all Eternity, which hath no Parts; the Father could no more be without the Son, than the Sun without Light, or Light without Brightness: Their 2d Questie on is, Whether the Father, after the Generation of the Son, hath begotten any other, because he is called the only Begotten; if he hath Begotten none other, than he hath lost the Power of Begetting: But I answer, that Generation is without time, always perfect, not successive, without beginning or end. The 3d is, the Father hath begotten, either unwilling or willing; if unwilling, than he hath suffered something which he would not; if willing, than his Will was before the Generation of the Son; I say, part of this Argument was answered a little before, whereunto I shall add: The Will of God was indeed before all Creatures, for he hath done whatsoever he pleased; 
Psal. 115.3.  but 'tis not so of the Son, for of him we read in Scripture, he was, and is with the Father; so the Son is no Creature, neither is he made by the Will as Creatures are; he is born of the Father, and is Coeternal with the Person of the Father; the Father's Will is in Him; for in HIm he willeth, and by Him He doth all things: In those things which proceeded from Nature, there is no Fore-counsel or Predeliberation; yet the Father hath not begotten, being unwilling; for He begat with a Will, not Antecedent, but Concomitant; thus the Father's Person is, not because He was willing to be, but because He is, and willeth not Himself not to be; so the Son is not born against the Father's Will, neither doth the Fathers Will go before His Generation. A 4th presumptuous and unbecoming this adorable Mystery, Vain and Sophistical Cavil of theirs is this, Did the Father cease to beget? If so, that Discontinuation hath the beginning of the Son. The Answer is this, The Substance and Generation of God are without, and above time, and Divine Nature is not deprived of a begetting faculty, because 'tis without time; 'tis an Impiety to say the Father discontinued, for then thereby would be introduced three Parts and Spaces, before, now, and after, it were a Change, which God is uncapable of, He is above those things which import a Duration; Fire produces Heat, yet is not heated by that Heat; it shall never cease to heat, and the heat is ever perfect: But these Comparisons out of natural things, are very defective to represent those high and incomprehensible Mysteries.  
Out of these I leave the Reader to consider the manner of Spirit, which that People are acted by; how familiar, how bold, how saucy they would be with God: These holy things lay before them as Pearls before Swine; they speak of, and handle them as they would in Schools the meanest Subjects of all, only to try their Wits, which therein are very Profane, and to make a Show of their Parts, when Men, that have a true Sense of Piety, instead of going about to play with, and ridicule them, will ever think and speak of them with a Religious Fear, and Awful Reverence: There is a danger for those, who dare to approach to God with a strange Fire, only to think on't, should make Men fear and tremble. However, let them wander and blaspheme never so much concerning that Eternal Generation; the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the thing is, Scripture hath revealed it, but the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: the manner how, it hath not, neither could we comprehend or express it, however it hath declared as much as is convenient and necessary for us to know. Solomon, whose glorious Kingdom was a Figure of that of Christ, and his Renowned Wisdom was a Type and a Shadow of that of the Son of God, who alludeth to it when he saith, that the Queen of the South came to hear the Wisdom of Solomon, 
Matth. 12.22. Prov. 3.  and behold a greater than Solomon is here. That King, I lay, in that Chapter, already mentioned more than once, hath under the name of Wisdom, made a notable mention of Christ, the Wisdom of the Father, the Wisdom he therein speaks of, is not an Attribute of God, or a quality of Wisdom, infused into, and inherent in Man, but is a Person, self-subsisting; for he is said to cry, to call and invite Men to come; which Actions are proper for Persons, and not for things; and to this place of Solomon doth John regard and ●llude, when he saith, in the beginning was the word; the Meaning of which Word, beginning, is by that King at large explained in that place. And when the question was put, who Christ was, Peter in his Confession saith, not Moses nor Elias, nor none of the Prophets, nor John Baptist, the greatest among them that were born of Women, but the Son of the living God, by an Eternal Generation, whereunto belongs what our Saviour saith of himself; As the Father hath Life in himself, so hath he given to the Son to have Life in himself; 
John 5.26.  here as the Father hath Life in himself, so the Son hath it in the same manner that is in himself, that he may properly be as the Father, 
Ch. 6.57.  the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: Socinians would have him to be the Son of God in their Sense, after his Resurrection; but after it, he can be the Son of God no more than David was more the Son of Jesse, after he came to be King; but Christ being the Son of God, he by his Resurrection declared his Deity, which he had before; for as St. Paul saith, was declared to be, not made, the Son of God by the Resurrection from the Dead.  
They continue Sophistically to argue thus: Divine Essence is the Father, Divine Essence is the Son; therefore the Son is the Father; after the fame manner they say, the Father is the true God, but the Son is not the Father, wherefore the Son is not the true God; and again, the true God is the Father of Christ, but the Three Persons are not the Father of Christ, therefore the Three Persons are not the true God: But these and the like must not be reckoned among the Expositorious, and Categorical Syllogisms, because these Terms, Divine Essence, and True God, are not incommunicable, but common to the Three Persons, consequently they conclude no more than do particular Affirmatives; for in a true Syllogism, according to the Rules, the major Proposition is not to be particular nor equivalent to it; for from such a Proposition, when any thing communicable to more, is the subject of it, and is restrained unto one Particular, out of it nothing can be concluded; and this Proposition being made particular, the terms of the Subject or Predicate are supposed to be Reciprocal, as if God and the Father be the same, which is false; we grant the Father to be the only true God, so we say of the Son; but thence it doth not follow, that the Son is the Father; for in saying the Father is the true God, we do not relate to his Paternity, in respect to his Son, but to his Being and Nature, as the Scripture never said, that the Father only is the true God, so we do not say, that he that is the true God is the Father only; but to affirm, that because each Person is God, therefore one Person must be another, is just without giving any reason at all to  what God hath declared. The Father, say they, is the only true God; but the Particle alone, or only is restrictive of the Predicate, not of the Subject; for Son and Holy Ghost are the same God, the Person is not formally Person by the Essence, but by the manner of having that Essence, and thus there are Three Persons of the same Essence; as to the Generation we do not say that the Father hath sometimes begotten, and sometimes not, nor that the Generative Faculty is an Attribute of that Nature, but a personal Propriety of the first Person; who in a peculiar manner hath the Essence; wherefore 'tis no wonder if the other Persons have it not.  
But we must proceed upon other Objections of theirs; they say, every where Scripture distinguisheth Father and Son one from another and never confounds them together; for it teaches that there is but one God the Father, of whom are all things, and we in Him, and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by Him, and one Holy Ghost, by whom we cry Abba Father; they are distinguished by the Manifestation of the Trinity in the Lord's Baptism, and in the form of Baptism, etc. We answer, They are Names Relatives, which assert the Distinction of Persons; but because they are distinct Persons, it doth not follow that there is not one and the same Essence of the three Persons, and that they are not one only God, Father, Maker and Preserver of all; and out of the Texts they produce, they cannot make out what they intent; how the Father and the Son are never contained together under the Name of God; for the Persons are distinguished where Scripture speaketh Relatively of God, and doth oppose or compare them, or describe their Proprieties. Further they object, they have distinct Essences, whose workings are distinct, but Father's and Son's workings are distinct, therefore their Essences are so: But we say, the major Preposition is to be understood of Operations ad extra, or outward; for if whilst one doth work; the other ceaseth, than the Essences are distinct, but as to the inward workings there is no distinction or difference of Essences; far from it, that the Generation of the Son, and the Procession of the Holy Ghost, do confirm the unity of Essence; for by the Generation, one and the same whole Essence of the Father is communicated unto the Son, and by this same reason there is but one and the Essence of both: Now the Minor Proposition speaketh of inward Operations, and this Omonimy or Ambiguity of Terms brings in four Termini in the Argument, contrary to Rules; but if one and the same kind of Operations be understood, than one of the Propositions is false; the major is understood of those, ad imra, the minor of those ad extra, and in the case of the Incarnation, there are two terms to be considered; a quo from whom, and ad quem to or in whom, tho' as thus it be terminatively in the Son, yet a quo, or originatively, it is the work of the whole Trinity.  
Another Argument of theirs is this, the Essence unbegotten and begetting is not the same with the Essence begotten and not begetting, but the Essence of the Father is unbegotten, yet hath begotten the Son, but the Son's is begotten yet nor begetting, therefore the Essence of the Father is not the same with that of the Son: This Argument is borrowed from the Arrians, whereof the minor Preposition is false; namely, that the Essence of the Son is begotten, the Names begotten, or not begotten, do not belong to the Essence, but show an Hypostatical or Personal Difference: Should the Essence beget, it would either beget itself; and so should be begotten of itself, so it would make many different Essences of the Godhead, whence would follow many Gods. Moreover, as in natural things, not the Essence but the compositum doth beget, so in divine things the Person begets, and is begotten, which yet is not a vain Relation, seeing it is not constituted without the Essence. Now, if it were true, that the Divine Essence doth beget, one could say, either the Son doth beget, or deny the Son to have the Divine Essence. Again, They say, Two or three distinct Persons have so many distinct Essences, for the distinction of Essences doth follow that of Persons; so than Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, being three distinct Persons, they have three distinct Essences; but the first Preposition is true, only in natural, not in Divine things; besides, they are in a mistake, when they think there is no real Distinction, except the things do differ in an Essential Number, when there are several things that differ in the thing and definition, which yet in Essence and Number are but one: Here by the by, I say, the words like and likeness, when a Comparison is made between the Persons, is not convenient to be used, but equal and equality, which indeed containeth a likeness, but something above: Another thing I shall add here, how some things are properly spoken of the Essence, which also are properly spoken of the Persons, for 'tis properly said of the Essence and of the Persons, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, that they are Spirit and Holy; for the word Spirit is spoken of as common and essential, 
John 4.24.  God is a Spirit; properly and personally of the Son, Christ declared to be the Son of God, according to the Spirit of Holiness, 
Rom. 1.4. Heb. 9.14. ●Pet. 3 18.  and who through the Eternal Spirit offereth himself; and elsewhere, Christ was put to death in the flesh, but quickened in the spirit. So of the Father and Holy Ghost; also to be holy is an Attribute of the Essence, yet in particular and properly in Scripture, attributed to the Father, to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost: Upon this Matter one thing more I shall take notice of, how Adjectives in the Plural may be attributed to God, by reason of the Number of Persons, and Substantives in the Singular, only upon account of the Essence.  
