rather then they would entertain or admit Communion or desire and practices with them T is possible it may be said that the reason of the difference is because Origens opinion was contrary to Scripture and that this other is not To this I shall make no further reply then in the words of Vincentius Lirin Imo planè nemo unquam Magistrorum fuit qui pluribus divinae legis uteretur exemplis His only fault then must bee that he urged divine Testimonies in uncatholick Interpretations And whether that have not place here also I leave it to every one to consider and so saith Lirinensis again Dum parvipendit antiquam religionis Christianae simplicitatem dum se plus cunctis sapere praesumit dum Ecclesiasticas traditiones veterum Magisteria contemnens quaedam scripturarum capitula nova more interpretatur meruit ut de se quoque Ecclesiae Dei diceretur Si surrexit in medio Tui Propheta Thirdly then to come to your Testimonies from Scripture of the N T especially for proof of the affirmative And 1. for the use of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is acknowledg'd that these words properly signify the same that in English death or dying doth But that this should be limited to utter destruction and annihilation is most unreasonable For in the using of this argument it is foreseen and granted that death is taken sometimes for death in and unto Sin Only 't is suggested that those are mysticall and metaphoricall Sences Hereupon I infer that if the words be taken sometimes mystically and metaphorically and yet no assurance that they are so but because they are us'd in a matter whereto death as it signifies a separation of Soul and Body is unappliable then may they by the same reason be taken so elsewhere and not bound to that one which is thought to be the sole literal and proper signification If Death appear to signify in Scripture somewhat beside utter destruction then how can the wickeds utter destruction be concluded from the mentions of their death c Against this it avails not to say that the one is the proper but the other only metaphoricall notion of it for it being granted that the scripture useth Metaphors in one instance why may it not in another as probably This is sufficient to the force of that argument But then ex abundanti I adde that the Notion of Death for utter destruction i. e. Annihilation being only usefull to the disputer it will be hard for him to produce any one place either in Old or New Testament I might adde or in any other Author where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. signifies Annihilation It signifies indeed the separation of Soul from Body very frequently but that is not founded on supposition that in that separation either of the parts much lesse both utterly perish Nay the doctrine for which the proposer of the questions disputes supposes him not to mean death in that notion for then Eternall death the wickeds portion must be eternall separation of Soul and Body which is exclusive of all reunion or resurrection at the day of Judgment which the Disputer averts as hereticall Nay 't is to be observ'd that when our Saviour came nearest the expressing this matter or annihilation he chooseth two other Phrases not this of death or anything that way inclining having never been born and having a milstone hanged about the Neck and being cast into the midst of the Sea which by an imperfect resemblance seemeth meant on purpose to signifie annihilation And yet it is also observable to the main question that either of these states and so annihilation is better and more desirable then the Lot which in Gods decree awaites a betrayer of Christ a wicked man for that one fact Thus far by way of evacuating all force in that Argument To this I shall adde somewhat Positive toward the laying foundation for the evincing the contrary viz. That death in scripture use is as 't is granted in the objection oppos'd to life Life then ordinarily signifies that which results from the union of Soul and Body but it also signifies the result of another union Unio Virtutis betwixt God and the Soul or betwixt God and both In the former of these it signifies spirituall life both as that signifies living well whereby the passages of spiritual vertue betwixt God and us are kept open and free and as it signifies pardon of sin the contrary whereto is expressed by separating and hiding his face and turning himself from us In the latter viz. betwixt God and the Soul and Body i. e. Person of man it signifies Gods favour and protection of which under the style of Gods presence the Psalmist saith that in it is life And then as all felicity is the certain effect or consequent of this kind of union so life oft signifies felicity even that of the highest Magnitude And all this not Mystically or Metaphorically that I know of or if it did that exception is of no force as hath already been shew'd but as litterally and with as full propriety as the union of Soul and Body is call'd Life God being as the School saith out of St Augustin intimior cuicunque rei creatae then the Soul is to the Body and so the several parts of that union more necessary to the several sorts of life signified thereby Mean while it is evident that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 life belongs not to being simply for all Ents have not life or to miserable being non est vivere sed valere vita but to greater or lesser degrees of happy and joyfull being the utmost of which is so naturally expressed by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that it wants not the addition of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 oft times to do it If thou wilt enter into life Mat. XIX 17. and VII 14. and XVIII 8. i. e. the happy being in Heaven Which is so properly that which is call'd life that this we live here scarce deserves the appellation in comparison with it Now in proportion to these acceptions of life must the Notion of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. be calculated Had life signified most properly being simply taken there might have been some pretence that the contrary 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should denote the contrary to being viz. Annihilation But when it signifies those so many other things and not simple entity 't is most rationall that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should both technically and properly signify the opposites to those severals wicked life the displeasure of God a miserable being here separation of Soul from Body of both from God and above all endless torments in another World Joh. viii 51 52. and that as somewhat to be seen and tasted which were not so well appliable to annihilation and in many other places I instance in one or two more first Heb. 2 14. because there it seems to mee to have a mark
