ence and infidelity. How these things are so, we do not therefore in the smallest degree pretend to explain; but that they are so, has in part been shewn, and shall now be farther proved from the Scriptures themselves and that is the best of all proof.

That all Godhead, which comprehends all its attributes, resides in the Father, is not in dispute. That it resides also, and equally, in the Son, was shewn in the last discourse. That it resides in precisely the same degree in the Holy Ghost, as a separate Person in the divine Trinity, comes now to be proved from the same unquestionable authority. The first passage which shall be mentioned to that purpose is my present text; "When he the "Spirit of truth is come, he will guide "you into all truth." We have here a form of speaking which indicates Personality, if it indicates any thing. The expression is evidently intentional, and marks the purpose for which it is employed. The

c John xvi. 13.

Spirit of truth is, as we know, in the Greek of the neuter gender. The regular mode of expression in any language, would have been, not he, but it, the Spirit of truth, if the Spirit were merely an attribute of a Person. The masculine gender is however substituted for the neuter in the original languaged, where it is most important: for in this particular translations prove nothing on either side. He therefore is used here; he, the masculine gender, expressly to mark the Personality of the Holy Spirit. The same is the case in other passages; "The Spirit of truth whom," denoting Personality in the same manner, "whom "the world cannot receive:" "Even the Spirit of truth, who proceedeth from the "Father."

A form of speech so unusual

4. Εκείνος τὸ πνευμα της αλήθειας.

e John xiv. 17.

"He

f John xv. 26. "The Comforter, which is the Holy "Ghost, he shall teach you all things." xiv. 26. “If "I depart I will send him unto you.” xvi. 7. "will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of "himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he "speak and he will shew you things to come. He "shall glorify me," &c. xvi. 13, &c.

must have been employed for some sufficient purpose, which it was peculiarly calculated to effect: for to suppose any inaccuracy or oversight in God's word, is to suppose imperfection in God himself; which is both impious and impossible. Since then that form of speech must have been employed intentionally, there must also be a peculiar signification in it, and it is for the Unitarians to shew what be its peculiar import, if it be not that here maintained. St. Peter's discourse to Ananias, immediately preceding the judgment which was inflicted on him, is an express mention of the Person of the Holy Ghost, distinctly as God: "Why hath Satan "filled thine heart to lie to the Holy "Ghost? Thou hast not lied unto men, "but unto God." St. Paul says to the Romans, "The Spirit itself maketh in"tercession for us." We have not here indeed the expression of the Spirit himself, to mark Personality, but we find it to be indicated with abundant plainness by the

& Acts v. 3, 4.

h Rom. viii. 26.

whole tenor of the Apostle's expression in this place. For surely the act of making intercession implies Personality in him who makes it since it cannot be said, that the spirit of a person, meaning a part of himself, intercedes with the rest of himself for

the pardon of offenders. God's Spirit, mentioned in that sense which the opponents of the Trinity would put upon the word, might be moved, might be affected. But it could not be the active agent towards God. It could not move him to do nor to forbear any thing; for that is the office of a distinct Person, the Person of the Holy Ghost. With the same distinction, the Prophet Isaiah also speaks: "And "now the Lord God, and his Spirit, hath "sent me." Here is a manifest distinction of Persons, though not any division of Godhead. The Father, and his Spirit, are both particularly named. We could not, consistently with the common rules of language, say of a man, that a person and his spirit had done any thing. The spirit

¡ Isaiah xlviii. 16.

of a man is himself; not only without division, but without distinction. But here is a distinction between the Father and his Spirit; such as belongs not to human nature; but such as does, however incomprehensibly, belong to the Deity. Many more texts might easily be collected upon this point, in which acts of power and dominion are imputed personally to the Holy Spirit; and I have selected only some of those which seem to me to mark the distinction of Persons most plainly; because I would, previous to going farther into that evidence, notice the evasion which is evidently prepared in the expressions by which the Unitarians deny the Personality

k. "We ought to recollect, that while with regard to "the Holy Spirit, the ordinary current phraseology of "Scripture is framed on the supposition of his Person"ality, this is not the case with any thing else, which, "although occasionally personified, is not a person. "In other cases, the language of personification is the "exception to the general phraseology. But in this 66 case it is quite the reverse. Any expressions that "seem inconsistent with Personality form the excep❝tion, the general complexion of the language being "all in its favour." Wardlaw, Sermons on the Socinian Controversy, p. 289.