Twelve ARGUMENTS Drawn out of the Scripture, Wherein the commonly received Opinion touching the Deity of the Holy Spirit, is clearly and fully refuted.  
To which is prefixed a Letter tending to the same purpose, written to a Member of the Honourable House of Commons.  
And to which is subjoined an Exposition of five principal Passages of the Scripture, alleged by the Adversaries to prove the Deity of the Holy Spirit; together with an Answer to their grand Objection touching the supposed Omnipresence of the Holy Spirit.  
By JOHN BIDLE, Master of Arts.  1 Thess. 5.21. 
Prove all things, hold fast that which is good.  
Printed in the Year 1647.   

To the impartial READER.  
Reader,  
WHen I consider with myself, how many Truths have (in their dawnings) gone forth like the Morning, and are now risen unto a glorious day, unto the amazement, and confounding of those, who were grand Opposers of them; (though I know truth hath, and still shall have many Adversaries; whilst the face of the covering, and the veil spread over all Nations remains undestroyed; yet I know too, that Truth's bare breasts are Armour of Prooff against all the daring darts of Satan, and all the furious attempts and storms of the flesh) I cannot but abundantly rejoice in the glory of its strength. How many things have in several Ages (as well as in Ours) been cried up for truths? And how hath God blown upon them, that they have withered, and the whirlwind hath taken them away as stubble? Again, how many Truths have been cried down as Blasphemy and Error, the beams of whose glory, are now ready to dazzle and obscure all the glory of the flesh? Sometimes taking in those (through the go forth of God in it,) who have been the mightiest enemies, insomuch that (standing amazed awhile) they have soon been swallowed up in the power of it: And oh that mine eyes might behold more of that day of God's power, and of the out-letting of the beauties of his holiness; that the tall Cedars of Lebanon might be bended, and the Oaks of Bashan ashamed, that the creature and its glory might be brought low, and men who are now like Bullocks unaccustomed unto the yoke, might be made willing, and the Lord alone exalted in them, by them, and amongst them.  
Did we but seriously consider, how most men are adorned with living names, (viz. of Believers, Christians, Protestants, etc.) whilst they are indeed dead, (as will appear, seeing there are no symptoms of life in them) we could not but startle at it: what is the profession, or Religion, of most part of men, but formal and fleshly? Are they not like those barbarous Lettoes, who who were always in the Fields and Woods, heard uttering these words, feru feru Masco Lon: but being demanded the reason, they Replied, That they knew nothing, but that they had been so of long taught by their Ancestors: men's mouths are now filled with Forms, and they are daily crying out the Temple of the Lord, the Temple of the Lord; God, and Christ, and Spirit; when 'tis evident, they have no more than what Education affords, nay less, because not moralised, wherein Heathens outstrip them, they know not God, did they, they could not lightly blaspheme him; they go Christlesse, and have not received the Spirit of wisdom in the Revelation and knowledge of him; and this makes them to cry out, that whatsoever is not according to their fleshly Forms, is Error, Heresy, Blasphemy, because it will not hold according to carnal principals, unto which they must needs reduce all things, who have no principal of life within them; such are those who are called Christians, and yet reel too and fro through wine and strong drink, and swell by reason of Oaths, living in abominations; of which sort of men most of our Parish Churches are constituted: such men have not discerning spirits, neither are they competent judges, because enemies to Truth, as well as Error, wherefore the Author betakes himself to the Christian Reader, i.e. one that is so indeed.  
I know many men (as well as myself) will be ready to cry out Blasphemy, Blasphemy at the first view of the Title Page, yet I could wish that they would embrace the Apostles counsel, Prove all things, holding fast that which is good: Call all things to a serious examine, and reject nothing hand overhead, take nothing upon Trust, without a fore-examining of every circumstance, lest in the one, they should reject Truth instead of Error; and in the other, embrace Error instead of truth.  
The Author hath a long time waited upon learned men for a satisfactory Answer to these Arguments, but hath received none, his hopes are, that the publishing of them will be a means to produce it, that he may receive satisfaction, and others may be held no longer in suspense, who are in travel with an earnest expectation of a speedy resolution, as well as he. I should desire those who view it, but especially those who undertake to Answer it (for my hopes are, that some one will) to consider; first, that to say, such an Argument is invalid, and weak, and not worth the Answering, is no convincing way of arguing, nor able to yield the least satisfaction to a doubting spirit. Secondly, that invectives, rail or reproachful terms, are no convincing Arguments (as all men of a sober judgement well know;) at these rates the weakest man may subvert the strongest Controversy, yet these have been the arguings of our times, both in Press and Pulpit. Thirdly, to prohibit the progress of it, can no ways unscruple doubting spirits, amongst whom (for the present) I number myself, expecting an Answer to these ensuing Arguments; and that God will be with him that undertakes it, and give in a spirit of Meekness, and of Wisdom, in the Revelation and Knowledge of Truth, shall be the matter of his prayers, who desires Truth may be cleared up, and shine like the noonday, and all Error confounded, and vanish before Truth, like a mist before the Sun.  
T. H.   

