the very son of Abrahams body yet it would not avail any thing upon a Gospel account as saith John the Baptist to such as would have pleaded their interest in the Gospel Covenant and Priviledges by their being the Children of faithful Abraham saying Do not begin to say you have Abraham to your Father for without you be of the same Faith as if he should say it will avail you nothing but know that God is now laying the Ax to the root of the Trees to cut down those that are unfruitful and raise up stones viz. the Gentiles to beleeve in Christ and so to be accounted the Children of Abraham through Faith and know that Repentance or Faith was never required as an antecedent to Circumcision as it is required in point of Baptism Again If it be objected from the words of Paul That Children are holy and therefore may be baptized I Answer That their holiness giveth them not right to Baptism unless you can shew a text of Scripture which commands that all holy Persons should be Baptized for it is the Command makes it a Duty as the want of a Command makes it Will-worship for we know that Abraham was long in Covenant with God and Faithful and yet was not Circumcised till there was a Command given him to do it And also we find That Lot was a very righteous holy man and yet never was Circumcised at all so that it is the Command which makes the Practise lawful and if you have a Command for Infants to be Baptized or that all holy Persons must be Baptized produce the Command and then I shall say it is lawful but in the mean time till you can produce a Commandement or Example for it by those whose steps we are to follow give me leave to call it a Tradition of Man and Will-worship Moreover Take notice that the Holiness spoken by Paul in that place 1 Cor. 7.13 14. is Matrimonial Holiness so that the unbeleeving Wife is as Holy in the sense there spoken although she be an Infidel as the Children for the Text saith The unbeleeving Wife is sanctified which is no otherwise to be understood but according to that Holiness or unholiness spoken of in Ezra 10.3 And that you may see this also more clearly proved read my former Treatise entituled Zions Redemption Vindicated And again If it be Objected out of 1 Cor. 10.1 2 3. that Infants were Baptized because the Text saith That our Fathers were all baptized to Moses in the Cloud and Sea My Answer is That I have also formerly proved That that Baptism there spoken of was not water Baptism and have given the Reasons wherefore it was not and therefore I shall omit to speak of that here and shall say no more but this That it is clear that they were not Children which were baptized but the Fathers for so saith the Text. Secondly They that were baptized sinned and fell in the wilderness which sheweth that they were the Fathers for the Children died not there And Thirdly They were those that saw the great signs and beleeved which was not the Infants And Fourthly The Text doth not say that the Infants were baptized and if the Conclusion be drawn That all that passed thorow the Sea were Baptized and so consequently the Infants I Answer and say The word All means none but the Elders or Fathers of Families restrictively for the Text calls them so or otherwise we may conclude that their Cattel were Baptized for they also passed thorow the Sea but the Text saith it was the Fathers the which bringeth me to the next Objection which is say they Object 3. In the time of the Law when the Father of the Family was in Covenant so was the Children also and so we may see it to be in the time of the Gospel by those Houshoulds which were baptized Answ To which I Answer and say That those that so think are much mistaken for Christ sheweth that its clear another matter for his Coming was to destroy the old Customs of the Law that consisted in implicite carnal shews of Religion and tells us that he came not to bring such Peace but rather a Sword a Family and a House divided against it self the Father against the Son and the Son against the Father and the Mother and Daughter one against another and a mans Foes to be those of his own house So that from hence you may see that the Fathers obedience in Gospel-time doth not bring the Children to the like Conformity but sometimes the Children shall rise up against their Parents and cause them to be put to death But peradventure some will say What do you think of those several Housholds that were Baptized in the Primitive time as the Jaylors Houshold and Cornelius's and Lydia's and the Houshold of Stephanus and the like To which I say That they were not Infants which bore the Name of the Houshold there but Beleevers and that you may see this read Acts 33. 44 45 46. that those of Cornelius Houshold were all come together to hear the Word of God and were converted and spake with new Tongues and did magnifie God which could not be Infants Secondly You may see that the Jaylors Houshold were such and not Infants Acts 16.34 for the Text saith that when the Jaylor had been Baptized he brought them viz. Paul and Silus into his house and set Meat before them and rejoiced and beleeved in God with all his house From whence we may see that as the Text saith that they were all baptized even so it saith that his houshold did Rejoyce and Beleeve in God so then all that were baptized were Beleevers and not Infants Thirdly And the like was said of the houshold of Lydia Acts 16.40 for saith the Text They entered into the house of Lydia and comforted the Brethren and departed which shews That they that were baptized in Lydia's house were Brethren which were capable to receive comfort from the Apostles which also sheweth to us that they were not Infants but Beleevers And Fourthly As for the Houshold of Stephanus they are said to addict or give themselves to the administring unto the Saints 1 Cor. 16.15 which cannot be understood to be Infants for they are not capable so to do take this word by the way It cannot be proved that there were any Children in either of these Families nor that any of them were Married Couples but if it were both granted yet it would not prove the matter because the word whole Housholds respects the Major part or the like and not every indivividial person in the house And so I pass to the next Objection which is drawn from Matth. 