Further they object, Christ hath a Father, who is the God of Christ, but the Father hath no God called his, therefore Father and Son are distinguished in Essence, the major they prove out of our Saviour's Word, I ascend unto my Father, and to your Father, unto my God, and to your God, and my God my God why hast thou forsaken me? I answer, Christ hath a common Father and God with us, in as much as the word was made Flesh, and dwelled among us and in as much as the Man Jesus Christ is Mediator, between God and Man, yet so, as in his Mediatorship he is true Man, so he is true God: This Discourse being intended for his Brethren, he gins with the Profession he makes to own them as his Brothers, Go to my Brethren; all which to be understood of the Nature, which the Brotherhood doth relate to; and tho' the Father continueth such in relation to what the Son was, when the Word was with God, yet in the Birth and Incarnation the Father remaineth what he was; God is the Father of all Flesh, but not in the same manner and sense as he is the Father of the word; in Scripture 'tis declared in what sense, and on what side they are Brethren to the only begotten Son of God, 
Colos. 1.18.  I will declare thy Name unto my Brethren, but he said before, I am a Worm, and no Man; 
Psal. 22.6.  Christ is by the Apostle called the Firstborn amongst many Brethren, also because the Firstborn from the Dead. Furthermore they say, if Christ, when he speaketh of God, should mean also himself, he would include himself in the mention he makes of God, but he doth not, but maketh a difference between himself and God, whom he calls the true God; so in the Apostolical Writings, God and Christ are spoken of asunder, which places I quote in the Margin, 
c. John 3.16. and 17.3. d. Rom. 16.23. 1 Tim. 6.13, 14, 15, 16. 1 Cor. 15.24. Col. 1.3. Eph. 4.5. 1 Thes. 1.2, 3, 9, 10.  to show we omit none of them: So, say they, he not joining himself with God, showeth he is not the same with God; thus the name God absolutely taken, belongeth only to the Father: I answer, the name of God is taken either personally, namely, as he begets, and as he is begotten; and thus the Son is distinguished from the Father, and upon this account the Apostle speaks of them separately, Christ is distinguished from God, both in Person and Office, not in the Godhead or Essence, or else the name is absolutely, simply, 
Rom. 8.31, 32. 1 Tim. 1.1. 1 John 5.20. Joh. 14.1.  and essentially taken, when the Question is about the Godhead; then as to the Deity, the Son is not distinguished from the Father, as when Christ saith, there is none good but God, he doth not exclude himself from being good, 'tis as if he had said unto the Man, if thou believest me to be good, for so thou callest me, thou must also believe me to be God, for none is good but God; and this was to have the Man to look upon him to be God: Again, When our Saviour saith, Unto God all things are possible, and that God is able out of Stones to rise Children unto Abraham, when the Apostles in their Salutations name first God, and our Father, and then the Lord Jesus Christ; 'tis no good Consequence to say that the Son is not of the same Nature with the Father, for the Name of God is therein attributed unto the Father, as the Spring, and first in order of the Deity, than the Son is proposed as Mediator, to lead us unto God, for we are led by Christ unto the Father to worship and adore him together with the Father; for he saith, Ye believe in God, believe also in me, thereby showing we ought to render unto him the same things we render to the Father; wherefore in several places we read how when the Name Father is added, yet that of God is immediately put before; when generally something is taught, which belongeth to Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, then having named the Father, the Mediator is mentioned, to breed in us Hope and Comfort; thus the same Apostle opposeth one God to Idols, where Christ is not excluded; for immediately in the same Verse he declareth who that one God is, namely, the Father of whom are all things, and we in him, and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, 
1 Cor. 8.6. Ephes. 4.5, 6.  and we by him; thus in another place he saith, there is one God, as there is one Baptism, Christ, in whose Name we are baptised, is not excluded from that oneness of Godhead; 
Joh. 14.6.  and because he would come to the Mediator, he very fitly nameth the Father, to whom, as the Head of the Deity, there is no approach without the Mediator; so by the Name Father is represented God, essentially offended by Mankind, and by the Son and Christ that Person of the adorable Trinity, who hath undertaken to make our Peace, and reconcile us unto God, he is the way, the truth, and the life, and none can come to the father but by him: So when we read the word God, we must not separate the Father nor the Son, because the Divinity of the Father, and of the Son, is but one and the same.  
Moreover they object the Father is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God of himself, hath all of himself, and acts of himself, but the Son is not God of himself, he is from the Father, himself he saith he came from the Father, and the Father sent him; to this I answer, They go upou a wrong Principle for they would have this to be of one self, or of another, to import a different Essence or Nature, for even in created things, that which is begotten is ever of the same Nature with that which hath begotten; but by reason of Imperfection these are one only in Species; but God, the Father, and the Son, may not be said to be one in Species or Kind, because thus they would make two Gods: What they add how in Divine things, he that begetteth, and he that is begotten, are not one, either in Essence or Species, because Men and Angels are called Sons of God, which are not one with God, either in Nature or Kind, is very frivolous; for 'tis certain they are called Sons of God upon a very different account from that on which Christ is so called: None is ever called God's own and proper Son, only begotten, come from the Bosom of the Father; for unto which of the Angels, or Men, said he at any time thou art my Son, 
Heb. 1.5.  this day have I begotten thee; and again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son. Moreover, they are mistaken, to think that to be of another, is to be of a different and inferior Nature; indeed, he who receiveth not all, but out of favour only part of what another hath, may be said to be inferior to him of whom he receiveth, but he not so who hath all that another hath; not by favour, but by Nature and Generation: They are farther much mistaken, when they deny Christ, simply and absolutely to be God of himself; for he must need be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, who is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. That is a being or Essence of himself, Life of himself, Holy of himself, Power of himself, is good of himself, Light of himself, Truth of himself, Wisdom of himself, Righteousness of himself, Perfect of himself, and Glory of himself, which all are Attributes of the Deity, and to whom they belong: So doth also Divine Nature; all which Attributes were by the ancient Orthodox Doctors of the Church, and after them by the eminent Instruments of Reformation, owned to be the Right and Property of the Son of God, grounding themselves upon the Authority of Scripture in several Places, especially that of 1 John 5.20. by me already quoted; we are in him that is true, even in his son Jesus Christ: This is the true God, and eternal life.  
If we look upon the Son of God, as he is from Eternity begotten of the Father, and as he is the second Person, on such an account we own the Son to be from the Father, seeing he is true Son; but if we consider him as God, he is altogether self God, and God of himself; for the Divinity is wholly unbegotten, and of herself, knoweth of no beginning, and needs not to borrow of others what it hath of itself; and if to the Son one would attribute a Begotten, and form Essence, this is from the Father to make a second God. Lastly, Many of the Places which the Adversaries do heap up, do speak of Christ's Office of Mediator, which they improperly misapply to his Divine Nature, for though Christ's Humane Nature hath no Personality, but is upheld by the Divine Person, yet that upholding doth not confound the Natures, otherwise Passion and Death might be attributed to Divine Nature. On this Matter they form other Arguments, grounded upon false Suppositions, as sometimes they would have Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, to be three Spirits, and the words unbegotten, begotten, and proceeding to be Essential Differences; when to speak of three Spirits in the Godhead, is as good as to say there are three Gods, 
1 Cor. 8.4.  whilst Scripture saith there is none other God but one, who hath his Being from himself, and from none else, for we must say of every God so called, which is not such by Nature, 
Hosea 8.6.  what the Prophet saith of the Calf of Samaria; the workman made it, therefore it is not God; and 'tis a right Consequence, for nothing can be God that is made by another: So then to talk of three Spirits in the Godhead, is to set up three Gods; for God, as our Saviour saith, absolutely is a Spirit; and when we say Spirit, we understand his Nature, for a Spirit is a Spiritual Substance and being; thus, they go on still upon their Suppositions, they would have the words unbegotten, begotten and proceeding, to be essential Differences, and not personal as they are, so other times they would have the Son, because he is of the Father, not to be one God with the Father, who existeth of himself, and so not to be the one true God, because he hath a Being from another, but we must distinguish between the being of Essence, and that of the Person, the first the Son hath of itself, and the second of the Father.  
They farther object, he that is Mediator with the God of Israel, is not the God of Israel himself; for if it were so, three Absurdities say they would follow; the first, God would be inferior to himself; 2dly, God would pray to himself; 3dly, the Party offended shall be Mediator with himself; but to the first we answer, Tho' God be Mediator, it followeth not he is inferior to himself; for tho' upon the account of the Office, he that is a Mediator be inferior to him whom he intercedeth with, yet he is not thereby inferior in Nature; for even among Men one Equal doth intercede with his Equals. As to the second, the Son prayeth to God for us, according to his Humane Nature, tho' we exclude not the Divine from interceding, for it belongs to it, in as much as it is the Eternal Will of the Son that the Father would, by reason of his Sacrifice, receive us into Favour, the Prayers and Submission belong to Humane Nature, but the Divine maketh them effectual, both Nature's being united in one Person. The Divine was united with the Humane mediately in the Person of the Son; but the same Person was immediately united to Humane Nature. As to the third it were absurd indeed, if the Party offended was Mediator when there is but one Person offended; but where several Persons are offended, there is no Absurdity, if by their common Consent one of those offended Persons offereth satisfaction for the Offender, and to reconcile, and in this Case it could not be otherwise; for it was required that the Reconciler should be God; and 'tis but a Cavil to say that he, with whom the Son is not Mediator, could not be reconciled, and that the Son was not Mediator with himself, or with the Holy Ghost, but only with the Father; for first, not only he is reconciled and appeased by the Mediator, with whom the Son performeth the Office of Mediator, but also they that are joined, and about it agreed with him; wherefore, seeing in every thing, the Will of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost be agreed, it followeth, that through the Merit and Satisfaction of the Mediator, the Father being fully satisfied, the Son and Holy Ghost are so too. I add as to the second, it is not absurd as they think, that the Son should be Mediator with himself, for the Son of God doth the Office of Mediator in both Capacities; for, as God being one with the Father, he receiveth us into Favour; and as he is Mediator according to both Natures, so as he is God, manifested in the Flesh, by reason of his Merit and Satisfaction, we are received into favour; and although this being received into favour be common to Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, yet the Mediator is said to intercede for us with the Father, who is considered as the Spring of all Divine Counsels and Operations; who being willing that the Son should satisfy for our Sins, and that by virtue of that satisfaction, our Sins should be forgiven, it is not possible for the Son to will and do otherwise; to this purpose makes what the Apostle saith about our being reconciled to God by Jesus Christ, and what the Evangelist writeth, he that hath my commandments, 
2 Cor. 5.18, 19, 20, 21,  and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me; and he that loveth me, shall be loved of my father, and I will love him, and manifest myself unto him; 
John 14.21, 23.  to the same effect doth tend what is said in another place of Christ, who, when he had by himself purged our Sins, sat down on the right hand of the majesty on high: So than the Son is appeased, 
Heb. 3.3.  and forgiveth our sins, receiveth us into favour, and giveth us Eternal Life, upon the account of his own satisfaction. The Father, Son, and Holy Ghost do the same, by reason of the satisfaction given by the Son: In the mean while, in relation to the Son, who for his own sake receiveth us, 'tis called his Will, in relation to the Father, 'tis called Mediation or Intercession; therein the Will of the Son, in order of the Person and Divine Working, doth follow the Will of the Father. Hence it appeareth, how they do ill, to confound the Divine Nature of Christ under his Office of Mediator, as such; according to his Humane Nature, he prayed to the Father, and taught us a form of Prayer, that we should call upon the Father through the Mediator, yet he thereby never intended to exclude or deprive himself of his own Due or Right, there is no Contradiction to worship the Father in the Face, and through the Intercession of the Mediator, for we worship the Father not in his Person only, but of the whole Nature; and Christ in John 5.22. as in the form of Baptism, proposeth himself to be worshipped; for Adoration is not confined in the Person of the Father only.  
