devils," President Edwards observes, “shall be brought before the judgment-seat of Christ. These shall be gathered to the left hand of Christ, and, as it seems, will still remain upon the earth, and shall not be caught up into the air, as the saints shall be." But whatever probability may attach to this opinion, Witsius justly condemns the fancies detailed by Cornelius a Lapide respecting the valley of Jehoshaphat as the place of judgment, the extending of that valley, &c. The view which our Author presents of the scope and connexion of the 3d Chapter of Joel, appears to be right. Very probably, indeed, it relates, in the first instance, to certain remarkable deliverances wrought for the ancient Church, as those which took place at the destruction of Sennacherib's army, and the overthrow of Antiochus. But the connexion seems to justify the conclusion, that this prophecy refers ultimately to "some signal display of the Divine vengeance on the enemies of the New Testament Church, not unlike that which happened in the time of Jehoshaphat." Several observations regarding the valley of Jehoshaphat, similar to those of our Author, may be seen in Dr Wells' Geography of the Old and New Testament.t NOTE LII. Page 298. Our Author very laudably exposes the notion of Grotius, which has been adopted by Whiston and others, that the Apostles in reality apprehended, that the day of the last judgment was to arrive in their own age. Independently of other considerations, it is truly strange, that men of learning should have hazarded this opinion, after the Apostle Paul's explanation in 2 Thessal. ii. From this passage indeed it is not unreasonable to infer, that some Christians at Thessalonica had rashly considered several expressions in his First Epistle to them, as intended to excite or encourage an expectation of the second coming of Christ before the conclusion of the apostolic age. But Paul shows them plainly, that they had completely mistaken his meaning, and that after a very considerable lapse of time, a grand apostacy was to happen in the Church, prior to the glorious appearing of the Son of man. He reminds them, too, that, when he was yet with them, he had given them intimations relative to that "falling away," the careful recollection of which would have served to obviate the misapprehensions they had latterly entertain • Hist. of Redemption, Period iii. Part 2. sect. 2. VOL. II. 4 A 39. ed. On this subject, see Hammond, Doddridge,t and particularly Whitby.+ NOTE LIII. Page 305. It is scarcely necessary to remark, that the terms Spirit and Ghost are entirely synonymous. "The name of Ghost or Gast,” says Pearson," in the ancient Saxon language, signifieth a Spirit."§ "Ghost," says Secker to the same effect," in the ancient use of our language, denoted the same thing, which Spirit doth now; a substance different from body or matter. Indeed we still use it in expressing the departure of the spirit from the body, which we call giving up the ghost; and in speaking of supposed apparitions of the spirits of persons after their decease."|| Our Author does not stop to inquire into the various senses of the word spirit, when employed with reference to creatures; but confines himself to a short statement of its different acceptations with regard to what is strictly Divine.-The proper meaning of this term, and of the corresponding words in Hebrew and Greek, according to Parkhurst,** is "air in motion," or, as Witsius expresses it, "a gale of wind." Our Author considers this designation as given to the Spirit, not merely on account of the resemblance that may be traced between his ageney on the human soul and the agency of air and wind in the material creation, but also on account of the manner of his eternal and incomprehensible procession. In this view, it may be noticed, he agrees with Dr Owen; who, in his elaborate Treatise on the Holy Spirit, when explaining the import of the term, has the following remark: "As the vital breath of a man has a continual emanation from him, and yet is never separated utterly from his person, or forsaketh him; so doth the Spirit of the Father and the Son proceed from them by a continual divine emanation, still abiding one with them."++ * Paraph. and Annot. 2 Thes. ii. Note c. Family Expos. 1 Thes. iv. 15. Note e. Paraph. and Annot. Notes on 1 Thes. iv. 15, and 2 Cor. v. 1, 9. Also a Discourse by way of inquiry, whether the Apostles in their writings spoke as conceiving the day of judgment might be in their days, and accordingly suited their phrases and exhortations."-In this discourse, Whitby adverts to Whiston's erroneous statements on this point in his Essay on the Revelation of John, and demonstrates the futility of that writer's arguments. § Expos. of Creed, Art. viii. p. 308. Works, Vol. iv. Lect. 13. pp. 317, 318. ** Hebrew Lex. on 1, and Greek Lex. on veμa. ++ Book i. ch. 2. sect. 9. We have no cause to be offended at the figurative language regarding the Divine Persons, which occurs in sacred writ. It becomes us, on the contrary, to adore the goodness of God in "using similitudes," relative to those high points which far surpass our comprehension, but some imperfect knowledge of which is of great value and importance. If the terms Father and Son, which the Scriptures apply to the First and Second Persons in the Godhead, carry an allusion to a certain interesting human relation, we need not think it strange, that the designation by which the Third Person in the Trinity is known, and which seems to refer to the eternal relation subsisting between Him and the other two adorable Persons, alludes to a gale of wind, or rather to the human breath. In both cases, the metaphor falls infinitely short of the sublime topic which it is employed to illustrate: and we must guard against abusing the divine condescension, by entertaining gross, unworthy, and erroneous conceptions, which those figurative expressions were never intended to convey. It is necessary, for example, to fortify our minds against every idea repugnant to the true personality of the Holy Spirit. Were any one to allege, that, because the Father is