99.The ancient Syriac is Ü Ü“Ü¡Ü Ü the modern is the same word, which is literally καμηλονa camel, not καμιλονa cable. This Eastern proverb is now well established. Vide Campbell, Clarke, &c.
99.The ancient Syriac is Ü Ü“Ü¡Ü Ü the modern is the same word, which is literally καμηλονa camel, not καμιλονa cable. This Eastern proverb is now well established. Vide Campbell, Clarke, &c.
100.We do not find the word used in that sense till the second century,by Justin Martyr [Vid. ejusd. Dial. 2.] and Clemens Alexandrinus [in Pædag. Lib. 1. cap. 6.] and therefore we are not altogether to take our measures in explaining the sense of words, used in scripture, from them, who sometimes mistake the sense of the doctrine, contained therein. However, if we take the word in this sense, it does not militate against our argument, since a person may be baptized, who is not in a state of grace and salvation.
100.We do not find the word used in that sense till the second century,by Justin Martyr [Vid. ejusd. Dial. 2.] and Clemens Alexandrinus [in Pædag. Lib. 1. cap. 6.] and therefore we are not altogether to take our measures in explaining the sense of words, used in scripture, from them, who sometimes mistake the sense of the doctrine, contained therein. However, if we take the word in this sense, it does not militate against our argument, since a person may be baptized, who is not in a state of grace and salvation.
101.See Pag.124,125ante.
101.See Pag.124,125ante.
102.See Pag.122,123ante.
102.See Pag.122,123ante.
103.There seems to be an hendyadis in the apostle’s mode of speaking. By the heavenly gift we are to understand extraordinary gifts, which are called the Holy Ghost elsewhere, Acts xix. 2.because they were from the Holy Ghost as effects of his power, and wrought to confirm the gospel dispensation, which is called the world to come, Heb. ii. 6.and therefore they are styled the powers of the world to come.
103.There seems to be an hendyadis in the apostle’s mode of speaking. By the heavenly gift we are to understand extraordinary gifts, which are called the Holy Ghost elsewhere, Acts xix. 2.because they were from the Holy Ghost as effects of his power, and wrought to confirm the gospel dispensation, which is called the world to come, Heb. ii. 6.and therefore they are styled the powers of the world to come.
104.See Quest.lxvii:Pag.15ante.
104.See Quest.lxvii:Pag.15ante.
105.See page54,55, ante.
105.See page54,55, ante.
106.See Quest.lxxxiii.
106.See Quest.lxxxiii.
107.The wordαδοκιμοι,though it be sometimes used to signify such as are rejected as objects of God’s hatred, as in Heb.vi. 8.and consequently is inconsistent with the character of believers; yet, in other places it may be taken according to the grammatical construction thereof, as opposed toδοκιμοι;which signifies persons approved, 2 Tim. ii. 15.and so it signifies a person whose conduct is blame-worthy, or whose actions are not to be approved of; and this may be applied to some who are not altogether destitute of faith,though they are not able to vindicate themselves in all respects as blameless. That the apostle uses the word in this sense here, seems probable from the application he makes of it to himself; it is said, ver. 3.Ye seek a proof of Christ speaking in me, δοκιμην ζητειτε;and verse 6. he says, I trust that ye shall know that we are not reprobates;so we render the wordsελπιζω δε οτι γνωσεθε oτι hμεις ουκ εσμεν αδοκιμοι;but it would be more agreeable to what is said in verse 4. if we should render them, I trust that ye shall know that we are not disapproved, or that ye shall find a proof of Christ speaking in us: and in verse 7. he farther says, I pray to God, not that we should appear approved. ουχ iνα hμεις δοκιμοι φανωμεν,that is, I am not so much concerned about your finding a proof of Christ speaking in us; but that ye should do that which is honest,q. d.I am more concerned for you than myself, though we be as reprobates, hμεις δε wς αδοκιμοι ωμενthat is, whether you think we have a proof of Christ’s speaking in us or no, or his approving us in the course of our ministry, my great concern is, that you may be approved; so that it is plain the apostle uses the wordαδοκιμοι,as signifying disapproved; and therefore as it is applied to those he speaks of in verse 5. the meaning is this; you seek to know whether we are approved of God as ministers; therefore I would advise you to examine yourselves, whether you be in the faith, and to prove your ownselves: and if you know not yourselves, you are in this respect blame-worthy, or to be disapproved; especially because you seem to have been negligent as to the duty of self-examination. Whether he who is diligent in the exercise of this duty, and yet cannot apprehend that he is in a state of grace, be, in this respect to be disapproved or no, it is certain, that he who is a stranger to himself, because of the neglect hereof, is disapproved.
107.The wordαδοκιμοι,though it be sometimes used to signify such as are rejected as objects of God’s hatred, as in Heb.vi. 8.and consequently is inconsistent with the character of believers; yet, in other places it may be taken according to the grammatical construction thereof, as opposed toδοκιμοι;which signifies persons approved, 2 Tim. ii. 15.and so it signifies a person whose conduct is blame-worthy, or whose actions are not to be approved of; and this may be applied to some who are not altogether destitute of faith,though they are not able to vindicate themselves in all respects as blameless. That the apostle uses the word in this sense here, seems probable from the application he makes of it to himself; it is said, ver. 3.Ye seek a proof of Christ speaking in me, δοκιμην ζητειτε;and verse 6. he says, I trust that ye shall know that we are not reprobates;so we render the wordsελπιζω δε οτι γνωσεθε oτι hμεις ουκ εσμεν αδοκιμοι;but it would be more agreeable to what is said in verse 4. if we should render them, I trust that ye shall know that we are not disapproved, or that ye shall find a proof of Christ speaking in us: and in verse 7. he farther says, I pray to God, not that we should appear approved. ουχ iνα hμεις δοκιμοι φανωμεν,that is, I am not so much concerned about your finding a proof of Christ speaking in us; but that ye should do that which is honest,q. d.I am more concerned for you than myself, though we be as reprobates, hμεις δε wς αδοκιμοι ωμενthat is, whether you think we have a proof of Christ’s speaking in us or no, or his approving us in the course of our ministry, my great concern is, that you may be approved; so that it is plain the apostle uses the wordαδοκιμοι,as signifying disapproved; and therefore as it is applied to those he speaks of in verse 5. the meaning is this; you seek to know whether we are approved of God as ministers; therefore I would advise you to examine yourselves, whether you be in the faith, and to prove your ownselves: and if you know not yourselves, you are in this respect blame-worthy, or to be disapproved; especially because you seem to have been negligent as to the duty of self-examination. Whether he who is diligent in the exercise of this duty, and yet cannot apprehend that he is in a state of grace, be, in this respect to be disapproved or no, it is certain, that he who is a stranger to himself, because of the neglect hereof, is disapproved.
108.Vide Bellamy’s Works, 3 Vol. p. 81-83.
108.Vide Bellamy’s Works, 3 Vol. p. 81-83.
109.See Quest.lxxxvi.xc.
109.See Quest.lxxxvi.xc.
110.Reflecting as mirrors, or beholding as by mirrors.
110.Reflecting as mirrors, or beholding as by mirrors.