Unextinguishablenesse of the one must be answered with the durableness of the other Tenthly For the same and like Phrases in the Old Testament granting according to the mind of the Objector that they include the second death after the general judgment yet still this avails nothing to the desir'd conclusion unlesse it be farther prov'd that those Words and Phrases do signify absolute utter destruction or annihilation for upon that only the affirmative of the question depends and for that there is no least pretence of proof offer'd here Eleventhly For the Phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it will never be usefull to the disputer for if the first death be the Act of separation of Soul and Body and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not the torments of Hell but the state or continuance of that separation as it will be found to signify in all the places of the Bible and in the most and best heathen Authors then the second death being the taking away them must by consequence be founded in the reunion of the Soul and Body that reunion being in propriety the dissolving of separation Act and State both Granting therefore that the casting of death and Hades I must set that word instead of Hell which in use signifies another thing even that whereunto it is there said to be cast into the lake of Fire Revel 20.14 is the second death and the converting those Act and State into a State of sensitive and real misery what can follow thence to the disputers advantage That according to the Rabbinical Notion it signifies final and utter destruction Why let it do so and the result is that then death being finally and utterly destroy'd a never ceasing State of being though that most miserable now takes place and that is eternity of torments far remov'd from annihilation for though utter destruction of positive Entities may be deem'd to signify annihilation yet when attributed only to privative Entities death and Hades it can in no reason signifie annihihilation but the contrary restauration to being i. e. to union of Soul and Body But then secondly that the Rabbins or Chaldae Paraphrast Deut. 33.6 or Is 22.14 meant by second death to denote absolute negation of all being must not be allowed for Deut. 33.6 the Hebrew reading let Reuben live and not die and the Chaldae Paraphrast using the Phrase of the second death that can infer no more then by that Phrase they explain'd what they deem'd already meant by the Hebrew word duly rendred dying and there is no reason or colour for saying that that signify'd annihilation dye he might yet not be annihilated And the like is apparent of the other place Is 22.14 so much therefore for that To proceed then will it be for the Objectors advantage that the second death is express'd by the lake of Fire and Brimstone and that evidently referring to the utter destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah To this I reply first that 't was a tempestuous Rain of Fire and Brimstone that consumed Sodom and not a Lake and so the reference doth no farther hold then the Fire and Brimstone i. e. The terrible stinking and furiously burning Fire and that gaines nothing to the disputer The Fire of Hell may be as searching and noysome as is possible without being finite utterly consuming or annihilating Nay secondly when the Men of Sodome and Gomorrah the inhabitants as well as the Walls were burnt to ashes by that Fire and Brimstone to which that lake bears some resemblance what probability is there that either those walls that were burnt to ashes were annihilated or els that all that people were then annihilated so as to be uncapable of being rais'd and judged at the day of doom Or if they were wherein did their punishment appear to be greater then the portion of any other more moderate wicked man which in the disputers sence shall be so finally annihilated and sure reap no advantage by the state that expects him in the intervall Lastly will his advantage be that as death by being cast into the lake is suppos'd to be utterly destroyed so whoever else is cast into the lake shall be utterly annihilated That I suppose the specially design'd advantage but as it was said it will prove none because death being a privative thing the destroying of that necessarily infers not only a positive Resurrection but consequent to it an undying State and that is contrary to the disputers pretentions And then though those privations be destroy'd by being cast into the lake yet it no way followes that men by being cast in thither shall be destroyed also The concluding thus were as if putting off the prophetical expression one should say in plain words After the death of Adam and all his posterity and their continuing in the state of separation some thousands of years they shall be rais'd againe and their Souls eternally united to their bodyes and of those so rais'd many should be cast into as eternal flames the former of these is parallel to the casting of Hell and Hades into the lake the latter of the persons into the same lake Ergo as there shall be no more separation of Souls