Hence that in Job 2.4 Skin for skin and all that a man hath will he give for his life And that of Solomon A living Dog is better than a dead Lion Eccles. 9.4 For when Life is gone there succeeds an incapacity not only of Doing but also of Enjoying Good From this consideration it is that the other significations of the word have their Original For Life being looked upon as the greatest natural Good and Death as the greatest natural Evil The one by a Synechdoche speciei is frequently used both in sacred and profane Authours to signify Good indefinitely especially the greatest Good and the other in like manner to signifie Evil especially the greatest Evil. The one is put for Happiness and the other for Misery And then again by a Synechdoche generis this general notion of Good or Evil Happiness or Misery implied in the words Life and Death becomes applicable to this or that particular Good and Evil as occasion serves Suppose the Spiritual Life of Grace or Death in Sin And the Eternal Life of Glory in Heaven or the Eternal Death of Torment in Hell Thus Deut. 30.19 I have set before you saith Moses to Israel life and death blessing and cursing where Life and Death are made equivalent to Blessing and Cursing therefore chuse life saith he that thou and thy seed may Live that is that you may be Happy So at ver 15. of the same Chapter I have set before you saith he life and good death and evil Where Life and Good are put exegetical each of other and so Death and Evil. And in the same sense it is the Poet tells us Non est Vivere sed Valere vita Thus God to Adam in Paradise for 't is no new Trope nor of yesterday In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt die the death that is thou shalt become miserable For we know that Adam did not the same day die a natural Death but some hundreds of years after but he did that day begin to be in a state of Misery whereof his natural Death was but a part So Rom. 6.23 The wages of sin is death where the comprehension of all the Evils or Misery which sin deserves or God inflicteth for it is called Death like as on the contrary all the Happiness which the Saints enjoy is on the same account called Life The gift of God is eternal Life through Jesus Christ our Lord. So here By Life we understand Happiness contrary to which is the Death of Misery and then by a Metalepsis or double Trope that Happiness in special which the Saints enjoy in Glory though not exclusive of what they have before and that Misery which in Hell attends the wicked 'T is true indeed that the condition of the Saints in Glory after the Resurrection may even in a proper sense be called Life because of that Union which shall then be of Soul and Body and the exercise of at least the most noble faculties of Life Yet do not I take that to be the true import of the Word here For though it be true that the Saints in Glory have not only an Union of Soul and Body but likewise a knowledge or sense of that estate wherein they are which may import not only a Life but even a Rational Life yet as true it is that the Damned in Hell have so too for their Souls and Bodies shall not be less United nor shall they be Insensible of their Woful condition yet is not that estate of theirs called a Life though naturally it be so and it is their misery that it is so but Eternal Death because a Life of Wo and Misery not of Bliss and Happiness A Living Misery being in this sense the truest Death Secondly As it is called Life for its Excellency so for its Duration it is called Eternal It is very usual in Scripture in the use of Allegories or Figurative expressions to add some kind of Epithet to distinguish the word so used from the same in its native signification And when the word is used so as to express figuratively somewhat more excellent than it self the Epithet hath somewhat of additional exellency in it Thus Christ is said to be the Spiritual rock 1 Cor. 10.4 the Living Bread or Manna that came down from Heaven Joh. 6.50 to distinguish the words so metaphorically used from the Rock and Manna literally spoken of in the story of their travails in the Wilderness And the Church of Christ as Living stones become a Spiritual house and a Holy priesthood to offer up Spiritual sacrifices to God 1 Pet. 2.5 Where the Epithets serve both for distinction from the material Stones and Temple the Levitical Priesthood and corporeal Sacrifices and for the commendation or preheminence of those before these So the new heaven and the new earth and the new Jerusalem Rev. 21.1 2. Jerusalem that is above Gal. 4.26 And Matth. 26.29 I will drink no more saith Christ of the fruit of the vine till I drink it New with you in my Father's kingdom Not that Christ did intend anew to drink of such wine in his Father's Kingdom but of a New wine another sort of wine than that commonly so callâ—d to wit those spiritual Joys in his Father's Kingdom which should more refresh their Hearts and Souls than this wine did their Bodies So I am the true vine and my Father is the husbandman Joh. 15.1 I am the good shepherd Joh. 10.11 Not that Christ was more truly a Vine in propriety of speech than that which we so call or indeed a Shepherd who took the care of Sheep But that there was in Christ somewhat of another kind much more eminent than that of the Vine which did yet in some measure resemble it and a much greater Care but of another nature of those he calls his Flock than a Shepherd hath of his Sheep So here This is life eternal Not a natural Life such as is commonly meant by the word Life a life of the Body which after a short time is to be exchanged for Death but a Life a Happiness of another nature a far more excellent Good than what we call Life which doth but very imperfectly express it An Eternal Life And this Eternity as it serves in general to distinguish this word Life from the ordinary acceptation and doth import for the kind of it somewhat much more excellent So it doth particularly point out that Everlasting Duration of this so great a Happiness 'T is that which though indeed it have a Beginning shall never have an End And upon this account it is that it is so often called Eternal Life and Life Everlasting that it were endless to enumerate the places where it is so called An eternal inheritance A house eternal in the heavens An inheritance incorruptible and undefiled which fadeth not away A kingdom which cannot be moved An eternal weight of glory When our mortal shall have put on immortality And this consideration
