I

CHAP. XIV.

Of the Trinity in Unity.

HAVE hitherto been shewing (I hope, to your Satisfaction and Conviction) that, 1. the WORD or Divine Nature of our Lord Jesus Christ, 2. the Holy Spirit, are the selfexiftent or very God, and confequently one and the same Being.

But then 'tis evident, that the Holy Scriptures do notwithstanding manifeftly diftinguish the WORD from the Spirit. The whole Course of the New Teftament is a continued Demonstration of this. However, let us reflect upon one Confideration.

The Apostle declares, that the WORD was made flesh, John 1.14. So that the WORD was as truly united to the Man Chrift Jesus, as the Spirit of a Man is united to his Body; And during the whole Course of his Ministry this Union lasted. And yet all this while, the Holy Spirit, as you truly (a) observe, is defcrib'd in the New Testament as the immediate Author and Worker of all Miracles, even of those done by our Lord himself; and as the Conducter of Christ in all the Actions of his Life, during his State of Humiliation bere upon Earth. Again, 'twas not the WORD, but the Spirit, which preserved our Lord from Sin; for thro the eternal Spirit be offer'd himself without spot to God, Heb. 9. 14. And tho' the Union of the WORD and the human Soul continued after the Separation of the Body from the Soul by Death; yet the WORD did not raise the Body again; but 'twas

(a) Script. Doct. p. 301.

P4

quickned quickned by the Spirit, 1 Pet. 3. 18. This clearly shews, that the WORD and the Spirit are as really distinct in the same selfexistent Being, or very God; as the Soul and the Body are really distinct in the same created Being, Man. For the WORD and the Spirit are constantly represented as distinct Principles of Action; and the Spirit acted, in the most eminent manner, in and thro' the Man Chrift Jesus, at the same time, that the WORD was quiescent in him.

But farther, as the Holy Scriptures inform us, that the WORD and the Spirit are really distinct in the selfexistent Being or very God: so do they plainly diftinguish the selfexistent Being, or very God, both from the WORD and from the Spirit. Particularly the WORD is called the WORD of God, 2 Pet. 3. 5. Rev. 19. 13. and the WORD is said to have been with God in the beginning, John. 1. 1. And as God made all things by or thro' our Lord, viz. his Divine Nature, 1 Cor. 8. 6. Col. 1. 16. Heb. 1. 2, 10. so God is said to have made all things by or thro' the WORD, John 1. 3, 10. The Spirit also is call'd the Spirit of God, and thereby distinguish'd from God, whose Spirit he is, in several Places. And confequently the WORD of God, and the Spirit of God, are in some Sense diftinguish'd from God, whose they are.

From hence it follows, that tho' neither the WORD nor the Spirit is a distinct Being from that God, whose WORD and Spirit they are; any more than the Spirit of a Man is a distinct Being from the Man, whom the Spirit of a Man essentially belongs to: yet there is in the Divine Essence or Nature something distinct from the WORD and the Spirit; and which together with the WORD and the Spirit, constitutes the whole Divine Nature or Effence. Now

T

Now it must be observ'd, that tho' the

WORD and the Spirit are God, that is, essential to, and conftitutive of, the selfexistent Being; yet that which together with the WORD and the Spirit does constitute the Divine Nature or Effence, is not known to us by any other Name, than such as expresses the selfexistent Being, which it (together with the coeffential WORD and Spirit) constitutes, viz. by the Names God, Father, &c. And because the WORD was made Flesh, and personally united to the Man Christ Jesus, whose Generation by the Holy Ghost made him the Son of the selfexiftent Being; therefore the WORD may well be term'd the Son of God upon the Account of this temporal Generation. And as for the eternal Generation of the WORD (tho' that Phrafe is not found in Scripture, nor is God therein ever called the Father of the WORD, nor the WORD called the Son of God, upon any Account antecedent to the Incarnation: yet) because the WORD fubfifts eternally (because necessarily) in God, not as a distinct Being from God, but as one and the same Being with God; and because God (or that which, besides the WORD and the Spirit, is in God, or effential to God) is all along represented so, as that the WORD is his, and he is not the WORD's: therefore we justly think of the whole Divine Nature or Effence in such a manner, as that God, or (if you will fuffer me so to speak; for our Ideas being so imperfect, and our Language so defective, I hope, I may be excused fuch a Figure or Similitude) so much of the Divine Nature or Effence, as is not by any more particular Name diftinguish'd in Scripture from the WORD and the Spirit, and which is conceived by us as Prior in order of Confideration to both the WORD and the Spirit, is very properly term'd the eternal Father of the WORD, which which WORD is accordingly very properly term'a his eternal and coeffential Son.

Now the Father (in the Sense just now admitted) the Son or WORD, and the Holy Spirit, are commonly called the Three Persons in the Godhead, or Divine Nature or Effence. What is the original Notation of the Word Person, what various Aссерtations it has had, and in what Senses it has been apply'd to Father, Son, and Itoly Ghost; I shall not inquire. 'Tis true, the Word Person, when apply'd to the Son and Holy Ghost, does not fignify a distinct intelligent Being separat from the Father. For tho' we can't exactly define what a Divine Perfon is, yet we can say what 'tis not. And consequently the three Persons of the Godhead are not three Persons in the same Sense, in which three Men are three Persons. There is therefore noReason, why we should wrangle about a Phrase. The aforesaid Distinction in the Divine Nature or Effence, is what we mean by Personality: and the thing diftinguish'd, is the Person. Whether the Terms are properly used, or no; 'tis needless to dispute. I only defire, that the use of them may be continued, till better can be substituted in their room. What is meant, is pretty generally agreed, viz. that the Father, the WORD, and the Spirit, tho' they are truly and really distinct, so that one is not the other, yet are not separat Beings, but one and the same Being, which Being is the selfexistent or very God.

Briefly therefore, the Father (in the Sense already given) the WORD, and the Spirit, are one and the fame Being with each other. That is, tho' they are distinct in, yet they are coessential to, and necessarily conftitutive of, one and the same Being. Even as the Soul and the Body are distinct in, tho' coeffential to, and necessarily constitutive of, the

same Being, Man. I do by no means say, that the Father,

Father, the WORD, and the Spirit, are different Substances, as the Soul and the Body are in a Man (the Body being a material Substance, and the Soul an immaterial one) but furely if the Union of distinct Substances may constitute one and the fame Being, Man: certainly the Father, the WORD, and the Spirit (of whose joint Substance I affirm nothing, because 'tis not known) may constitute one and the same most simple and uncompounded Being, viz. the very or selfexistent God.

The manner of this Distinction in the very God, I think, 'tis impossible to assign or comprehend; because the Divine Substance is not understood by us. But fince we know so little of the Substance of any thing; methinks, we should readily believe, what God himself has reveled concerning his own Substance; tho' at present perhaps our Faculties are not qualify'd to form any tolerable Idea of it. This we know, that God is immaterial. But Immateriality is only a Negation. There may be thousands of immaterial Beings, whose Substances may be as different, as the Substance of the human Soul is different from that of the Body. How then can we hope to find out the positive Substance of God?

Had we been as little acquainted with Matter, as we are with the positive Substance of God; and had a Triangle then been made known to us, not by a Name which expresses its positive Nature, but by fome other Name as little expressive of its positive Nature, as θεὸς (for Instance) is of the pofitive Nature of God: I doubt not but we should have found it as difficult (tho' the Comparison is by no means adequate) to conceive the real Distinction of the Angles A, B, C, in the Unity of the Nature of the Triangle, to which each of them is coessential; as we do now find it to conceive the