They say, If the Father be greater than Christ, than he is not God equal with the Father; but Christ saith, 
John 14.28.  the father is greater than I: Therefore, is not God equal with the Father? in this place Christ speaketh not of his Divine Nature, but of his Office; the Father doth send, and the Son is sent; and though he be less as to his Humanity, he is equal in relation to his Divinity. Wherefore, I answer, Christ is less than his Father in respect to his Humane Nature, which he assumed with the Infirmity thereof, Sin excepted; for he was hungry, weary, sorrowful, and the like, and we read he wept, tho' never that he laughed; but before that Assumption of the Flesh, he had a Being of another Nature, which can be no other but Divine, as it appeareth of what Scripture saith, sacrifice and offering thou wouldst not, 
Heb. 10.5.  but a body hath thou prepared me. He certainly need have had a Being before this natural Body was prepared for him; me then he was a Person before the Body. This Inferiority must be understood of his Person, in that voluntary humiliation of his in his state of exinanition, yet this his being inferior to the Father in respect of his Humanity, doth not at all take away the equality between him and the Father, in relation to his divine Nature, for he is the Word, Son of God; tho' when he was made Flesh, he was made that which he was not before with assuming human and mortal Nature, yet he still remained that which he was before, namely, God blessed for ever; there was no addition, diminution, or alteration in his divine Nature, but continued the same Person of the most holy Trinity, begotten of the Father from all Eternity. Christ is less than the Father, in respect to his Office of Mediator: We are in Covenant with God, not upon our account, but upon that of C●●●st, who is thus become the Head of all Men that are in covenant with God; and in relation to this, he is called the Mediator of the New Testament: 
Heb. 9.15.  wherefore we must observe how in Scripture the Lord Jesus is said to be made Lord and Ch●ist, 
Acts 2.36.  but never said to be made God; which things are very different, for by Nature God is Lor●, but Christ by Will and Appointment, in respect of his Personal Dominion, and of the Oeconomical Kingdom belonging to his Mediatorship; He is God absolutely, but Lord and Christ relatively unto us, God essentially and Christ accidentally: In this last sense he was anointed with that Oil and Gifts of the Holy Ghost, for in the other sense he wanted no such thing; he was not anointed simply as God, but as Christ a Prophet, a Priest and a King, for our sake, and for our good: And all places in Scripture wherein the Father is said to be greater than Christ, to be the Head of Christ, to have made Christ Lord, to have exalted and anointed him, and the like, aught to be ta●●en in this sense, that is, in regard of his human Nature and Mediatorship, and not as to the divine, for when this is spoken of our Saviour, himself saith, I and my Father are one, 
John 10.30.  there is no difference either in Nature or Power. After this manner also is to be understood that place, 
John 5.22, 27.  wherein the Father is said to have committed all judgement unto the Son, and given him authority to execute judgement, because he is the Son of man: which hath a relation to his Office of Mediatorship in the Government of the Church, and Judgement over the Enemies thereof: His essential Kingdom he hath of himself, but this dispensatory one from the Father, not because he is the Son of God, but because he is the Son of Man: which reason tends to breed in us Comfort and Assurance, in that we are to be judged by a Man, one who having taken our Nature, with its Infirmities, Sin excepted, will compassionate us, for he was tempted as we are; and in human Judgements 'tis a Privilege to be wried by his Peers and Equals, that is of the same ●ank and condition with us. In this sense ought also to be taken the place where it is said, The Son also shall be subject unto him that put all things ander him, 
1 Cor. 15.28.  and deliver up the Kingdom into his hands, the Kingdom of ruling, governing, and preserving of the Church: This giving or dellvering up of the Kingdom is no sign of inequality, for as the Son is to give it up to the Father, so the Father gave it up to him without any diminution of his Power; neither shall the Son receive any diminution of his, he shall deliver it in a perfect Oeconomical administration, having overcome all Enemies, and brought all his Elect to be crowned with Glory; so there will be no more to do, no need of being a King in that respect. By the words, Then shall the Son himself be subicel, is to be understood the account he is to give of his administration thereof; and this is a kind of subjection which shall be swallowed up in that perfect Happiness wherein God will be all in all, no more Enemies to fight, no more need of a Mediator.  
But for their last gasp they reserve a frivolous and insignificant Exception; for some of them say, our Arguments are not coherent, sometimes we plead for Unity, at other times for a Trinity; but we form our Arguments according to the nature of the Matters, and the Principles of those whom we do dispute against. Against the Gentiles and Heathens we prove, That there is but one true God; against the Jews, That besides God the Father, there is also another Person, namely, the Son of God, who is also true God: We are to deal against several Adversaries to this truth, Arrians, Sabellians, Samosatenians, Socinians, Tritheists, etc. and accordingly we frame our Arguments suitably with the Principles of those whom we dispute against. If I deal against Gentiles, my Arguments must not be drawn out of Scripture, which they receive not, but from natural Reason, and out of the Writings of their Philosophers and other Authors, as St. Paul did in Athens, Acts 17.28: So if against Samaritans, I must argue only out of the Pentatench or five Books of Moses: If against Jews, only out of the Old Testament, because they own not the New; and so of the rest.  
This is the substance of what they say in opposition to these Heavenly Truths, which to compass they are not ashamed to wrest Scriptures, to force upon them a sense contrary to the Design of the Spirit of God, and to the Analogy of Faith; and in order to form a detestable System, whereby they do what they can to overthrow the whole foundation of our holy Religion, not only they for many Years racked their own Brains to extract all the Poison which Satan could infuse and 〈◊〉 ●own natural Corruption suggest, but also called for Help upon the most infamous and abominable Heretics that ever were in the Christian World, and out of all made a Quintessence of all that erroneously, impiously, or blasphemously can be forged or said against the Divine Nature, Attributes, Persons, and Grace of God: Yet not wholly trusting to this, they have set up a Diana, a God-Idol of their own, even their own natural Reason, that where abusing Scripture cannot serve the turn, their unreasonable Imaginations may do't, wherein they seem to scorn being guided by the Word of God, where it doth not answer their Ends; but divine things must not be measured by our shallow Capacity. And if we believe Scripture to be the Word of God, than we must receive that which God teaches us therein; and we must not to the prejudice of this be guided by our own Reason, which in such matters is but an ignis fatuus, a false and deceitful Guide, that will lead us to Rocks and Precipices; that only must be our Rule which God hath revealed in his Word. For an Instance; Will not Human Reason suggest, that if our Saviour, instead of poor Fishermen, unlearned, and of no account in the World, had called the joseph's of Arimathea, the Nicodemus, and men of good parts and of quality in the World, the Gospel would have gotten more ground and been more spread abroad in the World; yet this is contrary to God's Method, who hath hidden these things from the wise and prudent, 
Mat. 11.25.26. 1 Cor. 1.26, 27, 28, 29,  and revealed them unto Babes, who hath chosen and called the foolish the weak and base things of the world to confound the wise and the mighty: And why so? first, because so it seemed good in his sight; secondly, to the end that no flesh should glory in his presence: 
Joh. 7.48.  This confirmed by Experience, for Have any of the Rulers or of the Pharisees believed on him? So then to insist on this reason is no less than to arraign the Wisdom of God, which no Man may or aught to do. Farther, some things there are taught by Philosophy of the Soul of the World, of several things therein, and of Man's Soul, which to human Understanding appear to have no Truth in them; yet in those things, if upon the account of the Learning and Wit of those great Men, we have a kind of esteem and reverence for their Opinions, much more ought we to have a reverence for the Truth contained in God's Word, and received by so many great and good Christians, and suffered for by them in all Ages, for never was any Divine Truth more universally, and in all places and times, received, notwithstanding the opposition of some wicked men, than the Mystery of the most holy Trinity.  
As indeed not only the Offering and Preaching, but also the whole Application of Salvation to be obtained in this and another Life, do depend upon the truth of the holy Trinity, because everywhere the Father works by his Son, and this with the Father by the Holy Ghost, which if we believe not, we cannot have either the use or comfort of things relating to Salvation; but God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit, 
1 Cor. 2.10, 12.  and we have received the Spirit which is of God, that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. 'Tis then our Duty and Comfort to know the Father in the Son, and both through the Holy Ghost, for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God: as Christ saith, none knoweth the Father but the Son, and to whom the Son will reveal him, so John testifies, that he that hath not the Son hath not the Father; and Paul, 
Mat. 11.27 1 Joh. 2.23. Eph. 2.12.  that those that are without Christ are also without Hope, and without God in the world: 'Tis said indeed how God at sundry times, and in several manners, spoke in time passed unto the Fathers by the Prophets, but the knowledge of him, and of Salvation, than was in the dark till the last days, when he spoke unto Men by his Son: When we hear of the salvation which God sent into the World, then at the same time the Son and Holy Ghost are mentioned, because without them there is none. Among several other places in Scripture, wherein this great work is spoken of, and wherein we find the three Persons mentioned, that is remarkable wherein the Apostle joineth them together; 
Heb. 10.29.  Of how much sorer punishment suppose ye shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the Covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the spirit of grace? All three are concerned, so they were before salvation was actually effected, long before when all was under Types and Figures, 
1 Pet. 1.11, 12 compared with 2 Pet. 1.21.  for by the spirit of Christ the Prophets prophesied of old: so now in this great business the Son hath his part, and the Holy Ghost his also. As much as God hath been pleased to reveal unto us about this adorable Mystery, we must study and inquire after, but no farther; where God is silent we must be so too; and we ought to curb our Curiosity and Presumption, and not to stretch our Brains to find out Proofs out of Comparisons with Sun, Soul, Rainbow, Trees, Triangle, etc. which are all lame and defective. This I speak as to us who believe that high and incomprehensible Mystery upon God's Word, wherein he hath revealed it unto us; for as to the abominable wretches, which out of Hell are broken loof against it, and not only make a Jest of and despise and hate it, we must leave them to God, if peradventure he will give them repentance, 
