them as subjects of disputatious speculation, or presumptuous curiosity. And may he," who hath promised to give his Holy Spirit to those who ask for him," guide us by his divine teaching into the sanctifying knowledge of the truth, in this and every subject that we investigate.

We may, I presume, be allowed to say, that if such language be uniformly used in the Scriptures concerning the Holy Spirit, as in all other cases would convey to our minds the ideas of personality and personal agency; the true believer will conclude him to be a personal agent. In allegories, indeed, and in sublime poetry, we often find attributes, propensities, or modes of operation personified: but none, except the most ignorant reader, is in danger of being misled by such adventurous figures of speech. Should any man suppose that Wisdom, in the book of Proverbs, was introduced merely as an allegorical person; we might allow that he had some colour for his opinion: though I should rather say, that the Messiah, the Word and Wisdom of the Father, who is made wisdom to us, is the real speaker in those passages. But if such bold figures of speech are supposed, without any intimation, to be interwoven in historical or didactic discussions, or in promises and precepts, that is grants and laws, where the greatest precision is absolutely necessary, what instruction can be certainly derived from revelation? or how shall we know what we are to believe, to do, or to expect? Surely this tends directly to render the Scriptures useless; and to perplex and bewilder every serious inquirer after the way of eternal life! But it is from discourses of this lattter kind especially, that I shall select my proofs of the personality of the Holy Spirit.

Our Lord promised his disciples, "that he would pray the Father, and he should give them another Comforter, that he might abide with them for ever," &c. (John xiv. 16, 17:) and afterwards he added, "the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father shall send in my name, he shall teach you all things," &c. (ver. 26:) and the personal pronoun (us) is used in this, and several other passages, especially those that follow. Calling this Comforter "the Spirit of Truth, which proceedeth from the Father," he added, "he shall testify of me," &c. (John xv. 26:) and still more explicitly, he says, when "he cometh, he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak :" "he shall glorify me; for he shall receive of mine, and shall show it unto you" (John xvi. 7—15.) Not to insist further on the repeated use of the personal pronoun, which the ordinary rules of language appropriates in such discourses, to a personal agent; being sent, coming, testifying, receiving, showing, teaching, hearing, and speaking, do undoubtedly imply personal agency: and if we are required to suppose the strongest rhetorical figures, that ever orators or poets have used, to be constantly interwoven in the plainest instructions and promises; we must infer, that the language of the scripture is so indeterminate and unusual, that no certain conclusions can be drawn from it. This indeed seems to be the inference that some interpreters of the scripture are willing should be deduced from their observations: but an insinuation more dishonourable to God and his holy word can hardly be imagined.

66

In like manner, St. Paul, when expressly instructing the Corinthians concerning the gifts of the Spirit, uses the strongest personal language: "all these worketh that one and self-same Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will," (1 Cor. xii. 11 :) but are not working, dividing, and willing personal acts? or can such terms be used of a mere attribute, consistently with the precision required in religious instructions? He also speaks of the Spirit, as searching all things, yea the deep things of God" (1 Cor. ii. 10,) for he knoweth the things of "God, as the spirit of man knoweth the things of a man." The Holy Spirit is also said to dwell in us, to lead us, to "bear witness with our spirits, and to make intercession for us," whilst "he that searcheth the hearts, knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit;" which certainly implies personal distinction (Rom. viii. 11, 14, 16, 26, 27.) The sacred historian also records several instances, in which the Holy Spirit spoke, acted, and com

manded. "The Holy Ghost spake by the mouth of David" (Acts i. 16.) "The Spirit said to Philip," (Acts viii. 29). The spirit said to Peter, "Arise, get thee down," (Acts x. 19, 30). The Holy Ghost said, "Separate me Barnabas and Saul: and they, being sent forth by the Holy Ghost, departed," (Acts xiii. 2, 4). "It seemed good to the Holy Ghost," (Acts xv. 28). "They were forbidden of the Holy Ghost,"-"The Spirit suffered them not," (Acts xvi. 6, 7). "Well spake the Holy Ghost by Esaias," &c. (Acts xxviii. 25.) To which the language of other Scriptures accord; "Wherefore, as the Holy Ghost saith," (Heb. iii. 7.) "Let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches,” (Rev. ii. 7.) That this is the frequent phraseology of Scripture is undeniable: and as the sacred oracles were given to make us wise unto salvation; so it is evident, that we are taught in them to think of the Holy Spirit as of an Agent, willing, hearing, speaking, acting, commanding, forbidding, receiving, and executing a commission; and performing a part in the great work of our salvation, distinct from that of the Father, by whom, or that of the Son, through whom he is given unto men. I apprehend that they who deny this doctrine, would feel themselves embarrassed in familiarly using such language as this, concerning the Spirit, or in speaking according to the oracles of God in their discoures, treatises or devotions; at least many of them deem it convenient to adopt a more literal, philosophical, or modern style than that of the Scriptures, lest they should mislead some of their unestablished disciples, or give men reason to call their consistency in question.

