OF THE AT PRINCETON, N. J. x> t» :>r --vi- 1 1> >r o i*- SAMUEL AGNE\V, or PHILADELPHIA, PA. 04^0. 'c^'s^jy/^ .y§^r f^ ^ns^ ^ ' ,-^^^'s e<^^5>© e<*3^ ^ n Case, Shelf, Divic Book, _. klq % IfLCti (? ■" see '^^ Sincere Christian's ANSWER TO THE Appeal to the Common Sense of all Chriftian People, Concerning an important Point of Dodrine, im- pofed upon their Confciences, by the Autho- rity of Church Government -, And, In particular. To the Members of the Church of England. In a Letter to the APPELLANT. Together, with a PREFACE; wherein, occafionally, the Cenfures of the Authors of the Monthly Review^ upon the Eflay towards an Anfwer to the Eflay on Spirit, written by the Author of this Anfwer, are examined, and obviated. / For the Letter kilieth, but the Sphfit giveth Life^ 2 Cor. III. 6. By the Rev. Thomas McDonnell, D. D. L O N D O N: Printed for J. Cooke, at the King's Arms-, Great lurnjiiky Holbourn, 'vr THE PREFACE. F"^KMF^^ appeal to the Common Senfe of allChrif- kj^F*"^^-^ tian People, naturally fuppol'es, that all W^ /f "^S Chriftian People are compc^tent Judges S^i J^^ <^^ the Subject Matter of fuch Appeal: C wwwC D And that in the managing and carrying m^^^^^jk jj.^^^ Nothing is pi oduced by Way of Evidence, but what is flridly adapted and made le- vel to their Underitandings : But, with regard to the Piece, to which the following Sheets are intended for an Anfwer, the appellant hath man feftly exceeded the Bounds, to which he folemnly profefled to confine his Appeal. The plain tranOated Text of Scripture, which only his Judges can be ilippofed, to under- fland, he hath frequently deviated tiom. He hath been obliged, unavoidably indeed, to refer to the original Text in many Inftances. He hath often pro- duced the Authority of tne Learned, in Support of his Corredlions of the vulgar Tranllation •, and, as of- ten advanced his own Comments and Paraphrafcs j which his Judges are inplicitly to affent to upon his hare Word. It is evident then, that the Subjea:- Matter of his Appeal is not fimply cognizable by thofe, to whom he hath appealed. The Meceiiity he was under of in- troducing Evidence, which only the Learned can A 2 com- IV PREFACE. comprehend, plainly confines the Decifion to them-, from whofe Knowledge and Skill the Bulk of Man- kind muft conftantly receive their Information in fuch Cafes: Nay, upon their Authority it is, that common Chiiflians unavoidably affent to the plaineft Truths, which they find fet down in the tranflated Text •, of which, therefore, they are only fo far Judges, as they have," before-hand, received all the Convi6tion, which they are capable of, from the Teflimony of the Learned, that thofe Sacred Books have been carefully preferved, and as faithfully tranflated. AH Chriftians have, certainly, a Right to look into Scripture themfelves •, but they have not ail, no, not, by far, the greateft Part, either Opportunity or Abili- ties, to confult the Original. When therefore they find the Tranflations in their Hands, reprefented to exprefs the original Senfe, either imperfedly, or differently ; how can they judge of any Point in Queftion, but by having Recourle to thofe, whofe known Integrity and Abi ities give them all the moral AiTurances they can expcd, that they may depend upon their Informa- tion ? And who then, in the End, are the real Judges ? Can they, or d.o they, in fuch Cafes, judge for themfelves ? They certainly cannot ; and if they do, they wilfully run the Hazard of erring, perhaps, in the rnofl: material Points. 1 am fuiiiciently aWare, that both the Tapift^ and the Delfi^ have railed Objedions againft the Scriptures, on the Realoning here advanced ; but it is certainly the Bufinefsof thtAppellarit^ and not mine, to anfwer thofe Objedlions, in order to fupport the Juftice of his own Appeal. Was I to defend the Scriptures ngainft either of them, I fhould take a quite different Method •, fuch a one, indeed, as fliould fliew the in- finite Ufe, the Scriptures, even in the mod faulty Tranflation of them ever yet publifhed, may be of to the Unlearned ; and yet demonftratc, that the Un- learned PREFACE. V learned are not fLifficient Judges of Co ntroverfies about Interpretations of Scripture. The Tribunal then, which the Appellant hatherecfl- ed, is plainly arbitrary and irregular j and the Per- fons, of whom it is compofcd, cannot but perceive the popular Flattery paid to their Underflandings \ and at the fame Time, the Appellant's artful Evafion of bringing the Queftion to that Bar, before which only it can be properly, and legally tried. As he hath made a little too free with the Authority of the Learn- ed, and as the unlearned, plain Chriflian Reader can- not, of himfelf, difcover this ; fo he prudently de- clines the approved and allowed Jurifdi6lion of the Former, to take Refuge in the unprecedented, and incompetent Arbritration of the Latter. Had he, however, confined the Controverfy to the plain Matter of Fa6t, as fet forth in the tranflated Scriptures, admitting the original Text to be thereby truly and fufficiently exprelTed, the plain unlearned Chriftian might have been allowed his Sufrrage in the Decifion of the Qiieftion, and the whole Controverfy been reduced to the narrow Compafs which he pre- fcribes : But, as he hath not been content to let the Matter reft there ; fo, it is evident, the bare Confi- deration of the feveral Colledlions of Texts, menti- oned by him, will not fuffice to clear up the Difpute •, for he hath plainly involved in it Matters of a foreign Nature -, and fuch, as plain illiterate Underftandings cannot, of themfelves, comprehend. And befides thofe two Collcdions of Texts, in which he hath, in more than one Inflance, varied from the tranflated Reading ; he hath, thro' the Whole, infifted upon many other Texts, interpreted by himfelf, or, as he aflerts, by learned Authority, in a different Manner from the vulgar Tranflation : In which, that he juftly £^s, is not in the Power of thofe to determine, who A ^ know VI PREFACE. know no more than what plain Englifh enables them to iinderftand. The immortal Do6lor Clarke, as the Appellant cd\h him, hathj indeed, laid the Foundation of endlefs Difputes, and Cavils ; and the dangerous Tendency of his Labours, in this Way, hath been long fince detfcded and expofed ; yet the Reputation of his mif- applied Learning will get him Difciples, while Men pay a greater Deference to mcer human Compofitions, than to the Scriptures, the true Fountain of religious Knowledge. But had thofe two great Ornaments of Literature, and able Props oi Chriftianity, the learned Potter and Waterland, been now alive, it is highly probable, the Appellant would not have ventured to enter the Lifts with Men, who had already fo eminently foiled the ableft Abettors of the fame Caufe : But for any Thing t\{Q^ which he might then have had to fear from thofe Men, whom he here, by a malignant Infinuation, re- prefents in the moft terrible and fliocking Light of a perfecucing Spirit, he hath taken care, by his name- lefs Performance, to keep himfelf out of the Reach of Power, was it fo inclined ; at the fame Time, that he exhibits a Shew of Courage and Zeal, to thofe, who know not but that he hath expofed himfelf to the worft, that the Oppofers of the eftabliilied Faith do, by the Laws, deferve ; who yet, by the prudent Mildnefs of the Executors of thofe Laws, julily founded upon the fecure Footing of our eftabliflied Religion, are accordingly over-looked, or defpifed. But, if the Appellant is a Clergyman of the eftabli- fhed Church (as by his pointing to thofe two great Men, and daring, thro' them, their SuccefTors, to the iitmoft Exercife of their Power, he feems to infinuate himfelf to be) he ought to be well alTured, that his Zeal for the Truth is lb far guided by Knowledge, as to be able to counterpoife the folemn Profeflions he hath PREFACE. vli hath already made in Favour of the Dodlrine which he now fo earntflly oppofes. In giving his Opinion of the Effay on Spirit^ the Appellant thinks, that the Scheme of that Author, with regard to the Holy Spirit, may be further confirmed by, y^^J VIII. 26,29. the fame Perfon, whoisftiled Angel of the Lord, being called Spirit. No doubt; all Angels are Spirits ; and he, who is here called an Angel, is alfo called^ a Spirit ; but not the Holy Spi- rit. It is to be obferved alfo, that the King's Manufcript, and many other approved Copies, and authentic Quo- tations, read the 39th Verfe of the fame Chapter thus ; 'The holy Spirit fell upon the Eunuch^ but the An-^ gel of the Lord caught away Philip, ^c. whereby the Holy Spirit and the Angel are plainly diftinguilhed. Again, the Angel that appeared to Cornelius^ A^s X. and the Spirit that fpeaks to Peter^ are evidently two didinft Perfons ; inafmuch as the Former plainly intimates, V. 4. that he was fent on that MelTage from God i and, V. 20. the Latter exprefsly declares to Peter ^ I fent them^ the Meffengers of Cornelius^ who came to feek Peter, The Appellant appeared, as he declares, foon after the Audjor of the Effay on Spirit : And as I have at- tempted to offer to the World an Anfwer to that Ef- fay, I thought it incumbent upon me to confider every Thing that appeared on that Side of the Queftion. Upon Perufal of the Appeal, I found it's Author had endeavoured to eftablifh the fame Do6i:rine, but in a quite different Manner -, flattering the Weaknefs of human Nature, in making it, unaffiffc';,^ and uninform- ed, capable of judging of the original Scriptures by barely being acquainted with the Englijh Tranflation: At the fame Time, mod inconfiftently giving us to underftand (in order to favour his own Interpretation of the Englifh^ where it plainly contracii6s his Scheme) that the Original Greeks and it's Tranilation, A 4 in viii PREFACE. in many PafTages, materially differ. This, and his reviving the old exploded Dodrine of Chrift^s affum- ing an human Body only, and his utter Denial of any Worfhip due to the holy Spirit, made me think what I had before done, to be in a great Meafure imper- fedl, if 1 did not alfo endeavour to unfold the Arti- fices of the Jppellant^ and obviate his further Ad- vances againfl the real Humanity of Chrifl, the Na- ture of the Worfhip paid to him, and the religious Worfhip due to the Holy Spirit. When, therefore, I had made a confiderable Pro- grefs in the following Work, a Vindication of the Divinity and Manhood of Chrift, profefTedly an An- fwer to this Appeal, appeared in Dublin ^ upon the Perufal of which, I found the honed and highly de- ferving Author, had, with great Care, Faithfulnefs, and Affiduity, fhewn the Stalenefs and Artifice of the Appellant^ ^Arguments, as being no more than what had been long fince refuted, and now only obtruded up- on plain Chriftians, as if they had never before been con- fidered and anlwered : And tho' his Zeal might fome- times, perhaps, feem to make him too minute and prolix, yet the Whole appearing entirely fufficient to fatisfy any impartial and inquifitive Man, I concluded my Labour at an End, and accordingly fufpended it's Progrefs. But the Authors of the Monthly Review^ in their fecond Article for y<^w«^ry, 1755; where, agreeably to their avowed Principles, with refped: to this Point of the Trinity^ they endeavour to decry the Labours of a truly learned, and worthy Defender of the eftab- lifhed Faith ; having, at the fame Time, challenged him, or any other Champion for the Do6lrine he ef- poufes, to give a folid Anfwer to this very Appeal ; I began to think, that either the above Vindication had not appeared there, or, if it had, thefe Gentlemen had treated it in fuch a Manner, as might eafily fup- preis PREFACE. ix prefs a Work, fo undefervedly difconntenanced, as this, and every other Performance, in Favour of this paicicular Point, feems to be ; while the bufy, and watchful Advocates for the contrary Do6lrine, are not only eagerly read, but on Account of that Eager- nefs, the Prefs feems to be open only to them. And, having mentioned thefe Gentlemen, I mufl: beg Leave to return them my Thanks for the Honour they have done me, in giving me a Place in their Re- view of June^ ^155 \ hoping, at the fame Time, that they will excufe the Liberty I fhall now take to ex- amine the Juftnefs of the Cenfure they have been pleafed to throw out againfl m.e ; not doubting, but that, as I had fome time ago given notice to a Book'feller in London of my Intentions, with regard to this Appeal, they prudently meant it as a prepa- rative Antidote to any Thing of mine, which might hereafter appear upon the fame Subject. Want of Judgment, Defeds of Stile, mean Criti- cifms, and weak Reafonings, as they proceed from a deficient Underflandir.g, fo are they rather Misfor- tunes than real Faults : And the only Fault imput- able to an Author, in whom thofe Dcfcds are found, is that of prefuming to write with fuch unequal Qiia- lifications. But this again, the Weaknefs oi his \\\- telledl accounts for, which could not point out to him the Infufficiency of his own Strength ; and may be refolved into a natural Piece of Self-flattery, inci- dent to other Authors, as well as to the Object of thefc Gentlemens' Cenfure. But thefe Gentlemen declare, they cenfure with Reludance. Very reluctantly, indeed ! When they liberally bellow upon me, not only thofe Imputations already mentioned, but alfo the fcandalous Character of a malignant Conveyer of perfonal Reflections, and abufive Inuendos, reaching even to fcurrility ; and what is flill worfe, that of a Falfificr, Defacer, and An- Xil PREFACE. fentation of this plaufible Pretext, with which he kt out. The next Inflance, which thefe Gentlemen produce from the fame Dedication, Page i6, 17. muft be in» tended as a Sample of the Weaknefs of my Reafon- ings. They, therefore, firft impute to me, as a pe- cuHar Opinion of my own, advanced without the lead Authority, that the i^^!rmatiOn,'; a'^ they firfl infinuate, nor fo deftitute of fufficient Proofs, as they afterwards, upon better Recolkdtion, pretend. The Neceffity, indeed, which I laid mjyfelf under, to follow my Author Step by Step, unavoidably threw this Proportion at fome Diftance from it's immkliate Proofs: But thefe Gentlemen, I thank them, have luckily brought them, for the moll Part, together;- infomiich that, even in this View, parcelled cut as they are, and flript of fome material intervening Steps towards the main Proof, any Man of common Senfe, who' is at all acquainted with the Hiftory of the Reformation, mult yet fee, that the Propofition doth not ^want a pretty fufficient Foundation. And,' therefore, the Simiilitude of the Serpenfs perfuading- Eve^ mud have more Propriety than thefe Gentlemen are willing to allow ; and, confequcntly, it's Malevo- knce, perhaps, confifts in it's properly illuR-rating a dif- ^greeable Truth. • And here I cannot but congratulate myfelf at their palTing over more than Half of a Work, which yet, in their fetting out, they pronounced to abound with manifold, and moil flagrant Faults. From the Nature of their Remarks hitherto, an impartial Reader mud fee how little Grounds they had' for their moH: injuri- ous Charge. And, hence too he miay reafoiiably in- fer, that they do not nov; decline, for fo far, their Enquiry, to fave him any Trouble, but, perhaps, be- caufe they defpair of finding, in that Compafs, any further Matter of Cavil to dwell upon. But, to make Amends for their failing here, they have at length found in the Compafs of a few Lines, P. 1 60, PREFACE. XV P. 1 60. of my EfTay, not only weak Reafoning, but the mod glaring Mifapplication, Perverfion, and Milquotation of Scripture : And all thefe fo obvious and apparent, that their Readers, without Afiiftance, may eafily difcern them. But as thefe are only bare Afifertions, I fhall an- fwer them by others of the fame Kind, and infift, that neither thefe Gentlemen, with all their Sagacity, nor any Man of common Senfe and common Read- ing, can fhew and prove the kaft MifappHcation, Perverfion, or Mifquotation of Scripture, in the whole PafiTage, when fairly connected and compared with what goes before, and follows it in the fame Se6lion ; at the fame Time, duly confidering, that if Chrifh be truly God, as the former Part of that Work hath more than barely made probable, every Defcription of the one true God muft be flriiflly ap- plicable to Chrifl. Whether my dropping the Particle, And^ in the Beginning of St. Paurs Words, i Tim. III. 16. .or my faying, God manifefted in the Flejh^ inflead of, God was manifefted in the Vlefh^ be the glaring Mif- quotation they hint at, is befl known to themfelves ; any other, I am fure, they cannot point out : And this evidently makes no i^ifference, as by fupplying- the Particle, in the firft Cafe, at once appears. And, with regard to the fecond, the Words are quoted by the founded Divines as often one Way as the other ; efpecially, when introduced in Connexion with their own ; each being equally declarative of the Apoftle's true Meaning. And therefore, the Scriptures being fairly and honeftly handled, I muft further infift, that the Reafoning is, confequently, ftrong and good. Succeeding however fo well, as they imagine, in this Part of their Charge, they fcruple not, in the next xvi P R E F A C E. next Place, to fallen upon me a flat Con trad id I on ; which yet, had the whole Context of each Period been fairly reprefented, would clearly appear to be none at all. In the Firft, Page 210. I plainly refer to the true fcriptural Dodtrines of the primitive Fa- thers; and in the Second, the following Page, I as plainly refer to their own pre-conceived Notions, drawn from Plato^s> Philofophy, according to. which they frequently attempted to explain the Scriptures, and which, in my firft Period, are clearly diftinguifn- ed from their true fcriptural Doftrines. But, fetting afide the Context, I firft fay, the Fa- thers aiTert the abfol'Jte Co-equality of the Son with the Father •, and in the fecond Place, fay only. They feem, as Dr. Cudwortb fays, to give it up. Here is no Shadow of a Contradidion.; or if there is, it lies on the Fathers themfelves to anfwer it. But the fame may be faid of the Scriptures, without Offence, becaufe true. They affert the Co-equality, and feem to give it up i elfe wherce this Difpute about it ^ Indeed, by fuch unfair Reprefentations as^thefe, the moft confiftent ExprefTions of the moft guarded Writers, may at any Time be eafily fet in the moft. contradidory Light. But how fuch Dealing becomes Men, v;ho have profelTtdly taken upon them to cri- ticize faithfully on the Works of others, I leave to the honeft Reader to determine. In their laft Extract, they endeavour tQ make me appear as unintelligible, as they have already, in vain, attempted to reprefent me contradidory, weak, and icurrilous. The PalTage, which they fix on, ftands in the 275th Page of my EJfay. And if every im- partial, lenfible Reader, who will take the Pains at- tentively to confKkr the ftveral diftind Propofitions, of. which the Whole is compofed, will afterwards fay, he doth not underftand the Terms of each, nor confe- PREFACE. ?v|? ponfequently, what each Propofition alTerts ; and then again, that he is not able to compichend the Senfe of them all together, as they Hand corneci:e4 in the PafTage itfeif, I fhall be contented to fubmit^ fo far, to the Cenfure pf thefe Gentlemen. ' To clear the Reader's Way, I fhall take the Lft berty to lay before Jiin:^ the feyeral Propofitions ii| their diftind: Views. // implies no QonlradiBion to fyy^ thcit God hatJ\ from all Eternity^ exhibited^ in the infinite Fund of his own eternaly omniprefent EJfence^ certain difiin^ incppi^ tnunicable Properties. That thefe Properties perfonally fuhfifl therein. That they are inteyided to fpecify each particular ^ and extraordinary Manifefiation of his, ctherwife, invi/ibl^ Omniprefence. That they are alfo^ by fuch Specification^ intended to denote the confiant, and invariable Relation^ which every fuch perfonal Manifeftation bears to him^ the ori- ginal Source and Fountain of all. Thefe are all the Propofitions, about which there can be the leaft Queftion : Which yet, I dare ven- ture to fay, any Man of Senfe, acquainted with the precife Meaning of the feveral Terms, cannot fail, with the leaft Degree of Attention, to underftand : And a very little more will then enable him to com- prehend their entire Connexion and Dependance, as j:hey ftand in the PaiTage objeded to. '^ It is plain, however, that thefe Gentlemen would be jthough't themfelves to underftand it ; fince, as they jtake upon them to call it (in the Author's Efteem) a proper Explication, it fhould feem, that they allow it; in their own Efteem, to be, at leaft, an impro- per one: Highly indeed imp-.oper, if intended,' as jthey fuppofe, for the meanelt Capacides. But th(? Tct-ms therein unavoidably infifted on, and the' Dif- finftions by them implied, plainly fliew it to be in- ^ tended Xvlii PREFACE. tended only for thofe, wliofe Learning and Know- ledge enable them fully to comprehend the Terms, and clearly difcern the Nature of the Diftindlions : With regard to whom, therefore, it is, perhaps, as proper an Explication as the infinite Nature of the Subjed: would admit of. But if, in treating of fuch a Subjecl, an Author bb not fometimes allowed, equally with his Adver- fary, to fpeak only to the Learned ; confined thus in his Defence, he will foon be obliged to quit the Field to his Opponent, who is permitted the Ufe of as niany Weapons as the Strength of his Caufe will bear. But fuppofe thefe Gentlemen did not underftand this Paffage at all ; they could not then pretend to pronounce any Thing certain concerning it, more than of any other Piece of downright Nonfenfe, equal- ly unintelligible to the Learned and Unlearned. But belides their Determination already mentioned, where- by they pkinly would be thought not altogether ig- norant of it's Meaning ; they moreover feem to ad- mit it poflible to be underflood by lefs, indeed, than One in an Hundred, or rather One in ten Thoufand : It is not then abfolutely unintelligible. And for them thus to infinuate themfelves to be, each^ that One in more than an Hundred^ or rather, that One in more than ten Thoufand^ is arrogating an higher Degree of Penetration to themfelves, than perhaps, juftly, falls to their Share. Having thus difpatched tlieir Remarks pn my ElTay, and thinking that they have thereby fet it in fo contemptible a Light, as that there needed little to be faid 'to give an equally mean Opinion of it's jhort Vindication ^ they are content to Ihew the Va- rjity of it's Author from his own Words, and fo give iii'm lip to the juft Contempt of every Reader. Bur, if to confefs a lowly Senfe of one's own Parts fee what thefe Gentlemen call Vanity, I certainly, in PREFACE. XIX the Pafifage produced by them, acknowledge myfelf vain enough to think, that my own weak Abihties, unafTilled by the Grace of God, were not at all e- qual, even to fo eafy a Talk, as that which my Ad- verfary called me to : While, on the other Hand, from a firm Perfwafion of my being on the Side of Truth, my Humility led me to hope, that my En- deavours, properly exerted, would entitle me to the Favour of that all-fufficient Being ; who, (till, I can- not help thinking from the Event, hath fully an- fwered my moft fanguine Expedtations. If thus then my giving the Glory to God be rather taking Praife to myfelf, my Vanity, I hope, will never be other- wife difplayed ; nor my Enemies ever be able to lay an heavier Charge upon me. The Prejudice which the Cenfures of thefe Gen- tlemen, had they been pafled by unanfwered, might have naturally thrown in the Way of the following Work, will, I flatter myfelf, appear to be a fuffici- ent Apology for the Length of this Preface : And if it fliall happily be thought by the candid Reader, that his Time hath not been fpent in vain, he will then have the Advantage of entering upon the fol- lowing Examination freer from Prejudice, than perhaps he would otherwife be •, and it's Author the agree- able Profpedl of a fair and impartial Trial ; in which, that the Decifion may be in Favour of Truth, he moft earneftly prays to the God of all Truth, who is able to defend his Church againft the Wiles and Ma- chinations of the moft artful and defigning Men ; and yet is graciouily pleaied, in his great Wifdom, .often to make ufe of meer human Means, ^e Fool- ^i/hnefs of the World, to confound the Wife^ and the weak ^Things of. the World to confound thofe that are mighty. December 3^ 1755- ERRATA. Page V. Line 15. /or, Arbrltration, ready Arbitration, vi. 5. /<>r^ and the dangerous, ready and fjfce* th^ dangerous, iX. 33. before the Wordy liberally, /tf//^', fo, 3ti._ 4, fory Levity, ready Lenity, ICti, 32. fory every, ready any. 5, II. tf/>fr, declines, /:^/>/>/y, it. 5. ao. /or, Affertation, ready Aflertion. ai. /or, contradidlion, ready contradiftindiop. lo« a8. /or, would, rw^, could. 34. II. after y defcribe, fupply, h\n\, "i I. fory fay, read, fays. 15. 20. /or, and Doftrine, re-^i, and the Doftrine, at. 4. fory doing, r^aJ, Nothing. 33- /"■> exemplied, r^^^, exemplified, *4« 5» Z"*"* inveftore, rwi, inveftiture. 7, *^ore, from his own Words, fupply, vr« have. -5» 3« *'/''^^> intended, fupply, be, a6. 22. /or, confequently, ready confequent, 13. fory full, ready fully, 59. ag. A^/br*, it heightened, fupply y that, 38, 19. fory probable, read, reprobate. 44* 33. /or, inftances, ready inftance, 34. /or, publifhed, r^<2 1. /or, know, rcad^ knew, 97« 8. fory diftinguifhed, ready difplayed. 99, 28. fory Infmuations, ready Infmuation* 107, 23. fory Words, ready Works. Ho, ^' f°>'» or, ready and. 112, a. before, the Apoftles, fupply y to, 218, 9«/'"'» ineach, rffli, of each. 225. 24. /or, his Spirit, ready this Spirit, J28. 13. Dele fame. 141, "^S'f^^t woi^ld, ready could. '45' 5' f°''* equally, read, equal. 259, 28. fory it is, read, is it. 281. 1' f°r> imperceptibly, ready unperceivedly, 282. 29. fory agam till fometime aftCT this, rtal^ till fometime after this again, 284. 31. foTy and if, ready and as if, j8^, 14. /r, thofc, rsady thefc. ( I ) Sincere Christianas Anfwer^^r, SIR, F^S^M'^OUR Appeal, &c. promifing, by it's ^■JMS:^MM Tide and Manner of Addrefs, fome«> thing convincing, plain, and clear, be- yond any Thing that hath been yet written on the Subje6l ; and, at the fame Time, your Charge upon the eilabliflied Dodrine of our Church being fo bold and peremptory ; I could not help thinking 1 fhould fail in my Duty both to myfelf and thofe, whofe Informa- tion and Infl:ru(5lion, in a great Meafure, depend upon me, if I did not give it that fair and candid Examina- tion, which you feem fo earneilly to requeft of all chriftian People. I have therefore. Sir, given it a full and impartial tiearing at the Bar of that common Senfe which, I truft in God, I enjoy jointly with all other fincere Members of his Church ; and which, give me leave to fay, I am equally convinced with you^ every true ratipnal Chriftian hath a Right to ufe in weighing the Senfe of Scripture, and from thence in- fering the Meafure of his Faith, and the Rule of his religious Duty. Without then any further Ceremony, I fhall proceed to give the Refult of my Thoughts upon what you have been pleafed to advance in Support of your Appeal. B That (a ) IT hat no Church hath a Right to impofeDo(5lrind/ Hot clearly revealed in Scripture, will be readily grant- ed ; but that we are not to underfland the Scriptures, in every Part, according to the Letter meerly, but ac- cording to the general Senfe and plain Connexion of each correfponding Part, 1 believe. Sir, you will not deny : And therefore when the bare Words of Scrip- ture do feem to contradid what the plain conneded Senfe ftrongly infers, it will not, I prefume, in this Cafe be difputed, but that the Interpretation according to the latter is always to be preferred before that of the former. Upon thefe few, and, I think, evident Principles, I have ventured to examine yourDodrine. By Means of which, Sir^ I am, in the firft Place^ 'induced to think that your Cenfure of the eftablifhed Doflrine of our Church, in this Point of the Trinity^ as fet forth in the Athanafian Creed, is a little too hafty ; for tho^ the very exprefs Wofds of Scripture are, perhaps, not to be found in that Creed ; yet this, it Ihould feem, ought not to be fufficient to con- demn it, unlefs it alfo evidently contradids the con- nedled Senlc and plain Tenour of thofe facred Writ- ings : The Queflion, therefore, in my humble Appre- henfion, is, Whether, or not, that Creed contains the true Dodrine of the Scriptures, according to their true Senfe and Meaning ? Your State of this Princi- pal Queflion, when properly diftinguifhed, will amount to the fame Thing. But here, Sir, you mufi: give me Leave to obferve, that in the two different Manners, wherein you pro- pofe the Queflion, you have, in the firfl, confounded the I'erms, Intelligent Agent., and PerfoHy as well as the Terms, EJfence, and Si:bftance. That God is an intelligent Agent is obvious to Senfe and Reafon \ but that he is a Perfon^ that is, a certain individual, intelligent Agent, diftinguifhed by pecu- liar Properties from all other Individuals of the fame Kind,: ( 3 ) Kind ; which is the conflantly known and allowed Senfe of this Term, cannot, with any Truth or Pro- priety, be laid of God taken abfolutely ; of the fame Kind, or Nature, with whom no other Exigence caa be conceived : And that the Terms Effence^ and Sub- fiance^ bear quite diflin6t Significations, hath been elfe- where *, and it is to be hoped, not in vain attempted to be fhewn. But, perhaps, it may be objeded here, that if God, taken abfolutely, cannot be a Per/on, neither can the Father, the Son^ or the Holy Ghoft ; becaufe they are not under a Species as Individuals : In Anfwer, I fay, that the Term, Perfon, when applied to them, is not iinderftood in fo ftrid: a Senfe, as when ufed to denote the intelligent Individuals of the human Species ; but in fuch a Senfe, as is fufficient to exprefs the Diftinc- tion of the Godhead, refembiing, in fome Sort, the Diftindion of three human Individuals, tho' every Circumflance of each Diftindion doth not exadly cor- tefpond. In your fecond Manner you feem to take it for granted, that where ever in Scripture God is called, the Father, thereby is particularly meant the Father of our Lord Jefus Chrifl ; whereas it is evident that God Almighty is frequently called, the Father, and, our Father, as being the Father of all his Creatures ; which we are given to underftand, he is in a quite dif- ferent Manner from that whereby he is the Father of our Lord. And therefore where the ExprelTion, the Father of our Lord, is added to the Term, God, or the Context requires it to be fo underftood; there the Per- fon only of the Father of our Lord is particularly in- tended, to whom, by Way of Eminence, as being firfl in order in the blefled Trinity, the Appellation of God is generally given. B 2 But f See an Eflay towards an Anfwer to the EJfay on Spirit, in th« beginning ; fold by J. Payne, in Pater-nojisr-roiv, London. ( 4 ) 6i:t to fhew that the Term, God, cannot be t'akeTt abfoluteJy and peribnally at the fame Time, be pleaf- cd to attend to the Words of St. Paul^ Coll. II. 2. where if the Term, God, be taken both Ways at the fame Time, it muft unavoidably mean a diftin6l Per- fon from, either the Father, or Chrift -, the Copula- tive, apJy denoting as plainly fomething different in the Term, Father, from what is intended in the Term, God, as the Repetition of the fame Copulative de- notes fomething different in the Term, Chrift, from what is contamed in either of the foregoing Terms, Father, or God ; but this cannot be th-e true Interpre- tation, unlefs you allov/ the firft Term, God^ to mean the holy Spirit ; and then it is plain the Term cannos be taken abfolutely ; but if you do not^ it cannot on the other Hand be taken perfonally ; but muft abfo- lutely mean the entire Godhead, diftributively, and equally extended to both Father and Son. Your State then, Sir, of the principal Qiieftion be- ing, by thefe proper Diftin6tions, rendered clear and direflly to the Point, the Decifion of this will equally anfwer your fecondary Quertion. Your firft Obfervation,. wilb Regard to the Unity of God, is fo tar juft as you fay it is delivered and in- culcated in the cleareft and ftrongeft Light ; fo that no poflible Doubt can be made of this grand Principle of natural and revealed Religion ; but wherein this Unity confifts, whether in the Unity of Agency, or Unity of Perfon, the very State of your Queftion fliews it to be a Point not fo clearly decided, as you now, for your Purpofe, would have it to be. But it is yet a Queftion v/irh me, whether v;hatyou advance, from the Ne^u; Tefiajncnt^ doth not prove more than you defire : For tho' our Saviour's Anfwer to the inquifitive Youth, Matth. XIX. 16, 17. is plainly declarative of the Unity of God, and that the Epithetj Good, is only properly applied to him ; yet you- is) jou win not fay that his affirming none to be Good, ■fave one, that is God, determines particularly who that one God is ; but only fo far (hews the abfolute Goodnefs of the one God, whatever the Nature of his Being may be : Neither can you truly and dire6lly fay, 'however you endeavour to infinuate it, that by afking the Youth, why he called him Good, he thereby ab- iblutely difclaimed thatTirle; when, according to botfi Prophets and Apoilles, he is defcribed, in the highcil Senfe, to poflefs all moral Perfeftlon : Itfhould ftrem, therefore, that he declines here only in order to lead the young Man to fhew, whether his Manner of Ad- drefs arofe from his juft Application of the Prophets to him, as being the divine Perfon of the Meffiah ; or meerly from his judging him to be no more than a Man, fit however to inftrufl him in his Duty, as any other Teacher of the Law. If from the firft i it is plain, then, that our Saviour could notj without difowning himfelf to be that Perfon, refufe the Title in its higheft Senfe •, and then the di- redl Inference is, rhat as our Saviour declares -G^i only to be good, fo now by thus admitting diat Title to "be applied t^o himfelf alfo, he declares, himfelf and God, to be one and the fame Being : and that, accord- ingly, the young Man had, fo far, a riglit Notion of the Deity, which our Saviour's further Speech to him feems to evince. For Cbrtfi, as if he was fo far farisfied with the young Man'*s Behaviour, upon his intimating to hin> in what Senfe he was to underftand his Goodnefs; bids him, then, in order to enter into Li-fe, to keep the Commandments; and upon his aflr Senfe \ the Term, Lord^ will be there- by appropriated to the Son : And yet the Scriptures do, eJfewhere, plainly declare the Father as well as the Son, to be Lord ; and confequently, two Lords, contrary to this of St. Paul, If again, the Term, Lord^ in the New Teftamenty defigns only the Son, the higheft divine Attributes are thereby charaderiftically given to the Son. The Lord, whereby, according to you, the Son is efpeci- ally dillinguifhed, is frequently defcribed to be, and to do, what God Almighty is always underftood to be, and to perform. Where the ExprefTion, therefore, Lord Gody is ufed without any particular Specification, it fhould feem more reafonable to determine it to denote the Son than the Father . Since, by your Dodrine, Lordy is the peculiar Appellation of the Son, and you do not deny, that he is alfo called God, tho' in an in- ferior Senfe, But beyond all doubt, the I^rd our God is exprefs- ]y declared in St. Mark'Xll. 29. to be one Lord; and and ver, 32, it Is afferted alfo, that there is none other but he : And it is as certainly faid by St. Paul^ To us there is hut one God the Father — — • and one Lord Jefus Chrift : It therefore plainly follows, that, as, by the Words of the Evangelifty there is but one God, and one Lord, and that the one God is that one Lord 5 fo Jefus Chrift^ who is equally affirmed by the Apoftle to be tht one Lord, mud alfo be the one God, And accordingly, if we look back into the OldTef- tament, the Prophet Zechariah^ XIV. 5, plainly fore- telling the coming of Chrifi, doth adually defcribe under the Charadler of, the Lord my God, and ver. 9, Hill defigning the fame Perfon, fay. In that Day Jhall there he one Lord, and his Name, One. But the clear and diftinfl Mention, and not Defcrip- tion, as you call it, of the one God, one Lord, and one Spirit, Ephef. IV. 4, 5, 6. doth, indeed, evi- dence three Perfons -, but by no Means difproves thefe three Perfons to be the one God, For the Apoftle exhorting the Ephe/ians to keep thd Unity of the Spirit in the Bond of Peace, afligns, as a Motive for their fo doing, their being called to be Members of the one Body, the Chriilian Church, en- lightened and conducted by the one Spirit, and hav- ing, moreover, one Lord, one Faith, one Baptifm, on4 God and Father of all. Now the diflindt mention of each Perfon, and par- ticular Mark of Unity added to each ; as they are in- iifted oh here to enforce Union and Concord in the Church of Ephefus, fo lately converted fi-om Paganifm; fo, were they further intended to point out an abfolute dif-unioh in the Perfons, they would feem rather to fruftrate the Scope of the Apoftle's Exhortation ; by- giving the Ephejians to underftand, that inftead of one God, they had one fupreme.