Objection why do they not remember former things vea 11. There is no Remembrance of former Thing Which cannot relate to Memories or Records for such there were but to Revolutions it doth well refer In his Answer to Queiry seven from 1 Pet. 3.18 19 20. He takes it for granted without any solid Proof that Christ his preaching to them of the old World was his Spirit in Noah but this is at large refuted in the Book of two Hundred Queries and is is plain the preaching of Christ to them was after his Death and consequently long after Noah Again his preaching had a good effect upon them to Conversion for it is said They were sometimes disobedient and therefore not always but in Noahs time they remained disobedient until after Christs Death for they were all drowned for their disobedience And indeed Calvin is so ingenious as to confess it relates to the time of Christ after his Death though he hath another gloss upon it less propable than is here enquired But the Author doth greatly mistake the enquirer as if by Prison he meant Humane Bodies for he meaneth not Humane Bodies but their Sins and the power of Satan in which they were held until living again they were converted after Christs Death by the preaching of the Gospel yet it is not to be supposed that all were converted as neither all the Sodomites at their last Revolution shall be all converted for the words of Christ imply that some shall not be converted but perish It shall be more Tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah in the Day of Judgement c. In his Answer to the eight and last Query Taken from the Metaphor of a good Husband-Man that new Grafts and Transplants his Trees that so at last he may have kood Fruit. He alledgeth the Metaphorical Arguments will prove nothing but the weakness of such as make them Reply Metaphorical Arguments such as Parables and Allegories what is intended by them with respect to the scope and intention by them when dully apply'd and the Anology is due and proper as in this case it is being warranted by Scripture for Paul tells us Rom. 11. That the material Branches that in his Days were cut off for their Sin of unbelief shall be Grafted in again in some following Age or Time of the World so as to be made true Members of the Church of Christ Now how can this be but by their living again by Revolution in order to their Conversion seeing we find no ground in Scripture to believe that Souls are Converted any where else but as they live here in Humane Bodies on Earth His Arguments from Metaphor by way of reversion being partly false in matter of Fact and partly improper and unduly applyed I need not spend time nor Paper to refute it I say partly false in matter of Fact because contrary to his assertion a wise Gardiner will remove his Graft from his Stock he hath once incerted it if the Stock prove bad and happen to die and corrupt he will remove it to another stock and not easily lose it Also a wise Gardiner may by several Graftings or Transplantings of the same Tree make better Fruit as experience hath proved But the Author it seems has as little skill in good Husbandry as he hath in Scripture Mysteries And his last Argument on this head is most improper because Man dies not as a Tree dies as the Author confesseth the Soul of a Man after Death survives and though corruptable with Sin yet the wise Gardiner knowing that it is capable of amendment thinks fit to give it a Tryal of a new life again in a Humane Body Having thus briefly discovered the insufficiency of the Authors Answers to the Inquirers queries I shall in the next place with the like briefness consider and show the weakness and insolidity of his pretended Reasons against this harmless Opinion His first Reason is suppose some bloody Tyranty as Nero to have taken away the Lives often Thousand Christians and by more than a Hundred kinds of Death he argueth that by this Hypothefis of having the same measure return'd â—o him again he must die ten Thousand times and more then by a Hundred kinds of Death Reply This will not follow for even according to that divine instinct of Justice that is in Man if one Man kill ever so many Justice requires no more but that he die for all his Crimes with some additional Circumstances of his Death to make his punishment the more severe And the Authors own distinction of a Analogical measure of punishment may serve to answer him here but this Analogical measure cannot be understood to be the greatest and severest Punishment of all viz the torment of Hell Fire for Ages of Ages simply for offences done to ther fellow Creatures but rather some suitable Punishment executed here in this World as I have said above upon the Answer to the first Query and the like may be said in case of a raw Rebellion or self-murder some Analogical Punishment such as the most wise and just Judge of the whole World shall Judge most fit to be inflicted is sufficient in these cases the greatest and most severe Punishments of Hell-fire being reserved only for such as demonstrate themselves incorrigible after all these less severe Punishments here in this World have been inflicted on them For Christ himself hath taught us that the proper Punishments of every Sin is not Hell fâ—ire but only of the worst sort as Contempt of God finally Impenitency and Unbelief after God hath extended