ΒΛΑΣΦΗΜΟΚΤΟΝΊΑ: THE BLASPHEMER SLAIN With the SWORD of the SPIRIT: Or a PLEA for the GODHEAD OF THE HOLY GHOST.  
Wherein the Deity of the Spirit of God is proved in the demonstration of the Spirit, and vindicated from the Cavils of John Bidle.  
The second Edition with many Additions.  
By Matthew Pool, Master of Arts of Emmanuel- College in Cambridge; and Pastor of the Church of God at Michael's Quern in London.  
London, Printed by R. & W. I. for John Rothwell at the Fountain and Bear in Goldsmith's Row in Cheapside, 1654.   

To my dearly beloved friends, the flock of God in Michael's Quern Parish in LONDON.  
Dear beloved in the Lord:  
IT was my earnest desire, when first I published this Treatise, for many reasons, as far as possibly I could, to have the Author undiscovered, and therefore I could not preface any Dedication to it. But notwithstanding all my endeavours for secrecy; what I thought to conceal is commonly known, and I am looked upon as the Author of it. As long as there was a possibility of privacy I laboured for it, seriously and sincerely; but since, now is it become public, it would be, both a vanity and folly to endeavour any longer to smother it. I thank God, I am not ashamed of that cause that I have undertaken, only herein I desire pardon of ingenuous Readers, that being so young and raw, and confessedly unfurnished with those treasures of knowledge that are necessary for one that appears in Print, I should engage myself in so weighty a cause, in so public a manner.  
And now having adventured thus fare, to whom should I dedicate these first-fruits, but to you, to whom I am obliged both by the providence of God that hath fixed me among you, and set me over you, and by those many favours, by which I stand engaged to some of you.  
It hath been my desire, since I have been among you, to approve myself to God and to your consciences, in that work that the Lord hath entrusted me with, and I can say in sincerity, I have endeavoured that you (as well as I) might be able to give up your accounts with joy in that great Day. And as I have often considered, and sometimes told you; that the work of a Minister doth consist in two things in building up his people; 1 In Knowledge, 2 In Grace: and that these two are like Hypocrates his Twins, that laugh and weep, live and die together; so have I really and sincerely, though in much weakness, endeavoured, both that your hearts might be cleansed from hypocrisy, and your heads from heresy, that you might neither make shipwreck of faith, nor of a good conscience, that you might be antidoted both against the gangrene of erroneous doctrine, and the leprosy of a vain and sinful conversation.  
God hath made us that are Ministers, Shepherds, we are therefore to preserve you (as far as we can) from those grievous Wolves that come in and devour the flock: Watchmen, we are therefore to give you timely notice of approaching enemies: Salt, we are therefore to season you against corrupt principles and practices: Light, we are to acquaint you with the ways and works of darkness, that you may avoid them: Husbandmen, we must pluck up the weeds that hinder your growth: Leaders and Commanders, we must go in and out before you, and fight your battles: Witnesses of Christ, we must continually bear witness to the cause and truth of Christ, however despised and reproached.  
Accordingly I have employed part of that time, which I have spent among you, in endeavouring to establish you in some of those truths, that are most opposed in our days. Here is another truth that I have not yet had occasion to speak of in the course of my Mininistery, which in this Treatise is briefly defended. A Truth not concerning some circumstantials in Religion, not a matter of indifferency, that may with safety be either maintained or opposed, but a Truth that concerns the very heart and soul of Religion; a truth that relates to the vitals of Christianity; a Truth that concerns the Holy Ghost, and that in no less a matter then his Deity: Which however some bold and insolent persons may contemptuoufly, and as they think, without danger speak lightly of; yet our blessed Saviour doth so highly value it, that he tells us in express terms though a blasphemy against himself shall be forgiven, yet blasphemy against the H. Ghost shall not be forgiven to men, Matth. 12. 31, 32.  
A Truth, which whosoever opposeth, opposeth also the deity of Christ, & therefore he that is well grounded in the former, will never question the latter. This is the truth that is here asserted, which I present to your solemn and serious consideration: It is not sufficient that you hear truths in a Pulpit, men's unfaithful memories will soon deceive them, it is very expedient that you also be frequent and diligent in reading those that have most briefly, plainly, and solidly writ about them: You have one great privilege (o happy you, if you aid well understand and seriously consider your happiness!) there is scarce any error, but it hath been substantially encountered, and fully refuted in the English tongue. It would be your wisdom to get one or two of every sort, and to take some time to peruse them, that so you might the better be enabled to give a reason of that hope that is in you to any one that asketh it.  
It may please God to suffer wicked and unreasonable men so far to prevail, as you may be deprived of the Ministry, and be left as sheep having no Shepherd, which if once Satan and his instruments can effect: you may expect, 〈…〉 the deluge of Errors sh●●●● break in upon you, with greater violence when there is no Standard to be lifted up against it, that those grievous wolves will tear the poor flock more fiercely, when there is none to deliver them. Ministers are living Books, and Books are dead Ministers; and yet though dead, they speak. When you cannot hear the one, you may read the other. Do not say, You have no time. Either you must find a time to mind the saving of your souls, or else God will find a time to afflict your souls. I may say of these heretical opinions, (what he said of Ministers, though in a far different sense) they watch for your souls. Certainly it deserves a little time to look to a matter of that concernment. And how can you watch against your enemies if you are not furnished with defensive weapons.  
This, therefore, I do earnestly desire, and as an Ambassador of Christ and your Pastor require at your hands, that you would make conscience of increasing your know ledge according to your opportunities; That you would every day labour to be deeplier rooted in the faith, and abundant in the work of the Lord. And that you may so be, is the daily prayer of  
The unworthiest of all that call Christ Master, and your Servant for Jesus sake, M.P.   

Christian READER;  
ALL Heresies come from Hell; the Apostle calls them the Doctrines of Devils, 
1 Tim. 4. 1, 2.  and the ancient Ignatius, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The inventions of 
Ad Tralenses.  the Devil.  
All Heresies lead to hell; S. Peter styles them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
2 Pet. 2. 1.  Damnable Heresies. Epiphanius, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The Gates of Hell; 
Haeres. 74▪  they involve (though some men think otherwise) both the Seducers and the Seduced in everlasting 
Ad Ephes.  vengeance, in the judgement of Ignatius.  
Amongst all Heresies, none are more dangerous nor infectious than such as assail the Sacred Trinity, God blessed for ever. These are most dangerous, because they raze the whole foundation of Christian Religion, and by reason of the blindness, curiosity, wantonness, pride, etc. of man's wit, the most infectious.  
In all Ages of the Church Satan hath bestirred himself to sow and disperse these Heresies. I intent not a catalogue of all (see this in Danaeus) but in stead of all, the Story of this one denying the Deity of the Holy Ghost in this short Treatise confuted.  
It was at first taught by Arrius, implicitly: after him publicly maintained by Macedonius, 
Epiphan. Haeres. 74. N●ceph. Hist. lib. 9 cap. 42, 47.  the furious Bishop of Constantinople: After him propagated far and near by Marathonius Eleusius, and their Associates. It was censured and condemned in the second Council at Constantinople, by 180 Bishops, upon this occasion 
Haeres. 74.  met together; and confuted largely by Epiphanius; yet it lived obscurely in aftertimes, as 
Haeres. 42.  is observed by Danaeus and Prateolus; and in the last Century began again to fly abroad, broached by Servetus, and dispersed by S●cinusand his followers.  
What endeavours have been used to infect, and prevent the Infection of the Belgic Churches with this Heresy, is discovered by the Learned Cloppenburgh, in his Compendiolum Socinianismi 
Cloppenburgh ann. 51. Hoornbec. pr●sat. ad Socin. confutat. par. 1. Mares. Hydra Socinianism. Dr. Cheynel, Rise & Growth of Socin.  Confutati, in the Preface. What stickling amongst us in these times of distraction, is most lamentable to rehearse; the whole body of Socinianism, that Hydra of Blasphemies, that Racovian Catechism (which walked only in the dark, and in the Latin tongue in the Bishop's times) is now translated into English for the more speedy corruption of the people; many bold Factors for these Blasphemies, which in those times durst not appear, do now both publicly, and from house to house disseminate their Heresies without fear: amongst these is Mr. John Bidle, who both in print and private doth deny the God head of the Holy Ghost, and dispute against it, David thought it time 
Psal. 119.  for God to work, when men made void his law; & thou (Reader) canst not but think it seasonable for his servants to watch, and for thyself to stand upon thy guard, when the enemy is sowing tares.  
Bless God for those Watchmen who stand upon the Towers to give warning of thy approaching danger, and take warning at the sound of the Trumpet, that thou 
Ezek. 3. Heb. 13.  mayest deliver thy soul, and thy blood may not be upon thine own head: this will be grievous to us, and unprofitable to thee.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Fly from Atheistical▪ Heresies, 
Tpist. ad Trallen.  was the last counsel of dying Ignatius to the Trallenses; agreeable to the grave advice of Solomon, Proverbs 19 Cease, my son, to hear the instruction that counsels to err from the words of knowledge. O that this counsel might take with thee! But we have a further request to thee, Reader, Labour that thou mayest stand fast, rooted, and grounded, and established in the faith. In Infectious times, it is usual to take Antidotes, and wear Annulets: in these times of seduction it is no less necessary to arm ourselves against prevailing Errors.  
This Book of Mr. Bidle's is not now at first confuted; the Reverend and Learned Mr. Estwick hath some years since answered it in a Just Treatise; and since him Dr. John Cloppenburgh hath in Answer to it, put forth a Plea for the Deity of the Holy Ghost in the Latin Tongue, in the year 1652. This short and full Manual, written by a Workman that needs not be ashamed, is added for thy advantage. In it thou shalt find the Arguments proving the Deity of the Holy Ghost fully asserted, against Mr. Bidle's Caviss; the Sophisms which Mr. Bidle makes use of to darken truth, and pervert thy faith clearly refuted, as Epiphanius hath it, Haeres. 74. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to the stopping of the mouths of gainsayers, and the satisfaction of the Docible. That the Spirit of Wisdom may be given thee to try all things, discern the things that differ, and hold fast that is good, is the Prayer,  
(Reader) Of thy Servants for Christ's sake, 

James Cranford.  
Arthur Jackson.  
Thomas Manton.    
Imprimatur,  
Ed. Calamy.   

To the READER.  