^ and two inferior Creature Gods ', inftead o^ one Lord, they had ovit fupreme, and two inferior Lords \ and inftead of one Spirit, they had (15) had onefupreme Spirit (for God is a Spirit,) ix)^tw6 inferior^ one animating an human Body, the other, indeed, a pure unbodied Spirit. This Interpretation, then, feems but aukwardly to anfwer the Apoftle's Defign : Would it not be more confiftent to fuppofe, that he chofe, upon this Occafion, to mention the three Perfons by Terms com- mon to them all ; yet, by a peculiar Apphcation, each becoming for certain Reafons, the diftinguifhing Cha- tadler of fome one, or other, of the Perfons ? This exadly correfponding with the general Tenour of the Scriptures, and the particular Dodlrine of this Apol^ tie in other Paflages, preferves at once the Diftinp:ion of Mankind, freely offers himfelf to be the Sacritice. But as it was alfo necefifary, to fhew the high Worth of this Sacrifice, that Men might be convinced of the Hainoufnefs of their Sins, which could not be redeem- ed but at an infinite Price •, Chrift is to demonftrate his divine and infinite Value by the Exertion of his Omnipotence in raifing himfelf from the Dead. Tq c 4 l^y (h) lay down his Life, therefore, and to raife himfelf from the Dead, that is, the Exertion of thofe Powers where- by he is able to do this, is the Commandment, which Chrift voluntarily undertakes to perform, and receives from the Father ; and not the Invefture of thofe Powers now^ as if he had them not before. How hq hath them, from his own Words, juft now fhewn ; and that an Equal may be fent by an Equal, and con- fequently commanded, hath been, already, cleared up. Here then. Sir, you fee, that without the help of nice and fubtle Diftin6tions, but only fuch as the plain and natural Conitruftion of the Context neceflarily leads us into -, we muft believe that a Perfon, who a6ls in obedience to another's Commands, can in other Refpedls, be equal to him, by whom he is fent or commanded. But the Paffage in St. MarkXlll, 32. feeming to you to have more of Difficulty in it, than the Defen- ders of the eflablifhed Church can readily account for ; I fhall give the whole Context a fair Examination, comparing it with the parallel Place in St. Matthew, XXIV. ^6. and other Parts of Scripture, necQlTary for the underftanding of this whole Matter j and then leave the candid and tinprejudiced Reader to judge be- tween us. - The whole Difcourfe, of which the PalTage in Queftion is a Part, is p:ainly introduced in each Evan- gelift, upon our Saviour's pronouncing the utter De- ilrudlion of the Temple ; in which, perhaps, his Dif- ciples then involved the final Deflrudion of the World : But for your pofitive AfTertion of this there appears no clear Foundation. The particular Day and Hour, therefore, which our Lord intimates, fhould feem, from the Context, to refer to that particular Dellruc- tion only. But be this as it will -, it is certain that our Saviour piakes no fuch Diftmdlion, as' you do for him, be- * tween ( 25 ) tWcen the Time of the Deftrudion of the Templet as owning he knev;^ that, and theTimeof the Worlds as owning he knew not that ; but if both intended blends his Prophecy of both together. "With Regard to which, therefore, it is obfervable, that tho' our iSaviour fays, in St. Mark^ exprefsly. Not the Son, hut the Father ; yet, in St. Matthew, which yet you take no Notice of, the Son is omitted, and initead of, "The Father, it is. My Father only. Now, according to a Diftinclion before obferved, neither nice, nor fubtie, but abfokitely necefiary to the clearing and underftanding fuch feeming Difficul- ties-, the Expreffion The Father, taken fimply and alone, denotes God, the Father of us all, different from that, the Father of our Lord Je/us Chrijl, or, my Father, when Chriji is the Speaker, whereby the particular diftind: Perfon of the Father of Chrift is intended ; who, we are given to underftand, is, in a different Man- ner,' the Father of our Lord, from that whereby God Almighty, which comprehends the three Perfons, and, -cherefore, applicable to any of them, is the Fa- ther of all his Creatures. This Diftindion, therefore, being attended to, the Difficulty vanifhes. Our Saviour, in St. Mark, con- fining this Knowledge to God, the Almighty Father of the World, by no Means abfolutely excludes him- felf ; who, as the only begotten Son of his Father, and the fecond Perfon in the Trinity, mull always be included in the Notion of Almighty God. For, tho' the Son feems to be exprefsly mentioned in the Exclufion j yet Chrift neither now, or at any Time before, had, as yet, diredly reprefented him- felf, as that divine Perfon, the eternal Son of God, begotten before the Worlds ; but, fimply, as the Son : in which Expreffion, his human Nature, as the Son pf Man, born in the World, being hitherto chiefly fpnfidered by hisDifciplesj who evidently did not as yet ( 26 ) vet comprehend, how he was otherwife the Son of Gody than by being miracLilouQy born of the Virgin Mary \ he therefore fpeaks to them agreeably to their prefent Conceptions of him •, while at the fameTmie, from the whole Context, he gives them a Clue, by which, when they came to know him more fully, they were enabled, notwithftanding, to conclude, as they afterwards did, John XYl. 30. XXI. 17. that he Knew dl Things: in which feveral Difcourfes and his concluding Prayer, according to that Apoftle, evi- dently delivered by our Saviour immediately after the laft Supper, and confequently to the two former Paf- fages of St. iViW/tey, and St. M^r^, he more full ex- plains to tliem his divine Nature and the intimate Connexions between him and his Father. But, moreover, what he fays to them, Joi^n XV. 1 5 . Jil Things whirb I have beard from my Father^ I have made known to you^ plainly fliews that he knew much more than he thinks proper to tell them. For that he doth not thereby mean all Things with- out Exception •, but only thofe Things which he heard firom his Father, relative to the Purpofes of his Mif- iion, is plain from hence ; By his entire Communica- tion with the Father, he perfefbly knew the Father himfelf : He knew the particular Method and Manner whereby all Things were created, and are preferved : By him they were created \ and therefore he knew their intimate Natures and Conftitutions ; he knew their Beginnings, and, confequently, their Ends : He knew all theThings, which the Father himfelf performs \ and yet he communicates none of this Knowledge to them •, and therefore, what he doth communicate can- not be his whole Knowledge. But it aiterwards fufficiently appearing to them, in the Progrefs of his feveral Difcourfes, that, even as the Father knew him, fo he, in the fame full and perfeft Manner, knew the Father-, and that the Father Ihewed V> (27) to him all Things which he doth, and that he is m the Bofom of the Father, the infeparable Partner of his Councils and Will j they, by being gradually led to com- ?)are all thofe Things together, do, at lafl, acknow- edge him to know all Things, without Exception, even to the Knowledge of their own Hearts, in as full and as ample a Manner as the Father himfelf ; at the fame Time reproving their own Forwardnefs in enquiring into Things, which it was not fit for them to know : for they now confefied, that he needed not that any Man fliould afk him ; and, by this ConfefTion, ex- prefled their Belief that he came forth from God, that he was the only begotten Son of the Father, partak- ing of the fame divine Nature, and confequently one with him, equally partaking of his infinite Perfedions. Having thus far obviated the feeming Force of St. Marie ^ Words ; the Exclufion in St. Matthew^ reach- ing only to Men and Angels, and the Knowledge be- ing confined to the Perfon of the Father, Chrift there- by plainly leaves it to his Difciples to colled after- wards, that he, himfelf, who is conftantly defcribed the full Partaker of all his Father's Councils and Will, and one with the Father, is alfo Partaker of this very Knowledge, otherwife confined to his Fa- ther only. Chrift^ therefore, in St. Mark^ fpeaks of himfelf, not as he really was, but as what his Difciples then ap- prehended him to be : While, in St. Matthew^ tho* the particular mention of himfelf is omitted \ yet the Exclufion extending to all Creatures, he leaves them, for that Time, to apply it alfo to himfelf according to their then Conceptions of him: but when he after- wards gradually lays open to them his divine Nature ; they juftly attribute to him all Kind of Knowledge without Exception -, and by their ConfefTion, fhew fheir Attention now clearly diredted to his divine, which ( 28 ) which before they only gave to his humaft. Pre* eminence. Now if this Interpretation doth not take Place, the whole Context of each Evangelift neceifarily involves a moft palpable Con tradition. For the Day and Hour, mentioned by both, plain- ly means the coming of the Son of Man, either at the Deflrudion of the Jezvi/b Temple, or at the End of the World : But in St. Mark^ and more fully in St. Matthew^ the Son of Man is reprefented, As a Man taking a Journey^ As a Man travelling into a far Country \ the Uncercainty ofwhofe Return reprefents the Uncertainty of Chrijih coming : But it will not be faid, that, becaufe tliC Servants did not know, the Mailer, or Lord of the Houfe, knew not alfo the Time of his intended Return -, and, therefore, in the parallel Cafe, Chrift cannot be faid to be ignorant of the Time of his own coming. If then none but God, the Father of C/^r^, knows this, here Chrift is faid to know, and not to know the fame Thing at the fame T'lmt : A Contradiction fo flrong and plain, as muft immediately ftrike the Un- derftanding of every the leaft fenfible Man ; and con- fequently, that of our Lord's Difciples : Who muft therefore be led to interpret this whole PafTage in the Manner here fet forth, without cafting any Reproach on the blelTed Jefys ; as if he abfolutely denied what he really knew ; when, on the Contrary, by an eafy, obvious and certain Method, or Chain of Reafoning, he brings them, at length, to own, that, the true Notion of the Son of Man carries in it much more than their grofs Apprehenfions did at that Time per- ceive. And now, Sir, having thus ftated this whole Mat- ter, I am bold to think, that every Man of commori Senfe will join with me herein •, and alfo conclude, in jhe next Place, that the earneft Prayers, which Cbrijl offers ( 2p ) offers up to his Father, are not fo much the Effe6l of his own real Infiifficicncy and Inferiority to the Father^ as of his voluntary and temporary Diveflrrient of his divine j^ower and Glory, during his purpofcd Humi- liation here. For furely, oiherwife, he, who fo exprcfsly had declared his Unity with the Father, and in a Senfe neceflarily different from that in which the Union of Chrifl and his Church is underftood, cannot, upon any Account, be fuppofed to pray to his Father j but becaufe he, for tha: Time, declined tlie Exertion of his Power, which he enjoyed in common with his Father, which he had with him before the World was, in order to carry on the great Work, for which he was fent. The Tears and Agony, therefore, which the Au- thor of the Epiftle to the Hebrews defcribes, are, by the very Words, Chap. V. 7. In the 'Days of his Fie jhy plainly intimated to be the Tears and Agony of his Hu- manity, which being at that Time entirely left to its Feelings by the Divinity, or rather it's Feelings quick- ened and refined thereby, muft naturally, in fuch Circumftances, utter ExpreiTions fignificant of itV own Inlui!iciency \ and yet that InfuMiciency be fo far attributed to whole C/6n/ ; in-af-much as the Divinity was at that Time, purpofely, as it were, inadlive'; or, if ar all employed, guarding the human Nature from any unworthy Refentment of the Surrcrings it felt, at the fame Time it heightened and enlarged the Senfe of its Sufferings. If then we compare this Prayer of our blelTed Sa- viour with the Declaration concerning the Deftruc- tion of the Temple, or the End of the World ; it will ferve to flrengthen further what is. there advanced to obviate your Objedion againft the perfed Know- ledge of C^rj/?. For (3°) For Chrift praying here, as Man, was, nevertlie-' lefs, even as Man, fully aflured he muil die : He knew it perfectly well: and yet he prays againft it. If then, from Mark XIII. 32. you conclude, he was altogether ignorant of the Event enquired after ; you muft conclude from the PalTage of St. Luke, referred to by the Author of the Epiille to the Hebrews, that he was not fure of his own Death : And yet, that he was fure of it, notwithftanding his Prayer to avoid it, as a Thing uncertain, can in no Senfe be denied : be- caufe he had voluntarily engaged to die •, he had pro- mifed and foretold it ; he had made the Prophets fore- , tell it, and put the Proof of his own MifTion, and the Salvation of all Men upon it. If he then, confident with his own certain Know- ledge, prayed againft the Completion of ah unavoid- able Event, as a Thing to be avoided -, why might he not, confident with his infinite Knowledge, not yet confelTed or underftood by his Enquirers, deny, as Man, while they took him to be no more, what he certainly knew, and afterwards convinced them of, as God ? Neither, Sir, after what hath been faid, will any Man of common Senfe, be at a Lofs to reconcile the ExprefTion in St. John XIV. 28. with the eftablifhed Dodlrine of our Church. For tho' Chrift fays, My Father is greater than I-, yet obferving there the Dif- tindlion already eftabliftied, it doth not follow, that his Father, as being exclufively God, is greater than him, but only in a Senfe correfponding to our Con- ception of a natural Father and Son. He is inferior to him as being his Father \ at the fame Time that he is equal to him, as being God equally with him : In the fame Manner that a natural Father and Son may be fuppofed to be jointly invefted with the fupreme Government of any one Kingdom. Here as the Fa- ther is King or Supreme, fo is the Son alfo : And yet the (30 the Son, with Regard to the private Relation whk& he bears to his Father, is inferior to him, not as King, but as his Father. And therefore, tho* the mofi: judicious Defenders of the Athanafian Dodrine, have, with Regard to this Expreffior., afcribed a Pre-eminence to the Fa- ther above the Son •, yet they, by no Means, Lave given up the main Point in Quellion ; to wit, whe- ther Chrift be abfolutejy, and in all Refpecls, inferior to God Almighty \ the contrary to which they con^ ftantly afiert, upon the Grounds already eftabiiflied, to wit, that he is inferior to the Father, as he :s his Father; but equal to him, as he is God, he being one God equally with him. This is the Voice of Scripture ; this rs the Voice of God •, and to. this the Reafon and Common Senfe of all Chriftian People mufb ever al- fent j notwithftanding the fallacious Light, rn which you endeavour to repre fen t thefe important "Truths, And thus far, you fee, Sir, how our Lord's own Declarations, rightly and duly compared and confider- ed, do fully authorize the Doctrine of our Church : "Which, however, we own, is not to be immediately and at once obferved by every carelcfs Reader -, but to a Mind, refolved with Attention and Care to read and examine the Foundations of its Faith, as clear and as evident as any other Truths therein contained : And at the lame Time as obvious to the Poor, the Mean, and Unlearned, in the Tranflation before them, as to the Wife and Learned. But you fay. Sir, that inaf much as St. Fcter^ Aols II. 32. declares that this "^'efus hath God railed up ; therefore, Chrifi mull be inferior to God, who raifed him up. But here again you take the Term, God, chjoluteh: whereas it evidently means the Perlon of God the Father : For David, in his prophetic Declarations con* cerning the Mefliah, cited here by this Apodle, ex- prefsly (30 prelsly fays, ihe Lord faid to my Lord, ^c. thereby making the Son as much his Lord as the Father ; as our Saviour's putting the Cafe to the Pharifees^ Matt, XXIL 42, 4g. plainly fhews -, and by giving theni both equally the Character of Lord, as he elfewhere doth that of God, he fhews them both to be equally Lord and God. For tho' the ExprefTion, thy God, Pfalm XLV. 8. makes the Father to be the God of Cbrift j yet it doth not this, becaufe he is underftood as God exclufively ; but as being the Father of God the Son, confidered here as Man ; as the following Expreffion, above thy Fellows^ clearly intimates : For otherwife the Prophet^ calling the Father God, and the Son God alfo, would be edablifhing, not fo much two Perfons, as two dif- tinct Gods, contrary to the exprefs Dodrine both of Reafon and Scripture. The Father of Cbrift^ therefore, being the Perfon here intended by the Appellation of God ; it by no Means precludes the co-operating Power of the Son in railing up the Man Jefus, or re-uniting his human Soul to his human Body; agreeable to the Command- ment, which he had received from his Father, as we have before properly explained it, relative to his Ex- ertion of that Power in this extraordinary Inftance and Proof of his infinite and divine Value. This Text then. Sir, being thus cleared and vin-r dicated from the falfe Confequences, which you would fallen on it ; that, which you build upon the 36th Verfe of the fame Chapter, will be as eafiJy over- thrown. For the Apoftle, to convince the Jews that the miraculous Gift of the Holy Spirit \Y2l^ not the Effeift of Wine, points out to them the Prophecy of Joel, whereby God declares, that, at the particular Time jvhen the Events prophetically defcribed, fhould be fulfilled, this further miraculous Gift of the Holy Spi- rit, C33 ) ril, he would pour out upon his Servants : Which Events he fliews to have been fulfilled, in the Courfe of our Saviour's Miniflry and Sufferings, by the Words of David: W^herein it is plainly intimated that the fame Perfon, whom the Royal Prophet calls his Lord, and the Holy of the Lord, and whofe King- dom he elfcwhere defcribes to be everlafting, is thai ChrisTj which was to be born of D^w^ after the Fk/Jj, to fufFer Death, and to rife again. But it being evident that the Man Jesus v/as born of the Lineage of David-, did fuffer Death and rife again ; it follows that he is alfo the fame with that Lord and Cbrijl defcribed and pre-figniiied by the Prophet •, and whom therefore he argues, in Confe- quence of his being raifed from the Dead and being the divine Perfon before defcribed, as well as the Man Je- fus, to be now, as to his human Nature, exaked to the Riglit Hand of God ; where receiving, in his new Chara6ter of hlb God and Man^ the Power of ful 1^1 ling the Promife of the Holy Spirit from the Fa- ther, he actually poured it down, as the Jc'uds then faw : Which yet, m the Prophet 7<7^/, Goci declares, he himfeif will do \ thereby alfo plainly de-iioting the Divinity of Cbrijl and his Union with the Father; in- af much as he performs what God promifed he him- feif would do. From all which, therefore, the Apoftle would have his Hearers, with himfeif, conclude, that this fame Jefus whom they crucified, God hath made both the Lord and Cbrift •, that is, made it manifeftly appear, by the Completion of thefe Prophefies, at this Time, and in this Perfon, that this fame Jefus is both the Lordand Chrift defigned and pointed out by David. You, therefore, Sir, juftly fay, that the Perfon here called God is the Perfon of the Father : And yet from thence as unjuftly infer that the Appellation, God, never fignifics Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, but D the ( 34 ) the Father only. For certainly you muft allow, that the Addrefs, O, GW, i^c. Pfalm XLV. 7. and as it is apphed by the Author of the Epiftle to the Hebrews^ is to the Son, and not to the Father \ as alfo that of St. nomas : And therefore that Term doth not always fignify the Father. Nay even in this Chapter it is more than probable, it doth not neither always fignify the Father : For when the Jews^ touched and prevailed on by what Peter faid, afl<. What they fhould do ? he anfwers them. Repent and be baptized every one of you in the Name of Jefus Chritl. But the original Inftitution, you know to be exprefsly, in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghofl. And therefore Baptifm in the Name of one only, if otherwife in every Re- fped diftind from the refl, infufficient : The Mean- ing therefore of the Apoftie muft be, that as the three Perfons are comprehended in the one God, and the Name of God, applied to any one of them, doth alfo extend to the other two : Baptifm in the Name of any one of them implying alfo, in the Name of the one God, doth confequently imply, in the Name of the three Perfons. Now this Confequence being plain and undeniable ; fmce otherwife the Apoflle would plainly enjoin a form of Baptifm difierent from that prefcribed by Chrift, and he alfo telling them that, in Confequence of this Baptifm, they fhould receive this Gift of the Holy Sprit ; which yet they could not do, if they were not baptized according to the prefcribed Form, afligns in Conclufion this prevailing and interefting Reafon, that the Promife thereof was to them and their Children-, and not only to them but to all Flefli, to all afar off, as many as the Lord our God fhould think fit to call and invite j wherein, Sir, you are to obferve -, Firfi (35) Firft^ that this Promifc is not confined, as others heretofore, to the Jews only ^ but extended a.'f'.) to xh^ Gentiles: by which we are plainly to underitand, tiiat the Apoftlc here defigns a new Charader ; not the God of Ifrael^ but the God of tlie 7ieiu Covenant. Secondly^ you are to obferve, that this God is defign- ed by the Name of the Lord, the Name which the Apoftle had but juii before proved to be the Name and Character of the MefTiah. And lajlly^ he is called by the Apoftle, not, your God ; tho' he is fpeaking to the Jews^ whofe God, in the Old Teftament^ God, notwithilanding, called himfejf, when they were his chofen and peculiar Peo- ple •, but, OUR God, the God of us, his Apoftles and Difciples who have embraced the Faith of Chj'-iji^ and been bapdzed in his Baptifm \ agreeable to that Defcription o^ Cbrijf., where it is faid, Tbey jhall call his Name Emanual, that is, God with us \ both upon Account of his being for a while upon Earth with us his Apoftles and Difciples, and his being our God in a peculiar Manner, as the Author and Finifher of our Faith, and his remaining with us and all true Be- lievers, according to his Promife, to the End of the World. Nor is it barely upon this Account that he feem.s to be fo called, here, by St. Peter., and the reft of the Apoftles in their Writings •, but in Conformity alfo, not only to the Defcription of him in the 45th Pfalm^ where he is reprefented and called God, in the Manner we "have mentioned •, and pardcularly {^it forth, as the HuftDand or Bridegroom of his Church -, but alfo to thofe Paflages of Jfaiab XXV. 9. XL. 3, 9. LIV. 5, in the laft of which the Evangelical Prophet doth not only infift upon the fame allegorical Reprefentation; but alfo fpecifies the Hufband to be the Maker of his Spoufe, the Church ; her Redeemer, the FIolv One D 2 'of ( 36) of Jfraely the God of all the Earth •, and exprefsl/ de- clares that the Lord of Hofts is his Name. Now if we add to this that the Marriage of the Lamb, the Bridegroom of the new Jeriifalem, in the Revelations^ is a plain Allufion hereto , it not only con- firms what we have here obferved-, but makes it high- ly probable that this Exprefiion of the Apoftle, ^he Lord our God^ means in this Place another Perfon be- fides the Father, in a Way both eafy and obvious to be underiiood : Efpccially if we further confider that thefe Prophecies can be faid in no Sort to be compleat- ed, if v/e do not interpret this and other fuch like Paf- fages in the fame Manner, where the Context fo fairly admits it. The refl: of your Remarks upon St. Peter's, and St. PauVs Difcourfes, as you produce thtm out of the^^j, do evidently turn upon your taking the Term, God, ahfolutcly and excluftvely •, which Fallacy being already fufficientiy deteded ; I fhall only attend you in thofe PafTages, where you feem to place your Ar- guments in a new or different Light. Accordingly you lay no fmall Strefs upon St. PWs calling Chrifty The Man whom God ordained, A3s XVII. But, Sir, in his Converfations, previous to this Dif- courfe, it is evident that he had more largely explained the Chriflian Dodlrine, and even touched upon the Divinity of Chrift, by their calling him a Preacher up of new Gods \ inafmuch as he had preached to them J<^fus and the Rejurre5iion ; and being, there- fore, thro' their Curiofity, led to fpeak again of thefe Matters, he, occafionally, taking the Hint from their acknowledged Ignorance of the true God, points him out to them : And after he defcribes his incom- prehenfible Nature, his Omnipotence, and Omnipre- fence, and the Corruptions of human Nature, which led Men to mif represent thofe great, and, otherwife, plain Truths, he fiom thence, and the Goodnefs of God, (27) God, infers the Neceflity of a general Revelation -, and, in Confcquence thereof, the Obligation upon all Men io verify their Notions of God^ and to repent ; which if they did not^ they were^ at the general Judg- vient^ to account for their Ohftinacy and Difohedience. Which Judgment, then, as he goes on to fhew, that it is to be exercifed in Righteouh-efs by that Man whom God ordained, in Evidence whereof he had raifed him from the Dead ; the Apoftle, upon mentioning this, is interrupted by the Mockings of fome of his Hearers ; and thereby prevented from enlarging upon, and explaining this Point further ; as is plain from the Behaviour of the more moderate of his Hearers : Who, becaufe of the prefent Diftur- bance and Interruption, declare their Intention of hearing him again concerning this Matter. Hence, therefore, it appears, that what St. Paul fays here, is only iatrodudory to what he intended further to fhew concerning Chrifi^ had he not been thus interrupted % and, therefore, no Inference to be drawn, concerning his Senfe of the whole Dodlrine, from this Mention of what was but barely preliminary CO it, and which evidently contains but a fmail Part of the Chriftian Faith. And as you juftly obferve the different Manner in which the Apoftles addrefs their different Kinds of Hearers -, you fiiould alfo have m vre fully and impar- tially reprefented it, and told your Chriliian Readers, I'hat, with Regard to the Jews^ it was necefiary to fhew them, to render their l^aith perfecl in thac Point, that they were to believe an'i rightly to apply the Prophecies concerning the Meffiah\ winch Pro- phecies fully and clearly declared the Mcffah to be of a Divine Nature ; and confequently of the lame Nature with him, v/hom they believed to be then God, mif- tcrioully reprefented under the di(tin6l Perfons of Fa- ther and Son. D 3 That (38) That again, to fhew the fame Jt'ws the full Com- pletion of tbefe Prophecies in the Perfon of Jefus Chnfi^ the Apoftles, by a particular Application of them, demonitrate Jejus to be the Mejjiah^ the only Begotten of the Father, who, upon that Account and wiiih Regard to his Manhood, is fuperior to him, and his God : But as they are both otherwife defcribed un- der the fiime Name, and with the fame Attributes, and exprefsly revealed to be one, and confequently of one and the fame Nature \ which the Apoftles do more than intimate by applying the Defcriptions and Cha- raders of the one God in tht Old Tejlament to Chrift in the Ne%v •, fo the Je'ws are thereby taught to believe thefe two Perfons, upon that Account, to be equally the one God. You ought. Sir, in the next Place, to have told your Readers, as to the Gentiles^ who knew not God, that it was necefiary, firft, to inform them rightly as to that Point -, and then from the probable State, in which they were, to fnew the Neceffity of a Redeemer, who from the Nature of their Sins and the confequent Satisfadion required by God, mufl: appear to be of fuch an infinite and invaluable Nature, as neither Death, nor the Grave, could compafs, or retain. But as the Scriptures are juflly fuppofed, only in a fummary Manner, to deliver theSubltance of what the Apoitles particularly enforced on thefe Occafions ; fo it isreafonable to believe that under each of thefe Heads, they infilled and enlarged upon all the Particulars re- quifite to eftablifli and compleat the whole Chriftian Do6frine. And if fo, it is natural alfo to fuppofe, that, in the Courfe of their Arguments, they at length effe(5i:ed that lull and perfect Conviction in the Minds. of their true Converts, as to be able afterwards to addrefs them, as St. Paul doth the Ephefiari Elders at Miletus, J^s XX. calling them to witnefs that he had declared to them (39) them the whole Council of God, exhorting them, therefore, to look to themfelves and the whole Flock, over which the Holy Spirit had appointed them Over- feers, by feeding the Church of God, which he (God) had purchafed with his own Blood. Now, Sir, in this lad Inftance, you may perceive a different Manner of Addrefs to thofe, who, upon full Convidion have profefTed the Faith of Chrift^- from either of the two former to a6lual Jews^ or Gen- tiles : And alfo what the Sum of that Do6lrine is, which St. Paul^ and, confequently, the other Apoftles, endeavoured to eftablilli in their feveral Ad- drefTes. For, beyond all Contradidlion, here two Perfons are equally called God. Unlefs you put a mod forced and unnatural Conftrudlion upon the whole Paflage ; or allow that the Term, God, in the 27th Verfe, means the entire Trinity. And, moreover, the Holy Spirit is here faid to do, what God is exprefsly declared to perform, by the fame Apoftle, as we have fhewn be- fore, T Cor. XII. 28. Here then are the three Perfons, diilindly fignified ; while two of them are chara6lerized by the Name of God ; and to the third, tho' not exprefsly here call- ed God, the peculiar Office of God is emphatically attri- buted ; who, therefore, with the other two, mufi: be the ONE God bleffed for ever : And yet. Sir, this PafTage you prudently llur over in your 37th Page, by barely alTerting, that the moft antientManufcripus read the Words, The Church of God., The Church of the Lord -, and then boldly appeal to the Learned for the Truth of your AfTertion. But for this your general Appeal to the Learned, you feem to be fupported only by Dr. Clarke, and, perhaps, one, or two, more : But why did not you let your illiterate Reader know, that others as learned (perhaps, I might juftly fay, more candid) and they, D 4 by ( 40 ) by far, more numerous, have, on a critical and im- partial comparing of Manufcripts, clearly decided for the common reading, as it now (lands in our Englijh Tranflation ? Your following Obfervations, therefore, being up^ on PafTages out of the Writings of the Apoftles, ad- dreifed to profeffed Chriftians ; the above may be well looked upon, as a Clue to guide you and your Chrif- tian Readers^ out of any feeming Difficulty, in which they may otherwile, from the Light you are pleaied to put them in, involve unguarded and inattentive Minds : efpecially with Regard to what you produce from St. Paul^ but, left depending altogether upon this, I fhould feem to decline a particular Difcurfion of your Arguments, I fhall be content to follow you clofely Vv'here ever it is neceflary. St. P^?// fays, I Cor. XI. 3. 1'he Head of every Man is Chrift^ and the Head of the Woman is the Man^ and the Head of Chrifi is God. But pray, Sir, is this to be underftood in a literal or figurative ; in a plain, or a myfrerious, Senfe ? Or, which of thefe two do you mean by your plain and proper Senfe ? If the firfu, every Man's Experience, if not your own, will con- tradifl you : But if the laft ; as the Apoftle himfelf declares it to be, Ephef V. 32. and there alfo, ver. 23. explains what he means by Chrill's being the Head of every Man, and the Man of the Woman, when he fays, The Hujband is the Head of the Wife., even as Chrifi is the Head of the Church \ his Meaning here alfo can be no more than this, that as Chrift and the Church are one Body, but Chrift the Head ; and the Man and Wife one Flefh, but the Man the Head ; fo God and Man are one Chrift, but God, the Head. Chrifi\ mediatcrfliip will neceflarily ceafe after the final Judgment: His Kingdom, as Mediator, of the pew Covenant, will then of Courfe ceafe alfo: But the Kingdom and Throne of the Son, as being one God with the Father, is notwithftanding declared to be everlafting, (40 everlafting, and for ever and ever. His Dominion is an re erlafting Dominion. Dcin.^W. 14. ny Throne y OGod., is for ever aitd ever. PfalmXhV. 6. Appli- ed to CbriJ^, Heb. I. 8, and 12. Thou art the fame^ and thy Tears jh all not faiL Again, Luke \. 