When the personality of the Holy Spirit has been proved from the word of God, little difficulty remains to ascertain his Deity. The operation of the Holy Ghost in our Lord's conception, rendered it proper to call him the Son of God, even in respect to his human nature, according to the language of Gabriel to the Virgin Mary, (Luke i. 35). Ananias, by "lying to the Holy Ghost, lied unto God," (Acts v. 3, 4). Christians are "the temple of God, because the Spirit of God dwelleth in them;" even "an habitation of God through the Spirit," (1 Cor. iii. 16, 17; vi. 19; 2 Cor. vi. 16; Eph. ii. 22). Indeed, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, in all believers, wheresoever they are dispersed, evidently implies the divine attribute of omnipresence; nor could he "search all things, yea, even the deep things of God," unless he were omniscient. His work of regeneration, or new creation, and sanctification, require omnipotence to effect it: and all these surely are divine attributes, incommunicable to any creature. But "if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his," (Rom. viii. 9—11): and they are strangely ignorant of Christianity, who do not "know that Christians are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in them." Of this more abundant proof will be given when we come to consider the ordinary influences of the Holy Spirit.

The very titles which are given to this distinguished Agent in all revivals of vital godliness, confirm the same conclusion. He is called, by way of eminence, the Holy Spirit," "the Spirit of Holiness," "the Spirit of Truth," "the Spirit of Power," "the Spirit of Promise," "the Spirit of Wisdom and Knowledge," "the Comforter," "the Eternal Spirit." These, and several other expressions of a similar nature, seem to denote both his essential perfections, and the nature or effect of his influences on our minds; and to distinguish him from all those created spirits which are sent forth to minister to the heirs of salvation. And when it is said, that "he divideth to every man severally as he will;" his divine sovereignty, as well as his personal volition, is declared to us.

But if distinct personality, agency, and divine perfections be in Scripture ascribed also to the Father and to the Son, no words seem more exactly to express the unavoidable inference than these, "that there are three distinct Persons in the Unity of the Godhead." The Scripture most assuredly teaches us, "that the One living and true God is, in some inexplicable manner, Triune:" for he is spoken of as One in some respects, as Three in others

The dependence, confidence, affections, and worship peculiar to Christianity, are manifestly connected by an indissoluble tie, with our sentiments on this respect: for, (not to anticipate the subject of the ensuing Essay) how can we avoid grieving the Spirit, if we entertain thoughts of him infinitely beneath his divine dignity and excellency?

Men may continne confidently to assert without proof, that the doctrine of the Trinity is either a contradiction in itself, or inconsistent with the Unity of the Deity: they may inform us, that the primitive Christians learned it from Plato and his followers, and so corrupted the faith by philosophy (though it is a thousand times more likely, that Plato borrowed his ideas from those Scriptures, which were extant in his time :) and they may dignify themselves as Unitarians, as if none worshipped the one true God but themselves. But we shall still have the satisfaction (mingled with our regret at such departures from the faith) to find, that they grow proportionably shy of the phraseology of the Scripture; that they want to diminish men's reverence for the sacred writers; that they are constrained to adopt methods of interpretation, in respect of those testimonies, which they still admit to be a divine revelation, that would be deemed contemptible, if employed in fixing the sense of any reputable classical writer; and that they make their principal appeal, not to the oracles of God, but to the oracles of human reason, or to the vague and disputed standard of antiquity. It must be evident to all who are conversant with modern treatises on these subjects, that the opposers of the doctrine no longer attempt to support their sentiments by a particular examination of Scripture testimonies, allowing the Bible, as we have received it from our fathers, to be the infallible word of God; and that it ought to be interpreted by the same rules, which judicious scholars employ in explaining other ancient writers. A small part of the Scripture is by them considered to be of divine authority; and the rest they would have us discard as doubtful, or irrational, or at most to give it a subordinate measure of attention.