THere is scarce any Truth contained in the Scriptures that hath not been opposed by Heretics in some ages of the Church; and amongst the rest, this Doctrine of the Blessed Trinity hath not been without exception; nay indeed, it hath found as much resistance as any other; partly from the ignorance of men that could not apprehend it; partly from the pride of men that will believe no truth, but what doth fully suit and comply with their (though corrupted) reason. It is very observable, how the Antitrinitarian Devil hath transformed himself into several shapes; sometimes telling us that there was but one Person, only it was called by three several names, and so they made a Trinity of words, but not of persons; thus he spoke in the mouths of the Simonians, Montanists, Noëtians, etc. Sometimes telling us, that th● three Persons are three Gods, and so they give us a Trinity of Divine Essences, not of Persons only; so he spoke in the Trith●itae. Sometimes telling us, that the three Persons are only three qualities; so he spoke in the Aëtiani. These Heretics like Samsons Foxes, though their heads looked divers ways, yet their tails were tied together, and firebrands in them to set the standing Corn of the Church on fire. Particularly, the Deity of the Holy Ghost hath been opposed at sundry times, and in divers manners: Some Heretics saying, It was only a name; some saying, it was a man; many saying, That it was not God, but a Creature, as the Arrians, Origenists, and especially 
Danaeus de Haeresibus.  the Macedonians; which last pestilent Error hath been of late revived, and particularly defended by john Bidle, in a Pamphlet entir●●●ed, Twelve Arguments, etc. whereby the Deity of the Holy Ghost (as he pretends) is clearly refuted; wherein, although I profess, as in the presence of God, I find nothing but common, trivial, absurd, and foolish Arguments; yet I observe the spirit of the man to be extraordinarily lifted up, as if he had said that which would puzzle all the universities in Europe to answer. He tells you in his Epistle, that he had waited upon, and contested with sundry Learned men, and could never get a satisfactory answer: nor I doubt, everwill in his own judgement: I fear God hath given him up to a spirit of delusion, to believe lies. To convince an Heretic, is but a little below a Miracle; and therefore it is not that I expect in this Treatise, but only the establishment of those that are yet free from this infection, and the reducing of them (if there be any such) who have followed this wretched Apostate out of the simplicity of their hearts.  
I am sensible, that this Treatise of Bidle's is fully answered by learned Mr. Estwick, to which Mr. B. hath never yet made a reply, nor ever will be able: But there are many that are unwilling to bestow either much pains or cost about books of that nature, and so that error doth yet spread, and some (as I am informed) are lately infected with it. I was therefore importuned to put forth a short and plain confutation of Bidle's Treatise, which might require less of the Readers money and patience, and so might serve as a common Antidote against that Pestilential Doctrine. Which motion I did at first utterly reject, being conscious to myself of mine own utter unfitness for such a work. And had I been left to myself, I should sooner have put my finger in the fire, than my pen to paper upon such terms. But being solemnly almost adjured by the honour of God, and good of souls, and being uncessantly urged; I confess, I durst not deny, lest I should prefer mine own credit, (which I thought might be justly blemished, by publishing my weakness in Print, with a Noverint universi, as thousands have done before me;) I say, lest I should prefer my credit to the glory of God (which was here so nearly concerned, and I hoped might be a little promoted by mine endeavours.) I therefore consulted not with flesh and blood, but immediately betook myself to the work. And if such fools as I writ, learned men may thank themselves, who suffer so many pestilent books to lie un-answered (as are daily put forth;) with what satisfaction to their own consciences, I know not; but I am sure with the great prejudice of the Church, and dissatisfaction of pious souls. I wish they would seriously lay this to heart, and take heed they be not found among them that wrap their talents (whether they be preaching or writing talents, all is one) in a napkin. And in this work I confess I was helped by the labours of some that went before me, Mr. Estwick, Doctor Cheynell, and Cloppenburgius; though I may safely say, there are some things added of mine own, which (I hope) may not be altogether useless and inconsiderable. Such as it is, here thou hast it: read, consider, examine seriously, diligently, reverently; and the Lord open the eyes of thy mind that thou mayest receive this truth in the love of it. If thou art already drawn into that pestilent error, that is here confuted, by the cunning craftiness of those seducers that lie in wait to deceive; thou hast the more need to look to thyself; for as thy distemper cannot be less than mortal, (if it be an error, as indeed it is, because it strikes at the very Deity of God himself) so it is almost incurable. And therefore it is high time for thee to awake out of sleep, for now is thy damnation nearer than when thou didst first Apostatise. It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent. Seriously bethink thyself, whether those foolish cavils thou pleasest thyself with here, are likely to bear thee out, and pass for currant at that great day. Besides what is in this Treatise, (which will either satisfy thee, or else I fear one day condemn thee) consider one thing further, (whereas your Champion cries out upon us as Idolaters) whether it be probable, that God (who hath promised to lead his people into all truth, to be with his Church to the end of the world) should suffer all his people, (those that did most sincerely love and worship him, most firmly believe in him) to fall 〈◊〉, live and die in such a foul and indeed damnable sin as Idolatry is, and that for so many ages together. Take one Caution more; do not think to comprehend this Mystery in thy shallow understanding: How should divine mysteries be depths, if a creature could fathom them? Do not make thy reason the rule of thy faith. So did the wise Grecians, the rational Romans; and that was the great cause why the preaching of the Cross was foolishness to them. The riches of Christ are unsearchable; shall we therefore  them? the peace of God passeth all understanding; shall we therefore dispute it out of the world? For you that are not yet tainted with this soul-murdering doctrine: 1 Bless God for it. 2 Take beed, lest you also fall. 3 Be wise unto sobriety. And the Lord give you a spirit of discerning to distinguish between things that differ: So prayeth he,  
Who passionately labours for thy Conviction and Conversion, or Establishment and Edification, M. P.   

The DEITY of the HOLY GHOST PROVED.  
BEfore I come to answer Mr. B's. Arguments, I shall lay down some Arguments to prove the Deity of the Holy Ghost. I shall not follow his way, in contending more by number and multitude, than strength and force of Arguments, in multiplying words without weight: I shall forbear to bring many Arguments, that might be alleged, and that upon good grounds; and shall only ●ull out some chief ones, and vindicate those which B. hath cavilled against. And thou blessed Spirit, the Spirit of Truth, plead thine own cause; s●nd out Thy Light, and Thy Truth, that they may guide me in the handling of this controversy, that Thy Divine Majesty may be fully vindicated, Thy people solidly established, and Thine enemies may be either con●●●ted or confounded. Amen.  
Arg. 1. He whom the Scripture calls the Great and the True God, is God: But the Scripture calls the Holy Ghost the Great and the True God: Ergo the Holy Ghost is God.  
I make that addition in the Premises, the Great and True God, because it is known and confessed that Magistrates are said to be gods, though they are never so called; but there is something added by way of qualification and diminution, I have said, You are gods; but you shall die like men, Psal. 82. 6, 7. So, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh, Exod. 7. 1. A made god, and a god to Pharaoh.  
The Major will be confessed: All the doubt will be about the Minor: For the proof, I shall only urge two places of Scripture.  
The first place is, Acts 5. v. 3. why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie unto the Holy Ghost, compared with the end of verse 4. Thou hast no● l●●d to men, but to God: That he speaks concerning the great God, is confessed by the adversary, and needs no proof. So that in the Apostles judgement, these are equivalent terms, to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to lie to God.  
For the confirmation of this Argument (though it is in itself so clear, that he that uns may read it; yet) I shall add four considerations.  
1 They are said to lie to the Holy Ghost, because only the Holy Ghost knew their sin, he only searched their hearts and knew their hypocrisy; and therefore, Verse 9 they are said to tempt the Spirit of the Lord, that is, to try whether he could discover their sin, and would punish it. They lied to him, whom they tempted, for in lying to him, it was, that they tempted him.  
2 Peter's intent was to aggravate their sin by this expression of lying to the Holy Ghost, that it was committed in a more special and immediate manner against God; Now if the Holy Ghost were only an Angel, as our Adversary asserts, it had been as great a sin to lie to Peter, God's extraordinary Messenger, as to lie to the Holy Ghost; because, as B. himself saith, What is done to any Messenger redounds to him that sends him; whether the Messenger were Angel or Apostle, that varies not the case; For though Ambassadors may differ in their private conditions, yet all of them do equally represent their Lord and Master.  
3 Peter doth make a Dichotomy here, acknowledging only two sort● of lies, a lying to men, and to God. But according to our Adversaries opinion, here should have been a Trichotomy, Peter should have said, Thou hast not lied to men, nor to the Holy Ghost only, but to God: But now seeing the Apostle hath made only two members of the Division, Thou hast not l●ed only to men, but to God also: Choose which you will, for one of the two you must acknowledge, either that the Holy Ghost is man, or God.  
4 Consider that Pet●r in the fourth verse, doth explain what he meant by that phrase in the third verse: Thou hast lied to the Holy Ghost; this he explains thus, Thou hast not lied to men, to a creature, but to God, to the Holy Ghost which is God.  
By what hath been said, B's first Exception falls to the ground; which is this, That a man may lie to God, and yet lie only to his messenger, because what is done to God's messenger, is done to God.  
Answ. It is true, that a sin committed against God's messenger, is committed against God; but withal Peter doth here intimate, that this was not only committed against God in that common and general respect (in which indeed all sins and all lies are committed against God) but that it was in a special, immediate, and extraordinary manner committed against God, that is, against the H. Ghost, as he before expressed it.  
But this Exception he himself distrusts, and therefore he flies to another, and that is, he finds fault with the Translation, and tells us, that the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being joined with an Accusative Case, doth signify the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉▪ that is, to belie and counterfeit, and so the words must be rendered, Why didst thou belie or counterfeit the Holy Ghost? But neither will this relieve him, for (although it might be instanced that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with an Accusative Case signifies to lie, and though the fourth Verse doth interpret the third, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being there but with a Dative, and so necessarily signifying to lie, yet) if his Exposition were true, the force of the Argument is not at all abated; still it holds though in other terms, Thou hast in counterfeiting the Holy Ghost, not counterfeited men, but God: Or in counterfeiting the Holy Ghost, thou hast not lied to men, but to God. I might add, that it may be rendered thus, as B. confesseth, and Streso with others render it; Why hath Satan filled thine heart to deceive the Holy Ghost? Why hast thou been persuaded by him that the Holy Ghost might be deceived? as if he did not understand thy thoughts and secret practices, as if thou couldst put a cheat upon the Holy Ghost, and make him believe thou art as good a Christian as the best. However to endeavour to deceive the the Holy Ghost, and to lie to the Holy Ghost, are phrases of the same signification.  
But there is yet another Objection, that some of our weak Brethren make (which I suppose is a part of B's Cabal) for he is the great Homer, whose vomit the inferior Poets his Proselytes do lick up. It is this, Exod. 16. v. 7. Moses and Aaron said, What are we that ye murmur against us? And Verse 8. it is said, Your murmur are not against us, but against the Lord. Hence say our Adversaries, it will follow according to your reasoning, that Moses was God.  
I confess, it is beyond my Logic to frame an Argument out of it. And it is observable, B. their Schoolmaster was ashamed to mention it, yet because I see they pride themselves much in it, lest they should be wise in their own conceit, I shall answer it.  