from Bodies so there shall be no more punishing of wicked men whereas indeed the very contrary followes The destroying of death is the commencing of this endless miserable life therefore proov'd to be endlesse because death is destroyed and so life comes universally and so to continue eternally instead of it for else death and Hades or that which is more then death annnihilation should returne to have their being again which it was decreed they should not and therefore they are said to be cast into the lake 'T is true indeed if Hades signified the place of Hell or state of torments then the casting this into the lake would be the finishing those torments whether after Origens way or any other it matters not but this as hath been said is not the importance of hades but the State of death as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the Act of it To what hath last been said that which followes in the bottome of p. 3. will be found no competent answer The first Answer is that the destruction of death and Hades is spoken properly in reference to them whose Names are in the Book of life But first if this were true then one of my former conclusions must needs be granted that Hades signifies not Hell Torments for that being destroyed to those that were under it the Godly were never under these but the state of the dead in universum Yet secondly it is not true for v. 12. I saw the dead small and great stand before God and the Books were opened the Books of Register of all mens deeds from which the book of life following is different and the Dead were judged the Dead indefinitely i. e. sure all the dead and yet more deictically by enumeration of all particulars concern'd in it The sea gave up its
Dead and Death and Hades delivered up the Dead which were in them and they were judged every Man according to their Workes Here 't is evident that Death and Hades are properly spoken in reference to all that were to be judged according to works and not only to them whose names were written in the Book of Life And so that evacuates the first Answer The second Answer is that they that are not written in that Book shall never suffer such a Death as brings to Hades but shall fall into a worse the second Death But to this I reply that this distinction hath no ground in the text but contrary wise both Death and Hades are equally there said to be destroy'd to all that were under them both whose names are and are not written in the book of life As therefore to the Godly that Death that leads to Hades is destroy'd so equally to the Wicked and then they are both rendred eternall and then the Wickeds being cast into this lake is not cannot be to be destroy'd there but being a lake of fire to be tormented there eternally as is most apparent v. 10. where the Divell was cast into this lake and the beast and the false Prophet said to be there already yet were not annihilated by being cast thither but as it follows shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever That they fall into a worse death I willingly grant and think it usefull to the cause I defend for suppose a Wicked Man whose impiety costs him dear here one of the Divels saddest Martyrs cruciated with the Diseases his Sins have brought on him in an exquisite manner many years and at last either seiz'd on by the hand of Justice and delivered to a wittily tormenting Death or exercised many years with the rack of Stone and Strangury or the like and at last by these horrid miseries his Soul rent from his Body and he continue in Hades many Hundred years and certainly partake of no good in that estate at the utmost but rest from the labours of his former life Can it in this case be said that the second Death is worse then this and yet this second Death defin'd by a swift Annihilation Certainly it cannot Nothing but long continued if not endless Torments can be said worse then those so long continued Torments But whereas it is added that the second Death is absolute and eternall destruction as the scripture elsewhere speaks I reply that the scripture no where speaks so never uses second death of any such thing as annihilation nor ever seems in any other words to say of any wicked man that he shall be annihilated As for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I grant it parallel to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but can see no Argument producible thence that either of them denotes annihilation being both so much more proper to denote Torments and those eternall For the valley of Hinnom 't is known that Children were not burnt to Ashes there but put into hollow brazen vessels and there fryed and scorched a most lingering pain and therefore call'd Tophet from the Timbrels that there us'd to sound to drown the noise of their dismal cryes And for the lake the Text is expresse they that be tormented without intermission Day and Night without cessation for ever and ever And though the valley of Hinnom being on Earth was not a state of of Eternall but temporary punishments yet that is no prejudice for being to take a resemblance from earth and humane punishments where nothing was eternall the most that could be was to take the sharpest and most lingering Torments thereby to expresse those which being most sharp were eternall also Thus much for the Texts of Scripture and phrases therein which seem favourable to the affirmation but duly weighed have not so prov'd Now for the Consideration taken from God's Attributes of Justice and especially of Mercy p. 4. There seem to me to be three weak parts in the arguing First that to those sins which are committed under temptations and infirmities of ours not generally releiv'd by a sufficiency of auxiliary grace God's eternal punishments are suppos'd to be affix'd by them that maintain such punishments of eternal torments Certainly they that thus doe doe amiss and by so doing give great occasion to those that believe them to find other measures