called a rock, a shield, and a consuming fire, a doubt is cast on the Father's personality; or, that, because the Son is represented as the Word of God, the light of the world, a foundation, and a vine, the personality of the Son is uncertain,-it would be universally acknowledged, that the allegation is utterly false and absurd. But to draw any conclusion hostile to the real personality of the Holy Spirit from those passages of Scripture in which material and irrational objects, as wind, breath, water, oil, a seal, and a dove, are made use of to illustrate his character and operations, would be equally preposterous. NOTE LIV. Page 309. The PERSONALITY of the Holy Spirit was denied at an early period of the Christian Church. In the fourth Century, the sect of the Pneumatomachians, or Macedonians, was formed by Macedonius, Bishop of Constantinople, an eminent Semi-arian Doctor, who taught that the Holy Spirit is " a divine energy diffused throughout the universe, and not a person distinct from the Father and the Son." This error was solemnly condemned by the council of Constantinople, in the year 381.* Our Author establishes the personality of the Spirit by solid arguments concisely expressed, and makes satisfactory replies to the • Mosheim's Eccles. Hist. Cent. iv. chap. 5. sect. 20. most important objections of adversaries. That personal characters and operations are often attributed to the Spirit in the sacred volume, is quite undeniable; but the enemies of the doctrine very boldly and speciously allege, that this is done merely by the figure of speech called personification. The futility of this exception is briefly pointed out by Witsius; and those who are desirous to see a more minute refutation of it may consult Dr Owen,* and also Dr Wardlaw's comprehensive Sermon on the Divinity and Personality of the Holy Spirit. The learned reader will find an interesting argument for the personality of the Spirit, in Dr Middleton's Note on Mat. i. 18.‡ from which the following is a short extract. "It may here be briefly noticed, that in the passages, which, from their ascribing personal acts to the v aysor, are usually adduced to prove the Personality of the Blessed Spirit, the words πνευμα and πνεύμα άγιον invariably have the article. See particularly Mark i. 10. Luke iii. 22. John i. 32. Acts i. 16. and xx. 28. Ephes. iv. 20. Mark xiii. 11. Acts x. 9. and xxviii. 25. 1 Tim. iv. 1. Heb. iii. 7. &c. The reason of this is obvious; for there being but one Holy Spirit, he could not be spoken of indefinitely. In Matt. also xxviii. 19. where the Holy Spirit is associated with the Father and the Son, the reading is te dy μTos." The ingenious writer goes on to show, that, where vux means not the Person of the Spirit, but his influence or operation, " a remarkable difference may be observed with respect to the Article." "Though the Holy Spirit himself be but one, his influences and operations may be many: hence v and μ ayer are in this sense anarthrous,” (i. e. without the article,) " the case of renewed mention or of reference being of course excepted. The expressions of being filled with the Holy Ghost,' 'receiving the Holy Ghost,' the Holy Ghost being upon one,' &c. justify this observation." NOTE LV. Page 311. It is perhaps somewhat difficult to determine the precise meaning of that expression in Acts x. 32, "The word of his grace." Henry and Guyse seem inclined to apply it both to Christ and to the Gospel: Beza and Doddridge understand it to mean simply the Gospel: but Gomar § and our Author are quite decided in referring the expression to our Saviour. This interpretation is supported by Wit ▪ Discourse on the Holy Spirit, Book i. chap. 3. sius, not only here, but also in a separate Dissertation on the Logos. In that Dissertation, his concluding argument is thus expressed : "The succeeding words of the verse cannot be referred to God, without imagining an unnecessary hyperbaton ; † and they do not suit the Gospel, which neither builds us up on a foundation, nor gives us an inheritance, but is the instrument by which Christ builds us on himself, and by which the inheritance and the way of obtaining it are revealed. But these expressions are perfectly applicable to Christ; for he builds the church on himself, and preserves it, Matt. xvi. 18. Heb. iii. 3. and also gives us an inheritance, Col. iii. 24." Our Author at the same time shows, that, though it were conceded, that not our Saviour, but the Gospel, is intended by " the word of his grace," the passage where this phrase occurs cannot invalidate his argument from Matt. xxviii. 19, in favour of the personality of the Holy Spirit. NOTE LVI. Page 324. To the Author's able illustration and defence of the argument for the DIVINITY of the Spirit, founded on Acts v. 3, 4, the following excellent quotation from a living writer, relative to the same topic, may fitly be subjoined. "The conduct of Ananias was farther aggravated by the dignity of the person against whom it was an offence. Thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God. He had indeed lied unto men, in attempting to deceive the Apostles; but Peter means that he had not lied only to them. It is observable that, whereas he affirms in the preceding verse that Ananias had lied to the Holy Ghost, he now charges him with having lied to God. It follows that the Holy Ghost is not a creature, nor a rhetorical name for a divine operation or influence, but a person possessed of proper Divinity. It is to no purpose to object to this inference, that an equivalent phrase is used where it is manifest that the same conclusion cannot be drawn from it. When the Israelites murmured for want of flesh against Moses and Aaron, they are said to have murmured against God, Exod. xvi. 8. The instances are not parallel. In the latter case, the Israelites were guilty of murmuring against God, because they fretted at Moses and Aaron his ministers; but in the former, Ananias is said not • Miscel. Sac. Tom. ii. Exercit. iii. weg. Ty λoy8, sect. 39. + A Hyperbaton is a figure of speech, by which the words are transposed from the plain grammatical order. T. |