That text proves the quite contrary, that Moses is not God, because he so fully separates & distinguisheth himself from God: even as it follows out of Act. 5. that Peter was not God, because he saith, Thou hast not lied to us, but to God. And (observe it) Peter and Moses are Parallels, not Moses and the Holy Ghost, as they absurdly fancy; for them it should have been said, Thou hast not liest to the Holy Ghost, but to God. If you would make that place parallel with this, you must first suppose Moses to speak thus, Why murmur you against the Holy Ghost, or holy Spirit? and then to add, your murmur are not against us, but against the Lord. And if so, not only the seeming fallacy vanisheth, but it will be a strong argument to confirm this instance in Acts 5.  
Take another instance. Suppose David's Ambassadors had said to Hanun, when he was abusing them, 2 Sam. 10. 4. Why do you abuse our Lord and Master? And presently after, This injury is not done to us, but to the King of Israel. Every vulgar eye would see two things. 1 That those Ambassadors were not the King of Israel. 2 That the King of Israel was their Lord and Master: So it is in this case, as any one may easily apply it.  
Another place to the same purpose we have, 1 Cor. 6. 19, 20. What, know you not that your body is the Temple of the Holy Ghost?— Therefore glorify God in your body. The Apostles Argument is this: He, whose temple you are, aught to be glorified, served, etc. But you are the temples of the Holy Ghost: Therefore he is to be glorified; or in the Apostles words, Therefore glorify God. What a miserable Argument were this? If the Holy Ghost were not God: It were in plain English to argue thus, You are the temples of, you are consecrated to, an Angel, therefore glorify God. For the illustration of this Argument, compare it with a parallel place, 2 Cor. 6. 16.— You are the temples of the living God, as God hath said, I will dwell in them. We are temples of God in one place; of the Holy Ghost in another. If this will not satisfy (as that will satisfy a blind mind and a perverse spirit?) It's proper to God to have a temple, as it is proper to him to be worshipped; especially for such a creature as man to be a temple to, to whom can this belong, but to the Creator of man? The Adversary of the Holy Ghost talks much of reason and wisdom, etc. It were to be wished that he would make a little use of it here. Well, what saith he to this clear place? He is resolved to say something, ne nihil dixisse videatur.  
1 He saith, Indeed it would follow, the Argument would hold, if it could be proved that our body is so the temple of the Holy Ghost, as to be his by interest, and dedicated to his honour.  
Well said; but who ever did understand any thing else? or how can any thing else be understood, especially by him that pretends so much understanding? What is it for a temple to be erected to one, but for his honour, worship, and service? was ever temple duly consecrated for other ends?  
2 He saith, That God is here distinguished from the Spirit.  
And did not B. know that we allow a distinction between the Persons, though not in the Essence of the Sacred Trinity: Also that we distinguish between the divine nature, and a divine person. But this will more fitly and fully be answered under his second Argument. I might mention 2 Cor. 3. 17. The Lord is that Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberly; and many other places: but I study brevity.  
Arg. 2. He to whom Religious worship is duly and truly exhibited, is God: But Religious Worship is duly and truly given to the Holy Ghost: Therefore the Holy Ghost is God.  
For the Mayor, one would think a few words would suffice to satisfy a man that calls himself a Protestant. But when once men relinquish principles, they rest no no where▪ And so B. lays down t●●s assertion, that the Holy Ghost is the intermediate object of worship, and so may be worshipped. But, 1 Worship is an incommunicable property. God may assoon appoint that a cre●t●●e shall be Omnipotent (which is a contradiction) as that a creature shall be worshipped (I mean with Religious worship, for a civil I worship or respect we confess is due to many men, and to Angels.) 2 It is quite contrary to express▪ Scripture, Deut. 6. compared with Matth. 4. Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. Paul calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the worshipping of Angels, an error, Coloss. 2. 18. So Revel. 22. 8, 9 observe, Worship not me, I am thy fellow-servant; now so all the Angels are Heb. 1. 14. Are they not all Ministering spirits? If then the Holy Ghost be an Angel or Ministering spirit (as B. saith) he is not to be worshipped. Again, worship God, let him have all thy worship; what can be more clear or pregnant? So you have the Major confirmed.  
But the Minor is principally to be proved. And I shall prove it.  
1 By Isai. 6. 1. I saw the Lord sitting upon his throne; This Lord was worshipped by the Seraphims, ver. 3. they cried, Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord of Hosts: This Lord sends a message by the Prophet, vers. 9, 10. Go ye, and tell this people, etc. Now go along with me to Act. 28. 25. 26, 27. where you have the very same message, & Paul brings it in thus, Well spoke the Holy Ghost by Isaiah the Prophet; Paul saith, the Holy Ghost spoke, and in the sixth of Isaiah, The Lord spoke; nor can it be said, that the Lord spoke by the Holy Ghost, as being one of those Angels; and that the same action may be attributed to several persons; as God is said to save men, and Paul is said to save men. For though that is a truth, yet here it cannot be so understood; (as if the Holy Ghost were God's Instrument in delivering this message, as Paul was in the saving of souls,) for he that spoke immediately, is evidently distinguished from the Angels. Vers. 6, 7. you read, one of the Seraphims flew, and touched the lips of the Prophet; then vers. 8. he passeth from the Angels, and tells you, he heard the voice of the Lord. The Lord that was upon his throne, vers. 1. that was worshipped, vers. 2. If it be yet said, There is a difference in the texts, for in the one, the Lord speaketh these things to Isaiah, i. e. in a vision; in the other it is, that the holy Spirit spoke them by Isaiah to the Fathers. I answer, that altars not the case; for the Scripture informs us, that it was the same Author that spoke to the Prophets, and by the Prophets to the people. It was God that spoke unto the Fathers by the Prophets, Heb. 1. ●. which is parallel to this place, The Holy Ghost spoke by Isaiah to the Fathers. The meaning of it is only this, that the Holy Ghost sent this message by Isaiah to the Fathers. Now he that sent that message was God immediately, as we have proved.  
2 That worship is due to the Holy Ghost, will appear from Psal. 95. 8. It is said, vers. 6. O come, let us worship and how down, let us kneel before the Lord our Maker, Vers. 7.— If you will hear his voice, ver. 8. Harden not your hearts.  
But you will say, How doth it appear, that the Holy Ghost is here intended. I answer, by comparing this place with Heb. 3. 7, 8, 9 wherefore, as the Holy Ghost saith, To day if you will hear his voice, etc. How did the Holy Ghost say it? By the mouth of David. Whospake by the mouth of David? Why, God, Heb. 1. 1. And observe it, Saint Paul, or whoever was the Author of that Epistle to the Hebrews, brings in the Holy Ghost speaking thus of himself, Your fathers tempted me, and proved me, and saw my works forty years: and so, Vers. 11. I swore they shall not enter into my rest: Who was it whom they tempted? They tempted the most High God, Psal. 78. 18. Who was it whose works they saw forty years? Who can do those marvellous works, but God? They are called Gods marvellous works, Psal. 105. 5. Who was it that swore? it was the Lord, Numb. 3●. 10, 11. The Lord swore, saying— None of them shall see the Land; The word in the Original is Jehovah, a name peculiar to God: and never given to any Angel. And that it was the Lord himself that swore immediately, is beyond all contradiction, especially, if this place be compared with Numbers 14. And yet here all these things are attributed to the Holy Ghost.  
3 Swearing is a part of worship, and we ought to swear by none burr God. Now the Apostle swears by the Holy Ghost, Rom. 9 1.— My conscience bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost. Swearing is nothing else but a calling God to witness; and as God alone doth search the heart, he alone is able to judge the heart, whether he that swears▪ swears in▪ truth: So he only is to be sworn by.  
4 This appears from Revel. 1. 4, 5. Grace b● un●o you, and peace from him which is, and was, and is to come, and from the seven spirits which are before his throne, and from Jesus Christ, etc. You see Saint John prays to all the Persons in the Trinity, amongst the rest the seven spirits. The Spirit of God is called the seven spirits, because of its manifold gifts and operations: Seven is a note of perfection, and seven spirits in relation to the seven Churches: The seven Churches were as liberally provided for, as if they had had seven spirits: These seven spirits cannot be meant of Angels: for 1 these seven spirits are put before Christ, whereas the Angels are far below him, Heb. 1. 2 The good Angels would never accept of Prayer or Worship, Revel. 22. 8, 9 3 Prayers are not to be directed to any creature, to any Angel, for we are to pray to none but those that know our hearts, Rom. 8. 27. We must pray to none but him that is the object of our faith. Rom. 10. 14. God hath commanded us only to call upon himself. Psal. 50. 15. Call upon me, not upon an Angel, in the day of trouble. Christ bids us pray only to Our Father, And much more might be said, but I am ashamed to see that we should need arguments to dispute down such rotten Popish Tenants out of those that profess protestancy. From all these it clearly follows, that these seven spirits cannot be understood to be created Angels. 4. Nor are the Angels the fountains of grace and peace: The seven spirits here prayed to, are so.  
If it be said, though they are not the fountains, yet they are instruments. I Ans. 1. The instruments of grace must not be prayed to. Ministers are Gods instruments in the working of grace, yet we must not pray to them. 2 The Scripture never in the least hints that Angels are Gods instruments in working of grace. And if it were true (as it is most false) that the Holy Ghost were an Angel, yet will it not follow because one Angel is said to have some causality in the working of grace, therefore 7 have; rather because it is attributed only to one, the rest are excluded. 3 If Angels are instruments then either moral or natural; not moral, for that consists in persuasion, etc. Angels do not persuade, etc. nor natural, for grace being created must needs be immediately produced by God; and besides, B. and all the Socinians are so far from allowing such a Physical influence of Angels upon the will, etc. that they deny it to God himself, and tell us he can only persuade the heart, but not work physically upon it.  
The best of creatures are in the condition of those wise Virgins, that have oil only for their own use. If it be said, Here the seven spirits are put before Christ, whereas Christ being the second Person should be put before the Spirit. I answer: 1 Nothing can be gathered from this order: Sometimes the Son is mentioned before the Father, 2 Cor. 13. 14. The reason is, though there be a priority of order among the Persons of the blessed Trinity, yet there is no precedency in dignity. 2 The Spirit of God is superior to Christ as Mediator, and so he is spoken of here, as is evident.  
Arg. 3. He in whose name Baptism is to be administered, is God: But Baptism is to be administered in the Name of the Holy Ghost: Therefore the Holy Ghost is God.  
For the Minor, that cannot be denied, it is express Scripture, Matth. 28. ●9.  
The Major will easily be proved. ● If you consider what it is to be baptised into one's name: it is to be baptised into one's worship, faith and do ●r●ne; and further to be baptised by the authority, or at the appointment of one. 2 If you consider what Baptism is: it is a Seal of the Covenant of Grace. Now in whose name is Baptism to be administered, but in his, who is able to seal to us God's part of the Covenant▪ and to whom we own the performance of our part? To whom doth it belong to appoint Sacraments, but to God alone? 3 If you consider how much Paul dreaded the thoughts of it, that any man should say, He was baptised in the name of Paul, 1 Cor. 1. 13, 14, 15. And no reason can be given, why, if it was lawful to baptise in the name of any servant or Minister, it were not as lawful to baptise in the name of Paul, as in the name of any Angel. 4 If you consider, that, Ephes. ●. One Lord, one Faith, one Baptism; where it is not obscurely implied, that Baptism is to be in the name of none but the Lord, and also that these three mentioned in Baptism, are but one, one Lord.  
