66

that it is erroneous to suppose that the Antenicenes do not allege it to prove the Divinity of the Son or Holy Ghost." For the Prelate whose words I have just cited has made it the chief object of his ninth chapter, to ascertain from the writings of the Antenicenes, whether those Fathers did or did not allege the text to prove the Divinity of the Son and Holy Ghost; and he draws abundant proofs from their writings that they did allege it to prove the Divinity of the Son and Holy Ghost. He alludes to those proofs in p. 220, where, after the words, "They (i. e., the Unitarians) say farther, that the ancients of the first four hundred years do not insist on this place, to prove the Divinity or Personality of the Son or Spirit;" he adds, “As to the first three hundred years I have given an account already; and, as to the fourth century, I could not have thought that they would have mentioned it; since there is scarce a Father of the Church, in that time, who had occasion to do it, but makes use of the argument from this place to prove the Divinity and Personality of the Son and Spirit."

With regard to the second objection, viz., "That the form of words used by St. Matthew doth not prove the Doctrine of the Trinity." It is obvious that the case is otherwise. "To baptise is, in a general sense, to cleanse from defilement, and to set apart for a pure use; as an ordinance of the Christian religion to be received but once, it is symbolically to cleanse from the defilement of sin, and to consecrate by a perpetual obligation to a Christian life. This obligation is the most comprehensive which can be imposed: it involves faith, worship, and obedience; the devotion of body, and soul, and spirit; and it is incurred to the name not only of the Father, but of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. It is not worship towards one, obedience towards another, and faith towards another; nor is it all these in a different sense and degree towards each; nor yet is it all

F

these in the same sense towards one, through another, and in another. Our Saviour does not make any division, distribution, or gradation, of our baptismal engagements; neither does He distinguish one person as more especially, or in a higher degree, the object of those engagements, than another; but whatsoever things are undertaken in baptism, whatsoever duties a Godly and a Christian life comprehends, these, undivided and undistributed—these, in the same sense and degree, are intended. Such honour, the highest which man can give, belongs only to God; nor will He permit any creature to be associated with Him in it."—Vogan, Bampt. Lect. p. 165. Vide also Waterland's Moyer's Lectures, viii.; Randolph, Vind. Trinity, part ii. p. 54-61.

NOTE (7), page 22.

"We have the concurrent testimony of all ancient writers, both Jews and Christians, that Jehovah is the proper and incommunicable name of the Supreme God, and denotes an eternal, immutable, necessary existence. It is derived from the verb ', which signifies to exist;' and God himself has explained this to be the meaning of it. When Moses, Ex. iii. 13, desired to know of God what was his name, God said unto Moses TN - I am that I am,' and then adds: Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, Jehovah, the God of your Fathers, hath sent me unto you; this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations.' And to this doubtless our Lord referred, when he used that remarkable expression to the Jews,- Before Abraham was I am,' John viii. 58. The Jews tell us that the time past, present, and to come, were all expressed in this word.

"The Scriptures of truth in the most express terms appropriates this name to the true God. We have already seen that God, Exod. iii. 15, commanded Moses' to say unto the children of Israel, Jehovah, the God of your Fathers, &c., hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations.' And that this latter clause more particularly relates to the title Jehovah, appears by comparing it with the foregoing verse, and also with Hos. xii. 5: Jehovah, the God of Hosts, Jehovah is his memorial.' See also Ps. cxxxv. 13, which should be translated 'Jehovah is thy name for ever, Jehovah is thy memorial from generation to generation.' I am Jehovah,'

saith God by his prophet, Isa. xlii. 8, 'that is my name, and my glory will I not give to another.' Again, I am Jehovah (Isa. xlv. 5), and there is none else, there is no God besides me.'