28.18 Object 4. Go preach the Gospel to all Nations and baptize them but Infants are part of the Nations saith my Antagonist therefore ought te be baptized Answ To which I Answer and say If my Antagonist be not Moon-blind I am much deceived for he can see Infants
thing represented or the figure of the thing called by the name of the thing figured and hence we may see although I could say much more of things of this nature that both Christs words and also Johns were true Christ calling John Elias it s to be understood John was a figure of Elias or represented Elias not only coming in the power and spirit of Elias but he being a forerunner of Christ in his first day to perswade the Jews to obedience to Christ as Elias is to be a forerunner of Christ in his second day namely the Great Dreadful day of the Lord and to perswade and establish the Jews in their waiting for their King Jesus and their obedience unto him And secondly Johns words are true also where he saith I am not Elias that is he was not that Elias really or simply understood that they looked for although he was a type of him and might by Christ be called by his name as well as the bread which Christ brake might be called his body or the pictures of Cherubims called Cherubims and Christ called David and many such like things that borrow their name from the things which they represent and thus much briefly by way of Answer to the Objection and the reconciliation of the words of Christ and the words of John which seemingly contradicts each other but being understood accordingly as they were spoken they agree together so then still it remains that Elias is to come before the GREAT AND DREADFVL DAY of the Lord and that it is to be Elias really so understood I give these reasons which before have been mentioned in general in a short and brief method First John the Baptist was not the real Elias as I think all will confess for he was the Son of Zacharias and Zacharias had a commandement from the Lord to call the name of his Son not Elias but John Luke 1.13 But ELIAS is to come as hath been proved before the great and dreadful day of the Lord. Secondly John the Baptist was not the forerunner simply so considered of the great and dreadful day of the Lord for that day that John was a forerunner of was the day of Christs sufferings and not the day of dread unto his enemies so as it will be in that day that the chief Captains and great and mighty men of the earth shall call to the Mountains to fall upon them and hide them from the presence of the Lamb for the great day of his wrath is come say they and who can stand but Elias is to be the forerunner of the great and dreadful day of the Lord. Thirdly The hearts of the Fathers shall be turned unto the Children and the hearts of the Children to their Fathers in that day which yet are at a distance for Christ sake so that the parents hate their Children and Children shall betray their parents to death for Christs sake although it be not denyed that John in a measure was a type of Elias in that thing according to the saying of the Angel to Zacharias Luke 1.13 18. For all men did account John a Prophet and he preparing the way of the Lord all Judah and Jerusalem came out to him to be Baptized of him in Jordan and yet notwithstanding afterwards were at great variance about Christ some saying that he was a good man and others saying nay he hath a Devil and is mad and after that laid violent hands on him and crucified him and the distance was so great that many families even Parents and their Children have been and are at a distance about him and so will be until that day of the coming of Elias and then the hearts of the Fathers shall thorowly be turned unto their Children and the hearts of the Children unto their Fathers and envy shall depart from Ephraim as before said which brings me to the fourth last reason to prove Elias one of the two Witnesses which is Fourthly Because the same judgments which was brought upon the earth by Elias when he was upon earth shall be again brought upon the earth by the two Prophets or witnesses Revel 11.6 compared with James 5.17 1 Kinge 17.1 which bespeaks such a thing as though Elijah should be one of those two Witnesses if we also consider that these Witnesses must be slain and therefore must be such as never yet have tasted of death because it cannot be rationally imagined that those Prophets which are so to die are any of the Prophets which are dead and shall be raised from the dead and then be slain again I speak this because some have supposed Moses to be one of these two Prophets which in reason cannot be so neither do I find any Scripture warranting any such thing neither do I find any where in my most serious