33. He Jhall reign over the Houfe of Jacob for ever^ and of his Kingdom there floall he no End. It is necefliiry however to obferve here, that the Term, God^ in the 24th Verfe of i Cor. XV. is par- ticularly determined by the additional ExprefTion, even the Father^ to denote the Perfon of the, Father *, while the fame Term, God^ in the 28th Verfe., by the compiehenfive Exprelilon, All in Ml., is defigned to point out the whole Trinity^ now manifefbed, confift- ently to fublift, in the perfed: Unity of the fupreme Godhead. But tho*. Sir, you have hitherto adhered, for the moft Part, to the literal tranflated Senfe of the feveral Paffages by you produced ; and by confining your Readers to that, have drawn your C/)nfequenccs from it ; yet in your Remarks upon Philipp. II. 6, ^c. you chink proper to wave your ufual Method, well knowing it would not fucceed here, and obtrude up- on us a figurative, but forced, Interpretation, as the univerfai Senfe of all the Learned, who have examin- ed this FafTage ; which yet is no more than that of your wonted Leader, Dr. Clarke ; while the Learned Hammond., Pearfn., and many others, evidently flievv the contrary Senfe to be the true Meaning; and which I fhall therefore lay before the plain, unlearned, but fenfible Reader. Do(5lor Clarke., then fays, that the original Word, ver. 6. which is tranflated Form., means only the State of Dominion, of Power, and of Glory, with which the Son was invefted by God before his Incarnation, and by which he was enabled to perfonate and repre- fent Ggd himfelf ; which yet, he owns, to be, in every (42 ) every Refpe6t, oppofed to the lame Word, as it is applied, ver, 7. and which, he confefTes, there to mean the fervile Condition of Humanity, or human Nature itfelf; Chrift^ truly and really, as he acknow- ledges, becoming Man. If then he truly allows this Oppofition, as it evi- dently muft be allowed ; he yet, by his Interpreta- tion, as certainly deftroys it : A State of Dominion and Glory, without the Divine Nature annexed to it, being but an imperfed and partial Oppofition to a State of Servitude annexed to human Nature, or ra- ther implying human Nature itfelf : And therefore, to make the Oppofition compleat, the Word, Formy. in its firll Acceptadon, muft, Vv^ith the State defcrib- ed, comprehend alfo the Nature of God •, as, in it's Second it a6lualiy means, not only the State of Servi- tude, but the Nature of Man alfo, to which that State is annexed. And this thofe great Men, whom I have mentioned, do clearly and learnedly prove, and there- fore no Grounds are left for your rendering it barely, hikenefs. They again. Sir, fliew, with equal Force and Strength of Argument, that the ExpreiTion in the Englijh^ le he equal with God, is the true and proper Senfe of the Original ; and therefore it is equal whe- ther the former Part of the Sentance, Thought it not Robbery^ as it (lands in our Tranflation, or your ren- dering, was not eager to retain^ be the true reading \ tho' it is more than probable our Tranflators have pitched upon the mod proper. This then being: the Cafe, the true Senfe of the whole Paflage will appear to be as follows. Who being in the Form of God {of the fame Nature with God) thought it not Robbery to he equal with God, or, if you will, was not eager to claim the Right of Equality^ {which the famenefs of Nature entitled him to,) but made himfelf of no Refutation {divejled himfelf of that Right i (43 ) Right ; for it is plain he could not diveft himfelf of his Nature) taking upon him the Form (the Nature) of a Servant^ being made in the Likenefs of Men ; andy being in Fafhion as a Man, humbled himfelf (yet further^) &c. And, therefore, from this undeniable Stn^t of this PalTage, it plainly appears that you have grofsly im- pofed upon your Readers. For this exemplary Humiliation of Chrifi^ evidently confuting, firlt, in his diverting himfelf of his Right of Equality with God, and refigning, confequently, his Dignity as a divine Perfon for that 'Time \ and then in taking upon him human Nature, and fubmitting, in that Nature to Death ; St. Faul very properly declares that God exalted him, now in the likenefs of a Man, and gave him a Name, to wit, Jefus^ the Name by which his Humanity is defigned ; in which Name, in Confideration of which Humanity, whereby he be- came the Mediator and Redeemer of the World, every Knee fhould bow in acknowledgment of fuch great Condefcenfion and Love; every Tongue alfo con- feiTing Jefus Chrifi^ the Son of God and Son of Man, to be the Lord: The Glory arifingfrom thisConfeflion redounding alfo to the Glory of God the Father, with whom God the Son is declared to be originally one and the fame, as well in Nature, as in Dominion and Power. But after all. Sir, Do you not perceive how your Interpretation weakens the Argument raifed here by St. Paul, for Humility in the Philippians, from the Son's degrading himfeJf from the Form and Dignity of a divine Perfon, to the Form and Death of a Ser- vant ? For if Chriji was no more than what you fay, he was yet but a Servant •, tho' in an higher Degree : His Humility, then, confifted only in his changing an higher Degree for a Lower, and fubmitting to fuf- fer in this for his guilty Fellow Servants. This in- deed ( 44 ) deed was Condefcenfion and Love ; but not fo great and fingular, confidered in the Light of a Fellov/ Servant -, and of one too, v/ho for fuch Debafemenr, according to you, had the afTured Profpedl of a much higher Advancement afterwards ; which Confidcra- tion mud proportionably lefen the Merit of his Hu- miliation. For tho^ the fame Apoftle makes it barely but a pof- fible Cafe, Rom. V. 7. that for a good Man fome would even dare to die -, while he fcarceJy allows that any one would die for a Man of an inferior Degree of Virtue : Yet, as he onJy fays this to enhance the Love of Cbrifly confidered as a Man, in dying for finful Men ; fo we, notwithilanding, find in tlie Hi (lories of paft Ages, fome rare In (lances of Men in the higti- eft Stations, who have devoted themfelves for their Country, thro' a Pcrfuafion, indeed, of gaining, not only immortal Honour here, but the firfl Place in their fuppofed Regions of Happinefs hereafter : Codrus in the Grecian Hiftory, and the Dedi in the Roman^ arc fignal Inftances of this. The Apoftie then, who muft have known this, raifes accordingly, in his Exhortation here to the Phi- lippians, the Inftances of our Saviour's Condefcenfion, above any publifhed parallel that might be drawn from his being a Servant, tho' iw the higheft Degree, before his Incarnation •, at the fame Time that he fliews that his Merit could not be ]e(rened from a Profpeft of an higher Exaltation afterwards ; when he pronoun- ces him to have been in the Form of God, and equal with God : In which particular aione the Example of his Flumiliation could be altogether new and fingular, and fo ftnking to the Pbilippians^ as to engage them, eftedually, to behave, for the future, with fui table Humility towards one another. Did you, again. Sir, examine and compare the 'whole Context, from whence you cite the Words of ColL (4i ) on. I. 15. with other parallel Places of Scripture and give it its full and fair Force ; your Reader, I am perfuaded, what ever you might do, would draw a quite different Conclufion from that which you would impofe upon him. ^ For that St. Paul calls Chrift the Image of the in- vifible God is plainly founded upon our Saviour's Declarations of his being in the Father, and the Father m htm, and that whoever hath feen the Son hath {it with the Father, thro' the whole NewTeJlmnent. But flill you fay, Sir, the Jatter Part of the Defcrip- tion, zvhich is, which was^ and if to come^ the Almighty^ is peculiar to the Father only. But in this, as in your other Aflertions, you are equally miilaken : For the firft Expreffion, which is, is only peculiarly applied to God, or Jehovah-, and of the other two, we have fliewn the firft to be peculiar to Chrift ; and the laft, which is to come, to Chriji and the Holy Spirit ; and altogether no where applied to God but in this Revelation of this Apoftle : ^ Who, therefore, having attributed, in none of his other Writings, the three folely to the Father j and having, notwithftanding, fhewn how the other two agree to Chrift ^ and che Holy Spirit ; muft mean by the full De- fcription the three Perfons; to each of whom, how- ever, as being now acknowledged to be the^;z^ God m Union with the other two, the v/hole Defcription be- comes at the fame Time equally applicable, as im- plying that Union, and the confequent Communica- tion of the fame Nature to all and each of the Per- Ibns. Neither, Sir^ doth the concluding Epithet, Al- mighty, confine this Defcription to the Father; for tho' Chrift, when particularly mentioned, is never elfewhere direftly called fo -, yet as it appears that he IS frequently called God, with the additional Epithets, the great, over all, bleffed for ever, the true, ^c. And alfo that the fame Glory and Power are attributed to him in the 6th Ferfe^ which he attributes, MatL VI. J 3. to his Father; it muft follow, that if thefe high Charaflers, Epithets, and Diftindlions are attri- buted to him, as being truly God, th^t of Almighty is equally alfo his Due. And, that the Apoftle St. John thought fo, is evident from his Application of the Paflages of Ifaiah ( 69 ) Ifaiah VI. 5. Zechariah XII, 5, 10. direftly to Chrift^ John XII. 41. XIX. 34, 37. whereby he clearly makes the Lord of Hofts, pointed out by the two Prophets, to be the lame with Cbrift. And that he underftood the Lord of Hofls to mean the fame with the Lord Almighty^ is plain from his alluding to the 3d Verfe of the fame Chapter of Ifaiah^ in the ^th V^erfe of the 4th Chapter of his Revelation^ and interpreting the Words of the Prophet, Holy^ Holy^ •Holy is the Lord of Hofts^ into thefe Words, Holy^ Holyy Holy Lord God Almighty, As therefore the exprefs Defcription of Cbrift, Rev, I. II. anfwers to the principal Part of that, ver. 8. fo doth the whole of Verfe 8. anfwer to Omft alfo ; and ^f, from the whole Context, appears to be the Lord who here fpeaketh, and not the Father ; who -otherwife mufl: befuppofed to be introduced fpeaking, for this once, abruptly, and inconfiftently with the plain Connexion of the whole Paffage ; and appro- priating to hi mfelf Characters and Marks, which were never before exclufively attributed to him, and fome of which are the peculiar Charadleriftics of his Son and Holy Spirit: And therefore it manifeftly follows, that the whole Defcription can, with no Sort of Propriety, ht attributed to any one of them, but upon the only true Suppofition of the three Rerfons being the one -God, partaking the fame common Nature; and there- by each conftantly implying, or reprefenting, the •other two. You will, doubtlefs, perceive. Sir, that in the Courfe of this Argument, 1 have taken it for granted, that the Perfon of the Holy Spirit, and none elfe, is 'here defigned by the {tvcn Spirits before the Throne ; according to an ufual Figure of putting the Effedis, the feveral fpiritual Graces conveyed to Mankind, lor •the Caufe and Conveyor of them, the Moly Spirit himfelf. Bus as you fuppofe the Contrary, ic will be •fleGefiary, , before we proceed, to Set forth the Rea- F 3 fons ( 70 ) . fons for my Opinion •, and in doing this I fhall at the fame Time fliew the Difingenuous Ule you make of this Paffage in the 88th Page of your Appeal. For, as there you fay, that the Salutations, in the Beginning of moil of the Epiftles, do not feem to be Prayers, but folemn Wifhes ; fo, to make this proba- ble, you produce this PafTage, as by no means to be underftood to be a Prayer ^ becaufe the feven Spirits, therein appHed to equally with God and Chrift, are, you fay, julily thought to be the fame v/ith the feycn Angels, Chap. VIII. 2. But, I believe, Sir, you will allow, that, of Prayers, with regard to the different Form of Words and Manner of FxprefTion, there may be two Sorts : One dire5f -, the other mdireU. In the former, the Petition is direclly offered up to God : In the latter, it is asked indireclly of, or from, God : While the intentional Ad: of the Mind, in which the true Effence of Prayer chiefly confiils, is the fame in both: The Lordh Prayer^ and all our Prayers formed according to that Pattern, you will grant to be of the former Sort: As are alfo in the Old Tejiament., the Prayer of Solomon at the Dedication of the Temple, and HezekiaFs Prayer upon the Receipt of the King of Jjfyrias Letter. The concluding Prayer of St. Paul., 2 Cor, XIIL 14. ne Grace of our Lord Jefus Chrift,, and the Love of God,, and the Fellcwjhip of the Holy Ghoft he with you all,, Amen. That is, be granted to you all from thefe divine Perfons ; is evidently of the latter Sort : as are again. Gen, XXVII. 28. XXVIII. 3. Ifaac's. blelfing Jacob,, and his benedidory Difmiffion of him to ftek a Wife amongft his Mother's Relations. Now certainly a folemn or pious Wifh for extra- ordinary Bleffings from God, is at leafl, an indirect Prayer : The fame Perfon is invoked in both and in the fame Manner : The general Matter, or Subftance, a Blelfing, or Mercy, afked, is the fame in both ; and the Form of Words and Manner of Expreflion, in t>oth, ( 70 both, equally differ from the Form and Manner, on- Jy, of a dire^ Prayer, the intentional A61 of the Mind being ftill the flime in all. But the particular Reafon for this verbal Difference, 2ls well in iht feveral Salutations mentioned, as in other Ejaculations of the fame Sort, where the Perfon fpeaking is in the fame Manner circumftanced, feems evidently to be this : The Speaker is immediately addreffing thofe, to' whom he writes, and in whole Behalf the Bleffings are afked : His Words, therefore, are dire^ly addreffed to them, whom the Matter of them immediately concerns •, and, confequently, the divine Power which is invoked to grant thefe Bieillngs, is unavoidably and neceffarily mentioned mdireolly and in the third Perfon. But the Words of St. Paul^ all whofe Epiftles, ex- cept one, begin in this Manner, when attentively confidered, will put this Matter quite out of Difpute. He fays, i 'Tim. II. i. I exhort^ therefore ., that^ firji of all., Supplications., Preyers, Inter cejfions., and Giving of Thanks be m.'Je for all Men. iNow, is it to be fuppofed, that the Apollle would enjoin Timothy to do what he did not give an Example of in hniifelf .? Can it be imagined, that, when he requires of him, as the iirft Thing to be done in the Difcharge of his Duty, to offer up Prayers for all Men ; that he himfelf, in the Beginning af his feveral epiftolary Exhortations, would neglect to do the fame in Behalf of thofe, to whom he writes, and for v/hofe S ilvation he other- wife expreffes the greateft Concern ^ Again, when he tells the Ephejians^ Chap. I. 15, 16, 17. that he never ceafes to give shanks for them., making mention of them in his Prayers., that the v ly fame Bleffings, in Effect, may be granted to them, which he had before requefred in his Salutations •, Is it to be thought, that he would have them to look upon the petitionary Part of hi^r Salutation to h- but a hare Wilh, tho' immediately followed by a folem.n Thanld*- F 4 giving? ( 72 ) giving ? Which yet, whenever he offers up fuch ir^ their Behalf, as in this Inflance, he afTures them 'ver. 1 6. is always accompanied with a Prayer, exadly correfponding, m Subllance, to that immediately fore- going his Thankfgiving in the Beginning of this Epiftle. This then feems undeniable •, every fuch Salutation, whei"^ the Cafe admits of it, is conftantly attended with a folemn Thankfgiving : But the Apoftle de- clares, that the Thankfgiving never goes without a Prayer ; of which, however, there is no Appearance but in the Salutadon. Every fuch Salutation, there- fore, mufl be, in the Apoftle's Judgment, truly and properly, a Prayer \ tho' an indire5i one for the Rea- lon already afligned. Now it is evident, that the Salutation of Si. John^ in the Beginning of his Revelation^ is of the fame Kind with thofe of St. Paul-, and confequently, at Jeatl, an indireul Prayer a!fo, attended with a mod folemn Thankfgiving, afcribing to Chrift the highefh Glory in Acknowledgment of the unfpeakable Bene- fits conferred upon us by his feveral Condefcenfions in our Favour. But if it is a Prayer, it then follows, by your own Conceffion, that the {i^vQw Spirits equally therein ad- dreflcd with the Father and Chrift, cannot be the fame with the feven, Angels, Chap. VIII. 2. nor confequently any other created Nature. They muft, then, certainly denote an uncreated Nature : And this, as the Father and Chrift are dif- tinftly mentioned, can be no other than the Holy Spi- rit of God: Which, however, that it fhould be thus myfteriouny exprefied, is only in Compliance to the Courfe of this whole Prophecy •, wherein. Emblems, Allegories, AlIuHons and Figures, are, with peculiar Propriety of Application, conftantly made ufe of to denote the feveral Matters therein contained. The Father himfelf, or, rather, the entire Godhead, is emblem.-i ( 73 ) ^emblematically reprefented. Chap. IV. 2, 3. the Sua no lels fo, under frequent Emblems, Figures, and allegorical Charafters. Tht feven Lamps burning be- fore the I'hrone, IV. 5. and the feve/i Eyes of the Lamb., V. 6. do evidently defign the fame with what is here intended by the feven Spirits. But the feven Lamps, and the ^fZYm Eyes of the Lamb fent forth into all the Earth, do diredly cor- refpond to the Defcription of Zechariab., Chap. IV. 2, 6, 9. where iht feven Lamps in the fecond Verfe .are plainly applied to denote the Spirit of God by the VV^crds of the 6th Verfe, which are fpoken in An- fwer to tht Prophet's Enquiry what this emblematical Reprefentation meant -, this is, fays the Angel Inter- preter., the Word of the Lord to Zerubbabel, faying., not by Might., nor by Power., but by My Spirit, faith the Lord of Hofis. And thofe fame feven Lamps are again, ver. 9. exprefsly faid to be the Eyes of the Lord, as here the Eyes of the Lamb, which run to and fro through the whole Earth. And therefore the feveral emblematical Expreffions, both in the Pro- phet and the Apoftle, do plainly denote the univerfal Influences of the diviyie Spirit. The Nurnber, feven, is ftill preferved, to fhew that the fame Influences v/ere flill intended with thofe in the firft Chapter : As to them the fame Number is given, as well as upon Account of that Number being given to them before in the Prophet, as to denote more parti- cularly, what we have already obferved, the imme- diate Influences of the fame Spirit upon the feven Churches of Afia. And whereas you pretend to fay, with a particular Kind of Strefs, that in all the fubfcquent Adora- tions to God and the Lamb, there is no Inflance of any Sort of Vv^orfhip paid to the feven Spirits ; tho' exprefsly faid, or implied, to be prefent at the fame Time : yet it is as remarkable; which however you difingenuoufly fupprefs, and thereby infidiouOy lead your (74) your Reader to fuppofe the contrary ; that thefe feven Spirits are never ^ice mentioned as joining in any fuch Acft of Worlliip ; tho' all the Reft of the hea venly Hoft, nay every Creature of God thro' the whole Univerfe, are frequently defcribed, in a par- ticular Manner, jointly performing thofe folemn Adls. Since, therefore, it is now plainly proved, that a folemn A61 of Worfhip is in this Salutation olfered up to the feven Spirits •, and that vv^hat they denote is alfo implied in the Defcription, ivbicb is^ which was^ and is to come \ this Silence ftiould rather induce us to conclude, that wherever afterv/ards the fame Defcription of the Deity occurs, receiving Adoration and Praife, theie emblematical Reprefentatives of the Holy Spirit are therein implied as a joint Objedl: of every fuch A<51 of Worfnip •, and not that they are no more than meer idle Spedators of what pafTes between the divine Being, and the feveral emblema- tical Reprefentations of the whole heavenly Hoft of Saints and Angels. The Words then of the 8th Verfe being thus clear- ly proved to be the Words of Chrift •, it is not at all furprifing, that learned and unprejudiced Men fhould conclude, that He, who is exprejsly faid to be the Lord, and not, literally^ made Lord •, as you would have it, and as we have before fhewn to be, by no Means the Purport of what St. Peter fays •, and who is here, Ver. 5. faid to be RpJer^ or Sovereign^ of the Kings of the Earth, and elfewhere King of Kings,^ £ind Lord of Lords^ ftiould be as abfoiutely, and as tru'y Lord and King as the Father -, who freely im- parted to him from all Eternity his Dominion and Sovereignty. The Almighty Son received his Al- mighty Power eternally from his Almighty Father ; and therefore with him is the Almighty God ; whofe .Kingdom is from everlafting to everjafting, and of whofe (73) whofe Dominion there will be no End : And to whom therefore, with the Father, BlefTing and Honour and Glory and Power are afcribed for ever and ever. Rev. V. 13. But his Mediatorfhip, his interceflbry Office, at the Confummation of all Things after the laft Judg- ment, the Son will refign into the Hands of his Fa- ther ; to the End that, all temporary Diftindlions ccafing ; the Reafons for which they were made, .ceafing then, alfo ; and thofe only remaining which .conftitute the eternal Diilin6lion of the three eternal Perfons -, they, the Father, in the firft Place, as being the eternal Fountain of the eternal EiTence of the other two, may appear to be One God, All in All ; that is, the Unity of the Godhead maniteftly appearing al- pgether confiftent with the Trinity of the Perfons. Chpiil indeed fays, and his faying it ought to be fufficient to flop the Mouths of Gain-fayers, that he and his Father are One •, ftriftly and truly, one Being, or one Thing, as you fay ; tho' not in the Senfe, in which you take it. Your Comment is this. Whether the Sheep be in the Hands of the Father ., who is greater than All, or in the Hands of the Son, to whom the Fa- ther hath given them, is one and the fame Thing in Effe5i. Which, if I apprehend your Meaning at all, is in other Words thus ; Whether the Father, who is greater than Jll, and confequently., whofe Power is greater than the Power of any other Being -, or the Son, who is inferior to the Father, and confequently, lefs powerful in Proportion to his Degree of Inferiority, he faid to do any A6l^ which evidently requires almighty Power to perforin it \ the doing of fuch A5t may yet, indifferently, and with equal Propriety, he afcribed to either. Which evi- dently fuppofes, that the Son, being in himfelf uner qual to the A6b, muft at lead receive, by Commu- nication from the Father, as much Power as will make (76) make him equal to it -, and confequently, in thatRe- fped equal in Power with the Father. But this is by no means Chrifi's Meaning ^ for oyr Saviour argues from his Works ; his own proper Works, (the V/orks 'which I do) \ which yet he did in his Father's Name, that is, by his elpecial and im- mediate Appointment , and by the fame Power with which the P'arher worketh •, (for fo to aft in another's Name conftantly means) and confequently, by the in- communicable Power of God -, that he is that divine Perfon, the only begotten of the Father, who was to come into the World ; and therefore the Chift whom the Jews enquired about. Now Chrift either aftually hath, in himfelf, the tower of doing the Works, or he hath not : But if he hath not, he is then here guilty of a mod falfe Prefumption. For, after afljgning the Reafon of the Jews Un- belief, he adds. My Sheep hear my Voice^ and I know them^ and they follow me \ and I give unto them eternal Life \ and they (hall never periJJo .; neither fhall any (any Being whatfoever) pluck them out of my Hand. Wherein afTerting and afiuming to himfelf a Power, which the Jews^ from their natural Reafon, could not but know to be the Power of God alone •, to fhew the Truth of his Affertion, he tells them, that his Father who gave him thofe Sheep, is the God whom they acknowlege to be greater than all ; and out of whofe Hand they mud confequently own none to be able to pluck them : But I affirm, fays he, I and my Father (the God whom you own J are One ; and the Confequence, which he leaves them to draw, is evidently this^ and therefore none jfhall be able to pluck them out of my Hand. Nov/ if the Words of Chrifl:, / and my Father are jone^ are not to be underfiood in the flrift literal Senfe, making Chrift and his Father edentially and truly one Bc:ing \ his Declaration, whereby he abfo- ki.tely (77) kitely and univerfally alTcrts, that no Perfon whatlb- Gvcr ihall be able to pluck the Sheep out of his Hand, is a plain prefumptuous Falfchood : Becaufe, if Chrift and the Father are not one Being ; Cbrifl mud be then, what you contend for, a meer Creature; and therefore it cannot be abfolutely true, that none is able to pluck them out of his Hand : For then the Father, being in every Refpe(5l fuperior to Chrijfy muft be more than able to do it. But to this you will perhaps, fay, that, tho' the Father is able, yet he will not do it. But what Aflurance have you, or even Chrifi himfelf, in this Cafe, that he will not do it ? Chrift, upon your Sup- pofition, is but a meer Creature : And therefore, tho' he be allowed to be the highefi, and moft perfect of all Creatures -, yet with refpecl to the infinite Being, infinitely imperfed : And confequently, there is a PofTibility, at lead, if you allow hmi at tiie fame Time to be a free Agent, of his fwerving from the "Will of God : Which, if it fhould happen, as it i^ no impoflible Suppofition, there is then the highell Probability, nay Certainty, that God would difpiace him from his high Office, and pluck his Sheep out of his Hand. And tht..^fore his pofitive and unconditional Af- fertion, that none fliall pluck them out of his Hand, carries in it a plain and moft falfe Prcfumption : Be- caufe it fuppof.^s that to be impolTible, which is evi- dently otherwife : And his whole Argument is built upon this falfe Principle of taking, abfolutely and univerfally, what can be only allowed conditionally and in Part : Which if he doth, there is then alio an aclual Reafon why God ihould pluck the Sheep out of his Hand, as out of an unfaithful Fland, afcribmg more Strength to itfelf than really belongs to it. But yet it may be faid, that Cbriji's AlTertion is not fo abfolute and univerfal as it is here pretended to be: for Cbrlft^ immediately pronouncing his Father to be g re ate (7^) greater than All, fhews, that his former AfTertion is tcf be underftood with a tacit Exception in Favour of the Father, whom he here plainly allows to be greater than Himfelf But to obviate this ; I would afk, Whether the following AfTertion, and None is able to f luck them out of my Father's Hand^ is at all ftronger, or in any Re- fpe6l different from that which Chrift alTerts of Him- felf? Is there the leafl E^cception implied in it ? And is it not moreover purpofely advanced to prove the exad Propriety and abfolute univerfal Truth of the former ? That it is fo, the Words, / and my Father are One^ which immediately follow, do plainly fhew. For take them in what Senfe you pleafe ; your own Words, in your Comment upon them, allow that they are here, diredly and only, introduced to fhew, that it is one and the fame Thing in Effedt for Chrift to fay. None can pluck the Sheep out of his own Hond^ and to fay, none can pluck them out of his Father's Hand. But if the Son hath not the fame Power to protedl the Sheep that the Father hath. Flow can it be one and the fame Thing in Effect ? Flow can it be as impoffible to pluck them out of the Son's Hand as out of the Father's Hand ? And if it is the Father's Power, and not the Son's, that ffill protects them (which evidently mud be the Cafe, if the Son's Power is infufficient) it is utterly abfurd to fay. None fliall pluck them out of the Son's Hand j when it is evident, they are ftill under the adual Pro- tedlion of the Father i and confequently, in his and not the Son's Hand. The Power then, even from your Senfe of the Words, muft be the fame : And therefore the Fa- ther, in this Refptd at lead, cannot be greater than the Son. But in this Refped chiefly it is that Chrift draws the Parallel here j his Affertion then, in Fa- vour (79) vour of the Father, plainly appears to be advanced to prove the exadt Propriety and abfoliite univerfal Truth of the former in Behalf of the Son ^ who, adnally having the felf-fame Power with the Father, could not be underflood to mean the ieaft tacit Ex- ception on his Father's Account. But certainly. Sir, there is but one infinite Power : This is found in the Fountain, the Father ; and, by eternal Communication, the fame is found aifo in the Stream, the Son. So that if the Fountain and the Stream are one undivided Water, the Attributes of both muft be the fame. To fuppofe therefore an Equality of Power in two Perfons, one infinite and perfect, the other finite and imperfed, and confequently of an infinitely different Nature from the former -, or rather the temporary Communication of the fame infinite Power from an infinite Perfon to a finite One, is fuppofing an abfo- lute Contradi6lion •, a finite imperfed Being, totally different in Nature, aftually endued with the incom- municable Property of an infinite and perfe6l One. And therefore the plain and obvious Inference, which any Man of common Senfe would make, is, that if the Power be the fame, and confequently un- divided ; the Nature or EfTence of thefe two Perfons, in which the fame Power is lodged, mull be the fame and undivided alfo : And, as there cannot be two infinite, two alfpowerful Beings, thefe tv/o Perfons muft, incomprehenfibly, make but One infi- nite^ One all-powerful Being •, and therefore the Words, / and my Father are One, ftridly and literally true. But ftill, to evade the Force of thefe fame Words, you are fain to fay, that the ExprefTion, Jre 0ns ^ is to be taken in the very fame Scnle with that, where- by the Union of the Members of the Church widi one another, and with the Father and the Son, is denoted, ( 8o ) denoted, John XVII. 22. But if the divine Union i«v defcribed in Scripture in a different Manner from the Union of Chriji^s Church, the ExpreiTions, whereby each is defigned, mufl be taken confequentiy in a different Senfe. Now it is certain^ that the divine Union is de- fcribed as immediate, eternal and neceffary ; imme- diate and eternal, inafmuch, as the Son, or Word^ is, John 1. I. faid to be from the Beginning (from all Eternity) with God ; that is. i, John I. 2. with the Father ; and to be fo immediately with him, as to be in the Bofom of the Father, John I. 1 8 ; and that xo intimately, as to partake of the divine Nature, to be really and exprefsly God : And that again fo ne- ceffarily, as that he was in the Beginning truly God, and without him was not any Thing made that was made : And the divine Nature to be fo fully and compleatly communicated to him as to be the exprefs Image of his Father's Perfon, Heb. I. 2. upholding all Things by the Word of his Power. All which Things are again faid, CoL I. 16, 17. not only to be made, in, by, and for him j but to confift in him, to owe their Prefervation to him as neceffarily and as abfolutely as to the Father. Chrift moreover faith, that the Father (adually) dwel- leth in him, John XIV. 10. by Virtue of which a6lual Dwelling of the Father in him, and their im- mediate confequent Union, he at the fame Time af- firms, that not he, but the Father, doth the Works ; which, otherwife, he himfelf both apparently doth, and afcribes to himfelf: From whence immediately in the next Verfe he argues their immediate and ne- ceffary Union *, Believe me, that I am in the Father ^ and the Father in fTie •, cr elfe believe me for the very Work's Sake. But now on the other Hand, the Union of Ch'ift^s Church is certainly defcribed to be no more than mediate. ( 8f ) kiediate, remporary, and arbitrary. Mediate, as be- ing caufed by the interpofition of the Holy Spirit : Temporary, as commencing upon the occafional Mif- fion of the fame Spirit : And Arbitrary, as depending upon the gracious Eledion of God, and even the free Will of Man to receive, or quench, to admit, or rejedl the Motions of the fame Spirit. I'his latter Union hov/ever is plainly fpiritual and figu- rative : The former therefore muft be in a fi:ri(5t li- teral Senfe, and confequently a true effential Union. You next, with regard to the Attributes of God, deny that any of thofe mentioned by you are af- cribed to Chrifb, in the fame high and abfoluteSenfe^ in which they are afcribed to God ; at the fame Time that you allow them to be afcribed to him in an infe- rior Senfe. But, Sir, they cannot be afcribed to Chriji in any Senfe at all, if nor in the fame full and perfedt Senfe, in which they are afcribed to the Father : For they, and all the Attributes of God, are eflentially appro- priated to the divine Nature •, and therefore undeni- ably incommunicable : No lefs therefore than God can be faid to enjoy them , to afcribe them then in an inferior Degree to any other, is to fuppofe them to be, not only communicated, but to be what they are, and lefs than what they are at the fame Time : A Con trad 161 ion, which neither you, nor any other Man living, can ever get over. If therefore Chrift is truly and properly defcribed as knowing all Things and all Men, and fearching the Reins and the Heart, which was never before attributed to any other Being but to God j he muft abfolutely do fo, and that your objecting what he fays, Mark XIH. Matth. XXIV. is of no Force, hath been already fully and fairly fhewn. Further, Chrift's Knowledge of all Men is not de- fcribed by the Apoflle, John II. 24. in a meer hu- G man ( S2 ) rftan Senfc, as yon would have us to think : But he therein plainly delcribes him according to the fuU- Faith and Knowledge, which he, as an Apoftle, was taught concerning him, Jelus Chrift, the Son of God and Son of Man : But if the Apoflles were in fome particular Inftances able to know Men, this was by the Intervention and Aid of the Holy Spirit: Whereas Chrifih Knowledge, tho' he received ic from the Father, is yet as truly and as properly his' own, as it is the Father's \ and as perfedl too, be- eaufe he received it from the Father. For, with regard to this very Point, our Saviour declares to his Difciples, John XVI. 13, 14, 15. V/hen the Spirit of Iruth is come^ he will guide you into all 'Truth \ for he fioall not fpeak of himfelf •, but whatforoer he pall hear^ that fhall he fpeak--, and he will foew you Things to come^ he fhall glorify me ; for he fhall receive of mine^ and fhall Jhew it unto you. Jlll Things that the Father hath^ are mine, therefore Ifaidy- that he fhall 4ake of mine, and Jhall Jhew it unto you. Here evidently the Holy Sprit is to glorify the Son^ becaufe he is to receive from him the further Know- ledge to be imparted to his Difciples ; even the cer- tain Knowledge of future Events, which the Son calls exprefsly his own. Now the Knowledge of future Events is one of the higheft Inflances of divine Omnifcience. But Chrift declares, without the lead Exception or Re- ferve, all Things, v/hich the Father hath, to be his,. (Chrill's own) alfo ; that is, as truly and as properly his, as the Father's, the Right of Property being mutual and equal ; as our Saviour's Words in his Prayer afterwards to the Father, clearly fnev/s, John XVII. 10. M mine are thine, and thine are mine, and J am glorified in them ♦, that is, the Manifeftation of this mutual Property is a clear Evidence of my Right and Title to equal Glory. For tho* thefe Words are fpoken fpoken Immediately of Perfons, and not of Attri- butes ; yet the Property in them being allowed to be mutual, they may very fairly be applied to explain the Senfe of fimilar Words, very nearly in the fame Manner exprefling the like mutual Property of At- tributes. The Omnifcience of the Father^ therefore, is Chnji\ Omnifcience alfo : And confequently, Chrift\ Know- ledge, in the feveral Inflances by you m.entioned. Is as truly and as properly his cwn^ as it is the Father's^ from whom he received it ; and upon that Account alfo equally perfedt. Again, Cbrijl^s Difciples confefs his univerfa! Knowledge, John XVI. 30. In Confequence of which, they declare their Belief of his coming forth from God : From whence you argue that he was not God, becaufe they only faid that he came forth from God ♦, that is, they acknowledge him to be endued with God's Omnifcience, and therefore not God : A Confequence, you fee, abfolutely falfej and therefore it's Contrary inconteftably true. For when they confefs that he came forth from God, It is manifed, by our Saviour's Difcourfe, that, by God, they here mean the Perfon of the Father, from whom Chriji^ as they confefs, came forth, and with whom our Saviour had before declared himfelf to be One ; agreeable to which they acknowlege and confefs his univerfal Knowledge, of which, as being one God with the Father, he is certainly pofTefied : But now appearing in the World in the Form of Man, they humanly exprels his Appearance as com- ing forth from God. When St. Paul tells us, Philipp, IV. 13. that he can do all Things ; he at the fame Time tells us, how he Is enabled, through Chrift", who ftrengtheneth him. And t\\t Holy Spirit was to teachdie Apoftles all Things, neceffary for them to know, and not abfolutely all G 2 Things. ' ( 84 > Things. ChrifHans, alfo, know all neceflary Things- by the ipiritual Undion. All Things, therefore, here relate only to all neceiTary Things relative to the Du- ty of Apoftles and Chriftians ; and not all Things in the lame abfblute Scnfe, in which Chrift is faid to know all Things. The Power of knowing and fearching the Hearts of Men is undoubtedly a ftrong. Proof of our Saviour's a*eal infinite Perfedions : And, unfortunately for you, the Argument, which you have fet down, is proof againfl all your Attempts to overthrow it. For in order thereto, you are obliged poorly to beg. a Qyeftion, which will nev^er be granted you, to wit, that God might communicate the Knowledge of the Hearts of Men to other Beings ; which is juft the fame Thing as to fay, that God might communicate his in- communicable Knowledge to other Beings : The Ab- furdity of which muft be manifefl to every one at firit Sight. For certainly God's Knowledge is the fame in One, as in any other Inftance ; but in every conceivable In- flance, it is not only infinite, but peculiar and eflential to the divine Nature : For the Knowledge of God implies the Knowledge of an infinite all-perfe6t Being, To fuppofe, therefore,, the Knowledge of God com- municated to any other Being,, is to fuppofe a finite Being ad:ually poflefied of an infinite Perfedlion : And to fuppofe a Portion of it only communicated, is to fuppofe the fame Knowledge to be infinite, and finite zi the fame Time. But to this you will fay^ that human Knowledge is but an inferior Degree of divine Knowledge •, if there- fore, it is communicated in Part to Men ; why not flill in an higher Degree to higher Beings } But, Sir, human Knowledge differs, not only in Degree, but totally in Kind, from divine Knowledge : For, if it was of the fame Kind, it would be infinite and per- fed^ ( 85 ) fe(51:, contrary to Experience and Facb : A.ncl a finite Being, as before, would be adlually poflcfTed of an infinite Perfedion : For that which is infinite and per- fedl admits of no Degrees. Human Knowledge, therefore, is Knowledge, improperly fo called, or ra- ther no Knowledge at all, in Comparifon with that which is truly divine. Your infilling, therefore, that Chrift's Knowledge 'is not as perfe£l as the Father's, becaufe Chrift fays he received it from the Father, doth rather moft ftrongly prove the contrary. For thereby it is manifeft, that it is the very fame Knowledge with the Father's ; for .