and Salvation at the General Day of Judgment Thirdly Concerning the Prayers or Cries of these Souls for Vengeance upon their Persecutors Mr. W. and I are hotb agreed that they made no other Cry in this Text then the Blood of Abel made to God for Vengeance on his Murtherer and I conceive there was no real Prayer or Cry in either of these Cases but that God himself had taken special Notice in both these Cases and that whensoever they came before him hy Remembrance or any sort of Re-presentation his Intention always continued firm to take Vengeance for those Facts upon all those who had therein acted and continued in such wicked Practices without Saving Repentance until the time of their Deaths I have Inclinations to think that this Exposition of our proving Text is more sound and true than that which Mr. W. hath before made of it and hence I think the Consequence will be very clear That Mr. W's Argument drawn from this Text is not a sufficient nor a good Argument to prove the Separate Subsistence of Souls The Eighteenth Argument PAge 118. Rev. 14.13 Blessed are the Dead which die in the Lord from henceforth yea saith the Spirit that they may rest from their Labours and their Works do follow them P. 119. Mr. W. says By Blessedness in this Text must needs be meant Happiness and all Happiness implies Joy and all Joy implies Life and when he has rais'd Blessedness in this manner he infers from the Word henceforth that it must Commence presently upon the death of the Person wresting the signification of the Words from Henceforth which do properly signifie from the time of that Prophesie to signifie the time of every Man's Death which I do not find to be mentioned or intended by the Text And he adds The meaning of the Text being thus opened he seems to direct his following Discourse only to those who will accept the true Sense of the Text to be as he hath opened it and to them he thus argues If the Dead in the Lord do from the time of their being dead commence a Blessedness not only in resting from their Labours but likewise in being rewarded for their Works then do they continue to live in some part of them which is their Spirits and consequently their Spirits die not with their Bodies but are Immortal P. 120. Mr. W. offers to us That this Blessedness is said by the Spirit to be given from the time of Mens Deaths this he collects from the signification of the Words from Henceforth as if that intended from the time of their Death's whereas it appears in this Text to intend no more but that from the time of this Prophesie the Dead which die in the Lord shall have a blessed Rest and their Works do follow them P. 121. Then Mr. W. pretends That the dead Saints do not only enjoy a blessed Rest but that they also enter upon and enjoy Rewards for their Works as soon as they are dead but I find no Ground for this Opinion in the Text but conceive he thought it was there because he had a great Mind it should be there as a thing that would have done him more Service than any thing that he can find in the Text besides Mr. W. says further If no Rewards of active Happiness and Joy followed immediately after Death it would be wonderful the Spirit of God should pronounce a Blessedness on such as die in the Lord above those who live on Earth in the Lord and this would be contrary to the Sense of all God's People and specially to the Sense of such as Administer Comfort to dying Persons from this Topick by telling them that immediately after Death their Souls shall by Angels be transported into Heaven or Paradise or Abraham's Bosome or some such Place where they shall not only be at rest but have present Joys and Happiness conferr'd upon them and I grant that if such Doctrine prove otherwise than true many Persons may have been deceived of their confident Expectations and more may still in future happen so to be And therefore I think it needful to take further Consideration and so make a stricter Scrutiny concerning the Truth of this Doctrine than in former Times and Ages hath been commonly done amongst Men. Mr. W. says He thinks there are none of God's People who would not rather chuse to live upon Earth tho' under Persecution then to die and be buried in the Earth He says it is evident That from the time of dying the Saints are blessed with Rewards for their Work as well as from their Labour I reply I am very sorry that I am not able to find in this Text an Argument or any of his former the thing which he says is so evident intending I presume to himself and some such other Persons as may be strongly fixed in his Opinion and Belief touching this Point concerning which and this Text I intend to make a little more large Examination The Words therefore are And I heard a Voice from Heaven saying unto me write Blessed are the Dead which die in the Lord from henceforth yea saith the Spirit that they may rest from their Labours and their Works do follow them I do not find in this Text any Words which signifie or import that Men shall be rewarded for their Works presently after Death otherwise than by a Blessed Rest from their Labours It is said indeed That their Works do follow them but there is no time mention'd when they shall overtake them And I desire Mr. W. and his Party from henceforth that they will cease from perverting the Sense of the Word from Henceforth in this Text by applying its Energy to the time of Mens Deaths whereas in the words of our Text it stands clearly apply'd to the time when this Prophesie was revealed to St. John and whereas Mr. W. says That none of Gods Saints upon Earth would willingly embrace Death but rather chuse a longer Life upon Earth altho' under a state of great Persecution if they did not expect Heavenly Rewards presently upon the death of their Persons and he says You shall never perswade People to a contented departure out of this World by telling them they shall presently enjoy a blessed Rest in the Lord and therefore they must be told of and perswaded to expect Glorious Rewards in Heaven presently after their passing out of this World I confess thereupon that Mens mistakes upon this Account may be very great and very universal but do by no means believe the first part of his Assertion viz. that there are no Saints or People upon Earth who are willing to accept of Death whensoever God shall appoint it to come upon them under a great contentment of Mind and the Satisfaction which they may receive from this Text That they shall have a blessed Rest in the Lord safe from all the Temptations and Tribulations of this World and from the Power and Malice of wicked Men
Time and not an Intent of our Lord to teach either Jews or Christians what the true state of Men after Death should be First It declares a great distance of space to be between Dives and Lazarus and that there was a great Gulf fixed so that none could pass from the one Place to the other and yet Abraham and Dives had a familiar Discourse between them without straining their Voices Secondly they saw and knew and spake to one another without the use of Eyes or Tongue or Ears as Mr. W. will suppose although the Text do not declare it to be so but speaks of Dives as having all these Members of a Man And therefore I Collect That if this Text prove any thing of the state of Men after Death it proves amongst the rest that the Persons suffering have Eyes and Ears and Tongue and like Bodily Members and that the Suffering there is principally if not only applied to the Body and his Tongue being eminently tormented in that Flame or Fire Thirdly this Parable imports That the Tormented and by the Rule of Contraries the Happy Souls have Remembrance and Care concerning those things they left upon Earth and concern themselves about their Friends Happiness or Misery Whereas Solomon says The Dead know not any thing and David says That in Death all Mens Thoughts perish and Job agrees That all Concerns perish with Death And Solomon names particularly Mens Love and their Hatred Isa 38 18. Hezekiah sings to God The Grave cannot praise thee Death cannot celebrate thee they that go down into the Pit cannot hope but the Living can only praise Thee as I do this day And thereupon I leave to Consideration whether our Parable in this Point do not oppose the fore-quoted and divers other Texts of Scripture and even the common Opinion of the Reformed Churches Fourthly I Recite a former Observation That if our Parable intended Dives to be in Hell in his Soul only then Abraham and Dives discoursed both unproperly and untruly in calling one another by the Names of Father and Son For that Mr. W. and his Partakers say That was a Spirit newly created by God which true Being and Subsistence before it was infused or injected into Dives his newly procreated Body without the Parents having any part in the Generation of it Thus the Soul of Dives came not from Abraham or any of his Posterity and how is he then his Son Mat. 22.42 Our Lord quotes David calling Christ his Lord and demands How is he then his Son And the Jews were not able to Answer him a word to that Question And this I apply to the Question which I last asked and from the Premises I conclude that our Lord did not by this Parable intend to teach the true State of Men after Death but to Illustrate that Assertion which he had before delivered by a Similitude drawn from that Opinion which the Jews then commonly held of the State of Men after Death The Seventh Argument PAge 74. Mr. W. quotes Luke 23. and recites the History of the Thief upon the Cross and the Promise made to him by Christ of his being with him in Paradise I say thereto Mr. W. hath urged this Proof before in this Treatise and I have given him thereto such an Answer as satisfies my own Understanding And because it is of some length I have no mind here to repeat it but rather make choice to offer an Argument raised from other Scriptures in Impeachment of the Verity and Credit of this Relation and begin with considering the Person of our Evangelist St. Luke who was it seems converted to the Faith by the Ministry of Paul whose Emanuensis he is conceived to have been in the writing of this Gospel And it seems that this Evangelist was not converted till divers years after our Lord's Crucifixion and we know that St. Paul was not only an Infidel but a Persecuter