for justice in God then those which he hath prescrib'd to men whereas in matters of this nature God is content to be judg'd by our Tribunal and measures Judge I pray you betwixt me and my Vineyard and Are not my wayes equal But they that maintain God's requirings Mic. 6. to be proportion'd to his shewings and the sufficiency of the Divine grace ready for all that will make use of it and therein found the justice of punishing those that do despise or neglect those meanes so liberally and abundantly provided for them by God have given no cause for that exception It is by them on the contrary marked out as an act of superabundant mercy that God forsakes not upon the first refusals and not making use of his grace he is long-suffering and most willing and most ardently labours that all should come to repentance even such as have long resisted his Evangelical methods of rich grace Secondly that weight is laid upon the Temporalness of the sins committed in this world intimating I suppose the unproportionableness of Temporal to Eternal and therein founding an objection against the Justice of those punishments This I suppose is believ'd to have force against those that are wont to answer it by compensating the want of weight in the temporariness of the sin and sinner partly by the eternity of God against whom the sin is committed partly by the preparedness and inclination of the man to sin eternally in case he should live eternally And I shall confess that I have alwaies look'd on those as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such as the Schools have many not able fully to satisfy humane understanding and have therefore been careful in several writings to offer surer grounds of satisfaction in this matter by laying the weight on the option which is by God given us of eternal blisse on one side as the reward of our Evangelical obedience as on the other of eternal woe on our wilful denying and this finally and obstinately persever'd in which makes it most just that they that resolutely and inexorably make this choice of never so much ill to themselves should have none but themselves to blame for the unhappinesse of their portion Thirdly that God in inflicting punishment is compar'd with man in respect of the compassion supposeable in him to see any the worst man thus afflicted Whereas I conceive God is to be look'd on here only as the Rector of the Universe whose office it is to proceed in the work of Judicature without passion on either side You may see it in a Judge on Earth which if he be a
eternal death may be truly cald everlasting punishment because though death should inferre annihilation wherein there is nothing ergò no punishment yet Death it self is something and is joyned with real paines as well as privations but of those or any other reality the state of annihilation is not capable and then to say everlasting punishment though that were supposed to signify no more then everlasting poena damni yet must it be founded in everlasting being for no man can be punished everlastingly by deprivation of bliss that hath not a being at all to be thus capable of devesting or deprivation for non entis nulla est affectio But to this it is replied that the text saith not the wicked shall be everlastingly punished but they shall go into a punishment and that punishment shall be everlasting and such is everlasting death To this I answer that there is no ground of this distinction in the Text which saith together they shall depart into everlasting punishment which is certainly the very form that would be used if the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were designed to be never so positively punitive if it were into the furnace of fire where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth Secondly 't is replyed that a man may suffer or be punished by that which he doth not actually feel and many attempts are made for the proof of this But it is sufficient in a word to say that none of the proofs come home to the state of annihilation whereof only our question is A mad man or fool may suffer though they discern it not a dead man who is not annihilated but lives in his better part may suffer in his memory children friends here much more while he lives may he without folly desire to avert such sufferings but he that is not is not capable of any of these and if I were sure that to morrow I should be nothing no real consideration of my self but either present care of others good or perhaps irrational phansy would incite me to make any provision for after that morrow So again privation of possible felicity is to any one that hath being a real punishment because he is a looser though not sensible of what he hath lost but to him that is not 't is an absolute nullity and were a man sure to be annihilate the fear of this were unreasonable for that time when he should be nothing and the only thing that renders it reasonable now is because he hath a being and hopes to continue it or whatsoever he is seduced to believe to the contrary yet still he desires it and as long as he hath life may well desire and cannot choose but wish all the accomplishments and even images of it and at once fear the loss of life and all felicities which either do or may accompany life But still this man's being subject to this fear because capable of the causes of it is no proof of his being punished who is supposed not to be he that hath a being and desires the continuance of it suffers when he looseth it but he that hath no being is not to be esteemed by these measures any more then he that hath never yet been is this day punished by not being created or conceived till to morrow Nor to this is it any way consequent as is objected that the desire of everlasting life should not be a reasonable desire For though it be reasonable to fear the privation of a reasonable desire yet this fear is only incident to him that hath a being and he that hath no being cannot have desire