-who knoweth the Father, but the Son ; who received his Knowledge from the Father-, and that in the very fame Manner as the Father knoweth the Son ? John .X. 15. Here then it is manifeft, that the Son's Knowledge is difi^srent from all human Knowledge, ,and yet the very fame with the Father's, becaufe he received it from him. And, therefore, fince no finite imperfed Creature can have fuch Knowledge, Cbrifi muft be of an infinite and perfedl Nature ; and confe- -quently of the fame divine Nature with the Father. You again infift,. that xhis high Knowledge was not vouchfafed to Chrift:, 'tiM after he had finidied his Work upon Earth 3 'till he had received the Book out of the Hand of God, as ^ Reward for his paft Hu- miliation and Sufferings J ^nd this you infer from Rev. V. 9. But if this was the Cafe ; How comes it to be de- clared, before his Death, th^t he kne.w all Things ; that he had the Words of eternal Life ? Or how is this confiftent with his own Declaration, that the Fa- ther ftieweth to him all Things that himfelf doth .; that all Things that the Father hath are his own alio ; :that he adluaily exifted from the Beginning with the jFather, and is in the Bofom of the Father ? Certain- G3 ly. ( 86 ) ly. Sir, you have flrained this Expofition a little to far. Nor is it in any Sort> as a Reward, the Opening of the Book is allotted to him •, but becaufe he was only able to open it j becaufe he had already evidenced his Refolution and Power, by fubmitnng in the Flefh to the bitterefl Sufferings (true Patience being the high- eft Inftance of Fortitude) and by raifing himfelf from the Grave, and thereby overcoming Death and Plell. It is not the Merit of his Humiliation and Sufferings, which entides him to open the Book •, but it is the Confideration and Remembrance thereof that give the heavenly Choir Affurance that he can, and will open it. For it is obfervable, that they fing this Hymn of Praife to him, before he hath opened one Seal, im- mediately upon his taking the Book into his Hand. Your m.aking, therefore, his Knowledge of all Things to be but gradual, hath no Foundation in Scripture with regard to his being the eternal Son of God. And your Objection, drawn from his faying that the Son knew not the Day of Judgment, hath been already obviated. The Eternity of Chrift's Nature hath alfo been al- ready fliewn from other Texts befides that of his be- ing Jlpba and Omega, &c. particularly from John I. i. as alfo from the Application of the Pfalmiji'^ Words, CII. 25, ^r. by St. Paul, Heb.l. 10. Your wrong Tnterpretation of the Words, The Firjl-horn of every Creature, CoL L 15. hath been, alfo, already manifefted in fuch a Manner as no Force againft his Eternity can be thence derived to your Argument. But the fame Argument?, which you bring againft Chrift\ Omni pre fence, will equally hold againft the pmniprefcnce of God: For if Chrift is fent by, or com- eth forth from the Father, the Father fends him forth from hirn ; and if going from the Father limits him v/ ho goes, it limits him alfo who is gone from; the Words ( 87 ) Words being Words of PJace with refpedl to both ; and confequently, as expreffive of Limitation with regard to the Father as to the Son : They mil ft there- fore be underftood figuratively, and, as they are evi- dently ineonclufive againft the Father*s Omniprefence, fo are they alfo againft the Son's : And when Chrip fays, M^//. XVIIl. 20. Where two or three are gather- ed together^ &c. he doth not confine his Prefence to any one Aflembly at any one Time ; but extends it to all pofTible AfTemblies of the Faithful at the fame Time ; which is the Privilege, or Power of God alone. But if you here explain his Prefence, by his fend- ing of the Spirit of the Father, which yet the Words by no Means admit, you muft then allow the Omni- prefence of that Spirit -, and, confequently, the divine Nature refiding therein, which only can be a6lually and really omniprefent, contrary to the Do6trine you hereafter endeavour to eftablifn with regard to that Spirit. So, that. Sir, you fee, the Arguments you advance in one Cafe, prefs you unanfwerably in another; the very Method of R^afoning, which you take to over- throw the Omniprefence of Chrift^ equally affecting that of God ; and yet unavoidably proving that of his Spirit: Which laft, if allowed, doth, notwithftand- ing, by a perverfe, backward Chain of Argument, efta- blifli the two former ; the Holy Spirit being as ex- prefsly and as diftindly called the Spirit of the Son, as of the Father. Your Attempt to overthrow the Force of that Text in St. John III. 13. fhews indeed your blind AHed:ioa for your Leader therein ; who, notwithftanding his Skill in Criticifm, hath made two ExprelFions parallel; in which, however, any impartial Judge of the Greek Language muft fee a \vide Difference, G 4 Tte ( S8 ) The Particle, noWy relating to the prefent Time, joined to the Verb, fee^ in the Expreflion, John IX. 25. plainly denotes an imphed Oppofuion between the prefent and pad Time ; and therefore the original Participle, in the fornni r Part of the fame Expreffion, being in the prefent Tim^^ alfo, to give it a pad Sig- nification ; a Particle, denoting tht- T' me pad, muft be evidently fupplied by the Mind of the Reader: And then the true, rnental Reading, ^xpreffive of the two plainly oppofed Times, the patt and the prefent, will be literal 'y thus, 7, being (before blind^ now fee. But to give the fame ( .iginal Participle, in the Words of our Saviour, JohnlW. 13. a paft Significa- tion, would reduce the Sentence into a riat and need- lefs Repetition of what was iumciently exprefled al- ready : For he, who immediately before was faid to have come from Heaven, muft be fuppofed to have firft been in Heaven. Your Difi:in6tion between the Omnipotence of God and that of Chrifi hath been already proved fallacious and ground lefs •, the Power of God being fhewn to be the Power of Cbrijl : As alfo that he is perfonally call- ed Almighty^ Rev. I. 8. And in many other Paffages it appears, by plain Implication and dired Inference, to be as much and as truly his Charadter, as the Fa- ther's. As to the Immutability, or Unchangeablenefs, of Chrifi: as God ; the Texts by you produced to dif- prove it, do, notwithfi:anding, moft flrongly eft^- blilh it. Your Reafons againfi: the Inference from, Heb. I. 12. are, firft, becaufe it is not Jikely that the Apofile fhould apply this to Chrifi: ; becaufe he had declared ver. 2. that God, by his Son, made the Worlds; and fo would be guilcy of a needlefs Repetidon. But certainly the Repetition would be much moi'e needlefs with regard to the Father, whom he hath already (89) already declared to have made the Worlds : And what doth he do now more than tell us fo again ? Unlefs you would have it to be a Revocation of what he faid be^ fore •, and that the Father abfolutely alone, and by himfelf made the Worlds -, and the Son, contrary to his former Declaration, had no Hand at all in their Formation. But this, you mufl confefs, cannop pofTibly be the Apoftle's Defign. His true Reafon then muft be to fhew the Foun- ,dation and Grounds, upon which he declared, ver. i, that God, by his Son, made the Worlds ; and alfo the Juftnefs and Propriety of his calling the Son, God, as well as the Father : That is, in other Words, to fhew, that the Son is perfedly qualified for this joint Work of Creation, and a proper Objedl of the divine Worlhip here afcribed to him. But to un- derftand the Words to be applied to the Father, by no Means anfwers this End of the Apoftie : They muft therefore be underftood to be applied loChriJl-^ v/hom thereby the Apoftie plainly makes to perform the Works of God, and to partake his moft effential Attributes. Secondly, you infift, that the Words, And thou Lordy &c. ver. lO. are moft naturally referred to God the Father, in order to eftablifti the higheft Af- furance of the Continuance of 'Cb}-ft\ Kingdom, as being given to him by that fupreme Lord, whofe Power and unchangeable Nature the Pfalmiji fets forth. But this Sort of AfTurance was evidently quite un- necelTary ; the Po'v^r and unchangeable Nature of God being aJr-ady fuilicientiy known and acknow- ledged by them, to whom tb/j Apoftie writes. But cnat, which he labours to convince them of, is -, that Chrifi is of fuch a fuperior Exct^llence to Mofes^ and conftquently, the Gofpel of ib much the more uniyerfal Force and Intiucnce tlian ih^ Law, that (9o) that they may be well afTured from thence, that God wiJl make no future Alteration in the Chrijlian Dif- penfation to the Difadvantage of Chrijly as he had now made in the Mojaic to the manifeft Difadvan- tage of Mofes. Aad therefore, tho' the Pfalmift^ in thefe Words, doth plainly iiti forth the Power and unchangeable Nature of God ; yet it is as plain, that the Apoftle is here profefledly letting forth the extraordinary Na- ture and Excellency of the Son : And to that End applies feveral Paflages of the Pfalms as immediately fpoken by the Father, and diredly addrefled to the Son. The Words of the 8th and 9th Verfes are evi- dently ufed in this Manner and to this Purpofe •, but the Words of the loth, nth, and 12th Verfes, tho' taken from a different Pfalm, are yet fo clofely con* peded with the former, that they cannot but appear to be the Words of the fame Speaker. For, befides the Force of the copulative Particle y/W, which is not a Part of the Pfalmiji*s Words •, and therefore plainly intended by the Apoftle to conneft what follows with the foregoing ; his Queftion, at the Clofe of the Whole, But to which of the Jngels faid he at any 'Time^ &c. clearly fhews, that the whole of what he had hitherto repeated, was here introdu- ced as fpoken by the Father : And therefore, as the two former Verfes were addrefTed to the Son, the three latter are addrefTed to him alfo : And not one Part an Addrefs of the Father to the Son, and the other, inconfiftently and unnaturally, an Addrefs of the Father to himfelf. But I cannot fee, in your third Reafon, how the Pfalmift's inferring from this very PafTage the tempo- ral Duration of the Children of God's Servants, can be applied to infer the eternal Duration of Chrift\ |Cingdom. Becaufe God gives a finite Duration to one (91 ) one Being, Can It be inferred meerly from thence, that he will give an infinite Duration to another ? Can an Argument, which oply concludes particularly, be ever brought with the fatrie Force to conclude uni- vcrfaliy ? Aware indeed of this you immediately add, thar, the Eternity of Chrift's Kingdom is therefore rather inferred, becaufe he was anointed by the fupreme Lord of all Things for that very End. But if this efpecial Anointing implies the eternal Duration of the Office, in the Ferfon anointed ; the Prophet Ifaiah then, who Chap. LXI. j. declares himfelf to be a- nointed by the Lord into the prophetic Office, muft be eternally in the a6lual PofeiTion of that Office ; but this is evidently falfe in Fa6l. And therefore jTuch Anointing implies no fuch Duration. Upon the whole then. Sir, it is plain, that you have here grofsly mifreprefented the Apoflles true Scope and Defign : Which being clearly now no lefs than to fliew the eternal Continuance of Chrift\ Kingdom from the Eternity of his Nature ; he could not give a ftronger Afiurance of it than this of the Father fo folemnly declaring it ; and that in the very Words wherein his own Power and Unchangeable- nefs are fet forth, Ffalm ClI. which therefore is not only a plain Acknowledgment of xxi^ Father that the Son is, of his own immutable Nature, but that he is alfo tiire6liy, and as abfolutely the Creator of all Things, as he himfelf hath always been acknow- ledged to be. Your Endeavours, in the next Place, to evade the Force of the other Text, Heh. XIII. 8. are not only weak and trifling, but fhameful and mean : For, if Jesus Christ is put here only to denote the Faich and Dodrine of Chrift^ you could not but fee, that the Unchangeablenefs of the Dodrine is inferred from the Unchangeablenefs of Chrlji. For othcrv/ife i^^(t Unchangc- (92) Unchangeablenefs of Chhjl could not be put to de- note the Unchangeablenefs of the Dodrine. So that you mud, to your Shame, own the Defcription to be literally and diredly true of Chrift •, while it is only figuratively and indiredly true of the Dodrine. But this Defcription being plainly an AUufion to the Words of the 12th Verfe of the firft Chapter of this Epiftle, quoted by the Apoftle from the i02d Pfcdm^ wherein the Ffalmift diredlly fets forth the Immutability and Eternity of God, you did well to infift only on the figurative Senfe, at jthe fame Time that you difingenuoufly negled the only Foundation for it. That the Works of Creation and Prefervation are judly applied to Chrift^ the Scriptures afford mofl: ample Aflurance : For tho' Chrift is never diredlly in Terms ftiled the Creator of Heaven and Earth -, yejC we have but juft now fliewn that he is flrongly in Senfe declared to be fo. The fame is manifeft from Hel. III. 3, 4. where Chrift is diredlly faid to be the Builder of Mofts ; that is, of the Jew'tjh Church ; and immediately af- terwards, he that buik all Things is exprefsly declared to be God. But if Chrift be not God, it is not true that he built Mofes^ or the Jewiftj Church, becaufe God, who built all Things, built that alfo : But it is true that Chrift built Mofes^ or the Jewifto C\\uxc\\ \ becaufe the Apoftle declares it. Chrift therefore muft be God^ v/ho building all Things, built Mojes^ or the Je\Juifio Church, alfo. As he is here, therefore, as well as elfewhere, de^ clared to be God in as full, as Xrue, and as proper a' Senfe as the Father ; his almighty Power, as we have ■alfo before fliewn, is plainly therein more than im- plied. And tho' from a magnified Diftin6liona which hath been fliewn* to be groundlefs and imagi- nary, * "Efliiy towards an Anfwerlto the Eflay on Spirit, p. 153. tbe Note. ( 93 > ?iary, he is by you fuppofcd to be only an inferloF' Infirument in the Hands of God ; yet from the Ex- prefTions themfelves, he is evidently not only a con- llantly concurring, but a necefTurily concurring Caufe in the Creation of all Things. For, firft, fays St. John, he was (not only) in the Beginning with God, hut he was himfelf God ; tJiat is, he was eternally with God the Father, and being confequently of the fame divine Nature, was God the Son ; adding immediately, to diftinguifh the Perfon of the Son from the Fci fon of the Father, the fame was i7i the Beginmiing with God. Now, becaufe God the Fatiier truly created all Things-, God the Son, as being One God with the Father, muft as truly have created all Things alfo : But becaufe the Father and the Son are reprefented as two diftin^l Perfons, to keep up the Diflindion, the fame Adions are, diiierently, applied to each ; tho' they are equally faid to tend to the Glory of both. For of Chrifl: it is faid,. Col. I. 1 6. All Things were created hy him and for him. And of the Father it i3 faid. Rev. IV. ii. Thou hafl created all Things, and for thy Pleafure they are, and were created -, which lliews them at lead co-operating to the fame End. The Apoftle John therefore, ftill fpeaking of the Son, fays. All Things were made by, or, thro* him ; and not of, or, out of him ; thefe latter ExprefTions being peculiarly referved to diftinguifh the Perfon of the Father. But to fhew the Son's conftant Concurrence, at leaft, St. John further adds. And without him was not an^ Thing made, that was made : And, indeed the Addi- tion of thefe Words to the former, which in them- felves fully and ftrongly exprefs the Creation of all Things whatfoever by the Son, feems to imply fome- thing more, not only a conftant, but a neceflary Con- currence, ( 94 ) currence. This however from what St, Paul fays; Col. I. 17. may be clearly inferred. He is before all Things^ fays that Apoftle, and ifi him all Things conjijl ; agreeable to what he fays of the Son, ileb. I. 3. Upholding all 'Things by the Word of his Pozver. Both which Paffages, that we here rightly render and apply fhall bv^ prefently fhewn. If then he was before all Things, and in him all Things confift, upheld by the Word of his Power % it mufl: follow, that they cannot confifl but in him, the Conftitution of their Natures being fo framed as necelTarily to depend upon him. And if they can- not confift but in him, and were all created by him ; it muft alfo follow, that they could not be created without him : For to be able to preferve any Confti- tution necefTafily requires a thorough Knowledge of that Conftitution. But he only, that made it, can have fucli Knowledge •, and therefore all Things, as they cannot be preferved without him, fo neither could they have been created without him ; which to fay of a meer Inftrument, is to make that Inftru- ment fo neceflary as that without it no Work could be done. But as this would confine too much the Power of God, who would feem thereby to be tied down to this Inftrument and no other •, to remove this abfurd Notion of the Deity, he, without whom nothing was made, and in whom all Things confift, muft be fuppofed to be, actually and truly, what the A- poftle defcribes him, God ; that is, of the fame di- vine Nature with the Father ; with whom co-opera- ting, therefore, as One God, he, with the Father, muft have created all Things. But if ftill, as you infift, Chrift is but an inferior Agent, for a meer pafTive Inftrument, you cannot, with any Reafon, fuppofe him to be -, his being not- withftanding fo conftantly necelTary as tjiat without him { 95 ) him was not any Thing made, that was made, and In him all Things confift, is ablblntely inconfiftent with what God fays, Ifaiah XLIV. 24, G'^. where he refcrves to himfeJf, not only the Works of Creation, but Prefervation alfo : For if he is fo neceflary ; God mud have received, and doth iliil receive fomeKind of Afliftance from him 5 otherwife he is not necef- fary at all ; and it is not true what the Apoftles fay, that without him was not any Thing made that vms made^ and in him all Things conftfi. Admitting then the Neceffity of even the Sub-a- gency of Chrifi^ which cannot be denied, without de- nying the true Force of the Words of each Apoftle, this Confequence is undeniable : But then to pre- ferve the fupreme Power of God from abfurdly (landing in Need of any inferior AfTiftance, it is equally unavoidable to fuppofe Chrift to be no lefs than God, and confequently, one God with the Father. Your Inflance, therefore, to prove the Confiftency of God's Declaration in Ifaiahy with the Suppofition of an inferior, neceflary Agent, is by no means appo- fite, or to the Purpofe -, unlefs you had likewife fhewn, that God could not bring about his intended Providences by the Intervention of other Means, or another Inflrument, but that, by which he effeded thefe ; for, tho'* it is properly faid^ that God done did. lead him, Ifrael, fc?f, when it is alfo faid^ he did it by fns Angel, or Mofes •, yet, if it is not faid alfo, that nothing, that was done, was done without his Angel or Mofes y this latter Cafe muft be totally different from the former ; and therefore of no Force in the prefent Qiieflion. For it is quite different to fay, that God made all Things by his Son, who is always fo neceffarily with him, as that without him was not any Thing made that was made j and to fay, that Cod did any one par- (96) J)!irtlcular A61 by an inferior Mefienger, or SeN vant, ading only by the occafional Authority of God for that Time : For as the Son is, evidently, from the Neceffity of his Co-operation, a Partaker of the divine Nature, and confequently God ; fo when it is faid that God doth any Thing by his Son, the PerfoJi of the Father can be there only^mcanti and the A6t underftood to be the joint Adl of Father and Son. But in the latter Cafe, it being the fole Power of God, by which the A6t is performed, either, medi- ately by his Angel,, or Servant, or, immediately, by himfelf ; the A6t is truly and properly faid to be the A(5l of God alone : But then the Term, God, is e- qually applicable to all, or any of the three Perfons in the Godhead. Your Reprefentatlon, therefore, of C?/.I. ly. l>y him all Things confifi^ is not the true one, for it is lite- rally, IN Him all Things conjlft ; agreeable to the diftinft Force of the fame Particle, in the foregoing Verfe, from the other Particle, by, or thro', ufed afterwards in the fame Verfe, as we have before fully fhewn : And, according to this Reading only, is it parallel to, Heb. I. 3. where the Son is faid to uphold all Things by the Word of his Power, But, to make out your Senfe, you fay, his Power means the Power of God the Father, contrary to the true Senfe and Meaning of the Apoftle's Words. For if the Son is the Brightnefs (literally. Efful- gence, or Shining forth) of the Father's Glory; that Glory mufl be adtually cpmmunicated to him, in order to its fhining forth in him. And if he is the exprefs Image of his Perfon, he muft be adually poffelfed of every elTential Quality, or Attribute, that diftinguifhes the Father, except that one, where-^ by he is the Father. For ( 97 ) For the original Word, which is here rendered exprefs Imagc\ means fuch a Reprefcntation as cha- raderiitically, that is, exaftly and minutely m every Refped, defcribes or exprcfles the Thing reprefented ; And therefore it is thereby plainly intended, that every Quality, or Attribute, necedaiy to ditlinguifli the Perfon of the Father, is adtuaily exprefled or dif- tinguiihed fully and perfedlly in the Son. But God's Power is Part of his Glory, and alfo one of his molt efiential Attributes : The Son there- fore is afluaily pofTeffed of the fejf fame Power with the Father ; fince otherwife he could not be, in this Refpe6l, the exprefs Image of the Father. The Apottle therefore diredly means here Cbr/fi's Pov/er, aetually refident in him, by immediate and adual Communication from the Father ; fo as to be- come a full and perfcffl Reprefentation of the Fa- ther's original Powder : And therefore the Son is diredlly faid to uphold all Things by his own Power, in as full and as perfedl a Senfe as the Father : And confequently, is no inferior Infirument in the Go- vernment of the World. But f!:ill you fay, that the fame Apoflle, CoL I. 15. declares the Son to be the Imao;e of the invifible God ', and as Man, tho' exprefsly faid to be made in the Image of God, is far from being God ; fo it is impofTible the Son can be that very God, whofe Image he is, tho' in a much higher Senfe than Man. If by an higher Senfe, you mean only, in the fame Manner, tho' in an higher Degree, as it is much to be fufpecSted you do ; the Scripture affords not the lead: Foundation for this -, but if you thereby mean, a different Senfe in every Refped:, which is indeed the Truth, your Iliuilration is nothing to the Purpofe. H Bur, ( 98 ) But, be this as it will ; 6"/. Paul here plain]/ un- derftands, by the invifible God, the Perlbn of the Father : For, ver. 9. he acknowledges to have pray- ed, that the Colojfians may be filled with the Know- ledge of his (Cbriji's) Will ; whom again, ver. 10. he calls, the Lord ; and in the Conclufion of the fame Verfe, plainly interprets the Knowledge of Chrijl's Will to be the Knowledge of God •, as ap- pears from his going on ftill, in the next Verfe, to fpeak with immediate Reference to Cbrijl-, from whom, ver, 12. and not till then, he pafles to give Thanks exprefsly to the Father, thereby manifeftly diftinguiflied from the Perfon to whom he gave the Appellation of God, ver, 10. and this, not only a- greeable to St. Johns Dodlrine, I. 18. and to the Words of Chrift in the fame Gofpel, XIV. 9, 10, II, but to what he himfelf hath frequently declared, J^s XX. 28. Rom. IX. 5. I Tim. III. ,16. Heb. I. 8, 9, y^. Chrid then is the Image of his invifible Father,- and not that very Father, becaufe he is his Son. But, upon that very Account, partaking of his divine Nature, he is one God with the Father, // fleafing the Father that in him fiooiiU all Fullnefs dwell , who o- therwife could not be his exprefs Image. For it by no Means follows, that, becaufe Chrift is called the exprefs Image of his Father, he is there- fore of a different Nature. It is faid of a Man, that he is the very Pidure or Image of his Father \ but furely it doth not follow, that he is a Brute or a Plant, becaufe his Father is a Man. But from the laft quoted Words, Col. I. 19. you feem^ to triumph and fay, that it is owing to the good Pleafure of the Father, that the high Charac- ters, fet forth in this Chapter, are juftly afcribed to Cbrifi, But ( 99 ) But Is it not as evident iVom hence, that all Full- hefsadually dwelleth in Chrift^^% that it is derived to him from the Father? And is it not equally evident, from the fame Words, that he, as the Son, is as fully perfect as the Father ? What then doth your Inference mean, but that Chrifl, owing all to the Father's good Fleafure, is not of x^iMt fame Duration with the Father ? As if it was thereby plainly inti- mated, that \yt began not to exift till it pleafed the Father ; and conlequently, there was a Time when he did not exifl •, and therefore but a meer Creature. But, pray, Sir, doth riot all Fullnefs dv^ell alfo in the Father ? To this, I believe, you v/ill not chufe to anfwer in the Negative. You mufl then give me Leave to afk you another Qtiellion ; which, tho' often before put to your Friends, hath never yet been anfwered : Doth this Fullnefs dwell in the Fa- ther according to his good PJeafure, or doth it not? When you anfwer this Qiieftion, I doubt not blic you will furnifli me with a. more fufHcient Anfv/er to your Objedlion here. For really, at prefent, I can- not fee how it follows from the Father's willing, that all Fullnefs fhould dwell in his Son, that he could not eternally have willed it. If this doth not follow, as I am fure it doth not, the Temporality of the Son can in no Sort be concluded from the Faf- fage, taken in a Senfe the mod favourable to your Principles. But after all, your Infinuations, that thefe Texts,' which are fo llrong in making Chrifl the Creator of all Things, are, by many judicious Chriftians, under- ftood of a moral Creation, or an Introduction of a new State of Things by Jesus Christ : As it fhews a manifeft DifBdence in the Strength of your Caufe, fo doth it feem infidiouHy defigned to lead your Rea- der into a Sufpicion of the Reality of every Thing, or Dodrine, delivered in the ISlevo 'tefiamsnt. FI 2 But, ( 100 ) But, Sir, you mull give me Leave to inform the Unlearned Reader, that thofe judicious Christians are no other than the Followers of one Socinus, who lived about the latter End of the 15th Century^ and who affirmed and taught, Chrift to be no more than a meer Man, never before exifting 'till he was born of the Vi rgin Mary -, to fupport which Doc- trine, he and his Follovv-ers have moft prepoileroufiy wrefted the Scriptures : For a further Account and Confutation of whom,. I fliall refer the Reader to Archbishop Tillotson's fccond Sermon on the Divinity of Chrifi. Having thus, Sir, fully fhewn the Weaknefs of what you are pleafed to offer againft thofe Parts of Scripture, which defcribe Chrift to be God in as high a Senfe as the Father; your Apollinarian Doc- trine will receive an eafy Confutation. For admitting his divine Nature, which is incapable of fuffering ; the Anathanafian Do6lrIne, as you are pleafed to call it, of his affuming an human Soul and an human Body, will undeniably follow. Your Af- iertion, therefore, that this Doi^trine is the pure In- vention of learned Men, is notoriouPiy falfe, the Scriptures plainly teftifying the contrary. For tho' it is faid, l^he Word was made Flejb •, yet it is notorious, that, in the Language of Scripture, the Word, Fkjh^ which is ftrictly, indeed, but one Part of Man, yet by a frequent and uilial Figiu'e denotes tlie whole Man compofed of Soul and Body ; as the Word, Soul^ on the other Fiand, is often put for the whole Man, or Perfon. And if it is faid, that God fent forth his Son made oi a Woman •, fl;ri6lly and literally, that cannot be true; the Son of God, accord- ing even to your own ConfeiTion, fubfifting perfedtly as fuch before he was fo born. The Expreffion, therefore, muft mean that Part of him only which he received from his human Mother; which ( loi ) which Part his Mother produced as fully and as per- fecftiy made of a Woman, as other Women produce their Children. For every Man that is born is faid to be made of a Woman ; and yet every fuch Man confifts of a Soul and Body ; without both which he could not be a Man, or made of a Woman. Again, Sir, the Exprefiion, a Body^ Heh. X. 5, 10, which you feem to infifl: on fo much, is only there ufed in Oppofition to the Bodies of the ineffec- tual Sacrifices of Bulls and Goats : But even they arc not to be fuppofed meer Bodies without Life, 'till after they were facrificed ; the very Word in the Greek plainly implying an animated Body, a Body with the Blood in it, that is, the Life ; .and confe- quently, when fpoken of a Man, the Soul is under- itood as well as the Body, which, .both together, compofe the animated human Body- As you have then. Sir, unfairly reprefented the ■true Force and Meaning of thefe fcripturai Expreffions, you as falfely affirm, that it is no where faid, in the Word of God, that Chriit confifts of a divine Nature, Soul and Body. For that the Nature, which he had before his In- carnation was truly divine, hath been already proved fi'om the exprefs Words of Scripture. But this, you own, incapable of any human PafTion or Suffering. We find it, however, exprefsly declared, that. he grew in Wifdom, that he hungred, that he was forrovvful, and groaned in the Spirit ; nay, that his very Soul was forrowful even unto Death -, exprefsly. Soul, the very fame Word which is ufually applied to denote the human Soul ; that he fjffered, and that he gave up the Ghoff ; that he died, that is, that his Soul v/a-s feparated from his Body by the Paffion of Death : Foi* that the V/ord, Gbo/l, here means his Soul, or Spi- rit, the acting or rational Principle in Man, is plain •trom tuQ dying Words of St. Stcpberi^ A»Tis VIT. 59. H 3 Lord ( 102 ) Lord Jefus ! receive my Spirit I that \% my Soul ; the original Word being the fame with That cxpreffive of Chrilt's dying. And that Chrifl: fuffered Death in the very fame Manner with other Men, in the adlual Separation of his Soul from his Body, feems plain from St. PWs conilantly expreffing his Death, by the very fame Word by v/hich other Men are faid to die. St. P^/^r alfo, /l^sll. 27. applying the V/ords of David direclly and literally to Chrifl:, not only fliews the adiual Exiftence of an human Soul in Chrifl:, hux the aftual Separadon of it from his Body in the Paf- lic^ of his Death •, and that, as long as his Body re- mained in the Grave. All which, therefore, being Affedions, or Paffions, peculiar to human Nature, to the Union of an human Soul to an human Body, he that denies them, mu(i unavoidably deny the plain and manifeft Word of God. But further, the very Text, Heh. If. 14. which you pronounce abfolutely inconfiftent with this Ac- count, is, notwithftanding, moft ftrong and exprefs againft you. For Believers being