of the Church for some years after our Lord's Death We no where find that either of them was present beholding that Execution and probable it is that neither of them were so In the Proem to his Gospel Luke to Theophilus says thus It seemed good to me having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first to write unto ye in order even as they delivered them to us who from the beginning were Eye-witnesses and Ministers of the Word Thus he professes to write from the Tradition of other Men who had been Eye-witnesses of them and Ministers of the Word And of those Traditions I conceive this Relation of the Crucified Thief 's Conversion to be one If we shall consider the other Three Evangelists we must find them totally silent concerning this Fact and that they do not concur with St. Luke in their Testimonies concerning it We have good Assurance that St. John was present at our Lord 's Suffering and continued with him till the Time of his Expiration and yet he takes no Notice nor makes any Mention of this Thief 's Conversion And yet I think the Fact was so Remarkable as deserved to be Recorded if he had known it to be done St. Matthew was one of the Twelve called by Christ to be of his Apostles and continued Faithful to him to the end whence it seems likely he might be one of the Beholders of this Tragedy and yet he makes no Mention of this Thief 's Conversion Men generally suppose That Mark writ his Gospel from the Mouth of St. Peter and very probable it is that that great Apostle was present at the Suffering of his Master and yet St. Mark makes no Mention at all of this Conversion And hereupon it seems to deserve our Enquiry How Luke who was not present at that Fact should come to know the Particulars of it when the other Three Evangelists either did not know it or have utterly suppress'd their Knowledge and the Mention of it The Silence of the other Three Evangelists seems a competent Ground to question the Verity of St. Luke's Relation but that is not all for Two other of the Evangelists Matthew and Mark give an opposite and contrarient Testimony to that which St. Luke delivers concerning it Mat. 27.44 There were two Thieves crucified with our Lord and the People which passed by whil'st he was on the Cross reviled him saying Save thy self if thou be the Son of God and come down from the Cross And the Thieves also which were crucified with him cast the same in his teeth Which I conceive to be a True and Proper Translation of St. Matthew's Greek Words Mark 15.27 With Christ they crucified two Thieves the one on his right hand and the other on his left and they that passed by railed on him and they that were crucified with him reviled him Both these Texts in Greek agree in their Expressions Mat. 27.44 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mark 15.32 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Here our Translators in St. Matthew have render'd the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
a Conviction strong enough to oblige all People to a Concurrence in that Opinion because all these Evidences are resolvable into an Humane Authority upon which I have no Inclination to found such a Faith as is the Evidence of things not seen i.e. such a Belief as concerning which there is neither Doubt nor Question Mr. W. gives us here a long Testimony out of Josephus from whence we may collect that some Jews held one thing and some another concerning Souls Some thought of them that one sort liv'd in perpetual Prison after Death and another sort rose very shortly and Mr. W. says The generality of the Jews were of that Mind and says The Sadduces denied the Souls Immortality and shews that Josephus was no Friend of theirs Then Mr. W. quotes Joseph a Speaker saying That Mens Souls go to Heaven and then after a certain Revolution or Period are again commanded to live in Bodies Another Speaker says It is Misery to live and not to die for Death freeth our Souls from Prison into their most pure and proper Place so as whilst they are in the Body they may properly be said to be dead but this passes with me for a Platonick Fable concerning which enough has been spoken This Jew says The Soul comes secretly into Men without being perceived and so departeth from them again I reply De non apparentibus non existentibus eadem est ratio I say also That where ever the Blood passes freely in the Body the Parts and Members are fresh and lively but where Obstructions hinders the rivage of Blood from passing the Bodily Parts and Members become withered and useless Mr. W. concludes It is clear that the Church of the Jews always held the Opinion of the Souls Immortality forgetting the Texts which I have before quoted which prove the Patriarchal and Mosaical Opinion to have been That the Life of Sensative Creatures lies in their Blood and other Opinion of the antient Jews hath he quoted none till that which he seems to collâ—ct out of the Discourse betwixt Saul and the Witch of Endor and which I do not agree to be proving nor do Job or David make any mention of Spiritual Souls so that Solomon's Writings are the first wherein we find mention of this sort of Souls of Mr. W. In his Third Chapter he doubts and in his Twelfth Chapter he says in few Words and Transiently The Spirit returns to God who gave it and there he is speaking of the dissolution of the humane Person and says The Body returns to the Dust as it was what became of the Spirit he did not perceive and therefore contented himself to say The Spirit return'd to God who gave it These are all the Arguments Mr. W. hath collected out of the Old Testament whence I am apt to inferr that he found no other Text in that Testament which made for his purpose but I think fit to mind him of the History in the second of Maccabees concerning the Martyrdom of the Seven Brothers by Antiochus there he shall find several of them declaring the Hope they had of being restored to their mangled Limbs at and by the Resurrection without mentioning their building of any Hope upon the Souls Seperate Subsistence whence I collect that Opinion had not yet prevailed amongst the Jews of those times It is also true that a Relation of this Martyrdom is subjoyned to the Works of Josephus as if it were of his Writing but I think the very great Verbosity of that Writing proves it to be none of his but it relates divers Sayings of these Brothers shewing the dependance of their Comfort upon the Souls Separate Subsistence and its immediate going to Heaven and this Difference proves to my Understanding that the Jews had alter'd their Opinion concerning their State after Death between the time of the Maccabees Writing and that wherein Josephus writ his Relation if the same be truly of his Writing P. 145. Mr. W. begins his Quotations of the Ancient Fathers for proof of the Souls Seperate Subsistence I have not the opportunity of examining his Quotations with the Originals and therefore do not find it reasonable to deny or question the verity of any of them taking them therefore for veritable I agree they give very strong Testimony that those Writings of the Fathers by him quoted prove the Belief of the Writers to have been much consonant to his Opinion and I proffer only this Gloss upon the last of them viz. that of St. Ambrose who remembers our Lord went to prepare a place for his Disciples unto which I would add that which follows next after in the Text When I have prepared fitting places for you I will come and receive you to my Self that where I am ye may be also This coming of Christ I conceive to intend his second coming to Judgment and then and not till thâ—n that which our Lord says in this Text may be accomplished It seems his words quoted out of Iraeneus do not prove the Souls immediately going to Heaven after Death but to a Paradise or place of Pleasure distinct from Heaven and yet I allow them to be a good Proof that Iraeneus by them intends a Belief of the Souls Seperate Subsistence His second Author which he quotes he calls the Author of the Responses Apud Justin This I do not think fit to accept as the Opinion of Justin Martyr Thirdly For the saying of Polycarpus he quotes no Author from whence he took it whence it possibly may be taken from Baroneus His Fourth Quotation out of Origen seems no strong Proof because he was a perfect Platonist both before and after his Conversion to Christianity Fifthly His Quotation out of Tertullian speaks of such a place for the reception of departed Souls as is far above the Infernal places and a place of refreshment of the Souls of the Just when they are departed out of this Life where they shall abide to the Resurrection yet takes it for a different place from Heaven and I agree it proves his Agreement to the Souls Seperate Subsistence His Sixth Quotation out of Cyprian seems very full to his Purpose that the Martyrs Souls went immediately to Heaven In his Seventh Quotation concerning the Oration of Constantine I find no Expression in it that proves strongly for him save that Emperour 's discoursing concerning the Souls Immortality upon which I think he might very well dispute without making any certain Conclusion thereupon His Eighth Quotation out of Gregory Nyssen seems to me partly Platonick Ninthly What Prudentius says seems but to be rendring the Parable of Dives in Verse Tenthly Gregory Naz. who calls the Body and this Life the Prison of the Soul follows therein the Platonick Doctrine P. 152. Mr. W. says He has thus given us the Judgment of the Primitive Church for the Four first Centuries of it which is no small Argument of the Truth of the Souls Immortality and of the same Opinion have the