111.Vid. Dauberi orat. Funeb. ad front. & Hor. Noviss. ad calc. Tom. 3. Riveti operum: in which he is represented as saying, Nolite mei causa dolere, ultima hæc momenta nihil habent funesti; corpus languet quidem, at anima robore & consolatione plena est, nec impedit paries iste intergerinus, nebula ista exigua, quo minus lucem Dei videam. Atq; exinde magis magisque optavit dissolvi & cum Christo esse. Sufficit mi Deus exclamabat subinde, sufficit, suscipe animam meam: Non tamen moram impatienter fero. Expecto, credo, persevero, dimoveri nequeo, Dei Spiritus meo spiritui testatur, me ex filiis suis esse. O amorem ineffabilem! id quod sentio, omnem expressionem alte transcendit. Veni Domine Jesu, veni, etenim deficio, nan quidem impatiens Domine, sed anima mea respicit te ut terra sicca. Preces & votum, ut Deus Paradisum aperiret, & huic fideli servo suo faciem suam ostenderet; his verbis supplevit; cum animabus justorem sanctificatis; Amen, Amen. Exinde lingua præpedita verbo affirmare; mox ad vocem adstantium, ipsum jam visione Dei frui, annuere; paulo post sub mediam decimam matutinam placide in Domino obdormiit.
111.Vid. Dauberi orat. Funeb. ad front. & Hor. Noviss. ad calc. Tom. 3. Riveti operum: in which he is represented as saying, Nolite mei causa dolere, ultima hæc momenta nihil habent funesti; corpus languet quidem, at anima robore & consolatione plena est, nec impedit paries iste intergerinus, nebula ista exigua, quo minus lucem Dei videam. Atq; exinde magis magisque optavit dissolvi & cum Christo esse. Sufficit mi Deus exclamabat subinde, sufficit, suscipe animam meam: Non tamen moram impatienter fero. Expecto, credo, persevero, dimoveri nequeo, Dei Spiritus meo spiritui testatur, me ex filiis suis esse. O amorem ineffabilem! id quod sentio, omnem expressionem alte transcendit. Veni Domine Jesu, veni, etenim deficio, nan quidem impatiens Domine, sed anima mea respicit te ut terra sicca. Preces & votum, ut Deus Paradisum aperiret, & huic fideli servo suo faciem suam ostenderet; his verbis supplevit; cum animabus justorem sanctificatis; Amen, Amen. Exinde lingua præpedita verbo affirmare; mox ad vocem adstantium, ipsum jam visione Dei frui, annuere; paulo post sub mediam decimam matutinam placide in Domino obdormiit.
112.See Fleming’s Fulfilling of the Scripture, in fol. Part 1. page 287.
112.See Fleming’s Fulfilling of the Scripture, in fol. Part 1. page 287.
113.See Dr. Goodwin’s Works, Vol. 5. in his life, page 19.
113.See Dr. Goodwin’s Works, Vol. 5. in his life, page 19.
114.See the Memoirs of the Life of Mr. Halyburton, Cap. 6.
114.See the Memoirs of the Life of Mr. Halyburton, Cap. 6.
115.See this argument improved by Mr. Fleming,in his Fulfilling of the Scripture,Edit. in Fol. page 394, & seq.in which he takes several remarkable passages out of Melchoir Adam’s Lives, and gives several instances of that extraordinary communion which some have had with God, both in life and death; whose conversation was well known in Scotland; so that he mentions it as what is a matter undeniably true: and he relates other things concerning the assurance and joy which some have had; which has afforded them the sweetest comforts in prisons and dungeons, and given them a foretaste of heaven, when they have been called to suffer death for Christ’s sake.
115.See this argument improved by Mr. Fleming,in his Fulfilling of the Scripture,Edit. in Fol. page 394, & seq.in which he takes several remarkable passages out of Melchoir Adam’s Lives, and gives several instances of that extraordinary communion which some have had with God, both in life and death; whose conversation was well known in Scotland; so that he mentions it as what is a matter undeniably true: and he relates other things concerning the assurance and joy which some have had; which has afforded them the sweetest comforts in prisons and dungeons, and given them a foretaste of heaven, when they have been called to suffer death for Christ’s sake.
116.See Page252, ante.
116.See Page252, ante.
117.See Vol. II. page 151.
117.See Vol. II. page 151.
118.Sequela naturæ.
118.Sequela naturæ.
119.Before this there was what some calltemperamentum ad pondus,which was lost by sin; and a broken constitution, leading to mortality ensued thereupon.
119.Before this there was what some calltemperamentum ad pondus,which was lost by sin; and a broken constitution, leading to mortality ensued thereupon.
120.See Dr. Bates on Death, chap.ii.
120.See Dr. Bates on Death, chap.ii.
121.Vid. Sueton. in Vit. Jul. Cæs. Talia agentem atq; meditantem mors prævenit.
121.Vid. Sueton. in Vit. Jul. Cæs. Talia agentem atq; meditantem mors prævenit.
122.See more of this in Quest.lxxxvii.
122.See more of this in Quest.lxxxvii.
123.See Quest.xc.
123.See Quest.xc.
124.The belief of a separate state is very ancient. Cicero and Seneca have asserted, that all nations believed the immortality of the soul. Yet we know there were not only individuals, but sects who were exceptions. Saul the first king of Israel believed that the soul survived the death of the body, or he would neither have made laws against necromancers, nor have applied to one in his distresses. If Samuel was raised, it is a fact, directly in point, but the words though express, are probably an accommodation to the sentiments of men. The son of Sirach who lived two hundred years before Christ, says that Samuel prophesied after he was dead. (Ecclus. c. 46. v. 20.) And Josephus in his account of the life of Saul, shows his belief to be that Samuel actually arose. The same feats of apparitions which the disciples had, still exist with the common people, and are proofs that they entertain the same sentiment.Some of the Pharisees, who are represented as believing a separate state, thought souls might return to other bodies. This was the opinion of Josephus with respect to the virtuous; and also of those Jews, who supposed that Jesus was Elijah or Jeremiah; but the question of the disciples, whether a man had been born blind for his own sins, implies a possibility of a return also of the wicked into other bodies. Nevertheless the prevailing opinion of the Pharisees was of a separate state; otherwise Paul’s professing their sentiments, which must have been known to him, was disingenuous; nor, if they had known the difference, would they have protected him. The approbation of the multitude when he proved the doctrine from the words of Jehovah to Moses at the bush, (Matt. xxii. 32.) and the parable of Lazarus and the rich man, evince that the common opinion was such.This subject, has been enlightened, not first brought to light, through the Gospel, but plainly asserted:this day shalt thou be with me in paradise. At home in the body, and absent from the Lord, absent from the body, and present with the Lord, is descriptive but of two states. The desireto depart to be with Christ, shows an immediate expectation. And otherwise it cannot be said that the spirits of just men aremade perfect.The Jews, Greeks, and Romans assigned the Heaven to the gods, earth to men, and under the earth (ש×ול, αδης, inferi) to the dead. The passages “the spirit shall return to God,†and “the spirit of a man goeth upwards†are not exceptions, for then they would prove that the evil, as well as the good, went to heaven. That the spirit is disposed of by God, and that the spirit of a man survives the death of the body, seem to be all that is respectively implied. Samuel was believed to come out of, and return to his place under the earth; and Saul was to be with him, below the earth; but, possibly, in a different apartment. Thus Abraham and Lazarus were in sight of, and only divided from the man in torments by a gulph.Under the gospel the place of separate saints is represented to be in Heaven. Heaven had been always assigned to God among the Jews, and even the heathens thought it the most honourable place: Virgil assigned it to Cæsar. Jesus declared he came from thence, and would return thither; and for the comfort of his disciples, told them, he would prepare a place for them, and take them to himself. They saw him actually ascend. He is to come from thence, and to bring them with him to judgment.This change of representation implies no contradiction, for pure spirits are not confined to place. Our souls are connected with our bodies, and therefore go and come with, or rather in them. But when the connexion is broken, the soul cannot be said to be in one place more than another, except as it is occupied with material objects. It can attend to one thing only at once, and therefore when in, it cannot be out of the body, and must be wherever occupied, but not in anyplace, except concerned with material objects. The infinite Spirit had no connexion with space in all the eternity which preceded creation; since time began as every thing is known and supported by him, he is said to be in all places. But the idea of place is not necessary to our conceptions of Spirit.To speak of the planets as the residence of spirits, and to talk of souls flying through thevisibleHeavens in quest of paradise is idle. If all souls must ascend to Heaven, from India they go in a direction opposite to our course thither.There is no sun nor moon enjoyed by saints in glory; the Lord is their light. And spiritual bodies are not flesh and blood, nor belly, nor meats; nor corruptible nor mortal; but fit for the society of spirits. The soul at death is discharged from the prison of these bodies, and not confined to place. It receives new faculties, which entertain it with more than substitutes for the sensations it had in the body; it obtains a perception of light more vivid than in dreams, and permanent. It enjoys the discernment, society, and communion of other Spirits; the presence of God and the Redeemer; and progresses in the knowledge and love of God, and so in holiness and happiness forever.