search of the Scriptures of any extraordinary Prophets namely such Prophets as is mentioned in Revel 11. to be borne in the last dayes when this prophesie is to be accomplished but Elijah never yet was slain but was caught up to Heaven in a whirle-wind and so at present I shall leave this and pass to the next thing which is to shew my opinion who it is that is the other Prophet because the Text saith that there is to be two Prophets or two Witnesses which are to prophesie in sack-cloth and as to the other Prophet I shall be very brief because I do not find any such Objection as I meet with against the fore mentioned Prophet namely against Elias and therefore I shall briefly shew my opinion and leave it Secondly As for the other Prophet which is to be a fellow companion with Elias I understand to be John that holy Apostle the beloved Disciple of Jesus which leaned upon his breast at Supper for as Elias was a man highly in the love and favour of God although hated by men and persecuted and banished even so was John dearly beloved of God although hated and banished from men yet the Lord Jesus dealt with him by manifesting of himself to him as God did to Elijah when he fled from the face of Ahab and Jessibel 1 Kings 17. and Chap. 18. but being in hast I pass many things which otherwise were necessary to be spake by way of parallel and come to shew the reasons why I understand John to be one of the two Witnesses spoken of in Revelations the 11. which are these First because when John writ the Gospel of Christ which was supposed to be thirty years after the ascention of Christ it was then reported amongst the Disciples that John was not to die John 21.23 and yet at that time they had the spirit of the Lord to teach them But if it should be objected and said that John saith not that Christ said he should not die but what if I will that he tarry till I come what is that to thee fellow thou me signifying Peters death To which I answer and say that it is true
in dying thou shalt die And so I pass to the second Reason to prove That Adams sin did not make him guilty of nor liable to the second Death which is Reas 2. Because Adam had no second life promised neither had he need of it while he stood in his Innocency and only a second life presupposeth a second death for a man cannot lose more than he hath to loose which was but only one life for the other came by Jesus Christ who did by death abolish death and brought life and immortality to light to which add this That if Christ had not died and also risen from the dead there had been no Resurrection and then having no second life there had been no second death for as by Man came Death so by Man came the Resurrection from the Dead So then it was Gods love to give man life and put him into that happy condition in Paradice but it was mans sin that brought death and a deprivation from that happy estate and condition it was Gods renewed love and unsearchable wisdom and mercy to bring man out of that Condition by a Resurrection from the Dead to a second life and happy estate but it is mans unsufferable perpetual wickedness which brings upon him the second death for this is THE condemnation that Light is come into the world and men love darkness rather than light Joh. 3. And thus we see that there was no second life in Paradise to be lost and therefore that sin purchased not the second death And so I pass to the Third Reason to prove That Adams sin did not make him guilty of the second death which is Reas 3. Thirdly Because if Adam had been guilty of the second death and that was the death intended where it is said in dying thou shalt die then Gods Justice had not been satisfied unless Adam had died the second death and all that were made guilty by that sin but none did die the second death for that sin committed in Paradise although the first death or a change which is as death passeth upon the Righteous as well as the Wicked and that if they had been made guilty of the second death they should also have died the second death is because the Scripture saith That God will by no means clear the guilty Exod. 34.7 But if God did send Christ to take away the second death so that many taste it not and none taste it for that sin committed in Paradise Rom. 5.18 then God did use a means to clear the guilty and so his word is Yea and Nay and not Yea and Amen but it being the guilt of the first death God spares not his own pretious Ones but we must needs die and be as water spilt upon the ground which cannot be gathered neither doth God respect the Person of any man yet he hath used a means that his banished shall not be for ever expelled from him 2 Sam. 14.14 and in this sense man must die for that sin and so Justice satisfied and so gives way to Mercy And thus I pass to the Fourth Reason to prove That the sin committed in Paradise made not Adam guilty and liable to the second death which is Reas 4. Fourthly Because it argues a change in God in what he hath absolutely Decreed for God did absolutely decree That if Adam did eat that he should surely die and Adam did eat Therefore if that death that God threatned to inflict upon Adam were the second death as some say then God changeth in what he did absolutely Decree for Adam and his are not damned for that sin as is clear from many texts of Scripture as Rom. 5. c. Add this also It makes God to be a Liar and the Devil to speak the Truth which were blasphemy to assert for as God said That if Adam eat he should die so the Devil said They