men in England who do not only with you deny the possibility of the Souls Seperate subsistence but do also deny the being of any sort of Spirits whatsoever I desire to rectifie one of his Expressions in this Paragraph in the saying There are other men who with you deny the possibility of the Souls Seperate subsistence which I would have thus read There are other men who with you deny the probability of the Souls Seperate subsistence and if this alteration happen to be refus'd me I will also refuse to be comprehended under the words with you Page 7. He says Men cannot be certain that Souls do not subsist in a state of separation after Death or that they are not in a state of happiness or misery till the Resurrection I answer That if such things were once made certain and clear to us we should need to remain no longer in a doubting condition as we now do and therefore we do heartily wish and desire that God would please so far to inlighten some man or men with a certain or clear knowledge of the truth in this point as that they may be able to clear the same to the understanding and minds of such persons as are very desirous to be farther and fully instructed in this great Point and divers other particulars thereupon depending Page 5. Mr. W. seems to expect rather thanks than blame for endeavouring to clear up to mens minds the truth in this Question and in this I am fully agreed with him and am ready to give to him or any other man who proceeds candidly and fairly as he doth my sincere and hearty thanks for such labour of love with intent to draw others from the evil of their ways of Errour of in Practices P. 6. Mr. W. says I conceive some who embrace the Opinion of the Souls Materiality may be otherways good Christians and are by this Opinion the most enemies to themselves and therefore he deserves their thanks for endeavouring to draw them out of it And I commend his Charitable Profession and Practice wherein he exceeds divers other maintainers of the Souls Immortality and give him my iterated thanks for endeavouring to draw me and others out of those Apprehensions or Opinions which he thinks at the best to be our mistakes and errours and thus I part with his Epistle to the Reader to make some such farther Observations upon his following Treatise as to my own understanding shall appear fit and reasonable to be done HIS Treatise stands divided by himself into several Chapters to each of which I purpose to apply the Observations intended to be made towards the discovery and clearing of the Truths therein deliver'd and the answering of such Objections or Inferences as he may have drawn from them or built upon them without true or sufficient grounds for his so doing CHAP. I. PAge 1. he pretends here to speak of the Soul as if the Point in dispute were already granted him or were judicially determin'd to be on his side for he says speaking of the Soul that when she is born down with melancholy damps of her muddy tabernacle so as to think that at death she shall be turned into sensless stupid dust she strait grows sad and affrighted and then upon the consideration of her own Immortality she clears up her doubts and receives great comfort upon the Opinion which she hath of her being so qualified Hereupon I observe he seems to take for granted that the Soul hath thoughts or conceptions of her own by reflection upon her self or otherways without being therein assisted by the bodily Organs of that person wherein she resides now whether she hath such thoughts of her own or not himself very well knows to be one of the main Points in our Controversie for that all Materialists do maintain she hath no thoughts activity or being but in the Body and therefore can do nothing without it I have formerly quoted Aristotle de Anima where he calls it a very Improper way of Speaking for men to say The Soul is sorrowful or learned or wise and that they might as well say the soul weaves or builds because all these and the like Qualities are not Powers of the Soul but of the Man and therefore our Author should have said when the man is born down by the sad Contemplations of Death or any other accident he may take comfort from the high Conceptions of his Immortality but in the mean time it seems Mr. W. stumbles dangerously at the very Threshold or Entrance of this Dispute and must either have that granted him which he knows his Opponents do utterly deny or otherways all that he says in this Paragraph must pass for a Non sequitur without serving to any purpose in the Dispute of that Question which he at this time pretends to handle P. 2. He goes on and says He cannot believe his Souls confidence of her own Immortality to be a distempered fit of her spirit prone to believe that to be which she desires may be because he finds men of the best tempers and practices to be of that Opinion as if this Opinion of the Souls Immortality were a plant that co0uld spring and thrive only in a pure Conscience and a Mind united to God He says This confidence of the Souls Immortality is so appropriate to the wisest and best of men as it seems an absurd suggestion that it should have risen from mens own Imaginations but it seems rather evident that the Souls of men having in some measure recovered their pristine holiness and integrity they thence begin to know themselves and their alliance to the great God and see plainly that they do not only bear his Image in righteousness and holiness but likewise in Immortality Upon this Paragraph I observe that no man charges the Opinion of the Souls Immortality that it is a bare Imagination of mens idle brains or phantasies but we are ready to grant that this Opinion is founded upon antient and great Authority and was first introduced into the Heathen World by the Doctrine of Phericides Syrus whose Scholar Pythagoras built upon that Conception his Opinion of the Transmigration of Souls from one Creature to another with a general Community both to Men and Beasts which Opinion was generally received by the World of his time and was thence propagated to future Generations and continues at this day to be firmly believed in the Eastern Parts of the World of India China and Japan Plato became a Scholar to the Successors of Pythagoras in that Doctrine and Opinion which by his Genius became somewhat refined by rejecting a Community of Souls formerly supposed to be betwixt Men and Beasts and confining the Transmigration of Humane Souls to the Bodies of Men only conceiving withal that some more perfect and pure Souls amongst them might so have acted in Bodies wherein they lived as they might deserve to be delivered from the Drudgery of acting Humane Bodies any longer and
confident in the Merit of their Actions who I think make the greater Number of People in the World his Opinion of the Souls Immortality and the immediate passing from Death to Judgement and fiery Condemnation of ill deserving People gives Terror and Affrightment rather than Comfort and Support to by far the greatest part of People in the World and if the Tenet be not true and cannot be sufficiently proved to the Understandings and Consciences of Men it may then pass for a Scare-Crow to the Bad and a Staff of Reed to such good People as may put their Confidence in it Mr. W. further demands Can any hearty Lover of the Lord Jesus think of the Interruption of his Communion with him from Death to Judgment without great Regret and Trouble of Mind And he says He is sure the Generation of the Righteous think it much otherwise To this I Answer That the Generation of the Righteous may think some one thing and some another and thereupon I conceive that divers of them will be very well contented with such a Portion of Happiness as the Spirit in the Revelation tells us they shall enjoy in the Words Yea saith the Spirit they rest from their Labours and their Works do follow them and at the end of that Rest shall overtake them and be joined again to them at the end and time of their intended Resurrection P. 5. He further demands Is this enough to quiet the fervent Longings of the Divine Nature in us after Immortality and to satisfie our lively Hope of an Eternal Life with God and the Lamb Away says he This is but to trifle with the greatest Concernments of the Lords People To which I Answer This seems but a Rhetorical Flourish without any true Substance in the matter of it It seems a kind of Cant which I do not well understand when he speaks of quieting the servent Longings of the Divine Nature in us after Immortality This may perhaps seem plain to Men of his Kidney and Constitution but to me it looks like a Riddle me what is this For I know of no Divine Nature in one man more than in another and I do not conceive it natural for Men to be troubled with such Longings after Immortality as he pretends here to describe I think Men do sometimes long for things which they do desire and have a likely and very strong Hope to obtain but those who entertain no Hopes of an Intermediate State betwixt Death and the Resurrection must be very weak in their Rationals if they trouble themselves with any Longings after such a State or receive any Disappointment upon their going without it P. 6. Mr. W. enters into somewhat a long Discourse wherein he largely Censures and Condemns such as maintain the Souls Extinguishment at the Dissolution of the Humane Person I will spend no Time in giving particular Answers thereunto but content my self with only saying thereupon that it all wants Proof and passes with me for a Non sequitur which hath no strength of Argument in it concerning that Question about which we now differ P. 7. Mr. W. quotes that Prophecy which gives A Woe to those who make the Hearts of the Righteous sad whom the Lord hath not made sad and Applies those Words to those who oppose his Opinion of the Souls Immortality And thereupon this seems to be the Case those who maintain a Point of Doctrine contrary to Truth which may make the Righteous sad the Woe pronounced by this Prophet pertains to that Maintainer whence if the Souls Extinguishment at the Death of the Party be not true it may probably make the Hearts of some Righteous People sad whom God hath not made sad and then our Prophets Woe may justly be imposed upon such Maintainers But if otherwise it should so fall out that this Opinion be True and that of the Souls Immortality be an Error Then those whose Hearts are made sad by that Doctrine which I conceive are by far the greatest Number of People in the World are so sadned by an Erroneous Tenet deliver'd without a sufficient Warrant from God And in this manner the Hearts of such People will be made sad whom God hath not made sad And thereupon I conclude that if the Doctrine of the Soul's Immortality be not True the Woe delivered in this Prophecy will as justly take hold of the Maintainers of it as it will do upon their Opposers if they maintain an Errour altho' they may think themselves to have the Right