But the Theomachist objects, The Jews are said to be baptised into Moses, 1 Cor. 10. 2.  
I answer: 1 There is difference between these phrases, being baptised into one, and in his name. Certainly, there was as much reason why the Corinthians might be baptised in the name of Paul, as the Israelites in the name of Moses: And therefore as Paul abhorred the thoughts of it, that any should be baptised in his name; so doubtless Moses would not have arrogated it to himself, nor Paul have given it to Moses.  
2 Moses is taken several ways: To omit other senses, sometimes it is taken for the Law and worship of God, delivered by the hand of Moses, Luke 16. 31. If they hear not Moses and the Prophets; Why Moses? where was he? And the Prophets do they live for ever? It was only the Word of God, written by Moses and the Prophets, Acts 21. 21. Thou teachest all the Jews to forsake Moses: so the meaning of it may be only this: They were baptised or initiated into the Law and worship of God delivered by Moses; now, what is this to the purpose? Or,  
3 The Preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be put for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as it is in other places, Acts 7. 35. The Law was given, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, into the dispositions of Angels, for by the dispositions of Angels, according to Gal. 3. 19 It was ordained by Angels.  
Whereas B. saith, We are baptised into the guidance of the Spirit, into the confession and obedience of it, it being the chief instrument whereby God guides, governs, sanctifies the Church.  
Alas, whither will a wand'ring creature rove? We use to judge the Papists sufficiently absurd (and I doubt not but B. will join with us in it) for making a visible head of the Church distinct from Christ. Now B. makes an invisible head the Vicar of God and Christ, and that one of those Angels, that are so far from being heads of the Church, that they are Ministering spirits to wait upon the heirs of salvation; for so all the Angels are, Heb. 1. 14. And observe it is one argument Paul there brings to prove Christ to be higher than all the Angels, because he is the head and governor of the Church, Verse 8. where as the Angels are but his Ministers, Verse 7. and 14. strongly implying that the same person cannot be both a ministering Spirit and head of the Church. Again, It is wholly against the analogy of faith, and indeed that common sense and reason that B. so much cries up, that one of God's servants should be joint commissioner with him in the appointment or honour of his ordinances; that was the very reason why Paul would not endure the thoughts of it, as we saw even now. But indeed the very naming of this far fetched fancy, is enough to confute it.  
Arg. 4. He to whom the Properties of God are communicated, must needs be God: But the Properties of God are communicated to the Holy Ghost: Therefore the Holy Ghost is God.  
For the Major, it is unquestionable. The Minor I prove by particulars, I shall instance only two. 1 The Holy Ghost is Omniscient. 2 He is Omnipresent.  
1 He is Omniscient, 1 Cor. 2. 10. The Spirit searcheth all things, yea, even the deep things of God: The very ways of God are said to be unsearchable, Rom. 11. 33. and his judgements past finding out; that is, by any creature: and yet the Spirit searcheth even the deep, secret things of God. It is ridiculous that B. replies, that this Omniscience will not prove the Holy Ghost to be God, because, if he have it, he hath it not originally and from himself, but communicated from God. For it is impossible (as all that understand any thing in Philosophy know) that God should make a creature Omniscient, or a creature that could search his deep things. No finite being can possibly search or know the depths of an infinite being. And the Argument is confirmed by the reason added, Even as the spirit of man: So that as the spirit of man is in man, so the Spirit of God is in God, and so is God; for whatsoever is in God is God. It matters not that that is not expressed in the text, that the Spirit of God is in God, for it is necessarily implied, otherwise the Apostles reason were invalid; and it might be replied, Paul, your instance is not to purpose; for the spirit of a man is in him, and so may know his depths; but, the Spirit of God is not in him, and therefore may very well be ignorant of it. The Son of man himself, as he was man, and every other creature was ignorant of the day of judgement; but the Spirit of God knew it; for that searcheth even the deep things of God: it knew far greater mysteries than that, much more did it know that. If it be said, It searches them, that intimates, that it was ignorant of them; as in a search we look for something we want. I answer; even God himself is said to search, I search the heart, Jer. 17. 10. God, and so the Spirit are said to search, not in regard of thein former ignorance, but because their knowledge is an intimate and piercing knowledge.  
2 The Spirit of God is Omnipresent, Psal. 139. 7. whither shall I go from thy Spirit? etc. The place is clear and full, and will admit of no answer: The Spirit is extended as far as the presence of God; and therefore the Spirit is every where. And it is worthy our observation, how the Prophet instances to prove the Omnipresence of God's Spirit, Verse 8. If I ascend into Heaven, thou art there? whereby it is fully implied, that God and the Spirit have but one essence, otherwise he could not argue from the presence of the one to the presence of the other. But further to confirm it, I lay down two Conclusions.  
1 There is one Spirit that dwells in all the people of God wheresoever they live: Ephes. 2. 18. Through Christ both they that are afar off, and they that are near, have access by one Spirit unto the Lord; Ephes. 4. 4. One body, one Spirit.  
2 The Spirit dwells in all the Saints: Their very bodies are the temples of the Holy Ghost: as is expressly asserted, 1 Cor. 6. 19 And whereas B. is forced to th●● shift, that when the Spirit is said to be or dwell in us, it is to be understood of the gifts of the Spirit (there in forsaking his great Master Crellius, merely to avoid the dint of this argument.) This is false, for the Spirit that is said to dwell in Believers, is contradistinguished from his gifts, John 14. 5, 16.— He will give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever.— H● dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. Then go to Verse 26. He shall teach you, etc. Here are the effects of the Spirit dwelling in them, which you see are clearly distinguished from his essence, Rom. ●. ●.— The love of God is sh●d abroad, etc. (th●re is the effect of the Spirit) by the Holy Ghost which is given to us; (there is the Spirit itself.) So, Rom. 8. 15. If it be said, The indwelling of the Spirit is the privilege of Saints, but by its essence it is in all men.  
Answ. Therefore that is not all (though it be one thing) that is required to make up this indwelling (for so he is present not only in all men, but in all beasts, all stones, all things, in whom yet no sober man will say he dwells.) But it is further required that he be there not only by natural necessity, but voluntary consent; not only by an essential presence, but also by his gracious presence, by his gracious communications. And thus he is only in his people. Well, what answers B. to this? That if the Holy Ghost be Omnipresent, than Satan is Omnipresent, because he is wherever the Word is preached, Mark 4. And this answer he delivers with as muchconfidence, as if he had made a knot that no man nor Angel could untie; which makes me adore the wisdom of God, that hath so far besotted him, as that he pl●c●th so much confidence in that, which any man that hath but a dram of sound reason in him, will acknowledge to be the very weakest passage in all his Book, though it is all weak enough: I confess, I fear sometimes (in this especially) he went against the light of his own conscience. The answer in a word is this: There is but one Holy Ghost, which is Omnipresent, but there are abundance of evil spirits, Mark 5. 2, 8. a legion was in one man: observe, it is called in the singular number an unclean spirit, and yet there was a legion; a legion among the Romans ordinarily contained above six thousand.  
Arg. 5. He that dictated, or was the Author of the Scripture, is God: But the Holy Ghost was Author of the Scripture: Ergo, The Holy Ghost is God.  
For the Major I prove it:  
1 Because the Scripture attributes that word that was spoken and written by Prophets or Apostles, unto God: Heb. 1. 1. God spoke in times passed by the Prophets. Here is the principal cause, God; the instrumental cause, the Prophets. To one of these the Holy Ghost must be referred, Luke 1. 7●. And so, 1 Th●ss. 2. 13. Paul commends the Th●ssalonians for receiving his word, not as the word of man, but, as it is indeed, the Word of God. Hence all the Scripture is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of divine inspiration, 2 Tim. ●. 16. or inspired by God; But so it could not be, if it were inspired by any creature, whether Angel or man: and indeed it cannot be otherwise, but that God should be the inspirer of it, because the Scripture cannot be founded upon the authority of a mere creature, for than it would not be infallible, nor would our faith be a divine faith. Let us suppose that the Holy Ghost were an Angel, as B. affirms: I say, we could not believe him with a divine faith, nor look upon his Word as absolutely infallible; which if I mistake not, is fully proved from Gal. 1. 8. Though we, or an Angel from Heaven, should preach any other Gospel unto you, then that which we have preached, let him be accursed: Where evident it is, the Apostle puts himself and Angels both into the same rank in that respect, and supposeth that neither of than were simply in fallible, and that we could not safely rely upon either of them with a divine faith. But now we may safely rely upon the Word and authority▪ of the Holy Ghost; for that is called a sure Word, yea, more sure than a voice from Heaven, as you may see, 2 Pet. 1. 19 and therefore so sure, because it was spoken by the H. Ghost, V▪. 2●.  
For the Minor; it is proved, 1 By that place , Acts 28. 25. The H● Ghost spoke by I says. 2 By 2▪ Pe●. 1. 21. Holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Ghost: Where the Deity of the Holy Ghost is not obscurely proved; for he tells us, Verse 20. Scripture is not of private interpretation; that is, it is not to be interpreted according▪ to men's private preconceived opinions, but according to the mind of the Holy Ghost, who was the Arthour of it. A parallel place you have▪ H●b. 9 8. The Holy Ghost this signifying, etc. where the mind of the Holy Ghost is made the genuine sense of the▪ Scripture▪ now Scripture▪ is to be interpreted▪ according▪ to the mind of none▪ but the Author of it▪ Many other places might be added, but I do not desire to multiply places.  
Whereas B. saith, the H. Ghost is▪ an Angel; that cannot be; for the Holy▪ Ghost●▪ you▪ 〈◊〉 i● the Author of the Scripture▪ and doth fully understand all Scripture-mysteries, but now the Angels are ignorant of them; they knew not the day of judgement, they are ignorant in great pair of Gospel-mysteries, 1 Pet. 1. 12. The Apostles preached the Gospel, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, with, or by the Holy Ghost,— which things the Angels desire to look 〈◊〉. Observe 1 The Angels are ●●●aly distinguished from the Holy Ghost. 2 The Holy Ghost is the Dictator of Gospel-mysteries, the Angels are Students, learners in them.  
Arg. 6. He who is ●●● in nature and essence with the Father, is God: But the Holy Ghost▪ is one with the Father: Therefore the Holy Ghost is God.  