124.The belief of a separate state is very ancient. Cicero and Seneca have asserted, that all nations believed the immortality of the soul. Yet we know there were not only individuals, but sects who were exceptions. Saul the first king of Israel believed that the soul survived the death of the body, or he would neither have made laws against necromancers, nor have applied to one in his distresses. If Samuel was raised, it is a fact, directly in point, but the words though express, are probably an accommodation to the sentiments of men. The son of Sirach who lived two hundred years before Christ, says that Samuel prophesied after he was dead. (Ecclus. c. 46. v. 20.) And Josephus in his account of the life of Saul, shows his belief to be that Samuel actually arose. The same feats of apparitions which the disciples had, still exist with the common people, and are proofs that they entertain the same sentiment.
Some of the Pharisees, who are represented as believing a separate state, thought souls might return to other bodies. This was the opinion of Josephus with respect to the virtuous; and also of those Jews, who supposed that Jesus was Elijah or Jeremiah; but the question of the disciples, whether a man had been born blind for his own sins, implies a possibility of a return also of the wicked into other bodies. Nevertheless the prevailing opinion of the Pharisees was of a separate state; otherwise Paul’s professing their sentiments, which must have been known to him, was disingenuous; nor, if they had known the difference, would they have protected him. The approbation of the multitude when he proved the doctrine from the words of Jehovah to Moses at the bush, (Matt. xxii. 32.) and the parable of Lazarus and the rich man, evince that the common opinion was such.
This subject, has been enlightened, not first brought to light, through the Gospel, but plainly asserted:this day shalt thou be with me in paradise. At home in the body, and absent from the Lord, absent from the body, and present with the Lord, is descriptive but of two states. The desireto depart to be with Christ, shows an immediate expectation. And otherwise it cannot be said that the spirits of just men aremade perfect.
The Jews, Greeks, and Romans assigned the Heaven to the gods, earth to men, and under the earth (ש×ול, αδης, inferi) to the dead. The passages “the spirit shall return to God,†and “the spirit of a man goeth upwards†are not exceptions, for then they would prove that the evil, as well as the good, went to heaven. That the spirit is disposed of by God, and that the spirit of a man survives the death of the body, seem to be all that is respectively implied. Samuel was believed to come out of, and return to his place under the earth; and Saul was to be with him, below the earth; but, possibly, in a different apartment. Thus Abraham and Lazarus were in sight of, and only divided from the man in torments by a gulph.
Under the gospel the place of separate saints is represented to be in Heaven. Heaven had been always assigned to God among the Jews, and even the heathens thought it the most honourable place: Virgil assigned it to Cæsar. Jesus declared he came from thence, and would return thither; and for the comfort of his disciples, told them, he would prepare a place for them, and take them to himself. They saw him actually ascend. He is to come from thence, and to bring them with him to judgment.
This change of representation implies no contradiction, for pure spirits are not confined to place. Our souls are connected with our bodies, and therefore go and come with, or rather in them. But when the connexion is broken, the soul cannot be said to be in one place more than another, except as it is occupied with material objects. It can attend to one thing only at once, and therefore when in, it cannot be out of the body, and must be wherever occupied, but not in anyplace, except concerned with material objects. The infinite Spirit had no connexion with space in all the eternity which preceded creation; since time began as every thing is known and supported by him, he is said to be in all places. But the idea of place is not necessary to our conceptions of Spirit.
To speak of the planets as the residence of spirits, and to talk of souls flying through thevisibleHeavens in quest of paradise is idle. If all souls must ascend to Heaven, from India they go in a direction opposite to our course thither.
There is no sun nor moon enjoyed by saints in glory; the Lord is their light. And spiritual bodies are not flesh and blood, nor belly, nor meats; nor corruptible nor mortal; but fit for the society of spirits. The soul at death is discharged from the prison of these bodies, and not confined to place. It receives new faculties, which entertain it with more than substitutes for the sensations it had in the body; it obtains a perception of light more vivid than in dreams, and permanent. It enjoys the discernment, society, and communion of other Spirits; the presence of God and the Redeemer; and progresses in the knowledge and love of God, and so in holiness and happiness forever.
125.Vid. Senec. Epist. 117. Cum de animarum immortalitate loquimur, non leve momentum apud nos habet consensus hominum, aut timentium inferos, aut colentium. Utor hac persuasione publica. Et. Cic. Tusc. Quest. Lib. 1. permanere animos arbitramur consensu nationum omnium; qua in sede maneant, qualesque sint ratione discendum est.
125.Vid. Senec. Epist. 117. Cum de animarum immortalitate loquimur, non leve momentum apud nos habet consensus hominum, aut timentium inferos, aut colentium. Utor hac persuasione publica. Et. Cic. Tusc. Quest. Lib. 1. permanere animos arbitramur consensu nationum omnium; qua in sede maneant, qualesque sint ratione discendum est.
126.In Phæd.
126.In Phæd.
127.Vid. Alcin. de doct. Plat. Cap.xxv. Αυτοκινητον δε φησι την ψυχην· οτι συμφυτου εχει τηυ ζωηυ, αει ενεÏγσσαν καθ αυτην.
127.Vid. Alcin. de doct. Plat. Cap.xxv. Αυτοκινητον δε φησι την ψυχην· οτι συμφυτου εχει τηυ ζωηυ, αει ενεÏγσσαν καθ αυτην.
128.Vid. Strab. Geog. Lib.xv. ΠαÏαπλεκσι δε και μυθους, Ï‰ÏƒÏ€ÎµÏ ÎºÎ±Î¹ πλατωγ πεÏι τε αφθαÏσιας ψυχης, και τωγ καθ᾽ αδη χÏισεων, και αλλα τοιαυτα, πεÏι μεγ τωγ βÏαχμαναν ταυτα λεγει.
128.Vid. Strab. Geog. Lib.xv. ΠαÏαπλεκσι δε και μυθους, Ï‰ÏƒÏ€ÎµÏ ÎºÎ±Î¹ πλατωγ πεÏι τε αφθαÏσιας ψυχης, και τωγ καθ᾽ αδη χÏισεων, και αλλα τοιαυτα, πεÏι μεγ τωγ βÏαχμαναν ταυτα λεγει.
129.Vid. Diog. Laert. in Vit. Thal.
