guage as to the Father, Word, and Spirit in this text, and confequently there is no reason to allow a real perfonality to the firft of the three, and only a figurative perfonality to the other two. As a figurative perfonality of all the three earthly witnesses seems to be proved, from the water and the blood being not real perfons, and not able to perform perfonal acts, fo a real perfonality of all the three heavenly witnesses feems evident, from the Father's being a real perfon, who performs personal acts. It is allow'd by our author, "that the Father is properly called a perfon, an intelligent voluntary agent, with very little or no alteration of the common sense of the word, in human language." I should have been glad, he had given us a little light into his way of proving, from Scripture, the Father's real perfonality. It is a very strong and convincing evidence of the Father's real perfonality, that the Scripture reprefents him as a perfon, and afcribes perfonal acts to him; but if any one should take it into his head to deny, that the Father is a real perfon, and fhould only allow him a figurative perfonality, I cannot fee how he can be confuted, upon Mr. Watt's hypothefis: for as the Son and Spirit are not real, but figurative perfons, according to him, notwithstanding they are reprefented under perfonal characters, I know not how the Father's having perfonal actions afcribed to him, can prove him to be a real perfon, any more than the other two. A fertil invention may furnish a man with a method of explaining away the Father's perfonality. It might be pretended that he is the intelligent, directive power of God; and there is the fame foundation for fayPage 187. ing ing fo, as there is for faying the Son is the intelligent volitive power, or the Spirit the intelligent effective power; for all this way of talking is from fancy and imagination, and nothing elfe. If any one could be fo whimfical as to fay the Father is the directive Power of God, and is only perfonaliz'd by idioms of speech, Í confefs, I am utterly at a loss to think, how our author could confute him, in a way confiftent with his own principles. To fay the Father is a proper perfon, and the Son and Spirit are his two powers, is only taking for granted what should be proved. As the perfonal actions afcribed to the Father in Scripture, fully prove him to be a real perfon; fo when the Son and Spirit are joined with him, under perfonal characters, the natural inference is, that they are perfons as much as he is. Neither can this inference be overturned, 'till it can be proved, that the Scripture has given us any caution against taking the perfonal characters, which it every where afcribes to the Son and Spirit, in the fame fense with those which it afcribes to the Father. We have the fame Scripture proofs of the perfonality of the Son and Spirit, that we have of the perfonality of the Father; we must therefore allow them all to be real perfons, or deny them all to be fuch. All perfonal properties, adjuncts, acts, and operations are afcribed, and do belong to each of the facred Three: and why they must be taken figuratively, when applied to the Son and Spirit, any more than when applied to the Father, no reason can be given, but ftrong prepoffeffion and prejudice. It does not belong to us to fay what may be, in things of this high nature: modefty in fuch matters becomes weak mortals, and curiofity will only leave them that give way to it under great disappoint ments. If 2 If a figurative perfonality be only allow'd to the Word and Spirit, we have only a figurative Trinity and I can fee no reason why the two powers of wisdom and efficience must be joined with the person of the Father, to make up a Trinity. Is not love a power of the Divine Nature, as well as wisdom and efficience? nay, more is attributed to that, than to the other; for God is faid to be love, but no where in Scrip ture to be wisdom or efficience. If then any one would be fo perverse as to fay, the three perfons in the Trinity are figurative perfons, love, wisdom, and efficience, I fhould be glad to know what Mr. Watts, confiftently with his own principles, could advance against him. Our author diftinguishes between God and his two powers; but what conception can we have of God, diftinct from, and that does not neceffarily include thefe effential powers. As I have no notion of a human foul, that does not include in it understanding and will, fo I have no idea of the Divine Nature, that does not in clude in it infinite wisdom and power. SECT. II. The Scripture proofs of the Son's real Perfonality. I Should now give the feparate evidence for the perfonality of Chrift, the Son of God; but as Chrift is God-man, our author thinks he may, in that fenfe, be allowed to be a proper perfon, and therefore if ever fo many texts were brought to prove his perfonality, he would evade them by faying, "Chrift affumed the Page 195. I human human nature, which will folve the attribution of perfonal ideas to Chrift." But there are fome paffages in Scripture, where the Son is spoke of under perfonal characters, before he could be fuppofed to have taken human nature into a perfonal union with himfelf: " His outgoings are of old, from the days of eternity, or everlafting. "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God all things were made by him, and without him was not any thing made that was made." Here the Son is fpoke of as a perfon whofe outgoings are of an eternal date, and as being with God, and being himfelf God, in the beginning, before any creatures were made: He was God, and he was with God; fo that he could not be the fame perfon with whom he was, for he is not faid to be in God, but with him. Befides, all things are faid to be made by him, or he made all things, which is a perfonal work: he was with God, and fo a diftinct perfon, before he made all things; that is, before his human foul, tho' & fuppofed the first of all creatures, could be formed, and confequently perfonally united to the divine wifdom. When the Son appeared to Mofes in the burning bush, h he took perfonal characters as God, and as Jehovah: "I have feen the affliction of my people; I am come to deliver them, I will fend thee to Pharaoh, I will bring you out of affliction." If Mr. Watts here fupfuppofes the divine Wisdom's being united to a fuper-angelic Being, is a foundation for thefe perfonal attributions, I would obferve, that he who took the character of a perfon here faid, f John i. 1, 3. с • Micah vii. 2. Page 196. he he was the God of Abraham, Ifaac, and Jacob, and that his name was Jehovah; which no mere created perfon, tho' ever fo fuper-angelical, can fay of himself. Befides, the notion of our author of a fuper-angelical Being, united to the divine Wisdom, is only an unfcriptural fancy and figment, as I fhall prove hereafter. When Chrift is defcribed under perfonal characters, as the Son of God, the only begotten Son, our author i thinks he is only Son of God, as he is the firft of creatures, both for time and rank, with respect to his human foul: and as this glorious Being was united to the divine Wisdom, Chrift God-man may be a real perfon. Now if Chrift be the Son of God properly, in his Divine Nature, this way of evading his perfonality as God, comes to nothing. No one that duly confiders the Apostle Paul's words: k❝to which of the Angels faid he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee;" will venture to fay, Chrift is called a Son, on account of the glorious angelic Spirit, which was to him inftead of an human foul; because the words declare Chrift to be a Son on a much higher account, than any angelic, arch-angelic, or fuper-angelic Spirit can be. Chrift's human foul, let it be deriv'd from God in ever fo unknown and tranfcendent a manner, is not derived in a way diftinct from other creatures, whatever our 1 author may fancy: for the creation of the higheft Arch-angel is as much bringing fomething into being, out of nothing, as the production of the meanest reptile. It is not therefore likely, that Chrift is called the Son of God, on account of this arch-angelick Spirit, if we fupPage 196, and in many other places. 1 p. 50. I 3 * Heb. i. 5. pofe 1 + |