should not die now if this be the second Death there mentioned and Adam not die that death and yet did eat judge who it was that spoke the Truth but it being the first death that God intended in that place Gods Word was fulfilled Adam did so die and so Gods Word was true and the Devil was a liar from the beginning But saith my Antagonist God may alter in his threatnings as in Nineveh and Hezekiah and the like but my Antagonist knows well that I have given him such an Answer unto it that he is not able to Answer time will not suffer me hear to repeat it read my former Book only this in short Consider that before God sent Jonah to Nineveh to proclaim forty dayes and Nineveh shall be destroyed he did decree and declare it That in what instant he spake as touching the destroying of a People if they did repent then he also would repent of the evil that he said he would bring upon them Jer. 18. but Nineveh did repent and proclaim a Fast and therefore God was engaged according to his Word not to destroy them but the case was not so with Adam And also Hezekiah did repent and humbled himself with mourning and so God was constrained to hear and answer his desire according to his Word Hence he had Mercy on the House of Ahab when he humbled himself yet God changeth not in what he hath Decreed but doth Decree to alter the Dispensation of Mercy and Justice according to his Creatures actings And thus I leave the Objection having Answered it before and also the Reason and come now to the Fifth Reason to prove That Adams sin did not make him guilty of or liable to the second death which is Reas 5. Fifthly Because Adam was but a natural man and had but a natural life and yet should have lived for ever by eating of the Tree of Life had he not sinned but when he had sinned and thereby deprived himself of the Tree of Life then in respect of Mortality he had no prehemenence above the Beast of the field Eccles 3.18 19 20. And that he was but a natural man read 1 Cor. 15.44 45. Moreover know as aforesaid That there was no Promise of a second life till after the Fall and therefore God could not threaten man with the loss of that which he had not given or promised to give unto him and therefore that sin in Paradise could not make Adam guilty of the second death because he never had a second life or a promise of it in the state of Innocency neither sinned he against the new Covenant or God manifest in Christ which brought the second life and therefore not guilty of the second death And so I pass to the Sixth and last Reason to prove That Adams sin made him not guilty of the second death neither was that death intended by God either in the threatning or in the sentence Reas 6. Sixthly and Lastly Because that death which entered into the world by Adams sin passed and reigned over all men from Adam to Moses Rom.
5.12 13 14. in which time lived Abraham Isaac and Jacob and Noah and Lot and several others over whom the second death had no power and yet that death which Adam purchased by his sin passed upon all men and also reigned over them which sheweth That the wages of Adams sin in Paradise was but the first death for that death Abraham Isaac and Jacob and the rest tasted of and so it reigned from Adam to Moses over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adams transgression that is against a prescript Law upon penalty of death which proveth That it was Adams sin and we in him which brought that first death upon us but as for the second death it reigned not over those holy men that lived between Adam and Moses neither doth it pass or reign over any till after the Resurrection and the eternal Judgement for THEN shall the Wicked be cast into the Lake of Fire which is the second Death Rev. 20.12 13 14. So then that Death which entered into the World for Adams sin the which all tasted of from Adam to Moses is seen to be no other death but what God threatned and pronounced in the sentence namely Dust thou art and to Dust thou shalt return even the first death And thus I pass to the Answer of some few Objections offered by my Antagonist And the first is a Quotation Romans 5.16 with Chap. 8.1 Object 1. The offence of one sin came upon all to Condemnation i.e. Damnation compared with Rom. 8.1 Answ This Quotation hath been already Answered yet I shall speak a few words to it in this place which is That the word Condemnation is used for the first death as well as for the second as in Luke 23.40 And it is used indefinitely in Rom. 8.1 There is therefore no Condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus it may be read there is therefore no death to them that are in Christ Jesus But you will say Yea the Righteous do die the first death But if you take notice Paul is shewing in that place that Christ delivereth from that body of death and in Christ we have victory and shall conquer the grave and so in that sense there is no death to the Righteous for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being an adverb is undeclined but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the same only it being declined may be read Judgement or Punishment or Death and you do only say the words differ but give no Reason worth a figg to prove it only you say that one sin was against Man and the other against God your meaning is The Malefactors sin was only against Man and Adams against God But I pray be serious do you not think that the Malefactor sinned against God Or is not Murder or Stealing or the like a sin against God What