To the Christian Reader.  
CHristian Reader, I beseech thee, as thou tenderest thy salvation, that thou wouldst thoroughly examine the following Disputation, in the fear of God, considering how much his glory is concerned therein, and at any hand forbear to condemn my Opinion as Erroneous, till thou art able to bring pertinent and solid Answers to all my Arguments; for thou must know, that though I have contested with sundry Learned men, yet hath none hitherto produced a satisfactory Answer to so much as one Argument. Farewell.  
I.B.   

A LETTER written to a certain Knight, a Member of the Honourable House of Commons.  
SIR,  
HAving now attended for the space of sixteen Months, partly in the Country, and partly in Westminster, that I might come to my Answer before the Parliament, and finding after all this tarriance, that I am still as fare from having my cause determined, as ever, I am even forced to make my address to you, and to beseech you, if you have any bowels towards them that are in misery, that you would either procure my discharge, or at least make report to the House touching my denial of the supposed Deity of the Holy Spirit. For that this only is the matter in contestation you very well know, having both heard my confession before the Committee, and remembering how when I was urged to declare my judgement concerning the Deity of Christ, I waved the question, as neither being that I was accused of, nor which I had yet sufficiently studied to engage myself publicly therein. As for my opinion touching the Holy Spirit, it is thus; I believe the Holy Spirit to be the chief of all 
a see Heb. 1.13.14. whence these words are borrowed; and compare it with 1 Pet. .1 12. as also Heb. 1.7. compared with Acts 1.2, 3.4. and it will easily appear that the Holy Spirit is a minister of God, as well as others.  Ministering Spirits, peculiarly sent out from Heaven to minister on their behalf that shall inherit salvation; and I do place him both according to the Scripture, and the Primitive Christians, and by name justin Martyr in his Apology, in the third rank after God and Christ, giving him a pre-eminence above all the rest of the Heavenly Host; So that as there is one principal Spirit amongst the evil Angels, known in the Scripture by the name of Satan or the 
b 1 Pet. 5.8.  Adversary, or the 
c Zech. 13.2.  Unclean Spirit,. or the 
d 1 Sam. 16.15.16.  Evil Spirit of God, or 
e ib. ver. the last.  the Spirit of God, or 
f 1 Kings 12.21. according to the Original.  the Spirit by way of eminence: Even so is there one principal Spirit; (I borrow this Appellation from the Septuagint, who render the latter clause of the 12 verse of Psal. 31. in this manner, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Spiritu principali fulci me, establish me with thy principal Spirit,) there is, I say, one principal Spirit amongst the good Angels, called by the name of the 
g john 16.7  Advocate,. or the 
h Eph. 4.30.  Holy spirit,. or 
i Neh. 9.20.  the good spirit of God, or 
k 1 Cot. 7.40.  the spirit of God, or 
l Acts 10.19.  the spirit, by way of eminence. This opinion of mine is attested by the whole tenor of the Scripture, which perpetually speaketh of him as differing from God, and inferior to him, but is irrefragably proved by these places of Scripture, Neh. 9.6.20. Thou, even thou art Lord (or jehovah) alone, thou hast made Heaven, the Heaven of Heavens, with all their Host. Thou gavest thy good spirit to instruct them (the Children of Israel.)] john 16.7.8. etc. Nevertheless, I tell you the truth, it is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away the 
m So the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Original perpetually signifieth amongst Greek Authors, and is so rendered by the Translatours themselves. 1 john 2.1. and aught to have been so rendered here, especially because he saith in the following words, that the Holy Spirit shall convince the world, for it is proper to an Advocate to convince.  Advocate will not come unto you, but if I depart I will send him unto you. And when he is come, he will reprove (in the Original, Convince) the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgement. I have yet many things, to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the spirit of truth, is come, he 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 show you things to come. He shall glorify me, for he shall receive of mine and shall show it unto you. All things that the Father hath, are mine: therefore said I, he shall take of mine, and show it unto you.] Rom. 8.26, 27. Likewise the spirit also helpeth our infirmities; for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the spirit himself maketh intercession for us, with groans that cannot be uttered. But he that searcheth the hearts, knoweth what is the mind (or desire) of the spirit, for he maketh intercession for the Saints according to the will of God.] Acts 19.2. And (Paul) finding certain Disciples, said unto them, have ye received the Holy Spirit, since ye believed? And they said unto him, we have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy spirit.] Eph. 4.4.5.6. There is one body, and one spirit, even as ye have been called in one hope of your calling. One Lord, one faith, one Baptism. One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.] 1 Cor. 12.3.4. etc. Wherefore I give you to understand, that noman speaking by the spirit of God, calleth Jesus accursed, and that no man can say that jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy spirit; But there are diversities of gifts, yet the same spirit. And there are diversities of administrations, yet the same Lord; And there are diversities of operations, yet it is the same God that worketh all in all.] Luke 3.21, 22. It came to pass that jesus also being baptised, and praying, the Heaven was opened, and the Holy spirit descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him.] 1 Cor. 2.11.12.13. But God hath revealed them to us by his spirit, for the spirit searcheth all things, even the depths of God. For what man knoweth the things of a man save the spirit of a man, which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth none, but the spirit of God, (he doth not add, as before, which is in him.) Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God, that we might know the things that are freely given us of God. Revel. 22.12.17. Behold I come quickly, and my reward is with me, to give unto every man according as his work shall be, and the Spirit and the Bride say, come.] Acts 5.32. And we are his witnesses of these things, and so is also the Holy Spirit, whom God hath given to them that obey him.] Gal. 3.5. He therefore that ministereth (or giveth) to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, d●th he it by the works of the Law, or by the hearing (or rather preaching of Faith.] He that ministereth or giveth the spirit to you, a strange kind of speech, if the Holy Spirit were God. The Scripture is wont to speak more soberly of Almighty God, then to say that he is given by another, much less by men, as it is here said of the Holy Spirit, 1 Cor. 8.4.5.6. [We know that an Idol is nothing in the world, and that there is no other God but one. For though there be that are called Gods, whether in Heaven, or in Earth; as there be many Gods, and many Lords, yet unto us there is but one God, ev●● the Father, of whom are all things, and we unto him; and one Lord, even jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.] You see here that the Apostle being about to set down, who is the only God, and only Lord of Christians, maketh no mention of the Holy Spirit, which could not have been done by so faithful an Apostle, had the Holy Spirit been either God or Lord. Of these places thus recited no man, though never so subtle, and though he turn and wind his wit every way, shall ever be able to make sense, unless he take the Holy Spirit to be what I say.  
Behold now the cause for which I have lain under persecution, raised against me by my adversaries, who being unable to justify by Argument their practice of giving glory to the Holy Spirit, as God, in the end of their prayers, since there is neither precept nor example for it in all the Scripture; and being taxed by me for giving the glory of God to another, and worshipping what he hath not commanded, nor ever came into his heart, have in a cruel and unchristian manner resorted to the arm of flesh, and instigated the Magistrate against me, hoping by his sword, (not that of the Spirit) to uphold their Will-worship; but in vain, since every Plant that the Heavenly Father hath not set, shall be rooted up; and that this practice of Worshipping the Holy Spirit as God, is such a Plant as God never set in his word, would soon appear to the Honourable House, could they be but so far prevailed with, as, laying aside all prejudice, seriously to weigh the many and solid proofs that I produce for my opinion out of the Scripture, together with the sleight, or rather no proofs of the adverse party for their opinion, which they themselves know not what to make of, but that they endeavour to delude both themselves and others with Personalities, Moods, Subsistences, and such like brainsick Notions, that have neither sap nor sense in them, and were first hatched by the subtlety of Satan in the heads of Platonists, to pervert the Worship of the true God. Neither could this controversy be set on foot in a fit juncture of time than this, wherein the Parliament and Kingdom have solemnly engaged themselves to resorme Religion both in Discipline and Doctrine. For amongst all the corruptions in Doctrine, which certainly are many, there is none that more deserveth to be amended then this, that so palpably thwarteth the whole tenor of the Scripture, and trencheth to the very object of our worship, and therefore ought not to be lightly passed over by any man that professeth himself a Christian, much more a Reformer. God is jealous of his honour, and will not give it to another, we therefore as beloved children should imitate our heavenly Father herein, and not upon any pretence whatsoever depart from his express command, and give the worship of the supreme Lord of Heaven and Earth, to him whom the Scripture no where affirmeth to be God. For my own particular, after a long and impartial enquiry of the truth, in this controversy, and after much and earnest calling upon God to give unto me the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him, I findemy self obliged both by the principles of Scripture and of Reason to embrace the opinion I now hold forth, and as much as in me lieth, to endeavour that the honour of Almighty God be not transferred to another, not only to the offence of God himself, but also of his Holy Spirit, who cannot but be grieved to have that ignorantly ascribed to himself, which is proper to God that sends him, and which he not where challengeth to himself in the Scripture: what shall befall me in pursuance of this work, I refer to the disposal of the alwise God, whose glory is dearer to me, not only then my liberty, but then my life. It will be your part, Honoured Sir, into whose hands God hath put such an opportunity, to examine the business impartially, and to be an helper to the truth, considering that this controversy is of the greatest importance in the world, and that the divine truth suffers not herself to be despised . Neither let the meanness of my outward presence deter you from stirring, since it is the part of a wise man, as in all things, so especially in matters of Religion, not to regard so much who it is that speaketh, as what it is that is spoken, remembering how our Saviour in the Gospel saith that God is wont to hid his secrets from the wise and prudent, and to reveal them unto children. In which number I willingly reckon myself, being couscious of mine own personal weakness, but well assured of the strength and evidence of the Scripture to bear me out in this cause; and remain  
April 1. 1647. Yours in the Lord, I. Bidle.   