Could it be proved, that the Trinitarians were not Unitarians also, some ground would be gained by them; but we suppose, that the Trinity of Per-. sons in the Deity consists with the Unity of the Divine Essence: though we pretend not to explain the modus of it, and deem those to have been reprehensible, who have attempted so to do; as the modus, in which any being subsists, according to its distinct nature and known properties, is a secret to the most learned naturalists to this present day, and probably will continue to be so. But if the most common of God's works, with which we are the most conversant, be, in this repsect, incomprehensible; how can men think that the modus existendi, (or manner of existence) of the infinite Creator can be level to their capacities?—The doctrine of the Trinity is indeed a mystery but no man hath yet shown, that it involves in it a real contradiction. Many have ventured to say, that it ought to be ranked with transubstantiation, as equally absurd. But Archbishop Tillotson has shown, by the most convincing arguments imaginable, that transubstantiation includes the most palpable contradictions; and that we have the evidence of our eyes, feeling, and taste, that what we receive in the Lord's Supper is bread, and not the body of a man; whereas we have only the testimony of our eyes, that the words, "This is my body," are in the Scriptures.-Now this is intelligible to the meanest capacity, fairly made out, and perfectly unanswerable: but who ever attempted thus to prove the doctrine of the Trinity to be self-contradictory? Or what testimony of our senses, or demonstrated proposition, does it contradict? ret, till this be shown, it is neither fair, nor convincing, to exclaim against it as contradictory, absurd, irrational, &c.

Indeed, it may be easy to say that Three and One cannot be the same; and then to show, that the absurd tenet which they would persuade men that we hold, is self-contradictory: but if we may not quote the much-contested text, (1 John v. 7, 8) as an authority, we may surely use it as expressing our sentiments: "There are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these Three are one;" three Persons, the

masculine being used; one Being, the neuter being substituted. Now let any man in logical form prove if he can, that these words involve a real contradiction but till this is done, let no man mistake confident assertion for demonstration.

I cannot but hope, that the preceding concise arguments have fully shown, that the sacred writers spoke as strong language, concerning the Personality and Deity of the Holy Spirit, as even the Nicene Fathers: though they did not use such illustrations, explanations, distinctions, or definitions, as the latter unhappily employed in the controversy. Nor can I doubt, but that the Deity of Christ hath been fully proved in the seventh and eighth Essays. And if these two points have been established on Scriptural authority, all that can be said against the doctrine of the Trinity on other grounds, only suggests these questions:-Is the human intellect, or the infinite understanding of God, most competent to determine on the incomprehensible mysteries of the Divine Nature? Shall we abide by the language of inspiration, or give it up for that of human reason? But what is faith? Is it not a disposition to say, "let God be true, and every man a liar?" For "the testimony of God is sure, and giveth wisdom to the simple." If the Scriptures be incontestably proved to be the word of God, by unanswerable external and internal evidences; and a man shall dare to say, "that to allow such a doctrine as that of the Trinity to be contained in it, is enough to impeach its divine authority;" it amounts only to this, that he is so wise in his own eyes, so leans to his own understanding, and is so fond of his own sentiments, that he is determined not to be convinced by any testimony, human or divine.

In addition to the general argument for the doctrine in question, which has been considered, it may be proper to consider a few remarkable passages of Scripture, in which the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are mentioned together, or jointly addressed in the same act of worship. When our Lord was baptized, the Father by a voice from heaven, declared him to be his beloved Son, and publicly sealed his appointment to the mediatorial office; of which he solemnly accepted, and on which he then entered. And the Holy Spirit, descending visibly, under the emblematic representation of a dove, lighted upon him, as through him to be communicated to all his true disciples; thus the Three Persons in the sacred Trinity, evidently acted according to the parts sustained by them in the great work of man's salvation. But the appointed form of Christian baptism is far more conclusive," Baptize them into the name" (not names)" of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." By baptism we declare our dependence on, and devotedness to him in whose name we are baptised; and it implies one of the most solemn acts of worship that we can perform. Would it not then greatly tend to mislead us, if a mere creature, and an attribute, were joined with the One True God in this ordinance? Upon the Trinitarian system it is extremely proper: but that man must surely have very lax notions of the peculiar honour due to God, which he will not give to another, who can think it consistent with the doctrine of our opponents. This form of baptism fully warrants the excellent doxology of our Church, "Glory be to the Father, to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost," &c. and it is worthy of observation, that ancient Anti-trinitarians attempted to improve our Lord's words, saying, "In the name of the Father, and through the Son, and by, or in the Holy Ghost:" which, joined with modern attempts to show the form to be non-essential to baptism, &c., constitutes a full proof that the argument is of great force, even in the opinion of our opponents. When our Lord says, (John xvi. 13—15), "The Spirit of Truth,-He shall glorify me,-all that the Father hath are mine," &c.; he establishes the doctrine of the Trinity. The personality, and consequently the Deity of the Spirit, has been proved from many testimonies: if all things belonging to the Father, belong to Christ also, his Deity must be allowed: and thus the three persons in the Trinity are here pointed out to our observation. The apostolic benediction ૨૩