much long-suffering towards them see Matt. 5.22 where three several degrees of Sin is held forth the first two against a Mans Neighbour as Anger and Contempt without cause they are only punishable by the Judgment of the Council to wit by the Superior Judicatories above unto which Superior Judicatories above the Jews had their inferiour Judicatories below corresponding as the Tabernacles and things of the Law here below did correspond to their Patterns above and to this Christ seemeth here to allude but for a Man to say to his Brother without a cause thou Fool is a manifest Contempt of God and reflects upon the great Creator himself and therefore he that is Guilty of this Sin is in danger of Hell-fire if he repent not timely of it His second Reason is that by the Hypothesis of the Revoluteons God would be the Author of Sin because whatsoever God hath ordered to come to pass in a certain and necessary manner of that he is the Author Reply Here the Author is greatly guilty against himself by his own inadvertncy Sua se jugulans gladio killing himself I mean his own Argument by his own Sword for hedid grant above that Domitian and Nero who butchered the Christians were butchered themselves and the Romans afterwards taken Captives by the Goths and Vandals And in these cases that Law of Justice of meting the same measure unto them was fulfill'd in this
Iâ—fidel so as to contradiâ—â— the express Testimony of Scripture the Souls of the Children come out of the Loins of their Fathers Gen. 46.26 and are conveyed into â—umane Bodies by humane Generation but to 〈◊〉 to all the curious and knotty Question either about the Soul as when or how it comes into the Child's Body it 's probable that as it surâ—â—sseth my Knowledge either of Physicks or Metaphysicks so it surpasseth his also and perhaps of most Men. His pleasing himself to requently with his jocund Humour on this and other Heads without any just Occasion given whereby to render the Hyâ—othesis of the Revolutions ridiculous is more like to have a contrary Effect upon himself as if at this rate a Woman might be with Child without a Man or that Abraham did not beget Isaac which are but ridiculous Consequences of his own framing having no â—ust Ground or Foundation from the Hyâ—othesis iâ— self Another of his wild and ridiculous Consequences is that a Man may beget his own Grand father and Grand-mother also that Men may be their own Fathers and thus the Genealogy of Adam shall be confounded and there shall not be seven Generations or Persons from Adam to Enoch tho' the Scripture calleth them seven Reply All this wild and ridiculous way of reasoning proceedeth not from any Absurdity of the Hypothesis it self but from his great Ignorance as touching the several Parts Stroaks Lineaments of it as asserted by its chief Favourers the Cabbalist Writer therefore in order to help him to a better understanding of the Hypothesis let him know that they commonly teach that every Child that is born into the World beside the Soul or Souls that revolve in the Body of that Child hath a Soul that is most properly the Soul of that Child and which is commonly a new Soul as formerly describ'd but these revolved Souls suppose of the Child 's Grand father are but Inmates in comparison to that other Soul that is the only proper Soul of the Child and this maketh no confusion at all to say the Soul of the Grand father may lodge in or impregnate the Body of the Grand-child more than to say the Soul of the Grand-child did formerly lodge in or impregnate the Body of the Grand-father as that Levi was in Abraham's Loins which the Scripture expresly declares yea and paid tyths in Abraham Besides that it is not probable nor allowed that the Souls of these worthy Men as Abraham Isaac and Jacob and many others either needed or had any Revolution in their Children The only most seeming difficulty on this Head is if divers Souls by Revolution live together in one Body with that call'd the new Soul that is most properly the peculiar Soul of that Body if these Souls attain to a perfect Restitution in that Body whose shall that Body be at the Resurrection or which of these Souls shall have it But this may be some way answer'd by the Similitude of a Grain of Corn that is sown in the â—arth how out of it divers Stalks and Eares of Corn and many Grains arise each Grain as full as that single Grain that was sown for tho' the gross visible Body of a Man be but one yet so much of Spiritual parts of Bodies may be lodged within that Shell or Husk of the gross visible Body as may suffice to be Seeds or Seminal Principles to as many Bodies as there are Souls lodged within that one Body And thus as the Scripture teacheth Every Seed shall have its own Body for thou sowest not the Body that shall be but bare or naked Grain c. See 1 Cor. 15. The distinction betwixt Revolution and Impregnation the Cabbalist or Mystick Hebrew Authors hold to be this that the Soul that revolveth into a Child's Body cometh into that Body immediately after the Child is born into the World so is not convey'd from the Father of the Child but cometh ab extra i. e. from without but the Soul that doth impregnate another Body cometh not into that Body when it is newly born but some considerable time thereafter as at the age of 20 or â—0 Years But that besides the Soul that