personality of the Holy Ghost, he might have, on the same ground, omitted to discuss the subject of the deity of Jesus Christ, by noticing, in like manner, a single verse of scripture, which he considered as a proof of the divine nature of the Son, and thus saved me the trouble of a long controversy. If the association of names, in a religious rite, were to be admitted as a proof of the personality of the Holy Spirit, the power of God, another divine attribute, should be considered God himself, it being also mentioned jointly with the Holy Spirit in the rite of unction (Acts x. 38); and Fire also should be supposed to be a distinct person of the Godhead, because we find Fire associated with the Holy Ghost, in the same rite of baptism as I before observed (Luke iii. 16); but I shall not recur to this subject, having fully examined it in pp. 646, 647.

Notwithstanding my plain declaration, in the Second Appeal, p. 239, that " with respect to the Holy Ghost, I must confess my inability to find a single passage in the whole Scriptures, in which the Spirit is addressed as God, or as a person of God, so as to afford believers of the Trinity an excuse for their profession of the Godhead of the Holy Ghost;" the Editor thought it advisable not to dwell on the subject, and only observes, "Were it needful, indeed, a rich fulness of scripture proof could be adduced respecting the Holy Spirit, as well as the Son; but the selection of a few passages will be quite sufficient." These are as follows: the first are

from the Gospel of St. John, xiv. 13, 26, xvi. 8, 11, and the last are from Acts x. 20, and xii.2. The Editor here overlooks entirely what I stated in the Second Appeal, on this very point; that is, if from the consideration of such expressions as, "God will send the Holy Spirit," "The Holy Spirit will teach you," ""The Holy Spirit will reprove the world," "The Holy Spirit will glorify me," the Spirit be acknowledged a separate person of the Deity, what would the Editor say of other attributes, such as mercy, wrath, truth, &c., which are also, in a similar manner, personified in various instances? Psalm lvii. 3: "God shall send forth his mercy and truth." lxxxv. 10: "Mercy and truth are met together; righteousness and peace have kissed each other." lxxxix. 14: "Mercy and truth shall go before thy face." xciv. 18: "My foot slippeth; thy mercy, O Lord, held me up." "Thy mercy, O Lord, is in the heavens." "For there is wrath gone out from the Lord." Numb. xvi. 46.

In the course of citing the above verses of John and Acts, the Editor quotes Acts v. 3, "Why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Spirit?" [4,]"Thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God;" whence he concludes, that he that lieth to the Holy Spirit, lieth to God, and, consequently, the Spirit is God. On this inference I have already observed, in my former Appeal, that any sin or blasphemy against one of the attributes of God, is, of course, accounted a sin or blasphemy against God himself.

But this admission amounts neither to a recognition of the self-existence of the attribute, nor of its identity with God. I then referred the Editor to Matt. x. 40, "He that receiveth you receiveth me;" and now I beg his attention to 1 Cor. viii. 12, "But when ye sin so against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, ye sin against Christ." Do these passages identify or equalize the apostles of Jesus, with himself? Nothing but early-acquired and long-established prejudices can prevent any literary character from perceiving such a gross error. As to Acts x. 20, if the speaker be admitted, aecording to the Editor, as a separate person, he must then be identified either with the spirit of Cornelius, who had actually sent the three men mentioned in ver, 19, as is evident from ver. 8, or with the angel of God, who ordered Cornelius to send them to Peter, (ver. 5,) a conclusion which would not, after all, suit the purpose of the Editor. I entreat the Editor to take notice, at least, of some of my arguments against the personality of the Holy Spirit, mentioned in Chapter VI. of the Second Appeal, pp. 231-234, or, if he declines adventuring on this point of theology, let him candidly reduce the supposed persons of the Godhead from a Trinity to Duality, and this point being gained, I may then continue my efforts with renewed hope of reducing this Duality to the Everlasting and Indivisible Unity.

The Editor concludes his Essay with saying, (p. 624,) "The deity and the personality of the

Son and the Holy Spirit, being established, the doctrine of the ever-blessed Trinity needs no further confirmation: it follows of course. We shall, therefore, close our testimonies from Scripture, by laying before our readers three passages, which bring the sacred Three fully into view. The first we select from Isaiah xlviii. [13,] in which one is introduced who previously declares, My hand also hath laid the foundation of the earth,' &c., and whom, therefore, we are at no loss to recognize. He, however, declares, verse 16, And now the Lord God and his Spirit hath sent me.'" Now, supposing the person who declares himself, in verse 16, to have been sent by the Lord God and his Spirit, is one of the persons of the Godhead, whose hand hath laid the foundation of the earth, according to the Editor; this admission would be so far advantageous to the cause of the Editor, as respects the plurality of persons in the deity; but it would be totally fatal to his grand object, since it would substitute Isaiah as a divine person, in the place of Jesus Christ. Isaiah the Prophet is the grand speaker throughout the whole of his book; who declares himself often to have been sent by God as a messenger to Israel. He often speaks abruptly in behalf of God, as if God were speaking himself in the course of his own discourse, as I noticed in page 430, and sometimes again he suddenly introduces his own sentiments, while he is announcing the words of Jehovah, without making any distinction. I mention here only a

few instances. Isaiah lxiii. 6: "I will tread down the people in mine anger, and make them drunk in my fury, and I will bring down their strength to the earth." (7.) (7.) " I will mention the loving-kindness of the Lord, and the praises of the Lord, according to all that the Lord hath bestowed on us." Does not the Prophet introduce himself, in verse 7, most abruptly, while speaking himself in behalf of God, in verse 6? Ch. 1. 3: "I clothe the heavens with blackness, and I make sackcloth their covering." (4.) "The Lord God hath given me the tongue of the learned, that I should know how to speak a word in season to him that is weary," &c. Here the Prophet introduces himself, in verse 4, in the same abrupt manner, without intimation of any. change of person.

I now cite the context of the very verse of Isaiah quoted by the Editor, to enable my readers to judge how far" it brings the sacred Three fully into view." (14.) "All ye (the inhabitants of Judah) assemble yourselves, and hear; who among them (Israel) hath declared these things? The Lord hath loved him (Cyrus* of Persia, the conqueror of Babylon). He (the Lord) will do his pleasure on Babylon, and his

* Isaialı xliv. 7: "And who, as I, shall call and shall declare it?" &c. (28.) "That saith of Cyrus, He is my shepherd, and shall perform all my pleasure." xlvi. 11: "Calling a ravenous bird from the east, the man that executeth my counsel from a far country: yea, I have spoken it, I will also bring it to pass; I have purposed it, I will also do it."