apostle prays to the Holy Ghost, together with the Father and Son,
_viz._ Cor. xiii. 14. _The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love
of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all, amen_;
where, in that part of this prayer, which respects the Holy Ghost, is
contained an humble supplication, that he would be pleased to manifest
himself to them, or that he would communicate to them those graces which
they stood in need of; that so, as the church is said elsewhere, in John
i. 3. to have _fellowship with the Father, and with his Son Jesus
Christ_; here the apostle prays that they may have fellowship with the
Holy Ghost; and how can this blessing be prayed for, without supposing
him addressing himself herein to the Holy Ghost? Whenever any thing is
desired, or prayed for, that can be considered no otherwise than as an
effect, produced by a free agent, this prayer, or desire, is supposed
more immediately to be directed to him: As suppose a person should use
this mode of speaking, in presence of a disobliged friend; Oh that he
would look upon me, that he would converse with me, or that he would
discover his wonted love to me! though, according to the form of
expression, it seems not be directed to him, yet every one would suppose
it to be equivalent to an immediate address made to him to that purpose;
wherefore, for the apostle to desire that the Holy Ghost would have
communion with, that is, converse with, and manifest himself to them, in
performing all those works, which were necessary for their edification
and salvation, this desire cannot contain less than a prayer to him.
We shall now proceed to consider some objections, brought by the
Anti-trinitarians, against the deity of the Holy Ghost.
_Object._ A divine Person cannot be the gift of God, for that supposes
him to be at his disposal, and inferior to him; but the Spirit is said
to be given by him, in Neh. ix. 20. _Thou gavest also thy good Spirit to
instruct them_; and, in Acts xi. 17. _God gave them the like gift_,
meaning the Spirit, _that he did unto us_; and, in Luke xi. 13. _God_,
the Father, is said _to give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him_.
Again, the Spirit is said to be _sent_, and that either by the Father,
as in John xiv. 26. _The Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the
Father will send in my name_; or by the Son, as in chap. xvi. 7. _If I
depart, I will send him unto you._ Again, he is said to receive what he
communicates from another, in John xvi. 14. _He shall receive of mine,
and shall shew it unto you_; which is inconsistent with the character of
a divine Person, who is never said to receive what he imparts to others,
as the apostle speaks concerning God, in Rom. xi. 35. _Who hath first
given to him?_ Again, he is said not to speak of himself, but what he
hears, when he shews things to come, John xvi. 13. Accordingly he did
not know that which he was to communicate before he heard it. Again, he
is said to have a mind distinct from God, unless we suppose that there
are a plurality of gods, and so more distinct divine minds than one; for
this, they bring that scripture, in Rom. viii. 27. _He that searcheth
the heart, knoweth the mind of the Spirit._ Again, he is represented as
making intercession, which is an act of worship, and consequently he
cannot be the object thereof; ver. 26. _The Spirit itself maketh
intercession for us_, &c. this also argues that he is not possessed of
the blessings which he intercedes for. Again, he is not only said to be
resisted and grieved, which expressions, it is true, are sometimes
applied to God, though in an improper sense, speaking after the manner
of men; but the Spirit is said to be quenched, or extinguished: thus, 1
Thess. v. 19. this, together with what has been before said concerning
him, is not applicable to a divine Person. These are the most material
objections that are brought against the doctrine which we have been
endeavouring to maintain, and the sum of them all is this; that it is
inconsistent with the character of a divine Person to be thus dependent
on, and subjected to the will of another, as the Spirit is supposed, by
them, to be.
_Answ._ That we may defend the Godhead of the Holy Ghost, against
such-like objections as these, we shall first premise something relating
to all those scriptures which speak of the Spirit, as given or sent by
the Father, and then apply it to the sense of those in particular which
are brought to support the objections, as before-mentioned.
