(2.) Let us proceed to apply our second criterion, and ascertain whether the divine persons, whom it is essential to distinguish, _are_ so distinguished by _characteristic titles_ in scripture; and share among them, with any approach to equality, the name of GOD. It is self-evident, that a _verbal revelation_ can make known _distinctions_ only by _distinctive words_; that if two or more objects of thought receive interchangeable names, and the term which had seemed to be appropriated to the one is transferred to the other, those objects are not discriminated, but confounded. We require, then, separate words in scripture to denote the following notions; of the One Divine Substance, or Triune Being; of the First, of the Second, of the Third person, in this infinite existence;—of the Divine Nature and of the Human Nature of Christ. For the Trinity, it is acknowledged, there is no scripture name; unless, indeed, the plural form of the word God in the Hebrew language is to be claimed for this purpose; and thus an attempt be still made to confirm our faith by argument which an orthodox commentator calls “weak and vain, not to say silly and absurd.”[175] “From the plural sense of the word Elohim,” says the great Calvin, “it is usual to infer that there are three persons in the Godhead. But as this proof of so important a point appears to me by no means solid, I will not insist upon the word. Let me then warn my readers against such VIOLENT INTERPRETATIONS.”[176] “I must be allowed,” says Dr. Lee, Arabic Professor in the University of Cambridge, “to object to such methods of supporting an article of faith, which stands in need of no such support.”[177] Of the first person in the Trinity, the word “_Father_,” it is to be presumed, may be considered as the distinctive name; of the Second person, the terms _Son_, _Son of God_, and _the Word_ or _Logos_; of the Third person, the phrase _Holy Ghost_, _Spirit_, _Paraclete_; and of the human nature of Christ, as distinguished from the Second distinction in the Trinity, the names _Jesus of Nazareth_, _Son of Man_, the _Man Christ Jesus_. If these names be _not_ distinctive, there certainly are no others; and if there be none at all, then the _distinctions themselves_ are not impressed upon the record; they are altogether destitute of signs and expressions, and must be pronounced purely imaginary. Meanwhile we will assume the titles, which I have just enumerated, to be appropriated to the purposes which have been assigned. To the use of the words _Father_ and _Son_ I shall have particular occasion to revert.