of Eternity added to that of Life this everlasting Duration to that unspeakable unimaginable Happiness renders this Eternal Life a perfect Felicity and every way compleat For that Perfection of Degree imported in the word Life can admit of no addition but that of Perfect Conâ—inâ—ance which the word Eternal assures us of Like as on the other hand that perfection of Misery which attends the wicked is capable of no greater Aggravation than that of Perpetuity sealed up in that sad expression of a Living Misery Eternal Death You have them both paralleled in Matth. 25.46 These shall go into everlasting punishment but the righteous into life eternal I have now done with the first part the Happiness here proposed Eternal Life Before I come to the sâ—â—ond The knowledge of God and Christ it will 〈◊〉 requisite to consider a little the conneâ—â—â—â— of these together in the word Is This is 〈◊〉 Eternal Which is capable of a double acâ—â—ptation For it may be understood either as a Formal or as a Causal predication This is life eternal that is Herein consisteth eternal life Or else thus This â—s life eternal that is This is is the way or means to attain eternal Life The former of these is very agreeable to the doctrine of the Schoolmen who generally place the Happiness of Heaven in the Beatifick Vision in the seeing or knowing of God Grounded on such places as that of Matth. 5.8 Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God 1 Cor. 13.9 10 12. We know but in part and we prophesie but in part but when that which is perfect shall come then that which is in part shall be done away We now see through a glass darkely but then face to face Now I know in part but then shall I know even as also I am known 2 Cor. 3.18 We all with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord are changed into the same image from glory to glory 1 Joh. 3.2 Beloved now are we the sons of God and it doth not yet appear what we shall be but we know that when he shall appear or when it shall appear we shall be like him for we shall see him as he is With others of the like import And certainly that Perfection of Knowledge shall be at least a great part of that Happiness which we expect in Heaven as from these and other the like places is well collected So that it is not improperly said that Eternal Life doth at least in part consist in such a knowledge Nor is it any sufficient Objection hereunto to say That it is not by knowledge only as an Act of the Understanding that we enjoy God wherein our Happiness consists but by an Act of the Will also chusing and closing with and delighting in him For though this be true yet neither is the Knowledge here spoken of a bare Speculative or Notional Knowledge wherein the Understanding is alone concerned But an Active Operative Knowledge such as brings the Will Affections and all the Faculties into a proportionate Conformity thereunto And in such a Knowledge of God in the Understanding attended with such a Conformity in the Will and other Faculties it is not to be denyed that our Happiness doth consist even that of Eternal Life Yet without excluding this sense I take the words here to be rather a Causal Predication assigning the way or Means whereby Eternal Life is attained This is life eternal that is this is the Way to attain Eternal Life To know thee the only true God c. The knowledge of God and Christ being the direct way to attain Eternal Life Parallel to which is that of our Saviour Joh. 12.50 His commandment is life everlasting And very frequent elsewhere are such Metonymies of the Effect for the Cause I am the resurrection and the life saith Christ Joh. 11.25 that is The Authour of it So Luk. 12.15 Man's life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth that is it doth not depend upon it it is not secured by it or a Christ elsewhere Matth. 4.4 out of Deut. 8.3 Man liveth not by bread alone c. And Moses speaking of their diligent observing the Commands of God Deut. 32.47 This is your life saith he and through this thing you shall prolong your days where the latter Clause is enegetical of the former just in the same form with the words here This is life eternal that is hereby they shall attain eternal Life This therefore being the most plain and simple Interpretation of the Words We are now to enquire particularly what that is that Christ here says to be Eternal Life or rather the Way thereunto That they may know thee the only true God and whom thou hast sent Jesus Christ. Which contains in brief the Doctrine of the Gospel or Christian Religion Distinguished into two parts The Knowledge of God and The Knowledge of Jesus Christ. Both which are necessary to bring us to Eternal Life I shall speak first to the former of these two the Knowledge of God that is of God the Creatour and Lord of all as contradistinguished