1. It may be easily observed, that in several places of scripture,
especially in the New Testament, the Holy Ghost is often taken for the
gifts or graces of the Spirit; and more particularly for that
extraordinary dispensation, in which the apostles were endowed with
those spiritual gifts, which were necessary for the propagation and
success of the gospel: these, by a _Metonymy_, are called the _Spirit_;
and, I humbly conceive, all those scriptures, which speak of the
Spirit’s _being poured forth_, as in Prov. i. 23. and Joel ii. 28.
compared with Acts ii. 17. and elsewhere, are to be understood in this
sense; and thus it is explained, in Acts x. 44, 45. _The Holy Ghost fell
on all them which heard the word_; upon which occasion it is said, that
_upon the Gentiles was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost_. Thus we
are to understand that scripture, in Acts xix. 2. _We have not so much
as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost_; and another in John vii. 39.
_the Holy Ghost was not yet, because Jesus was not yet glorified_; the
word _given_ is supplied by our translators, probably, to fence against
a weak argument of some Anti-trinitarians, taken from that text, to
overthrow the eternity of the Spirit; but whether the word be supplied
or no, the sense of the text is plainly this, that the gifts of the Holy
Ghost were not conferred before Christ’s ascension into heaven; which is
a farther confirmation of this acceptation of the word, or of this
figurative way of speaking, being used in this, and several other places
of scripture, to the same purpose.
2. All those scriptures which seem to represent the Holy Ghost, as
inferior to the Father and Son, some of which are contained in the
objection, may be understood as denoting the subserviency of the works
of the Spirit, which are also called the _Holy Ghost_, to those works
which are said to be performed by the Father and Son: Now it is certain
that the subserviency of one work unto another, performed by different
persons, does not necessarily infer the inferiority of one person to the
other: accordingly we must distinguish between the Spirit, as
subsisting, and as acting; in the former sense, he is a divine Person,
equal with the Father and Son; in the latter, he may be said to be
subservient to them.
But now we shall proceed to consider the sense of those scriptures,
brought to support the objection, in consistency with what has been
premised. The first scripture mentioned, is that in which it is said,
_Thou gavest them thy good Spirit to instruct them_; where the Holy
Ghost is described with a personal character, and probably it is not to
be understood metonymically for his gifts and graces; accordingly the
meaning of it seems to be this; that the Spirit’s efficiency, in guiding
and instructing them, was a special gift of God conferred upon them;
and, in this respect, though he was a sovereign Agent, yet he is said to
act by the will of the Father, which is the same with his own will: for
though the Persons in the Godhead are distinct, yet they have not
distinct wills; and it is no improper way of speaking to say, that when
a divine Person displays his glory, and therein confers a blessing upon
men, that this is given; as when God is said to give himself to his
people, when he promises to be a God to them. There is, indeed, in this
mode of speaking, a discriminating act of favour conferred on men, upon
which account it is called a gift; but this does not militate against
the divinity of the Holy Ghost, though he is said to be given to them.
As for the other scripture, in which it is said, _God gave them the like
gift, as he gave to us_, meaning the Holy Ghost, that is plainly taken
for the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit, the conferring whereof is
called, in the foregoing words, a being _baptized with the Holy Ghost_;
as it is particularly explained in that scripture, referred to, in Acts
x. 45, 46. where it is said, that _on the Gentiles was poured out the
gift of the Holy Ghost_; what this gift is, we may learn from the
following words, _They spake with tongues, and magnified God_.
Again, when it is said, in Luke xi. 13. that _your heavenly Father shall
give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him_; this is explained by another
evangelist, in Matt. vii. 11. where it is taken for good things in
general, and so includes the graces of the Spirit, that accompany
salvation, when it is said, your Father, that is in heaven, shall give
_good things_ to them that ask him; so that here the Spirit is taken for
all those blessings which he bestows upon his people, in answer of
prayer.
As for those scriptures before mentioned, in which the Spirit is said to
be sent, either by the Father, or the Son, they are not, indeed, to be
understood in the same sense, as when the Son is said to be sent in his
human nature, appearing in the form of a servant, to fulfil the will of
God; but when God is said to send his Spirit, the word is to be taken in
a metaphorical sense; in which, sending imports as much as giving; and
when the Spirit is said to be given, it has a peculiar reference to the
grace which he was to bestow upon them. If we enquire into the reason of
this metaphorical way of speaking, it may probably be this; that we may
understand hereby that the Spirit, which was to produce these effects,
was a divine Person, and that the effects themselves were subservient to
those works which were performed, by which the Personal glories of the
Father and Son were demonstrated.
