XII 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 Parliament ... / by John Biddle.

An Exposition of Mat. 28. 19.

GO ye therefore, and make all the Nations Disci∣ples, (so the Original hath it) baptizing them into the name (so it is also in the Origi∣nal) of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit; teaching them to observe whasoever I have commanded you.

Into the name of the Holy Spirit; that is, into the holy Spirit; by a circumlocution usual in the Scrip∣ture, see Act. 19. 5. And when they had heard, they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus: compared with Rom. 6. 3. Know ye not that as many of us as have been baptized into Christ, have been baptized in∣to his death? And into the Holy Spirit, that is, into the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Thus the Jewes are said to have been all baptized into Moses, (for so the Greek hath it) 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 the Truth. Now the Holy Spirit is mentioned together with God and Christ, because he is their chief

instrument whereby they guide, govern, sanctifie, 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 sequestred from the world, and admitted into the Church, to resign up themselves to the guidance of the Holy Spirit, whom God and Christ ap∣point, and send to order and direct the Church. Neither can it be rightly inferned, that because the Holy Spirit is here ranked with the Father and the Son, therefore he is equal to them: by this account, when the Apostle, 1 Tim. 5. 21. saith, I charge thee (Gr. I obtest) before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect Angels, that thou ob∣serve these things without prejudice, doing nothing by partiality: joyning the elect Angels with the Fa∣ther and the Son, in so great a matter as obtesta∣tion, to excite an Evangelist to do his duty with sincerity; this would imply, that the elect Angels are equal to the Father and the Son. Nor doth it follow, that because it is said, not into the names, but into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit; therefore they three have but one Name, power, or dignity; since by the like reasoning I might argue, that because Christ, Luke 9. 26. saith, Whosoever shall be ashamed of me and of my words, of him shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he shall come in the glory of himself, (so it is in the Greek) and of the Father, and of the Holy Angels; therefore the Father, the Son, and the Holy Angels, have but one and the self∣same glory. For that the Holy Spirit is not rank∣ed 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. Eph. 4. 4, 5, 6. where when the mention of him is joyned with that of the Father and of the Son, he is expresly, and emphatically excluded from being either that one God, or that one Lord of Christians, by being contradistinguished from both: but if he be neither that one God, nor that one Lord of Christians; as the Apostle, not onely in the fore-quoted places, but elsewhere also plainly testifieth; see 1 Cor. 8. 5, 6. Yet to us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all the things, and we for him. And one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all the things, and we by him: he cannot be equal to the Father and the Son, but is onely the chiefe Minister of both, peculiar∣ly sent out 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 ones head to imagine, that this phrase [are one] did signifie [have one Essence] since such an exposition is not onely contrary to common sence, but also to other places of the Scripture, wherein this kinde of speaking perpe∣tually signifieth an union in consent and agree∣ment,

or the like, but never an union in Essence. To omit other Sacred Writers, this very Apostle in his Gospel, chap. 17. verse 11. 21, 22, 23, useth the same expression six times, intimating no other but an union of agreement; yea, in verse 8. of this very chapter in his Epistle, he useth it in the same sence. For though the expression vari∣ech somewhat in the ordinary Greek Testaments, in that the preposition [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] is prefixed, (although the Complutensian Bible readeth it [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] in both verses:) yet is the sence the same; this latter being spoken after the Hebrew idiome, the former according to the ordinary phrase: for confirmation whereof, see Matth. 19. comparing verse 5. and 6. together in the Original; where∣fore this expression ought to be rendred alike in both verses, as the former Interpreters did it, though the latter Interpreters, in verse 8. have rendred it [agree in one] putting the glosse in stead 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 es∣sence; or that two or three cannot be one, but it must presently be in essence. I omit for the present to speak of the suspectedness of this place, how it is not extant in the ancient Greek Copies, and namely in that famous one of Tecla here in England, nor in the Syriack Translation, nor in most ancient Books of the Latine edition, and re∣jected by sundry Interpreters both ancient and modern.

An Exposition of Act. 5. 3, 4.

BƲt Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thy heart to lye to (or deceive) the Holy Spirit, and keep back part of the price of the Farm? while it remained, remained it not to thee? and being sold, was it not in thine owne power? why fast thou conceived (or put, or purposed) in thy heart this thing? Thou hast not lyed to men; but to God.