is the most proper and peculiar Soul of the Child's Body which the Child receiveth from the â—ather not by Generation but by Conveyance â—even as Water is conveyed out of one Vessel into another another Soul may come into the same Body by Revolution or Impregnation which two they distinguish they prove from Gen. 46.12 where it is said that Er and Onan died in the Land of Canaan and yet they are numbred to be of the 70 Souls that went down into Egypt therefore they must needs have revolv'd into some of their Brethren and that most probably â—harez and Zarah who were born to Judâ—â— their Father after they viz. Er and Onan died That â—ew or none have deliver'd their thoughts about the Revolutions when they died is no Argument against it tho' he make it one good Men do not revolve commonly and what bad Men say is little to be minded tho' Balaan seem'd to Prophesie of his Revolution in these words that may be read Prophetically in the future I shall die the Death of the Righteous and my last end shall be like his and yet his Death was not such as to that time of Life as also his Prophecy that he should see Christ but not near which Origen takes to be spoke Prophetically but how could this be true if he did not revolve in one of them See Origen Hom. 15. in num Ipse velut de seipso Prophetans dicit moriatur Amma mea inter Animas justorum fiat semen meum sicut semen justorum In English thus he to wit Balaam as prophecying of himself saith Let my Soul die among the Souls of the Righteous and let my Seed be as the Seed of the Righteous so the Septuagint as to this latter part of the Verse Numb 23.10 but in the former part he seems expresly to hold forth the Metempsychosis or Transanimation according to the Septuagint Version the words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i e. Let my Soul die in the Souls of the Righteous and that the wise Men or Magi of the East who come to worship the Child Jesus had their Descent from him and their Knowledge or Institution he saith expresly Hom. 14. in num â—â—x illo denique fertur Majorum genus inâ—sâ—tutio in partibus Orientis vigere ideo quando Natus est Jesus agnoverunt stellam intellexerunt adiâ—â—â—â—i prophetiam magis quam populus Isâ—ael In English thus Of him the Kindred of Magi is said to have come and their Institution or Learning to have grown in the Eastern parts and therefore when Jesus was born they knew the Star viz. that he prophesied of Numb 24.17 and understood that the Prophecy was fulfilled more than the Peâ—â— of Israel These words in Psal 78.39 God remembeâ— that we are but
Considerations 1. That every Offence that a Man commits against his Neighbour hath a two fold Guilt in it one as it relates to God another as it relates to his Neighbour whom he hath offended the Offence against God is either forgiven upon sincere Repentance or if not repented of is to be punished after Death at the great Day of Account but the Offence or Guilt as it relates to the Neighbour offended as in case of Oppression Murther or the like is not so pardoned upon sincere Repentance as not to be punished either in this Life or some time after as probably by living again and then receiving that punishment if the Person offended have not Satisfaction made to him or perhaps it may be allowed that if the offended Person doth forgive the Offender upon his sincere Acknowledgment of the Offence Satisfaction being made that way he is not liable to Punishment for it either in the present Life or the future And is deserveth our serious Consideration that God will not only have us seek his Forgivenness in order to receive his Pardon but we must seek Forgiveness from the Persons that we have offended in order to have them forgive us also or otherwise there seemeth a Punishment suitable to the Offence to remain due to him that offendeth which cannot be supposed to be at the Day of Judgment in such a particular Case when the Offence is forgiven of God as to his part And it is worthy also of Observation that under the Law in case of Theft or Robbery no Sacrifice could avail without Restitution and in case of murder even as it is at this day Repentance doth not expiate the Crime without giving Life for Life as among Men tho' possibly it may be allowed that if one murther the other and the Person murther'd sincerely forgive him at the instant of death it may so alter the Case that the Punishment of Death may not be required of him in any following Revolution for every Man hath a Right given him of God as his Creator to his Goods and Life and if a Man take this Right from him by Injustice Justice requireth it to be restored to him by some Satisfaction of the thing it self or the Equivalent which to use the Author's Words may be called the same Analogick measure But now if God hath pardoned the Offence as it immediately relates to him but the Offended Person hath not pardoned it it is no Analogous measure of Punishment for the Offender to be cast into Hell Fire for his Offence barely against his Neighbour when God hath forgiven it as it respecteth him and therefore it seemeth probable it must be punished with some suitable and analogous Punishment either in the present or â—uture Life by Revolution before the Day of Judgment seeing the Punishment of Hell Fire upon the supposition of God's forgiving what relates