129.Vid. Diog. Laert. in Vit. Thal.
130.Vid. Cic. Tusc. Quæst. Lib. 1.
130.Vid. Cic. Tusc. Quæst. Lib. 1.
131.Vid, Hom. Iliad. 23.lin. 65. & seq.Ήλθε δ᾽ επι ψυχη ΠατÏοκληος δειλοιο,Παντ᾽ αυτω μεγεθος τε και ομματα καλ᾽ εικυια,Και φωνην. και τοια Ï€Ïι χÏοι ειματα εστο.Στη δ᾽ αÏá¾½ á½‘Ï€ÎµÏ ÎºÎµÏ†Î±Î»Î·Ï‚, και μεν Ï€Ïος μυθον ἑειπεν.In which, after he had killed Hector, he addresses himself to his friend Patroclus, signifying that he had done this to revenge his death; upon which, the poet brings in Patroclus as appearing to him.
131.Vid, Hom. Iliad. 23.lin. 65. & seq.
Ήλθε δ᾽ επι ψυχη ΠατÏοκληος δειλοιο,Παντ᾽ αυτω μεγεθος τε και ομματα καλ᾽ εικυια,Και φωνην. και τοια Ï€Ïι χÏοι ειματα εστο.Στη δ᾽ αÏá¾½ á½‘Ï€ÎµÏ ÎºÎµÏ†Î±Î»Î·Ï‚, και μεν Ï€Ïος μυθον ἑειπεν.
Ήλθε δ᾽ επι ψυχη ΠατÏοκληος δειλοιο,Παντ᾽ αυτω μεγεθος τε και ομματα καλ᾽ εικυια,Και φωνην. και τοια Ï€Ïι χÏοι ειματα εστο.Στη δ᾽ αÏá¾½ á½‘Ï€ÎµÏ ÎºÎµÏ†Î±Î»Î·Ï‚, και μεν Ï€Ïος μυθον ἑειπεν.
Ήλθε δ᾽ επι ψυχη ΠατÏοκληος δειλοιο,Παντ᾽ αυτω μεγεθος τε και ομματα καλ᾽ εικυια,Και φωνην. και τοια Ï€Ïι χÏοι ειματα εστο.Στη δ᾽ αÏá¾½ á½‘Ï€ÎµÏ ÎºÎµÏ†Î±Î»Î·Ï‚, και μεν Ï€Ïος μυθον ἑειπεν.
Ήλθε δ᾽ επι ψυχη ΠατÏοκληος δειλοιο,
Παντ᾽ αυτω μεγεθος τε και ομματα καλ᾽ εικυια,
Και φωνην. και τοια Ï€Ïι χÏοι ειματα εστο.
Στη δ᾽ αÏá¾½ á½‘Ï€ÎµÏ ÎºÎµÏ†Î±Î»Î·Ï‚, και μεν Ï€Ïος μυθον ἑειπεν.
In which, after he had killed Hector, he addresses himself to his friend Patroclus, signifying that he had done this to revenge his death; upon which, the poet brings in Patroclus as appearing to him.
132.Vid. Odys. Lib.xi.lin. 575.& seq.in which he speaks of the punishment of Tityus and Tantalus. In this, as well as many other things, he is imitated by Virgil. See Æneid. Lib.vi.lin. 595, & seq.
132.Vid. Odys. Lib.xi.lin. 575.& seq.in which he speaks of the punishment of Tityus and Tantalus. In this, as well as many other things, he is imitated by Virgil. See Æneid. Lib.vi.lin. 595, & seq.
133.See this argument managed with a great deal of learning and judgment by Mede, in his apostasy of the latter times, who proves that the gods whom the heathens worshipped, were the souls of men deifyed or cannonized after death, from many of their own writers, chap.iv.and Voss. de orig. &c. idol. Lib. 1. cap.xi, xii, xiii.who refers to Lanct. Lib. 1. de fals. Relig. cap.v.his words are these; Quos imperiti, & insipientes, tanquam Deos & nuncupant, & adorant, nemo est tam inconsideratus, qui non intelligat fuisse mortales. Quomodo ergo, inquiet aliquis, Dii crediti sunt? Nimirum quia reges maximi, ac potentissimi fuerunt, ob merita virtutum suarum, aut munerum, aut artium repertarum, cum chari fuissent iis, quibus imperitaverunt, in memoriam sunt consecrati. Quod si quis dubitet, res eorum gestas, & facta, consideret: quæ universa tum poetæ, tum historici veteres, prodiderunt. Et August. de Civ. Dei, Lib.viii.cap.v.Ipsi etium majorum gentium Dii, quos Cicero in Tusculanis, tacitis nominibus videtur attingere, Jupiter, Juno, Saturnus, Vulcanus, Vesta, & alii plurimi, quos Varro conatur ad mundi partes, sive elementa transferre homines fuisse produntur. Et Cic. Lib. 1. de nat. Deor. Quid, qui aut fortes, aut potentes viros tradunt post mortem ad Deos pervenisse; eosq; ipsos quos, nos colere, precari, venerariq; soleamus?
133.See this argument managed with a great deal of learning and judgment by Mede, in his apostasy of the latter times, who proves that the gods whom the heathens worshipped, were the souls of men deifyed or cannonized after death, from many of their own writers, chap.iv.and Voss. de orig. &c. idol. Lib. 1. cap.xi, xii, xiii.who refers to Lanct. Lib. 1. de fals. Relig. cap.v.his words are these; Quos imperiti, & insipientes, tanquam Deos & nuncupant, & adorant, nemo est tam inconsideratus, qui non intelligat fuisse mortales. Quomodo ergo, inquiet aliquis, Dii crediti sunt? Nimirum quia reges maximi, ac potentissimi fuerunt, ob merita virtutum suarum, aut munerum, aut artium repertarum, cum chari fuissent iis, quibus imperitaverunt, in memoriam sunt consecrati. Quod si quis dubitet, res eorum gestas, & facta, consideret: quæ universa tum poetæ, tum historici veteres, prodiderunt. Et August. de Civ. Dei, Lib.viii.cap.v.Ipsi etium majorum gentium Dii, quos Cicero in Tusculanis, tacitis nominibus videtur attingere, Jupiter, Juno, Saturnus, Vulcanus, Vesta, & alii plurimi, quos Varro conatur ad mundi partes, sive elementa transferre homines fuisse produntur. Et Cic. Lib. 1. de nat. Deor. Quid, qui aut fortes, aut potentes viros tradunt post mortem ad Deos pervenisse; eosq; ipsos quos, nos colere, precari, venerariq; soleamus?
134.Some have wondered how the Sadducees could deny angels, and yet receive the five books of Moses, in which there is so frequent mention of the appearance of angels; and it might as well be wondered how they could make any pretensions to religion, who denyed the immortality of the soul; but as to both these, it may be said concerning them, that they were the most irreligious part of the Jewish nation. To make them consistent with themselves, is past the skill of any who treat on this subject. Some suppose that they understand all those scriptures that speak concerning the appearance of angels, as importing nothing else but a bodily shape, appearing for a time, and conversing with those to whom it was sent, moved and actuated by the divine power, and then disappearing and vanishing into nothing.
134.Some have wondered how the Sadducees could deny angels, and yet receive the five books of Moses, in which there is so frequent mention of the appearance of angels; and it might as well be wondered how they could make any pretensions to religion, who denyed the immortality of the soul; but as to both these, it may be said concerning them, that they were the most irreligious part of the Jewish nation. To make them consistent with themselves, is past the skill of any who treat on this subject. Some suppose that they understand all those scriptures that speak concerning the appearance of angels, as importing nothing else but a bodily shape, appearing for a time, and conversing with those to whom it was sent, moved and actuated by the divine power, and then disappearing and vanishing into nothing.