there reprefented as the Bre- thren of Chrift, and Brethren and Children of one Fa- ther, as partaking the fame Flefh and Blood •, Chrifl alfo (to fliew that he is in every Refpecl their Brother) is faid alfo to partake, in the' fame Manner, ot the fame Flefh and Blood •, that thro' Death, that is, by his fjfil-ring Death in the very fame Manner that 'Flefli and Blood fjflers the flime, he might deftroy him chat had the Pov\/er of Death -, him, that by his "Wiles expofed human Nature firfl to Death, which is now judicially made, in Chriil, the very Means of his (the Devil's) Deftrudlion : Which, therefore, deter- mines the Death of Chrifl to be the very fame Kind of Death, in every Circum fiance, wi:h that, which ' ' ' the < 103 ) the Malice of the Devil firft introduced into the World. But, diat Flefh and Blood do here mean the whole ihiiman Nature, the human Soul as v/cll as Body united together, is, moreover, alfo plain from the Words, ver, 17, 18. Wherefore in all Things it be- hoved him to be made like unto his Brethren^ that he might be a merciful and faithful High Priejl in Things pertaining to God, to make Reconciliation for the Sins of the People •, for in that he himfelf hath fuffered, being tempted, he is Me to fuccour them that are tempted. But this he could not be, if he had not an human Soul, as well as an human Body : Nor could he ex- perimentally judge of the Temptations, which Men are liable to, if he did not, experimentally, try their Force, by being tempted in their very Nature. Now to fuppofe that a divine Perfon, by occa- fionally alTuming a Body like ours, could become a proper and real Man, is, give me Leave to fay, ab- furd in the higheft Degree. For, at this Rate, that which diflinguiilies a Man, and truly determines him fuch, is the Form and Subftance of his Body only ; fince it matters not what that B^dy is animated v/ith, fo it be animated : And fuch a Body, whether enliven- ed by a Soul, or by a Spirit, good or evil, by an Angel or Devil, is, notwithilanding, according to you, a real and proper Man ; tho*, according to right Reafon and common Senfe, the Union of an •human Soul and human Body doth truly and fpecifi- rally conflitute an human Being. F'.mbodied Angels, indeed, .may appear like Men, and be taken for fuch by our bodily Senfcs, which are •capable of judging by the external Appearance only ; but where they are introduced, as fuch, we are lliil given to underfland, that they are, notwithftaiiding, really Angels, under an human Semblance for that lltiie, and for the Purpofes afTigned 3 and, by no H 4 ■ Meansa ( 104 ) Means, and In no Senfe, entirely reprefented as meer Mfn -, they as eafiJy divelling themfclves of that hu- man Semblance, as Men put off their outward Cioathing. For otherwife. Sir, was this their conftant and na- tural Appendage, that innumerable Hoft of Angels and Spirits, which we reafonably fuppofe to be dif- perfed thro' the whole Univerfe, would daily and hourly, fome of them, be expoled to our View. Their occafional AfTumption of it, therefore, plain- ly fhews, that they are not really what they feem to be, when prefented to our Sight ; and that, confequently, fuch Semblance, by no Means,conilitutes a Part of their Nature : And therefore, when feen in it, they are, improperly only, and in meer Condefcenfion to our fuperlicial Manner of diRinguifhing fenfible Objedls, denominated by it. Whatever then the Nature of our Saviour may be before his Incarnation ; it is plain, that he then aiTum- ed human Nature fully and perfecftiy, being made, in every Refpe^f, like unto us, Sin only excepted. Now, tho' upon the Vv^hole it is evident, that jefus Chrift is both God and Mayi -, yet it doth not follow, that he is two intelligent Perfons •, or, as you would infmuate, two Perfons and one Perfon at the fame Time. For as the human Soul and Body, evidently two difcinft Natures, do yet, incomprehenfibly united, make the one Man -, fo the human and divine Nature, incomprehenfibly united, make the one Chrifi. The Fallacy, however, of your Objection lies in this; you take the ahjolute Term, God^ and the general Term, hlan^ to mean the fame with the refpc61ive Terms, divine, and human, Perfon. For, remarking on our Doctrine, you fiy, that ac- cording to that, Chrift is God nnd Man^ or God united to a Soul and Body ; zvbich fccms to be a Cornpcfition of two ( lOi ) t'VDO intelligent Perfons^ according to the natural Signifi^ cfJion of the JVords. Now ic harh been already fully fhewn, that the Term, God^ taken ahjolutely^ cannot be underftood as a perfonal Character, that is, with any immediate Re- ference to this or that picuiiar Manner of Exiftencc; but only, as it were, in general, eXprefTive of the in- finite and incomprehenfible Nature of the divine Be- ing: But when taken relatively^ that is, immediately referred to denote any one of the three Perfons in the Godhead, it then, from that particular Reference, acquires a perfonal Signification . The TeriT), Man^ alfo, taken in the general Senfe, evidently means that general Nature, common to all Mankind, compofed of two very different Natures, a fpiritual and a material, a Soul and a Body ; which alfo, 'till we cbnfider it as the particular Nature of fome one intelligent Agent, remains unapplied in the general Senfe, Vv^ithout any Perfonality annexed to it. Now x!\^^ Soul and Body, of which Chrift's human Nature is compofed, acquired no Perfonality, 'till ic was applied to the individual Perfon of the Son of God, whofe Nature it then becam.e -, the Perfonality, therefore, of the divine Nature, and the Perfonality of the human, in Chrift, are one and the fame in- dividual Perfonality of the Son of God. And, there- fore, Chrift, compofed of thefe two Natures, which yet have but one and the lame Perfonality, is llill but one and the fame Perfon. This then being the true State of the Cafe, it is eafy to conceive the Divinity, when united to Fluma- nity upon Earth, fubmitting for that Time to be rank- ed amongil the Sons of Men \ and thereby becoming, under that Charader, an human Perfon ; and ah^b now the Humanity, when featcd at ^\^ Right- Hand of the Father, by Virtue of the Divinity, to vmich ic is ( io6 ) IS united, partaking with it the glorious Charafter of the fecond divine Perfon in the ever bleffed Trinity.- In the former Cafe, the Son of God, undergoing a voluntary Humihation, to compleat and perfect it, fufpends the Exertion of his divine Power, and leaves to his Plumanity to fpeak and a^fl agreeable to the Didlates and Feelings of human Nature, conducted and influenced, as all other good Men are, in Proportion to their own Endeavours and firm Confidence in God, by the Spirit of God, the Spirit of his Father : And as, in Rtturn for this great Condefcenfion of the Son of God, It was permitted, that th^ Nature, which he affumed, fliould be exalted v/ith him to the Right- Hand of the Father ; fo to fupport it further under the Weight of Sufferings it was about to endure, a iure Proipecl of this future Glory, and a Confciouf- nefs of its clofe Union with the Son of God, and of its becoming thereby his fecond Nature, are commu- r.icated to it : Whence it properly and tmly addrefles God by faying, O, 7ny Father^ if it be pojfibk^ let this Cup pafs from me! being now the affum.ed and proper Nature of his Son. That the Son of God came down from Heaven the Scriptures declare : He is called God in the higheft Senfe : He alTumed alfo perfect human Nature : He fufFered, ^c. But God cannot fufier, his human Na- ture, therefore, only fulTered, and fpoke and afted Vv^hat was unfliitable for God to differ, fpeak, or do. Thefe are undeniable and plain Confequences from Scripture : And, therefore, as plainly fet forth as the Words of Scripture cxprefs the Pre-exiftence and In- carnation, the FJumiliation and Sufferings, the Death, Refurrediion, and Afcenfion of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ. Flaving thus. Sir, fliewn the Weaknefs and Fallacy <>f your Arguments, brought againft the real Divinity and perfect Humanity of our Lordj it v/ill be no difficult ( 10? ) difficult Tafk to obviate, even from your own Con- ceflions, what you advance againil the real Divinity of the Holy Spirit. For, I believe. Sir, after the Al- lowances you are pleafed to make upon the Detail of the feveral Texts produced by you relative to the Holy Spirit^ no Body, but yourfelf, would argue as you do. For, if I miflake net, you grant, that it appears from them, that He was the Worker of all Miracles^ even of thofe done hy our Lord himfelf \ and yet would infer from thence, that he is a Perfon inferior to Al- mighty God : You do not, indeed, direflly fay, becaufe he performs the Words of Ahnighty God \ but hecaufe he is reprefented as proceeding from him, fent hy him, given by him, and afiing in all Things according to his fupreme Will and Fleafure. But, Sir, your Rea- fons, tho' not in Words, yet in "^^xxift^ amount to the fame Thing. For, if the holy Spirit acls in all Things according to the Will and Fleafure of God, he muft not only be competently qualified perfectly to know and under- hand his Will and Fleafure ; but he muft actually have Pov/er in himfelf fufficient to perform vv^hatever Works the divine W^ill and Fleafure C\\'tt\ : For otherwife, he cannot be truly, or properly, faid to ad:, or perform them. But it is manifeft, the Works afcribed to the Holy Spirit require no lefs than Almighty Power to per- form them. The holy Spirit, therefore, muft have this Power in himfelf, however acquired •, and confe- quently, as to the a6lual PoSnTefTion of fuch Power, be upon an equal Footing with any other Perfon whatfo- ever poffcfled of the fame Power. Again •, that his being given, or fent, doth not affed: his Equahty with t\\t Giver, or Sender, hath been fufSciently obviated in our Anfwer to your Ob- je6tions, upon that Account, to the Equality of the • Son ( loS ) Son with the Father.' It only, therefore, remains to be confidered, whether his being faid to proceed from God takts away in any Refped from his real Divinity. But to determine this, you mufl: give me Leave to an- ticipate a little, and here examine the Force of your Interpretation of the Words of St. Paul^ i Cor, II. lO, II. The Text itfelf runs thus •, But God hath revealed them to us by his Spirit : For the Spirit fearcheth all things ^ yea^ the deep "I'hings of God, For what Man knoweth the Things of a Man^ fave the Spirit of Man which is in him ? Even fo the Things of God knoweth no Man^ hut the Spirit of God. Upon which you obferve, firfl, that the God, here mentioned as revealing Things by his Spirit, muft be the God and Father of all *, becaufe it would be abfurd to fuppofe, that the Father, Son, and Ho- ly Spirit, revealed Things by his Spirit. But it already fuPnciently appears, from the Proof which we have given of the real Divinity of Chrift, that God the Father is not excJufively God •, and, therefore, that God, taken abfolutely, comprehends more than the Perfon of God l\\z Father : And con- fequently, it is not God, taken abfolutely, that is here meant by the Apoflle ; but the Perfon of God the Father, or God the Son, or Both. Next you fay, that it is not faid in the Text, that the Spirit is in God, as the Spirit of a Man is in Man ; but that he is plainly reprefentcd as difrind: from God, ^c, and confequently, he cannot be God himfelf. • But tho'. Sir, it is not exprefsly faid in the Text, that he is in God as the Spirit of a Man is in Man -, yer, certainly, it is (trongly and clearly implied: For the Apoille pofitively declares, that thole Things, which otherwife could not be known, and therefore v/ere known only to God, God hath revealed to us by his Spirit. And tliat we may be fure that this Reve- lation ( 109 ) ktlon by the Spirit is an immediate Revelation frorrt God, he afTigns this Reafon, The Spirit fearcheth all Things : And, to fhevv that he means all Things Vv^ith- out Exception, he addeth, Even the deep Things of God: From whence it is plain, that all the mod fecret Councils of God are learched out by, and intimately known to the Spirit ; and confequently, the Know- ledge of this Spirit is as infinite and as extenfive as the Knowledge of God. But to fhew the Reafonablenefs and abfolute NeceA fity of the Spirit's divine Knowledge, the Apoflle ar- gues the Abfurdity and Imporfibility of it's being otherwife, from the familiar Comparifon of the Spi- rit of Man, which is in him, knowing, therefore, the Thoughts of that Man ; with the Spirit of God, knowing, therefore, the hidden Councils of God, be- caufe he is in God, as the Spirit of Man is in Man. For, if this be not underflood, the Force and Ufe of the Comparifon entirely fails ; the only Foundation of the human Spirit's Knowledge being that of its be- ing in the Man ; and confequently, the only Foun- dation of the holy Spirit's Knowledge mufl be implied to be that of his being as truly, even fo, in God. This Confequence then being plain and undeni- able -, the Spirit being thus in God, by no means hinders his being a diilind: Perfon from the Perfon of the Father, or of the Son. For as the Spirit of a Man, which is in a Man, is diftindl from the bo- dily Subftance of the liime Man -, fo the Perfon of the holy Spirit, which is in the Godhead, is di(lin<5t from the Perfons of the Father and Son, which yet are in the fame Godhead -, the Dinilindion and U- nion of the latter being as certain as the Diftindion and Union of the former, and both equally incom- prehenfibje. When therefore it is faid of a Man, he knoweth or reveakth his Thoughts by his Spirit ; it is equally proper proper to fay, the Spirit of that Man knoweth, of revealeth his Thoughts; the' the Spirit or bodily Subftance of that Man be two diftind Sub'ftances : For tho' neither of them can perform any human Adtion without the mutual Affiilance of each other, and tho' either of them fmgly is, notwithftanding, often underdood to m.ean the whole Man ; yet, from the acknowledged Diftin6licn of their feveral Na- tures, they evidently cannot be one and the felf fame Subftance. In the lame Manner alfo, when it is faid of God, that he revealeth any Thing by his Spirit, it is e- qually proper to fay, the Spirit of God revealeth the lame Thing, tho' the Perfon of the Spirit, and the Perfons of the Father and Son be three diflin6t Perfons •, for tho' none of them can perform any divine Action without the Affiftance of the divine Nature infeparable from each Perfon, and confequently, with- out the Concurrence of each other ; and tho' any one of them fingly may therefore notwithflanding be un- derfiood to reprefent the endre Godhead -, yet from the acknowledged Ditfindion of the perfonal Pro^ perties, whereby they are othcrwife feverally de- fcribed, it is equally evident, they cannot be one and the felf-fame Perfon. Thus then, Sir, it appears that the Holy Spirit is in God, and confequently, in the Perfon of the Fa- ther, not meerly becaufe he is the Father, but be- caufe he is God ; and alfo in the Son, not becaufe he is the Son meerly, but becaufe -he is God alfo; and yet is, neither Father, nor Son •, becaufe, tho' he partakes of the fame common Nature, yet he is defcribed perfonally to poffefs certain diftici:, incom- municable Properdes. When, therefore, you fay, that, becaufe he pro- ceedeth from God, he is therefore a Perfon inferior to God, your Confequence is manifeftly falfe -, the contrary, as you may now plainly fee, being undeni- ably ( lii ) ably true ; for whatever is in God miifl partake of the Nature of God : But the holy Spirit is in God ; therefore the holy Spirit partakes of the Nature of God •, and confequenrly, he is God, equal to God the Father, and God the Son ; and the Miracles, therefore, which he worketh, are the Works of Al- mighty God. But moreover, as he is, i Cor. II. ii, 12. faid to be the Spirit of God, becaufe he is of God, or pro- ceedeth from God ; which, in the Language of our Saviour, is the fame v^ith the Spirit of the Father ; fo muft he alfo proceed from the Son, whofe Spirit he is called alfo. Gal IV. 6. Rom. VIII. 9. i Pet. I. IT. PhilippA. 19. Vv'hich therefore further proves the Unity of the three Perfons in the Godhead, e- qual in Nature, tho' fubordinate in Rank and Order, One God hlejfed for ever. That the holy Spirit then is filled God, A5fs V, 3, 4.. your Explanation by no Means difproves. For certainly. Sir, the Lie is here uttered immedi- ately to the Apoftles : But they, as Men, could not difcover this : The holy Spirit then reveals it to them •, and, confequenrly, the Power of knowing the Hearts of Men, which elfewhere is defcribed as the peculiar Attribute of God, is here afcribed to the Holy Spirit, But wherein do the Apoftles place the Aggrava- tion of Ananias^ Crime ? Is it not in that he lied not to Men, but to God ? If then the holy Spirit is not the fame here with God, he no more lied to the holy Spirit than he did to the Apoftles : For, if it is faid, he did not lie to them, becaufe they of them- felves could not difcern the Fraud ; fo it might e- qually be faid, that he did not lie to the holy Spirit, becaufe he neither of himfelf could difcern the Fraud. But ( 112 ) But it is exprefsly faid, he lied to the holy Sp:rit, and not the Apoftles ; the FoiinfJation then of the holy Spirit's Difceniment miift be quite different from that of the Apoftles. But it can in no other Way* differ, but in his having this Power in himfelf ; and if in himfelf, he muft be adlually and truly God. The Cafes therefore which you produce as parallel to this Paifage are, notwithftanding, utterly averfe to it : For tho' the Pbarifees fay, Adts XXliI. 9. // a Spirit , or Angela hath fpoken to him^ let us not fight againfi God •, to make the Spirit, or Angel, here in the fame Manner, to be ftiled God, it muft be proved, that the Spirit, or Angel, fpoke from his own Authority : But this you will not pretend to fay, much lefs to prove, and therefore the Cafe is not at all alike. Again, when ourSaviour fays, LukelL, 16. He that defpifeth you^ defpifeth me ; and he that defpifeth me^ defpifeth him that fent me \ here indeed is a manifeft Subordination implied, of the Difciples to Chrift, and of Chrift to his Father : But the Foundation of the Latter hath been already fhewn, at large, to be utterly different from that of the Former, when we proved the Union of the Father and Son to be alto- gether different from the Union of Chrift and his Church. Is there, however, the leaft Oppofition im- plied .'* Whereas in the Cafe of Ananias there is a clear Oppofition between the hcly Spirit and 'Man^ and between God and Man ; but not the leaft Sub- ordination even fo much as hinted at: Both Cafes therefore muft be utterly unlike in every Refpe»St. When likewife it is faid, i Ihcff. IV. 8. He that defpifeth^ defpijeth not Man, but God, who alfo hath given unto us his holy Spirit : I cannot fee in the leaft how this confirms the fuppofed Diftindtion between God and the holy S^pirit. For (113) for the Ad: of Contempt, firft mentioned, if it ^ffedls any one at all, mufl immediately and direftly affed the holy Spirit •, and yet it is faid, in the Re- petition, not to afFed Man at allj but immediately and dire(flly God. But this dired: and immediate' Application of the Contempt to God, makes the Contempt of the holy Spirit as ftrong, and as hei- nous as the Contempt of God ; who, giving his Spirit, gives himfelf, according to his repeated Pro- mife : Which Spirit therefore muft be fo peculiarly the Spirit of God, as to be in God, in the fame Manner as the Spirit of a Man is in Man y to the End that whatfoever immediately and diredly affeds the holy Spirit, may as immediately and as directly affedl God. But this cannot be fuppofed, if there is not the fame Inequality between the holy Spirit and Man, that there is between God and Man : Be- caufe then the Contempt can only immediately and diredly affe6l one of them, contrary to the plain E- quality, between the two Ads of Contempt, fet forth by the Apoflle. Here then the real Divinity of the holy Spirit is plainly implied •, and confequently, the Term, God^ cannot be taken ahfolutely^ but perfonally to denote either Father or Son, which at once overthrows the Force of this Inftance : For the Diftin6lion here holds only between the Perfon of the holy Spirit and the Perfon of either Father, or Son ; and not between the holy Spirit and God ahfolutely ; as you pretend it doth in the Cafe of Ananias -, which therefore makes a wide Difference. But if you fhould deny, that the Words, he that defpifeth, affe6l the holy Spirit ; there is then not the lead Similitude between tho. two Cafes-, and your producing it as a parallel Inftance could plainly be for no other End, than to amufe, and impofe upoa your Readers. I It (.14) It being faid, that our Bodies are the Temple o? God, and the Temple of his holy Spirit doth alfo as certainly prove the holy Spirit to be God. For, befides that the Word Temple ftrongly im- plies the Divinity of him, whofe Temple it is faid to be ♦, had you attended to 2 Cor, VI. 16. you inufl: have leen the Abfurdity of making a Creature the Reprefentative of God in us : For then the holy Spirit muft be no more than an Idol, which is fome- -what placed in a Temple to reprefent the Divinity. But, IVhat Agreement hath the "Temple of God with Idols ? We are exprefsly here faid to be the Temple ef the living God •, and he as exprefsly fays, that he (himfelf) will dwell in us. But how^ can that be, if he only dwells in us by a Reprefentative, a Creature > Neither the Father, as Father, nor the Son, as Son, is here faid to dwell in us, but abfoluteiy the living. God : If then the holy Spirit, doth not dwell in us ; as, upon your Principles, he is here utterly excluded ; we could not be a Temple with refped to him. But it is certain, we are elfewhere exprelsly faid to be the Temple of the holy Spirit^ who therefore muft be the Living God. The Text then by you quoted from, i Cor. VI. 19, 20. if it proves any thing, it is diredlly in Fa- vour of the Son •, and then again, by plain Inference from it's Connexion with the correfponding Parts of Scripture, proves the Divinity of the holy Spirit. For it fliould feem, that by the Term, God^ there, the Perfon of the Son is intimated, whofe we are, he having bought us with a Price, to wit, his own Blood, as the fame Apoftle declares, A£is XX. 28. and again applies the Purchafe of us to Chrift in the 2 2d and 23d Verfes of the following Chapter of this fame Epiftle ; when he fays, He that is called in the Lord being a Servant, is the Lord^s Freeman : Likewfe alfo, he that is called, being free, is Chrifi^s Servant, ( "5) Seevant. 2> are bought with a Price ; he not ye Ser- I'ants of Men. Where from the Context it is evident, that Lord and Chrift^ mean the fame Perfon. And from the Oppofition, between the Servant of Chrifl and the Servants of Men, Chrift is fet forth as the immediate Furchafer. From whence too it fhould feem to follow, that by the Term, God, in the next Veric, the A- poitie directly means Chrift •, Brethren^ let every Man , wherein he is called., therein abide with God ; that is, let him therein abide the Servant of God, who im- mediately before was called the Servant of Christ. It is plain however here, that our Bodies become the Temple of the hoh Spirit on Account of this Purchafe. Here then the holy Spirit feems to pofTefs our Bodies in Right of the Son. But the fame Spirit is alfo exprefsly faid to be the Spirit of the Father. Wherefore both Father and Son having the one and felf-fame Spirit ; and the one and felf fame Spirit be- ing, in and of, both Father and Son •, and we being faid to be the Temple both of Father and Son, as being the Temple of their holy Spirit -, thefe three Perfons muft, confequently, partake the fame Na-- ture: And therefore the Apoftle exhorts us to glo- rify God, the three Perfons all together. Again, i Cor. III. 1 6. may be either underftood of God the Father, or God the Son. But of whichfoever it is, the Spirit is here exprefsly called tlie Spirit of God ; and we are called the Temple of God, be- caufe his Spirit dwelleth in us. The Spirit then is defcribed as the adual Inhabitant : We are therefore immediately the Temple of the holy Spirit : And how then of God, if this Spirit is not, as the A- poftle declares, the Spirit of God •, and therefore in God, as the Spirit of a Man is in Man •, and, con- fequently, partaking of the fame Nature with Father and Son, God hintfelf? I 2 But (n6) But the Words of the fame Apoftle, Ephef.ll. i^^ i^c. will fet this whole Matter in the cleareft Light. You, indeed, by picking out fome ExprefTions, which feem to make for your Purpofe, from the en- tire PafTage, have Ihamefully curtailed and maimed it's Senfe. But the Apoftle, in that Chapter, plainly fumming up the Merits of Chrift towards the Ephejians^ who were before Gentiles ; to fhew that they were no lefs favoured by him than the Jews^ fays, For through him we both have Ace efs by the oris Spirit to the Father. Here he plainly diftinguifhes the three Perfoiis ; and alfo as plainly intimates by the Exprefllon, the one Spirit^ not only the equal Communication thereof ta both Jews and Gentiles^ but alfo the fame Spirit's acting to the fame End, under the equal Influence and Direction of the Father and Son. For, if through Chrift they have Accefs to the Father by the fame Spirit, it is plain, that Chrift muft influence the Spirit, as well as the Father •, and if the Accefs is not to be obtained, as it is plain it is not, without the Influence of Chrift ; this muft be as ftrong as that of the Father's^ and confequently^ one and the iame Influence. For, that Chrift is not repreifented here meerly as an inftrumental, but a principal Agent, is plain from the foregoing Words of the Apoftle, ver. 14, 15, 16, 17. where he recounts feveral Adts of Chrift;. in which as he is plainly the chief Agent, fo in that one of aboliftiing the Law, which is diredlly attri- buted to him, his almighty Power manifeftly ap- pears •, fince none but God can repeal what God had before appointed. When therefore the Apoftle fays. For through him we both have Accefs by the one Spirit to the Father ^ his principal and lole Efficiency in thefe feveral A(fts is plainly intimated ; and the confequent Unity of Faith, ("7) Faith, which the Operation of the holy Spirit pro- duceth in our Hearts, is the dire6b Effedl of his In- fluence, approved of and accepted by the Father, who, with Chrift, fent forth this one Spirit in our Hearts, the Spirit of Adoption, Rom.Vlll, 15. the Spirit of his Son, Gal. IV. 6, (the Spirit of Chrift, Rom. VIII. 9. I Pet. I. 11. Philip. I. 19.) whereby we cry, Jbl^a^ Father, In the firft of which laft three Paflages, that which is called the Spirit of God is immediately called the Spirit of Chrift -, and the Indwelling of Chrift, as well as of God, in us, is, by the Context, equally intimated by the In- dwelling of this one Spirit. The Apoftle therefore, having jfhewn the full Ef- ficiency of Chrift in bringing about their Union, and Reconciliation to the Father, by the Intervention of the one Spirit of the Father and of the Son •, fur- ther adds. Now therefore ye are no more Strangers and Foreigners., hut Fellow-citizens with the Saints^ and of the Houfhold of God^ and are built upon the Founda- tion of the Apoflles and Prophets., Jefus Chrift himfelf being the chief Corner-Stone^ in whom all the Building y fitly framed together^ groweth into an holy 'Temple^ in the Lordy (that is, in, or by, the efFedual and fandi- fymg Power and Prefence of the Lord) in whom ye are alfi btiilded together for an Habitation of God, in the Spirit., (that is, in, or by, the effedual and fandify- ing Power and Prefence of the Spirit). Here then it is plain, the Perfon, meant by the Lord in the 21ft Verfe, is diftinguifhed from Jefus Chrift J inafmuch as Jefus Chrift is reprefented as the chief Corner-Stone of the Building ♦, and the Perfon, meant by the Lord, as the Builder. But the holy Spirit, in the laft Verfe, is reprefented alfo as the Builder of the Habitation of God -, which can be no other than the fame holy Temple. I 3 The ( ii8 ) The Lord, here mentioned then, is the Appella- tion of the Holy Spirit. But God the Father inhabit- ing here that Temple, which elfewhere, as before, is called the Temple of the holy Spirit ; and Chrift poiTelTing the fame Temple, by the allegorical Re- prefentation of his being the chief Corner-Stone thereof; without which it is implied it could not be a Temple ; and which different Defcriptions, of the fame Property in each Perfon m this Temple, do dif- tindly fet forth the different Offices, exercifed by each, in the wonderful CEconomy of our Redemp- tion ; this Temple muft therefore be underftood to be equally the Temple of the three Perfons -, and then the plain Inference is, that thefe three Perfons are the One God. But that which St. John fays, i Efift. III. 24. IV. 13. is, if pofTible, yet flronger ; intimating plainly the Certainty of God's dwelling in us ; which the Word, Jhide., in the Original, ftrongly implies, from the actual Indwelling of his Spirit ; who, if he was not in God, and, confequently, God, God could not be fo exprefsly faid, adually to dwells or abide in us. Tho' again, Sir, you fay, that the Blafphemy a- gainfi the holy Ghofi^ Matth. Xll.^i, 32. doth not aftecl the Perfon of the holy Ghoft^ but his miracu- lous Works •, and therefore it doth not follow from thence, that he is God : Yet certainly. Sir, you did not confider, that whatever affeds the proper Works of any Perfon, muft affect the Perfon himfclf : And that they are the proper Works of the holy Spirit^ you yourfelf acknowledge, when you fay, he was employed by God to perform thefe wonderful Works. Por, granting he was employ 'd, it by no means takes away from his Property in his Works ; unlefs you could fnew, that he is no more than a neceflary and <"9) and paHive Inftmment in the Hands of his Env ployer. If then the Works are truly and properly his own Works, and the Aggravation of the Sin be, as you fay, the attributing them to the Devil, notwithftand- ing the cleared Conviction of the contrary *, the Af- front confifts in the Perfon of the Devil being fup- pofed the Performer of thefe Works, inftead of the Perfon of the holy Spirit: They acknowledge the Works, but not the true Performer of them. And confequently, the Blafphemy affeds immediately the holy Spirit's Perfon, but the Works only fo far as they are denied to be his Works. If therefore he be not God, but a Creature ; it is impoffible that you can fhew, that a Sin againft a Creature can be unpardonable ; and confequently, tho' upon Account of the unpardonable Nature of this Sin, he muft be acknowledged God •, yet it is not meerly upon Account of his being God, that the Sin is here pronounced unpardonable ; but becaufe the Jews^ in Oppofition to the cleareft Light, and the laft and higheft Con virion that could poffibly be afforded them, did attribute the Works of the Spirit of Truth, to the Devil, the Father of Lies. When the Words, which in any of the Prophets of the Old Teftament are fet forth as the immediate Words of the Lord Jehovah y the Lord of Hofts^ are yet as diftindly, and as immediately afcribed to the holy Sprit by the Apoftles in the New Tefbament, as thofe of Ifaiah, VI. 9. are by St. FauU Ms XXVIII. 25, 26, 27. it muft yield a moft flrong Convidlion of the real Divinity of the holy Spirit : Becaufe, as it is judiciouQy remarked by the ingenious Author of Deifm revealed^ in his Difcourfe upon the Divinity of Chrifly every fuch Proof acquires the Force of two ; and, befides, hath the immenfe Advantage of an I 4 Ap' ( 120 ) Application and Comment made by an Interpreter, who cannot err. But, Sir, you fay nothing is more fallacious than this Way of arguing. Whereas it is evidently the Way ufed by the Apoftle here. For furely, if the Apoftle exprefsly affirms the Words to be fpoken immediately by the holy Spirit, which Ifaiah as ex- prefsly afHrms to be fpoken immediately by God, the Apoftle could colled them no otherwife to be the Words of the holy Spirit, but becaufe he certainly knew the holy Spirit to be God. The only Difference between the Apoftle's Rea- foning and ours is this ; — he draws his Inference from the immediate Revelation of the Spirit to him con- cerning this great Truth ; we do the fame from the Apoftle*s Application, whom we believe, and know to be guided thereto by the fame Spirit, But to account otherwife for this, you fay, what-^ ever God fpeaks may very properly be faid to be fpoken by the Holy Ghost ; becaufe God always fpeaks to his Prophets by the Inspiration of his holy Spirit : By the Ambiguity of which Phrafe, I will fuppofe you mean one of thefe two Things •, either that God always fpeaks to his Prophets by the Mouth of his holy Spirit, and then it is not God that fpeaks, but his holy Spirit ; or that the Prophets are previ- oufly difpofed by the holy Spirit to attend to, and hear the Words immediately fpoken to them by God himfelf The ftrft Cafe, befides the Abfurdity of God's fpeaking and not fpeaking at the fame Time, is ut- terly falfe in Fad ; as appears from this one Inftance of Ifaiah^ where the Propliec reprefents an extraordi- nary Vifion of the Glory of the Lord of Hofis \ and the Lord, whofe Glory he faw, immediately fpeak- ing to him, without the leart Mention of the holy Spirit's intervening. So that to apply the Words to the ( 121 ) the holy Spirit, as diftind from, and inferior to •God, the Prophet gives not the leafl: Warrant. The fecond Cafe, however generally true, doth yet no more authorize us to attribute the Words fpo-- ken to the holy Spirit, than a Perfon's giving us No- tice of another's intended Vifit would authorize us to afcribe the Words of the Vifitor to the Meflenger, who prepared us for that Vifit. Since then the Prophet, in the firft Cafe, gives the Apoftle not the lead Warrant for his Applica- tion, fuppofing the Spirit diftindt from, and inferior to God ; and the Apoftle, in the fecond Cafe, could not, with any Truth or Propriety of Reafon, apply the Words to the fame Spirit ; it evidently follows, according to you, that either the Spirit mifled the Apoftle, or the Apoftle exceeded the Spirit's Commission. But both thefe Suppofitions are manifeftly abfurd. The Apoftle therefore muft have built his Inference upon the cleareft Convidlion of God and his Spirit being one and the fame Being : And confequently, the Words of God appear to him to be ftriftly and truly the Words of the holy Spirit \ and the Words of the holy Spirit, to be ftridly and truly the Words of God. But I muft not here omit taking Notice of the Pains you are at to reprefent this Way of arguing, which notwithftanding, you fee, is copied from the Apoftles, in as fallacious a Light, as that which you pretend to compare it with -, when you fay, in the fame Manner, you could conclude, that, becaufe what is afcribed to the Lord, Ifaiah LXV. i. {I am fought of them that afkednot for me ♦, I am found of them that fought me not) is, in Rom, X. 20. applied to /"- faiah^ (but Ifaiah is very bold, and faith, I was found of them that fought me not) therefore I[aiah is the Lord. Whereas no two Methods of Reafon ing can be more oppofite. We argue from the Apoftle's di- red ( 122 ) reft and literal Application of the Words in the Prophet, to the holy Spirit ^ for which, however, he having no exprefs Authority from the Prophet, we necefifarily conclude, he mud be direded therein by the holy Spirit himfelf. On the contrary, in the Method by you fuppofed parallel to ours, you argue from the Apoflk's figurative Reference to the Prophecy, to his dired and literal Application of the Words to the Prophet himfelf-, for which you have neither the Authority of the Spirit, nor of the Apoftle. For tho^ St. Paul fays, Ifaiah is very boid^ &c. yet no Man of common Senfe can imagine, chat the A- poftle applies diredly to the Perfon of Ifaiah what the Prophet declares, ver, 7. to be faid by the Lord. Indeed, the literal and fimple Acceptation of the Words, is very hold^ might fcem to confine them to JJaiah meerly -, but when it is confidered, that the A- poftle is here comparing the Prophecy of Ifaiah^ in this Particular, with that of Mofes to the fame Ef- fedt, this of the Prophet being in much plainer and ilronger Terms •, the Words of the Apoftle muft unavoidably be underflood in a figurative Senfe, and to mean no more than that the Words in lfaiah\ Prophecy are much bolder and ftronger than the Words of Mofes \ as they more clearly and exprefsly declare what the Words of Mofes ^ in Comparifon, but darkly hint at. The PafTages then in the Revelations^ II. 11. 