in this Point P. 7. He pretends that we have or may have once learn'd to know that God hath framed us for an uninterrupted perpetuity of living I say to this I am assured in my self and both can and do assure my Reader that if I did know or believe what he says in this Place to be true I would readily submit to his Dictator-ship in it without any further proceeding in a Dispute of this Nature But I do neither know nor believe the Truth of what he says in this Place conceiving it still more probable that the Soul extinguisheth at the Death of the Person and is neither Immortal nor Intelligent having no other Place of Subsistence but in the Body CHAP. II. PAge 8. Mr. W. says That he will enquire into the divers Acceptations of the Word Soul in Scripture or what is there usually intended by that Term and says in Scripture there are five Significations thereof First he says The Soul is there taken for the whole Person of Man Secondly Soul is there taken for the Body of Man only Thirdly Soul is taken for the Life of the Body Fourthly he says Soul is taken for the dead Carcass of a Man Fifthly The Word Soul is taken for the Rational Soul of Man whereby he stands in a kind of Level with Angels By which I suppose he intends the Humane Soul producing Life and Action in the Person which he says is Immortal and labours to prove it so and therefore brings Instances out of Scripture to shew the Truth and Practice of these Significations And hereupon I observe That his first Acceptation of the Word Soul for the whole Person of Man constituted of Soul and Body is very common throughout the whole Course of the Scripture well proved by the Instances which he gives to which Hundreds more might be added if any need should arise for the so doing But the Instances of his Second Signification seem not to prove what he intends by them for that the Iron entering into Joseph's Soul seems not to be intended only of his Body but of his Person for that his Body without a Soul could not be sensible or capable of suffering thereby His next Instance is of sending Leanness into the Souls of those that eat the Quails It seems the Word Soul here doth also intend the whole Persons of the Eaters for that Bodies cannot eat or be nourished without their Souls Concerning his Third Saying That Soul is taken
to offer that Answer to his Question And more to entangle the Matter he propounds a New Question demanding If it were an Extasie what was the Nature of that Extasie I Reply I pretend not to be able to tell him the Nature of any Extasie Trance or Vision which may happen to Men because I suppose them to be super-humane Actions inexplicable from the known or common Principles of Humane Nature And therefore without farther Answer to his Question about the Nature of an Exâ—asie I profess to Believe that the Answer before given viz. That St. Paul was in a Trance at that time is enough notwithstanding his saying That it is not enough and that it will pass for a good Answer and Solution of his first Question upon which all the rest depends I do not pretend to make such Interpretations of difficult Scriptures as are likely to satisfie all Perusers but count it enough if thereupon I can satisfie my own Understanding As to my best Judgment I have done upon this Text without being afraid of Mens Censures of losing the Meaning of such a Dark Scripture instead of Interpreting it Mr. W. proceeds to say Till I hear a better Sense given of this Text of St. Paul than I have here given of it I will conclude from hence that the Apostle Paul doth imply that his Soul and so all other Mens Souls are whil'st in the Body of such a nature as may be seperated from the Body To this I Reply Our Author hath Power to take this Text of St. Paul in what Sense he pleases or thinks most reasonable as all other Readers may do and may thence Infer and Conclude as their Judgments or Affections or Prepossessions shall perswade them But I profess my self to conceive they build upon sandy Ground who draw that Inference from the Relation of St. Paul's Trance or any other Text quoted to prove Mr. W's Third Proposition That the Soul can subsist in a State of Seperation from the Body Because I judge the Evidences by me produced and my Constructions upon his Texts do more clearly prove the contrary Mr. W's Fourth Proposition is that the Scriptures affirm That when the Body dies the Soul is actually seperated from it In Proof of which he quotes Eccl. 12.7 Then shall the dust return to the Earth as it was and the Spirit shall return to God that gave it Upon which he says It is most clear that by Dust is here meant the Body and by Spirit the Soul of Life in Man In which Construction I do not much differ from him but do easily Agree That by Dust here is meant the Body and that by Spirit is intended the Spirit of Life in Man And thereupon I Observe That these Words of Solomon are a single and transient Expression concerning a Subject not mention'd in the rest of the Chapter either before or after and without a particular Occasion given or offer'd to speak of the State of Souls after Death and seems to have something of a Chance in the delivery of it And as I find no Introduction to this Expression nor Occasion given to speak of a Rational or Intelligent Soul in Man so I do not perceive that they do either mention or intend the Spirit of Man to be such a Soul as Mr. W. pretends it to be Solomon was here treating concerning the Decays of Man's Life and recounts by what degrees Death makes its Approaches till at last it prevails over the Person and then the Dust returns to the Earth as it was and the Spirit returns to God who gave it And the Question upon this Text seems to be what is meant by the Term of the Spirit and what is meant of its Return to God who gave it Our Author says That by the Spirit is intended the Soul of Life And I think I differ not far from him when I say That by the Word Spirit is intended the Spirit of Life We know that Solomon had a careful Education under a pious Father and was endued with a strong Inclination to search out the Natures of Things and thence we may certainly Conclude that he had carefully perused the Patriarchal Book of Genesis and the other Mosaical Writings and there had found written Gen. 9.4 Flesh with the Life thereof which is the Blood thereof shall ye not eat and surely the Blood of their Lives will I require at the hand of every Beast will I require it and at the hand of Man at the hand of every Man's Brother will I require the Life of Man Whoso sheddeth Man's Blood by Man shall his Blood be shed for in the Image of God made he Man Also Deut. 12.23 Thou mayest kill of thy Herd and of thy Flock in any of thy Gates only be sure that thou eat not the Blood for the Blood is the Life and thou mayest not eat the Life with the Flesh And Moses says cause that was the Life of the Creature There hath before been quoted God's breathing the Breath of Life into Adam's Nostrils and the breathing the Breath of Life into Adam's Nostrils and the breathing a like Breath into the Persons raised out of Ezekiel's dry Bones which caused Life in them all Gen. 6.7 God says I will destroy Man whom I have created from the face of the Earâ—h both man and beast Chap. 7.22 All in whose nostrils was the breath of life upon the dry land dyed in the flood both Man and Beast were suffocated and drowned in the Waters of the Flood by stopping those Passages through which this Breath of Life should other ways have enter'd Dan 5 23. Thou hast praised the gods of silver and gold but the God in whose hand thy breath is thou hast not glorified Intending God in whose hand thy Life is such a Life as through the Power of God is produced and maintained by Breath and Breathing These Quotations seem to prove that the Spirit of Life in Man is a Compositum of Parts as well as his Body and that the Composition of such Spirit of Life required is of Blood and Breath The Blood and Humours of their Bodies and their Spirits are absolutely necessary for the Life of Man and Beast by maintaining and nourishing the glowing and yet lambent Flame of Life which acts their Organical Bodies and causes a continual Circulation of their Blood to that Purpose and no less necessary for the producing and maintaining of Life is that Breath which God first breathed into Adam and since hath communicated and continued to all his Posterity which have been procreated from that Time to this There passes a Principle of Life in Semine which by Fimentation Fermentation and Coagulation in loco idoneo arrives in its appointed time to a Vegetation and perhaps lives without Breath or Breathing or with very little Assistance thereof until Nature drive it forth into the open Air where after it hath once taken Breath it can by no means be kept alive for many Moments