135.In Phæd.
135.In Phæd.
136.His words are these; Κεβης δε μοι εδοξε τουτο μεν εμοι ξυν χωÏειν, πολυχÏονιωτεÏον γε ειναι Ψυχην σωματος᾽ αλλα τοδε αδηλον παντι, μη πολλα δη σωματα και πολλακις κατατÏιψασα η ψυχη, το τελευταιον, σωμα καταλεπουσα νυν αυτη απολλυνται και η αυτο τουτο θανατος, ψυχης ολεθÏος επει σωμα γ εξει απολλυμενον ουδεν παυεται.
136.His words are these; Κεβης δε μοι εδοξε τουτο μεν εμοι ξυν χωÏειν, πολυχÏονιωτεÏον γε ειναι Ψυχην σωματος᾽ αλλα τοδε αδηλον παντι, μη πολλα δη σωματα και πολλακις κατατÏιψασα η ψυχη, το τελευταιον, σωμα καταλεπουσα νυν αυτη απολλυνται και η αυτο τουτο θανατος, ψυχης ολεθÏος επει σωμα γ εξει απολλυμενον ουδεν παυεται.
137.ὉποιεÏοι δε ημων εÏχονται επι αμεινον Ï€Ïαγμα, αδηλον παντι πλην η τω θεω.
137.ὉποιεÏοι δε ημων εÏχονται επι αμεινον Ï€Ïαγμα, αδηλον παντι πλην η τω θεω.
138.Vid. ejusd. moral. Lib.iii.cap.ix.
138.Vid. ejusd. moral. Lib.iii.cap.ix.
139.Vid. Diog. Laert. in Vit. Zen.Την ψυχην μετα θανατον επιμενειν, φθαÏτον δε ειναι;upon which occasion Cicero says, That though they assert that they shall continue a great while in being, yet they deny that they shall exist for ever. Vid. ejusd. in Tusc. Quæst. Lib. 1. Stoici usuram nobis largiuntur, tanquam cornicibus; diu mansuros animos ajunt; semper negant.
139.Vid. Diog. Laert. in Vit. Zen.Την ψυχην μετα θανατον επιμενειν, φθαÏτον δε ειναι;upon which occasion Cicero says, That though they assert that they shall continue a great while in being, yet they deny that they shall exist for ever. Vid. ejusd. in Tusc. Quæst. Lib. 1. Stoici usuram nobis largiuntur, tanquam cornicibus; diu mansuros animos ajunt; semper negant.
140.Et ibid. Ea quæ vis, ut potero, explicabo, nec tamen quasi Pythius Apollo certa ut sint, & fixa quæ dixero, sed ut homunculus unus e multis, probabilia conjectura sequens; ultra enim quo progrediar quam ut verisimilia videam, non habeo; which Lactantius observes, speaking of him as in doubt about it. Vid. Lactant. de Vit. Beat. Lib.vii.§ 8. And elsewhere he says, in Lib. de Amicitia. Sin autem illa vetiora, ut idem interitus sit animorum, & corporum, nec ullus sensus maneat: Ut nihil boni est in morte, sic certe nihil est mali; & in Lib. de Senect. Quod si in hoc erro, quod animos hominum immortales esse credam, libenter erro: Nec mihi hunc errorem, quo delector, dum vivo, extorqueri volo. Sin mortuus, ut quidam minuti philosophi censent, nihil sentiam; non vereor, ne hunc errorem meum philosophi minuti irrideant: Quod si non sumus immortales futuri, tamen extingui hominem suo tempore, optabile est.
140.Et ibid. Ea quæ vis, ut potero, explicabo, nec tamen quasi Pythius Apollo certa ut sint, & fixa quæ dixero, sed ut homunculus unus e multis, probabilia conjectura sequens; ultra enim quo progrediar quam ut verisimilia videam, non habeo; which Lactantius observes, speaking of him as in doubt about it. Vid. Lactant. de Vit. Beat. Lib.vii.§ 8. And elsewhere he says, in Lib. de Amicitia. Sin autem illa vetiora, ut idem interitus sit animorum, & corporum, nec ullus sensus maneat: Ut nihil boni est in morte, sic certe nihil est mali; & in Lib. de Senect. Quod si in hoc erro, quod animos hominum immortales esse credam, libenter erro: Nec mihi hunc errorem, quo delector, dum vivo, extorqueri volo. Sin mortuus, ut quidam minuti philosophi censent, nihil sentiam; non vereor, ne hunc errorem meum philosophi minuti irrideant: Quod si non sumus immortales futuri, tamen extingui hominem suo tempore, optabile est.
141.Epist. 102. Credebam opinionibus magnorum virorum rem gratissimam promittentium, magis quam probantium.
141.Epist. 102. Credebam opinionibus magnorum virorum rem gratissimam promittentium, magis quam probantium.
142.See Quest.lxxxviii,lxxxix.
142.See Quest.lxxxviii,lxxxix.
143.The doctrines of the immortality of the soul, and of the resurrection of the body equally rest upon the will and word of God. But when viewed with the eye of natural reason, they have been deemed to possess very unequal grounds of probability. The properties of matter and of mind are so very different, they have been distinguished by almost all. If the mind be not matter, no argument for its extermination can be drawn from the dissolution of the body; and as its materiality has never been shown, no premises have been found from which its death can be inferred. Some wise men who had not the scriptures, have indeed withholden their belief; but the reason is discernible, they have demanded proofs which the God of nature has not vouchsafed; and their rejection of the preponderating evidence of probability, argues weakness and fastidiousness.The resurrection of the body has been held to be impossible. If so, the impossibility should either consist in the absolute incapacity in the dead body to be raised; but this it does not, for death can only reduce the body to its first element, and the dust which has been a body is not any more unfit to be reanimated, than it was to receive life in the first instance; or it must be owing to some detect of wisdom or power, or of both in him, who should raise the body; but God is unchangeable, and in all respects as able to raise him from the dead, as to create man at the first; and there is no contradiction implied in the thing, which should prevent the exertion of his power; a resurrection is therefore possible.The usual arguments for its probability drawn from analogy to the return of day, of spring, of vegetation, &c. are not conclusive. But those drawn from the resurrection of Christ, from the identity of man considered as a compound from the removal of moral evil, from which natural evils arise, from the earnest expectation of animal nature for a better condition, and from the perfection of the future state, seem to raise a presumption which is probable; yet these are not appreciated by the natural man; hence the world has so generally denied a resurrection of the body.The testimony of the Holy Spirit on both points has been always the same, but not with equal lustre.Jesus Christ explicitly affirmed both, and brought his proofs from the old testament, pressed them as motives of comfort or terror to saints and sinners, and so connected their truth with that of his own character, that every thing which proves the latter, is a proof of the former. Not only did his actually raising the dead, and arising himself, prove that the dead shall rise, but every prophecy accomplished in him, and every miracle wrought by him and his apostles, the continuance of his church, the purity of his system of doctrines, the doctrines of election, redemption, justification, regeneration and perseverance, as well as the express declarations on this subject, both in the old and new testament, all form a solid mass of evidence upon which the hopes of the Christian may firmly rest.