how reasonable soever it is for him that hath a being to have it The Sadduces had a being when they desir'd praise and though they believed no immortality of souls yet they believed durability of memory and memory was a kind of image of life and they that despaired of the body might take some content in the shadow but even that a meer shadow and phansy too which also would be at an end whensoever their being were supposed to be so So again the same Sadducee whilst he lived might fear death because he enjoyed somewhat which he was unwilling to loose and because death it self though it were thought to enter him on a state of nothingness yet was it self something both respectu sensus damni And beside the Sadducee could hardly be Sadducee enough in the point so as not to have some fear of the contrary however he still had a being and was to be unwilling to loose it But that having no being should be real punishment to him that is not is above my comprehension As to what is said in the objecter's person p. 10. at the beginning that if he believed annihilation he would yet as much fear the punishment as he desires everlasting life I shall grant it on this presumption that he now believes he shall enjoy everlasting life but then he that thus desires and fears is supposed to exist and to him 't is granted that deprivations are penal and again though he would fear that yet sure he would never fear 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the notion of eternal sensible punishments and scorchings of fire I know not whether all that I have said of the nature of the privative punishments be maturely said or no as non entis non est affectio so I have alwaies found it hard to satisfy my self concerning any thing of that which is not Only I rest my self in this that my mistake if it be such is sure of so nice a making that I cannot my self discern it and therefore it is not to be imagined that the truth of Christ's speech should hang on so weak a string as it must if by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christ meant no more then eternal deprivation of being For if that which is not cannot be eternally punished how can the wicked be said to depart to eternal punishment when they are annihilated For everlasting judgment I acknowledg it signifies no more then the former imported and so is to be concluded by the discourse on that 'T is the adjudging to a state which shall last to all eternity or a sentence wherein the eternity of him that is judged is concern'd Next for their worme never dying I have three things to add First that the worm in dead bodies devoureth very slowly and leasurely and so is as fit as any thing could have been to express lingring torments Secondly that the worm devoureth not the whole body the bones and firmer pars are not liable to her malice and so 't is most unfit to express utter annihilation of the whole Thirdly that the worm being peculiar to dead and putrified bodies is a most lively representation of gnawings and miseries after death and then when instead of mortal worms which are the only instruments of gnawing on dead bodies there is somewhat else threatned by Christ which is fit to be expressed by the style
distinguishing it both from death the separation of Soul and Body and from annihilation For of neither of those I suppose the Divell can be said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to have power especially not of the latter which is a work of the same Omnipotency that creation is Whereas of eternal torments of the wicked 't is certain that the inflicting of them is entrusted to the Divell and so he hath power over them Secondly 1. Joh. 3.14 Where he that loveth not his Brother is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to abide in that which is there call'd death which is some prejudice to the opinion of redactio in nihilum for in that there is no abiding So that I suppose it clear that there hath been little gaind to the establishing the affirmative of the question from this first objection the use of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. for the punishment of the Wicked Proceed wee then to the second sort of words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there rendred destruction or perishing or perdition For all these will be ruled by the former 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. none of them having any propriety to the sence of annihilation but only oppos'd to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the notions wherein they are visibly us'd for rescues or deliverances sometime from greater sometime from lesser dangers sometime for forsaking of Sin repentance Act. 2.40 coincident with spiritual life sometime for pardon of Sin sometime for temporal cures and sometime for that state of endless rest from pain Sin Frailties Infirmities together with addition of all positive blisse in the vision of God And in proportion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is fitly vs'd not only for the privations but contraries to every one of those the evils extreamly opposite to these good things And nothing hinders but that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be taken Mat. 10.28 not for annihilating but tormenting in Hell that being the known place for the inflicting of torments and to that end the fire eternal prepar'd for the Divel and his Angels and Men also adjudg'd to have their parts of it Mat. 25.41 and the office of the Divells there to be Lictors tormentors and jaylors which suppose space of detention and cruciating but are irreconcileable with instant annihilation see Mat. 5.25 26. And against this sence of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nothing farther said hath force For first thus 't is certain God both can and will punish i. e. cruciate those that fear him not Secondly 'T is denied that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 most properly signifies