In this passage, the Holy Spirit is neither ex∣presly (as every one seeth) nor by good conse∣quence called God. For admit the ordinary Translation were true (as it is not) yet would 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 Interpretati∣on imply a Metonymie of the adjunct, the Holy Spirit being put for men endued with the Holy Spirit) lyed not to men, but to God, that there fore the Holy Spirit is God; because in lying to them that are endued with the Spirit of God, one may lye to God, and yet neither they, nor the Spirit in them, be God, but onely the messengers of God; for what is done to the messengers, re∣doundeth to him that sends them; see 1 Thes. 4. 8. John 13. 20. Luke 10. 16. But if any man look more narrowly into the words, he shall finde that the verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is construed in a diffe∣rent manner, namely with an accusative, verse 3••

and with a dative verse 4. with an accusative, it signifieth in Greek Authors, to bely, pretend, or counterfeit: thus Lucian in his Pseudomantis, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, nomen quoddam mentitus, coun∣terfeiting a certain name. This being so, the words are to be rendred thus; Why hath Satan filled thy heart to bely the Holy Spirit, and keep back part of the price? (that is, Why hast thou skffered the unclean Spirit so to prevail with thee, as that thou shouldest sell thy Farm, and lay down this money at his suggesti∣on, as appeareth in that thou hast purloined part of the price, and not laid down all; and yet to bear us in hand, that thou didst it at the motion of the Holy Spirit?) thou hast not lyed to men, but to God: (that is, assure thy self that this dissimulation of thine, is not so much to us, as to God himself, whose Servants we are.) This Exposition is not onely agreeable to the Greek context, and scope of the place, but is also seconded by Erasmus, Calvin, and Aretius. But if any man will contend, that though 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 be not here rendred to lye unto (as I have not yet met with an instance where it is so rendred, when an Accusative is put after it;) yet the other signification, set in the Margin of our English Bible, is altogether to be admitted (and I confess I have in good Greek Authors found the word so used) and the place to be rendred, Why hath Sa∣tan filled thy heart to deceive the Holy Spirit? This will overthrow the opinion, touching the God∣head of the Holy Spirit: For if the Holy Spirit be God, then will it be all one as if it had been said, Why hath Satan filled thy heart to deceive God? Which seemeth to be blasphemy; for it importeth, either that God may be deceived, or else that Sa∣tan, or at least Ananias thought so, otherwise he

would not have purposed in his heart to do it. But what force or use (if this Interpretation of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 be admitted) will those words have, And to keep back part of the price; and also those, While it remained, remained it not to thee? and being sold, was it not in thy power? For these ex∣pressions argue, that Ananias pretended to have received a command from the Holy Spirit to sell his Farm, and lay downe the price thereof at the Apostles feet; and so did not deceive, or lye to, but bely the Holy Spirit; and consequently, was guilty not onely of coverousness, in keeping some of the money back; but also of Blasphemy a∣gainst the Holy Spirit, in fathering upon the Holy Spirit, that which was injected into his heart by the unclean Spirit: For he alike Blas∣phemeth the Holy Spirit, who doth with Ananias wilfully father the works of the Devil upon the Holy Spirit, as he who with the Pharisees, Mat. 12. 24. wilfully ascribeth the works of the Holy Spirit to the Devil.

An Exposition of 1 Cor. 6. 19, 20.

What? know ye not that your body is the Temple of the holy Spirit that is (or, dwelleth) in you, whom ye have from God, and ye are not your own? for ye have been bought with a price. Wherefore glorifie God both with your body, and your spirit, which are God's.

Whereas it is objected by some, out of this

place, that the holy Spirit is God, in that our bo∣dy 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 the highest interest, and primarily dedicated to his honour; for every one will confess our body to be God's in such a manner. But these things are so far from being intimated in this passage, yea that our body is at all his by interest, or dedicated to his honour, (both which are here affirmed of God contradistinctly from the Spirit) as that the con∣trary may from thence not obscurely be evinced. For after the Apostle had hinted in what respect our body is the Temple of the holy Spirit, to wit, by inhabitation, (for so much is implied by those words, that is, or dwelleth in you; since descripti∣ons in sacred Writers are not idle and imperti∣nent) he addeth, that we have the Spirit from God, thereby implying that he is disposed of, and given by God to us, and consequently he is ours by in∣terest, not we his; and accordingly concludeth from thence, that we ought with our body to glo∣rifie, not the Spirit, but God, who is openly distin∣guished from the Spirit, and declared to be the Proprietor of our body.

An Exposition of Matth. 12. 31.

All sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men; but the blasphemy against the holy Spirit shall not be forgiven.

For the Objection drawn from hence, that the

sin against the holy Spirit is unpardonable; I an∣swer, 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, against whom∣soever committed, is terminated in God) with an high hand, to wit, either by slandering and oppo∣sing such works, whereof a man is convinced in conscience that God hath wrought them by the holy Spirit, as the Pharisees did; or by renoun∣cing and opposing such Truths, whereof a man is convinced in conscience, that God hath revealed them by his holy Spirit, as the Renegadoes did, who are mentioned by the Author to the Hebrews, Chap. 10. 25, 26, &c. which things are the great∣est affronts that can be offered to God, who useth the ministery of the Spirit in none but things of the highest importance, and maketh the clearest discovery of himself, as to his Power and Majestie, by him. Hence it cometh to pass, that a sin against the Father or the Son may be forgiven, but not a sin against the holy Spirit, inasmuch as it is also against the greatest light. For God the Father maketh no discovery of himself to the world im∣mediately; and Christ, to prove his Authority and Mission from God, appealeth to the works which he did by the finger of God, the Holy Spi∣rit; see Luke 11. 20. compared with Mat. 12. 28. Wherefore I report this Argument against the Adversaries, as quite subverting their opinion touching the Godhead of the Holy Spirit: For if the Holy Spirit were God, you would commit