143.The doctrines of the immortality of the soul, and of the resurrection of the body equally rest upon the will and word of God. But when viewed with the eye of natural reason, they have been deemed to possess very unequal grounds of probability. The properties of matter and of mind are so very different, they have been distinguished by almost all. If the mind be not matter, no argument for its extermination can be drawn from the dissolution of the body; and as its materiality has never been shown, no premises have been found from which its death can be inferred. Some wise men who had not the scriptures, have indeed withholden their belief; but the reason is discernible, they have demanded proofs which the God of nature has not vouchsafed; and their rejection of the preponderating evidence of probability, argues weakness and fastidiousness.
The resurrection of the body has been held to be impossible. If so, the impossibility should either consist in the absolute incapacity in the dead body to be raised; but this it does not, for death can only reduce the body to its first element, and the dust which has been a body is not any more unfit to be reanimated, than it was to receive life in the first instance; or it must be owing to some detect of wisdom or power, or of both in him, who should raise the body; but God is unchangeable, and in all respects as able to raise him from the dead, as to create man at the first; and there is no contradiction implied in the thing, which should prevent the exertion of his power; a resurrection is therefore possible.
The usual arguments for its probability drawn from analogy to the return of day, of spring, of vegetation, &c. are not conclusive. But those drawn from the resurrection of Christ, from the identity of man considered as a compound from the removal of moral evil, from which natural evils arise, from the earnest expectation of animal nature for a better condition, and from the perfection of the future state, seem to raise a presumption which is probable; yet these are not appreciated by the natural man; hence the world has so generally denied a resurrection of the body.
The testimony of the Holy Spirit on both points has been always the same, but not with equal lustre.
Jesus Christ explicitly affirmed both, and brought his proofs from the old testament, pressed them as motives of comfort or terror to saints and sinners, and so connected their truth with that of his own character, that every thing which proves the latter, is a proof of the former. Not only did his actually raising the dead, and arising himself, prove that the dead shall rise, but every prophecy accomplished in him, and every miracle wrought by him and his apostles, the continuance of his church, the purity of his system of doctrines, the doctrines of election, redemption, justification, regeneration and perseverance, as well as the express declarations on this subject, both in the old and new testament, all form a solid mass of evidence upon which the hopes of the Christian may firmly rest.
144.See Quest.xc.
144.See Quest.xc.
145.See Dr. Edward’s exercit. Part II. on 1 Cor.iii.15. who, to give countenance to this opinion, produces two scriptures, viz. Markxiv.54. and Lukexxii.56. where the wordφως,is put for fire; from whence he supposes, thatφωςandπυÏ,are used promiscuously.
145.See Dr. Edward’s exercit. Part II. on 1 Cor.iii.15. who, to give countenance to this opinion, produces two scriptures, viz. Markxiv.54. and Lukexxii.56. where the wordφως,is put for fire; from whence he supposes, thatφωςandπυÏ,are used promiscuously.
146.Κολπος. Sinus,a bosom, coast, or haven.
146.Κολπος. Sinus,a bosom, coast, or haven.
147.Vid. Tertull. Apologet. Cap.xlvii.Et si paradisum nominemus, locum divinæ amænitatis recipiendis sanctorum spiritibus destinatum, materia quadem igneæ illius Zonæ segregatum.
147.Vid. Tertull. Apologet. Cap.xlvii.Et si paradisum nominemus, locum divinæ amænitatis recipiendis sanctorum spiritibus destinatum, materia quadem igneæ illius Zonæ segregatum.
148.See Whitby in loc.
148.See Whitby in loc.
149.See also his notes on Lukexxiii. 43.
149.See also his notes on Lukexxiii. 43.
150.Vid. Hoornbeck Socin. Confut. Tom. III. Lib.v.Cap. 1. who quotes some passages out of several Socinian writers, among whom I shall only mention what is said by two of them, with whom several others of their brethren agree herein. Vid. Socin. in Epist.v.ad Volkel. Tantum id mihi videtur statui posse, post hanc vitam, animam, sive animum hominis non ita per se subsistere ut præmia ulla pænasve sentiat; vel etiam ista sentiendi sit capax, quæ mea firma opinio facile potest colligi ex multis quæ a me dicuntur, &c.Et Smalc. in Exam. Error. Pag. 33. Animam vel spiritum hominis post mortum aliquid sentire, vel aliqua re perfrui, nec ratio permittit nec scriptura testatur: ut enim corpus sine anima, sic etiam anima sine corpore, nullus operationes exercere potest; & perinde sic ac si anima illorum nulla esset, etiamæ suo modo sit, quia scilicet nullius rei sensum habeat, aut per se voluptate aliqua fræ possit. And elsewhere the same author is so hardy as to term the contrary doctrine no other than a fable, in Lib. de Dei filio, Cap.vi.Pag. 43. Quod vern de vita animarum disserit, hoc instar fabulæ est, &c.Spiritum hominis ad Deum redire testatur sacra scriptura, at eum vivera vita, ut ait Smiglecius, spirituum, & vel aliquid intelligere, vel voluptate frui hoc extra, & contra scripturam dicitur.
150.Vid. Hoornbeck Socin. Confut. Tom. III. Lib.v.Cap. 1. who quotes some passages out of several Socinian writers, among whom I shall only mention what is said by two of them, with whom several others of their brethren agree herein. Vid. Socin. in Epist.v.ad Volkel. Tantum id mihi videtur statui posse, post hanc vitam, animam, sive animum hominis non ita per se subsistere ut præmia ulla pænasve sentiat; vel etiam ista sentiendi sit capax, quæ mea firma opinio facile potest colligi ex multis quæ a me dicuntur, &c.Et Smalc. in Exam. Error. Pag. 33. Animam vel spiritum hominis post mortum aliquid sentire, vel aliqua re perfrui, nec ratio permittit nec scriptura testatur: ut enim corpus sine anima, sic etiam anima sine corpore, nullus operationes exercere potest; & perinde sic ac si anima illorum nulla esset, etiamæ suo modo sit, quia scilicet nullius rei sensum habeat, aut per se voluptate aliqua fræ possit. And elsewhere the same author is so hardy as to term the contrary doctrine no other than a fable, in Lib. de Dei filio, Cap.vi.Pag. 43. Quod vern de vita animarum disserit, hoc instar fabulæ est, &c.Spiritum hominis ad Deum redire testatur sacra scriptura, at eum vivera vita, ut ait Smiglecius, spirituum, & vel aliquid intelligere, vel voluptate frui hoc extra, & contra scripturam dicitur.
151.See Locke’s Essay concerning human understanding, Lib.ii.Chap. 1.§ ix.to thexix.
151.See Locke’s Essay concerning human understanding, Lib.ii.Chap. 1.§ ix.to thexix.
152.Quest.lxxxix.
152.Quest.lxxxix.
153.“By affirming, that the grain produced from the seed sown, is not the very body which is sown, the apostle I think insinuates, that the body to be raised is not numerically the same with the body deposited at death, but something of the same kind formed by the energy of God. Having such an example of the divine power before our eyes, we cannot think the reproduction of the body impossible, though its parts be utterly dissipated. Farther, although the very numerical body is not raised, yet the body is truly raised, because what is raised, being united to the soul, there will arise in the man thus completed, a consciousness of his identity, by which he will be sensible of the justice of the retribution which is made to him for his deeds. Besides, this new body, will more than supply the place of the old, by serving every purpose necessary to the perfection and happiness of the man in his new state. According to this view of the subject, the objection taken from the scattering of the particles of the body that dies, has no place; because it does not seem necessary, that the body to be raised, should be composed of them. For the scripture no where affirms, that the same numerical body is to be raised. What it teaches is; that the dead shall be raised.â€Dr. Macknight.