immediately to him is too severe and â—o way Analogous in that Case and seeing the places of Scripture above-cited seem chiefly to relate to Men's Offences against their Neighbours the Punishments seem chiefly or rather only to relate to the times of Life here in this World and not to that which is to come when it may be supposed that God hath forgiven or may forgive afterwards the Offence as immediately relative to himself 2. It is a Maxim among the Mystick or Cabbalist Authors that seemeth very agreeable both to Scripture and good Reason si sit judicium infra non est judicium supra i. e. If Judgment be executed here below in this World it is not executed above or in the World to come for the same Offence for no Earthly Judge punisheth twice for the same Offence may it not therefore be allowed that to prevent the severe Punishment of Hell Fire that cometh upon the finally Impenitent it pleaseth God to punish Men here in this World with less severe Punishments than Hell Fire which is the most severe according to which there is a Maxim among the Hebrew Mystick Authors that God doth punish the People of Israel with long and great Punishments in this World that they may escape the more severe Punishment of Hell Fire in the World to come they believing that every Israelite shall inherit the Felicity of the World to come however severely they are here punished for their Sins in order to their Amendment all their Punishments here being Fatherly Corrections and this may not only be extended to all the natural Branches of Israel but to all God's Elect and Heirs of Salvation of Gentiles as well as of Jews and seemeth well warranted by Scripture both of the Old and New-Testament that saith all Israel shall be saved and the whole House of Israel which comprehendeth all God's Elect every where both of Jews and Gentiles and thus the Cabbalists expound the place in the Mystical Sense Gen. 25.28 Isaac loved Esau 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quia venatio in ore ejus because the Hunting or Prey was in his Mouth see the Hebrew Text understanding the word His to relate not to Isaac but to Esau himself Isaac foreseeing by the Spirit of Prophecy that Esau's Posterity should greatly afflict the Posterity of Jacob in the latter Days for a Punishment of their Sins and he fore-seeing that this Punishment should be for their Good and to prevent their being punished with Hell Fire in the World to come therefore he loved Esau the rather on that account and accordingly the Jews recâ—oâ— that the Gentiles or Nations that so hardly now use them are of Esau and do but fulfil Isaac's Prophecy that they may only have evil things here in this World that so they may escape greater vils in the World to come as Christ said concerning Lazarus He had his evil things in this Life And why many good Men are so greatly afflicted with Poverty and other Chastisements in this Life seem to have a reference to the like Case The places of Scripture above-cited by the Author prove not that this Life is no time of Recompense in any Case for he granteth that in some Cases it is and these places indeed prove as well as common Experience daily teacheth us that many wicked and cruel Oppressors escape Punishment in this present time of Life but that they are not punished in their Posterity some time before the end of the World they prove not and that cited place in Job 27. seemeth rather to prove the contrary even that Oppressors and wicked Men are punished in their Children and Posterity as v. 19. God layeth up his Iniquity see the Marginal Note i. e â—he Punishment of his Iniquity for his Children he rewardeth him and he shall knew it but how this is done will appear more hereafter In his Answer to the second Query from Rev 13.10 he restraineth that He particularly to some bloody Persecutor of the Christian Religion either Nero or Domitian or both who having butchered the Christians were butchered themselves and the Româ—ns afterwards
taken Captives by the Goths and Vandals so that they had the same measure meted to them again in this Life Reply As his applying that place of Scripture by a particular Limitation or Restriction to Nero or Domitian is very singular and contrary to the general Sense of Expositors so it is very absurd for it relates to some great Series or Succession of bloody Persecutors after the beginning of the 42 Months and entring of the Apostacy and the time of the Churches flight into the Wilderness for the same space of time otherwise call'd 1260 Days or three Years and a half as the Context maketh plainly appear many of which Persecutors as the persecuting Emperors in the fifth sixth and following Centuries after Christ's Resurrection died a natural Death in their Beds when they then lived and yet here it is foretold by John That they and such as joyned with them in bloody Persecution should suffer the like Punishment in their Posterity and Successors in after Ages as propably hath been in part already fulfil'd and yet is more to be fulfil'd But Math. 26.52 Speaketh universally For all they that take the Sword shall perish with the Sword said Christ In his Answer to the third Query he giveth away the Cause more than he is aware of or understandeth if he knew the manner of the Revolution as it is generally held by the chief defenders of it he