even down to latter times and the same Conception seems to have a Being and Substance in the Minds of some learned Persons until this time My Discourse concerning this sort of Spirit hath been deliver'd with intent to discover and evince That Solomon's Spirit returning to God who gave it was spoken and meant by him concerning this last sort of Spirit and I intend to recite some Arguments for the proving of this Construction First I Argue from the words or terms of the Text it self and say That it Solomon intended such a Soul as Mr. W. has described the Text it self seems not to be properly worded because I think nothing can be properly said to return to another thing except it had been a part or concomitant of that other thing before but Mr. W.'s sort of Soul seems never to have been a part or concomitant of God before its being put into the Body for the enlivening and acting of the Person I do not therefore well perceive how such a â—oul can be properly said to return to God but the Expression therereunto properly belonging should have been worded The Spirit goes to or goes before God with expectation to receive his Judgment and Sentence according to the demeanour of its Person upon Earth and I do not perceive how this Souls going to God for Judgment can be properly call'd a return to God who gave it Secondly I Argue I find not so much as one Text in Scripture which says the Souls of dying Persons go presently to God for Judgment nor any Text from whence this Opinion may be drawn by a rational Inference and that which makes nearest approaches to it of any that I know is the Parable of Dives where it is said the Begger died and was carried by Angels into Abraham's Bosom I know my Opposers will think it needless to ask them what is intended by the words The Begger was carried by the Angels into Abraham's Bosom and doubt not but they will soon make a bold Answer It neither was nor could be the Begger himself that was so carried in his whole Person Body and Soul into Abraham's Bosom and yet the Words of the Text seem to import that his whole Person Soul and Body was carried thither But if we shall grant their gloss upon this Text to be true that his Soul only was carried by Angels into Abraham's Bosom we may draw these inferences from that Relation either that his Soul was so ignorant as it knew not how to find a way to that Habitation or else was so weak and impotent as it was not able to pass thither without the Support and Ministry of Angels How then can we conceive that such a Soul as this should make its return to God presently upon the Death of its Person without mention of any other Assistance to be given it We hear nothing of Dives in the Parable but that being in Hell he lift up his Eyes and saw Lazarus in another place without mention of the means by which he came there and if we shall follow the common Conjecture that as Lazarus was carried to one place by Angels so Dives was hurried to the other by Devils it will appear very unlikely that Mr. W.'s sort of Soul is able to make its way and return to God at its Pleasure And here we Read the Begger 's Soul was carried by Angels into Abraham's Bosom without mention of its being carried or returning to God at all whence it seems probable that when Solomon speaks of the Souls returning to God he doth not intend such a Soul as Mr. W. hath described but rather such a Spirit as had first been a part oâ— parcel of the â—pirit of Nature or of God sent out for the enlivening and acting of a particular Person upon whose Death that Spark or Parcel of the Deity returns with a strong inclination to God who sent it out from himself for the enlivening â—nd acting of that particular Body and joyn'd it self again to its Totum as Water presently incorporates with Water and the particles of Air neither will nor can be seperated from the incorporating one of them with an other Thirdly I Argue That if Solomon had intended by the Words Returns to God who gave it a going of the Soul to God or before God for receiving the Doom of his intermediate Judgment it seems a matter of such great Moment as required a more full Discourse upon the same and giving us more Light in it than his very few words there do afford us And however it is very probable that he would not have immediately subjoyned to his Discourse which intimates an intermediate Judgment a Declaration and Description of the General Judgment for that would have been playing Judgment upon Judgment which must needs have past for false Heraldry We find in this Chapter that as soon as Solomon had writ the Words The Spirit returns to God who gave it he ceases to speak any further concerning the State of Man after Death till he come to the 14th or last verse of the Chapter where he sayes as a conclusion of his whole matter Fear God and keep his Commandments for God will bring every work into Judgment with every secret thing whether it be good or whether it be evil I think it not reasonable to conjecture that Solomon by his Returning of the Spirit to God who gave it did intend such a returning to God to be a going to him or before him for an intermediate Judgment for that if he had so intended he would not have immediately have mentioned and related the Certainty and Effect of the General Judgment as in this we see plainly he hath done and thus I leave Solomon's Words and the descant upon them to the further Consideration and Judgment of the Intelligent Reader Mr. W. goes on to quote Eccl. 3 20. Where he saith Solomon affirms that the Spirit of a Man goeth upward when he dieth adding that Solomon brings it in with an Intrrogation Who knoweth Not as if he doubted it for he cannot be said to doubt it since he delivered it most positively in the other verse intending as I conceive the Text last before quoted out of his 12th Ch. Hereupon I again declare I am no way satisfied with the manner used by our Author in his Quotations of Scripture The Text which in this place he quotes says thus Who knoweth the Spirit of Man that goeth upward and the Spirit of the Beast that goeth downward to the Earth Which to my understanding hath the same signification as if he had said Who knows the certain Truth of this Opinion That the Spirit of Man goeth upward and the Spirit of the Beast goeth downward to the Earth Or who knows whether this difference between the Spirits of Men and Beasts be real and true or not And further it seems to me that this Interrogation is Pregnant with a Negative and seems to have the same sense as if had said
Go thy way and as thou hast believed so be it done unto thee St. Luke relates it thus This Centurions servant was ready to die and when he heard of Jesus he sent unto him the Elders of the Jews beseeching him that he would come and heal his servant And they came to Jesus desiring him to do this Kindness for the Captain because he was a worthy Person and a Lover of the Jews and Jesus went with them towards the Captain's House and when he was not far from thence the Centurion sent Friends to him saying unto him Lord trouble not thy self for I am not worthy that thou should'st enter under my Roof wherefore neither thought I my self worthy to come unto thee but say in a word and my Servant shall be healed And Jesus thereupon turn'd him about and discours'd with those that followed him and they that were sent returning to the House found the Servant whole that had been sick Upon reading these two Relations I think it plainly appears That either this Centurion came Personally to our Lord to request his Servant's Cure or he did not come Personally to Christ for that purpose but sent the Elders of the Jews to request that favour upon his behalf Without that himself came either to Sight or Speech of our Lord upon that occasion I find no ground or reasonable guess which of our Texts deliver the absolute Truth in this Circumstance of the Fact which they relate but from this Variance and the other Instances before recounted I think it may reasonably be collected That Men are not bound to take and perhaps ought not to take every Saying or Sentence which they find written in the Scriptures to be an irrefragable Truth and the very Word of God And I am ready to apply this Tenet to the Sayings now in dispute with Mr. W. viz. Are not able to kill the Soul and have no more that they can do We find an apparent Variance between these Two Sayings and that the Words of St. Luke are adaequate and answerable to the Intent of our Lord's Doctrine in this place whereas those of St. Matthew have a double Aspect and look as it were two ways For one way it insinuates that Persecutors can do no more harm after they have killed Another way it seems next to an Assertion that Mens Souls live and subsist in a state of Seperation from their Bodies I do not by the Context or any other ways conceive that our Lord did speak or had any Intent to speak of the state of Men after Death in this Doctrine whence the Words Are not able to kill the Soul in that Prospect of intending to teach the state of Men after Death seems quite besides our Lord's Meaning in this Doctrine and if not quite out of it yet very plainly collateral to it And yet from this side-wind the Maintainers of Seperate Subsistence draw the strongest Proof which they can find for maintaining their Opinion of the Seperate Subsistence I think that upon perusal of this Argument it will appear the strength of this Proof is much weaken'd and abated and will be found to be of much less force than it seems to have at the first reading or hearing thereof and in this state of debilitation I leave it to prosecute my Observations upon Mr. W's Pages as I did before P. 64 Mr. W. pretends to take the disputed Words as Comments one upon another and says that by Construction they may be made to intend one thing And I am ready to grant that by Construction they may both of them be made to serve the Meaning of our Lord in this Doctrine but then in our Collateral Point which St. Luke doth not meddle with there is a very great Variance between these two Expressions for that the one proves strongly the Soul 's Seperate Subsistence and the other proves it not nor meddles with it at all Which proves that our Lord's Doctrine did not intend to speak of that Point in this place And therefore our Question thereupon is In what Words our Lord delivered this Doctrine And the Conclusion is That if he delivered this Doctrine in the Words of St. Matthew then they are a strong Proof of the Souls Seperate Subsistence but if his Doctrine were delivered in the Words of St. Luke then there is no Proof at all in it of the Souls Seperate Subsistence And I have before enough Argued on the side of St. Luke and for the Probability that his Text sets forth to us the very Words wherein our Lord delivered this Doctrine Mr. W. confesses That Luke expresseth less than Matthew but says He never meant less Which I think intends that the Meaning of Luke in his Text was That those who kill the Body are not able to kill the Soul Which Meaning doth not at all appear in the Words of Luke's Text which do not say so And how then Mr. W. should come to know that he meant so I do not understand and therefore I reject this Gloss upon that Text as Mr. W's own Invention or Fiction The Fifth Argument PAg. 65. Mr. W. raises an Argument for the Soul 's Seperate Subsistence from the Appearing of Moses and Elias and discoursing with our Lord upon Mount Tabor and says That Moses could not appear there in his Person Soul and Body because Deut. 34.6 says Moses died in the Land of Moab and He the Lord buried him in a Valley there over-against Beth-Peor but no man knoweth of his Sepulchre unto this day P 66. Mr. W. discoursing upon this Text says That Moses appearing at Mount Tabor must be either alive in Spirit only or else his Body was raised Adding I know that some conjecture that his Body was rais'd but they cannot prove that Conjecture from Texts of Scripture And therefore he thinks it more likely that Moses appeared in Spirit only intending I suppose in his Soul subsisting in a state of Seperation after Death Which I think to be no more than a Conjecture which he is not able to prove by Texts of Scripture any more than the former Conjecture can be so Proved And to these Two Conjectures I pretend to add a Third viz. That Moses may not have died in the Mount but might be translated or transported to Heaven in Person as Enoch and Elias had before been Which I offer to Prove by his Appearing with Elias at Mount Taber It seems they appeared both after a like manner and the one as much in Person as the other Mr. W. grants that Elias did appear in Person and Arguendo a simili it appears most likely that Moses did so too As to the Text which says Moses died and was buried I think fit to consider by whom this Book of Deuteronomy might be written and if the Promises thereof might be written by Moses or his Direction yet this closing Passage of it about his own Death and Burial it seems could not be so It appears not from whence the Opinion