to that of Christ the Redeemer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That they might know thee the only true God By Thee or the Person here spoken to we are to understand God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ For to him it is manifest that Christ doth here direct his Prayer Yet not so much in his Personal as in his Essential consideration For it is not the Personality but the Essence of the Father that determines him to be the only true God We have therefore in the Object of this Knowledge at least these Three Propositions I. That there is a God II. That there is but One True God III. That God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is this God I. The First of these strikes at Atheism or those that deny a God And that we know thus much is necessary from that of Heb. 11.6 He that cometh unto God must believe that God is and that he is a rewarder of those that diligently seek him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He must believe That there is a God Nay he must believe also somewhat of What he is Not fansie to himself somewhat under the name of God which indeed is not a God or notions inconsistent with that of a Deity as those Psal. 50.21 Thou thoughtest that I was altogether such a one as thy self or the like For to believe such a false notion of God is not to believe a God but to believe an Idol We are next to know as that there is a God so That there is but One God I mean But One True God For there are indeed as the Apostle tells us 1 Cor. 8.4 5 6. Gods many and Lords many that is there are that are called Gods for so he explains himself but to us there is but One God We know saith he that there is no other God
Creature And in imitation of them some others have since so used it But this is a New sense of later Ages since the time of those Fathers nor do the Schoolmen in this sense without a Metaphor apply it to the Sacred Trinity We cannot therefore conclude from hence What was the Fathers sense of it 4. To find out therefore the true sense of tâ—e word Person as applied to the Trinity we are not so much to consider what now-a-days the word doth sometime signifie with us in English nor what sense the Schoolmen have put upon it since the time of those Fathers As what was the true sense of the word Persona at or before their times in approved Latin Authours Which is quite another thing from either of these senses For what in English we sometimes mean by Three Persons taken indifferently for Men Women and Children the Latins would not have called tres Personas but tres Homines Though if considered in such Relations as Father Mother and Child they might so be called tres Personae Nor do I find that in approved Latin Authours the word Persona was wont to be attributed by them as by the Schoolmen it hath since been to Angels nor to their Genii or Heathen Gods But 5. It did signifie the State Quality or Condition of a Man as he stands Related to other Men. And so I find the Latin word Persona Englished in our Dictionaries Suppose as a King a Subject a Father a Son a Neighbour a Publick or Private Person a Person of Honour and the like And so as the Condition varied the Person varied also though the same Man remained As if an ordinary Person be first made a Knight and then a Lord the Person or Condition is varied but he is still the same Man that he was before And he that is this Year a Lord Mayor may be next Year but an Alderman or not so much Hence are those Latin Phrases frequent in approved Authours Personam imponere to put a Man into an Office or confer a Dignity upon him Induere personam to take upon him the Office Sustinere personam to Bear an Office or Execute an Office Deponere personam to Resign the Office or lay it down so Agere personam to Act a Person and many the like So that there is nothing of Contradiction nothing of Inconsistence nothing Absurd or Strange in it for the same Man to sustain divers Persons either successively or at the same Time or divers Persons to meet in the same Man according to the true and proper Notion of the word Person A Man may at the same time sustain the Person of a King and of a Father if invested with Regal and Paternal Authority and these Authorities may be Subordinate one to another and he may accordingly Act sometime as a King and sometime as a Father Thus Tully who well understood the Propriety of Latin words Sustineo Unus tres Personas meam Adversarii Judicis I being One and the same Man sustain Three Persons That of my Own that of my Adversary and that of the Judge And David was at the same time Son of Jesse Father of Solomon and King of Israel And this takes away the very Foundation of their Objection Which proceeds upon this Mistake as if Three Persons in a proper sense must needs imply Three Men. 6. Now if Three Persons in the proper sense of the word Person may be One Man what hinders but that Three Divine Persons in a sense Metaphorical may be One God What hinders but that the same God considered as the Maker and Sovereign of all the World may be God the Creator or God the Father and the same God considered as to his special Care of Mankind as the Ruthour of our Redemption be God the Redeemer or God the Son and the same God as working effectually on the Hearts of his Elect be God the Sanctifier or God the Holy-Ghost And what hinders but that the same God distinguished according to these three Considerations may fitly be said to be Three Persons Or if the word Person do not please Three Somewhats that are but One God And this seems to me a Full and Clear Solution of that Objection which they would have to be thought Insuperable Objection V. It