29. III. 13, 14. wherein the Words of Chrift are faid to be the Words of the Spirit, and referred to by you, as illudrating your Account of this Matter •, as they, in the fame Manner with this Paflage of St. FauU confirm the Unity of Chrifl and the holy Spirit^ fo do they all together further corroberate the Unity I, as God, enjoyed before my Humiliation in Right of the latter : Which Senfe being admitted, as it e- vidently muft, to reconcile thefe Words to other Parts of Scripture, our Inference remains ftill firm and unftiaken, and all you urge againft it falls to the Ground. But in Truth, Sir, you feem utterly to miftake the true Foundation of this Inference. For it is not meerly becaufe we are commanded to be initiated into the Name of the Son and holy Spirit, as well as into that of the Father, that we infer, that thefe three Perfons are equally entitled to the Godhead ; but be- caufe alfo we are thereby taught firmly to believe, that their joint and equal Concurrence is abfolutely ne- celTary to the Procurement of thofe Benefits thereby vouchfafed to us. For ( 129 ) For Chrift enjoins his Apoflles to teach all Na- tions previoully to their Baptifm, as is plain from their confcquent Pradice. But what were they to teach them ? Was it not to obferve all thofe Things which he had commanded theni^ which he had given in Charge to them, and fhewn to be neceflary to their Belief and Practice ? But had he not enjoined them, John XIV. I. to believe in him equally with the Fa- ther ; for that he, being one with the Father, was able to comfort them, and make them full Amends for the Sorrow they conceived at his approaching Departure ? And did he not promife them, ^ver, i6^ 26. another Comforter, one as effe5lual as himfelf^ who fliould fupply his Place by abiding with them for ever ; and whom they were to know by his dwel- ling with themj and being in them ; and v/ho was to teach them all Things, and bring all Things to their Remembrance, whatfoever he had faid unto them ? Now, how could this Knowledge of him come, but by Faith in him ? How could they be perfuad- ed, that he was able to do all thofe great Things for them, but by believing in him, in the fame Manner they believed in Chrill ; by which Faith they knew he was able to fend him, the holy Spirit^ to them? The Apoftles therefore were firft to teach Mankind to believe in the Son and the holy Spirit^ as well as in the Father : To believe that Salvation was only to be obtained from the Father, thro' the effedual Me- diation of Chrift his Son^ by the neceffary Guidance and Illumination of the holy Spirit ; and confequent- Jy, to baptize them in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. But if thefe two Perfons, Son and holy Spirit, are not eternal and co-equal with the Father *, we then are taught to believe, contrary to all Senfe and Rea- fon, that almighty God hath laid himfelf under fuch K Re- ( 13^) Reflridions, as not to be able to confer his Graces upon us without the Concurrence of two inferior Creatures : Nay, and that, with refpedb to the Chrif- tian Covenant, whereof this is the Form j with re- fped to the Authority of all the Gofpel-Promifesj and with refped to our Faith, our Dependance, our Love, and confequently, our Adoration •, he hath adlually advanced two Creatures to a formal Co-e- quality with himfelf. That therefore, which you further urge to invali- date the Force of this Inference from the Words of St. FauU I Cor. X. 2. is plainly no parallel Inftance j as having not the fame Foundation with this. For tho' the Apoftle fays, the Ifraelites were bap- tized into Mofes ; yet it is clear, that he thereby means no more, than that their paffing through the Red'Sea, under the Condud: of Mofes, prefigured the fpiritual Regeneration of Chriflians by Baptifm under the Gofpel -, and not that he underftood it to be as; full, and as pcrfe6l an Inftitution as the Chriftian Bap- tifm. For it is plain, that the original Account of it implies no fuch Thing : It is neither commanded di- reftly as fuch, nor are the Ifraelites taught to believe any fuch Matter about it. The Apoftle therefore, from his own clear Know- ledge of it's typical Nature, calls it only by an ulual Figure, that, which it by no Means was in itfelf, but meerly the Type and Shadow of; thereby in- deed more diftin6lly to point out the particular Chriflian Rite, which it was, but obfcurely at firft, intended to forefhew. As to what the fame Apoftle fays, 1 Cor. I. 15, if he had adually baptized in his own Name, he might as reafonably have fuppofed, that the Corin- thians intended to accufe him of fetting himfelf up for a God, as the orthodox Chriftians of thofe Times adually accufcd Simon Magus ^ upon his arrogating to himfelf ( '31 ) hlmfelf the Perfon and Charadler of Chriit, and con- fequently, baptizing in his own Name. And that the Apoltle doth fuppofe it, is plain from the Ear- neflnefs of his QLJettions in the 13th Verfe of the fame Chapter. Since then it is not meerly from the Son and holy Spirit being joined in the Office of Baptifm, that we argue them equal to the Father ; but from it's being declared alfo, that their joint and equal Concurrence is abfolutely necefTary to the Procurement of thofe Benefits thereby vouchfafed unto us ; and no fuch Thing being declared of the ele5f Jngels^ i Tim. V, 21. St. Paul's joining them to the Father and Son, in his Charge to Timothy^ doth by no Means argue them, in the fame Manner, equal to Father and Son : And confequently, the Parallel not hold- ing in all it's Parts, your Argument, drawn from thence, is of no Force. But befides this ; it is highly probable, that St. Paul^ agreeable to St. 7^^«'s Phrafe \n the Revela- tionsy means, by the ek5f Angels here, the chofen and approved Rulers, or Elders of the Church ; the Prophet Malachi^ II. 7. exprefsJy calling the Priefts under the Law, The Angels of the Lord of Hojis. He therefore, who conftantly endeavoured to have a Confcience void of Offence towards God and to* wards Man ; willing here alfo to approve himfelf, as well in the Eyes of his Fellow-Labourers, as of God and his Son, that he had done his Duty to Timothy^ by laying before him, and enforcing the requifite Duties of his Office, reafonably fubjoins them, as proper Witnefles of his Charge, and who were to juftify him before the World, if the other in any Sort a6led contrary to his Injundions : At the fame Time, reminding Timothy of the fame double Obli- gation upon him to preferve a good Report, not only before God and his Son, but alfo before the chofea Rulers and Paftors of the Church. K 2 When ( isO When again you fay, that God and the Creature are fometimes joined together as Objeds of the fame i^6l, Exod. XIV.31. 1 Cbron.XXlK. 20. you ought, ir^ Juftice to your Readers, to have obferved, that from the Concifenefs of the Hebrew Language, from whence thefe Texts are taken ; or rather from the fmall Number of original Words, of which that Language is compofed, the fame Word is often ufed to exprefs different, particular Sorts of the fame ge- neral A6k ; which therefore are only to be difcovered by the different Natures of the Objecls, to which tht A61 is appUed. Accordingly, when the People are faid, in the firfl Inftance, to believe the Lord and his Servant Mofes ; the Sort of Belief given to the Lord is by fo much higher than, and diftind from, that given to Mofes^ 5s by how much the Lord is fuperior to^ and of a diftin6t Nature from, Mofes, In the fame Manner, and upon the fame Account, in the fecond Inftance, the Worfhip, by which the Congregation worfhipped the Lord, is underftood to be proportionably fuperior to, and diftind from that by which they worfhipped the King. In the many other Texts by you produced, as re- prefenting Chrift and the holy Spirit utterly diftindt from God ; when, notwithftanding the Term, God^ is applied to the Perfon of the Father, as we have already fliewn it ought to be, the feeming Diftindlion immediately vanifhes : And the Application only ihews, that the Father is peculiarly called God, as well upon the Account of his being the Father of our Lord Jefus Chrift, as upon that of his being the Source, or Fountain, from whence the Divinity of the other two Perfons eternally flows. But the Account which you give of that remark- able Text, I John V. 7. is far from being either juft or true. For ( 133 ) For, firft, you fay, that this Text hath not ytt -been found in any Greek Manufcript older than the Invention of Printing. But pray. Sir, how came ic to be in any, even at that Time ? You will anfwer, by a defigned and corrupt Interpolation. But could this be done at a Time, when not only fo fignal an Alteration was made in the Method of .publifhing Books, but alfo, when the Scriptures in particular began to be critically examined, in order for the more exad and accurate Edition of them in •this new Manner, without fo manifeft and materia! a Corruption being known and dete<5led ? Or is it reafonable to fuppofe, that all the then Chriftian World confented to, or connived at, the Addition .f* The Church of Rome, indeed, is generally charged -with making this Addition. But if it was not to be found in any Manufcripts older than the Invention of Printing ; it muft be made at a Time, when the learned Adverfaries of that Church were employed in pointing out it's many Errors and Innovations : And fure then, this fo palpable an Innovation could not have palfed unnoticed : And tho' many fair Co- pies of the Greek Manufcripts were then probably made, to render the ImprelTions more correcft, and which, I fuppofe, you would infill are the Manu- fcripts in which this Text is now only to be found ; yet you cannot but fee, that it was morally impoflible that the Addition fhould be then foifted in without being obferved and cenfured. And therefore it evidently follows, that it muft have been, at leaft, in as many Manufcripts before ^the Invention of Printing, as were then made for the above Purpofes, in the feveral different Places where Printing was firft authorized. But that either the whole Text, or the main Sub- fiance of it, without any material Variation, was .found, at lead, in nineteen Gr^d*/^ Manufcripts, is plain K 3 trorn ( 134 ) frdm Gregory^ Collections, in his Edition of the Greek ^Tejlament, printed at Oxford 1 703. — Dodlor Mills deaf- ly fhews, from the Tellimony of Stephens and the E- ditors of the firft printed Spanijh Teflament, that there were many fuch extant above eight hundred Years ago : And after a full and impartial Difcuffion of the Point, determines itrongly in Favour of the prefent Reading : And for it's being either totally omitted, or varioufly read in others, fo as to affecl ih^ main Senfe, he very, fairly and probably accounts. Dodlor hammondy before him, hath done the fame in his Note upon this Place : Wherein at the fame Time he pofitively afierts, that the prefent ordinary Reading hath the Authority of many antient Copies, and all but one printed Copy. The learned Grabe, in his Notes upon Bifhop BuWs Defence of the Ni- cene Q'eed, doth no lefs. Whence it plainly ap- pears, that the Enquiries of the Learned are not fo univerfally on your Side as you pretend. You again afiert, that between three and four hundred Years after our Saviour's Time, when this very Point was warmly debated on both Sides^ this Text was never quoted, which it is impoffible to conceive ihould have been negleded, if it had been in their Bibles. If you mean the Arian Controverfy at the Time of, and fqr fome Time after the Nicene Council, which was held in the Year 325 ; the v/hole and en- tire Do6lrine of this Text was not the very Point io warmly debated then on both Sides ; there being no Queftion moved at that Time about the holy Spirit. The only Point in Difpute was the efTential Unity of the Son with the Father •, for which the Advocates for that Dodlrine had fufficient Authorities from Scripture, without having Recourfe to this. And for them to have produced this Text at that Time a- gainft Men who were but too ready to cavil and catch ( >3S) catch at every Thing-, as it contained alfo other Matters than what immediately related to the Point in Hand ; they probably forefaw would bring oh, .unfeafonably, the further Queftion corxerning the holy Spirit j as in Truth it foon happened after- wards. But this Text did a(5lually exifl, and was acknow- ledged long before the Council of Nice •, and it's Acknowledgment uninterruptedly handed down from Age to Age, even to this prefent Time : And con- fequentiy, it Ihould feem, not altogether unknown to the intermediate Time of the Nicene Council. Tertullian, in his Treatife againft Praxeas, plain- ly refers to it : Cyprian exprefsly quotes it : Bodi primitive Fathers of but this you have equally failed in. To favour, however, your Attempt, you prudent- ly Hop at the End of the 8th Verfe, beginning at the 5th, as if the whole Context of this Paffage ex- tended no farther. But you mud give me Leave to take in fomething more •, and alfo, from unfolding the Apoftle*s Rea- foning, to lliew the manifeft Defed: his whole Argu- ment v/ould labour under, if this Text was not to Hand a Part of it. The Apoftle's Reafoning then is diftindly this : In the former Chapter he had laid the Foundation of Chnftian and brotherly Love, in our true Senfe of the Love of God, and of thofe gracious Ads, wherein his Love was manifefted : He begins this Chapter, therefore, by fliewing more particularly v^hy Chriltians ought to love one another, being, thro' their Faith, fpiritually born of God, and therefore Brethren : Where, again he makes our Love of God, and confe- quent Obedience to his Commands, the Teit of this bro- ( H2 ) brotherly Love ; and, at the fame Time, our Obedi- ence the Teft of cur Love of God. But the Commands of God being gracioufly in- tended to enable us to overcome the World ; to make this Conquefl, thro' our Obedience, eafy, he re- commends unto us to have a right and well-fixed Faith ; which Faith he fhews chietiy to confift in be- lieving that Jefus Chrift is truly the Son of Gody who, notwithftanding, came into the World to fhew us, by his exemplary and finlefs Life and patient Suffering unto Death, how we are to overcome the World ; and to allure us further, that thefe feveral Articles of our Faith are true, he declareth, that the Spirit bear- eth Witnefs to them ; and that we may be alfo fure that this Teftimony is infallible, he pronounces the Spirit to be Truth itfelf. But becaufe the Apoftle, by thus confining this Teftimony meerly to the Spirit, might feem to con- tradid Chrift's attributing the fame, diftindly, in his Gofpel, to his Father, to Himfelf, and to the holy Spirit, JohnY. 37. VIII. 18. XV. 26. to obviate this, he immediately adds ; For there are nree that hear Record in Heaven \ the Father, the Word, and the lioly Spirit ^ and thefe Three ^r^ On e ; — plainly thereby referring to the Words of Chrift concerning this Tes- timony ; who alfo, in the fame Gofpel, declaring Him- felf and his Father to be One -, the Spirit here, by the Apoftle, declares the Father^ the Son, and Himfelf ^ in the fame Manner, to be One alfo \ and confequently, the Teftimony of the Spirit to be that of the threi Perfons. But becaufe again it might ftill be queftioned, in what Manner this Teftimony was conveyed, and what were the principal Fadls to which it pointed, the Apoftle further declares, that There are Three alfo that hear Witnefs in Earth ; the Spirit, the Water, and the Blood •, and thefe Three agree in One : That is, this Tefti- ( H3 ) Teftlmony, tending to the one and the fame End, is conveyed to Mankind in a threefold Manner. Firjt^ by Infpiration and Prophecy, arifing from the Effufion of the Gifts of the Spirit upon all true Be- lievers ; which. Rev. XIX. lo. is exprefsly called the ^ejlimony of Jefus. Secondly^ by the Baptifm of Water -, both that wherein Chrift was declared by the Voice from Heaven to be the Son of God ; and that which he appointed to be performed in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Ghoft j which all who re- ceive do therebv bear Witnefs^to his being the Son of God. And hftly^ by the Spilling, not only of his own Blood upon the Crofs, but that of thofe v/ho died for the Teftimony of Jefus -, and who are therefore called eminently Martyrs, A5fs XXII. 20. For that this threefold Manner of conveying the Teftimony principally regards Tranfa6tions here upon Earth, is plain from the Words, And there are T^hree that hear Witness in Earth \ which lad Words, in Earthy together with the Copulative, and., in the Beginning of the Sentence, as they clearly refer to the foregoing Mention of the three Witnesses in Heaven, you have thought proper to omit and change; tho' in many of the Greek Copies, where even the whole 7th Verfe is omitted, thefe are, notwithftanding, retained. The Apoille then, having thus fliewn the Nature, Force, and Manner of the Teftimony, goes on, ftrongly arguing, as our Saviour did in a parallel Cafe, Jahn^XW. 17, 18. that fince we receive the Teftimo- ny of fallible Men, when attended with the requifite Conditions of Quality and Number •, we ought much more readily to acknowledge this Teftimony of thefe three divine Perlbns ; who, from the Unity of their Nature, muft infalhbly concur in teftifying the IVuth \ and which therefore muft be the Teftimony of God him- ( 144 ) • himfelf ; and confequently, it being as to the Number of the Witnefies, alio plainly unexceptionable, of inr finitely greater Force than any human Teftimony whatfoever. Wherein, Sir, you are to obferve, that the Apoftle could not, with any Propriety, call the bare Manner of conveying the Teftimony, and the Fadls, to which it referred, (which Faffs, for the moft Part, were meerly human Tranfa6lions) the dired: and immediate Teftimony of God ; if he had not in the 7th Verfe declarefi who the WitnefTes were. Nor could he affirm the immediate Teftimony of the Spirit, mentioned in the 6th Verfe^ to be as im- mediately the Teftimony of God, if he had not alfo ftiewn, in the fame 7th Verfe, the Unity of the fame Spirit with the Father and Son \ and, confequently, that he was aftually and truly God. For, tho' to enforce the Reafonablenefs of receiv- ing this Teftimony, he immediately fubjoins •, For this is the teftimony of God, which he tejlified concernifig his Son ; yet, becaufe the Words of the 8th Verfe, taken without any Refpe6l to the 7th, do only exprefs three different Teftimonies of one and the fame Witnefs to three different Fa6ls ; each of which, however, in human Judicatures, would require two Witneffes at leaft ; and becaufe the Teftimony of the Spirit in the 6th Verfe, tho' it might even, according to your Ac- count, be remotely applied to God, is yet no more than the immediate l^eftimony of One ; which, there- fore, by the Apoftle's comparing this Teftimony with the Force of human Evidence, is not fo ftrong, in rc- fpefl of Number, as the latter, and which he yet means it fhould appear to exceed in all Points : It is evident, to make it fuperior in Point of Number al- fo, that he here refers to the three Witneffes fpecificd in the 7th Verfe; and that the Teftimony of God the C H5 ) the Father, is underflood by him to imply the Tefti- mony of the other two. For he hath already declared, that this Teflimony is alfo the Teflimony of the Spirit ; and that the Soriy jointly with the i^j7/^^r and holy Spirit, bears equally Teflimony of Himfelf, and that thefe three are One : The Teflimony therefore of each, miiflbe the Teflimo- ny of either of the other two, or of all together. The Apoftle, therefore^ fcruples not to add, in the loth Verfe, He^ that helieveth in the Son of God, hath thisHefiimony in himfelf \ that is, he, that believeth in the Son, mufl not only afTent to his Teftimony, but alfo in that acknowledge the Force of the united Tef- timonies of the Father and holy Spirit •, the one flill re- ciprocally implying the other ; and thereby be fo ful- ly pofTeffed of the Force of the whole Evidence, as to need no other AfTiflance but that of his perfed: Faith therein, to enable him to overcome the World, as he had before declared : To fhew the Nature of which Faith, and the Evidence upon which it is founded, he entered into this Detail \ of which, therefore, this full, clear, and fair Unfolding mufl evidently fhew, to every Man of common Senle and common Refiedlion, the material Defe6l the Apoflle's whole Argument would labour under, if this Text was not admitted to (land a Part thereof. And now. Sir, having thus followed you Step by Step, the Refult of what you have hitherto advanced feems to be plainly this : That becaufe the Perfon of the Father is, by Way of Eminence and Diflin<5lion, called God^ in Ibme Texts of Scripture, and in others, the Father \ efpecially in thofe where the three Perfonsare diflin<5lly pointed out ; and, therefore, in them God and Father are indifferently ufed, to denote the Perfon of the Father only ; the fame Term, God^ according to the con flan t Language of the Sacred Pen- men, never fignifies either the three Perfons taken to- L gether. ( h6 ) gethcr, or any one of the other two taken feparately, or a-part. Whereas, Sir, it appears, on the other Hand, in the Courfe of this Examination, that the Son is fre- quently in Scripture ftiled Gody and that in as high, and as abfolute a Senfe as the Father^ contrary to your groundlefs Infinuations of the Terms being taken ah- filutely^ when applied only to the Father ^ and fubordi-' nately^ or in an inferior Senfe^ when applied to the Son, Again, it appears, that the Inferiority in Scripture afcribed to the Son, regards only, either his human Nature, or the Relation of Sonfhip, or Office •, while his Unity and Equality with the Father, as the only be- gotten Son of God, and confequently, of the fame Na- ture with the Father, and therefore God the Son, is conflantly preferved, and frequently inculcated. Further, the holy Spirit aifo clearly appears to be called God, in the lame Senle, as often as the perfonal Diftindlion of his Nature feemed to require it ; for being otherwife always defcribed as the Spirit of God, and confequently, in God as much as the Spirit of Man is in Man, his Divinity could not be fo liable to be iniftaken as that of the Son, who was manifefted at firft by his human Nature only : The feeming Inferiori- ty, therefore, afcribed alfo in Scripture to the fame holy Spirit^ plainly refpeds ^/V Office only. The Son and holy Spirit moreover appear to be con- ftant, and neceflarily concurring Agents with the Fa- ther, in the Creation and Prefervation of all Things, and in the Redemption and Salvation of Mankind ; the Spirit of God, being conftantly in God, and there- fore infeparable from him in all his Works. And lailly, the fame Attributes, Titles, and Cha- racters, which are conftantly afcribed to God, when mentioned fingly and alonCj are frequently, and in as full and as abfolute a Senfe, given diftindlly to the Son and holy Spirit, W^hence, ( H7) Whence, it evidently follows, that the Term Cod, when iifed in Scripture, without any particular Speci- fication, cannot be denied to be applicable to the Three Perfons all together: And therefore. Sir, a manifefl Fal- lacy runs thro' your whole Argument ; the Proofs, it is built upon, being plainly reftrained and particular, while your Conclufion is, notwithftandin^, unlimited and univerfal. . Hence, then, will eafily appear' your unfair Manner of comparing the Do^rine of the Athanafian Creed with the Bo5irine of the Scriptures : The Latter de- clare the Perfon of the Son^ and the Perfon of the ho- ly Spirit to be God^ as well as the Perfon of the Va- iher\ making flill a conflant and plain Diftindion be* tween the T/^r^^ Perfons : They alfo declare the Father and Son to be One \ and, again, thefe two Perfons, with the holy Spirit^ to be One. In what Senfe then are we to underftand this Dif- tindion and Unity ? This the fame Scriptures alfb point out to u^, by exprefsly and conftantly declaring, that there is but one God \ and, accordingly, afcrib- ing to each Perfon the Chara6lers, Powers, and At- tributes of the ONE God. But have you fairly flated the Dodtrine of the Scriptures ? It is plain you have nor. What then fays the Athanafiayi Creed P It exprefsly declares, that the Father is God, the Son is God, and the holy Ghoft God ; and yet they are not three Gods, hut one God : And do the Scriptures fay either more or lefs ? Nay, the Title of God being eminently given to the Perfon of the Father in fome Texts, where the three Perfons are diftindly mentioned, is plainly al- lowed and implied in the Athanafian Creed •, where the Eminence of the Perfon of the Father over the other two, as being the Fountain and Source of their Divinity, is clearly dated in the 21ft, 2 2d, and 23d Propofitions J and, tho* in the 24th and 26th, their L 2 Co^ ( 148 ) Co-eternity and Co-equality are, from the Unity of their Nature, juftly affirmed ; yet a Priority of Rank and Order is clearly all along referved to the Perfonof the Father. And is not all this plainly to be collected from the exprefs Doclrine of the Scriptures ? Have Chrift and his Apoftles taught lefs than this ? Have they not taught, that Chrifl and his Father are One in the (Irid- eil Senfe ? Have they not alfo taught, that the Father, the Son, and the ho^y Spirit are, in the fame Manner, One ? Do they not teach, that each is God •, and yet, that there is but one God ? Is not the Son declared to be the only begotten of the Father ? Doth not the holy Spirit proceed forth from the Father ? Was not the Son, from the Beginning, that is, eternally, with the Father ? And is not the holy Spirit called exprefsly the eternal Spirit ? Heb. IX. 14. But for this you fay, it is, in fome Copies, holy Spirit : But how poor and low is this Evafion ! As if, tho' he was never called Eternal, the holy Spirit of God could yet be fuppofed not as eternal as God, whofe Spirit he is. Can there then be />6r^^ Eternals ? Can there be three Gods ? There evidently cannot : No, not even one fupreme, and two fubordinate : This flill, do all you can, making three diftind: Gods, contrary to the exprefs Declaration of Scripture, which gives not the lead Warrant, or diltant Hint, for any fuch Diftindi- on : And to fuppofe a Creature, or Creatures, exalted to the Dignity of a God by Office, is to fuppofe them to be only nominal Gods ; that is,Gods, and no Gods at the fame Time. The three Perfons, therefore, mud be equally, Jiowever ir.comprehenfibly, the one God : For this is, ne Myftery^ which was kept fecret fine e the World hegan^ hut now is made manifeft ; and^ by the Scriptures .of the FrophetSy according to the Commandment of the ever- ( 149 ) Everlqfting God^ made known to all Nations for the Obe- dience of Faiths Rom. XVI. 25, 26. The Doflrinc of the Scriptures then is fairly and clearly colleded in the Athanafian Creed ; and both, a'olblutely and equally, inconfiitenc with your Reprefentation of this whole Matter. But ftill, to throw this Creed into the mofi; invidi- ous Light, you reduce the yc^wr^/ Articles of Faith, relative to this Point, as delivered in the Scriptures, into One ; to wit, that Chrift is the Son of God, and that no more is neceflary to be believed to make a Man a true Chriftian ; as if, at the fame Time, there were not many other Articles connedled therewith, and de- pending thereon, as necelTary to be believed as this. And then ♦, this indeed being far fliort of the many other neceffary Articles delivered in Scripture, and therefore enforced in this Cr^^i; you, notwithftand- ing, arraign it, and with it evidently the Scriptures, of prefumptuoufly pronouncing the Denunciations of God, againll: thofe who do not believe thofe other ne- ceflary Articles : And yet, after all, when you have fufficiently alarmed your Reader, you own other Ar- ticles to be therein implied \ faving thereby to your- felf a Power of abridging, or enlarging their Num- ber, as it fhall feem beft to anfwer your Purpofes. But pray. Sir, doth the Dodrine of Chrift's being the Son of God imply no more^ than that fcfus of Nazareth^ (a Stile, in your Mouth, as contemptuous and undervaluing, as any in that of the moft phari- faical Jew) an extraordinary Perfon fent from God, taught an excellent Dotlrine, Worked Miracles in Confirmation of it, and, after a painful and fcan- dalous Death, God raifed him from the Dead, and made him Lord and Chrift ; who is likewife ap- pointed by God, at the End of the World, to pafs Sentence on all Men according to their Works ^ Had you impartially confidered the Context of the L 3 four ( 150 ) four Goipels, particularly that of St. Johff, froixj whence you quote two or three Texts, felecled fof your Purpofe, you would have inferred a great deaj inore. For it is plain, that St. John^ in his Gofpel, un- derllood, v>^ith the Jews^ that Chrift's calling himr felf the Son of God was the fame as making him- felf God, or equal with God, John V. i8. X. 32. upon the obvious Principle of Analogy, that as aa human Son is equal in Nature to his human Father, fo a divine Son is equal in Nature to his divine Fa- ther. For had the Conflru6lion of the Jews been flrain- cd or erroneous, it is not to be fuppofed, but that our bleffed Saviour would have vouchfafed to have fet them right fo far -, as he gracioufly condefcends^ upon all other Occafions, to convince them of their many other Errors •, and not, on the contrary, to have argued with them from Inferences by theni falfely made, which at any Rate muft have produce^ dangerous Confequences, not only in them, but m others alfo. But it is evident the Apofcle, reprefents no fuch Attempt of our Saviour, but rather his entire Ac- quiefcence in the Juftnefs of their Inference, and en- deavouring to perfwade them, by the ftrongeft Proofs, to believe and acknowledge the very Foun- dation upon which they built their Inference. And, what is very remarkable, tho' our blelTed Saviour, in this firft Conference with the Jews^ la- boured in vain to convince them of his being the Son of God, from the Works which he did, the very Works of his Father, the Works of Omnipotence *, he yet, in a following Conference, moft probably with the fame Jews, infifts, in Effed, upon the very Inference drawn by them in their former Con- yerfation j bringing it yet clofer, by declaring himfelf and ( «il ) and his Father to be One : Which AflTertion, that he by no means attempts to qualify, or differently explain ; but, after firft foothing their Fury, to main- tain and enforce, in the full Strength of the Words, hath been already fufficicntly fhewn. From all which it evidently appears, that the A- poftJe St. John^ and confequently, all the Apuilles and Evangelifts muft have affented to their Mafter's Reafoning ; and firmly believed, that by his being the Son of God, he was equal with God ; he was ftriflly and eflentially one with his Father. The different Methods, which the Apoftles uied to convince either Jews or Gentiles^ Unbelievers ; or to confirm real Chriflians, Profelytes to the Faith ; have been already reprefented. How far your Ac- count agrees, or difagrees therewith, will appear up- ^n Comparifon ; and the Reader will eafily judge which comes neareft the Truth. Your Evidence then, taken indeed fo far frorti the Word of God, being thus re-examined, com- pared, and confronted with other Evidence taken irom the fame Word of God, negledted by you ; however neceffary to explain and reconcile the for- mer, and without which the Truth could not be difcovered ; it appears, that there is but One God. But that this One God, is but One individual Perfon^ the Word of God no v/here declares : And Reafon fliewing us, that One God and ')ne r'/fon^ cannot, in any proper Senfe, be reciprocal Terms 3 it is not only unreafonable, but the .iighcit Fre- fumption, to confine the Idea, or Notion of the One God, to that of One individual Ferjon, without the exprefs Warrant of Scripture for fo doing. Nay, it further appears, that the Scripuure-Idea of God is diredly itt forth to comprehend more Perfons than One. For as there is evidently but One true God^ and confequently, only one true Idea of God •, L 4 and ( 152 ) and yet this fame Idea applied to three feveral Per- fons ; fo it muft evidently follow, that the One true Idea of God includes thefe three Perfons. But that this fame Idea of the One God is, equally, applied to the three Perfons, appears alfo from the diredl and equal Application of the Chara6ters, Powers, and Attributes of the One God to each Per- fon. And tho', when the three Perfons are mentioned diRindly together, the Father alone, by way of E- minence, is fometimes called God \ yet the other two Perfons being, at other Times, as exprefsly cal- led God as the Father •, and the flrong Defcriptlons and exprefs Words of God, in the Old Teftament, being diredly applied by the Apoftles in the New, to the Son and holy Spirit ; wherein alfo the Father, Son, and holy Spirit are exprefsly declared to be one ; this Diftindion, in Favour of the Father, caa only be accounted for by his Priority of Rank and Order in the Godhead : While their being equally Itiled God by the Prophets, as expounded by the Apoftles, the infallible Interpreters of the prophetic Senfe of Scripture, and the exprefs Declaration of the fame Scriptures for the Unity of God compared therewith, muft necefifanly lead unbiafled Minds to interpret the exprefs Unity of the three Perfons into an Unity of Nature ; thereby to preferve the grand and principal Foundation of Chriftian Faith and Worihip, the Unity of God. But your Application of fo much of the Evidence as you have thought fit to produce, evidently tends to dcftroy this grand Principle \ introducing, not a Trinity of Perfons, but a Trinity of Gods: And tho' you endeavour, by making one of them only fupreme, and the other two fubordinate, to make your Dodrine to chime, in fome Sort or other, with the meer