of his Death and Burial was derived or how the Jews might come to know that he so died and was buried Deut. 3.27 Goe get ye up into the Top of Pisgah and take a view of the Land And Chap. 34. says Moses went up from the Plains of Moab to the Top of Pisgah and died there The Words of both Texts seem to intend that Moses went up alone into the Top of this Mountain and told the Jews before his going up that he was to die there and they never saw or heard more of him after that time whence they might according to the common course of the World in such Cases reasonably enough conjecture that he died there and was buried according to the Custom of the World without finding any Evidence or Truth of such a Burial Whence I conceive his being buried was but a Conjecture of the Jews because they could not find what was become of the Body altho' probably they made a great Search for it Whence I Collect that his dying in the Mount and his being buried thereabouts was but a Collection or Conjecture of the Jews from his own not returning to them and their not being able to find his Body by their most diligent Search And Collecting from these Premises I am ready to infer as a Probability that Moses was translated and therefore neither dead nor buried and yet was never seen or heard of after nor could they by search find any place of his Burial or what other ways was become of him and I offer his Appearance at Mount Tabor as the best ground I have for this Conjecture conceiving that it might please God the Jews might not know of that Translation for that if they had known of his immediate going to Heaven they might have been apt to direct Prayers thither to him to intercede with God for their Nation as he often successfully did whil'st he was here upon Earth I have said before that Mr. W's Opinion of Moses's appearing at Mount Tabor in Soul only cannot be proved by any Text of Scripture is but his or at the most a humane Conjecture And I grant that his appearing in Person at Mount Tabor is also a humane but I think a more reasonable Conjecture And to this whole fifth Argument drawn from Mens Collections and Conjectures thereupon I Answer That Men expect more Clear and Assertory Proofs of the Soul 's Seperate Subsistence than this or such like Arguments can afford them The Sixth Argument PAg. 67. Mr. W. founds his Sixth Argument upon that which is delivered to us in the Parable of Dives And first he grants that Relation to be a Parable and not a real Story adding That Parables are shadows of Discourse by which are set forth things that are real and substantial And I grant they may be Instructive concerning those Matters for whose Illustration they were purposely delivered and yet even in those things I do not take them to be proving Mr W. says further That Tertullian Augustine and the rest of the Fathers did much build their Faith of the Souls Immortality and of Mens Happiness or Misery immediately after Death before the Judgment of the Great Day upon this Scripture I observe he avoids calling it this Parable I know not whether what he says concerning the Fathers building their Belief of such things upon this Parable be true or not but conceive that if this Parable was really the principal Foundation of that Belief it had but a very soft and sandy Foundation so as the building thereupon erected will not be enough able to resist the Storms Rains and Floods which may happen to assault it He further quotes Ireneus and relates the gross Errours which he and Tertullian fell into by following this Parable too closely viz. so far as to think That a Seperated Soul has a Shape Eyes Mouth and other like Members of a Humane Body He repeats his Concession again That this Similitude of Dives and Lazarus is not Historical but Parabolical P. 68. Mr. W. says By Abraham's Bosome is meant a Place of great Pleasure and Happiness reserv'd for the Righteous when they have finish'd this Life And hereupon I observe a Variance between being carried to this Place of Pleasure and a going before God to an intermediate Judgment and conceive that the being carried to this Place stands in Opposition to the Text of Solomon The Spirit returns to God who gave it for Lazarus in this Parable neither went to God for Judgment nor return'd to Him by a natural Bent or Power of its own but was carried to this unknown Place by the Ministry of Angels P. 70. Mr. W. raises a Question Whether the Words and Sense of this Parable do speak of and import a State of Persons presently after their Death or such a State as shall overtake them at the Resurrection and the last Judgment And he spends divers Pages and Arguments in Proving That the Import of this Parable points to a State presently succeeding the Parties Death and not to that State which shall follow low upon the Resurrection but his Labour to this Purpose is needlessly bestowed upon me or others who may think as I do That the Sense of this Parable intends a State presently succeeding the Parties Death Here Mr. W. says Our Lord by this Parable intended to set forth an immediate state of Happiness for the Godly and of Misery for the Wicked I Reply to this That there appears no Evidence in the Context of our Lord's Intent how to Teach by this Parable There is no Discourse in any Part of the Context which might lead our Lord to speak of the State of Persons after Death but the Context immediately fore-going doth plainly intimate and prove the special Intent of our Lord in this Parable was to Illustrate and Confirm a Sentence which himself had lately before uttered viz. That there are things highly esteemed among men and yet are an Abomination in the sight of God And to this Purpose he describes the state of Dives with such Circumstances as make it highly esteem'd and desired amongst Men and sets Lazarus so low and in a Condition so miserable as one can hardly devise a worse Condition amongst Men notwithstanding whereof the Sequel of the Parable declares That the state of Dives though highly esteemed amongst Men was in the whole of it abominable to the sight of God and Lazarus's state tho' abominated by Men was in the whole more blessed than that of Dives was And I conceive thereupon that our present Parable was delivered by our Lord with special Intent to illustrate this Doctrine without any apparent Intent to teach concerning the State of People after Death and yet I do Agree this Parable to set forth or prove that the common Opinion of the Jews at that time was correspondent to the Descriptions made in this Parable but I conceive withal that divers Particulars therein specified prove it to be a Jewish Conception of that
Come up hither and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter and immediately he was in the Spirit and behold a Throne was set in Heaven And from thence he prosecutes his Revelation of things afterwards to be performed Our Apostle doth not say here That his Spirit was transported into Heaven or that he was there in his Soul only but says Immediately I was in the Spirit I my self was there my Person was there in the Spirit So that all which was there revealed was so revealed to himself or Person without Mention of any Seperation of his Soul from his Body any more than St. Paul hath mentioned it in his proving Text. Whence I conceive that during the space of this Revelation St. John was in a Rapture or Transport of his Mind as other Prophets had been before him and yet he had so perfect a Perception of the things revealed and was so well assured of the Truth of them and remembered them so well as if he had perceived and known them with his Bodily Senses of Seeing and Hearing and remembered them as well and he might possibly be as uncertain as St. Paul was whether this was a Rapture of his Person into Heaven or that it was only a Rapture of his Mind wherein this Revelation was made to him I have quoted these Four Parallel Texts of Scripture to evince or perswade that St. Paul in our Proving Text did not doubt whether his Soul was actually seperated from his Body but whether his Rapture into the Third Heaven was a Transport of his Person thither or whether this Transport was only a Rapture of his Mind I am by what hath been said satisfied in my own Understanding that St. Paul did not intend in this Text to teach concerning the Seperation of the Soul from the Body or that the Soul could subsist in such a State of Seperation and therefore I think that the Argument which Mr. W. draws from this Text for Proof the Souls Seperate Subsistence is unsound and fallacious and is by no means a good Proof of the Souls Seperate Subsistence The Twelfth Argument PAge 97. Phil. 1.21 23. To me to die is gain for I am in a straight betwixt two having a desire to depart and to be with Christ which is far better Hereupon Mr. W. argues That if St. Paul's Soul was Immortal then are all Mens Souls Immortal But Paul's Soul he says was Immortal Ergo He proves Paul's Soul to be Immortal by saying If Paul's Soul was in a better Condition at the Death of his Body than when it lived therein