Twelve Arguments drawn out of the Scripture, wherein the commonly received Opinion touching the Deity of the Holy Spirit, is clearly and fully refuted.  

ARGUMENT 1.  
HE that is distinguished from God, is not God; the holy Spirit is distinguished from God. Ergo. The major is evident, for if he should both b● God, & be distinguished from God, he would be distinguished from himself, which implieth a contradiction. The minor is confirmed by the whole currant of the Scripture, which calleth him the Spirit of God, and saith that he is sent by God, and searcheth the depths of God etc. Neither let any man see think to fly to that ignorant refuge of making a distinction between the Essence and Person of God, saying that the Holy Spirit is distinguished from God, taken personally not Essentially. For this wretched distinction (to omit the mention of the Primitive Fathers) is not only unheard of in the Scripture, and so to be rejected, it being presumption to affirm any thing of the unsearchable nature of God, which he hath not first affirmed of himself in the Scripture: but is also disclaimed by Reason For first, it is impossible for any man, if he would but endeavour to conceive the thing, and not delude both himself and others with empty terms and words without understanding, to distinguish the person from the Essence of God, and not to frame two beings or things in his mind, and consequently two Gods. Secondly, If the person be distinct from the Essence of God, than it is either something or nothing: if nothing, how can it be distinguished, since nothing hath no accidents? If something, then either some finite or infinite thing; if finite, then there will be something finite in God; and consequently since by the confession of the adversaries themselves, every thing in God is God himself, God will be finite, which the adversaries themselves will likewise confess to be absurd. If infinite, then there will be two infinites in God, to wit the Person and Essence of God, and consequently two Gods; which is more absurd than the former. Thirdly, to talk of God taken only Essentially is ridiculous, not only because there is no example thereof in Scripture, but because God is the name of a 
* By person I understand, as Philosophers do, suppositum intelligens, that is, an intellectual substance complete and not a mood or subsistence, which are fantastical and senseless terms, brought in to cozen the simple.  Person, and signifieth him that ruleth over others; and when it is put for the most high God, it denoteth him who with sovereign and absolute authority ruleth over all; but none but a person can rule over others, all actions being proper to persons: wherefore to take God otherwise then personally, is to take him otherwise then he is, and indeed to mistake him.   

ARGUMENT 2.  
If he that gave the Holy Spirit to the Israelites to instruct them, be jehovah alone, than the Holy Spirit is not jehovah or God; But he that gave the Holy Spirit to the Israelites to instruct them, is jehovah alone; Ergo. The sequel of the major is plain, for if he that gave the Holy Spirit be jehovah alone, and yet the Holy Spirit that was given be jehovah too, the same will be jehovah alone, and not Jehovah alone, which implieth a contradiction. The minor is evidenced by Neh. 9.6.20.   

ARGUMENT 3.  
He that speaketh not of himself, is not God. The Holy Spirit speaketh not of himself; Ergo. The minor is clear from joh 16.13. The major is proved thus: God speaketh of himself; therefore if there be any one that speaketh not of himself, he is not God. The antecedent is of itself apparent, for God is the primary author of whatsoever he doth, but should he not speak of himself, he must speak from another, and so not be the primary, but secundary author of his speech, which is absurd, if at least that may be called absurd, which is impossible. The consequence is undeniable. For further confirmation of this Argument, it is to be observed, that to speak or do any thing not of himself, according to the ordinary phrase of Scripture, is to speak or do by the showing, teaching, commanding, authorising, or enabling of another, and consequently incompatible with the supreme and selfe-sufficient Majesty of God. Vid. john 5.19.20.30. 7.15.16.17.18.28. 8.28.42. 11.50. 51. 12.49.50. 14.10.24. 15.4. 18.34. Luke 12.56.57. 21.30. 2 Cor. 3.5.   

ARGUMENT 4.  
He that heareth from another what he shall speak, is not God; The Holy spirit doth so; Ergo. The Minor is plain from the for●●ited place john 16.13. The major is proved thus; he that is taught, is not God; he that heareth from another what he shall speak, is taught; Ergo. The major is clear by Esay 40.13.14. compared with Rom. 11.34. 1. Cor. 2.16. The Minor is evidenced by john 8. where our Saviour having said in the 26. verse, whatsoever I have heard from him (the Father) these things I speak;] in the 28. verse he expresseth the same sense thus; According as the Father hath taught me, these things I speak. Neither let any man go about to elude so pregnant an Argument, by saying that this is spoken of the Holy Spirit improperly; For let him turn himself every way, and screw the words as he please, yet shall he never be able to make it out to a wise and considering man, how it can possibly be said that any one heareth from another what he will speak, who is the prime Author of his speech, and into whom it is not at a certain time insinuated by another. For this expression plainly intimateth, that whatsoever the Holy Spirit speaketh to the Disciples, is first discovered and committed to him by Christ, whose Ambassador he is, it being proper to an Ambassador to be the Interpreter not of his own, but of another's will. But it is contradictions to imagine that the most high God can have any thing discovered and committed to him by another.   

ARGUMENT 5.  
He that receiveth of another, is not God; The Holy Spirit doth so; Ergo. The Minor is witnessed by the aforesaid place john 16.14. The Major is proved thus; God is he that giveth all things to all; wherefore if there be any one that receiveth of another's, he cannot be God. The antecedent is plain by Acts 17.25. Rom. 11.35.36. The consequence is undeniable, for if God should give all things to all, and yet receive of another's, he would both give all things, and not give all things; which implieth a contradiction. The Major of the Prosyllogisme is otherwise urged thus, He that is dependent, is not God; he that receiveih of another's, is dependent; Ergo. The Major is unquestionable, for to say that one is dependent, and yet God, is in effect to say he is God and not God, which implieth a contradiction. The Minor also is evident, for to receive of another's, is the very notion of dependency.   