may perhaps be Objected further Why must we needs make use of the word Person and call them Three Persons if Three Somewhats will serve as well I answer First We have no such need of the word Person but that we can spare it Hypostasis will serve our turn as well And if they think the Latin word Persona be not a good Translation of the Greek Hypostasis Let them retain the Greek word We mean the same by both And then perhaps they will find themselves at a loss to fasten some of their Objections upon the word Hypostasis which they would fasten upon Persona 2. But Secondly If the Thing be thus far agreed That these Three Somewhats thus considered may be One God I see not why they should contend with us about the Name Person For this is only to quarrel about a Word or Name when the Notion is agreed 3. If it were admitted which I see no reason for that the word Person doth not fitly express that Notion which it is intended to design the most that can be inferred from it is but That we have not given it so fit a Name And to cavil at that when the Notion intended by it is understood were just as if one should argue There never was such a Man as whom they called Pope Pius because the Man who was so called was not a Pious Man 4. But I see not why the word Person should not be thought a very fit word for this purpose For Two of these Three are represented to us in Scripture under the Names of Father and Son and this Son as Begotten of the Father and therefore these Names are not to be quarrelled with But all this in a Metaphorical sense For no Man can suppose that this Father doth so Beget this Son as these words do properly signifie amongst Men Now the Relations of Father and Son in a proper sense are such as are properly denoted by the word Persona in its proper Acceptation And consequently the Father and Son in a Metaphorical sense may by a Continuation of the same Metaphor be fitly called Persons in that Metaphorical sense And in what sense they be Father and Son in a like sense they be Persons according to the Propriety of the Latin word Persona For such Relatives the Latins called Personas And if the Father and Son may fitly be so called no doubt but the Holy Ghost may be so called also as One Proceeding or Coming forth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from them As in Joh. 14.26 The Comforter which is the Holy Ghost whom the Father will send in My name he will teach you all things And Joh. 15.26 The Comforter whom I will send
THREE SERMONS Concerning the Sacred Trinity By JOHN WALLIS D. D. Professor of Geometry in the University of Oxford LONDON Printed for Tho. Parkhurst at the Bible and Three Crowns in Cheapside 1691. TO THE READER THE first of the three Sermons here following is Printed according as it was Preached in Oxford in the Year 1664. accommodated to that time and place but it was for the Substance of it Preached in London Twenty Years before that time Which I mention to shew that the Construction which I give of the Words is not a new forced Notion just now taken up to serve a turn or as somebody is pleased to call it Equally New and Cautious But what I did so long ago take to be a then received Truth And I since find it is at least as old as St. Austin's Epist. 174. The other Two are lately added in pursuance of some other Discourses lately made publick concerning the Sacred Trinity Wherein much of what was said before scatteringly as those who wrote against it gave occasion is now inlarged and put into a little better Order If what I have done may be serviceable to the Truth and to the Church of God I have what I did desire and shall not think the Labour ill bestowed A SERMON Preached to the UNIVERSITY of Oxford Decemb. 27. 1664. JOH xvij 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And this is life eternal that they might know thee the onely true God and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent I Need not apologize for the seasonableness of this Text by telling you that the Subject Matter of it suites well with the great Solemnity which at this time we celebrate and the Pen-man with that of the day Because a Discourse on such a Subject can never be unseasonable to a Christian Auditory Especially to such as whose profession being to seek after Knowledge should not decline that of God and Christ the chief of all Nor will it be any Exception hereunto That it is no news but well known already Not only because That there be many who pretend to know what they do not or do in effect deny and That there be many things which though we know well we have need enough to be minded of But even because I do not find that many persons are wont to be displeased with being often minded of those things wherein they think that either their Interest or Excellency lies more than a good Wit when commended or a fair Lady with being told she is handsome even though sometimes as we are wont to say they know it but too well already And therefore since to know God and Christ is both our Interest and our Commendation it will not I hope seem grievous to any to hear it discoursed of to the end that those who know it not may be incited to learn it and those who know it may take content in it And I shall as little apologize for a plain Discourse on this Subject Since it is both my Profession and Practice to Demonstrate or make things as plain as I can not to perplex or make them intricate which may amuse the Auditors or sometimes please or tickle them but is not wont either to Teach or Perswade like too much of Ornament which doth but disguise the native Beauty or too much Trimming which hides the Cloth The words read are our Saviour's