Again, when it is farther said by our Saviour, in John xvi. 14. that
_the Spirit shall receive of mine, and shew it unto you_; this plainly
intends the Spirit’s applying to them those blessings which Christ had
purchased by his blood, which tended to his glory; and still it
signifies only the subserviency of the Spirit to the Son, in working, as
the application of redemption tends to render the purchase thereof
effectual, to answer its designed end.
As to the next scripture, before mentioned, in John xvi. 13. where _the
Spirit_ is said _not to speak of himself, but whatsoever he shall hear,
that shall he speak_; this does not argue, in the least, that the Spirit
receives what he communicates, as dependent on the Father, for the
knowledge of those things he is to impart, or that he has ideas
impressed on his mind, as creatures are said to have; for that is
inconsistent with what has been before proved from scripture, _viz._
_That the Spirit knoweth the deep things of God, even as the spirit of a
man knoweth the things of a man_; or, as an intelligent being, is
conscious of his own thoughts, or actions, not by information, but by an
immediate internal perception. The sense therefore of this text is this;
that the Spirit shall communicate no other doctrines, or give no other
laws, but what Christ had before given in the gospel; or that what he
revealeth, is the same that Christ had given them ground to expect:
accordingly, it is so far from militating against the Spirit’s divinity,
that it proves the harmony and consent of what is suggested by one
divine Person, with what had been before delivered by another; and as to
the mode of expression here used, concerning the Spirit’s speaking what
he had heard; this is spoken after the manner of men, and is no more
inconsistent with his divine omniscience, or the independence thereof,
than when God is said, in other scriptures, to know things by searching
them, or, as it were, by enquiry, as hath been before observed, in
considering omniscience, as attributed to the Holy Ghost. These, and
suchlike expressions, by which God is represented, by words,
accommodated to our usual way of speaking, when applied to men, are to
be understood, notwithstanding, in a way agreeable to the divine
perfections, by abstracting from them every thing that argues the least
imperfection in him, when applied to the Holy Ghost; as when some
expressions, agreeable to human modes of speaking, are elsewhere used,
with a particular application to the Father, without detracting from his
divine glory.
Again, when it is objected, that the Spirit hath a distinct mind from
God, as when it is said, _God knoweth the mind of the Spirit_; and, as
though he were represented as engaged in an act of worship, he is, in
the following words, described, as _praying_, or, _making intercession
for us, according to the will of God_; as, in Rom. viii. 26, 27. it is
plain, that, by the _mind of the Spirit_, we are to understand those
secret desires in prayer, which are wrought in believers by the Spirit,
when they want words to express them; instead of which, they address
themselves to God, as it is said, _with groanings that cannot be
uttered_, which are from the Spirit, as the Author of these secret
desires, which are only known to the heart-searching God, who knows the
meaning of them, what it is we want, in which respect, this is called
the mind of the Spirit, as the Author thereof, though it is subjectively
our own mind or desires, which we want words to express; and when the
Spirit is said to make intercession for us, it implies nothing else but
his enabling us, whether in more or less proper modes of speaking, to
plead with God for ourselves.
_Lastly_, As to those expressions, by which the Spirit is represented,
as _quenched_, or _extinguished_, these are to be understood in the same
sense as when by a _metonymy_, as before mentioned, the gifts of the
Spirit; as when those extraordinary gifts were first promised, they were
led to expect that they should be _baptized with the Holy Ghost, and
with fire_, that is, they should have the extraordinary gifts of the
Holy Ghost conferred upon them, which were to be signified by the emblem
of _fiery tongues, that sat on them_, in Acts ii. 3. the reason of which
emblem might probably be this; that as a necessary qualification from
their preaching the gospel, they should be filled with an holy flame of
love to God, and zeal for his glory, as well as with the gift of
tongues, by which they might communicate his mind to the world. This
privilege, which they had received, the apostle exhorts them not to
forfeit, abuse, or provoke the Holy Ghost to take from them, which is
called a quenching the Spirit; therefore this metaphorical way of
speaking, accommodated hereunto, must not be supposed to be inconsistent
with his divinity.