ARGUMENT 6.  
He that is sent by another, is not God; the Holy Spirit is sent by another; Ergo. The Minor is plain from the forequoted place john 16.7. The Major is evinced thus; he that ministereth is not God, he that is sent ministereth; Ergo. The Major is undubitable, it being dissonant to the supreme Majesty of God to minister, and serve another, for that were to be God and not God; to exercise sovereign dominion over all, and not to exercise it. The Minor is confirmed by Heb. 1. ult. where the divine Author showeth that the Angels are all Ministering Spirits, in that they are sent forth; as he before intimated Christ to be Lord, because he sitteth at the right hand of God. Thus David Psal. 2. declareth the Sovereignty of God, in saying that he sitteth in Heaven. The Minor is further proved thus; He that receiveth a command for the performance of something, doth Minister; He that is sent forth, receiveth a command for the performance of something; Ergo. The Major is evident to common sense, since it suiteth with none but ministers and inferiors to receive commands. The Minor is manifest by john 12.49. The Father that hath sent me, he gave me a Command what I shall speak.] Neither let any man here reply that this very thing is spoken also of Christ, unless, having first proved that Christ is supreme God, he will grant that whatsoever is spoken of him, is spoken of him as God: or can make good that to be sent at least may agree to him as God. The contrary whereof I suppose I have clearly proved in this Argument, showing that it is unsuitable to the divine Majesty.   

ARGUMENT 7.  
He that is the gist of God, is not God; The Holy Spirit is the gift of God; Ergo. The minor is plain by Acts 11.17. For as much then as God gave them the like gift (meaning the Spirit) as he did unto us, who have believed on the Lord jesus Christ, was I one that could withstand God? The Major though of itself sufficiently clear, is yet further evidenced thus; he that is not the giver of all things, is not God; he that is the gift of God, is not the giver of all things; Ergo. the major is apparent from Acts 17.25. God giveth to all, life, breath, and all things. The Minor is proved thus; he that is himself given, is not the giver of all things; he that is the gift of God, is himself given; Ergo. The major is undeniable, for otherwise the same would be the giver of all things, and yet not the giver of all things, inasmuch as he himself, a principal thing, is giver, which implieth a contradiction. The minor needeth no proof. Moreover, a gift is in the power, and at the disposal of the giver; but it is gross and absurd to imagine that God can be in the power, or at the disposal of another, Neither let any man here think to evade by saying, that not the Holy Spirit himself, but only his gifts are imparted to men; Since both the more learned adversaries themselves confess, that the Person of of the Holy Spirit is given together with his gifts, and the Scripture putteth the matter out of doubt if you consult Neh. 9.20. and Rom. 5.5. In both which places, the Holy Spirit is said to be given contradistinctly from his gifts and operations; in the first, contradistinctly from the instruction flowing from him; in the other, contradistinctly from the love of God diffused in our hearts by him. Whence we may draw this Corollary, that if the Person of the Holy Spirit be out of favour given to certain men, as the aforesaid places testify, than he was not personally present with them before, and consequently by the concession of the adversaries themselves, cannot be God, since they will not deny that God is always personally present with all alike. But I forestall the following Argument.   

ARGUMENT 8.  
He that changeth place, is not God; The Holy Spirit changeth place; Ergo. The major is plain, for if God should change place, he would cease to be where he was before, and begin to be where he was not before, which everteth his Omnipresence, and consequently, by the confession of the adversaries themselves, his Deity. The minor is ocularly apparent, if following the 
* Abi, Ariane, ad jordanem, & Trinitatem videbis.  advice of the adversaries, you will but go to jordan, for there you shall have the Holy Spirit in a bodily shape descending from heaven, which is the terminus à quo, alighting upon Christ, which is the terminus ad quem, Luke 3 21.22. Neither let any man ●lledge, that as much is spoken of God. Exod 3. & chap. 20. & Gen. 18. For if you compare Acts 7.30.35.38.53. Gal. 3.19. Heb. 2.2.3. & chap. 13.2. with the foresaid places, you shall find, that it was not God himself that came down, but only an Angel, sustaining the Person and Name of God; which hath no place in the history, touching the descent of the Holy Spirit   

ARGUMENT 9  
He that prayeth unto Christ, to come to judgement, is not God; The Holy Spirit doth so; Ergo. The mayor is granted. The minor is evident from Rev. 22.17. compared with 12. verse. Neither let any man think to elude this proof, by saying, that the Spirit is here said to pray, only because he maketh the Bride to pray. For when the Scripture would signify the assistance of the Holy Spirit in causing men to speak, it is wont to affirm, either that the Holy Spirit speaketh in them, as Matth. 10.20. or that they speak by the Holy Spirit, as Rom. 8.15. We have received the Spirit of adoption, by whom we cry Abba Father.] But here it is expressly said, that the Spirit and the Bride say, come; not the Spirit in the Bride, not the Bride by the Spirit.   