means this Discourse if it argue not gross ignorance I am very much mistaken in my Judgement But looking a little forth I find you citing an old Argument of Mr. Perkins's which is That sin that is committed against an infinite God deserveth an infinite punishment but Adams sin was such Ergo Where art thou Hammon saith my Antagonist To which I Answer and say That it is not our Question what Adams sin deserved but what the punishment was which God was pleased to inflict upon Adam for that transgression the which I before have proved to be but the first death and such like punishment And also I do say and have said That Adams sin was so great that it caused him to lose all that God gave him and to lay his honor in the dust and yet notwithstanding it made him no more guilty of the second death than the Beasts which touched the Mountain and therein offended God and must be thrust thorow with a Dart and yet lost no more than what it had to lose Heb. 12.20 And if I should deny your Major Proposition you would be troubled to prove it because Mr. Perkins hath not done it already for you And whereas you ask by way of a jear Where I am I could tell you That I may be found through Mercy at my Native place although as for your part if I should ask where you are as in reference to either your Judgement or Habitation men know not and it is possible you care not they should know where you are to be found but this by degression I pass and come to the Third Objection which is say you Object 3. If Adam brought but a temporal death on men then Christ died but a temporal death to satisfie God Answ That Christ did not die the second death that is to say Christ did not suffer in the Lake of Fire and Brimstone is clear for if he had he had been irrecoverable Take notice that there is a great gulph fixed so that those that once come into that place take heed cannot go thence any more Fie fie what did Christ suffer in Hell with the Devil and Damned spirits No surely although your Creed have taught you so to beleeve And whereas you say That Christ was made a Curse for us it is acknowledged that he was hanged upon a Tree and cursed is every one that hangeth upon a tree But I hope that it is but a temporal curse for otherwise there be many of the Saints that have so suffered and then are in a cursed estate and condition if your opinion be true but it is not And whereas you say That my Opinion makes Children but a little beholding to Christ for if he had not come they had died but a temporal death and so they do still To which I Answer and say It is true that if Christ had not come they had died but a temporal death for that sin committed in Paradice and also that they do die a temporal death notwithstanding and yet your Conclusion false for Christ is very beneficial to them notwithstanding so that if I had the tongue of men and Angels I could not express it as I should do Time is pretious take this in short That Christ brings them to a resurrection and brings all the glory that is spoken of in the Scripture to be there portion at the other side of the grave I could be very large but I must speak now by figures as we say and not by words at length and leave you and the Reader to enlarge it in your understanding And for as much as you desire me to inform you what should have become of the soul of man I shall shew you my opinion about it and the grounds and reasons from the Scripture and if I be mistaken in it I hope some sympathyzing tender heart will be as ready to inform me better in it as the captious Spirit will be to cavil at it and I hope I shall receive such information with humility of mind and thankfulness of heart and so I pass to the Subject of Discourse
lump of man-kind in using a means to bring them to a Resurrection of life and Glory and I shall handle them in two particular Subjects The first will be the Resurrection and the second Gods love to man in point of Salvation and glory and so to the first Subject namely That although man must dye and be like water spilt upon the ground yet the Lord will bring him up again from the dead to live for ever in glory or misery according as they have received his grace and walked worthy of it or as they have slighted and abused grace and mercy and not walked worthy of it THE Resurrection of the Body PROVED AS touching this Subject of the Resurrection I shall be brief yet full enough to prove it to be the truth of God and the foundation of the godly mans faith and hope and my method to prove it shall be by laying down this Position which is That the dead bodies of those that return to the dust shall live again and arise and come to Judgment to receive according to what they have done whether it be good or evil For so saith our blessed Saviour John 5.28 in these words Marvel not at this for the hour or time as the word will bear it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hora is coming in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voyce and shall come forth they that have done good to the Resurrection of life and they that have done evil to the Resurrection of Condemnation for the Trumpet shall sound and the dead shall be raised incorruptible and we shall be changed 1 Cor. 15.52 And that this is true weigh the following Reasons which will confirm the truth of the Position and the first Reason is Reas 1. Because Christ himself did both die and rise again to be the first fruits of them that sleep that he might bear a sure Testimony to prove the Resurrection of the dead