153.“By affirming, that the grain produced from the seed sown, is not the very body which is sown, the apostle I think insinuates, that the body to be raised is not numerically the same with the body deposited at death, but something of the same kind formed by the energy of God. Having such an example of the divine power before our eyes, we cannot think the reproduction of the body impossible, though its parts be utterly dissipated. Farther, although the very numerical body is not raised, yet the body is truly raised, because what is raised, being united to the soul, there will arise in the man thus completed, a consciousness of his identity, by which he will be sensible of the justice of the retribution which is made to him for his deeds. Besides, this new body, will more than supply the place of the old, by serving every purpose necessary to the perfection and happiness of the man in his new state. According to this view of the subject, the objection taken from the scattering of the particles of the body that dies, has no place; because it does not seem necessary, that the body to be raised, should be composed of them. For the scripture no where affirms, that the same numerical body is to be raised. What it teaches is; that the dead shall be raised.â€
Dr. Macknight.
154.This is reported in a very fabulous manner, and is reckoned no more than an idle tale by Pliny, who mentions it among other stories of the like nature. Vid. Plin. Nat. Hist. Lib.vii.Cap.lii.Animam Aristæi etiam visam evolentem ex ore, in Proconneso, corvi effigie, magna quæ sequitur fabulositate. This is also mentioned as a fable by Origen.Vid. Origin. Lib.iii.Contr. Cels.
154.This is reported in a very fabulous manner, and is reckoned no more than an idle tale by Pliny, who mentions it among other stories of the like nature. Vid. Plin. Nat. Hist. Lib.vii.Cap.lii.Animam Aristæi etiam visam evolentem ex ore, in Proconneso, corvi effigie, magna quæ sequitur fabulositate. This is also mentioned as a fable by Origen.Vid. Origin. Lib.iii.Contr. Cels.
155.Vid. Plin. Nat. Hist. Cap.lii.Reperimus inter exempla Hermotimi Clazomenii animam relicto corpore, errare solitam, vagamq; e loginquo multa annunciare, quæ nisi a præsenti nosci non possent; but by the following words he speaks of him as not dead, but in a kind of deliquium; corpore interim semianimi; but yet it was given out by many, that he died and rose again very often. This Lucian himself laughs at as a foolish tale. Vid. Lucian. Enc. Musc.
155.Vid. Plin. Nat. Hist. Cap.lii.Reperimus inter exempla Hermotimi Clazomenii animam relicto corpore, errare solitam, vagamq; e loginquo multa annunciare, quæ nisi a præsenti nosci non possent; but by the following words he speaks of him as not dead, but in a kind of deliquium; corpore interim semianimi; but yet it was given out by many, that he died and rose again very often. This Lucian himself laughs at as a foolish tale. Vid. Lucian. Enc. Musc.
156.Vid. Plat. de Repub. Lib.x.
156.Vid. Plat. de Repub. Lib.x.
157.Vid. Euseb. Præparat. Evang. Lib.xi.Cap.xxxv.It is mentioned by Plutarch, Symp. Lib.ix.Cap.v.
157.Vid. Euseb. Præparat. Evang. Lib.xi.Cap.xxxv.It is mentioned by Plutarch, Symp. Lib.ix.Cap.v.
158.Macrobius speaking concerning it, in Somn. Scip. Lib. 1. Cap. 1. represents Cicero as being under a great concern, that this story of Er was ridiculed, by many who did not stick to say, Visum fuisse Erem, vitam effundere, animamq; recipere, quam revera non amiserat. See more to this purpose in Hust. Demonst. Evang. Prop.ix.Cap.cxlii.
158.Macrobius speaking concerning it, in Somn. Scip. Lib. 1. Cap. 1. represents Cicero as being under a great concern, that this story of Er was ridiculed, by many who did not stick to say, Visum fuisse Erem, vitam effundere, animamq; recipere, quam revera non amiserat. See more to this purpose in Hust. Demonst. Evang. Prop.ix.Cap.cxlii.
159.See a late learned writer, Hody on the resurrection of the same body; who refers to several places in Heathen writers, of whom some believed it; others exposed it as fabulous, Pag. 13-16.
159.See a late learned writer, Hody on the resurrection of the same body; who refers to several places in Heathen writers, of whom some believed it; others exposed it as fabulous, Pag. 13-16.
160.Thus Pliny, who a little before related several stories of persons raised from the dead, notwithstanding calls the doctrine of the resurrection, puerile deliramentum.Vid. Ejusd. Nat. Hist. Lib.vii.Cap.lv.and elsewhere he speaks of it as a thing in its own nature impossible; and therefore concludes it to be one of those things which God cannot do. Lib.ii.Cap.vii.Ne Deum quidem posse omnia, nec mortales æternitate donare, aut revocare defunctos. And Minutius Felix. Vid. Ejusd. Octav. Cap.xi.brings in an Heathen, who was his friend, railing at it, without any decency, as though it was no better than an old wives fable; and the principal argument he produces, is, because he supposes it impossible for a body that was burnt to ashes, to spring up into life again. And Celsus, speaking concerning the impossibility of God’s doing any thing contrary to nature, reckons this among those things. Vid. Orig. Contr. Cels. Lib.v.Page 240. and says, the hope hereof is more worthy of worms than men and styles it an abominable, as well as an impossible thing, which God neither can nor will do.
160.Thus Pliny, who a little before related several stories of persons raised from the dead, notwithstanding calls the doctrine of the resurrection, puerile deliramentum.Vid. Ejusd. Nat. Hist. Lib.vii.Cap.lv.and elsewhere he speaks of it as a thing in its own nature impossible; and therefore concludes it to be one of those things which God cannot do. Lib.ii.Cap.vii.Ne Deum quidem posse omnia, nec mortales æternitate donare, aut revocare defunctos. And Minutius Felix. Vid. Ejusd. Octav. Cap.xi.brings in an Heathen, who was his friend, railing at it, without any decency, as though it was no better than an old wives fable; and the principal argument he produces, is, because he supposes it impossible for a body that was burnt to ashes, to spring up into life again. And Celsus, speaking concerning the impossibility of God’s doing any thing contrary to nature, reckons this among those things. Vid. Orig. Contr. Cels. Lib.v.Page 240. and says, the hope hereof is more worthy of worms than men and styles it an abominable, as well as an impossible thing, which God neither can nor will do.
161.Αναστασις.
161.Αναστασις.
162.Vid. Volkel. de vera relig. Lib.iii.Cap.xi.Apparet promissionem vitæ sempiternæ in prisco illo foedere factam minime fuisse. And in a following part of this chapter, wherein he professedly treats on this subject, he adds; Quæ apertis luculentissimisq; verbis ut in nova scriptura fieri videamus, hoc Dei beneficium nobis polliceantur. Ex quorum munere, hoc de quo agimus, nequaquam esse hinc patet, quod antequam Christus illud explicaret, nemo unquam extitit, qui vel suspicari auderet, tale quid illo comprehendi.
162.Vid. Volkel. de vera relig. Lib.iii.Cap.xi.Apparet promissionem vitæ sempiternæ in prisco illo foedere factam minime fuisse. And in a following part of this chapter, wherein he professedly treats on this subject, he adds; Quæ apertis luculentissimisq; verbis ut in nova scriptura fieri videamus, hoc Dei beneficium nobis polliceantur. Ex quorum munere, hoc de quo agimus, nequaquam esse hinc patet, quod antequam Christus illud explicaret, nemo unquam extitit, qui vel suspicari auderet, tale quid illo comprehendi.