ARG. 10.  
He in whom men have not believed, and yet have been Disciples and Believers, is not God; Men have not believed in the Holy Spirit, and yet have been so; Ergo: The major is plain, for how can any be Disciples and Believers, according to the phrase of Scripture, and not believe in Him that is God? The minor is proved thus, Men have not so much as heard whether there were an Holy Spirit, and yet have been Disciples and Believers; Ergo: They have not believed in the Holy Spirit, and yet have been Disciples and Believers. The Antecedent is apparent from Acts 19.2. The consequence is grounded on that of the Apostle Rom. 10.14. [How shall they believe on Him, of whom they have not heard?] Now if any man to decline the dint of this Argument, shall say, that by Holy Spirit in these words [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] is meant not the Person, but the Gifts of the Holy Spirit, He, besides that he perverteth the plain and genuine meaning of the words, and speaketh without example, doth also evacuate the emphasis of the Particles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which imply that these Disciple were so far from having received the Gifts of the Holy Spirit, whereof we may grant that the question made mention, that they had not so much as heard whether there were an Holy Spirit or not. Again, that the Holy Spirit is not God, doth further appear by this very instance, since the Apostle, when there was so ample an occasion offered to declare it, (if it had been so) doth quite decline it: For it is incredible that He, who was so intent and vigilant in propagating the Truth, as that casually seeing an Altar at Athens inscribed to the unknown God, he presently took a hint from thence to preach unto the Heathens the true God; yet here being told by Disciples that they had not so much as heard whether there were an Holy Spirit, or not, should not make use of the opportunity to discover unto Them and in Them to Us, the (Deity of the Holy Spirit, but suffer them to remain in ignorance touching a point of such consequence, that without the knowledge thereof (if we believe many now now adays) men cannot be saved. Certainly, the Apostle had a greater care both of the Truth of God, and the salvation of men, then to do so.   

ARG. 11.  
He that hath an understanding distinct from that of God, is not God; The Holy Spirit hath an understanding distinct from God; Ergo: The major is clear; for he that hath an understanding distinct from that of another, must needs likewise have a distinct Essence, wherein that understanding may reside. The minor is proved thus, He that heareth from God, and that at the second hand, what he shall speak, hath an understanding distinct from that of God; The Holy Spirit so heareth from God; Ergo: the minor is evident from Joh. 16.13, 14, 15. The major is confirmed thu●; He that is taught of God, hath an understanding distinct from that of God; He that heareth from God, is taught of God; Ergo: The minor is manifest from John 8. where our Saviour Christ having said in the Verse 26. whatsoever I have heard from him (the Father) these things I speak:] In Verse 28. he expresseth the same sense thus, [According as the Father hath taught me, these things I speak.] The major is of itself clear; for he that is taught, hath an unknowing understanding, since none can be taught what he knoweth already; and he that teacheth hath a knowing understanding, otherwise he could not teach another something; but it emplyeth a contradiction that the same understanding should at the same time be both knowing and unknowing of the same thing. Besides, that the Holy Spirit hath an understanding distinct from that of God, is easily deducible from the words of the Apostle, 1 Cor. 2.10. where he affirmeth, that the Spirit searcheth the depths of God, (as Rom. 8.27. he intimateth, that God searcheth the heart of the Spirit:) but to search the depths of any one necessarily supposeth one understanding in him that searcheth, and another understanding in him whose depths are searched, as is evident not only by collation of other places of the Scripture, as 1 Pet. 1.11. Rev. 2.13. but even by common sense, dictating to every man so much, that none can without absurdity be said to search the depths of his own understanding. Whence the Apostle going about to illustrate what he had spoken of the Spirit of God, by a similitude drawn from the spirit of a man, doth not say, that the spirit of a man doth search, but know the things of a man, though his former words did seem to lead him thereunto.   

ARG. 12.  
He that hath a will distinct in number from that of God, is not God; The Holy Spirit hath a will distinct in number from that of God, Ergo. The major is irrefragable: The minor is asserted thus; He that willeth conformably to the will of God, hath a will distinct in number from that of God; The Holy Spirit so wills; Ergo: The major is plain, for conformity must be between two at least, else it will not be conformity, but identity. The minor is confirmed by Rom. 8.26.27. [Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities, for we know not what to pray for as we ought, but the Spirit himself maketh intercession for us with groans unutterable; But he that searcheth the heart, knoweth what is the mind (or will) of the Spirit, for he maketh intercession for the Saints according to (or conformably to) the will of God.] Which words of the Apostle afford us another impregnable Argument of the Holy Spirit's being inferior to God, inasmuch as he is said to make intercession unto God (as we before urged his praying to Christ, Arg. 9) and that with groans unutterable; which is not so to be understood as if the Holy Spirit were here said to help our infirmities only by suggesting petitions and groans unto us, and making us to pray, (as is commonly, but falsely affirmed,) for the very words of the context sufficiently refute such a gloss, since they say that the Spirit himself, not we by the Spirit, (as we have it in verse 15. of the same chap.) maketh intercession for us: but to help others infirmities by making intercession for them, is not to instill petitions into them, but to pour out petitions apart in their behalf, as is apparent both from the thing itself (since none can intercede for himself, all intercession requiring the enterm se of a third person:) and by the collation of verse 34. of the same chapter, and by the 30. ver. of the 15. chap. and by 2 Cor. 1.11. Heb. 7.25. 1 Tim. 2.1. Col. 4.12. Eph. 6.18. Neither let any man think to bafflle off this Argument, which is written with a beam of the Sun, by saying that this is improperly spoken of the Hol● Spirit; for, besides that he hath no other ground to say so, but his own preconceived opinion touching the Deity of the of Holy Spirit, he ought to know that the Scripture, though it speaketh many things after the manner of men, yet doth it no where speak any thing that argueth his inferiority to, and dependence on another. But this passage of the Apostle plainly intimateth the Holy Spirit to be inferior to God, and dependent on him; otherwise what need had he to intercede with God, and that with groans unutterable, on the behalf of the Saints?   