then was his Soul Immortal But he says Paul's Soul was in a better Condition after his Death than when alive which he proves by â—aying That which gained by the Death of the Body was much better out of the Body than in the Body But Paul's Soul gained by the Death of his Body and therefore was in a much better Condition out of it than before This he proves by Paul's saying To die was gain Secondly because the Soul at the Death of the Body he says would obtain such a Being with Christ as it had not in the Body Hence he Concludes the Souls of good Men are more happy out of the Body than in it and they cannot be so except they subsist in a State of Seperation from the Body P. 98. Mr. W. Objects thus against his own Argument That Paul in this Text speaks not a Word of his Soul but only of himself or his whole Person and that it is not fair for Mr. W. to argue a greater happiness of his Soul only at Death from St. Pauls speaking of a better condition that himself should enjoy at Death To this Objection he answers That Paul must in this Text when he speaks of himself only be understood as intending his Soul because Death could not possibly be again to his Body nor could Death bring him to a more blessed presence with Christ than he had whilst alive And against his own Doctrine he puts another Objection P. 99. as if some had said That Pauls desire to be with Christ after Death was only in expectation of happiness at the Resurrection Then Mr. W. answers this Objection which is not owned by me or any other which I have heard or read of and therefore it passes with me for another Man of Straw set up by himself to be batter'd down again by the same hand Phil. 20. I hope that in nothing I shall be ashamed but that Christ shall be magnified in my body whether it be by life or by death for to me to live is Christ and to die is gain but if I live in the flesh this is the fruit of my labour what I should chuse I wot not but am in a strait betwixt two having a desire to depart and be with Christ which is far better nevertheless to abide in the flesh is more needful for you I observe upon this Text that there is no mention of the Soul made in it although there is mention of the Body that Christ shall be magnified in it intending his Person by the Name of his Body In all the rest of the Text there is nothing else denoted but by the Terms of I and Me both which do properly denote and signifie the Person and all that which Mr. W. has raised out of this Text concerning the Soul or its Subsistence in a Seperate State from the Body seems to be the proper effect of his own Invention and not really founded upon St. Pauls Text before quoted Mr. W. hath said from the Text That to die is gain and that to die is better than to live here These two Sayings may I think be very properly applied to the Person that it may be gain for some Persons to die rather than live and consequently that it is better for such Persons to die than to live here Thirdly he says St. Paul gives the Reason why it is better for him to die than to live here because in departing hence he shall be with Christ I Answer We do not read in this Text That Paul chose rather to die because then he should be with Christ but says That if he did die he should be with Christ He had other Reasons for chusing Death rather than Life and took that for a Comfort and Support in obtaining this Choice that after Death he should still be with Christ in a State of Rest and Quietness which would be far better for him than that State which he now endured in this World Coloss 1.24 I Paul do now rejoice in my Sufferings for you and fill up that which is behind of the Afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his Bodies sake which is the Church We know that Christ's Sufferings for his Body sake the Church were great to which Paul in this place compares his own Sufferings and therefore we have reason to think they were great also Eph. 3.13 I desire that ye faint not
at my Tribulation Philem. v. 9. This Apostle was then Paul the Aged and a Prisoner of Jesus Christ. 2 Tim. 4.6 Paul says I am ready to be offered and the time of my departure is at hand Ver. 16. At my first Answer no man stood with me but all men forsook me but God stood with me and I was delivered out of the mouth of the Lion Philip. 4.14 The Philippians had sent a Present to supply St. Paul's Wants and in return he says Ye have well done that ye did communicate with my Affliction and supply my Wants and prays God to bless them for their so doing The several Texts thus collected seem to declare to us the State of St. Paul's Person at that time He was Paul the Aged a Prisoner under a necessitous and wanting Condition ready to be offered up by a dolorous Death having but lately escaped out of the Mouth of the Lion and that he lay continually under great Afflictions for the Church's sake and had the Care of all the Churches lying upon him All which Particulars considered our Apostle had great Reason to chuse Death rather than Life in all such Respects as did only concern himself for that by Death he should be delivered from the manifold Afflictions and Tribulations before-named and thereby attain a state of Rest and Blessedness in the Lord. Rev. 14.13 John heard a Voice from Heaven commanding him to write Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord yea saith the Spirit that they may rest from their labours and their works do follow them Rom. 14.8 Whether we live we live unto the Lord or whether we die we die unto the Lord whether we live therefore or die we are the Lord 's Chap. 8.35 Who shall seperate us from the Love of Christ Ver. 38. I am perswaded that neither Death nor Life nor Angels nor any other Creature shall be able to seperate us from the Love of God which is in Christ Jesus ' our Lord. Here we may observe Life and Death are made indifferent things to Believers such as seem neither to hinder nor further the State or Condition of them or to be either of them greatly desired by Christians in this World but rather ought to be referr'd to the Will and Appointment of God Luk. 20.38 God calls Himself The God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob and yet the Text says He is not the God of the dead but of the living for all live unto him Which to my Apprehension proves what before is said That whether we live or die we are the Lord's during Life we live and move in Him and when we die we rest and sleep in Him in expectation to be raised by Him at his Second Coming And from the Premises I Argue That all Mr. W's Suppositions and Surmises concerning the Soul and the Seperate State of it are ill grounded and unsound We read of many Persons whose Conditions were so much distress'd that with Job they have heartily desir'd Death and would be ready with him to dig for it as other Men would do for hidden Treasure the very Aged and Sickly one of which I am will easily be perswaded to think Death a Gain to them and to desire it accordingly The present Time affords a rare Example of a young rich and otherwise happy Lord who by a Pistol Bullet took away his own Life at the Bath meerly to rid and free himself from such sharp Pains of the Gout and Stone as then oppress'd him And daily Experience assures us that the Consideration and Hope of Death is one of the greatest Supports under Mens present Sufferings and is by such Persons accordingly desired and thus they are at apparent Agreement with St. Paul's Opinion That for them to die is Gain although their Expectations of future Happiness may be nothing so well grounded as his was It may be also observed I have a desire to depart and be with Christ which is far better Not saying He desir'd to depart that he might be with Christ but that though he did depart he knew he should still be with Christ so as his Departure and being with Christ do both stand well together he had a Being with Christ whil'st he was alive and he doubted not of having a like Being with Christ when he was dead and that a more peaceable and quiet Being than he had whil'st he was here and therefore that Estate was the more desirable and the more gainful If a Person go to his Friends or his Father's House he may truly he said to be with such a Friend or Father either sleeping or waking and we know Death is compared to a Sleep the Scripture usually calls it so and really and truly it is no other but a sound and lasting Sleep to continue unto the Sound of the last Trumpet at whose Summons the Dead shall be raised and those who are alive upon Earth shall have their Persons changed St. Paul does not say that he or any other Person is more present with the Lord when dead than alive but that in both Estates Men are alike present with the Lord For If we live we live unto the Lord and if we die we die unto the Lord so as whether we live or die we are the Lord 's Neither Death nor Life can seperate us from the Love of God in Christ Jesus So it seems whether we live or die we are alike with Christ and have no more Being with him dead than when alive but that in both these States we have alike Being with him This Exposition of St. Paul's present Text I conceive to be sound and true and that Mr. W's is Erroneous For that this my Construction applies St. Paul's Terms of I and Me to denote and intend his whole Person as in their proper Signification they do whereas Mr. W. applies them to signifie only one Part of his Person viz. our Author's sort of Soul concerning which our Dispute is Whether there is any such thing in the World or not Next Mr. W. takes up the Bulk of his Argument in a Discourse concerning the Soul its Seperate Subsistence after Death and its enjoying Happiness in that Estate whereas in St. Paul's whole Text there are no words which mention any of these things or give us any Information concerning them or any of them I leave therefore his Construction as a Mistake of the Apostle's Meaning and think I have Reason to conclude That Mr. W's Argument drawn from this Text is not a sufficient nor a good Argument to prove the Subsistence of the Soul in a State of Seperation from the Body The Thirteenth Argument PAge 100. Colos 1.19 20. It pleased the Father that in him should all Fulness dwell and having made Peace through the Blood of the Cross by him to reconcile all things to himself by him I say whether they be things in Earth or things in Heaven P. 101. Mr. W. says There were Souls of Men in Heaven when St. Paul