The Major will not be denied. The Minor is proved from 1 John 5. 7. There are three that bear record in Heaven, the Father, the word, and the Spirit, and these are one. Consider, 1 If the Spirit were an Angel, there were three thousand witnesses in Heaven. 2 Again, there is a clear variation of the phrase in the next Verse: there it is, they agree in one, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; but here it is not, they agree in one, but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, they are one; it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, not the personal number 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Neutral, to note, that though there is in the Trinity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a person and a person, yet there is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a thing and a thing; though there are three Persons, yet there is but one nature, but one Essence: Had the H. G. been an Angel, John had committed a wilful and gross offence in varying the phrase, whereby just cause of suspicion was given, to think that he was one with God, not only by consent, (for so the Water, Spirit, and Blood are one, they consent in their testimony) but also in Essence. 3 ●ook to Verse 9 If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: He takes notice only of two Witnesses, the witness of God, and the witness of men. The witness of the Holy Ghost is not the witness of men; nay the contrary is most clearly implied, that it is the witness of God.  
But this place is no better than its companions, and therefore B. offers violence to it.  
1 He saith, This phrase is never taken to signify one▪ in ●●ss●nd●, but always one in consent.  
I answer, This is false; the contrary is evident from John 10. 29▪ I and my Father are one: Haddit Christ meant only one in consent, the Jews would never have been ready to stone him▪ Again, he gives this as a reason why none could pluck hi● sheep▪ out of his hand, because he had one and the same power, and so the same Essence with God. For if he had only been one in consent with the Father, one might assoon have plucked his sheep out of his hand, as out of the hand of any of his Disciples, for they also were one in consent with God. But here lies the source of the argument, My Father is greater than all, and therefore none can pluck them, out of his hand. And I am as great as the Father, for I and he are one,▪ and therefore it will be as hard a work to pluck them out of mine hand. And it is observable when the J●ws charge him with making himself God, he doth not fly to B's refuge, to say he meant only one in consent (which if true, had been the fairest and best way) but he argues from their own principles, that they allow Magistrates to be gods, and therefore he may be called God, because lie hath authority from God (as Magistrates have) & was in a more ●mi●●●nt way sanctified by God, and sent into the World, by the way, holding forth that he had another nature and being, and was a person before he was sont into the World (how could nothing be sanctified & sent into the World?) and therefore had not only the humane n●●● which he received from the Virgin, after he was sent into the world) but also a divine nature, by which he was God: But B. faith, That it is contrary to common▪ sense, that three should be 〈◊〉. Thus it fares with men, when they will make sense and reason the Judge of Scripture▪ controversies. Hath B. never read, that the naturalman receiveth not the things of God? 1 Co●. 2. ●4▪ that when Pe●●●r said, Christ was the Son of the living God, Christ told him, Fl●sh and blood hath not revealed this to▪ thou, Matth. 16. that The carnal mind is enmity against God, Rom. 8. 7. The truth is, not▪ only common sense cannot reach these mysteries▪ But a man must have more than common faith to subject his reason to them: not that reason may not clearly discern this mystery in the Scripture, but that it cannot invent o● fathom it; not but that the▪ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is clear from the Scripture, that there is a Trinity▪ but that reason cannot find out the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉▪ how can these things be? All men are Socinians by nature, they will believe God and the Word of God no farther than they can see reason.  
But B. adds, the C●m●lut, Bible hath this place, otherwise, I answer▪ What then▪ It must be here as it is in▪ many other cas●s of the some nature, that must be overruled by the consent of other Copies. But B. goes on, & tells u●, that this place is not to be found in many Copies. I answer, It is certain that ancient▪ Heretics have offered violence to many Scriptures, that did most clearly confute them, as might be instanced in many other places, and yet the providence of God hath always countermined their designs by keeping some▪ Copies pure, when others were corrupted by Heretics; and some perfect, when others were defective; and for this particular, it is certain, it was extant in the Greek Copy before ever your forefather▪ Macedonius broached that Heresy that now you have revived. And if in some Copies▪ it▪ be wanting, we may▪ thank those▪ ancient▪ Heretics, in whose steps you tread, for taking it away. Certtain it is, that Cyprian cited this place, (who flourished about 250 years after Christ) his words (as I find them cited by Vedelius▪) are these; Dicit Dominus, Ego▪ & Pater unum sumus. Et iterum de Patre & Filio, & Spiritu Sancto scriptum est? Et tres unum sunt, etc. Saint Hierome also citys it (as our adversaries acknowledge) and divers others. And if it be wanting in some other Copies, let it be considered that it was the complaint of divers Ancients, that the old Heretics did corrupt and deprave the Scriptures in several places that were most pregnant against them. And the A●titri●itarians were as guilty in this as any. Socrates complained that those that were against the Deity of Christ, blotted out those places▪ that proved his Godhead, and in particular some places out of this first Epistle of John, lib. 7. c. 32. An other names two old Heretics, that made this their business to alter and corrupt the Scriptures. The truth is, it is rather a wonder that any Scripture is preserved from infection, then that any place is corrupted. Indeed, the fraud of Heretics about this place is very discernible, they fumbled so unhandsomely about it, that some of them left out one word of this Verse, and some another, and some all; as any one that would further be satisfied, may sufficiently inform himself out of Vedelius, in a discourse upon this place. But that it was there Originally, and that it ought to be there, will evidently appear, if you consider, 1 The end of the sixth Verse, which doth necessarily require that that should follow, for it is given as a reason, why the Spirit is truth, because there are three, etc. that is, it is all one with the God of Truth, and with the Son, who is called Truth; and so this place is parallel to John 16. 13. He will▪ guide you into all truth, for he shall not speak of himself, but from the Father; that is, he shall speak nothing but that wherein the Father and he agrees. 2 From the ninth Verse▪ If we believe the witness of men, the witness of God is greater, for this is the witness of God, which he hath testified of his Son: Now, I beseech you, where is this witness of God here hinted and pointed at, if not in the seventh Verse? Howsoever if there were not such a place as this in the Scripture, there have been several other places alleged beyond all exception.  
Arg. 7. He to whom those actions are ascribed that are proper to God, is God: But those actions which are proper to God, are ascribed to the H. Ghost: Ergo, the H. Ghost is God.  
For the Major, it will readily be acknowledged. The Minor is proved in particulars▪  
1 In Creation: The H. Ghost creates, Job 33. 4. The Spirit of God made me. Nor can it be said, God made him by the Spirit as an instrument; for instrumental causes in creation are ridiculous, and rejected by all men that understand any thing in Philosophy. And therefore B. betrays his ignorance in saying, that the Spirit was God's instrument in creating things. For, 1 It implies a contradiction; for every instrument must work in some subject: and therefore presupposeth a subject: but Creation doth not presuppose a subject, but make it. 2 Every instrument requires some time for its work: But Creation was done in an instant, and that by God himself, as Genes. 1. doth expressly inform us, He said, Let there be light, etc. B. speaks as if he had never read Genesis. And therefore it is a most illiterate exposition that B. gives of that place, Job 35. 10. where is God my Maker? (Heb. Makers) which he is forced to confess: argues that Creation was the work of several persons, but the one (forsooth) most learnedly and profoundly he makes the instrumental cause of that Creation, which I dare say, all the Universities in Europe would hisse at. Luke 1. 31▪ the Holy Ghost created the body of Christ, which was neither convenient nor possible for a creature to do. He that spoke by the mouth of David, made both heaven and earth, Acts 4. 24. and who that we read Acts 1. 16. The Holy Ghost spoke by the mouth of David: To pass by that known and clear place, Genes. 1. 2. The Spirit moved upon the face of the waters; and many others.  
2 The Spirit works Miracles▪ Miracles are actions above nature; and none can do acts above nature, but he that is above nature. Christ proved himself to be God by working miracles, Matth. 9 5. That you may know the Son of man hath power upon earth to forgive sins, he saith to the sick of the Palsy, Aris●▪ None but God can forgive sins: now miracles are ascribed to the Holy Ghost, Matth. 12. 28. Christ cast out Devils by the Spirit of God: and that which adds weight to it is that parallel place, Luke 11. 20. I by the finger of God cost out Devils: What Matthew calls the Spirit, Luke calls the finger of God, or the Omnipotency of God, which is the same with God, Exod. 8. 19 The Spirit of God was greater and stronger than Christ as man. Again, Rom. 15. 19 Mighty signs and wonders were wrought by the power of the Spirit. Those Miracles which the Apostles wrought, they professed they did not work by their own power, Acts 4. 12. but by the power and strength of Christ: And doubtless, it had been as sacrilegious to say, they wrought them by the power of an Angel, or any other creature: And therefore whereas sometimes they ascribe them to Christ, Acts 4. 16. sometimes to the Holy Ghost, as in the place now mentioned; sometimes to God the Father, Acts 5. 30. it hence clearly follows, that every one of these is God; and because the Scripture tells us there is but one God, Deut. 6. 4. therefore we conclude, there are three persons, and these three are one. Again, Rom. 8. 11. The Spirit of God raised up Christ from the dead, and yet he raised himself; I will raise up this temple, John 2. 19 Hence also it follows, that Christ and the Holy Ghost are God, and are one God.  
3 It is proper to God to govern the Church, I mean to govern it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and to send Ministers, and yet this is attributed to the Holy Ghost: Acts 13. 2. The Holy Ghost said, Separate unto me Barnabas and Saul, for the work whereunto I have called them: Was this a comely dialect for a creature to use? far different I am sure it is from the language of created Angels; see Revel. 22. 9 So Acts 20. 28. Take heed to the flock of God, over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Overseers; and compare this with 1 Cor. 12. 28. and you shall find, that it was God that sets Officers in the Church; Jesus Christ himself was sent by the Spirit, Luke 4. 18. Again, Acts 1●. ●8. It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us, that is, to the Holy Ghost in us, to decree: You see the Holy Ghost is the Lawgiver of the Church, and yet God is the only Law givet, Jam. 4. 12.  
4 The Holy Ghost acteth according to his good pleasure, according to the counsel of his own will (which is the property of God, Ephes. 1. 11.) 1 Cor. 12. 11. All these things worketh the Spirit, dividing severally, as he will. All creatures must say, Not my will, but thy will, Lord, be done; Jesus Christ himself, who is far higher than all the Angels, said it, and the Angels in particular are said not to do their own will, but to do God's Commandments, harkening to the voice of his word, Psal. 103. 20. And again, Paul would have gone and preached in Bythinia, but the Spirit suffered him not, Acts 16. 7. Who is this that undertakes, whom he will to save and whom he will to destroy? Non vox hominem sonat: It is not the language of a Creature, but of the great God. Jesus Christ himself (whom yet the Author to the Hebrews proves at large to be better than all the Angels, Chap. 1. and so according to B's. supposition, better than the Holy Ghost, yet he) did not dispense the Word according to his own pleasure, as man, but according to the pleasure of his Father, Matth. 15. 24. I am not sent, but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.  
I might add, that the Holy Ghost sanctifies us, and it would easily amount to a Demonstration: But I have said enough for the proof of a point, so clearly expressed in the Scripture: I have done with the Cataskevastical part; I now come to the An aske●astical, I mean to detect the fallacies and cavils wherewith the enemy of the Holy Ghost endeavours to dispute him out of his Throne and Deity.  