Words addressed to his Father in the behalf of his Disciples And are a part of that Prayer with which he closeth his large Exhortation or Farewel-Sermon to his Disciples the night before he was to suffer of which we have a large rehearsal in the three foregoing Chapters the 14 th 15 th and 16 th which this 17 th closeth with a Prayer He begins his Prayer with a Petition concerning Eternal Life which he was to bestow according to the Power his Father had granted him to as many as He had given him that is to as many as should effectually believe in him To which Petition he subjoins this Exegetical Epiphonema And this is life eternal that they may know thee the only true God and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent We may consider the words either according to a Synthetic or an Analytic method as the Schools speak The former of which they commonly follow in Sciences Theoretical the latter in Practical If considered Synthetically they present us with First The Cause or Principle The Knowledge of God and Christ and Secondly The Effect or Consequent resulting from it Eternal Life If Analytically we have in them First A glorious End proposed Eternal Life and Secondly The Means proportionate thereunto The Knowledge of God and Christ. In the former way the Result of them is to this purpose That the excellent Knowledge of God and Christ is attended with this most glorious Consequent Eternal Life In the latter way it amounts to thus much That the way or means to Eternal Life is the Knowledge of God and Christ. Nor is it much material whether of the two ways we take them Synthetically or Analytically whether we take them as a Theorem affirming this Effect of that Cause or as a Problem directing to these Means for such an End Yet I chuse rather to take them in the latter consideration though not exclusive of the former Because this Epiphonema taking its rise from the mention made of Eternal Life in the former verse not from a former mention of the Knowledge of God and Christ it seems to be rather intended as a Direction how to attain Eternal Life than an account of the Effect of such a Knowledge But in doing the one it doth the other also I shall begin first with that which lies first in the order of the word The End proposed or the Effect or Consequent of this Knowledge the Happiness which doth attend it which for its Excellency is called Life and for its Duration Eternal This is life eternal The word Life I take to be here used in a figurative sense and to import Good or Happiness like as its contrary Death especially Death Eternal to import Misery There is indeed at least a threefold Life commonly mentioned and in proportion thereunto a threefold Death Natural Spiritual and Eternal Life Natural which is indeed the proper acceptation of the word Life or the first signification of it is more easily apprehended than expressed It imports that active state or condition which ariseth from the Union of the Soul and Body as well in Man as in other Animals not to mention that of Plants the destruction or want of which upon the Soul's departure we call Death 'T is that according to which in common speech a Man or Beast is said to be alive or dead Now this Life is of all natural Goods looked upon as the chiefest and consequently Death the greatest of natural Evils Because Life is that foundation or first good which makes us capable of what else is so and with our Life we lose all the rest
is said of Christ Joh. 10.30 I and the Father are One is said of all Three by the same St. John â— Joh. 5.7 The Father the Word and the Holy Ghost thâ—se Three are One. Objection III. It is Objected that these words last cited are said to have been wanting in some Translations or some ancient Copies Answ. Be it so And so are some whole Epistles wanting in some Translations And considerable parts of some other Chapters But we are not therefore to cast them away as not Genuine The II d. and III d. Epistles of St. John and that of Jude are said to have been wanting in the Syriack and Arabick Translations And the Story of the Woman taken in Adultery Joh. 8. wanting in the Gothick Gospels And part of the last Chapter of St. Mark 's Gospel is said to be wanting in some Books And the Doxology in the close of the Lord's Prayer And the like in divers others But we must not thence conclude them not to be Genuine and put them out of our Bibles because they have chanced to be omitted in some Books And it is so far from being strange that such Omissions should sometimes happen that it is very strange if there were not a great Providence of God to preserve the Scriptures pure and entire that there should be no more such mistakes than what are found For before the convenience of Printing was found out when Copies were to be singly transcribed one from another and even those but in a few hands 'T was very possible and hardly avoidable even for a diligent Transcriber sometime to skip a line Especially which is the case here when some of the same words do again recur after a line or two Men are very subject both in Writing and Printing as those well know who are versed in either to leap from one word to the same recurring soon after Nor is such Omission when it happens readily discerned if as here the sense be not manifestly disturbed by it Now when such variety of Copies happens that words be found in some which are wanting in others this must either happen by a Casual mis-take without any design of Fraud or by a willful Falsification as to serve a particular turn which I take to be the case of the Papists Indices Expurgatorii And as to the words in question If the difference of