Sound of fcriptural Words j yet your Dif- tindlion ( 153 ) tin(5lion manlfeftly contradidling the exprefs Words of God himfelf, who hath declared there is none other Gods befides himfelf, whereby even your fub- ordinate Gods are abfolutely excluded ; and making the Unity to confifl: in Supremacy alone ; whereas the Words of Scripture plainly fix it in the divine Nature ^ the Verdid, which any Man of common Senfe muft bring in, upon a due Confideration of the whole ELvidence, can be no lefs, than that you have, not only partially reprefented the Truth, by unfairly fuppreffing the moft material Part, but grofsly perverted, or corrupted, what you could not avoid producing. This Decifion then of your firft Queftion evi- dently determines your fecond. But as you have thought fit to purfue it; thereby to find, if poITible, a Refuge from the Sentence, which you might rea- fonably expecl upon the firfl ; I fliall (till attend you with my Obfervations in every material Step which , you feem to take. ^ Firft then you evidently confine the One God and Father of all his Creatures, by Right of Creation and Prefervation, to the fingle Perfon of the Father of our Lord Jefus Chrift^ making them one and the lame individual Perfon^ and thereby plainly intimat- ing, that he is the Father of our Lord, in the fame Manner that he is the Father of all Creatures. Whereas it hath been clearly pointed out, that he is defcribed in the New Teftament to be, in a quite different Manner, and upon a different Account, the Father of Chrift ; and that God, abfolutely taken^ cannot, in (trid Propriety, be at all denominated a meer Perfon. And therefore, when Chrift infifts upon the Command of God, Matth. IV. lo. it is plain, that he did not particularly mean the fole Perfon of his Father, but the one God, whom the Jews worfhipped, and Satan acknowledged. Neither Neither doth he fingly mean the Perfoii of his Father, when, in the feveral Padages of his Sermon on the Mount, addreffed to his Difciples, in the Hearing of the Multitude, he calls God their Fa- ther : Much lefs in the Prayer, which he makes for them as a Pattern for their own Prayers ; in which, in plain Oppofition to the Repetitions of the Gen- 4iles^ he teaches them to addrefs God, under the fimple, but endearing. Name of. Our Father. Indeed, there is one Paffage jii the Clofe of this Serm6n, Chap. VIL 21. which you have tix^ught fit not to mention here, wherein he ipcaks of his Fa- ther perfonally ; and at the fame I ime, clearly inti- fnates praying diredly to himfelf to be as effedual as praying to the Father ; and confequently, the Worfhip of him, by Prayer, equal to the Worfhip paid, in the fame Manner, to his rather. The Words are thefe : JSIot every one that faith un- to me. Lord, Lord, /hall enter into the Ki?igdom of Heaven \ but he that doth the WiU of my Father which is in Heaven. Now this is allowed by all to be an In fiance of the Inefficacy of meer Prayer, without our fincere Endeavours to do our Duty in every other Refpe6t. Here then our Saviour fuppofcs Prayer to be made to him for the higheft Favour, the being admitted to be worthy to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven: But the Will of his Father not being otherwife per- formed, renders it of no Effedb ; which however, had it been performed, the Prayer would have been juft, proper, and fufEcient. But that the doing his Father's V7ill was the fam-e as doing his own, hath been already proved -, which the Words in i\\t 24th Verfe do further fhew ; Who- foever heareth thefe Sayings of mine, and doeth them^ i£c. But his Sayings exprefifed his Will : To do his Sayings then is to do his Will : And therefore, to do his ( ^55) his Will is the fame as to do the Will of his Father which is in Heaven. Again, Sir, you have plainly midaken the Differ- ence between the Worflikip of the Old and New Teftament. The Jews were commanded to worihip the One God, and hmi only •, Chriftians alfo the fame One God, and him only ; but not one Word of Su- freme in either. The Title of Father is alfo often given to the One God in the Old Teftament : But the peculiar Name, and elTential Attributes of the One God, being plainly given in the New Teftament to two other Perfons befides the Perfon of the Father, and thefe three being, notwithftanding, declared to be One; it is diredly and fairly inferred, that the One God comprehends thefe three Perfons, The Adoration and Worftiip therefore addrefled to this One God, is equally addreifed to the three Perfons. But becaufe the Perfon of the Father is firft in Rank and Order, as being, in a peculiar Manner, the Father of our Lord Jefus Chrift ; and from whom, with the Son, the holy Spirit proceedeth ; and be- caufe the Son and holy Spirit are reprefented in the Courfe of our Redemption, to a6t in voluntary O- bedience to the Father ; the former fubmitting to take our Sins upon him, and to fuffer in the Flefh for our Sakes •, the latter to be the immediate Com- forter and Sanftifier of our finful Hearts and Wills ; the general Courfe of the Gofpel- Worihip is there- fore addrefled to th.e Perfon of the Father, as being, by their efiential Union, the proper Reprefentative of the other two : And this however always in the Name of his Son Jefus Chrifi -, by whofe Merits on- ly, and effedua! Interceflion founded thereon, we have Accefs to the Father, thro' the Encouragement and Guidance of the holy Spirit. We ( 156 ) We pray dlre6lly to God the Father, in the Name of God the Son ; he having freely fubftituted him- felf in our Steads to bear our Punifhment ; whofe Merits therefore we are gracioufly permitted to tranf- fer to our own Account, and to put curfelves, in our Turn, in his Stead, encouraged thereto by tlie comfortable Motions of God the holy Spirit. This then is the true Chriflian-Worfhip, plaiiily founded on the Commands of Chrift and the Ex- ample of the Apoftles ; and which every other A6t of Worlhip found in the Scriptures doth conftantly imply. For, allowing the Divinity of the Son and holy Spirit, and their confequent Union with the Father, Praying to the Son evidently acknowledges •the Power -of the Father ; as every dire6l Acknow- ledgment of our Dependence on the holy Spirit, and Exhortation of Obedience to his Will, argue his Power and Will to be the fame with thofe of the Father and Son, from whom he proceedeth. But you fay, the Worfhip, plainly paid in Scrip- ture to Chrift, is an inferior Kind of Worfhip. Upon what Authority you afferc this, you beft can tell. Sure I am, t'here is not the lead Foundation for this Diftindlion in Scripture. You attempt, however, to make it our, by giving a peculiar Turn of your own to the PafTages wherein this religious Worfhip is plainly given to our Lord : But with what Appear- ance of Truth we now fhall fee. In the firft PafTage fingled out by you, A£is L 24. before you grant what no reafonable Man ever difputed, in order to give a Colour to your Glofs, you fay, there is nothing peculiar in the Words, or Context, to determine pofitively, whether Chrift, or God the Father, be meant. But pray, who was it that chofe, and ordained the twelve Apoftles at firft ? Was it not the Lord Jefus ? Was any other Perfon then to chufe one now in the Room ( ^57) Room of Judas ? Is not the Title of the Perfon, to whom the Prayer is addrefTed, the fame with that given to Jefus but three Verfes before ? And can it then be doubtful whether thefe Words are direded try Chrift, or to God the Father ? You are forced, at lafl to confefs, that the firft is not unlikely. But to make it only an inferior Kind of Worfhip, you artfully infmuate, that, as his Knowledge of the Hearts of Men is not fo abfolute and perfed: as the Father's, becaufe he received it of the Father ; fo the Worfhip here paid to him is not fo ablolute and perfedV as the Worffiip paid to the Father. But we have already fliewn, that this Knowledge of Chrift is as abfolute and as perfed as the Father's, for the very Reafon becaufe he received It of the Father, becaufe it is therefore the very fame with the Father's. And what then becomes of your Dif- tindlion of their Worfhip built upon this groundlefs Difl:in6lion of their Knowledge ? Why ftill you have a Referve, and fay, that it is an Example of Worfhip paid to Chrid with regard to an Olhce, in which he was particularly concerned. But is he not particularly concerned in all other Matters relating to his Church, who is the Head thereof ? Is he not particularly concerned in the Sal- vation of all Men, who died for their Redemption? Is he not particularly concerned in the Creation and Prefervation of all Things, in whom, by whom, and for whom all Things were created, and in whom all Things confiil ? And can a Perfon thus equally and jointly concerned with the Father for the Benefit of his Church, and for the Happinefs of Mankind in general, be entitled only to an inferior Worfliip, in- ferior Acknowledgments of Gratitude and Love ? And that too not extended to all, but only to a few particular Cafes ? But pray. Sir, confider what true religious Wor- fhip is. Is it not a folemn Service paid by rational Creatures (^J8) Creatures to the divine Being, in AcknowledgmenC of their entire Dependence upon that Being ? For that it is referved to God alone, to the On^ Cod, and not to him, and to whom elfe it is pretend- ed, he Ihail appoint, or command^ to be worfliip- ped, is beyond Contradidlion plain -, inafmuch as it is almoft the firft: Injundion infifted on by our Sa- viour in St. Matthew'' % Gofpel ; and not with ftanding jhe feveral Ads of Worfhip paid in the Revelations to Chrift, or the Lamb, very nearly the laft in the End of that Prophecy, twice delivered by the commiflion- ed Angels of God, in the very fame Manner, and upon the fame Account, to the Apoftle : And alfo, becaufe both in the Old and the New Teflament, the Precept is repeated and enforced in fuch a Manner, as abfolutely to exclude the leaft Referve, or Excep- tion, for any Kind of religious Worfhip in Favour of any other Being whatfoever. As then the divine Nature of the Obje6l evidently determines the Adl to be religious Worfhip, fo there cannot poffibly be Degrees of this Worfhip ; but that, which is inferior to it, muft differ alfo totally in Kind, as being altogether unworthy of the divine Being ; and therefore no true religious Worfhip at alh And as the Adb is determined by the Objed, fo the particular Manner, in which the A61 is appointed to be performed, is appropriated alfo to that Adt itfelf -, the Excellency of the Objed plainly requir- ing a different Mode of Performance in religious Worfhip, from that of all other allowable Ads of Worfhip paid amongfl rational Creatures to one an- other. If Chrifl then be not truly and effentialiy God, the Worfliip paid to him in Scripture cannot be true reli- gious Worfhip -, but the very fame Kind of Worfhip which is addreffed to the Father by the whole Uni- verfe. ( J59 ) verfe. Rev. V. 13. is, in the very fame Manner, by the very fame Ad:, in the very fame Vv'ords, and at th^ very fame Time, addrelfed to the Son, in the Cha- ratler indeed of a Lamb, of a Sacrifice, in his loweft Charadler. Either then the fame A6t of Wordiip, which is here offered to the Father and Son, is not true reJigi-* ous Worfliip ; or the Son equally partakes of the di- vine Nature with the Father. You fee. Sir, iil>epe is evidendy no middle Way here : The Parts of the Propofition are immediately and diredly oppofed ; ifi one be true, the other mult be abfolutely faife. Chuffi& you which you will i but let me firil: intreat you tt» permit your impartial, unbialfed Reafon to make the Choice. St. Supben^s dying Prayer then is evidently an Adb of true religious Worlhip, J^s VIP. 59, You fay, it is only an Invocation : But how, in fuch a Cafe as this, the CaJhng. upon the Lord Jefus can be called lels than a Prayer, tcann at conceive. Is it to be fuppofed^ that a Man^ in the Agonies of a painful Death, and full of iht holy Ghcjly would negled, in the moft pro- per and devout Manner, to call upon God, if he thought his Calling upon the Lord J ejus was not as ef- fectually the fame as Calhng upon God ? But you again fay, he calls upon him, not as Godl fupreme, but as Mediator or In terceflbr. Well! but how is he Mediator? It is only, as you infinuate, by his- being the Son of Man, by taking, upon him the human< Nature } Or rather, by his being as truly the Son of God as he is truly the Son of Man ; by as truly par- taking the divine as the human Nature ? Thereby be- coming, in the two Nature % a perfect and equal Me- diator between God and Man : Even his Medjatorfhip then implies his divine Nature; and, therefore, upon that A-cGount, adorable with true religious Worfliip, the Worlhip due to the, divine Being. But ( i6o ) But fnppofe the dying Martyr invoked him only in your Senle of Mediator i would his Addrefs be pro- per ? Would he not rather have faid, Lord Jefus in- tercede with God to receive my Spirit ; and not to have diredlly prayed to Chriil for what he knew he could not grant him without the Permiflion of God the Father ; and which he alfo knew would not be obtained, if his Petition was not immediately direded in the proper Form to the proper Perfon ? On the contrary, he plainly faw the Glory of God, and Jefus {landing at the right Hand of God ; the Son upon an equal Footing wiih the Father. He therefore addrefles the Lordjefus^ well knowing, ihu in praying toHim^ he prayed to the Father alfo. But he not only prayed for himfelf, but for his ve- ry Murderers. If Chrift then was only Mediator in your Senfe ; the abfolute Power of remitting Sins, which this Prayer notwithftanding fully implies, could not be in the Son of Man, he being only In- terceffor with God for them •, and yet the Son of Man, while upon Earth, infifted upon this Power -, and now in Heaven, it is here plainly and diredly attributed to him. St. PauVs Thankfgiving, i Tiw. I. 12. is plainly from the Context, and the particular Circumftances of his Converfion, diredlly addreffcd to Chrift. For, what is it he returns Thanks for ? Is it not for that he (Chrift) counted him faithful, putting him into the Miniftry ? Was it not Chrift the Lord, who ftruck him blind, thereby to open the Eyes of his Un- der ftand in g ? Did he not, by Ananias., open his Eyes, and fill him with the holy Ghoji ? Was it not Chrift then that enabled him^ that miraculoufly direded him to the true Faith .^ That chofe him in an efpecial Manner for an Apoftle ? Doth he not in the ift Verfe acknowledge himfelf an Apoftle of Jefus Chrift^ ac- cording to the Appointment of Gody our Saviour^ and Lord C i6i ) Lord Jefus Chrift^ who is our Hope ? Was it not by his immediate Appointment and Command that he became an Apoftle ? Doth, again, the Account, which is given of his Converfion, /Icls IX. intimate any other Perfon ? Doth not Chriil there tell Ananias^ that he (Paul) was a chofen \*^^(t\ to him, or, a VelTel choien by him? Which St. P<^«/, XXII. 14. in his Vindication to the Jews^ interprets of the God of their Fathers -, and the Inftrudion given him by yf/MwV?^, v. 16. to call up- on the Name of the Lord, he interpret?, in the next Verfe, of praying to him, when, in Confequence of his Prayer, he was entranced, and the Lord, whom he cal- led upon, appeared to him ; which Manner of Wor- inip, called then, by the Jexvs^ Herefy, he, XXVI. 14. defcribes as the WorlTiip of the God of his Fa- thers, believing all Things which are written in the Law and the Prophets; wherein he clearly faw, that all the Angels of God were appointed to worlhip the Son with the fame Worfhip due to the Father ; and, therefore, he defcribes him, in the Epiftle to the He- brews^ as we have already fliewn, '•The eternal and im- mutable Creator of all Things . Upon all thefe Accounts then, it is highly probable, that the Apoftle, in this Epiftle to Timothy^ after men- tioning fome of the moft fignal Favours vouchfafed to him by Chrift, upon whole Account aUb, Gal. I. 15. the Father feparated him from his Mother's Womb, &c. which yet is attributed to the holy Spirit^ A^s XIII. 2. offers to the three Perfons, united in i\-\^ Godhead, that folemn Thankfgiving and Praife in the 1 7 Verfe ; the divine Nature of the Son being the fame invifible Nature v/ith the Father % and holy Sfi- rit's, and only thro' the Veil of his Flelli made mani- feft to the World. But you think the Account of the Worfliip paid fo Ibiemnly to Chritl, Rev. V. furHcIently authorizes M you ( i62 ) you to declare it a ^ new Kind ofWorjhip^ eftabllfhed by ^}^Q, exprefs Authority of God : Whereas, I can fee no Foundation tor its being called a new Worjhlp^ but that the heavenly Hod is faid to fing a new Song : And if it is to be underftood a new Kind of Worfhip on that Account, whenever, in the Old Tedament, a new Song is king to God, we may equally fay a new Kind of Worfnip is thereby ellabliflied. But pray, Sir, is this the firfl: Inftance of Vv^orlhip paid to Chrill ? Did not his Difciplesworfhip him^ even with Proilration, immediately before, and after his Afcenfion ? Was he not worfliipped by the A- poflles, Atls I. 24. not meerly becaufe he was fiain, I3c. but becaufe he is acquainted with our mod inmoft Thoughts ? poth not St. Stephen\^iox^\^ him, in par- ticular, even at the Point of Death ; tho' the Glory oi' God the Father was fully displayed to him at the fame Time ? And doth he not addrefs him by the particular Name of Jefiisf Which plainly implies the Reafon for which his Humanity is exalted to the Right-Hand of God \ and which, therefore, if it made the Worfnip of an inferior Kind, mud alfo have rendered it kfs effedual than praying to the Father. Doth not, again, St. Taut aiTure us, Philipp. II. that this Vv'orfhip, upon this very Account, was ap- pointed previoufiy to the Time of this Vifion ; at the fame Time that he informs us, that this Perfon, who, for our Sakes, took upon him the Form of a Servant, ^c. was, before this his voluntary Humiliation^ in the Form of God, equal with God ; and, therefore, entitled to equal Honour and Worfhip ? Ls not the highed V/orfhip and Honour paid to Chrid, upon this very Account, in the Beginning of this Revelation ? It cannot then be only now urd appointed, upon Chrid's taking the Book out of his Father's Fland, in the Appearance of a Lamb. But ( i63 ) But, if the Motives and Grounds of religious Wof* fhip can at all alter and affed: the Nature of the Wor- fhip itfelf, what higher Motive can be afljgned to ra- tional Creatures than that of being redeemed from eternal Mifery ? Than that of the only begotten Son of God condefcending to take our Nature upon him, and freely fubmitting to be fent, to be employed as a meer Man, the liumbled and loweft of his Father's Servants, to undergo all the Miferies of this mortal Life, and at lafl: to be put to a painful and fcandalous Death, in order to raife us from the Death of Sin, to the Life of Righteoufnefs ? This is fo flrong and glaring, even in your own Eyes, that, after you have endeavoured to reprefent it in the mod difadvantage- ous Light, you are, notwithfbanding, obliged to ac- knowledge the Worfhip paid to Chrift to be a Part of the fame WoiTnip paid to God the Father : But, if, properly fpeaking, a Part ; how thtn can it be of an inferior, or diiierent Kind ? Your Obfervation, with which you conclude your Remarks on this Paffage, had it been juft, might have flood you in fome Stead ; but, if I miftake not, the Acknowledgments of Praife and Glory, which are fee forth as given to the Lamb, do not entirely end where you are pkafed to (lop : The 13th Verfe raifes them, if pollible, yet higher ; fhewing the Former to be given to him upon an equal Footing with the Fea- ther ; the Lamb, here, being joined with the Father equally the Objed of the Praifes of the whole Uni- verfe ; to which the four Bealls folemnly aiTenting, the four and twenty Elders immediately tali down, and worfhip Him that liveth for ever and ever. But after the whole Univerfe had thus jointly wor- fhipped, in the moft folemn Manner, the Father and Son ', is it to be thought the- four and twenty Elders fell down only to woriTiip the F"'ather ? Did they not before proftrate themfelves, in the lame Manner, to M 2 the ( i64> the Son, to the Lamb ? Ay ; but you fay the Perfon, v/hom they now fall down to worfliip. is particularly determined to be the Father by the Charadler of Him', who liveth tor ever and ever, afcribed to God, who fat upon the Throne, in the folemn Worfliip, at the Clofeof the 4th Chapter. But, Sir, there is not one Circumflance, in that Defcription, v/hich determines the Worlhip to be paid to the Father alone. I have already clearly fhewn, that the Chara6ler, Lord Gad Almighty^ v:hich was^ and is^ and is to ccme^ belongs equally to Fa- ther, Son, and holy Spirit \ that they, as being the One God, are equally concerned In the Creation of all Things : And as to the peculiar Charader of living for ever and ever, the ahfolute Eternity of Son and holy Spirit^ clearly fet forth in Scripture, equally en- titles them to it ; but in particular, with regard to the Son, Chrift appropriates this very Charader to Fiimfelf, Ch. T. 1 8. where he fays, / am he that liveth^- and was dead •, and lo, 1 am he that liveth for ever and ever : The Words there, in the Original^ being exadl- ]y the fame with the Words here. But, Sir, had you attentively confidered a mofb re- markable Circumflance in this Vifion, you would cer- tainly have given it a quite different Interpretation from what you have laid before us. xAfter the full Reprefentation of the Glory of God, Ch. IV. and the Worfnip conftantly paid to him in Heaven ; upon the Proclamation of the Angel, de- manding who v/as worthy to open the fealed Book in the Right-Hand of God, on a fudden there appears, in the Midft of the Throne, the Son of God, in the Semblance of a Lamb, that was (lain ^ iffuing forth from the Bofom of iiis Father, where, the fame Apoille, John I. 18. tells us, he conftantly is, the per- fonal Diftindtion being before concealed in the unap- proachable Light, in which the Godhead dwellcth, and ( i65 ) and now exprefled by the emblematical Figure of a Jacrificed Lamb ; as that of the holy Spirit is already fee forth under the myflical Appearance of feven Lanps ; and now, again, by the feven Eyes of the Lamb, to fliew it to be equally the Spirit of the Father and Soti. This Circum (lance, I fay, duly confidered, mud fhew every reafonable Man from whence the Lamb, on a fudden, appeared in the Midft of the Throne ; and that the Lord God Almighty, who before was d fcribed fitting upon the Throne, was not the Father alone, but Father, Son, and holy Spirit, who, by their effential Union, make the one God. And now, Sir, that we are come to the Clofe of this Point -, give me Leave to aflc you the few fol- lowing Quellions. May we pray to Chrifl or not ? Are we to pray to him tho' abfent ? For if he is but a Creature, he cer- tainly may be abfenL Is he to be prayed to, or glori- fied by Hymns, as a Man ? Is not this Creature- wor- ihip ? Or is he to be prayed to as an Angel, tho' con- fidered, at the fame Time, in his loweft Charader P Doth this make it at all better ? Or would you rather chufe to fay, it is the Union of the Angelic Nature ■with the Human, that exalts both together into an ■Objedl of Adoration ; or to fay, it is the Will of the Father that doth this ? Doth the Feather will that a Creature fhall be adored in Con junction with Himfelf by the whole Univerfe ? That an abfent Creature Ihall be prayed to, tho' he doth not hear our Prayers ? Mud Chrifl fee in, or hear from God, the Matter of our Petitions, as the Papifts fay the Angels and beati- fied Saints do, before they intercede for us ? When you can truly fatisfy yourfelf with regard to thefe Queries, I doubt not but you will favour the World with your Solutions. What then hath been juft now faid, and what I have -before fliewn with regard to the Salutations in the M 3 Be^ ( i66 ) Beginning of mod of the Epiftles, do fully anfwer all that you have further infilled on with regard to the religious Worfhip paid in Scripture 'to the Son •, and therefore, your Objedions againft that of tlie holy Spi- rit will be the more eafily difpatched. For your Argument turning chiefly upon this, that v/hereas we have no Warrant from Scripture, either by Precept or Example, for putting up Prayers, and afcribing Glory diredly to the Perfon of the holy Ghoft ; and yet granting, that we are direded to baptize in his Name, to wiih BlefTing from him ; which yet we have fhewn to be a real and effectual Prayer •, and many other Adls, which plainly imply his lovercign InPiUence and Superintendency i it, not- withllanding, clearly follows, that he, who is thus put upon an equal Footing with the other two Persons in the mofl important Articles of Chriftian Duty, is equally entided to our Prayers, Praifcs, and Thankf- givings. Now, that Baptifm, in the Name of the three Per- fons, is one of the moft important Articles of Chrif- tian Duty, evidently appears from the indifpenfable Obligation upon all Chriilians to receive that initiating Sacrament : And alfo, becaufe the performing it in the Name of any One of them is not fufficient, but, diilindly, in the Name of the Three ; as appears from the Inftances, where the Apoftles oblige thofe, who had been baptized only, according to the Baptifm of John^ in the Name of Jejus^ to be re baptized in the Name of the three Perfons ; and that, therefore, whenever this Baptifm is reprefented to be efFedually performed in tht general Terms of the Name of the Lord •, the Term, Lord, equally means the three Perfons j and, coniequently, the holy Spirit equally called Lord with the other two : As, v/hen again, it IS exprtlied by baptizing in the Name o{Jefus Chrift •, the Name, Jefus Chrilf, by the eflendal Union of the < »67 ) _ the three Perfons, is reprefentatively put as implying the other Two. To receive then effedually this fundamental Grace of Baptifm, is evidently as high an Ad: of religious Worfliip as any other enjoined by Chrift and his A- l^ofiles ; fince without it, we cannot be Members of the Church of Chriit ; and, therefore, utterly unqualifi- -ed, as fuch, to offer up Prayers, or Prailes, to either Father or Son. It is the hrfl: and primary Ad of Worlhip, which fandifieth all the reft ; as it is the Teft of our Faith, and the Evidence of our Acknow- ledgment of the neceffary and equal Concurrence of the three Perfons to the working out our Salvation ; and, therefore, of the fame Import with addrefling Ourfelves diredjy to the holy Spirit in Prayers orPraife. But yet, you fay, the plain Reafon why the holy- Spirit is joined with God and Chrift, in the t-orm of Baptifm, evidently appears from the whole Scheme of •the'Gofpel-Difpenfation, becaufe he is the chief In- ftrument, whereby they govern, and fandify.the Church. But Chrift, a v^^hile ago, was the chief Inftrument ; .and now, to make room for the holy Spirit, he is plainly railed to an equal Footing with God, govern- ing and fanclifying, jointly with him, the Church by the holy Spirit. Is not this. Sir, trifling with the moft facred Things ? Can God be tied down to one Inftru- ment rather than another ? And yet hath it not been ftiewn, that, in the Inftitution of Baptifm, the holy Spirit is fct forth as neceflary a Difpenfer of the Graces of the Gofpel as the Father or Son ^ Can he then be but an Inftrument, without whole indifpenfa- ble Concurrence the Father and Son together are re- prefcnted incapable of ferving us ^ Do but confider what St. Paul fays, i Cor. XII. id^. v/here, after enumerating the manifold Gifts of the Spirit, he adds. But all thefe zvorkctb the one and [elf M 4 [amt (i68) funis Spirit^ dividing to every Man feverally as he will ; not as God, as his Superior, willeth, but as he him- felf willeth. Is this the Defcription of an Inftrumenr, acting entirely by the Direclion of another's Will ? Doth not his own Will determine him here to do, what God is faid, in the fame Manner, to do, V. 6 ? He furely tlien muft be God, who a(5ts of Himfelf what God is faid to perform •, and, confequently, as adorable as Father, or Son. But perhaps. Sir, it will yet appear, that the Scrip- tures reprefent him to be adually, and perfonally adored and prayed to. The folemn Wifli of St. Paul, 2 Cor. XIII. 14. which yet we have fhewn to be a real, and effecftual Prayer, you allow to be a folemii Addrefs to Chrift ■^nd God ; to Chrift for his Grace, to God for his Love ; but that the Remainder is not an Addrefs di- rc(5lly to the holy Spirit, to grant his Communion, or Fellowfhip, to the Corinthians ; but a continued Addrefs to the other Two, to grant it for him. Now, what can be more evafive, or difingenuous,- than this ? You have but juH: now allowed, that we are directed by Scripture to wifh BlelTing from him ; and, immediately, in the only one Inftance you produce for it, you deny any fuch DirecTtion to be at all contain- ed : A.nd why, pray .? Becaufe there is Nothing here expreffed, by St. Paul, proper to be' given to the Co- rinlhians by the Spirit. — What } Was it not proper for the holy Spirit to give to them the Communion of Himfelf, the Pellowfhip, the joint Participation of his Comfort and Graces ? Are not thcfe the peculiar Gifts of the holy Spirit ? Who is fo proper to give them, to vouchfafe his Society to them, as the holy Spirit himfif? And as diftincl Favours are evidently prayed tor, from Chrift and God the Father, no more proptr to be granted by each, than the Communion of the holy Spirit by Himfelf j why, if each of the for- mer ( 169 ) mer is fuppofed, notwithllanding, to be properly ad- dreflcd, Ihould not the holy Spirit alfo ? There evidently can be no Reaibn for the Diftin(5li- on : And, therefore, as hath been clearly proved be- fore, this, and all fuch AddrefiTes are, really and ef- fedlually, Prayers ; and the holy Spirit is here prayed to equally^ with the P'ather and Son. I'his, then, being fo plain, doth it not feem pro- bable, at lead, that the Difciples at Antioch^ A5fs XIII. 2. prayed particularly to the holy Spirit \ when, by his immediate Diredion, they feparated to him Barnabas and Saul for the efpecial Work whereunto he had called them } For you fee. Sir, that, in Obedi- ence to his fole Command, they falted and prayed •, and, laying their Hands upon them, they fent them away ; who, being thus fent forth by the holy Ghoft^ adling immediately from Himfelf, become the Apolfles of the Gentiles^ by his immediate CommifTion : For the ef- fedual Performance of which, therefore, it fhould feem r^eafonable to fuppofe, that they particularly pray- ed to Him, under whofefole Direc^tion they then a6t- €d. But your Interpretation of the Words of St. FauU Rom. IX. I. entirely deftroys the Force of the A- poftle's AfTeveration. For, if he appeals only to his own Confcience, as enlightned by the holy Spirit, for the Truth of what he fays, he doth no more than what any other Perfon might do, pretending to the fame Illumination -, and, the Teftimony of his Confcience flill remains with his Hearers as queftionable as that of any other Man, in whofe Power it is to affertas much, without any imme- diate Proof of its being fo, or not: The Apofble, therefore, appeals immediately to the holy Spirit, to teftify, that his Confcience, rightly informed by that Spirit, witnefTeth to the Truth of what he is about to deliver ; to the End that his Flearers, who were ful- iiyo) !y perfuaded of the holy Spirit's Power to fearch the Heart, might be convinced of the Sincerity of the Apoftle, by t!je hoiy Spirit's teilifying, in his Acqui- cfcence, to the Truth of his Appeal. But pray. Sir, aie the Words, I fpcak the 'Truth in Chriji^ rightly tranflated ? Vvhy then Ihouid the iame Greek Particle, in^ be differently interpreted, when applied in the fame Verfe to the holy Spirit <* You cannot affign any one fufficient Reafon for it. If then there is an Appeal here to Chrijl in the For- mality of an ailertory Oath, as there plainly feems to be, there is, undoubtedly, the fame to the holy Spirit. For the Manner of the ExprefliOn is the fame with regard to both ; only fomewhat more fo- Jemn with regard to the Latter. I /peak the Truth in Chrijl^ I lie not ; my Confcience a[fo bearing tne Witnejs in the Holy Gii-oft. Nor is his 1 itle from hence to religious Wordiip, by Prayer, in any Sort invalidated by your pretended Parallel of the fame Apoftle's appealing to God, Chrifr, and x}.