And truly one may rationally expect that he that comes to dispute a truth out of the Church, that hath had so long possession; to throw down a doctrine that hath so firm a foundation in the Scripture; should write like Tertullian, and have as many sentences as words, & as many argnments as sentences. But contrariwise, I find in this Pneumatomachist nothing but a heap of words, a Jury of arguments that are neither good nor true, bold dictates imperiously obtruded upon the World without any proof, ancient Landmarks removed, quia ipse dixit, because the Schoolmaster would have it so, and such things which Non sani esse hominis, non sanus juret Orestes. You will say, Why then do you answer him? Because of that of Solomon, Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit, Prov. 26. 5. Besides, God hath in just judgement sent abroad a spirit of delusion, and there are multitudes that will sooner comply with a new and erroneous opinion upon the appearance of one argument, then embrace a truth, though confirmed by several solid demonstrations and evident Scriptures; even as one stroke will carry a man further with the tide, than five against it. And therefore that I may cut off an occasion from them that seek an occasion to fall from the truth, that I may leave those inexcusable that are resolved they will not be convinced, that I may lay up an evidence to justify God, and to be a witness against them, (who I perceive will not see) against that dreadful day of judgement; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, I come to answer his arguments.  
This only in the general: There is one consideration, that will utterly enervate all his Arguments: It must needs be acknowledged, and B. himself confesseth it, That there are many things that are spoken of God, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, after the manner of men, and must be understood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, so as it do not reflect dishonour upon God. And therefore when he tells you. The Spirit speaketh from God, heareth from God, receiveth from God, is sent of God, is the gift of God, changeth place, maketh intercession for us, etc. The answer in a word is this, (and it would suffice to stop the mouth of any sober-minded man) that all these things are spoken of the Holy Ghost improperly, and must be so expounded, as may consist with the divine Majesty of the Holy Ghost, which is so clearly asserted in other Scriptures, as you have heard.  
But I shall add one thing more in the general, That we all confess there is an order, though not an in equality among the divine Persons; and so all that B. objects may be answered, if one do apply it to his several Arguments. But I come to particulars.  
Object. 1. His first Argument is this: He that is distinguished from God, is not God: But the Holy Ghost is distinguished from God: Ergo the Holy Ghost is not God.  
Answ. To the Major I answer, He that is distinguished from God really and substantially, is not God, so your Major is true, otherwise not; for there is a modal distinction among the persons, and then in your sense the Minor is false; for the Holy Ghost is not substantially distinguished from God; for though their persons are distinguished, yet the Essence is the same. But B. foresaw this answer, and seeing he wanted arguments, he falls a railing. 1 He calls this, an ignorant refuge; A bold censure, for a rustic Pedagogue to pass upon so many learned men, whose shoes he will never be worthy to bear. He adds, That no man can conceive it in his mind. Alas, vain man, dost thou think to conceive these great mysteries, which the very Angels adore? But come a little lower, canst thou conceive what the eternity of God is? What his infinity or immensity is? All the conceptions of thy mind are finite. Yet a little lower, Canst thou conceive what a Spirit ●s? What a soul is? wiser men then B. could never yet do it, and therefore they can only describe them by Negatives, and tell us what they are not, but cannot tell us what they are. Yet a little lower, Canst thou tell how every quantity may be divided into infinite parts? What is the nature of the Loadstone? nay, Why thy hair is black or white? Canst thou tell what is the essence of a pebble? canst thou give the definition of a Feather? Away, vain man, lay thy hand upon thy mouth, and henceforth never grudge that thou canst not conceive such a mystery as this is in thy mind.  
I believe B. can as hardly conceive the resurrection of the body, especially when one Cannibal eats another, and a beast him, and another man that beast, etc. will he therefore  the resurrection of the body? Can B. conceive how the soul and body are united together? it hath puzzled other manner of Philosophers then B. is; will he therefore conclude, that the soul and body are not united together?  
But he faith, It is a distinction unheard of in Scripture.  
Answ. That is false: 1 It is clearly, John 1. ●. The word was with God, and the word was God▪ wi●h God; there God is taken personally, the Son was with the Father▪ was God, there it is taken essentially▪ the Son was God, had the Essence of God▪ It is a silly cavil of B's. that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not to be understood in the same sense, because the Father is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the God. Christ only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a God. Nay not only B. brings this exception, but which is the wonder, his fellow-creatures, his puny disciples, that I dare say, never saw Athens, are all on a sudden turned Grecians, they that were the other day but Graculi momento turbinis, are become Graeculi, before ever they could construe this Latin Graecum est, non potest legi. But let not B. think to do (as other Heretics have done) to justle out an article of faith by an article of Grammar. Such 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may satisfy a pedantic Grammaticaster, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but will never sway with serious or judicious men. The observation is false and foolish. For the Father is many times called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, without an article,— Seek the Kingdom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Matth. 7. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Mat. 10. 6. And Christ is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with an article, Heb. 1. 8. and 1▪ John 5. 20. So that being all B. hath to say to that place, it doth 1 Fully prove the Divinity of Christ. 2 By consequence give good ground for our distinction between the divine Essence, and a divine Person. 3 This also we read in Scripture, These three are one, 1 John 5. 7. 4 Two things are clear in the Scripture: 1 That there is but one God. 2 That yet the Father is God, the Son is God, the Holy Ghost is God. But he goes on to an argument (as he thinks) a very subtle one.  
If the Person be distinct from the Essence of God, than it is either something or nothing; if nothing, how can it be distinguished? (By the way, friend, is there no distinction, no difference, between something & nothing?) If something, than either finile or infinue; finite, we will not say; if infinite, then there are two infinites in God, the Person and the Essence. An old argument new sodden.  
I answer, 1 But what if I should say, a person barely considered is neither yes, a thing properly, nor yet nothing; but modus r●●, the manner of a thing: modus substautialis. Had B. studied Philosophy a little better, before he had made such a bold Essay in Divinity, he would not have wondered at it. The folding of my hands is not a thing, (for then I should be a Creator, and make a thing) nor is it plainly nothing, (for there is a difference between my hands folded, and stretched-out) but nothing cannot make a difference, as B. saith.  
2 I answer, a person considered, precisely, and by itself, is neither finite nor infinite (for these are the properties of essences.) Indeed, every essence or being is either finite or infinite; but the person singly considered is not a being, but the manner of a being. Or,  
3 The Persons considered with the Essence are infinite, and yet they are not three infinites, because they have but one Essence, and so one infinity.  
But he adds, To talk of God Essentially taken, is ridiculous, because God is the name of a person. Wretched ignorance! B. doth not understand the meaning of his Adversaries. None ever took God essentially in that sense, for an essence abstracted from a person: but the meaning is this, that I may a little instruct him in this principle; We say, God essentially considered, acts, not as if the abstracted nature of God did act, but because it is an act common to all the Persons: Thus to create, is an act of God essentially considered, because all the Trinity creates; but to beget the Son is an act of God personally considered, because that is an act proper to the first Person.  
Object. 2. His second Argument is this, He that gave the holy Spirit is Jehovah alone, Neh. 9 6, 2c. Therefore the Spirit is not God.  
Answ. This exclusive Particle doth exclude Creatures and Idol-gods, but not the other Persons of the Trinity; So it is used in many other places, Matth. 11. 27. The day of Judgement none knows but the Father only, and yet Christ as God could not be ignorant of it, for he knew even the thoughts of the heart▪ Math. 9 4▪ which is much more; nor could the Spirit be ignorant of it, for that searcheth even the deep things of God, 1 Cor. 2. 10. so, 1 Cor. 2. 11. the things of God knoweth, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, (not only no man, but) no person; for so the word signifies, but the Spirit of God: Shall any weak or perverse Disputant infer from hence, Therefore the Father knows them not, or knowledge is not properly attributable to God, as Mr. Goodwin, tells us▪ So Rev. 19 1●. Christ had a Name which no●● knew but himself; what, did not God the Father know it? So, Deut. 32. 12. The Lord alone did lead them: and yet Christ is said to lead them, 1 Cor. 10. 4, 9 and also the the Spirit, Neh. 9 20. So, Psal. 136. 4. The Lord alone doth great wonders; and yet▪ we have proved that the Holy Ghost doth great wonders.  
Object. 3. His third Argument is this, He that speaketh not of himself, is not God: But the Holy Ghost speaketh not of himself: Therefore the Holy Ghost is not God. The Minor is proved from Joh. 16. 13.  
Answ. This is the fruit of God's condescensions to unthanfull men, they take occasion to slight him for them. Thus because Christ was pleased to assume the nature of man, some have rendered him this thanks, to dispute him out of his Godhead. Thus, because God in Scripture condescends to our capacity, therefore they have requited him thus, to say that all things must be understood properly of God, how much soever they tend to his dishonour. Ungrateful wretches! assure yourselves, this wicked unthankfulness shall not go unpunished. But to answer: 1 This phrase doth note an order, though no inequality in the Divine Persons. Now as the Holy Ghost, in regard of his person, is not of himself, but from the Father and the Son, so he acts also from them. 2 This phrase doth note the consent that was between the Father and the Spirit; as if Christ had said, The Spirit shall not speak one thing, and the Father another, but both shall agree; according to that, There are three that bear record in heaven, 1 joh. 5. 7. There is not the single testimony of the Spirit, but the joint attestation of all the three Persons. He shall not speak from himself (alone,) the exclusive particle is often understood. So Deut. 6. 13. is expounded by Christ, Matth. 4. 16. But he shall speak what he hears, the very same things that the Father speaks, and he hears, he shall speak. Nor doth this hearing argue any inferiority; one man may hear another that is no more learned than himself: As if I should say of three Ambassadors of equal parts and power, Such an one of them, you may safely treat with, for he shall not speak of himself, but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak. My meaning is not, He shall not speak by his own power or virtue, nor from his own knowledge, but only to show that there is a consent between them all. 3 The words may be taken thus; He shall not speak of himself, concerning himself, only or principally, but whatsoever he shall hear concerning me, etc. that is fit for you to know, he shall ●●ew you. So th●t it notes not his manner of speaking, but the matter that he shall 〈◊〉 of.  