I shall conclude with some inferences, which more especially respect the
practical improvement of the doctrine of the Trinity. And,
1. We may take occasion, from hence, to observe the difference that
there is between natural and revealed religion. As the former respects
the knowledge of God so far, as it may be attained without the help of
divine revelation, and that worship, which the heathen, who have nothing
else to guide them but the light of nature, are obliged to give to the
divine Being; the latter, which is founded on scripture, contains a
display of the Personal glory of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, which
is necessary to be known and believed, as being the foundation of all
revealed religion; so that the sum of Christianity consists in our
subjection to, and adoring the Godhead, as subsisting in the Father,
Son, and Holy Spirit.
2. As this doctrine is eminently displayed in the work of redemption, it
is necessary for us to consider how it is accommodated to, and
demonstrated by all the branches thereof. The price that was given, by
our great Redeemer, has a value put upon it, in proportion to the
dignity of his Person, and lays a sure foundation for our hope of being
accepted in the sight of God, on account of his obedience and sacrifice,
which was of infinite value: and the application of redemption being a
work which the Spirit, who is a divine Person, has undertaken to
perform, encourages us to expect that it shall be brought to perfection;
so that they, who are the objects of redeeming love and sanctifying
grace, shall, in the end, be completely saved.
3. As it is necessary for us to adore and magnify the Father, Son, and
Holy Ghost, for the hope which we have of this inestimable privilege in
the gospel; so we must observe the distinct glory that is to be given to
each of these divine Persons for this work; to the Father, in that
whatever is done by the Mediator, to procure this privilege for us, is
considered, in scripture, as taking its rise from him, 1 Cor. i. 30. _Of
him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us, wisdom, and
righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption_: And whatever was
done in the human nature, or by God incarnate; that is, in a peculiar
manner, the work of the Son, and a revenue of glory is due to him for
it, who gave his life a ransom for many, and herein expressed the
highest instance of condescension, which is enhanced by the infinite
dignity of his Person. Moreover, whatever work is performed in
subserviency to the Mediator’s glory, whereby the Spirit demonstrates
his distinct Personal glory; this gives us occasion to adore him, in all
the displays of his power, in beginning, carrying on, and completing the
work of grace in the souls of men.
4. As to what respects that fellowship or communion, which believers
have with the Father, Son, and Spirit, this depends on the account we
have, in scripture, of the distinct methods, in which their Personal
glory is set forth therein: Thus we have access to God the Father,
through the Mediation of the Son, by the powerful influence of the Holy
Spirit, as the apostle says, in Eph. ii. 18. _Through him we have an
access, by one Spirit unto the Father_; and our hope of blessedness
proceeds this way, as it is the gift of the Father, who has prepared an
inheritance for us, the purchase of the Son, on whose death it is
founded, and the work of the Holy Ghost, as bringing us to and putting
us into the possession of it.
5. This directs us as to the way of performing the great duty of
self-dedication, to the Father, Son, and Spirit; to the Father, as our
covenant God in Christ; to the Son, as the Mediator, Head, and Surety of
this covenant; and to the Spirit, by whom we are made partakers of the
blessings promised therein; in all these, and many other respects, we
are to have a particular regard to the persons in the Godhead, in such a
way, as their Personal glory is set forth in scripture.
6. Since the Father, Son, and Spirit, are one, though we distinguish
them as Persons, yet we must consider them as having the same divine
perfections, the same divine understanding and will, lest, while we give
glory to each of the Persons in the Godhead, we should suppose that
there are more Gods than one; therefore, though the Person of the Father
is distinct from that of the Son and the Holy Ghost, we are not to
suppose the power, wisdom, goodness, and faithfulness, or any other
divine perfections, belong, in a more or less proper sense, to one
Person than another.
