« ÎnapoiContinuați »
34,) be washed, but with water, which is another species of matter? And, lastly, what is spirit but breath or wind, that is, air, which is also material ? Thus the demonstra. tion is complete, and the favourite system of materialism is triumphant. But a man, who is compos mentis, will at once see that all these are figurative expressions, by which the properties of matter are predicated of spirit: and, therefore, that every argument founded upon the literal in. terpretation of them must fall to the ground. Unless Mr. G. seriously intend to deny all spirituality to the Spirit, he will find that his objection is levelled against his own as much as at the common hypothesis. He thinks it “ fectly rational to suppose that divine powers were divided, measured, and poured out, or that persons were baptized with them, or quenched them.” Now let Mr. G. be asked, What is the cubic measure of the divine power ? Into how many parts is it divisible ? What quantity of it will fill a man of ordinary stature ? After a division of it into many parts, do those parts attract each other again, or does division annihilate some of them ? How is it used when Socinians baptize with it, instead of ordinary water ? What becomes of it when it is quenched ? “0," says Mr. G., " these are all figurative expressions.” The answer is satisfactory. But it is equally so as a reply to his objections to the personality of the Holy Spirit.
8. Mr. G.'s next objection is founded on the supposed ignorance of the Holy Spirit. Because our Lord has said, “No one knoweth the Son but the Father, neither knoweth any one the Father save the Son,” Mr. G. infers that the Holy Spirit knew neither the Father nor the Son, without a special revelation. From hence he argues that “ the Holy Spirit cannot possibly be a person in the god. head distinct from the Father.” (Vol. i, p. 169.) This argument
founded on a gross mistake. For, as we have already seen, “ the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.” What is here said of the Father and the Son, is therefore asserted also of the Holy Ghost. “ No one, ouders, knoweth the things of God, but the Spirit of God, and he to whom the Spirit of God shall reveal them." Will Mr. G. now draw the same inference concerning the Father and the Son ?
9. Lastly : “ The expressions of the Holy Spirit being given by the Father, and sent by Jesus Christ, are in. compatible with the idea of its being a person.” (Vol. i, p. 165.)
What an argument! So the Son of God was not a person, because, forsooth, “God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son,” John iii, 16; and be. cause the Father “sent him into the world." But Mr. G. has an answer ready. We are informed that Jesus Christ “came voluntarily.” So then the Son of God was a person, had a will, before he came into the world, and came voluntarily! Thus does a Socinian establish at one time, what at another he pulls down. But if it had not been expressly said that Jesus Christ came voluntarily into the world, Mr. G. would have denied him the honour of personality. And yet every person of us came into the world involuntarily.
II. Having found the Holy Spirit to be, not a mere energy, an abstract attribute, but a substance, a real being, and a person, we now inquire whether he be a crea. ture or God.
If the Holy Spirit be, as we have shown, a spirit, he must be either created of uncreated. It is not consistent with Mr. Go's hypothesis to assert that he is created; nor could such an assertion find any support from the authority of Scripture. But if he be not a creature, and yet be a real being, he must be God.
The Holy Spirit is frequently denominated the Spirit of God. If then, as our Lord has asserted, and Mr. G. has repeatedly granted, “God be a spirit,” the Spirit of God is God. There is no way of evading this conclusion but by supposing that God is one spirit which is himself, and has another which is the Spirit of God. But by this supposition we run into two absurdities : viz., first, that there are two divine Spirits, and therefore two Gods ; and, secondly, that these two Spirits are one Spirit, and these two Gods one God.
Doctor Lardner, whom Mr. G. has thought proper to cite, “thinks that in many places the Spirit, or the Spirit of God, or the Holy Ghost, is equivalent to God himself.” (Vol. i, p. 152.) Whether Mr. G. agrees with the doctor or not, it is difficult to judge; for in the present instance,
the question cannot be decided by the contradiction which that agreement would involve. Be that as it may, we shall find that he cannot fairly interpret many parts of Scripture without implicitly sliding into the doctor's position.
When, therefore, Mr. G. finds himself hemmed in by such scriptures as denominate the Holy Ghost the Spirit of God, he is obliged to grant that “by the Spirit of God is meant the same thing, in reference to God, as the spi. rit of man in relation to man. (Vol. i, p. 162.) “ Now, I think, for consistency's sake,” says he, “you must allow that if by the Spirit of God is meant a distinct being, by the spirit of man must also be meant a being distinct from the man.” (Vol. i, p. 122.) “Only,” he adds, “ do not say that in one instance the words must be figurative, and in another they must be literal, just as best suits the system you have adopted. (Saul among the prophets !) Upon fair reasoning, then, on Scripture grounds, if your arguments prove the Spirit of God to be a being distinct from God, from precisely similar premises we may draw the following inferences, that the spi. rit of Jesus was a being distinct from Jesus, the spirit of Paul a being distinct from Paul, and the spirit of every man distinct from the man himself.” (Vol. i, p. 123.)