the destruction of the being of the subject or annihilation and whereas 't is affirm'd so to signifie Mat. 10.39 it is certain it doth not For there as it is once oppos'd to the loosing this present life as our Saviour foretels the complying Jewes and Gnosticks should in event do by those very means by which they intended to preserve them so it is a second time apply'd to godly Martyrs who loose their lives for Christs sake of whom it will not be imagined that they are annihilated when they so dye Thirdly the Concession that when apply'd to a person it signifies generally death in the proper sence is a manifest prejudice to its signifying annihilation for if the death of a person were the annihilating that person all resurrection were superseded And this is farther evident by the several proofs farther produced as Mat. 26.52 where they that take the Sword against the lawfull Magistrate shall i. e. are worthy to perish by the Sword of the Magistrate which yet I hope can annihilate no man but only kill the body Mat. x. 28 And beyond that have no more that they can do so Mat. 27.20 I hope Jesus was only crucifyed not annihilated And so in all other places save only that of 1 Cor. 15.18 where upon a false assumption it would follow that not the wicked which alone were pertinent but good Christians should utterly loose all being at least of the body or be never rais'd again so that it is far from being by that Cumulus of Testimonies concluded that the destruction or perishing or the wicked signifies utter destruction If these testimonies may be believ'd some of which belong to Christ some more to the godly and no one to the annihilation of the wicked the direct contrary will be concluded Fourthly the places that are produced to prove this to be the expectation or the Devils prove it not Not Mar. 1.24 for there to destroy them is to retrench their great power over the men of the World to destroy their Dominion to cast them out of the bodies v. 25. yea and out of the Temples and minds of men which they possest The other of Luke 4.34 is to the same purpose and so concludes no more then that concluded And indeed it cannot be with any shew of reason imagined that the divels should know so little of their own doom as to thinke it possible they should at Christ's coming be annihilated Nay if they had their present condition being so far from the least degree of happinesse they could have no reason to deprecate it or beg Christ to let them alone and disclaim having any thing to do with him Their annihilation if that had been the signification of destroying them the speedier it were it were certainly the more desireable especially when it would also have secur'd them from the fear of a yet worse condition which we know was decreed them and of which they cannot be doubted to have receiv'd presages by being finally sentenc'd to it If this argument be consider'd it will certainly warrant my affirmation that 't was not annihilation that the divels with such horrour expected from Christ but as appeares by comparing with Mat. 8.29 amandation to torments Fifthly the uses of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for eternall destruction exemplifi'd by the Objector by many texts Jo. 3.15 c. if proved as manifestly as freely granted by me are still of no force to induce the desired conclusion because it was said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies not annihilatiō And yet it falls out that severall of the testimonies are impertinent to that to which they were design'd as 1 Cor. 1.18 2 Cor. 2.15 where they that perish are impenitent sinners abstracted from the doom that expects them as oppos'd to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the notion of penitents and the next 2 Thes 2.10 is of the same importance Sixthly the uses of the nounes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must be concluded by what hath been already said of the verbs and nounes together and indeed infer as little toward the undertaken cōclusion For to that two premisses being requisite 1. That the punishment of the wicked is exprest by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. That those words signifie
annihilation only the former of these is pretended to be prov'd from the use of the words in the quoted places the later on which all the weight lyes being not pretended or endeavoured to be prov'd but rather taken for granted which is the great fallacy of petitio principii not to be tolerated in the pressing any Argument Seventhly For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it availes nothing for allowing it to be all one with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a word which by the way I must now adde having formerly omitted to insert it signifies bodily smart inflicted by the devill 1 Cor. 5.5 all one with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Cor. 12.7 buffeting yet still it signifies not annihilation but sometimes an effect of spirituall death or separation of God from the soule viz abominable uncleannesse which in a Christian is the defiling of Gods Temple 1 Cor 3.1 and that is granted by the Objector to be uselesse to him and is not rendred more serviceable by pretending 't is Metaphoricall for though to call a man a Temple may be deem'd a Metaphor yet to pollute whether Temple or Man is propriety of speech and that the only importance of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in all places of the N. Testament 1. Cor. 15.33 2 Cor. 7. â— and 11.3 Eph. 4.22 Jud. 10. Revel 19.2 and so very often 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 8.21 vid. Annotat 2 Pet. 1.4 and 2.12 twice and 19. Sometimes the corruption of the body in the grave 1 Cor. 15.42 and 50. sometimes for hurt to the man Col 2 2â— and sometimes for the punâ—shments that await the wicked Gal. 6 8 and opposed to an happy everlastâ—ng state call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by that