as saith the Apostle 1 Cor. 15.20 21. in these words But now is Christ risen from the dead and become the first fruits of them that sleep for since by man came death by man came also the Resurrection of the dead for as in or by Adam all die even so in or by Christ shall all men be made alive but every one in his own order vers 22.23 Reas 2. Secondly because the Scripture saith that our bodies shall be redeemed from the Grave and cloathed with immortality and indeed it was the very thing that Saint Paul waited for and comforted himself in Rom. 8.19 20 21 22 33. in these words For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the Sons of God for the creature was made subject to vanity not willingly but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope because the creature it self also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God for we know that the whole Creation groaneth and travelleth in pain together until now and not only they but ourselves also which have the first fruits of the Spirit even we our selves groan within our selves waiting for the adoption to wit the redemption of our bodies From whence we may see that the Apostle did look and wait in his mind for the Resurrection of the BODY which is to be understood the Resurrection and thus we see that our BODIES shall be redeemed from the dust and all kind of Corruption which proveth the Resurrection And so I pass to the third reason which is Reas 3. Thirdly because the Scripture saith the dead bodies of such as are in the dust shall arise again and live as saith the Prophet Isa 26.19 in these words Thy dead men shall live together with my dead bodie shall they arise awake and sing ye that dwell in the dust for thy dew is as the dew of Hearbs and the earth shall cast out the dead that is in it The which agreeth with the words of the Prophet Ezek. which saith And as I prophesied there was a noise and behold a shaking and the bones came together bone to his bone and when I beheld loe the sinews and the flesh came upon them and the skin covered them about and there was no breath in them Then I Prophesied as he commanded me and the breath came upon them and they lived and stood up upon their feet an exceeding great Army From whence we may see that there is to be a Resurrection of the body out of the dust of the earth to life again that all may come to Judgment to give an account of what they have done in the body whether it be good or evil And so I come to the fourth Reason to prove the Resurrection of the body which is Reas 4. Fourthly because the same IT which is sown in corruption the same IT riseth in incorruption and every seed shall have its own body as saith Saint Paul 1 Cor. 15.42 So also is the Resurrection IT is sown in corruption IT IS raised in incorruption for this corruptible must put on incorruption and this mortal must put on immortality so when this corruptible hath put on incorruption and this mortal shall have put on immortality then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written death is swallowed up in victory O Death where is thy sting O Grave where is thy victory Which clearly proveth that the same that goeth to the dust the same riseth again out of the dust only the corruption putting on incorruption and the mortal putting on immortality which cannot be understood another body but the same body neither can it be true which is said Death is swallowed up in victory no for if the dead bodies rise not out of the Graves then the Grave hath victory and is not conquered so as to be said O Grave where is thy victory but the victory of the Grave is destroyed by Christs death and Resurrection that we should not be holden therein All which proveth there is to be a Resurrection of the dead bodies out of the Graves And so I come to the fifth Reason to prove the Resurrection of the dead which is Reas 5. Fifthly Because Job also confirms this truth saying O that my words were now written O that they were now printed in a book that they were graven with an Iron Pen and laid in the rock for ever for I know that my redeemer liveth and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth and though after my skin worms devour this body yet in my flesh shall I see God whom I shall see for my self and my eyes shall behold and not another although my reins be consumed Job 19.23 24 25 26 27. From hence we may see that although Job were in great afflictions yet the consideration of the Resurrection comforted him and that he means the very same body is plain because he saith that although worms did devour his body yet in
from him for Christ hath destroyed him that had power over death which is the Devil and hath delivered us by Resurrection who by the reason of the fear of death were kept in slavery all our life long For nothing would be so troublesome to the godly as the thought of death were it not for a Resurrection but saith the Lord I will ransome them from the power of the grave I will redeem them from death O Death I will be thy Plague O Grave I will be thy destruction He will swallow up death in victory and the Lord will wipe away tears from all faces Hosea 13.14 Isa 25.8 2 Sam. 14.14 Heb. 2.14 From these Reasons and Scriptures and many more which might be added we may clearly see That the dead namely such as do now and shall sleep in the dust shall arise both good and bad and come to Judgment And now courteous Reader seeing it is so that the dead as before said must arise and come to Judgment be exhorted to