"Thou whose name alone is Jehovah,' saith the Psalmist, lxxxii. 18, art the Most High over all the earth.' This is called, Deut. xxviii. 58, the glorious and fearful name.' This is the title on which God throughout the whole Old Testament insists; by this He asserts His Authority, Power, and Supremacy, glorying, in a manner, and triumphing in it, as the distinguishing character by which he would be known to be infinitely superior to all the gods of the nations. With this title he introduces the Decalogue: I am Jehovah thy God,' Ex. xx. 2, Levit. xviii. and xix., and elsewhere. And this he frequently adds by way of sanction to his laws, ' I am Jehovah.'

"And thus he expresses himself to his Prophets, 'I, even I (Isa. xliii. 11), am Jehovah, and besides me there is no Saviour.' I form (Isa. xlv. 7) the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil; I Jehovah do all these things. "Who hath (Isa, xlv. 26) declared this from ancient time have not I Jehovah, and there is no God else

besides me.'

6

Behold I am Jehovah (Jer. xxxii. 27), the God of all flesh: is there any thing too hard for me?'

I am Jehovah (Mal. iii. 6); I change not.'

6

6

· All the

Gods (Ps. xcvi. 5) of the nations are idols; but Jehovah made the Heavens.' Against all the Gods (Ex. xii. 12) of Egypt I will execute judgment: I am Jehovah.'”—Randolph's Vindication of the Doctrine of the Trinity, part i. p. 61-65.

NOTE (8), page 27.

6

6

"As Christ is called an Advocate,' so the Holy Ghost is said to be another Advocate. Christ our Advocate to plead our cause with God, He, Christ's Advocate, to plead His cause with the world:"-" The verb πаρакαλeiv is of a very large and unlimited signification: it sometimes signifies to comfort,' very frequently to 'preach,' 'teach,' and 'exhort,' and sometimes to plead as an Advocate the cause of another.' And this seems to be the proper notion of the word παράκλŋtos in this place, the Advocate or Patron of a cause,' one that pleads for the party accused. And in this sense, and no other, Christ is called our apάKληTOS, or Advocate with the Father.' 1 John ii. 1. If any man sin we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.' And as Christ is our Advocate with the Father in Heaven, so the Spirit is Christ's Advocate here on earth, and pleads His cause with the world. And it is And it is very observable that this very word ' Paraclete,'

though it be not an

Hebrew, but a Greek word, is frequently used by the Chaldee paraphrast, and other Jewish writers, in this sense of an Advocate. And that this notion of the word agrees best with this place, I shall clearly shew, when I come to the second

head of my discourse; namely, to shew the happy consequence and effect of the coming of the Holy Ghost, viz., the convincing of the world how injuriously they had dealt with Christ, and the clear vindication of his innocency, which is the proper office and work of an Advocate."— Tillotson, vol. x. Serm. cxcviii. p. 308, 309. Vide also Clarke's Serm. vol. vi. p. 74.

66

NOTE (ε), page 37.

But among all the reproaches," observes Dr. Wall, "cast on the Fathers, there is none so scandalous and destructive of the credit both of the Fathers and of Christianity itself, as is one they have lately set abroad, viz., that the doctrine of the Trinity, or of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, in whom we believe, and in whose name we are baptised, is (as it is understood, explained, and held by the said Fathers) a doctrine of Tritheism, or of believing in three Gods. I may repeat their sayings, for they are industriously handed about in the English tongue. One of them says thus:

66 6

1

They (the Fathers) thought the three hypostases (or persons in the Trinity) to be three equal Gods, as we should now express it.'-And again: Not to recur to the Fathers, whose opinion was quite different from that which is now received; and who, properly speaking, affirmed that there were three consubstantial Gods, as has been shewn by Petavius, Curcellæus, Cudworth, and others.'

1 M. Le Clerc, in his Supplement to Dr. Hammond's Annot. on 1 John v. 6, 4to. London, 1699.

2 Ibid. Preface, or see the Latin edition, Novum Test. Hammondi et Clerici, 2 tom. fol. Francofurti. 1714, tom. ii. p. 594, sect. 5.