no sin, but what would be against the holy Spirit, in that all sins are committed against God, as being the transgressions of his Law. Again, when we sinned against the Father, we must of necessity also sin against the holy Spirit, if he be the same God with the Father. For as the Adversaries hold that the works of the Trinity ad extra, that is, to without, are common to all three: so must they by the same reason confess, that whatsoever is done to any one of them ab extra, that is, from without, is also common to all three.

An exposition of Isai. 6. 9, 10.

And he said, Go and tel this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not: and see ye indeed, but perceive not. Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes: lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed.] compa∣red with Acts 28. 25, 26, 27. Well spake the holy Spi∣rit by Isaias the Prophet, unto our Fathers, saying, Go unto this people, and say, Hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand, &c.

Because that which in Isaiah is attributed to the Lord, is in the Acts ascribed to the holy Spirit; the Adversaries hence conclude, that the holy Spi∣rit is the Lord. Which kinde of arguing, though it be very frequent with them, is yet very frivo∣lous; for at this rate I may also conclude, that be∣cause what is attributed to the Lord, Exod. 32. 11. [Lord, why doth thy wrath wax hot against thy peo∣ple,

which thou hast brought forth out of the land of Egypt?] is in the seventh verse of the same cha∣pter ascribed to Moses: [And the Lord said unto Moses, Go, get thee down: for thy people which thow broughtest out of the land of Egypt, &c.] therefore Moses is the Lord. And because what is attribu∣ted to the Lord, Isa. 65. 1. [I am sought of them that asked not for me: I am found of them that sought me not: I said, Behold me, behold me, unto a nation that was not called by my name] is in the 10 of the Romanes, vers. 20. ascribed to Isaiah: [But Isaias is very bold, and saith, I was found of them that sought me not: I was made manifest unto them that asked not after me:] therefore Isaiah is the Lord. And because what is attributed to God, 2 Tim. 1. 8, 9. [According to the power of God, who hath saved us, and called us, &c.] is by Paul attri∣buted to himself, 1 Cor. 9. 22. [I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some,] and to Timothy, 1 Tim. 4. 16. [In doing this, thou shalt both save thy self, and them that hear thee:] therefore Paul, yen Timothy is God. If the Ad∣versaries say, that these things are otherwise ascri∣bed to the Lord, then to the men aforesaid: I answer, This is more then is held forth in the texts themselves, which neither express nor inti∣mate any such thing. If they further contend, that though such a thing be neither expressed nor intimated in the said texts, yet other texts, and the nature of the thing it self, doth sufficiently teach it: I reply, that I can make the same an∣swer touching the Lord and the holy Spirit. But it is well that there is such an intimation in the texts themselves; for in the one, the Lord speak∣eth those things to Isaiah in a vision; in the other it

is said, that the holy Spirit spake them by Isaiah to the Fathers. Which twain every one may easily perceive to be different, since Isaiah onely heard those words in the vision: for had the Fathers, the people of Israel, been also there, why should God bid Isaiah, go and tell them to the people? wherefore Paul ascribeth these words to the Holy Spirit, onely to intimate that whatsoever is spo∣ken in the Scripture, was recorded by the inspi∣ration of the Holy Spirit, and so spoken by him.

An Exposition of 2 Cor. 3. 17.

Now the Lord is that Spirit.

By that Spirit is not here meant the third Person of the HOLY TRINITY, otherwise the Lord, that is, Christ (for the Apostle Paul, by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Lord, doth always, unless he cite some place out of the Old Covenant, understand Christ) will be the Holy Spirit; which is repugnant to the Scri∣pture, wherein there is a plain distinction every∣where made between Christ and the holy Spirit. Understand therefore (what the expression it self implyeth) the same Spirit that was before in the sixth verse opposed to the Letter, and conse∣quently the mystery or hidden sence of the Law, denoted by the Letter: for thus the word Spirit is also taken, Rom. 2. 29. Circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, and not in the Letter. And Rom. 7. 6. But now we are delivered from the Law, that

being dead wherein we are held; so that we serve in the newness of the Spirit, and not in the oldness of the Letter. And Rev. 11. 8. Their dead bodies shall lye in the streets of the great City, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified. Jerusalem is here spiritually, that is, mysti∣cally called Sodom and Egypt, because of the abomi∣nable filthiness thereof, and cruelty towards the people of God. Wherefore the sence of the words of Paul is this, namely, that the Lord Christ is the Mystery, Life, Scope, and Kernel of the Law, as be∣ing both foretold therein, and prefigured by the Cere∣monies thereof.