would go near to say the same for they hold that Men are not only punished in their Posteitry and successors by Revolving in them but that Ancestors do frequently Revolve in their Children in After-Ages in order to Conversion together with them But that this noted place in Rom. 11. should only be understood of the Posterity of them that should live in these After-ages yet to come excluding the Fathers and Ancestors is expresly contradictory both to this place and many other places of Scripture that say all Israel whereas the Posterity excluding the Fathers of so many Ages and Generations backwards would be butâ— very small part of Israel And indeed the many Arguments used by Paul in that Chapter to prove that the natural Branches that were cut off by them in belief shall be grafted in again even all of them by true Faith in Christ Jesus either proveth that the Fathers that dyed in their unbelief shall be grafted in again or the Apostles Arguments seem not effectual and of force for he Argueth universally concerning them all and not a part of them See ver 16 24 26 27 31 32. In his Answer to the fourth Query he again wrongs the Person querying saying he concludes whereas he but querieth the meaning of that place of Scripture Matth. 23.35 And he wholly passeth by that which is most material in that passage viz. That these Jews to whom Christ spake are charged expresly with slaying Zacharias whom they slew said Christ between the Temple and the Altar now if they had no share in it how could he charge it upon them as their Fact But his main defence is that by these words of Scripture Exod. 20. where it is said God visits the Sins of the Fathers to the third and fourth Generation God doth not limit his Justice as if it did never reach Offenders beyond the third and fourth Generation a greater number doth not exclude the less but contain the lesser under it Reply What is this but to sport with Scripture to put such strained Sence and Contradiction upon it He may as well say when the Scripture saith There were eight Persons saved in the Ark he may at this rate of perverting Scripture say there were eighty or eight hundred or as many more as he may fancy and defend himself by alledging if there were eighty or eight hundred there were eight but this is meer trifling instead of solid answering God said an Edomite was not to enter the Congregation of Israel until the fourth Generation nor a Bastard or Moabite until the tenth But it would be a gross perversion of Scripture to extend the Edomites enterance beyond four Generations or the Bastards and Moabites beyond ten seeing the Scripture preciesly mentions these numbers His Example out of Scripture as 1 Sam. 2.31 32. 2 Kings 5.27 and 1 Sam. 15.2 prove not what he intends unless be had proved that these Mens Posterity did neither Sin in their Fathers nor that their Fathers by Revolution did not live in them but in this he falleth short not understanding the true and real Hypothesis of that Doctrine which he undertaketh to refute but that he faith it is no injustice in God to punish Children for their Fathers Faults when they imitate their Fathers wickedness I answer if their Sin be only bare imitation and doing the same wicked things they are justly punished indeed for their own Faults but if they were not accessary to their Fathers Sins but only that they commit the same Sins they are punished for their own Sins according to that place of Scripture Every one shall die for his own Iniquity the Son shall not bear the Iniquty of the Father but the Soul that sinneth shall die and every one that eateth the sower Grapes his Teeth shall be set on edge But their Fathers Sins are not imputed to them only for their bare imitation but for having a share in their very Sins either whilst they were in their Fathers Loins and acting in them which is one Branch of the Revolutions or afterwards living together with them in distinct Bodies And because according to the Hypothesis of the Revolutions as delivered by Cabbalist and Mystick Writers the Souls of the Fathers do frequently Revolve in their Posterity as their Grand Children or Childrens Children therefore they are punished in and with their Children as their Children Sinned in and with them even as we all Sinned within Adam and his Sin is not our Sin by bare imputation as some alledge but by real participation the Souls of the Children while in their Parents Bodies being capable to act in them Good or Evil as it is said of Levi who received Tithes he paid Tythes in Abraham and though the Souls of his Bretheren were in Abraham as well as he yet it is not said of them but of him For his Reference to Dr. Cradocks Sermon on Eccles 9.2 I have not had oppertunity to see it and think it not material to enquire after it Next whereas he argueth that Christ maketh a manefest distinction between the Jews and their Fathers which he would not have done had they been the same Persons again he saith the same Men could not be the Children and Fathers too as our Inquirer imagines To this it is easily Replyed that though there is a manifest distinction betwixt the Fathers and the Children yet this hinders not but that without all Confusion the Children might have both Liv'd and Acted in their Fathers As Levi paid Tithes in Abraham and yet Levi was not Abraham And as the Souls