2 Tim. 2. ●●.  to the acknowledging of the Truth.  
As to our blessed Saviour, whom they go about to rob of that Glory and Honour which Scripture declares do belong to him, and which therein he assumeth unto himself, and whom they would make a mere Man, a Creature, and if I dare speak it without blasphemy, an imaginary and a mock God, acting the part of a God as an Actor doth upon a stage that of a Prince, when he is not such. In Scripture the Names of God absolutely attributed to none but unto the true God; and that also in so many places of Scripture, whereof many we already quoted, and others not: We have given instances of all the incommunicable Names of Divine Nature appropriated unto him; also we made it appear how all Attributes proper to the true God, and never communicated to the Creature, do belong to Christ, as do all divine works truly such; why then should not all own him to be true God by Nature, seeing essential Attributes are inseparable from the Essence? The Oneness of which Essence with the Father he doth attribute unto himself, explaining in what sense he calleth God his Father, not by Adoption or Grace, or merely by reason of his assumption of our human Nature, 
John 10.30, 38.  or by virtue of any Office and Dignity, but because of his eternal Generation and Co-essentiality with the Father, in which sense he saith, I and the Father are one; 
Chap. 1.14 & 3.16. Rom. 8.3, 32. Mar. 14.33.  and upon the account of this oneness of Nature he saith, The Father is in me, and I in him. And this eternal Generation in one Essence is denoted in Scripture, when called only begotten of the Father, God's own and proper Son, the true Son of God, yea, such a Son as is Heir of all things, and in opposition to Angels, as the Son is to the Servants; which Sonship and Generation is more clearly expressed when he is called the Brightness and express Image of the Father's Person, because in him, through that eternal Generation, is expressed the whole Person and Glory of the Father; for which Image of God he is called the Firstborn of every Creature, that is, begotten before there was any Creature, and so from Eternity; as in the Form and Nature of God, to be equal with God, who otherwise hath not, and owneth none equal to himself. 
2 Sam. 7. 1●.   
In these high and divine matters Men must not presume beyond what is written and revealed in God's Word, nor wrest the Delign of the Spirit of God, or force an unusual and contrary sense to the words of the Text, but we ought to keep ourselves within the bounds of that holy reverence which becomes us in the contemplation of the Majesty of God. In these very things Hierom, as said before, was very cautions about acknowledging three Hypostases in the Deity, because he thought the word to denote substance. When God was upon withdrawing the Spirit of Prophecy from among his People, 
Chap. 4.4.  he, by Mal●c●y, the last of the Prophets, commands them to remember the law of Moses his servant: So now, when the Apostles, immediately inspired by the Holy Ghost, ceased so long since, men should wholly acquiesce to the sound Doctrine which those Servants of his Son Jesus, left for our use and instruction, wherein we learn how God hath revealed himself, and communicated his own infinite fullness unto his Creatures, in all of them, immediately by his own Son, first, in the creation of all things; secondly, in their providential disposal and rule; thirdly, in the revelation of his Will and Ordinances; fourthly, in the communication of his Spirit and Grace, in none of which is the Person of the Father otherwise represented unto us than in and by the Person of the Son, for the whole end of the Gospel is, 
2 Cor. 4.6. 1 Tim 6.10. 1 ●o●n 4.12.  to give knowledge of the glory of God in the 〈◊〉 of Jesus Christ, that is, the glory of the 〈◊〉 visible God, whom no man hath seen. Now in that forenamed Prophecy of Malachy, the same Chapter, and two last Verses, the coming of the 〈◊〉, which had often been prophesied of before, is again promised, yea, of the Lord himself, who then was and had been from all Eternity, but was to come only at such a time, which is called the great and dreadful day of the Lord, for against the appearing, and long before, of that Sun of Righteousness, all those Stars the Prophets were to disappear, one only excepted, like the Morningstar before the rising of the Sun; Behold, I will send you Elijah the Prophet, before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord: By whom the Lord Jesus is meant, as John Baptist is by Elijah, so called because he came in the spirit and power of Elias, for both were endowed with a fervency of Spirit, which made them spare neither Kings nor People: And the Evangelist makes use of the words of the Prophet, He shall turn the hearts of the Fathers to the Children, Luke 1.17, compared with Matt. 11.14, Mark 9.11, 12, 13. That same Lord, whose coming with such Concomitants, as great and dreadful, was Jehovah himself, the God of Israel, whose words, tho' in his state of humiliation, were so conspicuous, glorious, and great, as he in one particular said himself to the man out of whom he had cast a Legion of Devils, Return to thine own house, 
Luk. 8.39.  and show what great things God hath done unto thee: And the Evangelist, who in the beginning of the Verse relateth Christ's words to the man, doth in the latter end of the same declare what the man did; And he went his way, and published throughout the whole City how great things Jesus had done unto him; he did it in the same words, how great things, only instead of God he said Jesus, so that Jesus was the God that had done great things unto him. This was in the Land of Judah, where no other God but the true God of Israel was owned and worshipped; so the Lord Jesus was that same God, whom the Father from Heaven calls his Son, which is the Name mentioned, 
Phil. 2.9.  that is above every name, and this name, more excellent than any given the Angels, 
Heb. 1.4.  he hath obtained by inheritance, not by favour, according to what saith the Apostle, for the name by him designed is that of Son of God, Thou art my Son, with the exegetical adjunct of his generation, This day have I begotten thee; 
Acts 13.33.  which words Paul doth apply to the Lord Jesus: This day of Eternity, after the manner of time spoken in relation to God, with whom are no parts of time, as with Men, past, present, and to come: With God are not days, but only one day, which had no beginning, and shall have no end: It was never said to any Angel personally upon his own account, Thou art the Son of God, much less with the reason of the appellation, This day have I begotten thee: so in that place the Apostle doth not speak of the general Name of a Son, but of the particular appropriation thereof unto the Lord Jesus, upon his own account. When the Apostle saith, he is the firstborn, the thing itself is not meant of being the first begotten, but the Dignity and Privilege that attended it. 
Psal. 89.27  Thus God saith of David, I will make him my firstborn, explained in the later part of the Verse, higher than the Kings of the earth. Thus among Men one may say, I will make such a one my Firstborn, or my Heir; which is the Privilege attending the Birthright. This is Christ's Title by Nature and not by Office; anointing was a Ceremony used to make and declare a King, but that anointing made him not a Man, for he was so before: So the Lord Jesus was God before he was Christ.   

CHAP. XI. Some Animadversions upon a Book called, Christianity not Mysterious.  
WHAT I said somewhat before concerning Reason, puts me in mind of a thing I promised about the middle of my Discourse, namely, to take notice of a Book with the Title of Christianity not mysterious; wherein the Author undertakes to show, there is nothing in the Gospel, or in our Religion, against or above Reason: And tho' I have hardly any room left, yet to be as good as my word, I must briefly say something to it.  
We agree with him against all human Authority, contrary to the Word, and own Scripture to be the only competent Judge, and allow of our Reason, as long as it draweth out of that Spring, and not otherwise. Let us be sincere, and avoid Ambiguities, there is true and sound Reason, whereof the Word of God is the right and standing infallible Rule, for the Will of God is the measure of all Truth and Equity, and our Reason, to be Reason indeed, must be guided by that, or else it doth deviate from the Rule. There is also that which is called Reason, but is not really so, merely human, subject to Error, a mere Chimaera and Fancy of Man's shallow Brains, according to this natural Reason Men willing thereby to judge of spiritual things, to speak in Paul's words, professing themselves to be wise, become sools; far from being rational, are unreasonable, and have forfeited their reason; for Scripture opposeth human Reason to divine, Man's Wisdom to God's, as may be seen in the places quoted in the margin, 
1 Cor. 1.18, 19, to 30. & Chap. 2.4, 5, 6, 13, 14. Jam. 3.15.  which I desire the Reader to peruse, and a little lower I shall have occasion to mention. And another Apostle speaks of this human Wisdom or Reason (for the rational man is the wise man) in opposition to the divine with a witness, when he saith, This wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish; but true Wisdom the Lord giveth; 
Prov. 2.6. Jam. 1.5.  and If any lack wisdom, let him ask of God.  
We do not destroy our Reason when we submit and make it subordinate to Scripture, for human must depend upon divine Reason, or else 'tis blasphemously to deny there is more of and better Reason in God than in Man; so we must own there is in God more of good Reason than in us: wherefore Reason is not independently to be lodged in our weak Brains, but in the Wisdom of God, in his Word. Thus our Reason is not to be the Rule of Faith, for 'tis so apt to fail, to be misled and imposed upon; but the Spirit of God speaking in Scripture, and to our Spirits, is not so, we are said to be the Epistle of God, 
1 Cor. 3.3.  written not with Ink, or any human and natural thing, but with the Spirit of the living God. It is strange, that whilst this man doth so much plead for Reason he is so unreasonable in some things he saith; as, par. 4.5. that after he hath justly taken away an infallible Authority, from a Council or a Pope, that is, from a collective Body and a company of Men, yet he would lodge it in every single man, in his shallow Brain, mine, and any ones else. We own, 'tis every man's Duty and Concern to inquire and exercise his Reason about Faith and Religion, but to make either depend upon his Reason, is to build upon the Sand, to make the infallible depend upon the fallible, and confound matters of Faith with those of Fact.  
But to the end we may know what we speak of, 'tis necessary to say something about Reason, the thing most excellent in Man, for he thereby is made to differ from merely sensitive and vegetable Creatures, and it gives him a denomination, for from Reason he is called reasonable, from his noblest part reasonable Soul, which, as Schoolmen say, is Man's forma informans, and makes him to be what he is. Now Reason is seated in the Understanding, which is the superior part of the Soul, and the Judgment-seat of all things offered to her consideration, there to be examined, whether true or false, which is the Object of the Operation of the Understanding, as Good or Evil is that of the determination of the Will. But how these Objects come into the Mind, Intellect, or Understanding, which are the same, this is the usual order about it, which God hath settled in Nature: First, The Objects that are outward are offered to the Organ of the Sense, as may be the Eye of seeing, the Ear of hearing, etc. which communicates it to the Sense, whence they pass into the Imagination, and thence are conveyed into the Mind, which is the Receiver and Looking-glass of all Forms; for, as the Hand is called the Instrument of Instruments, so is the Intellect the Form of Forms, and can understand all things intelligible, by means of the Brain, the Organ of it.  