(2 Cor. xiii. 14), refers to the One Name in which Christians are baptised; and leads our thoughts to the form of blessing appointed in the law, (Numb. vi. 24-26); in which benedictions were pronounced on the people with a threefold repetition of the name of Jehovah, as well as to the adorations of the heavenly hosts, "Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord," &c. (Isaiah vi. 3; Rev. iv. 8). Now this benediction is in reality a prayer in behalf of the Corinthians, for all the blessings of salvation; and these are sought from the Lord Jesus, and from the Holy Spirit, as well as from God the Father. To this accords the address of the Apostle John to the seven churches in Asia, in which he wishes, or prays, for grace and peace to them, from the eternal Father, from the seven Spirits before the throne, and from the Lord Jesus, &c. (Rev. i. 4-6.) According to the emblematic syle of this book, the Holy . Spirit, with reference to his manifold gifts and graces, and to the seven churches in Asia, is spoken of as the seven Spirits, &c.: but we cannot doubt of the meaning, nor can we imagine, that any created spirits would have been thus joined with the eternal God, in such an evident act of adoration.

I shall close the present Essay by observing, that the subject before us is of the greatest importance. Either Trinitarians, or Anti-trinitarians, are idolaters; for they cannot both worship that God who reveals himself to us in Scripture; but one of them must-substitute an imaginary being in his place. It is not therefore a subject to be decided by sallies of wit, or ostentation of learning, or by attempting to render one another odious or ridiculous. A sober, humble, teachable mind, disposed to believe the testimony of God, is above all things requisite in such inquiries; this must be sought of God by fervent prayer; and then the Scriptures must be daily and diligently examined with an obedient and reverential mind. The writer of these remarks was once an Anti-trinitarian, and on the point of leaving the Church of England, from objections to her doctrine and worship in this respect. But the study of the Scriptures has changed his judgment: and as he then neglected or disliked the other doctrines which he now values more than life, and was a stranger to vital, experimental religion; so he observes, that they who deny this doctrine, gradually give up other peculiarities of Christianity till the name alone, or very little more, be left of it. He cannot therefore but deem it, (like the key-stone of an arch) essential to the support of evangelical piety; and would subjoin these observations on the Trinity with the apostle's words, "This is the true God, and eternal life; little children, keep yourselves from idols. Amen."

But whilst we deem the rejection of this doctrine as a virtual renunciation of Christian baptism; a dissent from the apostolical benediction; and a substitution of another object of worship in the place of the God of the Bible; and whilst we lament the rapid progress of this destructive heresy, which often proves a forerunner to prepare the way for a more avowed apostacy; we must also observe, that it is almost equally to be lamented, that so few who profess the doctrine, seem to understand its real nature and tendency, or to experience its sanctifying efficacy upon their hearts. Alas! what will it avail any man to have maintained, or even triumphantly contended for this fundamental truth, if he continue the devotee of ambition, avarice, or any other vile affection? Of what use is it to show the distinct offices of the Father, Son, and Spirit, in the work of our salvation; unless we, as lost sinners, depend on the everlasting love and free mercy of the Father; on the merits and mediation of the incarnate Son, and on the sanctifying grace of the Holy Spirit? No outward administration of baptism can profit those who are not made by "the true baptism," the spiritual worshippers and servants of "the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost." Nor can the pronunciation of the apostle's benediction save any man who does not partake of the blessings pronounced, in the inward experience of his own soul.

Moreover, whilst we disregard the charge of bigotry, in refusing all religious intercourse with Anti-trinitarians, lest we should give a sanction to