\t eled Angels ; inafmuch as we have already fhewn the different Foundation of that Ap- peal, and the high Probability of the Apoftle's Meaning by the ele6l Angels, in that Paffage, the elect Rulers of the Chridian Church here upon Earth. And here I cannot but obferve your inconfifient, and indeed contradidory Behaviour in the" whole Courfe of your Appeal. You infer, that Chrift is a Creature^ tho' he is pofitivcly called God : Yet you vj\\] not let us infer, that the holy Spirit is GoJ^ tho' he is no wiiere denied to he God. You will not again allow Chriil to be God, tho' f)n a Throne in Heaven, and receiving Worfliip from the Vv'hoie Univerle : Yet you would prove that the holy Spirit is not God ; btcaufc he is not found on a Throne^ nor receiving divine Woriliip. An ( I70 An Argument made up of Negatives only, you cannot but know, concludes Nothing. Yet this is your Argument ; He that is not on a Throne, nor prayed to, nor worfliipped, is not God : The holy Spirit is not on a Throne, prayed to, nor worfliipped •, Therefore he is not God. Our Argument for the Divinity of Chrift is, on the other Hand, entirely affirmative, and drawn from the fame Topic •, yet is, it feems, to pafs for nothing with you, who ufe the former. It is this ; He that is on a Throne, prayed to, and wor- fliipped, is God : Chrifl: is on a Throne, prayed to, and wor- Ihipped ; Therefore Chrifl: is God. But if the Father was never reprefented as on a Throne, or prayed to, would you conclude from thence, that he is not God ? Would no Afiertions of Scripture, fuch as, that he is God, that he is eternal, &€. convince you ? Nay, is the Father ever once re- prefented, in the New Teftament, by Name, as fit- ting upon a Throne ? But after all, tho' there was not one Inflance of religious Worfhip paid perfonally to the holy Spirit; his real Divinity being otherwife clearly evinced -, and he being alfo reprefented as the immediate and in- feparable Spirit of God ; can it be fuppofed, that you, or any other Man, can pray to Almighty God, without praying at the fame Time to his holy Spi- rit ? Can the Spirit of a Man, tho' evi^iently diftind: from the bodily Subftance of that Man, be Icparated, even ( 172 ) ^ven in I'hought, from the Man himfelf? In the jame Manner, neither can the Spirit of God, v/hich is in God, as the Spirit of Man is in Man, tho' dif- tinguifhed with pecuhar Properties from the Perfons •of the Father and Son, evidently comprehended in the fame Godhead, be fcparated even m Thought, from God himfelf Praying to God then is diredlly praying to his holy Spirit. And this feems plainly to be the Rea- fon why fo m.uch fewer Prayers, or dirt6l A6ts of religious Woriliip, are addrefled perfonally to the Spirit, than to the Son. For, the Son being reprefented as fubfifting in the human Nature, as well as the divine, and the For- mer being more frequently recurred to than the Lat- ter ; to keep up, amongfb other Reafons, our Senfe of the humane Difpofition of our Mediator and Judge, whofe truly awful, and divine Character might otherwife reduce poor finful Mortals into a State of abfolute Defpair \ frequent religious Wcrfhip is paid to the Son •, to the End, that the Evidence of his Divinity fliouid not be quite lod in the confranc Contemplation of his human Nature ; but that, from a due Confideration of the true Nature and proper Object of religious Worfliip, his divine Nature ihould be, as frequently as pofTible, laid before us. Whereas the holy Spirit, having no inferior Na- ture to tempt Mankind to a low Idea of him, and being fo fully and ftrongly ^ct forth as the conftant Spirit of God -, and that fo intimately and nearly, as that the perfonal Afts of the Spirit have been looked upon by fome Heretics, as only different Energies, or Exertions, of God's Power and other Attributes ; the holy Scriptures therefore jnfifl: chiefly on thofe A6cs, which connrm, in the ftrongeft Manner, his perfonal Agency -, and but fparingly touch the col- lateral Proofs of his Divinity, fo powerfully efla- blilhed ( 173 ) blifhed in the exprefs Declaration of his being the immediate and inicparable Spirit of God, that fcarch- eth all Things, even the deep Things of God. From this d liferent Pradice of the Apodles then, wherein they fo carefully guard the Divinity, when endangered by the Perfonality in the one Cafe, and fupport the Perfonality, Vv^hen likely to be abforbeci by the Divinity in ihe other ; it feems, beyond Contradiction, plain, that it was their determined Purpofe to fix the Belief of Father, Son, and holy Spirit, three Pcrfons and one God, in the Minds of Chriilians •, to inculcate, with the Unity of the God- head, a co-equal and co-eternal Trinity of Perfons. For why, otherwife, fhould they, on the one Hand, fo induflriouQy afcribe to the Perfon of the Son, even as the Son of Man, the Titles, Charade- riftics, Attributes, and Worfhip of God ; and, on the other Fland, as induftrioufly afcribe to the holy Spirit, w^ho, as the exprefs Spirit of God, mud o- therwife unavoidably be looked upon as, numerically and individually, one with the Father, the diflinft and incommunicable Properties of a third Perlbn ? Account for this. Sir, reafonably, any other Way, and then you fliall have my Leave to fay, that the facred Writers have left no Example of any Sort of Worfliip, directed to three Perfons ^nd One God:, ' Tho' now it is as evident to my Apprehenfion, that it is flrongly expreffed to the three Perfons, and thefe three Perfons are as ftrongly implied to be the One God, as that three Perfons cannot be one Perfon ; or that the Term, God, ahfolutely taken^ cannot, ftriftly and properly, mean one fingle, individual Perfon. The truly celebrated Argument then of learned Men, drawn from this Article of Wor'liip, (till re- tains it's full Force, notwithdanding your repeated Attacks upon it. You ( 174 ) You fay, that God's exprefs Command to worfliip One God, and him only, doth not preclude God from a Right to appoint an inferior Worfhip to be paid to a Perfon in the Capacity of a Mediator. If indeed the Words of Scrjpture Vv'cre, One Supreme God, you niight then bring in as many inferior Ob- je6ts of Woriliip, as many inferior Gods as yoij pleafe. But the Term, Supreme^ is no Scripture Word at all, and only artfully brought in by all on your Side for this very Purpofe. The Words then, Ilripped of your Addition, evi- dently appropriate all that is meant by Scripture- WorOiip to the One Gcd. There cannot then, as I have before fhewn, be any Degrees of this Worfhip. And therefore, if any Kind of this Worfliip is ap- pointed to be paid to the Perfon of the Son of Gcd, he is fo far, at leafl, upon an an equal Footing with the Father. But you have already allowed, that Part of the Worfhip, due to the Father, is paid to the Son. And here you allow our Saviour to declare, that yf// Alen Jhould honour the Son, even as they honour the Father ; and that thereby a general Likenefs of Ho- nour is denoted, but not a ftrict Equality. But whence do you colledl a general Likenefs only, and not a llrid: Equality ? Why, from the like Form of ExprelTion in Infiances, where certain- ly the Nature of the Things compared, determines the Force and Extent of the Comparifon -, and therefore the fame Rule fhould reafonably hold in this Cafe alfo : But an human Father and an human Son are evidently, as to Nature, equal -, and only different in this Refpe61:, that the one is confidered as the Begetter, the other, as Begotten : And, by r\na- logy of Reafon, a divine P^ather, and a divine Son, fhould be confidered in the fame Manner. The ( ^73 ) The Fionour then, in this Cafe, to be paid to each, it ihould Icem, ought to be equa) ailb i ex- cepting only that the Honour is paid to the Son, as the Son, and to the Father, as the Father: The Honour exadly the fame, tho' with a pecuHar and con Han t Regard to the Difcindion of the Perfon to whom it is paid ; which the Reafon afligned, by Clniir, for this Honour being given to him, plainly intimates: Tbe Father judge lb no Man, but hath com- mil ted all Judgment to the Son. If then ail Judgment is committed to the Son, all the conf^-quent iiime Kind of Honour, which the Father would other wife have had, is coniigned to the Son aifo. And if he diat honourcth not the Son, honoureth not the Father who font him , it follows^ that he who honoureth the Son, honourcth, at t\\Q fame Time, the Father: And confequendy, the Honour paid to the Son mud be equal to, and of the fame Kind with, the Fionour paid to the Father; otherwife, it would be unworthy of the Father, and therefore could not honour him. So that, when we would pay Honour to the Son, we mull be iiridly careful, that it is not inferior, or unequal, to the Fionour due to the Father : For fince the Fionour paid to the Son, redounds to the Fa- ther ; if it is yet unequal to the Honour due to the Father, and therefore unworthy of him, it will nei- ther be accepted by* the Son, but return in Diilionour upon our own Heads. Inferior religious Worlliip hath already appeared to be an implied Contradidion : To affirm it, not- withftanding, to be cxprefsly commanded by Al- mighty God, requires, not only the cleared and mod authentic Evidence, but alfo an exprefs Revocation of the firft Command, whereby ail Manner of reli- gious Woilhip is plainly appropriaied to t|ie dvvine Being, But, ( 176 ) But, for the fir ft, you have only to fay, that when^ the Son a6lually receives equal Honour with the Fa- ther, he is reprefcnted under the Charadter of a Lamb that was flain •, a Character abfolutely incon- fident with the Notion of his fupreme Godhead j tho', in the former Part of the fameBook, he is plain- ly fet forth under a different Charafler, under that of Almighty God : And tho' elfev/here in the Scrip- tures his two Natures, his divine and human, are diftinftly fpecified, and the higheft Honour is ap- pointed to be paid to him even in the Latter, in Con- iideration of his faiTering in that for the Sins of the whole World ; a Charader, again you f^y, abfo- lutely inconfiftent with the Notion of his Title to fupreme Honour and Worfhip, at the very Time that he is aftually receiving it. But the Scriptures, in the next Place, are fo far from giving the leaft Intimation of any Sort of Re- peal of that firft and principal Command of wor- ihipping God alone, that immediately after God's delivering it, he, by his Servant Mofes^ according to the Septnagint Verfion, Deut. XXXII. 43. referred to by St. Paul^ Heb. I. 6. introduces the Worfliip of the Son by all the Hoft of Heaven : And after he had again, by the Mouth of David^ Pfahn XCVII. 7. intimated the fame, he yet declares, by the Prophet Ifaiah, XLII. 8. XLV. 5. XLVIII. 11, 12. that he will not give his Glory to another •, that he is the Lord, and none elfe •, there is no God befide him ; I am he-, I am the Firft ^ and I am the Laft. The very Charafter, which Chrifl affumes to himfelf in the Revelations •, and by which, notwithftanding, in the Prophet, God diftinguifhes his incommunicable and fingular Glory : And, after all, (I mufl repeat it again) Chrid himfelf infills upon the fame Command, Matth. IV. 10. in its full exclufive Force ; and, in the Clofe of the New Teftament, the Angels to St. John ( 177 ) y^^/^;/ repeat it to the abfolute ExcliifionoF the higheft Creature, or Angel. Doth this then. Sir, look like a Repeal of even thfe ieaft Tittle of this Command ? Can the lead Referve, or Exoeption, be thence coilefled in Favour of any other Being whatfoever ? Is there the lead Implication for an inferior Degree of religious Worlliip, or a Part of that, due to God, to be given to an inferior Mini- ller ? There evidently is not. If then you infifl, not- with (landing, that it is exprefsly commanded by JI- mightyGod, contrary to the exprefs Declarations of his Will, who is it that arraigns the Gofpel Account of fuitable Worfliip being paid to Chrifl: ? You, or the Advocates of the eftabliflied Dodlrine ? Tou^ who would eflablifh an inferior mediatorial Worlhip to Chrifl, of which the Scriptures fay not one Word •, inftead of the true religious Worfhip, which they ac- tually afcribe to him equally with the Father °, or IVe^ who, with the Scriptures, deny him your inferior Worfliip, and, with the fame Scriptures, give him the Worfhip due to God ? Which, therefore, being the true State of the Difference between us, the Papifls certainly have as good Authority for giving inferi- or Worfhip to Saints, and Angels, and the Virgin Mary^ as you have for giving no more to our Lord^ and God, our Saviour Jefus Chrifi. And now. Sir, having thus fliewn the Weaknefs and Vanity of your Obfervations upon the exprefs Authorities of Scripture, relating to religious Wor- ihip ; and how unfatisfadory your pretended Anfwer is to the truly celebrated Argument of learned Men upon this Article ; you mult give me Leave here, in my Turn, to addrefs myfelf to our common Read- ers, in order to reprefent to them, in their true Lights a few Fadbs, which you have taken upon you to ad- vance, in the following Pages of your Appeal, great- ly, I fear, at the Expence of Truth. N Ftrft, ( 178 ) Firft^ then. Beloved in Chrift, be pleafed to ob- e, that this Gentleman, your Jppellant^ (how truly fo, will, perhaps, hereafter appear,) afierts that, ad- mitting your Convidion of the Truth of what he hath here taught, by Means of his Treatife, or any other Help, you have an undoubted Right to make a ferious and folemn Protelt againft the Doflrine of the Jthanafjan Creed. But if this Matter is fo clear, as this Gentleman pretends, it would be but a poor Compliment to the Majority, if not to the whole Body, of your fpirituai Guides and Paftors, to fuppcfe them fo void of com- mon Senfe and common Reflection, as not, equally with the Jppellanty to perceive fo evident a Point ; and, if they did, it would be dealing hard Meafure to them indeed, to think that they fhould, contrary to the Teftimony of their own Confciences, not only Themfelves continue in fo grofs an Error, but endea- vour to go on in deceiving their Hearers. This then being a Cafe not reafonably to be fuppof- ed •, it fhould feem, therefore, on the other Hand, to be incumbent on you, however flrongly kd by the AffellanC^ Arguments to concur with his Opinions^ to communicate firft your Motives for this propofed Change of your Faith to thofe, whofe Information and AlTi (lance you have hitherto depended on \ who, if they before have not thought this Gentleman's At- tempt worthy of their Attention, will now, for your Sakes, and for the Difcharge of their own Confciences, give it fuch an impartial and fair Trial, either at the Bar of their own Skill and Knowledge, or that of others more able and approved, as that the Refult will be, either an entire Concurrence with the Jppellanfs Sendments, or a fufficient Supply of fuch convincing Arguments, in Behalf of the eftablifhed Faith, as will enable you to withftand the Force of all his for- mer (^79) hicr Attacks upon your now plainly abuled Under- flandings. In the firfl Cafe you evidently will not need to a6l independently of your fpiritual Superiors. And in the fecond Cafe, it being as plain, that your fuppo- fed Convidlion arofe from a Mifreprefentation of the Truth, I fhould be far from thinking that you would flill obftinately perfift to efpoufe a manifefl Error : And therefore you muft give rfie Leave to pronounce that your undoubted Right to proteft at all, in this Cafe, previoufly to fuch a Condudt, is altogether groundiefs and imaginary: Efpecially as fuch Proteft, confidering the general AfiTent of the whole Body of the Clergy to the pre- fent eftablilhed Faith, excepting the late under-hand Attempts of a very few, who feem unhappily givea up to the fame Delufion, would unavoidably become the Means of a total Separation between Clergy and People ; which, indeed, might perhaps be ufeful to the Schemes of the Jppellant and his Adherents ; bun certainly would be very fatal to the Peace and Quiec of both Church and State. * He next tells you, it is your Duty as Chriftians* or Difciples of the blefifed Jeftts^ to make an honefc and open Profeflion of your religious Principles with regard to fuch an important Point. The Advice is certainly good. No Man ought to be either afraid or afhamed to profefs what he fincerely believes, up- on proper Convidion, to be true. But in your Cir- cumftanccs, I fhould, at lead, chufe to wait till this kind Advifer fliewed me an Example -, and, by that one honeft Step, convinced me fo far of the Since- rity of his other ProfefTions. And yet you fee, he who pretends to fo great Refolution, to fuch a Zeal for the Truth, as he calls it, and fuch a Readinefs to fuffer every Thing in fo glorious a Caufe ( jud as if there was indeed fome- N 2 v/hat (i8o) -what to fear from the Rancour of his Adverfaries) poorly keeps himfelf in the dark! conceals his Name! and, cunningly fkulking under the Cover of Pro- teftations, proved vain and infidious by his own Tvary Condud, invites you out to Protefts and De- clarations, with a Refolution to follow, as foon as he fhall fee a fufficient Number of you in the Field! Whether this his Timidity arifes from a fecretDif- truft of his Caufe, or from an abjed: Apprehenfion about his worldly Support, he beft knows : But you certainly muft give him up for a Leader, and may fally out by yourfelves, if you pleafe. A Champion that talks of Confcience to others, that vaunts his Courage to Men, that even prays, and appeals to God for his Sincerity •, and yet Hes concealed in a Cloak and Mafl<., well enough becomes the difinge- nuous Caufe he efpoufes ; but fliews too much, I cannot help faying, of Coward and Diffembler, for, either the Prudent or the Honeft, to truft to as a Leader. But if he dare not lead you to an open Aflault, he offers you his Service for a Sap, or a Mine ; and here advifes you to no more than what he himfelf hath probably reduced to Practice a thoufand Times, and, glaringly, I am fure, in this very Appeal to you. He, who will not be your Leader in that honeft and open ProfelTion of his own Principles, to which he fpirits yon up, advifes you, in effect, to temporife, and join in Forms of Worfhip, as he doth, condemned by your own Confcicnces as well as his. He evidently ihews you how you may ftill conform, notwlthftand- ing your Protefts and open ProfefTions. He points out to you the exceptionable Parts of our Liturgy in his Opinion -, which you are only inwardly to diflfent from, or change into a Form fuitable to your own Way of Thinking, or interpret in a Senfe of your own •, and then you may fafely continue in Communi- on ( i8i ) on with thofe, whom you think in your Hearts to be no better than Hereticks, impofing Terms of Chrifti- an Communion, which were never required by Chrill and his Apoftles. . , xr rr But, if this be fufficient, where then is the Necelli- ty to proteft and profefs againft Forms of WorHiip, which you may thus, imperceptibly and dexterouHy, reduce into others more agreeable to your own Palate ? Certainly there is none at all. And, therefore, this Gentleman will hardly be prevailed upon to fhew you the Way •, but if you are difpofed for a Night Expedi- tion, to ad: covertly and in the dark, he, who tells you how to fliuffle, and equivocate with God and your own Confciences in Matters of Religion, will lead you here with all the Skill of a pra6liced Veteran. When he tells you, it is a iMatter of Fact, well known to the Learned, that the exceptionable Expref- fions in the Nicene Creed, concerning the Son, did not obtain in any genuine Creed 'till the Year 325, and thofe concerning the holy Spirit were not added 'till the Year 381 •, He ought to have told you the Reafons of their obtaining and being added then. He ought to have told you that the Do6lrine of thofe Expreffions, concerning the Son, was the con- ftant Doa-rine of the Church, down from the A- poftles' Times to the above Period ; as the learned Bifhop Bull hath unanfwerably proved in his excellent Defence of that Creed. He ought to have told you, that, about that Time, and not before, the real Divinity of the Son begun to be queftioned by one Arius ; who, thereby caufing a Schifm in the Church -, to put a Stop to the further Proo-refs of his Herefy, a Council of above 300 Bifhops of the Church alTembled at Nice, by the Authority of Coyiftantine the Great, the firft Cbrifiian Emperor, from all Parts of the Chriftian World -, and, upon a ilrict Review and Exan^in.ition of theScnfe of ^ the ( l82 ) the Church from the Time of Chrift, condemned the Jrian Innovations by the Claufes in Queftion of that Creed : In which, tho' the dire6t Words of Scripture are not f^t down, yet the Do6lrine is plainly, and un- deniably collefted from the clear and obvious Senfe of Scripture. He ought, in particular, to have told you, that the fingle Point, given in Charge by the Emperor to the Council, was to enquire and determine what was the Faith of the Church concerning the Divinity of Chriil, which they had received from their Fore-fathers and Predecefibrs ; and that they all, five or fix only excepted, gave in the Words of the Old Creed, as it now ftands. Very God of Very God, &c. with the Addidon only of the Word, Conjitihjlantial^ or ra- ther, Co-ejfential. He ought to have told you alfo, that the real Di- vinity of the holy Spirit was not called in Queftion again till fome Time after this \ which at length ob- liged the Council of Conftantinople to add the Claufes concerning the holy Spirit^ agreeable to the conftant Dodrine of the Chriftian Church, from the Times of the Apojlles to the firft moving of that Que- jflion. He ought, my Brethren, to have told you the whole Truth, and not difingenuouQy to have fup- prefled the principal Part •, thereby to make the efta- blifhed Dodrine of our Church to appear to have been a mcer Innovadon at thofe Times : Whereas the Arian and Semi- Jrian Herefies were then only firft broached in Oppofition to the conftantly received Do6lrines of the Church, even from the Time of pur blefTcd Saviour. The Hiftories of thofe Times, particularly of thofe reladng to thefe Difputes, ma- ny of which are in the Englijh Tongue, will fully ^ inform you of the Truth of what I have here laid iDefore you. He ( »83 ) He a-ain my Brethren, takes upon him to repre- f.n; ou' a" -y as a divided Body •. feveral groamng zealous m their Uttence, r ^.a "j^ fur^ en- Experience, however -f.J"J,f .rirRepreVent- '''S^lpaHng the Defenders of the prefent were as glaring and manitat as tae ^ui y ^7.:!,:!:-^^''^^^.^''>^^ """ "f rr i. Once The B.ft Revival of this Co^roverf,, h«l. SS™" nfASq*y And .11 .ha. .he^,,^.« ff S;«,T, -cr..r;i"e hee. fo ol..„ ».- '"l\f ?;«n«h of the Whole, however , », te ieaea ui x^i onH hs eic^ht Sermons re la- Oueries upon the Point, ana nis civ^ni- ( i84 ) eafily procured, I earneflly recommend to the Perufal of thole who require Satisfaction upon this Head -, and yet cannot attend to, or compafs, the other Works of that great Champion of the true Chriftian Faith. To the Queftion, put by your Apfellant^ Whether ar,y Suhmffion is required of Chriftian People to their Idwful Governors^ and whether Chriji hath not left his Church to be direcled and governed by the Paftors ^of Chrifi's Flock P I mud beg Leave to obferve the In- lufficiency and Evafion of his Anfwer. The Sum of it is this : It becomes Chriftian People to comply with Rites and Ceremonies of an indifferent Nature, Matters of external Form and Decency, fet- tled by their lav/ful Governors, and to fubmit to their Authority therein; and, it fhould feem, therein only, fo far as they can do it confidently with acknow- ledging Chrift as the King and Head of his Church ; who alone had Power given him by Almighty Gpd to declare and fix the Terms and Conditions of Sal- vation ; while the Paftors are only to inculcate, by Perfvvafions and Example, the Faith and Pra6lice of the plain and fundamental Points of the Gofpel. As if, tho' Chrift alone hath Power to declare and fix the Terms and Conditions of Salvation, yet thofe Terms and Conditions, and the confequcnt funda- mental Points of Faith and Pradlice, were fo plain and obvious, in the Midft of infinite Difputes about them, to all Kinds of People, as to need no Expla- nation, but from himfelf -, it ftiould feem, and Men of his own Stamp -, and if therefore the Paftors had no Right to offer any, nor the People were under any Obligation to receive them when offered. For when he afterwards fays, that the Governors of the Church are to impofe nothing upon Chriftian People, but what they may perceive with their own ynderftanding5, when properly inftruded -, tho' he. plainly ( i8i) plainly acknowledges a NecefTity of Inftrndion, yet he feems unwilling to fuppofe, that it fhould come from the Clergy j as appears from what he prefently adds, that the People have a Right to be informed, in a Matter plainly tending to create a Sufpicion of the Clergy •, to wit, that the Authority of Councils^ Convocations^ Bijhops, and Prejbyters^ is hutna?i •, and confequentjy ought to be difregarded, when it (lands in Competition with the exprefs Determination of Chrift and his Apoftles : Plainly intimating, as if they had, all together, combined to impofe upon, and miflead the People in this Point, and therefore not to be confided in on any Account whatfoever. It is evident then, that he evades the principal Matter of the Queftion, anfwering it in that Part only which relates to Matters of meer Indiffercncy : While with regard to the efTential Points of Duty, in which, however, our bleffed Saviour thought it abfolutely neceflary to appoint, in his Church, peculiar Teach- ers and Inftrudors, he, notwithflanding, feems to infinuate, that others are rather to be depended on ; whom, did he dare to fpeak out, he would not leave you long to guefs at. But how inconfiflent again is he here with himfelf in the Beginning of his Appeal, where he perfwades you to think that you fland in need of no other AfTiftance, but that of your own plain Reafon and common Senfe ! But, pray, my Brethren, do but obferve that in the primitive Churches, where the Ufe of the origi- nal Scriptures was common to all, even then there a- rofe various Differences of Opinion concerning the Senfe of fome of the plained Points \ and for the Settlement of which, frequent Recourfe was had to the Rulers and Pallors affembled for that Purpofe. Can it then be fuppofed, that the Bulk of Mankind now, who only can have Recourfe to Tranflations, (and it is notorious, that the befl Tranflations cannot always ( i86 ) always precifely and exa6lly convey the Senfe of the Original) are better qualified to perceive, and agree in, the Senfe of any difputed Point, from thofe TranHations, than the primitive Chriftians were ; who had the Originals in their Hands, and nnderftood them as well as we do Englijh ? Who then are to be confulted and depended on, but thofe who have made it their Bufinefs and Study carefully to examine and compare both ? Your Appellant himfelf Qiews you ^e unavoidable Necefiity of this : For while he feemingly appeals to you only, he is frequently obhged to drop you, as truly incompetent Judges, and turn his Appeal to the Learned ; — to thofe very Men, whom yet he hath endeavoured to reprefent to you, when his Purpofe required it, as prejudiced and partial WitnefTes •, the Forgers and Inventors of all thofe Subtilties and nice Diftinctions, with which, he fays, they have puzzled and perplexed the Truth ! You cannot then, my Brethren, but own, you ftand in Need of the beil: Helps : And what better can you have than thofe, whom Chrift hath appoint- ed to work for your Salvation, and to guide you into all faving Truth, under the Penalty of eternal Mi- fery, if they wilfully, or thro' Negled:, mifguide, or deceive you ? And that you may furely know and diftinguifh who thofe pious Men are, who fincerely and earneft- }y labour for your Salvation, the beloved Apoftle of Chrift hath given you this plain Rule, i John IV. i, 2, 3. Beloved^ believe not every Spirit •, hut try the Spi- rits, whether they are of God • hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every Spirit that confefjeth, that Jefus Chriji is come in the Flefh, is of God -, and every Spirit that confejfeth not that Jefus Chrifl is come in the Flefljy ii not of God. Bup ( 18? ) But to confefs that Jejus Cbrtjl is come in the Flefli, is, in other Words, to confefs the whole Gof- pel of this fame Apoftle •, wherein he clearly teaches, that the Perfon, whom he here means by Jefus Chrift, Jn the Beginning was the JVord^ and the Word was with God (the Father,) and was God (the Son) -, that he jointly with the Father^ created all Things •, is (always) in the Bofom of the Father^ his only-begotten Son, and One with the Father-, that he was made Flejh ; that is, took perfed human Nature upon him ; and confequently aj6led and fufFered, confidently with the one, or other, of thefe two Natures, as the Occafion, or Circumftances of our Redemption required. They then, who confefs and teach the fame Dodlrine which St. John taught, are thofe whom ye are to believe. Chrift himfelf alfo tells you, Matth. VII. i6. Y^ Jhall know them hy their Fruits -, that is, by their Lives, Behaviour, and Adions. But if you hear of new Dodlrines, and know not who deliver them to you, how can you judge of thofe Men by their Lives and Adlions? Who, hke Wolves in Sheep's Cloathing, like Deceivers under the plaufible Colour of Sincerity and a pretended Zeal for the Truth, deny you the only true Teft of their Sincerity and Zeal, the Opportu- nity of comparing xht'ir Bo5irines with their Lives and Anions •, the Opportunity of knowing by their open and undifguifed Profeflion of what they teach, whe- ther they are ready to feal with their Blood, if re- quired, to the Teftimony of that new Faith, which they fo zealoufly recommend ; Men, who boldly pro- fefs a Readinefs to do this, yet flatly give the Lie to their Profeflions, by concealing their Names, and keep- ing themfelves out of Harm's Way. If the Appellant then, who fo earneftly exhorts you to this Pra(5lice, declines it himfelf, what are you to think of him ? Are you not to think that \\t hateth the Light, becaufe his Deeds are evil ? That, becaufe he (i88) he decllneth to give that Argument for the Proof of his Gofpel, which the Apoflles and primitive Chrif- tians gave for that of the Gofpel of Chriff, he is plainly doubtful of his being worthy to receive the fame extraordinary Affiflance, which enabled them chearfully to lay down their Lives for a Teftimony to the true Faith ? Had he again the lead Regard for Truth, would he have fo notorioufly mifreprefented the State of the Chriflian Church, in and after the Time of Conjian- tine^ in fuch a Manner, as to make any one imagine, who knew not otherwife the Hiftories of thofe Times, that the Arian Tenets were ih^ true Apoflo- lical Articles of Faith, and thofe of the Defenders of the Nicene Creed, the only Innovations ? That AtJM- nafius and his Adherents v/ere Tyrants and Perfecu- tors, and that Arius and his Followers were the per- fecuted Sufferers ? When it is notorious, that while the Arian Faction prevailed, as it frequently did for a while, by the Caprice of the Emperors, little at- tentive to the true Interell of Religion, the Papal Tyranny of Rome afterwards could only exceed the wanton Abufe of Power in the Avians : And that when the Orthodox gained the Afcendant, their ne- ceffary Cenfures againfl the contumacious Perverters of the true Faith, were conftantly tempered with that Mildnefs and Charity, which always denote the meek and peaceable Spirit of the Church of Chrift. To the Diiiradions then, with Vv^hich the Avians^ and the many confequent Se6ls fprung from that Hy- dra^ tore and defaced the Church, may be juftly at- tributed, arnongft other concurring Caufes, the Op- portuiiity wliich xkiQ Bijhop of Rome took to ere6l his papal Fyranny over the Minds and Confciences of iMen. The Chriftiansof the Weil willingly fubmit- ted to the Eflablifhment of a Power, which, in the then defptrate State of the Church, feemed to them to ( iS9) to be the only likely Means to put an End to tliofs Differences, which were but too far already fpread a- mongft themfelves •, and the fatal Effcdls of which were but too vifible in the Eaftern World : For the true Faith having been corrupted in the Minds of mofh Men, and enfeebled in all, the Impoftures of Mahomet prefently over-ran all thofe Countries where Jrianifm^ it's Twin, but elder Brother, had before taken Root. But this Reliance upon Man, more than upon God, fhortly turned 'out a far heavier Puniiliment than all the dreaded Confequences of their former Divifions ; till at length the gracious Providence of God vouch- fafed to thofe Nations the Power of enjoying once more the invaluable Comforts of true Chrillian Liberty : Which that it was rightly underftood by our firft Re- formers, as well as by thofe who ftill re-eftablifhed it, after the feveral Shocks, it, from Time to Time fuf- tained, is evident from the ftricl Concurrence of all thofe illuflrious Men employed therein at thofe fe- veral Times, in the one and the fame original Plan. At the glorious Revolution it received it's laft Con- firmation ; and the happy l\d: of Settlement feems to have fixt it upon a Foundation not to be moved till the Revolution at the laft Day. Many Attacks, indeed, have been fince made upon it, pretty much of a Piece with this of your Appel- lant. God hath hitherto been pleafed to render them all ineffeclual : And he hath gracioufly given you all the moral Aflurances, that he will ftill continue his Protedlion to you, by fixing a Family on the Throne of thefe Kingdoms, under whofe impartial and equi- table Government, the greatefl Liberty hath been given to difcufs and canvafs thofe very Points by the ableft Men of both Sides of i\\t Que (lion •, in order, doubdefs, that thereby the fulled Light may be thrown on the prevailing Side, that the Truth might ( 190 ) might be either more firmly eftablifltec], or, if any Errors fnould be found to be obtruded upon it,' they might be thoroughly purged away, and the Minds of Men receive the fulleft Satisfaction in fuch impor- tant Articles. The Event hath confpicuoufly and eminently favoured the prefent eftablifhed Faith: And we may be fure, it^s gracious and royal Defen- der will not now permit it to be dilturbed by old and dale Objedions, already fo ftrongly and clearly refuted. Thefe extraordinary Bleffings, however, are not unconditional. Suitable Returns are expe6ted from us in the ftrid Practice of true Piety and Holinefs, and a firm Adherence to the Faith, which God hath fo fignally preferved to us. Our Sins, I fear, are, notwithibnding, grievous, and the Cry of them go- ^th up unto Heaven. Let us betimes then, my Bre- thren, think ferioully of the Reformation of our Lives, and provoke not God to reduce us to a worfe State of Mifery and Darknefs than that, from which our Forefathers fo meritorioufly delivered us. The Exhortations of your Appellant would appear in a much better Light, Had he not fo greatly lelTen- ed the Value of the Motive, upon which he fo ear- neftly recommends to you the Pra<5lice of true Chrif- tian Piety, The infinite Value of the Sacrifice offered by a divine Redeemer, muft greatly enhance the Hainouf- nefs of our Sins, which, we find, could not be a- toned for at a lefs Price. But when we are told, that the Value of our Ranfom is infinitely over-rated, the Senfe of the Enormity of our Sins muft be propor- tionably lefTened : And confequently, as there are dif- ferent Degrees of Sin, Men would be apt to rate the diminifhing Proportion with too favourable an Indul- gence to themfelves -, and thofe Sins, which now juftly appear of a deep and Scarlet Dye, (ink into a Degree of ( iQi ) of venial Moderation : Lower Degrees again \rould lofe their Enormity quite -, while others ftill, compa- ratively iefs hainoLis, would feemingly change their Nature, and put on the Appearance of reputable Virtues. But if the Guilt of Sin be thus diminifhed, the threatned Punifhments will be confequently looked upon as proportionably leflened alfo. If our Re- deemer is only called God by Courtefy, the tremen- dous Sound of eternal Punifhment may likewife be reafonably fuppofed to be no more than a defigncd Exaggeration ; Heaven and Hell but higher tem- porary States of further Probation ; and therefore the Inhabitants of each may yet, by their future Be- haviour, be liable to a further Change : Angels of Light be ftill in Danger of becoming Angels of Darknefs, and Angels of Darknefs have a fair Chance of becoming Angels ''of Light. Thefe Things I (ay not meerly on Conjedlure : The Arians^ both antient * and modern, have taken them into their Syftem of Morality •, and, with the Deifts, are throwing out the Lure of a temporary Hell to catch at Profelytes amongft the vileft of Men. How far then Chriftian Piety would be promoted, by this Gentleman's intended Reformation of our Faith, may be eafily imagined. But you, my Fel- low-Chriftians, are not, I hope, to be thus amufcd. The plain Declarations of Scripture, and the direct confequential Do6trines from them, faithfully point- ed out to you by thofe, whom Chrift hath appointed your Teachers and Guides, will fufficiently engage you to preferve that Faith whole and entire, upon which our Lord and Mafter hath built his Church : And your Chriftian Charity will lead you, with me, to pray for the enlightening of your y^/?^//^;?/'s Mind, and the Minds of all thofe, who, with him, are in. Error and Delufion \ that they may clearly lee the Things ( 192 ) Things which belong to their Peace, and iinderftand and confefs, that Great is the Myftery of Godlinefs ; God was manifefted in. the Flejh^ jujiified in the Spirit ^ feen of Angels^ preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the Worlds and received up into Glory. Now unto him who is able to keep you from falling, and to prefent you faultlefs before the Prefence of his Glory with exceeding Joy, to the only wife God our Saviour, be Glory and Majefby, Dominion and Power, both now and ever. FINIS. M ^- %,