Tho' upon the present occasion this matter ought to be handled more Theologically than Philosophically, however something must be said in relation to this: as the Organs of Sense, for instance that of Seeing, receive Objects, either by emission or intromission of visual beams, a Dispute in Philosophy, not proper here to be meddled with, but 'tis certain it receives them; so doth the Understanding Objects conveyed into it, whether by means of intelligible or intentional Species, 'tis not to our purpose, no more than whether they be there objectively or subjectively as an Ens rationis, or real, as are Sciences. But this must be known, that in Man are the Intellect, a Faculty of the Soul; Science, an Habit of that Faculty, and Knowledge, an Act proceeding from the Faculty through the Habit. The working of the Understanding is done successively, and through many Acts, which some Philosophers reckon to be eight in number, that may well be reduced under three; the first is, the receiving and apprehending of the Objects; the second is, the working of the Mind to reduce into order, and dispose those Objects into a good form, and this is properly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Reason; the third is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a ratiocinative Discourse, or a working and motion of the Mind from one to another, whence ariseth the right Understanding, and as it were the Decree and Sentence about the thing. This is the natural order in these matters: Now hence let us conclude some things.  
Reason is Knowledge upon true grounds, and herein we must see how far we may trust our Reason; according to the Rule in Philosophy, Nihil cadit sub intellectu quod non fucrit prius sub sensu; Nothing comes under the Intellect but what before hath been under the Sense. And since the Organs are often deceived by the Objects, the Senses by the Organs, the Imagination by Senses, it is a rational consequence to say, that the Mind may also thereby happen to be imposed upon from the very first step. In the case of Seeing three things are necessary, the thing that seethe, the thing seen, and the medium or help, without which not seeing; the Eye is the seer, but if blind it cannot see, neither can it see except there be something to be seen; then the medium is the light which helps us to see, for in the dark, Objects cannot be discerned; also there ought to be a proportionable distance between Organ and Object; a Man cannot from the Street see a Pin upon the top of a Steeple, because it is too remote: Our Mind is the Eye of the Soul, and tho' Reason seated in it hath Objects offered, it cannot rightly judge without the medium, even about natural things, else how could there among Men, who all have a rational Soul, be so many different and contrary Judgements about the same things? The reason of our Mind must be grounded upon the reason of the thing, which is that whereby the thing is so: We say, why is it day? The reason is good, because the Sun is up, for that is the cause of the day: so that Certainty is not grounded upon the clearness of our perceiving, as upon the mainness of the Evidence confirmed by a continual Experience. Now natural Reason is fitted for natural Things, but for supernatural it must be supernaturally endowed: And besides Ideas, a due temper and application of the Mind are required. But about divine things, besides what is in us, there ought to be a Rule in them, which is Revelation; this is the medium or middle between Eye and Object, without which in spiritual things we can see nothing till the Lord openeth our Eyes. When an Army of Syrians had compassed Dothan, to take Elisha, his Servant seeing so many Horses and Chariots, was afraid, till at the Prayer of the Prophet the Lord opened the Eyes of the young man, 
2 Kings 6.15, 16, 17.  then and not before, he saw the mountain full of Lorses and chariots of fire round about Elisha. These Heavenly Armies cannot be seen by a mere natural Eye, it must be enlightened from above: As we cannot know a thing of which we have no Idea, so we must have a true one, to make a right Judgement of it, or else we go upon a wrong bottom, and it still remains a Mystery to us. The true Notion we ought to have of a Mystery is this, namely, something that is hidden from our Knowledge and above our Reason: see what a false Idea a learned and rational man, a Master of Israel, Nicodemus, had of Regeneration, as we shall see somewhat lower; it was a very necessary and truly rational thing to believe in Christ, 
Joh. 7.48.  yet Have any of the Rubers and Pharisees believed on him? Those men in their way wanted not Reason; God, saith the Apostle, 
1 Cor. 1.27.  hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise. The greatest commendation of Man's Reason is, to call it Wisdom; yet it is confounded about spiritual things: for this very thing our Saviour rejoiced in spirit, and gave his Father Thanks for revealing the Mysteries of salvation unto Babes, which the wise and prudent of the World could not understand for want of this Revelation, Luke 10.21. Wherefore when God will have his People to know him, he saith not, their Reason and Mind shall know me, but I will give them an heart to know me, that I am the Lord, Jer. 15.7. This Knowledge is not an effect of their Reason, but the Gift of God. The right Judgement of a thing doth sometimes depend upon so many different circumstances, that a mistake in one of them doth much alter the thing, and so pervert the Judgement; besides that, our Understanding being often disturbed through Passion and Prejudice, it thereby lieth under great mistakes: If so in natural and temporal things, how much more in spiritual and eternal, wherein the disproportion between the Understanding and Object is infinitely greater! Yet that sort of People make no difference in reasoning about the Word of God and human Writings, with them it is all one to judge of God or of Men, and their Reason they make the Judge of both: This is to set up a Tribunal, which God will never allow of, to inquire after, and examine his ways and works, 
Job 33.13.  when he giveth no account of any of his Matters; that is, he is not bound, tho' sometimes out of his gracious Condescension, he be pleased to do't. But once for all, I must warn those Men, who so much dote upon their own reason, to have a care, lest that very same, through a just Judgement of God, doth to them as to others, prove fatal; for they glory too much in it. Absalom's Hair was his Pride, and it became his Halter; Jezebel delighted in painting her Face, which, as she thought, made her full of Charms; but a while after it was washed off with her own Blood: Herod's Robes were glorious when he sat upon his Throne to make a Speech to the People, but very soon after they were full of Worms, whereby he was eaten up. They who trust to, and glory in their Reason, have cause to fear some such end or other will befall them: But we rely on the word of God, and depend upon the Gospel, as it is a promise of Grace, and must endeavour to conform to it, as it is the rule of Life.  
All he saith, Sect. 2. and Chap 1. doth not concern us, who hold the Doctrines of the Gospel not to be contrary to true and sound Reason; in his Philosophical Notions he consounds himself that is in the whole first-Section, and 4th Chapter thereof.  
As to his Ideas, or Evidences, Experience, which is a good reason, though not always, for it falls sometimes, showeth how every Man hath not the same Idea or Notion of this or that thing, and that which is Evidence to one, is not to another; then he goeth upon a false Supposition, as if the Devil; through his Suggeitions, and the Corruptions of our Hear, did not sometimes darken our Light, deceive our Mind, pervert our Judgement, and overrule our Affections; 'tis so in worldly things, much more in Spiritual; thus, through their vain Sophistry, they would set up this Reason as an independent and infallible Judge in Man, and so overthrow whatsoever Scripture in so many places declareth of the Blindness, Darkness, and Ignorance of our Understanding, and of the Perverseness, Corruption, and Stubbornness of our Heart.  
The Texts he quoteth, Pag. 47, 48. are true and good, but he should go further, and own Christ to be true God, not only in his Works, but also in his Nature; he sometimes hath some good and true things like Grains, to make Chaff Currant, thus, Pag. 49, 50. he condemns those that say the New-Testament to be written without any Order or Scope, but only as Matters came into the Heads of the Apostles, which is a Socinian Tenet, yet he there seems to be against it.  
The Physical Impotency to understand the Mysteries of Religion, is not absolute, but 'tis all one as if it was so, without the Help of Grace, as a blind Man cannot see, a dumb speak, a dead Man perform any Vital Action, as of himself, but if God pleases he shall be restored to his Sight, Speech and Life. There is a moral Impotency to understand Matters and Mysteries of Religion; we have a Mind, but dark, blind, and ignorant; can a blind Man see, though he hath Eyes? a deaf hear, though he hath Ears? a dumb speak, though he hath a Tongue, a dead Man act, though he hath Organs, as Hands and Feet; no, if he had but a dead-palsy: Men, by Revelations, are not endued with new Faculties, but these old Faculties are enabled to act, which they could not before; God gives a new Heart, a new Spirit, new Thoughts, new Affections.  
His Discourse of Sect. 3. Chap. 2. is all out of the Purpose; the things he speaks of are Natural, and unnecessary, as how Rain is form in the Air, but Matters of Religion are Spiritual and necessary; Matters of Election, manner of Conversion, without a revelation in the Word, are incomprehensible, as our Saviour saith to Nicodemus, in point of Regeneration, The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, 
John 3.8.  but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth; so is every one that is born of the spirit, observe the blockishness of a Doctor, and Master of Israel, in Spiritual things; Can a Man enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born? v. 4. Where was his reason all this while? several such things we read of the Disciples, whereof I shall give but one Instance about the Resurrection, 
Mark 9.10.  They questioned one with another what the rising from the dead should mean? Nay, they were in that gross Ignorance, till after our Saviour's Resurrection; 
Joh. 20.9.  yet they knew not the Scripture, that he must rise again from the dead; wherefore he upbraided them with their unbelief, 
Mark 16.14.  and hardness of heart; and indeed they were no better, till he opened their understanding, 
Luke 24.45.  that they might understand the Scriptures.  
In his Page 81. his Conclusion is false, that neither God nor his Attributes, nor Eternity, are Mysteries to us: But certainly the smite cannot know the Infinite, but as much, and in such a degree, as the Infinite is pleased to communicate himself; as no Day light but what the Sun doth communicate, and that more or less, according as 'tis done, in a dark Room one sees only proportionably to the Light that's brought in, so in a Spiritual Light and Life 'tis only as God is pleased to reveal, and as Man is capable to receive; the word alone is a dead Letter, but the Spirit doth quicken it, as it was in the Apostles; the word they had heard from Christ was quickened by the Holy Ghost when he came upon them, which in them caused a wonderful Alteration, and made them choir another sort of Men: Divine things cannot be comprehended for want of an Adequate Notion, there is to be a Proportion between the Knower and the thing known, so our Reason, without Revelation applied by the Inward Teaching of the Spirit, can no more know the Nature of God and his Attributes, than a little Bottle hold in all the Water of the Sea. To know things, we must know their Essence and Nature; as to God, we, by the Light of Nature, may know there is one, but what he is, must be revealed; and 'tis usual, when we speak of any thing, to have a Definition or Description of it: What is a Man? a rational Animal? What is God? an infinite Being, described by his Attributes, Almighty, Eternal, Independent, etc. Concerning the Infiniteness, and some other Attribute of God's, David owneth his Ignorance, when he saith, Such knowledge is too wonderful for me, 
Psa. 139.6.  it is high, I cannot attain to it: And no wonder, seeing in the same Psalm he so much admires the formation of his Body in the Womb, when he saith, he was fearfully and wonderfully made. 
v. 14, 15, 16.  If any one pretends he can know more than the Prophet David, let him speak and stretch his Reason further than he could; his Son Solomon was of the same Mind, both as to Bodily and Spiritual things, when he saith, As thou knowest not what is the way of the spirit, nor how the bones do grow in the womb of her that is with child: 
Prov. 11.5.  even so thou knowest not the works of God, who makes all: These times of Ignorance are over now, say Socinians, we have Men, more knowing and wiser than David and Solomon: But, if it be so of the formation of our natural Body, how much more of the work of Regeneration within us, which our Saviour, as said before, compared to the blowing of the Wind; that such things are, we know and feel, but understand not the manner: Thus we know that Gold, Silver, and other Metals, are formed under Ground; for we draw them out of the Earth's Bowels; but the manner and how they are form we cannot tell, so these are hidden, secret and mysterious things unto us, much more are supernatural.  