But B. saith, This phrase in Scripture, to do a thing not of himself, notes, to do a thing by the teaching, command, authority of another. I answer: There are many phrases, which are spoken both of God and man; but B. must know, that things are not attributed to God and man univocally, that is, in one and the same sense. God is said to repent, and man is said to repent; yet I hope B. is not so brutish as to think God reputes and grieves properly; how then should he be perfectly happy? But since I writ my last, I have ground to recall my hopes; for B's. followers (who, it is like, dare not speak a word without their Masters warrant) are such things, that they say, God is grieved properly. Lest any man should think I wrong them, and that the World may see what rare intelligent creatures these are (that cannot believe the Deity of the Holy Ghost, because of too much reason) I will give you their own words, as I had them out of a p●tifull Manuscript, which is much applauded by that party: They are these, We must either conclude, that God doth repent and grieve, and that properly too, or else we must, in effect say, Scripture, thou liest. Oh prodigious wit, profound judgement, quintessence of learning, mirror of reason! And yet these are the only Animalia vatioxalia, and we poor mortals that believe Personalities, Trinunities, etc. it is a favour, if they will allow us to be Animals, but for rationality we must leave it with them, and it is confessed, they have great need of it. But to return: God is said to have hands and feet, etc. and so are men; yet I hope not in the same sense. And yet a man might as well urge these e●p●●ssions, to prove that God hath hands, etc. because when it is spoken of men, it is so to be taken, as to infer with B. because when a man is said not to speak of himself, it is meant, he speaks by the direction and at the appointment of another: therefore it is so to be understood, when it is attributed to God the Holy Ghost. And yet it is false that it always is so taken among▪ men. Suppose a King should say, I will levy such a tax, or do such a thing, but I will not do it of myself, but I will confer with my Council about it; doth this note, that he levies the tax by the teaching, command, authority of another, and not by his own authority?  
Object. 4 His fourth Argument is this, The Spirit heareth from another, joh. 16. 13. Therefore it is not God.  
Answ. This Argument is the same for substance with the other, and the same answer will suffice▪ But B. soresaw what answer▪ would stop his mouth, and therefore▪ he lays a strict charge upon us▪ not to say, this is spoken improperly. Well, but ● Shall we take it properly, hath the Holy▪ Ghost bodily ears to hear? 2 Or was the▪ Holy Ghost to learn? was he to seek in Gospel-mysteries? How can that be imagined of him that dictated the Scripture, and fully▪ understood all the meaning of it? Heb. 9 8. Besides a Text that B. himself citys, will not permit this; which is Isa. 40. 13, 14. compared with Ro. 11. 34. I confess I cannot but admire both the wisdom of God, and the besortednesse of this man, that should cite such a Text that is enough to overthrow all▪ he saith: I beseech you follow his directions▪ compare those▪ Texts▪ together; what in one place, Rom. 11. 34. is said of the Lord, Who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his Counsellor? that in▪ Isai. 40. 13. is spoken of the Spirit of God; Who hath directed the Spirit of the Lord? or being his Counsellor hath taught him? The same independency and selfsufficiency is attributed to them both. Again, that Spirit of the Lord, Isai. 40. 13. is there called the Lord God, vers. 10. is said to be infinite, ver. 12, 15. is said to be he to whom sacrifices belong, ver. 16. which is God's prerogative; is called God, ver. 18. All which, if I listed to prosecute them, would make so many unanswerable Demonstrations. It is a sign of a desperate cause that B. is forced to this refuge, that by the Spirit▪ of God▪ here is not meant the Holy Spirit, but only the mind of God, which indeed deserves not a refutation; for that phrase is never so taken in all Scripture, or any other Author. Nor doth B. cite any place, wherein it is so taken (the more his boldness to foist in such a novel interpretation, without any example.) Wherreas he parallels it with 1 Cor. 2. 16. Who hath known the mind of the Lord? that is nothing to the purpose. For, 1 By the mind of the Lord may very well be meant the mind of the Spirit, or the mind of Christ rather, as appears by the Antithesis in this place, but we have the mind of Christ. 2 If it were the mind of the Father, it would give him no help; for the Father, Son, and Spirit have all one mind, and so that is all that would follow; not that the Spirit of the Lord and the mind of the Lord are the same, (as B. groundlessly fancies) but that the mind of the Father and the mind of the Spirit is one and the same.  
Object. 5. His fifth Argument is this, He that receiveth of another, is not God▪ But the Holy Ghost receiveth of another▪ joh. 16. 14. He shall receive of mine, a●● show it to you: Therefore the Holy Ghost i● not God.  
Answ. This also is but the same Argument over again, repeated only (I suppose) to make up the dozen. The answer to the third Argument will suffice for this, yet something may be added▪ For suppose the Holy Ghost did properly receive any thing from the Father, yet could he not properly be said to receive any thing of Christ (according to ●'s supposition, that looks upon Christ but as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a mere man:) for contrariwise, Christ as man received all his fullness from the Spirit, Joh. 3. 34. He received the Spirit without measure▪ Isai. ●1. 1. Again, it is not said, he shall receive of me, but of mine; that is, he shall take my wisdom, righteousness, holiness, my death, resurrection, etc. and shall show them to you, shall make a full discovery of those mysteries to you, he shall take my blood and sprinkle it upon your consciences; my death, and thereby destroy the body of death in you; my resurrection, and by showing that to you, and working a serious consideration of it in you, shall quicken you to newness of life. The meaning▪ is not (as B. ignorantly supposeth) that the Holy Ghost receives any knowledge of Christ for his own perfection (seeing he did so perfectly understand all▪ Scripture-mysteries before, as we have proved,) but only that he shall receive or take these things to show them to you.  
Object. 6▪ Arg. 6. He that is sent of God is not God: But the Holy Ghost is sent of God: Therefore he is not God.  
Answ. Still the same mistake: the same answer will suffice again, (for indeed for substance▪ this is still but the same Argument:) The Holy Ghost is not properly sent, nor can be, that is, from one place to another, for he fills all places, as I have proved already, and therefore this must not be so brutishly understood as if the Spirit were sent a long journey from heaven to earth; but only this, I will undertake (saith God) that my Spirit shall be a Comforter to you; and this God might will without any disparagement to the Holy Ghost, because the Father and the Spirit have both one nature, one will, and so what the one wills, the other wils also, and so the Holy Ghost did actually consent to this promise of the Father; now by consent one equal may send another. Thus Christ, who thought it no robbery to be equal with God, Phil. ●. 6. yet was sent of God.  
Nay even in civil States one may, be sent as an Ambassador by his equals. Suppose a State governed Aristocratically by eight men: four of these may send the other four with their consent upon an Ambassage, and yet all of them are equal in power and dignity.  
Object. ● Arg. ●. He that is the gift of God is not God▪ But the Spirit of God is the gift of God: Ergo he is not God.  
Answ. I confess here are new words, animus ●amen idem, but the same sense. In a word, the Major is false; God gives himself in Covenant to his people▪ I will be their God, Jer. 32. 3●. Let us see whether his Argument will not as well disprove the Godhead of the Father, as of the Spirit. He that is the gift of God is not God. But God the Father is the gift of God: for he given himself (as Christ also is said to give himself, Gal. 2. 20.) The conclusion, then is, according to B's. principles, God the Father is not God; a conclusion indeed suitable to the premises, but both to be abominated by every pious soul. But B. adds, A gift is in the power and at the disposal of another. I answer 1, That is false▪ I may give my daughter to a man to wife, and yet she is not in my power, for this I cannot do without her consent▪ So neither can God give the Spirit without its consent▪ 2 What if I should grant the Holy Ghost were at the disposal of God's will▪ remember that the Father and the Spirit have but one will, and so that is no more than to be at its own disposal▪ 3▪ This Argument may be strongly retorted; therefore the Holy Ghost is not a created gift, because he is at his own disposal, as we have proved in the seventh Argument.  
Object. ●. His eighth Argument is this, He that changeth place is not God: But the Holy Ghost changeth place, Luke 3. ●●, 22. Therefore he is not God.  
Answ. 1 Certain it is, that God is often said in Scripture to change place, Psal. 18. 9 God bowed the Heavens, and came down: Hos. 5. ●5. I will go and return to my place: Gen. 1●. 21. The Lord came down to set the City, though elsewhere he is said to be Omnipresent, 2 Chron. 6. 18. Psal. ●●9. Jer. 23. 24. But he saw the weakness of this Argument, and therefore he adds this, Nor let any man allege that thus much is said of God, Exod. 3. For it is not God that came down, but an Angel, as you may see, Acts ●. 30, 35, 3●. Which (by the way) is a transition to another Argument: Yet I shall follow him even in his extravagancies. I answer therefore, 1 This doth not at all weaken our answer; for what though Angels came down at some time, and not God, yet it remains a truth, that the great God is said to change his place (though not properly) as hath been proved. 2 Nor doth it follow, because sometime an Angel came down and spoke, therefore God never came down, nor spoke. 3 God himself is called an Angel, Mal. ●. 1. Christ is called the Angel of the Covenant: The Angel that wrestled with Jacob, Gen. 32▪ was the Lord, for Jacob made supplication to him, Hos. 12. 4. Gen. 32. 26. Now worship is peculiar to God. 4 Evident it is that this Angel, Exod. 3. was the Lord; for he saith expressly, I am the God of Abraham, whereas the good Angels and messengers of God never spoke in that manner in the first person: I am thy fellow-servant, said that Angel, Revel. 22. So the Prophets used to speak of God in the third person, Thus saith the Lord.  
Object. 9 His ninth Argument is this, He that prayeth unto Christ is not God: But the Spirit prayeth to Christ to come to judgement, Revel. 22. Therefore it is not God.  
Answ. It can never be proved, that this Te●t is to be meant of the Spirit of God, it may very well be meant of any Angel. For, 1 Certainly the Angels desire to see the happiness of the Saints completed. 2 In the very verse before the Text, there is mention made of a created Angel.  
Object. But than it would not have been Spirit in the singular number.  
Answ. There is no necessity of that, for why may not one good Spirit signify more good Angels, as well as one unclean spirit signify a legion, Mark 5. 2, 9  
But what if it were meant of the Spirit of God? The meaning only is this, the Spirit speaketh in the Spouse, and dictates to the Spouse; It is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a Figure very frequent both in Scripture, and in other Authors: though the Adversary doth magisterially forbid us this Interpretation, without giving one real proof against it,  
I shall add here what B. hath in his twelfth Reason, which indeed properly belongs to this place. He quotes, Rom. 8. 27. The Spirit maketh intercession for us with groans unutterable. The Spirit (saith B.) pours out petitions apart in our behalf. This our adversary calls an invincible argument; but I hope by that time we have done with it, it will be found like the invincible Navy, Nomen, & praeterea nihil.  
I answer, The Spirit is said to intercede, because it makes us to intercede: For proof of this, 1 It is ordinary in Scripture for God to be said to do that which he maketh us to do; thus, Gen. 22. 12. God is said to know, when he maketh others to know: So, Matth. 10. 20. The Spirit of your Father speaketh in you, which is thus expounded, Luke 21. 15.— I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which all your adversaries shall not be able to gainsay: So that the Spirit speaking in them, and they speaking by the Spirit, signify the same thing. Thus a Scrivener is said to write, when by directing our hands he makes us to write. 2 It is the Spirit within us, not without us, that makes intercession for us, our prayer therefore is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Jam. 5. 16. haply to note, that it is wrought in us by the Spirit. 3 This interpretation suits best with the Context; all along he is speaking of the Spirits operation in us, ver. 11. If the Spirit of God dwell in you, Verse 15. is parallel to this 27. Ye have received the Spirit of Adoption, by which we cry Abba, Father: These are equivalent expressions, the Spirit in us cries Abba, Father, and we by the Spirit cry Abba, Father. And the same thing you since expressed both ways by the former phrase, Gal. 4. 6. by the latter, Rom. 8. 15. which if well considered, will fully answer B●ales Argument. But indeed we need to go no further for an antidote against B's. poisonous interpretation, than the 26 verse, and we may add the 27 verse to it. Thence I argue, 1 Such an interpretation must be understood as helps our infirmities in praying: But our infirmities in praying are helped by the Spirits enabling us to pray, and not by I know not what intercession of the Spirit apart.  