“How forcible are right words!" Who could have argued more conclusively that the Spirit of God is God, than in these few lines Mr. G. has done! We believe that the spirit of man, though distinct from the body of man, is man, and not a being distinct from man. With Dr. Lardner, and Mr. G. who quotes ( query, believes ?) him, we say that it is the incorruptible part of man which survives after (the) death (of the body.) And we join with them in their judicious appeal to Solomon, who says, “ And the spirit shall return to God who gave it," Eccles. xii, 7. God, however, has no body, but is all in. corruptible spirit. We are, therefore, violently driven, by Mr. G.'s most 'conclusive argumentation, to confess that the Spirit of God is not a being distinct from God, but God himself.”
We may now, without fear of contradiction, and in hope of farther occasional assistance from Mr. G., pro. ceed to adduce some additional proofs of what he has so liberally granted.
1. The Spirit of God is frequently called God. Not that the sacred writers formally announce the divinity of the Holy Spirit, as when they say “the Word was God," they announce the divinity of the Son. In the latter case, the truth was, and must be unknown, until it was reveal. ed. But, in the former case, treating the subject as already known where the Holy Spirit was understood to be the Spirit of God, and supposing his proper divinity to be as obvious to all men as it is to Mr. G., they only mention it incidentally, and, as it were, without design. This method, however, rather strengthens than weakens their testimony. In this way St. Peter, having charged Ananias with "lying to the Holy Ghost," immediately subjoins, “ Thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God,” Acts V, 4. “ So that,” to use the words of Athanasius, approved 3, by Dr. Lardner, and cited by Mr. G., in confirmation of his own argument, “he who lied to the Holy Spirit lied unto God, who dwells in men by his Spirit.” (Vol. i, p. 162.) St. Paul speaks in the same manner; for having made that appeal to the Corinthians, "What! know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God," 1 Cor. vi, 19, he, in another place, tells them, “ Ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them,” 2 Cor. vi, 16. To the Ephesians the same apostle writes, “ You are builded together, for a habitation of God through the Spirit,” Eph. ii, 22. And lastly: St. John
says, “ He that keepeth his command. ments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us," 1 John iii, 24.
2. As the name of God is thus applied to the Holy Spirit, the argument adduced from thence is much con. firmed by the application to him, which we find the sacred writers make, of those perfections which are exclusively divine.
(1.) He is represented as eternal. “Christ, through the eternal Spirit, offered himself without spot to God,” Heb. ix, 14.
(2.) He is represented as omnipresent. “Whither shall I go from thy Spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence? If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there; if I
bed in hell, behold, thou art there. If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea ; even there shall thy hand lead me, and thy right hand shall hold me," Psalm cxxxix, 7-10. In this passage the psalmist speaks of the presence and of the Spirit of God as synonymous, and attributes to the Spirit of God the proper omnipresence of God.
(3.) He is represented as omniscient. 6 Who hath di. rected the Spirit of the Lord, or, being his counsellor, hath taught him ? With whom took he counsel, and who in. structed him, and taught him in the path of judgment, and taught him knowledge, and showed to him the way of understanding,” Isa. xl, 13, 14. It is remarkable that in this passage, compared with the context, the prophet speaks indifferently of Jehovah, and of the Spirit of Jehovah; and that the Apostle Paul applies it to God himself, when, speaking of the infinite knowledge and wisdom of God, he exclaims, “O the depths of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! For who hath known the mind of the Lord ? or who hath been his coun. sellor ?" Rom. xi, 33, 34. The drift of the passage is to assert that peculiar attribute of the Holy Spirit, original, underived knowledge. of the extent of that knowledge we have already seen the strongest testimony in those words : “ The Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. The things of God knoweth ovdels, no one, but the Spirit of God," 1 Cor. ii, 10, 11.
(4.) He is represented as omnipotent. In the passage just cited, without changing the person, the prophet proceeds, “Behold, the nations are as a drop of a bucket, and are counted as the small dust of the balance; behold, he taketh up the isles as a very little thing,” Isa. xl, 15. 6 All these worketh that one and the self-same Spirit.” Should it be asked, What are all these? The answer is, “Wisdom,” “ knowledge,” “ faith,” “ gifts of healing," * working of miracles," " prophecy," " discerning of spi. rits," " divers kinds of tongues," and " the interpretation of tongues," 1 Cor. xii, 8-11,—gifts which imply omnis. cience, prescience, and omnipotence in the donor. So the angel declared to Mary, the mother of Jesus : The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the