Copies happened at first by a Casual mistake as I am apt to think 't is very easy for a Transcriber unawares to leave out a Line which was in his Copy especially where such omission doth not manifestly disturb the sense but not to put in a line which was not there And in such case the Fuller Copy is likelyest to be True and the Omission to be a Fault Which happening as it seems it did some hundreds of years ago in some one Copy it might easily pass unobserved into many others transcribed thence and so to others derived from those Transcripts But an Insertion of what was not in their Copy must needs be willful and not casual On the other side If this variety of Copies were at first from a willful Falsification It is much more likely to be a willful Omission of the Arians in some of their Copies which might be done silently and unobserved than by a willful Insertion of the Orthodox For the Insertion of such a clause if wholly New and which had never before been Heard of would have been presently detected by the Arians as soon as ever it should be urged against them Nor was any advantage to be made of it by the Orthodox since the Divinity of Christ which was the Point then in question might be as strongly urged from that in St. John's Gospel I and the Father are One as from this in his Epistle These Three are One. And therefore it is not likely that the Orthodox should willfully make any such Falsification from whence they could promise themselves no advantage Nor do I find it was ever charged upon them by the ancient Arians in those days though Athanasius and others urged it against them And in very ancient Copies in which it had been left out it is found supplied in the Margin as having been faultily omitted And it is the more likely to be Genuine because in this clause The Father the Word and the Holy-Ghost the second Person is called sunpliciter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word which is St. John's Language both here and in his Gospel Joh. 1. And is I think peculiar to him and not so used by any other of the Holy Writers of the New Testament I do not deny but that this second Person may be called the Word of God in Heb. 11.3 By Faith we understand that the Worlds were framed by the Word of God And 2 Pet. 3.5 7. By the Word of God were the Heavens of old and the Earth c. and by the same Word they are kept in store As he is by the same St. John Rev. 19.13 His name is called the Word of God But to call him the Word absolutely without other addition I think is peculiar to St. John And therefore much more likely in this place to have proceeded from the same Pen and not to have been inserted by an Interpolater some hundreds of years after And that clause These Three are One in the Epistle agreeing so well with I and the Father are one in the Gospel is a further confirmation of their being both from the same Pen. Add to this That the Antithesis which we find in the 7 th and 8 th Verses is so very Natural that it is a great Presumption to be Genuine There are Three that bear record in Heaven The Father the Word and the Holy-Ghost and these Three are One And there are Three that bear witness in Earth The Spirit and the Water and the Blood and these Three agree in One. Which as it stands is very Natural but the latter clause would seem lame without the former and the words in Earth wholly redundant in the latter if not by Antithesis to answer to the words in Heaven in the former Verse And that it was anciently so read appears from St. Cyprian by whom it is twice cited in his Book De Unitate Ecclesiae and in his Epistle ad Jubaianum before the Arian Controversy was on foot In the former place arguing for the Church's Unity not to be broken by Schisms he speaks thus Dicit Dominus Ego Pater unum sumus Et iterum de Patre Filio Spiritu Sancto scriptum est Et hi tres unum sunt Et quisquam credit hanc Unitatem de divina firmitate venientem sacramentis coelestibus cohaerentem scindi in Ecclesia posse That is Our Lord saith I and the Father are One And again of the Father Son and Holy Ghost It is Written These Three are One. And who can believe that this Unity of the Church proceeding from this Firm Union in God
it to some other occasion that I be not prevented by the time in what I have to say further That there is a God the Creator a God the Redeemer and a God the Sanctifier and that these are the same God I think cannot reasonably be Denied I shall shew it of each As to God the Creator we are told Gen. 1.1 In the beginning God Created the Heaven and the Earth And to the same purpose in many other places And I think there is none doubts but that this Creator is the True God the Supreme God And in Jer. 10.11 God doth by this Character distinguish himself from all other pretended Gods The Gods that have not made the Heavens and the Earth they shall perish from the Earth and from under these Heavens As to God the Redeemer I know that my Redeemer liveth saith Job Ch. 19.25 By which Redeemer doubtless he meant the Living God a God who did then Live a God who was then in Being and not as the Socinians would have us think who was not to Be till Two Thousand years after And Isa. 44.6 Thus saith the Lord the Redeemer the Lord of Hosts I am the first and I am the last and beside Me there is no God Which Redeemeâ— must needs be the same God with God the Creator the Lord of Hosts As to God the Sanctifier Purge me with hyssop saith David and I shall be clean wash me and I shall be whiter than snow Create in me a clean heart O God and renew a right spirit within me Psal. 51.7 10. Which certainly are works of Sanctification and the God to whom David prayed is