take up that good resolution with the holy man Job 14.14 which saith If a man die shall he live again then all the dayes of my appointed time will I wait till my change come giving thanks alwayes to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the Resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead to an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled that fadeth not away Therefore gird up the lines of thy mind waiting for that blessed hope and glorious appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ who will change our vile bodies and fashion them like unto his glorious body according to his promise and mighty working whereby he is able to subdue all things unto himself who hath abolished death and brought life and immortality to light To whom be praise and glory for ever and ever Amen 1 Pet. 1.3 Phil. 3.20 21. 2 Tim. 1.10 Secondly take this word of advice by way of Caution which is take heed and beware of giving heed to such as do deny the Resurrection of whom there is two sorts now in our dayes as there was in the Apostles dayes the one sort is like unto the Saduces Mat. 22.23 which deny that there is any Resurrection Angels or Spirits viz. God or Devil Heaven or Hell of that sort is the Ranter and his adherents and such like Athiestical Spirits And the other are like unto HYMENEVS and PHILETVS 2 Tim. 2.17 18. who say that the Resurrection is already past whose words eat as doth a canker and of this sort is the Quakers who doth affirm that he is already risen from the dead and in the Resurrection and so the Resurrection is past to him who denyeth iniquity in words in the history and yet heaps up iniquity upon iniquity in the mystery And these are the two sorts which may fitly be compared unto the Sect of the Saduces and to Hymeneus and Phyletus and I do not report the things whereof I write by hear-say but from their own mouths the more is the pitty and to be lamented These two sorts differ in manners or conversation but very little in Judgment in point of doctrine unless it be in that of conversation as before said the which if they had the conversation of Angels and yet so corrupt in principle the Scripture declares them to be in a cursed and miserable condition Gal. 1.6 7 8 9. Col. 2.18 19. Acts. 3.23 24. And indeed the conversation of many of them is bad enough although they disfigure their faces and seem unto men to fast from sin and to be more righteous then others yet they have been seen to want that special duty of prayer in their families and giving thanks in the presence of their Families for their food which God hath bestowed on them although Christ and the Apostle did not neglect to do their duty in that case to lead us an example but no more as to this I shall leave it until the day in the which God will try the wayes of the sons of men and discover all deceit and falsehood of what nature soever it be But as touching the opinion about Gods holy Ordinances by which he hath appointed to be worshipped in is sleighted and rejected by them as water-Baptisme and eating of Bread and drinking of Wine solemnly celebrated to set forth Christs death and a participation of the benefit thereof with the slightings of forms as they call them although God delight in nothing which is out of form and order as the host of Heaven and earth doth declare who when God found them without form and void did by his word put them in form and order and gave decrees to the Sea and ordinances unto the Sun Moon and Stars and they keep them so that God delights in form and order and also is a God of order in all the Churches of the Saints hence Saint Paul commended form Rom. 6.17 18. in these words But ye have obeyed from the heart that form of Doctrine which was delivered unto you being therefore made free from sin ye became the servants of Righteousness c. From whence you may see That those men which do slight and deny forms in our dayes have not received that Spirit which was in the Apostle but another Spirit even the Spirit of error although it strive to transform it self into an Angel of light that thereby it may deceive the hearts of the simple for men are got to this height of wickedness in the mystery as to think that they comprehend all things and so consequently are Gods but they shall die like men for their breath is in their nostrils yet talk of what you will almost it is in them as they say as the first Adam and the second and God and also the Serpent slain within them the tree of life and the tree of knowledg the judgment seat Heaven and Hell Mount Zion and the new Jerusalem the two witnesses and what not they have comprehended all these things as they say but alass they die and in the very same time their thoughts perish and they are chased and gone like a vision of the night Mark one peece of horrible pride of Spirit which is in them they will not allow the holy Scriptures to be called the word of the Lord neither do they exhort and press men to be diligent to read and keep the things contained therein but their fraughty books must some of them bear the Title of the word of the Lord to the world and earthly men and the like so that he that seeth but very little may see them to be the men before spoken of which shall deny all that is worshipped as God shewing themselves that they are God O horrible pride and yet pretended humility this is ungodliness in a mystery I shall not enter upon the particulars of their bottomless opinion first because it is not my task at this time and