opposition not prejudiced but rather concluded to be an everlasting miserable state For whereas the contrary is suggested without offer of proof viz that destruction being oppos'd to eternall life doth therefore seem to signify that which is most opposite thereto viz. real and eternall destruction this is indeed scarce so much as a seeming or probability very far from a demonstration For sure eternall miserable being is most properly contrary and so opposite to eternall happy being And though in Metaphysicall consideration absolute not being be most opposite to being and so to eternall being yet in morall speaking it is not so 1. For sure eternall ill being eternal torments are much worse then no being at all the bare Bonitas Entis which Dr Twiss and some Predestinarians fly to being when joyn'd with infinite miseries very far from being valuable to him that hath it If we believe Christ having never been born is more desireable then it What is said on this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the interpreting of 2 Pet. 2.12 is in my opinion not to be adher'd to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are I think to be actively taken and so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will signify those that take and corrupt others the filthy Gnosticks see Annot and in that sence of which only the words are capable the phrase hath no shew of usefulnesse to the Objecter For then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 readily signifies in their corrupting or debauching others they shall be destroyed i. e. punish'd severely I suppose eternally though that word enforce it not Eighthly For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luk. 19.27 the full importance of it is to denote a signal execution of punishment on malefactors brought forth and slain before the provoked King but no more implies annihilation then any of the former Nor is it at all discernable by that place whether the punishment executed were to be swift or lingering it only signifies sharpe and not to be averted and solemne and exemplary as for a great and provoking crime and indeed the passage wherein we find that phrase being a Parable the Notion of it must be accorded thereunto and so cannot be other then such as a Prince executes on his rebell subjects neither annihilation on one side nor eternal punishments on the other so that phrase will be argumentative on neither part Ninthly For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the other words of the same nature with that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the utmost that can be pretended of them is that those things that are thus burnt consum'd and devour'd are utterly changed from their former state not that they are annihilated For what is utterly burnt is turn'd to ashes but then ashes and not nothing are the terme of that corruption So likewise that which is eaten and masticated never so small and converted into Chyle then blood then flesh the rest going out into the draught is still but thus chang'd not annihilated 'T is not indeed what it was but thereby it only the more fitly represents those infernal torments and state which is as wide a moral mutation departure from all good or desirable to any appetite as can be imagin'd And certainly this is all that can pretend to be deduc'd from common interpretation which is referr'd to of those Phrases For if the wicked were granted to be destroy'd exactly after the manner of Chaffe c. Yet as chaffe is not annihilated so would it not follow that the wicked are annihilated But then withall it will be just to remember that Similitudes and Parables must not be bound to such accurate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as that every circumstance in the parable be accounted for strictly in the application but only the main lineaments wherein the design'd resemblance consisted preserv'd viz. that as after the threshing and winowing the good corn and laying it up carefully in the granary the manner is to set fire to the chaffe which licks it all up and never ceaseth 'till it have consum'd all and in that respect is call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the wind conspiring with the fire as in their open threshing flours on the tops of mountains the Jewish husbandry directed so after the trying and purging and at length rewarding the godly with eternall Heaven 't is to be expected that God shall proceed to deal severely with the wicked and then that severity be such as they shall not possibly avert nor be able to undergo without the utmost morall damage to them As for the use of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. 13.11 of sacrifices burnt to ashes Act. 19.19 of bookes burnt also and Revel 8.7 of trees and green grasse burnt up it is no more then hath been yeelded to the force of the former places For still none of these were annihilated they were burnt to ashes not to nothing Nay when the very phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is sometimes joyn'd with the burning of the wicked as of chaffe it is not obvious to render any reason for the choice of this phrase but what will be founded in the eternity of their torments and being for fire we know goes out it self when the fewel is exhausted and so the