doubtless the Living God a God then in Being And when God promiseth â—o Israel I will give them a hearâ— to kâ—ow me and they shall return unto me with their whole heart Jer. 24.7 I will give them one heart and one way that they may fear me for ever I will put my fear in their hearts that they shall not depart from me Jer. 32.39 40. I will give them one heart and put a new spirit within them I will take away the heart of stone and give them a heart of flesh Ezek. 11.19 and 36.26 I will put my Law in their inward parts and write it in their hearts Jer. 31.33 The Lord thy God will circumcise thine heart and the heart of thy seed to love the Lord thy God with all thine heart and with all thy soul that thou mayst live Deut. 30.6 All these are sanctifying works and that God who doth them is God the Sanctifier And it is the same God who doth thus Sanctifie that is the Creator and the Redeemer Now this God the Creator God the Redeemer and God the Sanctifier I take to be the same with what we otherwise call God the Father God the Son and God the Holy Ghost And our Church doth so expound it in her Catechism First I learn to believe in God the Father who hath Made me and all the World Secondly In God the Son who hath Redeemed me and all Mankind Thirdly In God the Holy Ghost who Sanctifieth me and all the Elect people of God And it is no more absurd or inconsistent to say that God the Father God the Son and God the Holy-Ghost are the same God than to say that God the Creator God the Redeemer and God the Sanctifier are the same God As they stand related to us they are called God the Creator God the Redeemer and God the Sanctifier As to the different Oeconomy amongst themselves one is called the Father who is said to Beget another the Son who is said to be Begotten a third the Holy-Ghost who is said to Proceed or Come forth But are all the same God Objection IV. But then here I meet with another Objection on which the Socinians lay great weight If God the Creator God the Redeemer and God the Sanctifier or God the Father God the Son and God the Holy-Ghost be the same God they cannot then be Three Persons And if they be Three Persons they must be Three Gods For like as Three Persons amongst Men doth signifie Three Men so Three Persons who are God must be Three Gods Contrary to the First Commandment which allows us to have but One God To which I answer First This is only to cavil at a Word when they have nothing of moment against the Thing So that if inâ—â—ead of saying â—hese Three Persons are One God we say These Three are One God or give them another Name instead of Persons or say these Three Somewhats without giving them a Name this Objection is at an end 2. I say further 'T is very true that in our English Tongue by another Person we sometimes understand another Man because that other Person is very often another Man also But it is not always so nor is that the proper Signification of the Word but an Abusive sense put upon it And the reason of using the word Person in this abusive or improper sense is for want of an English word to answer the Latin word Homo or the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which might indifferently relate to both Sexes For the word Man doth properly relate to the Male and Woman to the Female And if the word Man be sometimes so used as to imply the Woman also it is by a Synecdoche putting the Name of One Sex to signifie Both. And 't is for want of such a Word which might indifferently relate to both Sexes that we sometime make use of Person in a borrowed sense rather than to use a Circumlocution of Man and Woman by naming both Sexes And if we should use such Circumlocution of Man and Woman yet even this would not reach the whole Species For we do not use to call them Man and Woman till they be of a considerable Age before which time they are called Children and therefore to comprehend the whole Species we say Man Woman and Child We do indeed sometimes to that purpose make use of the word Mankind adding the word kind to that of Man to Ampliate the Signification of it But this relates only to Genus Humanum in a Collective sense not to Homines taken Distributively For we do not say a Mankind two Mankinds c as we say Homo Homines We are fain therefore for want of a proper English word to make use of Person in a borrowed sense to answer the Latin Homo But the Ancient Fathers who first applied the word Persona to the Sacred Trinity did not speak English And therefore we cannot from the present use of the word Person in our Language conclude in what sense they used the word Persona 3. Again the Schoolmen in later Ages have yet put another sense on the word Persona peculiar to themselves extending it indifferently to Men and Angels for want of a proper word of that Extent so as to signifie with them what they call Suppositum Rationale or what we call a Reasonable