2 Such an intercession of the Spirit must be understood, as teacheth us how to pray as we ought; but it is not a supposed intercession of the Spirit of God apart from us that doth that: (how the prayer of an Angel, which we neither hear, nor know, should teach us to pray, is not easy to conceive) but the Spirit in us enlightening our minds, dictating to us what we should ask, that, and that alone helps us against our ignorance.  
3 Whose the groan are, his the intercession is: That is clear to any one that reads the 26 verse, The Spirit maketh intercession for us with groan, etc. But the groan are ours, as appears, 1 So they are said to be, vers. 23. 2 They are groan that cannot be uttered: I suppose B. will not say, but the Spirit is able to utter all his mind. 3 Nor can it easily be imagined, that the blessed Spirit which is our comforter, and the Spirit of glory should be subject to groaning, seeing the very glorified Saints are freed from them, than whom the Spirit cannot be thought to be less happy, or more miserable.  
4 If the mind of the Spirit be our minds assisted by the Spirit, than the intercession of the Spirit, is our intercession helped by the Spirit. But the mind of the Spirit is meant of our minds, or our desires assisted by the Spirit; because Gods searching the heart is given as a ground of Gods knowing the mind of the Spirit. Now there were neither coherence nor consequence between the searching of our hearts, and the knowing the mind of the Spirit, if the mind of the Spirit were to be understood properly.  
5 The intercession of the Spirit is according to the will of God: But the Spirits interceding for us apart, as B. supposeth, is not according to the will of God. Nay, that an Angel (for such B. saith the Spirit is) should intercede for us, is contrary to the will of God, for this is the will of God, There is but one Mediator, 1 Tim. 2. 6. that is, one Mediator of Intercession, as well as one of Redemption (as we generally say against the Papists;) for of intercession he is speaking in that Chapter, ver. 1. And on the other side it is the will of God, that the Spirit should intercede for us in our sense, that it should help us in our prayers and intercessions, by convincing, comforting, enlightening, guiding, and teaching us, by helping our infirmities; and therefore so it must be here understood.  
To add one thing, I should desire nothing more than that both our doctrines might be tried by this Text, I durst willingly venture all upon its arbitration. For besides, what hath been said, let this be considered: How it can possibly be that the Holy Ghost should be only a created Angel, and yet here be said to know the particular wants and most secret desires of every particular Saint?— Considering 1 That it is the property of God to search the heart, Jer. 17. 9, 10. The heart is deceitful,— who can know it? I the Lord search the heart. Where nothing more evident than that he speaks exclusively. So here in this very place, these 26 and 27 verses. 2 That it is not imaginable, that that person that is ignorant of the day of Judgement, can know all men's hearts. But so all the Angels, yea Christ himself as man is, Mark 13. 32. 3 God doth venture all his Godhead upon a less matter, Isa. 41. 22, 23. Let them show things to come, what shall happen, that we may know ye are gods. And yet some men have been so bold as to dispute whether Angels might know things to come, but no man before B. durst say that they knew the hearts of men. Nor will any man say so, that understands any thing either in Philosophy or Divinity. But to return.  
B. objects, None can intercede for himself. For that I answer, Intercession is taken sometimes more strictly, when the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and then indeed it is most commonly understood of one that inrercedes as a Mediator between two parties: but sometimes it is taken more largely, and so is the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 oft taken for interpellare, or compellare, to entreat, whether for a man's self, or for another; In Thucydides, Pars adversa adversae parti hostiluer dicitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: So that it notes only compeltare, whether supplicando, or expostuland●. So in the eighth Chapter of the wisdom of Solomon, vers. 21. Knowing (saith he) that I could never be wise and good except God gave it, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, I interceded, or made request to God for it, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. A like place is, wisdom 16. 28. where the word is so used. And though these places be Apocryphal, yet it matters not, for it shows how that Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is sometimes used for a simple praying, though for a man's self, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which was the thing to be shown. For the addition of the word, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that may refer either to a person, or a business, Oro pro negotio aliquo, as well as pro persona altera. Nay not only, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but which is more, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is applied to God himself in reference to man without any third party, Heb. 6. 17. Deus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, he established, or confirmed with an oath, but properly it signifies, he mediated to himself or interceded to himself with an oath. And therefore, if the Spirit be said to intercede to God, let not B. infer, therefore it is not God, for we see God intercedes to himself.  
But he adds, To intercede, notes inferiority; and though in Scripture somethings are spoken after the manner of men, yet no where is any thing said that argues God's inferiority to, and dependence upon another.  
I answer, 1 This is very false; God saith to Moses, Let me alone, Exod. 32. Doth not this expression argue inferiority and dependence too? Yes surely, B. cannot deny it; but only he must say, it is improperly taken; and must be so interpreted, as may consist with God's Majesty and Glory: and so he will also enervate all his own Arguments. 2 I observe hence, that B. doth positively conclude, that Christ (because he intercedes) is inferior to God, though he professed he would not meddle with that▪ But alas! we need not now run to consequences to prove that B. denies the Deity of Christ: for that same wretched hand that lift up itself against the Holy Ghost, hath in the same manner, and with the same weakness too endeavoured to dethrone our Lord jesus, and written many leaves expressly against the divinity of our ever blessed Saviour, who (doubtless) will plead his own cause, and will one day show how ill he takes it at the hands of those men that pretend to be bought by his blood, and yet can quietly suffer every unworthy fellow to preach and write high treason against the King of heaven and earth; and in the mean time, prosecute even to the death those that do any way abet any treasonable design against the State.  
Object. 10. His tenth Argument is this, Some have been Disciples and Believers, and yet have not so much as heard whether there be an Holy Ghost, Act. 19 2. and so they could not believe in him.  
Answ. 1. The meaning of the Text is quite mistaken; for they did not doubt whether there was an Holy Ghost or no, they could not be ignorant of this: John doubtless having instructed them before ●● did baptise them, and there being so m●ny clear testimonies of the Spirits existence in the Old Testament. But the meaning than is this, We have not heard whether the Holy Ghost be come and manifested in so eminent a manner as is promised; for you must consider, that the jews after the Babylonish Captivity had lost those glorious discoveries, and the gracious presence of the Holy Ghost, which once they had; this being one of those five things, wherein they used to complain the second Temple came short of the first. And further, they knew that God had promised the manifestation of the Spirit in an extraordinary manner, Joel 2. Now that this is the real meaning, & not a fancy, I will prove, 1 By a parallel place; you have the very same phrase, Jo. 7. 39 The Spirit was not yet (given, is not in the Original only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) why? the Spirit was, and had descended upon Christ long before; but this is the meaning, the gifts of the Spirit were not so plentifully shed abroad as afterwards they were upon the Apostles and others. 2 It appears from the Context, that he speaks of the gifts of the Holy Ghost; see vers. 6. The Holy Ghost came on them, and they spoke with congues and prophesied. So th●● I cannot choose but laugh at, and pity the ●old and conceited ignorance of B. who saith▪ It is without example to take the holy Spirit ●● the gifts of the Spirit; whereas you se● must needs be so taken in the places now mentioned, and in many other places: see, Act. 2. 17. So, Joh. 20. 22. He breathed on them, and said, Receive ye the Holy Ghost. The person of the Holy Ghost they had received before; They were the Temples of the Holy Ghost before: Nay, B. himself (that you may see error doth not only oppose the truth, but itself also) doth elsewhere contradict this very assertion, and tells us, That when the Spirit is said to dwell in us, the meaning is not, that his person or essence dwell in us, but that he dwelleth in us by his gifts or effects. Well, but what if B's. interpretation were true? nothing of moment follows. What an Argument is this? Some were ignorant of the Deity of the Holy Ghost, therefore it is not God: As if a man should argue, B. is a Disciple and a Believer, and he believes not that the Holy Ghost is God; therefore it is not God.  
But (saith he) Many now tell us, that without the knowledge of this point (of which they were ignoraat) we cannot be saved. Answ. 1. They were not ignorant of it, as hath been proved. 2 But the times or states of the Churches wherein men live, do much vary the case: according as the means of knowledge are more or less, an error may be damnable or not. To instance, in the first infancy of the Church, Circumcision was an error winked at, Act. 15. and 16. 3. but afterwards it proved no less than damnable, Gal. 5. 2. If you be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing: So the Apostles word once ignorant of, and did not believe the Death and Resurrection of Christ▪ but if any man now doubt of them, we may upon much better grounds doubt of his salvation: So though God might wink at this error in former times, let not B. now think that God will hold him guiltless in times of so much light and means; let him look to it, God is very jealous of his honour, and particularly of the honour of the Holy Ghost, Matth. 12. 32.  
Object. 11. Arg. 11. The Spirit of God hath an understanding distinct from the understanding of God, for he heareth from God, joh▪ 16. 13, 14, 15.  
Answ. This is the selfsame Argument with the third and fourth, as you see, and therefore I pray you go back for an answer. Only one thing he adds, That the Spirit is said to search the things of God, 1 Cor. 2. 10. But to search the depths of one, necessarily supposeth one understanding in him that searcheth, and another in him whose depths are searched; then which nothing is more false ●●d foolish: For, 1 By searching there, is meant nothing but knowing, as appears from ver. 11. where instead of searching is put knowing, The things of God knoweth the Spirit of God: and again, God is said to search the heart, Rom. 8. 29. that is, to know it. 2 Doth not God know himself? nay, cannot we search ourselves? cannot our understanding reflect upon itself, and search its own nature? are not we commanded to search, try, and examine ourselves?  
Object. 12. His last Argument is this, The Spirit of God willeth conformably to the will of God, Rom. 8. 27. He maketh intercession for the Saints according to the will of God. But this Argument is already answered under the ninth Objection; the sum of what is there at large proved, is this, That the Spirit is said to pray, intercede, will, because he maketh us so to do, because he maketh us to pray, according to the will of God. And thus I have detected all the fallacies wherewith the Adversary laboured to oppose the Deity of the Holy Ghost: and so notwithstanding all that he hath said, i● remains a sure truth, and will do so to eternity, that the Holy Ghost is God. And therefore Trinuni Deo, Patri, Filio, Spiritu● Sancto sit Laus, Honour, & Gloria,  
Amen.  
FINIS.