deprivation of life and all that is precious here and very much more of bitterness after it And this is further inforced by their being not consumed but tormented with Fire and Brimstone not here as Sodom was in the presence of men but in the presence of the Holy Angels and in the presence of the Lamb. i. e. by the sentence of Christ with his assembly of Angels in judgment and so vers 11. the smoak not simply as Rev. 19.3 nor of their burning or consuming as in Isay it was but of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever and they have no rest day nor night quite contrary to death whereby men rest from their labours and to annihilation much more which is a perfect cessation and that eternal as opposite as was possible to having no rest day nor night so chap. 19.20 where 't is said of the beast and the false prophet the Roman Idolatry and Magick c. i. e. the eminent supporters of the former by Magick and auguries the principal factors for the holding up the Heathen Worship Apollonius Tyanaeus c. See note on Rev. 13. g.h.i.k. that they were cast alive into a Lake burning with Fire and Brimstone the meaning in all reason must be that they were from this life sentenced to be cast into exquisite torments not that they were utterly destroy'd or consumed but as infallibly removed to that place of Torments as if they had gon down quick Bodies and Soules together into Hell Here indeed is nothing said of the perpetuity of those Torments but that is expresly set down chap. 20.10 not only as far as concernes the Divel that was to bear them company and was cast into the Lake where they are which by the way must either inferre that the Divels who are not deemed to enter on their full punishment till the day of Doom shall then also be annihilated or that the wicked who are then in the same condition with the Divels shall not be consumed or annihilated but particularly as to them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Beast and the Prophet shall be tormented for ever and ever And if you shall demand why I said not this thus particularly in the Paraphrase and Annotations on the places of the Revelation I answer that it was not agreeable to my design on that Book which was only to set down the grand lines and branches of that obscure Prophetick Writing and not more nicely to descend to every minute expression in it Where it is said pag. 12. l. 8. That to apply any passages in the Revel to that which is to follow after the last judgment is not so Prophetical and therefore not so probable a sence I answer that all that is future as surely all that followes the last judgment is may well be ingredient in a Prophecy and so in this probably enough if either speaking of vengeance on wicked men this be added over and above their visible portion for that sure is very fit in a Christian Prophecy when wicked men oft thrive very prosperously here 'till the day of full iniquity and their accounts comes and then they die oft but as other men and would not deterr any man from following their steps if we were not admonisht that after death they must meet with a dismal Portion or speaking of the end of the World and the day of doom the several allotments of men be there seasonably mention'd also as we see it is in Rev. 20.12 13 14 15. As for the last reserve that if the punishment here described be to be understood of that which followes the last Judgment yet no expression used in any of those Texts doth necessarily signifie an absolute eternity of positive Torments I answer that undoubtedly some do I instance in Rev. 20.10 as it hath been formerly inlarged on day and night for ever and ever expresseth an absolute eternity as much as any words of man can do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth plainly denote positive torments and referring peculiarly to a rack doth thereby denote the kind of positive torments to be such as are not designed to ending the life but to continuing it in great paines for so we know the Rack is among men Now for the exceptions to Rev. 20.10 I must adde somewhat 1. 't is suggested that that seems not to be spoken of the last final judgment I grant it is not but of the houre of death whereon I suppose those wicked mens Soules cast into the Fire of Hell and never rescued from thence till Body and Soul together at the day of doom being joyned in those torments they are shut up thither to all eternity Secondly 'T is suggested that it seems not to be meant of Hell i. e. Gehenna into which none were ever cast alive i. e. before the first death To this I answer that to be cast alive into Hell is a phrase like to that of going down quick into Hell used of them whom the earth swallowed up Wherein 't is more then possible that such notorious sinners might go Bodies and Soules together to Hell without any previous separation by death by the same analogy whereby we believe that Enoch and Elias went up bodies and souls into heaven without seeing death and whereby we believe the same of those that shall be found alive at Christ's coming both wicked and Godly But then secondly if this be not certain enough to be adhered to then the phrase will signify as suddenly and really to be cast into those Flames and there to be tormented as they could be imagin'd to be if bodies and souls together they should be cast alive thither and so this is a direct prejudice to the sleeping of their souls or receiving any interval of rest from their passing out of this life and their entring into the torments of hell Of the places in the Apocalypse some things are added to the taking off from their force First a desperation of any certain understanding of that book To which I answer that 't is but a panick and popular fear which is the author of that desperation and keeping men from the study of it makes it necessarily unintelligible whereas First there be many repeted passages of Christ in it designed on purpose to excite men to the studying of it Secondly there are evident characters which serve as keyes to the understanding of it and nothing but the seeking and fancying depths and mysteries in it hath made it so mysterious the meaning nearest to literal and such as by comparing it with other prophecies appears to be the one prophetical signification of each passage will be found to be the truest and they that strein higher and seek farther off to find what was never intended by the inspirer or the Amanuensis are the men that have made this Prophecy obscure which would otherwise be as perspicuous as any one of the greater Prophets of the Old Testament Secondly when 't is suggested that the places