7. This doctrine is of use to direct us how we are to address ourselves
to God in prayer: thus, when therein we call him our Father, we are not
to consider him in the same sense, as when he is represented as the
Father of our Lord Jesus Christ; but we address ourselves to him, as the
Author of our being, the God of all grace, and the Fountain of
blessedness; in which respect, the Son and the Holy Ghost are not to be
excluded, especially unless we consider him as our Father in Christ, and
so express our faith with respect to his distinct Personality, from that
of the Son and the Spirit. And though only one divine Person be
particularly mentioned in prayer, the blessed Trinity is to be adored;
or whatever Personal glory we ascribe to one, as subsisting distinctly
from the other, we must, notwithstanding, consider the Father, Son, and
Spirit, as the one only living and true God.
Thus we have gone through this great and important subject, and therein
have taken occasion, particularly, to insist on the chief matters in
controversy relating to the doctrine of the ever-blessed Trinity, and
consider the various methods taken to oppose it both by the Socinians
and Arians, and endeavoured, not only to defend the Deity of our
Saviour, and the Holy Ghost by enquiring into the sense of those many
scriptures, in which our faith therein is founded, but to answer the
most material objections that are brought against it; and our enlarging
more on it, than we shall do on several following answers, cannot be
reckoned a needless work, inasmuch as a great deal hath been written in
opposition to it, whereby the faith of some has not only been shaken,
but overthrown. I would never attempt to speak of this doctrine, or any
of the divine perfections, without being sensible of the difficulty of
the subject, it being such as is not to be comprehended by a finite
mind. I hope nothing will appear to have been suggested inconsistent
with the essential, or Personal glory of the Father, Son, or Spirit; and
it may reasonably be expected that there should be allowances made for
great defects, since it is but a little of God that can be known by us;
therefore, when we pretend to speak concerning him, it will not be
thought strange if we give occasion to any to say, that we have the
greatest reason to acknowledge, that, in many instances, we cannot order
our words, by reason of darkness.
Footnote 76:
“God is One: a most pure, most simple, and most perfect Being.
“The absolute unity and simplicity of this glorious Being is strictly
exclusive of any division of perfections. Yet, as human knowledge is
not intuitive but discursive, we find it necessary to form and
communicate our conceptions, by referring them to distinct and
infinite attributes. Such are independence, spirituality, eternity,
immutability, power, knowledge, rectitude, and benevolence.
“It is absurd to say, that either the abstract essence, or any of the
infinite perfections of God, in themselves, or in their exercise, can
be grasped, included, or comprehended (or whatever equivalent term be
used) by a limited intellect. ‘A _part_ of His ways, a _little
portion_ of Him,’ we know; for He has unveiled it. The knowledge of
the best and greatest finite mind can only be, to immortality, an
approximation; and therefore must for ever be infinitely small. God
alone is CAPABLE OF COMPREHENDING His own nature, mode of existence,
and perfections.
“The only questions, therefore, that we have to ask, are, Has Deity,
in fact, communicated to man _any_ information concerning HIMSELF? And
_what_ has He communicated? Whatever such revelation may be, it is
impossible that it should be self-contradictory, or any other than
most becoming to infinite wisdom and purity.
“This revelation authorizes us, by a variety of inductive proofs, to
conclude, that, with regard to the mode of existence of the ONE Divine
Essence, the Unity of the Godhead includes a Trinity of Persons (so
denominated for want of any better terms) who are scripturally styled
the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit: Distinct, not in essence or
in perfections, but only personally: One, not personally, but in the
common possession of the same identical nature and attributes.
“No contradiction or absurdity is involved in this doctrine, because
the unity refers to one respect, and the trinity to another. But we
make no difficulty in professing our incapacity to include in our
knowledge, or express by any possible terms, _the respect_ in which
the Trinity of persons subsists in the perfect Oneness of the Deity.
Such pretension would imply a contradiction.”
SMITH’S LETTERS TO BELSHAM.
Footnote 77: