John. Although I acknowledge that William Penn was a great and good man, I cannot take his expressions as sufficient authority; I look to a higher source, even to the Scriptures of truth, for evidence on this important question. Now, the Scriptures appear to me to speak of the Deity in a threefold sense:-first, as the Creator and Father of all; secondly, as the Son, who is the mediator between God and man; and thirdly, as the Holy Ghost, who is sent by the Father and the Son, to sanctify the heart and regulate the affections. Yet it is repeatedly said in the Old and New Testament, that God is one; therefore, we conclude that there are three persons in one God,each of which persons is perfect in himself, possessing omnipotence, omniscience, and eternity; the "same in substance, equal in power, eternity, and glory." [See Westminster Confession.] I shall now endeavour to prove these positions by passages from Scripture.

1st. That there is more than one person in the Godhead, may be inferred from the following texts: "God said, let us make man in our image, after our likeness." Gen. i. 26. "And the Lord God said, the man has become as one of us, to know good and evil.” Gen. iii. 26. And the prophet says, "I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, whom shall I send, and who shall go for us?" Is. vi. 8. We are also informed by learned men, that the name most commonly given to the Deity, in the Old Testament, is Elohim, which is a plural noun; and this has been considered a strong proof that there is a plurality of persons in the Godhead.

2d. That the number of persons in the Deity is three, may be concluded from the words of our Lord, who said to his disciples, "Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." Mat. xxviii. 19. And also from the benediction of the apostle Paul, who says, "The grace of our Lord

Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all." 1 Cor. xiii. 14.

3d. We argue that each of these is, in some sense distinct, because one is represented as the Father, who sends; another as the Son, who is sent into the world; and the third as the Spirit, that was poured out upon all flesh. The Father and Son are also represented, in many places, as speaking to each other, which shows that they must be distinct from each other in one sense, although for ever united in another. Now, I think it may be proved that each of these persons is Divine, and consequently, co-eternal and co-equal. That the Father is omnipotent, omniscient, and eternal, will, I suppose, be admitted without argument. That the Son is so, may be shown from the introduction to the Gospel by St. John. "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him, and without him was not any thing made that was made." Ch. i. 2. "And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth." ver. 14. There are many other texts of similar import, but I shall quote only one more, which I consider sufficient. St. Paul says, "God, who at sundry times, and in divers manners, spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high." Heb. i. 1-3.

That the Holy Ghost is not only Divine, but personally distinct from the others, may be inferred from the operations assigned to them being generally different. He is represented as the baptising power;

Christians are also said to be born of the Spirit: and Christ promised his disciples, "I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever, even the Spirit of truth." John xiv. 16.

4th. Having now shown from Scripture that there are three persons in the Deity, it only remains to be proved that Jesus Christ is the second person, or Logos, mysteriously united to "a human body and rational soul," and born of a virgin; and this has been called the hypostatical union. This may be proved from many passages. It is said, "He took not on him the nature of angels, but he took on him the seed of Abraham; wherefore, in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high-priest, in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people; for in that he himself hath suffered, being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.' Heb. ii. 16-18. He is also called, "God manifest in the flesh." 1 Tim. iii. 16. "God with us." "The Lord of glory." 1 Cor. iii. 8. And, "over all, God blessed for ever." Rom. ix. 5. That he had a human soul, as well as a human body, is very clear; for he says, "My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death." "Yet his human nature must not be confounded with his divine; for, though there be an union of natures in Christ, yet there is not a mixture or confusion of them or their properties. His humanity is not changed into his Deity; nor his Deity into his humanity; but the two natures are distinct in one person. How this union exists is above our comprehension; and indeed, if we cannot explain how our bodies and souls are united, it is not to be supposed we can explain this astonishing mystery of God manifest in the flesh."-[See Buck's Theo. Diet. article Jesus Christ; also, Smith's Treatise on the Trinity.]

Father. Those who profess to derive their doctrines

entirely from the Scriptures, ought to be very careful to keep to the language of Scripture, especially when speaking on a subject that they do not pretend to understand. If the doctrine of a trinity be taught in the Scriptures, it must be conveyed by inspiration in the very best language which could be chosen; and there is no need of inventing new terms to express it. But we do not find any such term in the Scriptures as a trinity; nor is it said that there are three persons in the Godhead; nor is there any language there conveying the same ideas. I therefore conclude, that this doctrine is an invention of men; and it must be acknowledged by every reader of history, that it has been one of the principal causes of dissention and persecution ever since it was introduced into the church. If we take the word person in its common acceptation, it means an individual or a being; and if we say there are three infinite persons in one Being, each of whom has all power and all wisdom, the proposition contains in itself a contradiction, that is obvious to the meanest capacity. Therefore, the advocates of this doctrine are obliged to admit that the term person does not exactly convey their meaning, and that they only use it for want of a better. Why then should they contend so strenuously for words that do not convey their meaning?

I shall now proceed to examine the foundation on which this doctrine rests.

In the first place,-It is said that the use of the plural pronouns us and our, ascribed to the Divine Being, and the circumstance of one of the names given to him in the Scriptures being a plural noun, indicate that there is more than one person in the Deity. This peculiarity in the Hebrew language,* has

*The late learned and amiable Hindoo reformer, Rammohun Roy, remarks: "Were we even to disregard totally the idiom of the He. brew, Arabic, and of almost all Asiatic languages, in which the plu. ral number is often used for the singular, to express the respect due to the person denoted by the noun; and to understand the term, image" and "our likeness," found in the verse, [Gen. i. 26,] as convey.

our

furnished one of the strong arguments of trinitarians; but they appear to forget that the same kind of plural language was applied to the golden calf, which the children of Israel worshiped in the wilderness,-although it is very evident that there was but one calf made on that occasion. It is said, that the people brought their golden ear rings to Aaron," and he re

ing a plural meaning, the quotation would still by no means answer their purpose; for the verse in question would in that case imply a plurality of Gods, without determining whether their number was three or three hundred, and of course without specifying their persons.-No middle point in the unlimited series of number being determined, it would be almost necessary, for the purpose of obtaining some fixed number, as implied by those terms, to adopt either two, the lowest degree of plurality in the first personal pronoun both in Hebrew and Arabic, or to take the highest number of Gods with which human imagí. nation has peopled the heavens. In the former case the verse cited might countenance the doctrine of the duality of the Godhead entertained by Zirdusht and his followers, representing the God of goodness, and the God of evil, to have jointly created man, composed of a mixed nature of good and evil propensities; in the latter it would be consistent with the Hindoo system of religion; but there is nothing in the words, that can be with any justice construed as pointing to Trinity. These are not the only difficulties attending the interpretation of those terms:-if they should be viewed in any other than a singular sense, they would involve contradiction with the very next verse: "So God created man in his own image;" in which the singular number is distinctly used: as in Deut. ch. iv. ver. 4: "The Lord our God is one Lord;" and also with the spirit of the whole of the Old Testament.

To those who are tolerably versed in Hebrew and Arabic, (which is only a refined Hebrew,) it is a well known fact, that in the Jewish and Mohummudan Scriptures, as well as in common discourse, the plural form is often used in a singular sense, when the superiority of the subject of discourse is intended to be kept in view. This is sufficiently ap parent from the following quotations taken both from the Old Testament in Hebrew, and from the Qoran. Exo. ch. xxi. ver. 4, "If his masters (meaning his master) have given him a wife." Verse 6, "Then his masters (that is, his master) shall bring him unto the Judges." Verse 29th,But if the ox were wont to push with his horn in time past, and it has been testified to his owners," (that is, to his owner.) Isa. ch. vi. ver. 8, "To whom shall I send? and who will go for us?" (that is, for me.)

So also in the Qoran, "We are (meaning I am) nearer than the jugular vein." "Surely we (meaning I) created every thing in proportion." In these two texts of the Qoran, God is represented to have spoken in the plural number, although Mohummud cannot be supposed to have employed a mode of expression which he could have supposed capable of being considered favourable to the Trinity."—Appeal, &c. p. 140–143.