He goeth upon a Mistake, as if we thought Matters of Religion to be Mysteries after the Revelation, which makes them cease to be Mysteries, which they were before: so 'tis in him labour in vain, Pag. 91. When a Prophecy is fulfilled it ceaseth to be a Prophecy, and becomes a History. The strength of his Argument lays herein, that those things once revealed are no longer Mysteries. But we must know how some things are wholly revealed, and others but in part; it is true, we must yield an Obedience of Faith, that the thing is so, as that the Son of God was made Man, that there are three Persons in the Godhead, God having revealed it, we are fully persuaded it is so; but the manner and how, we are in the dark about, it is incomprehensible by, and unconceivable to us; and beyond the power of our Nature to know it, yet as much as is necessary, 'tis revealed; here I cannot avoid taking notice how the Man unworthily compares the Mysteries of our holy Religion, with the Tricks and Cheats of the Heathens, Page 99 and what? If what in their false Worship they called Mysteries, there were Cheats, as we own, doth it follow it must be so in our Religion? Theirs was Idolatry and Superstition, but ours is Holy and Divine, then after this Rule, because they had false Gods, we must have none at all, and so must be as bad as they; the Devil, who is God's Ape, and in imitation of God's Church, hath set up a Synagogue for himself, hath his Drudges and Bondslaves to serve him, must not God's People adore him? and because there is a false Worship, must there be no true one? Thus for Men, who so much pretend to Reason; 'tis a very unreasonable Inference to say, that because the Heathens in their Matters of Idolatry had Tricks, which they called Mysteries, therefore the Mysteries of our Holy Religion must be Cheats and Tricks: Such comparisons are odious, and unworthy to be used by any who call themselves Christians.  
Then, if Mystery does relate sometimes to the Matter, and sometimes to the Manner, certain Points of our Religion, as the Trinity, Eternal Generation of the Son, Procession of the Holy Ghost, were a Mystery before they were revealed, it follows, That the Revelation was necessary to make them known unto us, and that it was not in the Power of our Reason to know them without Revelation, so they were above it; and thus, tho' the thing be re-revealed, so that we must believe it, yet still there are some things that be unrevealed, and above our Capacity. He would have every thing after the Revelation to cease to be a Mystery in Religion; but as I said, some things are not wholly revealed, because 〈◊〉 full Revelation is not necessary to our Salvation, and within this Limitation is to be understood what St. Paul saith, 
Act. 20.27.  how he had not shunned to declare, unto the Elders of the Church of Ephesus, all the counsel of God, that is as much as 'twas necessary for them to know; for certainly he was not acquainted with all the Counsels of God. What the Author saith, Pag. 108. is false; for the Mysteries of the Kingdom of God were incomprehensible, except by means of a Divine Revelation, so that none understood them but they to whom God revealed them, and those whom they were not revealed unto, could not know, much less comprehend them; therefore they in themselves were above the Capacity of those who needed a Revelation to understand them, and of those who understood them not for want of a Revelation, yet some had their Reason, but to no purpose; a Divine Mystery is such a Secret, as all the wits of Men cannot of themselves find out 'tis the glory of God to conceal a thing. 
Prov. 25.2.  The Doctor's Dialogue between the Doctor and his Parishioner, P. 113, 114. is but an insipid thing.  
We do not say every thing in our Religion is a Mystery, but only some things are as the manner of the Lord Jesus' Union with the Members of his Mystical Body, which the Apostle calls a great mystery: Certainly the whole Matter of Salvation before it was revealed, was a Mystery, but still some things therein remain a Mystery; for alas! what a vast difference there is between that we know, and that which we are ignorant of; for saith the Apostle, Now we see through a glass darkly, and we know but in part, 
1 Cor. 13.9, 10, 12.  but when that which is perfect is come, than we shall see face to face, then shall I know, even as I am known. They brag of Reason, which with them is commonly Sophistry, which Paul exhorteth to beware of; The true reason is that which is grounded upon and consonant with God's word, 
Colos. 2.8  the true Rule of it; but our Reason is naturally perverted, unsound, misled, overruled by Sense, Lust and Passion. I must take notice of something the Man saith, which I cannot avoid calling by the name of Impudence, among other places in his Pag. 130. of the first Edition, the Orthodox he calleth Ignorant and Perverse Men, Cavillers and Deceivers, which are his own and Gangs proper Attribute. 4●o. Modo, Proprium Propriissimum. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
These Huffs and Hectoring Champions, for Reason against Faith and Revelation, are like those whom the Prophet speaks of, that walk in the light of their own sire, and in the sparks that they have kindled. But saith God, 
Isa. 50. 1●  This shall ye have of mine hand ye shall lie down in sorrow; for that very same thing, Socinians will believe of God no more than the Works of Nature, and their Reason will teach them, but we must know more, or else our Reason must be subject to, and depend upon Creatures, even in those things, which do far exceed Sense and Reason; thus also they make their Reason the standing Rule of their Faith, yet Scripture calling Faith the Gift of God, doth thereby imply it, not to be grounded upon Humane Reason or any thing in Man; we know Reason to depend upon the Information of Sense; so what we hear, feel, smell and taste, we reasonably believe to be; and our Senses being convinced, our Reason is easily persuaded; now this Opinion of theirs makes our Religion to depend upon Senses, not upon Faith; thus against Scripture it must be said we live and walk by Sight and Sense, and not by Faith; so what our blessed Saviour said to Thomas, were in vain, 
John. 20.29.  Blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed; for indeed Faith is a steadfast and firm Persuasion of what God hath promised, be it almost impossible to be thought by Humane Reason: But the Socinian doth as good as say, what he hath not seen he will not believe, which Infidelity of his might as well extend itself to the sensible and visible World, as to the Invisible, and that which is to come, which all his Reason cannot see; thus he might not believe there are such Cities as Constantinople and Rome, because he hath not seen them; for what Revelation is in Religion and Spiritual Things, that same Relation is in Temporal and Worldly; thus he will not believe that Asia produceth very delicious Fruit, Africa Monsters, the Sea, Whales, because he hath not been an Eye-witness: After this rate he must not believe the former Ages of the World, nor take any thing upon the relation of others, much less must he believe the Spiritual World, which is of another Condition and Nature, nor the Influences of Heaven; which being not sensible, do exceed his Reason.  
They profess not to believe the Mysteries in Religion, because their Reason cannot understand them, but there are such things as we cannot comprehend, yet must believe them, even for that same reason that we cannot comprehend them; Infiniteness is an essential Attribute of God, yet that Infiniteness which is God infinite, is every way incomprehensible to me, and my very Reason and Philosophy must acquiesce unto this; for the very Heathens would erect an Altar to the unknown, 
Act. 17.23.  or incomprehensible God, whom them worshipped: In Humane and Civil Things Reason is the guide, which God hath given Man for his Direction, even in those that relate to his Salvation, but in a subordinate way to Religion, which as as far above Reason, as Heaven is above the Earth, 'tis not contrary to, but serveth to enlighten and sanctify it, after which Reason is of a great Use, for than it can out of Scripture draw Inferences and Conclusions; but if Reason be the standing Rule of Faith, whereby we are saved, what will become of so many in the World, who are quite deprived of the Use of Reason? Is there no way out of Bedlam into Heaven? or is there no Salvation for those who have no natural Reason to ground Faith upon? Again, if we should know no more of God than natural Reason can suggest, that Knowledge would be confined within very narrow bounds, we believe a Trinity of Persons in an Unity of the Godhead, because God himself hath revealed it; and whatsoever is in God, is Infinite and Incomprehensible, in all these Matters, without the Light of Revelation, tho' with the whole help of Reason, to speak in the Prophet's Words, 
Ice. 59.10.  We grope for the wall like the blind, and we grope as if we had no eyes: we stumble at noonday as in the night; for indeed our own Light is but Darkness: But Socinians will admit of no such things in God, because their Reason cannot conceive it, but their Reason is natural, and the Revelation thereof supernatural; their Reason is finite, and the Godhead infinite: Can a Quart-Bottle hold all the Water of the Sea, or the Blind see the Sun? That People begin with undermining God's Altar, no doubt with an Intent to pull it down if they can, and so to set up an Idol of their own, that is, their Reason against Revelation or Scripture, and thus to go a whoring after their own Inventions, without any Measure and Bounds; all our Understanding and Reason, in Religious Matters, should be guided by Revelation; for saith David, 
Psal. 119.1 9  Give me understanding according to thy word, not according to my Reason, except that word be a Lamp unto our Feet, and a Light unto our Path, we are sure to go astray, and deviate from the Rule, and miss the Mark; hence spring those seeming Contradictions, which arise from the shallowness of Man's Brains, and not from the Repugnancy of things, which sometimes makes them fight against the Man in the Moon, as their fancy suggests to them to go out of the Road, so by Attempts to explain things, they entangle them the more; and so what themselves call Strength of Wit and Reason, others upon better Grounds look upon't as effects of a distempered Imagination, for they think to have engrossed and monopolised to themselves all Wit and Learning; as for us, about these Controversies we follow the Method of Aopollor, who showed not by the strength of his own Reason, 
Act. 1●. 28.  but by the Scriptures that Jesus was Christ, and thereby mightily convinced the Jews, for he was mighty in Scriptures.  
Socinians would seem to refer themselves to be judged by Scripture and Reason, as Papists by Scripture and Tradition; but the reason of one, as the Tradition of the other, is a devourer; for Reason of one side, as Tradition on the other, do swallow up Scripture; which, tho' first named, is with them last minded, and signifieth least, as indeed they both would make of it a stalking Horse, and subservient, one to his Tradition, and the other to his Reason; and these would set up for the only Rational Men in the World, and whatsoever doth no come up to them, they hastily call Nonsense and Contradiction, after which Rate the Holy Spirit of God in Scripture is liable to their Censure, and shall be as he is by some of them, charged with Contradiction, yet we know Truth doth not gainsay itself, the Spirit of God is the Spirit of Truth; his word, the word of Truth, for so saith he who is Truth itself. These Imaginary Contradictions arise not out of the things themselves, but out of the Perverseness of Man's Heart, and Blindness of their Judgement, which as the Apostle says, prompts them to wrest Scripture unto their own Destruction, 
2 Pet. 3.16.  such are not the learned and steady in the Truth, as some Men in the World account themselves to be, but the unlearned and unstable, as the Apostle calls them, so we may in the Prophet's Words, say, they are not valiant for the truth. 