163.Vid. Joseph. de Bell. Jud. Lib.ii.Cap.vii. Και Î³Î±Ï ÎµÏÏωτσαι Ï€Î±Ï Î±Ï…Ï„Î¿Î¹Ï‚ ηδε διξα φθαÏτα μεν εναι τα σωματα, και τήν υλὴγ ου μονιμον αυτοις, &c.
163.Vid. Joseph. de Bell. Jud. Lib.ii.Cap.vii. Και Î³Î±Ï ÎµÏÏωτσαι Ï€Î±Ï Î±Ï…Ï„Î¿Î¹Ï‚ ηδε διξα φθαÏτα μεν εναι τα σωματα, και τήν υλὴγ ου μονιμον αυτοις, &c.
164.See Dr. Hody on the resurrection, &c. Page 56-59.
164.See Dr. Hody on the resurrection, &c. Page 56-59.
165.See Bishop Pearson on the Creed, Artic. 11. who observes, from their writings, that because, in the formation of man, mentioned inGen. ii. 7.Moses uses the wordוייצר,and in the formation of beasts, verse 19. the wordויצר,the former having twojods,the latter but one: Therefore the beasts are made but once, but man twice; to wit, once in his generation, and the second time in his resurrection. And they strangely apprehend a proof of the resurrection to be contained in the malediction, Gen. iii. 19. Dust thou art, and unto dust thou shalt return,q. d. thou art now dust while thou livest; and, after death, thou shalt return unto this dust, that is, thou shalt live again, as thou, dost now: And those words inExod. xv. 1. then sang Moses and the children of Israel;they renderhe shall sing,viz. after the resurrection in the life to come, and from thence infer this doctrine, which could afford but very small satisfaction to the Sadducees, while they omitted to insist on other pregnant proofs thereof.
165.See Bishop Pearson on the Creed, Artic. 11. who observes, from their writings, that because, in the formation of man, mentioned inGen. ii. 7.Moses uses the wordוייצר,and in the formation of beasts, verse 19. the wordויצר,the former having twojods,the latter but one: Therefore the beasts are made but once, but man twice; to wit, once in his generation, and the second time in his resurrection. And they strangely apprehend a proof of the resurrection to be contained in the malediction, Gen. iii. 19. Dust thou art, and unto dust thou shalt return,q. d. thou art now dust while thou livest; and, after death, thou shalt return unto this dust, that is, thou shalt live again, as thou, dost now: And those words inExod. xv. 1. then sang Moses and the children of Israel;they renderhe shall sing,viz. after the resurrection in the life to come, and from thence infer this doctrine, which could afford but very small satisfaction to the Sadducees, while they omitted to insist on other pregnant proofs thereof.
166.See Vol. II. Heb. and Talmud. Exercit. onJohn iv. 25.wherein he says, that they pretend to prove it fromDeut. xxxi. 16.where God says to Moses, Thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, and rise again;which is an addition to, as well as a perversion of the text; which says, the people shall rise up and go a whoring,&c. and Page 541, and 787. he represents them as proving it fromJosh. viii 30.where it is said, that Joshuabuilt an altar unto the Lord;which they translate, he shall build an altar;supposing this to be after the resurrection: And fromPsal. lxxxiv. 4. Blessed are they that dwell in thy house, they will be still praising thee,they suppose is meant of their praising God after the resurrection. See many other absurd methods of reasoning to the same purpose, referred to by him in the same place.
166.See Vol. II. Heb. and Talmud. Exercit. onJohn iv. 25.wherein he says, that they pretend to prove it fromDeut. xxxi. 16.where God says to Moses, Thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, and rise again;which is an addition to, as well as a perversion of the text; which says, the people shall rise up and go a whoring,&c. and Page 541, and 787. he represents them as proving it fromJosh. viii 30.where it is said, that Joshuabuilt an altar unto the Lord;which they translate, he shall build an altar;supposing this to be after the resurrection: And fromPsal. lxxxiv. 4. Blessed are they that dwell in thy house, they will be still praising thee,they suppose is meant of their praising God after the resurrection. See many other absurd methods of reasoning to the same purpose, referred to by him in the same place.
167.Macab.vii. 9, 11, 14, 23, 29.
167.Macab.vii. 9, 11, 14, 23, 29.
168.Thus Josephus Jacchiades, referred to by Witsius in Symb. Exercit.xxvi. § 41.in explaining that famous text in Danielxii. 2.says, Et tunc fiet miraculum resurrectionis mortuorum: Nam multi dormientium in terra pulverulenta expergiscentur, hi ad vitam æternam, qui sunt sancti; illi vero ad opprobria & detestationem æternam; qui sunt impii. Quorum resurrectionis causa est, ut impii fateantur palam, suam fidem esse falsam, & eos qui ipsis fidem habuerint, prosecutos fuisse vanitatem atque evanuisse, ipsique agnoscant suos majores falsitatem possedisse. And Menasseh Ben Israel, de Resurr. mort. Lib.ii.Cap.viii.proves it from the same scripture. More to the same purpose may be seen in Dr. Hody on the resurrection, Page 72. &seq.who quotes several of the Talmudical writers, as signifying their belief of this doctrine; and especially Pocock in Maimon. Port. Mos. Cap.vi.who produces a multitude of quotations to the same purpose; in which some assert this doctrine without proof, others establish it by solid arguments, and some mix a great many absurd notions with it, which we shall, at present, pass over.
168.Thus Josephus Jacchiades, referred to by Witsius in Symb. Exercit.xxvi. § 41.in explaining that famous text in Danielxii. 2.says, Et tunc fiet miraculum resurrectionis mortuorum: Nam multi dormientium in terra pulverulenta expergiscentur, hi ad vitam æternam, qui sunt sancti; illi vero ad opprobria & detestationem æternam; qui sunt impii. Quorum resurrectionis causa est, ut impii fateantur palam, suam fidem esse falsam, & eos qui ipsis fidem habuerint, prosecutos fuisse vanitatem atque evanuisse, ipsique agnoscant suos majores falsitatem possedisse. And Menasseh Ben Israel, de Resurr. mort. Lib.ii.Cap.viii.proves it from the same scripture. More to the same purpose may be seen in Dr. Hody on the resurrection, Page 72. &seq.who quotes several of the Talmudical writers, as signifying their belief of this doctrine; and especially Pocock in Maimon. Port. Mos. Cap.vi.who produces a multitude of quotations to the same purpose; in which some assert this doctrine without proof, others establish it by solid arguments, and some mix a great many absurd notions with it, which we shall, at present, pass over.
169.Vid. Tertull. de Resurrect. Carn. Cap.xxx.Non posset de ossibus figura componi, si non id ipsum, & ossibus eventurum esset.
169.Vid. Tertull. de Resurrect. Carn. Cap.xxx.Non posset de ossibus figura componi, si non id ipsum, & ossibus eventurum esset.
170.Vid. Hieron. in Ezek.xxxvii.Nunquam poneretur similitudo resurrectionis, ad restitutionem Israelitici populi significandam, nisi staret ipsa resurrectitio, & futura crederetur; quia nemo de rebus non extantibus incerta confirmat.
170.Vid. Hieron. in Ezek.xxxvii.Nunquam poneretur similitudo resurrectionis, ad restitutionem Israelitici populi significandam, nisi staret ipsa resurrectitio, & futura crederetur; quia nemo de rebus non extantibus incerta confirmat.