An Exposition of Matth. 28.19.  
[Go ye therefore, and make Disciples (so it is in the Original) of all Nations, baptising them into the name (so is it also in the Original) of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.]  
In the name of the Holy Spirit] that is, into the Holy Spirit, by a circumlocution usual in the Scripture, vid. Acts 19.5. compared with Rom. 6.3. And into the Holy Spirit, that is, into the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Thus the jews are said to have been all baptised into Moses, 1 Cor. 10.2. So that our Saviour's words amount to thus much; initiating them into the confession and obedience of God the Father, and of the Lord jesus; Christ, the Son of the Father, and of the Holy Spirit the Advocate and guide of all truth. Now the Holy Spirit is mentioned together with God and Christ, because he is the chief Instrument whereby they guide govern, sanctify and endow the Church; and to intimate, that whereas men, before they gave their names to Christ, lived according to the Prince of this world, the unclean Spirit, that worketh in the children of disobedience, they ought henceforth, being sequestered from the world, and admitted into the Church to resign up themselves to the guidance of the Holy Spirit, whom God and Christ have appointed to order and direct the Church. For that the Holy Spirit is not ranked with the Father and the Son as being equal to them, is evident by other punctual places of the Scripture, as 1 Cor. 12.3, 4, 5, 6. Ephes. 4.4, 5, 6. where when the mention of him, is joined with that of the Father and the Son, he is expressly and emphatically excluded from being either God or Lord, by being contra-distinguished from both. But if he be neither God nor Lord, as the Apostle not only in these places, but elsewhere clearly testifies, vid. 1 Cor. 8.5.6. he cannot be equal to the Father and the Son, but is only the chief Minister of Both, peculiarly sent our to Minister on their behalf that shall inherit salvation.   

An Exposition of 1 john 5.7.  
[For there are three that bear record in Heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one.]  
It would have been hard, if not impossible, (had not men been precorrupted) that it should ever come into any one's head to imagine, that this phrase are one] did signify [have one Essence,] since such an Exposition is not only contrary to common sense, but also to other places of the Scripture, wherein this kind of speaking prepetually signifieth an union in consent and agreement, or the like, but never an union in Essence. To omit other Sacred Writers, this very Apostle in his Gospel, chap. 17. ver. 11.21, 22, 23. useth the same expression six times, intimating no other but an union of agreement; yea, in vers. 8. of this very chapter in his Epistle, he useth it in the same sense. For though the expression varieth somewhat in the ordinary Greek Testaments, in that the preposition [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] is prefixed, (although the Complutensian Bible readeth it [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] in both verses:) yet is the sense the same; this latter being spoken after the Hebrew idiom, the former according to the ordinary phrase; for confirmation whereof see Matth. 19 comparing verse 5. & 6. together in the Original; wherefore this expression ought to be rendered alike in both verses, as the former Interpreters did it, though the Latter Interpreters, in vers. 8. have rendered it [agree in one] putting the gloss instead of the Translation. So that this place maketh nothing for them that hold the Holy Spirit to have one and the same Essence with the Father, unless they can prove that those who are one in agreement must likewise necessarily be one in Essence; or that two or three cannot be one, but it must presently be in Essence. I omit for the present to speak of the suspectednesse of this place, how it is not extant in the ancient Greek Copies, nor in the Syriack Translation, nor in most ancient Books of the Latin Edition, and rejected by sundry Interpreters both Ancient and Mordern.   

An Exposition of Acts 5.3.4.  
[But Peter said, Ananias, Why hath Satan filled thy heart to lie to, (or deceive) the Holy Spirit, and to keep back part of the price of the Land? while it remained, was it not thine own? And after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? Why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.]  
In this passage the Holy Spirit is neither expressly, nor by good consequence called God. For admit the ordinary Translation were true, (as it is not) yet will it not presently follow, because Ananias by lying to men endued with the Holy Spirit (for even Piscator in the words acknowledgeth, and the words themselves, according to this Interpretation, imply a metonymy of the adjunct) lied not to men, but to God, that therefore the Holy Spirit is God; for in lying to them that are endued with the Spirit of God, one may lie to God, and yet neither they, nor the Spirit in them be God, but only the Messengers of God; for what is done to Messengers redounds to him that sendeth them. see 1 Thess. 4.8. John 13.20. Luk. 10.16. But if any man look more narrowly into the words, he shall perceive that the verb [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] is construed in a different manner, to wit, with an accusative in verse 3. and with a dative in verse 4. Now [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] with an accusative in Greek Authors is the same with [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] that is, to belly, or counterfeit; thus Lucan in Pseudom. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, nomen quoddam mentitus, counterfeiting a certain name. This being so, the words are to be rendered thus, [Why hath Satan filled thy heart to belly or counterfeit the Holy Spirit? (that is, why hast thou suffered the unclean spirit so fare to prevail with thee, as to lay down this money at his suggestion, as appeareth, in that thou hast proloyned part of the price of thy Possession, and not laid down all: and yet to bear us in hand, that thou, as well as others, didst it at the motion of the Holy Spirit?) Thou hast not lied to men, but to God: (that is, assure thyself that this dissembling of thine is not so much to us, ●s to God himself, whose servants we are.) This Exposition is not only agreeable to the Greek context, and scope of the place, but is a also seconded by Erasmus, Calvin, and Aretius.   