Jerem. 9.3.  There is a great Difference between gross Contradictions to our Reason, and barely being above it, that is, not having any distinct Conception of the Nature of things in a clear Idea, which is a full and evident Perception of it.  
Of two contrary Propositions, if one be true, the other must necessarily be false, according to the rule of Contraries, but no such thing as this is to be found in any part of Scripture, consequently we may conclude how the great Mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation therein contained are true, not to be cavilled at by Humane Reason; for what is infinite is above our Comprehension, no Duration without Succession, which is not to be found in an infinite and Eternal Being, that existeth of himself, yet that Eternity we cannot understand, only by parts of time, as past, present, and to come, which imply Duration and Succession, the reason is, because it exceeds our Capacity. The way to obviate and prevent any seeming Contradictions in Scripture, is first to observe the Analogy of Faith; in some places, God, to condescend to our weak Capacity, doth attribute unto himself Humane Passions, as Anger, Wrath, Fury, to repent, and Members of Man's Body; as the Eye, Hand, Arm, etc. yet thereupon we must not say, God is subject to our Passions, like the Antropopathites, or hath a Body like the Antropomorphites, because we are taught in Scripture God is a Spirit and unchangeable; so the second thing to be observed is the Scope of the place, of many Instances, I shall bring but this, the blind and dumb both spoke and saw, Matth. 12.22. Here is a seeming Contradiction; if the Blind sees, than he is not blind; if the Dumb speaks, he is not dumb; but let the Scope of the place be consulted, and it will set things at right, and therein we find how a Man, blind and deaf, was miraculously cured by our Saviour, so that he who before was blind and deaf, both spoke and saw, having recovered his Sight and Hearing.  
What he saith, Page 138, doth not belong to us, for we are not for an implicit Faith, we are not against, but searching into, and examining the Grounds of our Religion, but withal say, all that Examination will signify nothing, except it be given us from above to understand, therefore 'tis beyond our Reason: Our Religion is not of Works, but of Faith; which this Opinion of theirs about Reason, destroyeth: Faith is a strong Persuasion, grounded and built not upon Reason, but upon God's gracious and special Promise, infused into us by the Holy Ghost; wherefore, in several places of Scripture 'tis called the immediate Gift of God; for though Faith comes by the Word, yet the Application thereof, wherein it doth chief consist, is the immediate and effectual working of the Spirit. The several Objections as brought in by him, Page 142, 143, 45, 46, have but little in them, as I could easily demonstrate, if I had but time and room enough, I shall take notice of what he saith about the latter end of Page 146. Now Reason is from God as well as Revelation, but he must know that Reason is corrupt, but Revelation not so, when Reason was whole, yet it deviated, but Revelation is always the same; the Light of Reason through Sin is become Darkness, and a Guide, that hath and doth commonly, if not constantly, err. Here he would give us a sound reason, which is so no more than a sound Nature, Pag. 148.  
How often doth God in the Old-Testament, and Christ in the New, complain, that People could not hear and understand what was said to them? and what he saith to them in the last quoted Page, how slowly must the Gospel have moved at the beginning, if those that were to preach it had been obliged to qualify themselves, is insignificant, 'tis known they were immediately inspired by the Holy Ghost and Heaven qualified them, not they themselves; for if Humane Reason be fallible in natural, much more in supernatural things.  
There are many dark and mysterious Passages of God's Providence, which our Reason nor any Humane thing can understand, whereof Scripture affords many Instances, and of these we may say as of a Watch, the several pieces of which being asunder, seem to be insignificant; but put them together in their due place, they are of good use, and commend the Art of the Maker, when he hath showed us what it is good for, which before we could not know of ourselves. Thus one or few acts of divine Providence are Mysteries to us, which we cannot dive into, nor understand, till God hath manifested them to us: What would all the Humane Reason in the World say of the Command which Abraham received, to sacrifice his own Son; in all appearance it was a murder, and a barbarous and unnatural one too, for a Father to destroy his own Son, God's Will, to try his Faith and Obedience, was a Secret. As Job's Afflictions for a trial of his Patience, and to make him in Ages to come an Example of it. Joseph's being cast in Prison for so good an Act, as to refuse committing Adultery with his Master's Wife, would puzzle the Brains and Reason of any Man who believes God to be just and pure; if by the several things, which the same wife Providence brought to pass, God had not made his design known, which David saith was to try him, 
Ps. 105.19.  the word of the Lord tried him: So God's command, to the Prophet Hosea, to take unto him a Wife of Whoredoms, when the Lord is a most holy God: That the Son of God, who is just, harmless, undefiled, separate from Sinners, should by Blasphemers be accused of, condemned, and executed for Blasphemy, and this by the determinate Counsel and foreknowledge of God, is that which doth transcend the poor, weak, frail Understanding of Man, tho' never so much screwed up, or his Reason put to the rack: I am sure David a Prophet, as well as a King, speaks of himself to that purpose about the Prosperity of the Wicked in this World; so foolish was I, 
Psal. 73.22, 16, 17.  and ignorant, I was as a beast before thee; and when I thought to know this, it was too painful for me, too hard for me to understand, until I went into the sanctuary of God. No Humane Reason, only Divine Revelation, could make it intelligible; Whoso is wise, and will observe those things, even they shall understand the loving kindness of the Lord; that is, 
Psal. 107.43. from 40.  the Wisdom from above, not the Humane, can teach us to understand God's Gracious Dispensations, especially in the wise Government of his Church, which to Humane Reason is passed understanding, as concerning God's Works and Thoughts, of which David saith, O Lord how great are thy works, and thy thoughts are very deep: which, if we may believe him, 
Ps. 92 5, 6.  a brutish man knows not, neither doth a fool understand this. With Admiration and Exclamation he saith it, and so deep, that Humane Reason cannot fathom it without Revelation; Heavenly Light maketh some know and understand, but the Brutish, the Fool and Wicked doth not, and cannot, for want of this Divine Grace; and when they would find to measure Divine Mysteries with the Line of this Reason, than they become Fools; so to them these things still continue to be Mysteries. This Author is one of those whom the Prophet speaks of, 
Psal. 64.5.  They encourage themselves in an evil matter; for at first he concealed his Name, whether out of Fear or Modesty he knows best, but now in his second Edition he pulled off the Vizard, and hath his Name at length, how he came by that Encouragement, deserves, as I think, to be inquired into by those that are more than I, immediately concerned.  
I agree with him when he speaks the Truth as thus, how the Converted Jews would still retain some of the Levitical Ceremonies, as may be seen, Act. 15. and therein might happen to be too much Compliance, as with the Gentiles, who brought in some of the Heathenish Rites, and that Remissness in some, afterwards made those things a part of Christianity itself; thus they degenerated from the Simplicity of the Gospel, by means of self and worldly ends: Hence we see how from Page 165, till 172, he takes Advantage upon account of Ceremonies, and such foolish or selffish Priestcraft as he calls it. But after all, do this Socinian People think to monopolise to themselves, and be sole Masters of all good Sense and Reason; surely others among the Ancients, and now, are as rational as they, why should not their Wisdom and Reason, seeing they make it to be natural, differ from Wisdom and Reason, that is Spiritual? From hence I am sure St. Panl makes not only a difference, but also a great Opposition between them; for saith he, We speak not in the words of humane wisdom, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth, and God hath revealed them, that is, the Doctrines of the Gospel unto us by his Spirit; and as 'tis not the Wisdom or Reason of Man (which the same Apostle in the same Epistle, Ch. 3.19. calls foolishness with God) but the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, 
1 Cor. the whole Ch.  etc. And where this Spirit of God is not pleased to teach the Truth of the Gospel, that remains hidden, all the Reason in the World cannot understand it; 
2 Cor. 4.33.  and we know it is hid to some, to them that are lost; among whom are some of the most learned and wise in the World, endued with as much Natural Reason, and great Parts, as any of our Adversaries; yet this natural Reason cannot comprehend it; I go farther, and say, that some of these things of God remain still Mysteries; and if not wholly yet in part, are hidden, even to those who have the Spirit of God, because, by reason of the weakness of their Nature, they are not capable, and 'tis above their reach to understand it; first, as to God's Nature, to us it is incomprehensible, because infinite; behold the heaven, 
1 Kings 8.27. Compared with Job 11.7, 8, 9  and heaven of heavens cannot contain thee, nor Reason comprehend: So in his Attributes, his greatness is unsearchable, and his understanding is infinite; so are his Works both of Power and Providence, Wisdom, Mercy and Justice, far above the reach of Humane Reason, as to be seen in Job, in the Psalms, and other parts of Scripture, and let one Text of Job serve for all; great things doth he, God, 
Psal. 145.3. Ps. 147.5. Job 37.5.  which we cannot comprehend; and to apply this to our present purpose, we own that the Doctrines of the Gospel, necessary to be known, both as to the Substance, and to the Declaration, are clear and perspicuous, but still there are some, as to the Difficulties, which learned Men and Doctors do study to understand, which they can never rightly do, without a special Assistance of the Spirit of God; for 'tis he, and he alone, that can lead us into all Truth; for if of ourselves we cannot understand the plainest, much less the hardest; wherefore, to the end we may know the Truths of God, we must be taught them of God; now, as all Promises are Yea and Amen in Jesus Christ, so are all and every Truth of the Gospel in him; which to understand, we must be taught by him, and by the Holy Ghost; 
Eph. 4.21. 2 Cor. 3.6.  for the letter alone killeth, but the spirit giveth life.  