that St. John did but Platonize and borrowed his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from Plato's Trinity that I rather think that Plato borrowed his Trinity as he did many other things from the Jewish Doctrine though by him disguised And take it for a good Evidence that the Doctrine of the Trinity was then not unknown to them Aristotle in the last Chapter of his Book De Mundo which is de Dei Nominibus He tells us that God though he be but One hath many Names And amongst those many he reckons that of the Tres Parcae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or as we call them the Three Destinies Atropas Clotho and Lachesis whom he doth accommodate to the three diversities of Time past present and future to be One of these Names Which though numbred as Three are but this One God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And cites Plato to the same purpose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So that it seems both Plato and Aristotle were of opinion that Three Somewhats may be One God And this in likelihood they derived from the Jewish Learning I might say the like of their three Judges in another World Minos Radamanthus and Aeacus which thing though it be Fabulous yet it implies thus much That they had then a Notion not only of the Soul's Immortality but also of a Trinity of Persons in another World who should take Account of mens Actions in this World And both these Notions they had no doubt from the Jewish Learning from whence their most sublime Notions were derived To these I might add that of their three-shap'd Chimaera which their Poets feign to have been 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as is to be seen in Homer one of their most Ancient Poets And that of Cerberus their three-headed Porter of the other World Which Poetical Fictions though invented perhaps to ridicule the Trinity do yet at last argue that they had then some notices of a Trinity of Three Somewhats which were yet but One. For if they had no notice of it they could not have ridiculed it Our Adversaries perhaps may please themselves with the Fansy that Chimaera and Cerberus are brought in to prove the Trinity But they mistake the point We are not now Proving the Trinity which is already settled on a firmer Foundation but inquiring whether this Doctrine were then known And as we think it a good argument to prove the Christian Religion to have been known in Lucian's time and known to him because Lucian doth Scoff at it which he could not have done if he had known nothing of it So is it a good Argument to prove the Doctrine of the Trinity to have been then known when it was ridiculed And it proves also that there might be then prophane Wits to ridicule it as there are now to Blaspheme the Trinity as a three-headed Monster and that this 〈◊〉 Wit of theirs is not their own but stollen from wittier Heathens But whether it were or were not known to the Jewish Church before Christ of which there be great Presumptions that it was so known as well as that of the Resurrection it is enough to us that we are taught it now And if any will yet be so obstinate as not to believe either the Resurrection or the Trinity upon pretence that neither of them was known to the Jewish Church or at least not so clearly but that they may be able to cavil at places from the Old Testament alledged to prove either we must leave them to the Wisdom and Judgment of God till he shall think fit to instruct them better Now to God the Father God the Son and God the Holy Ghost Three Persons but One Eternal and Ever blessed God be Praise Honour and Glory Now and for Evermore Amen FINIS Advertisement BY reason of the Authors absence from the Press at so great a distance some mistakes have happened both in the Letters and Sermons and some things omitted which should have been inserted in their proper places but that they came so late to the Printers hands that it could not well be done without dâ—scomposing his Affairs Of both which it is thought fit thus to direct ERRATA LEt I. p. 12. l. 6. for Divisions read Dimensions p. 13. l 6. dele Three p 18. l. 7. for Meaning read Memory Let. II. p. â— l. 21. for that read shall Let. III. p. 30. l. 11. as a separate Existence p 32 l. 7. as to be p. 37. l. ult for Those read These p. 41. l. 18 known p. 57. l. 7. for sure read save Let. IV. p. 7. l. 20. for toil read talk p. 11. l. 2. as well as Let. V. p. 6. l. 22. dele of p. 7. l. 19. for any read my p. 11. l. 10. read 1 Joh. 5.20 p. 12. l. 18. for Israel read Jacob. p. 18. l. 13. doth not well p. 21. l. 14. said so much Let. VI. p. 4. l. 1. for Nor read Now. p. 9. l. 28. for then read tâ—ere p. 10. l. 28. for London read Leyden p. 11. l. 19. at least p. 13. l. 30. for This read Thus. p. 14. l. 33. for as read in l. 34. thee only the. p. 17. l. 6. for Railing read Ranting p. 18. l. 2. was not then l. 13. beside that in Let. VII p. 6. l 28. Possibility p. 7. l. 27. for fourtâ— read fault p. 10. l. pen. All-comprehensive p. 12. l. 20. Father p. 13. l. 5. afteâ— Notionâ— add further than they are revealed l. pen. Words p. 14. l. 13. Hands p. 17. l. 13. to Answer l. 23. for one read me Serm. p. 15. l. 14. exegerical p. 19 l. 7. God p. 22. l. 19. for for read or l. 21. for er read fer P. 61. l. 9. read Author P. 73. l. 3. read were framed ADDITIONS LET. I. p. 2. l. 1. after united add or intimately One. p. 12. l. 21. after Cube add there being no limits in nature greater than which a Cube cannot be Let. III. p. 16. l. 18. Add this Marginal Note The Saxon word Hel or Helle whence comes the English word Hell doth not properly or necessarily import the place of the Damned But may be indifferently taken for Hell hole or hollow place Which are all words of the same original Helan to hide or cover Hole cavitas Hol cavus hollow And when it is used in a restrained sense it is Metonymical or Synecdochical as when Hole or Pit is put for the Grave and the like p. 19. l. 2. Add So that I take the plain sense of the words to be this He was for some time in that Hell or Hades what ever by that word be meant wherein it is expresly said he was not left but was Raised from it p. 44. l. 16. Add Beside this Letter of thanks from his Partner in the Disputation there was another from Sandius himself not Printed but in Manuscript acknowledging a like conviction Of which Wittichius recites an Extract in his Causa Spiritus Sancti Victrix demonstrata à Christophoro