An Exposition of 1 Cor. 6.19, 20.  
[What? know ye not, that your Body is the Temple of the Holy Spirit, that is in you, whom you have of God, and that ye are not your own? For ye have been bought with a price: wherefore glorify God both in your body, and in your Spirit, which are God's.]  
Whereas it is objected by some out of this passage, that the Holy Spirit is God, in that our Body is said to be his Temple: I Answer, that it would follow, could it be proved that our body is so the Temple of the Holy Spirit, as to be his by interest, and dedicated to his honour, both which are in the following words affirmed of God contradistinctly from the Holy Spirit. But these things are so fare from being held forth in this place, that the contrary may thence not obscurely be evinced. For the Apostle, after he had intimated in what respect our body is the Temple of the Holy Spirit, to wit, by inhabitation, (for so much is emplyed by the description, added to the Holy Spirit, since descriptions in Sacred Writers are not idle and impertinent) he addeth that we have Him from God, thereby not only distinguishing Him from God, but intimating also that He is disposed of by God, and bestowed on Us, and consequently that He is ours by interest, and not we his, as the objection would infer.   

An Exposition of Matth. 12.31.  
[All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men; but the blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven unto men.]  
For the Objection drawn hence, that the sin against the Holy Spirit is unpardonable: I Answer, that the sin against the Holy Spirit is not therefore unpardonable, because he is God, (for this the Scripture nowhere acknowledgeth, and besides, by the same reason every sin against God would be unpardonable:) but because he that sinneth against the Holy Spirit, doth in the same act sin against God (for every sin is terminated in God) with an high hand, to wit, either by slandering and opposing such works, whereof a man is convinced in conscience that God hath wrought them by his Holy Spirit, as the Pharisees did; or by renouncing and opposing such Truths, whereof a man is convinced in conscience that God hath revealed them by his Holy Spirit, as the Renegadoes did, that are mentioned by the Author to the Hebrews, cha. 10, 25, 26. etc. Which things are the greatest affronts that can be offered to God, who useth the Ministry of the Spirit in none but things of the greatest importance.   

An Answer to the grand Objection of the Adversaries touching the supposed Omnipresence of the Holy Spirit.  
After I had throughly sifted this Controversy, I found that the Adversaries, who so much cry down Reason, saying that we must renounce it when we speak of Divine Mysteries, and simply rest in the words of the Scripture, do notwithstanding in the upshot wave the Scripture, as giving a very uncertain Testimony to their Doctrine in this point, and ground themselves on the mear conjectures of their own Reason. For thus they argue, The Holy Spirit, if he were not omnipresent, and consequently God, could not inspire and dwell in so many men at one time. For Answer hereunto, I will only ask them one question, which if they resolve, I will then tell them how the Holy Spirit though he be not omni-present, may inspire all the faithful in the world at one time. Our Saviour in the fourth of Mark, explaining the Parable of the sour, saith in vers. 15. [And these are they by the way side, where the word is sown, but when they have heard, Satan cometh immediately and taketh the Word that was sown in their hearts.] Suppose now that the seed of the Word be sown in ten thousand places at one time, as it happeneth on every Lord's day, how can Satan whom the Adversaries will deny to be omni-present, come and immediately snatch the Word out of the hearts of the greatest part of the Hearers? The same resolution that they shall give to this question, will I apply to their own objection. If this be not sufficient, take yet more proofs, that may seem to evince the omni-presence of the unclean spirit: Thus is he said to have been a lying spirit in the mouth of four hundred false Prophets, 1 King. 22.22, 23. (and there is the same reason between four hundred, and four Millions.) Thus is he said to hold the impenitent (who make the greatest part of mankind) in hi● snare, and to take them captive at his will, 2 Tim. 2. ult. To blind the minds of them that believe not, 2 Cor. 4.4. To dwell in the ungodly, Revel. 2.13. To show the wicked whatsoever they practise, Joh. 8.38. Yea, to deceive the whole world, Rev. 12.9. & 20.2.3. If they dare not for all this to affirm the unclean spirit to be omni-present, why do they on less ground conclude the omni-presence of the Holy Spirit, especially when the Scripture so plainly testifieth that He changeth place, as you may see in the vl Argument above?  
FINIS.