It is very strange, yet true, that Socinians will trust and depend upon their own Reason, notwithstanding the Advice of wise Solomon given them long ago, Lean not unto thine own understanding, 
Prov. 3.5.  which is the Seat and Centre of Reason; for if Men have any thing of Reason, there it lays, as to natural things, but as to supernatural, it is derived out of Scriptures, whereupon our Holy Religion is grounded; therein is nothing useless and needless, yet still something is mysterious, either as to Matter, or in the Manner wherein it is spoken; and 'tis this which God hath given us for our continual Exercise in this World, therefore he requireth we should inquire into●t with all possible Diligence and utmost Endeavours; and they who fall into that course, do, and will, by Experience, upon frequent reading of the Word, daily find new Lights, new Discoveries, and new cause of Admiration, which through Grace from above, are the Fruits of their Obedience and Industry; as there is nothing unnecessary, superfluous and useless, and that for all sorts of Christians, whether weak or strong, so the the right consideration of the Matter, the Words, Order, Contexture, the Design of the Holy Ghost in them, do instruct us of and guide us in our Duty towards God, whereof the parts are various, large, great and wonderful; upon this account, saith David, 
Ps. 119.96.  Thy commandment is exceeding broad, because it contains the whole Revelation of God unto us, which is full of infinite Wisdom in the whole Frame and Order of it; and as the Revelation in the Word is from God, so is the Understanding of that Revelation; that is the reasn why Men should not, as some do, perplex themselves, to find out the Grounds and Suitableness of some things in the New-Testament, with others in the Old, when they should know how 'tis not in their Power to know the height, depth, length and breadth of God's Infinite Wisdom therein contained, when, may be, the Holy Ghost aimeth at such things as they cannot dive into, who by degrees openeth Man's Eyes more and more, to know things necessary for them; for as the Apostle saith, 
1 Cor. 3.2.  He feeds us first with milk, then with meat, when we are able, and strong enough to bear it; for, as another Apostle saith, Newborn Babes desire the sincere milk of the word, 
1 Pet. 2.2.  that they may grow thereby; and thus, till we come unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ. 
Eph. 4.13.  And those Men, who in these things rely upon the Strength of their own Reason; I may well compare to these little Babes, who being not able to feed themselves, lay Hand into their Milk, wherewith they do not feed, but only slubber themselves; or to that Child that would not have the Nurse to hold him, tho' he wants strength of himself to go; if the Hand that bears him up doth but hold off, than he is gone, and sure to fall: So 'tis of any one that trusteth to his Understanding, and leaneth upon his own Reason; 'tis a bruised Reed that will go into his Hand, and pierce it: Wherefore God's sends us to the law, 
Isa. 8.20.  and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them; for their Light doth come from the word, yet not all at once, but by degrees, and in their several Kind's; all which, as the Apostle saith, worketh that one and the selfsame spirit, 
1 Cor. 12.  dividing to every man severally as he will: and let us know never so much out of Scripture, there is still more to be learned: Ought not this to convince Men, that it doth contain Mysteries? The Apostle directs us to think soberly, 
Rom. 12.3.  not to allow our Fancy and curious Speculations to go beyond the bounds of a becoming Sobriety in things above us, which Scripture doth both command and commend and is very much suitable unto right Reason: Now the rule of that Sobriety is positively, fully, and unalterably given thus, Secret things belong unto the Lord our God, but those which are revealed unto us, 
Deur. 29. 2●.  and to our children. In those things Divine Revelation must be the measure and rule of our Knowledge, the contrary is an effect of Pride, Vanity, and Presumptuousness forbidden in Scripture, not to 〈◊〉 above that which is written; which if M●n obey, 
1 Cor. 4.6.  it will bring them to Certainty and Truth, whereof the contrary leads them into all kinds of Error.  
But to conclude this, for I must no longer insist upon't, as I never intended fully to answer it, only to take notice of it on my way; as to the point of Reason, see how foolish in these things Man is, and how confounded his ●eason, by the Example of Peter, an Elect of God, a Disciple dear unto Christ: The Lord Jesus comes to him to wash his Feet, but he presently said, 
John 13.5, 6, 7.  Thou shalt never wash my feet; but our Saviour answering, If I wash thee not, thou host no part in me. Peter soon goes to another Extreme; first, he would not have Christ to wash him at all, but now he would be washed every where, not only the feet, but also hand and head too; but our Saviour shows him Reason, why he ought to suffer himself to be guided, and not to take upon him to direct his Lord and Master in what he was to do, he that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet. Now the cause of this wand'ring and error of Peter, is expressed, v. 7. namely, his Ignorance, What I do thou knowest not now? Where was his Reason at that time? For certainly he was unreasonable to be of a different Mind from his Saviour, and till he submitted unto his Will; the like we may say about these things unto those who fancy themselves so rational, and would set up their blind and lame Reason for a competent Judge; Reason is always striving, and always at a loss; all our Reason hath to do is to be guided by Scripture, and to own it to be the infallible word of God; all beyond this is the work of Faith; for Christ is an object not to be known naturally, or by natural Reason, and the obligation to know Christ, and believe in him, springs and ariseth only from a positive Command, superadded unto the Law of Nature: If St. Paul speaks Truth, 
Col. 1.27.  Christ in us is a mystery, considering the manner whereby he is in us, therefore the Image of the new Man in us is called the hidden and inner Man, 
1 Pet. 3.4.  which in the following Verse is explained of Christ's dwelling in us by faith; and elsewhere the same Apostle calls Union and Relation between Christ and the Church, a great Mystery, 
Eph. 5.32.  which our Reason cannot comprehend without a Revelation: This made David say, 
Psal. 119.169.  O Lord give me understanding according to thy word, and not according to my Reason, or natural Capacity; and, blessed is he whom thou teachest out of thy law; 
Psa. 94.12  not out of his shallow Brains. Our blessed Saviour's saying, he that eateth my flesh, 
Joh. 6.16.  and drinketh my blood, contains Doctrines, not obvious to Reason; that eating and drinking with Christ's dwelling in us is so true, that we may not doubt of it; for the word saith it, but how, and the manner of it, as well as our dwelling in Christ, and he in us, is above Reason to understand, wherefore Scripture hath revealed it to be by Faith; but that People will believe nothing but what they can give Reason for, when Paul wrote his Epistle to the Colossians, the Gospel and Doctrine of Salvation were certainly revealed, yet still he calls it a Mystery, the mystery of God, 
Col. 2.2, 3.  and of the Father, and of Christ, and in the following Verse he gives an instance of it, in whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. That thing is so, he gives it as Matter of Faith by us to be believed; but how it is, and how all these Treasures are hid in him, 'tis for us a mysterious thing.  
Every Nation, whether Jews or Gentiles, in matter of Religion, had Mysteries, so Christians have theirs, and in particular that of the Incarnation, which the Apostle calls a great one beyond all Dispute and Comparison, and besides all this, surely there are great Mysteries in Religion, God, whose infinite Nature and Attributes are the Ground of all Religion, is the greatest Mystery of all, and most incomprehensible; for this Reason the Trinity and Incarnation are great Mysteries, and above Reason, tho' not contrary to't: These Doctrines indeed contain great Difficulties, but no Contradictions which theirs do, as to set up a Metaphorical and Figurative God, secondary, subordinate, a Creature to be God by Office, not by Nature a God, but of 1700 standing, and this Creature God to be worshipped, is not this downright Idolatry? Herein we must go no farther than Scripture leads us, for fear of going out of our Depth, and losing ourselves in the deep things of God; many more things to our purpose, I could say upon this Matter; but for the present have no time nor place left to do't.  
But to come to a Conclusion of the whole and main Subject, to all that hath been said, I shall add this out of the Prophet, where the Husband of the Church of the Gentiles that were to be called to communion with Christ, is said to be the Lord of hosts, 
Isa. 54.5.  the holy one of Israel, the redeemer, and the Lord of the whole earth: In the whole Bible the true God of Israel, never assumed unto himself higher names than these are, nor ever did effect a greater outward work, than to redeem his Spouse. Now out of several places in the New Testament it doth appear how Christ is the Husband and Redeemer of the Church, which he is said to have purchased with his own blood, 
Act. 20.28. Eph. 5.25.  and to have loved it, and have given himself for it. Thus this Prophecy is plainly fulfilled in Christ, who is the Person therein described with those glorious Names and Attributes altogether incommunicable, even the Enemies themselves being the Judges, to any mere Man or Creature whatsoever. Moreover, every house is builded by some man, 
Heb. 3.4.  but he that built all things is God: Nay, the World and the Church were built by Christ, and by whom also all things were created in the beginning, and made of nothing; and tho' we would grant, which we do not, to Socinians, that that which is spoken of the Creation of the World, is to be understood of the new Creation, or Regeneration, yet this very same doth import and require as Divine and Infinite a Power, as doth the Creation of the World; and if we may so say something more than to make something out of nothing, here is no opposition, nothing to hinder, but to bring Light out of Darkness, Good of Evil, to drive away Darkness, Blindness, and Ignorance out of the Mind, to remove perverse and corrupt Affections out of the Will, and incline it to Good, to change the stubborn and violent Passions of a Heart desperately wicked and deceitful above all things: I say, to create a new Heart, and renew a right Spirit, is every jot as great, if not a greater Work, than the Creation of the World, which Christ by his own Power having done, and doing it every day Day, is an illustrious, and aught to be an undisputable Proof of his Deity, which is confirmed as by his Names and Attributes, so by his other works, and by that divine and glorious worship, due, and rendered unto him, not on Earth only, but chief in Heaven equally with the Father, by the four Beasts, the Elders and Millions of Angels, who upon their Knees, if I may so say, for 'tis written, They fell down; saying with a loud voice, worthy is the Lamb that was slain, to receive power and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, 
Rev. ●. 11, 12, 13, 14.  and glory; and every creature which is in Heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I, saying, blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever, Amen.  
But if after all, these Enemies of Christ do refuse to join their Voice in this Heavenly Concert, to give him Glory, one day when they shall appear before him, who is to judge the Quick and the Dead, and he puts Questions to them concerning their impious disowning of him, like the Man that came in without the Wedding-Garment, 
Mat. 22.12  they shall be speechless, they shall have nothing to say for themselves, no more than the Sadduces and Pharisees; for as then in the time of his humiliation, no man was able to answer him a word, 
v. 46.  much more when he doth appear in his Glory, shall his Enemy's Mouths be stopped, 
Luke 13.17.  and all his adversaries ashamed, as we read they were, tho' now they be never so shameless and brazenfaced, yet at last they certainly shall be confounded.   
FINIS.   

Books Printed for Rich. Wellington, at the Lute, in St. Paul's-Church-yard.  
1. THE Works of that Excellent Practical Physician, Dr. Thomas Sydenham, wherein the List of acute Diseases are treated of, after a new Method; but also the safest and shortest way of Curing most Chronical Diseases: Translated by John Pechey, of the College of Physicians.  
2. A Discourse upon the Nature and Faculties of Man, in several Essays; with some Considerations upon the Occurrences of Humane Life. By Tim. Nurse, Gent.  
3. A general History of the Diseases of Children: Collected by the most eminent Practical Authors; by John Pechey, of the College of Phsitians.  
4. The Family Physician; being a choice Collection of Approved and Experienced Remedies to cure all Diseases, incident to Humane Bodies, useful in Families, and serviceable to Country People. By George Hartman, Phylo Chemist, Author of the Preserver and Restorer of Health, Servant to Sir Kenelm Digby, till he died.