A calm and sober enquiry concerning the possibility of a Trinity in the Godhead…

2. Whether some further distinction may not be admitted as possible, consistently with the salved unity of the Godhead.

As to the former, 1. Whereas you think the word Person to be a good word, and sufficiently warranted by Scripture, Heb. 1. 3. where the Son is called the express Image of his Father's Person; alleging ⟨p. 101⟩that so we render the word Hypostasis which is there used, and do mean by it what you think to be there meant; I desire you would please to consider whether the word Hypostasis, according to the common use of it will admit to be so taken, as you explain your self to mean by the word Person. For though the Latin word persona, as you say, according to the true and ancient sense, may well enough admit to be so taken, as that the same Man might sustain three persons, I offer it to your re-consideration, whether ever you have observed the word Hypostasis, in any sort of Authors, when it signifies any Person at all (for I know that it frequently signifies somewhat else than a Person) to be taken in that sense. And whether one Hypostasis so taken as it uses to be when it signifies a Person, may not be capable of sustaining three of those Persons which you here describe. And whether, according to this sense you mean not God to be only one such Hypostasis.

As to the former, 1. Whereas you think the word Person to be a good word, and sufficiently warranted by Scripture, Heb. 1. 3. where the Son is called the express Image of his Father's Person; alledging ⟨p. 101⟩that so we render the word Hypostasis which is there used, and do mean by it what you think to be there meant; I desire you would please to consider whether the word Hypostasis, according to the common use of it will admit to be so taken, as you explain your self to mean by the word Person. For thô the Latine word persona, as you say, according to the true and ancient sense, may well enough admit to be so taken, as that the same Man might sustain three persons, I offer it to your re-consideration, whether ever you have observ'd the word Hypostasis, in any sort of Authors, when it signifies any Person at all (for I know that it frequently signifies somewhat else than a Person) to be taken in that sense. And whether one Hypostasis so taken as it uses to be when it signifies a Person, may not be capable of sustaining three of those Persons which you here describe. And whether, according to this sense you mean not God to be only one such Hypostasis.