writ this Epistle because the Apostle says there were things in Heaven reconciled by the Blood of the Cross But there are no such things in Heaven reconciled by the Blood of the Cross except they be the Souls of some Holy Men that went hence Then he expresses a Desire to know what Men can say to this Argument And therefore I say to it That by his own Expression it appears he says he knows not what for he says He knows not that there are any other things in Heaven which need Reconciliation to God by Christ except Men will take these things to be the Souls of departed Persons But if Men will not accept of this Meaning then he knows not what the Apostle can mean by things in Heaven reconciled to God by Christ Which intends no more than that he doth not otherways know what the Things in Heaven reconciled to God by Christ may mean Which I take for a Confession That he doth not know what Paul meant by these things in Heaven Secondly I conceive he doth not know that there are any Souls in Heaven because if he did he should be able to make such a Demonstration or Description of their Being and of their being there as other Men who are willing might be able to understand and conceive He hath taken Pains to write this Treatise and therein hath already produced Thirteen Arguments in Proof of this Tenet but very unsuccessfully as those who peruse these Observations will easily discover The Perusers of this Argument will I think easily find That Mr. W. must have Two Things granted him before he can pretend to prove any thing by this Argument First That there are no things in Heaven which need Reconciliation to God unless Men will admit that Humane Souls are there And therefore Secondly he would perswade Men to admit of his Position That there are Souls in Heaven But I think fit to reject both these Proposals and say First That there may be other Things in Heaven besides Souls which may need a Reconciliation to God by Christ And Secondly to conceive that possibly or even probably there are not nor ever were any Humane Souls in Heaven nor in any other Place in the World except in their own proper and peculiar Bodies Here Mr. W. puts another slight Objection against his own Opinion and answers it P. 102. Mr. W. demands If there be any things else in Heaven besides the Souls of Men which need a Reconciliation to God What are those things I Answer I do not know what those things are and alike Confession of his Ignorance concerning this Subject would better have become Mr. W. than his groundless Guesses at what is meant in this Text by St. Paul's Expression of Things in Heaven and the supplying his Ignorance therein by a bold but Erroneous Guess That by Things in Heaven St. Paul intended the Seperate Souls of Men of which the Text makes no mention at all and his Supposal that there were Seperate Souls hath no better Foundation than his own Supposal which hath very little Power to convince intelligent Persons That Humane Souls have any sort of Subsistence in a state of Seperation from the Body The Fourteenth Argument PAge 102. Heb. 12.23 We are come to the Spirits of just Men made perfect Mr. W. begins this Argument with somewhat a long Comparison between the Law and the Gospel which makes little to our Point and therefore I pass it over P. 104. Mr. W. says as he is very apt to do That the Souls or Spirits of Men are Immortal and therefore it is a very great Truth that they are Immortal And adds Those Souls which the Gospel reveals to be alive out af their Bodies are thereby proved to be Immortal but the Gospel reveals that the Souls of just Men are alive out of their Bodies therefore the Souls of Men are alive out of their Bodies therefore the Souls of Men are Immortal Mr. W. says The Gospel revealeth that the Spirits of just Men are alive out of their Bodies Because the Text says they were made perfect and there is no Perfection in Death P. 105. He says We have a Right to the Society of those Spirits of just Men mude perfect which we shall have in possession when we depart hence But I find neither such Words nor Things in his Text viz. That we shall come to that Society when we depart hence so as I must repute it his own Addition to the Words of the Text which doth not appoint the Time for our coming to that Society I find Mr. W. has only quoted so much of this Text as seemeth most to support his own Opinion and therefore I intend to quote it somewhat more largely Heb. 12.22 Ye are come unto Mount Sion and to the Heavenly Jerusalem or City of God to the Company of Angels to the general Assembly and Church of the first Born and to God the Judge of all and to the Spirits of just Men made perfect and to Jesus the Mediator of the New Covenant Ver. 25. See that ye refuse not him that speaketh whose Voice at the giving of the Law shook the Earth but now he hath promised saying yet once more I shake not the Earth only but also Heaven and this signifies the removal of those things which are shaken and that we shall receive a Kingdom which cannot be removed The Words of our Text thus fully quoted do by no means import That Men or their Souls shall come to the enjoyment of those things at their Deaths as Mr. W. hath erroneously suggested but the words of the Text run in the present Tense Ye are come to the things which I here report to you viz. Ye are come to the City of the Living God the Heavenly Jerusalem to the Angels and to the general Assembly and Church of the First Born when not only the Earth shall be shaken but also Heaven and the things so shaken shall be removed I conceive that the Description here made doth very properly denote the Time of the Resurrection and the great Day of Judgment For at that time we are instructed by the Scripture to expect the things here mentioned God and Christ attended by the Angels and the Church of the First Born consisting of Just Men made perfect both in their Spirits and in their Bodies to the City of God or the New Jerusalem which St. John tells us Shall come down from God out of Heaven as a Bride adorned for her Husband at or after the time of the Resurrection after Heaven and Earth have been shaken and are removed This I conceive to be the Time pointed at in this Text and I think these Descriptions are not applicable to any other Time nor hath Mr. W. mentioned any other Time for their Accomplishment saving that at Mens Death and for which he hath no Warrant from any words of this Text and as to the words in present Ye are come to these Glories I think
I answer That if Mr. W. think truly an infinite number of other Persons go to Hell as well as Judas and therefore Hell is no more the proper place of Judas than the Grave may be Secondly I say That altho' the Grave be a place of Rest and Blessedness to those that die in the Lord yet to those who die in a state of Enmity with him the Approaches of Death seem terrible and the Grave is not a sufficient shelter for them from the wrath of God and of the Lamb when Christ shall come to give Judgment upon the quick and dead Thirdly It seems the very words of the Text do naturally require a different Construction from that which Mr. W. hath put upon them by applying the words might go to his own Place unto the Person then to be chosen who might with assurance go to his own Place of a Twelfth Apostle into which by Lot he should then be chosen and Matthias we read did go to his own place and was numbred with the other Eleven Apostles I do not know whether Dr. Hammond apply the words after this manner or not but if he do I think he is in the right of it and give my Consent thereunto And thus it seems to me no reasonable Argument can hence be drawn to prove the Souls Separate Subsistence Mr. W. for further proof of his Opinion quotes Jude 7. Even as Sodom and Gomorrah and the Cities about them in like manner giving themselves over to Fornication are set forth for an Example suffering the Vengeance of Eternal Fire Hereupon Mr. W. says This Text intends the Sufferings of the Sodomites Souls after Death I answer that to those who already believe there are Souls so suffering Mr. W's Sense of the Words may be well enough admitted but to those who stand unconvinc'd of Mens Souls suffering soon after their Deaths this saying seems to have no strength of Proof in it for they will expound it otherways and say that for the wickedness of the People those Cities and the whole plain of Sodom do suffer the Vengeance of Eternal Fire they did so at the time of that Destruction and they do so still and are likely so to continue to the end of the World turn'd into a Sulphureous and Bitumenous Lake the matter whereof is apt to take Fire upon all occasions and as to the word Eternal we find it in Scripture divers times used to signifie things of a very long Continuance as the Priesthood of Aaron the Royalty of David the Establishment of Jerusalem their being establish'd for ever And yet we have seen them all destroy'd long ago And hence I infer that no good Argument can be taken from his last quoted Text for proof of the Souls Separate Subsistence With this Quotation Mr. W. closes Eighteen or Twenty Arguments for proof of the Souls Separate Subsistence to each of which I have given a distinct Answer and such as doth very well satisfie my own Understanding with submission therein to the judgment of such intelligent Persons as may happen to peruse both our Endeavours for the proof and disproving of our Apprehensions in this Question P. 123. Mr. W. here proceeds in his endeavour to main tain the Souls Seperate Subsistence by inferring absurd Consequences from the other Opinion of the Souls extinguishment at the Death of the Person P. 123. Mr. W. thinks it an absurd Belief that Men should suffer for their Sins no more than Temporal Death but says If his Soul have not a Seperate Subsistence he can suffer no more than a Temporal Death except we had Ground to believe a Resurrection of the Body of which the Scripture is silent and we likewise deny it I say to this that I do not therein apprehend his Meaning I cannot believe that he intended to deny the Resurrection of the Dead which I offer as a full Answer to his pretended Absurdity and tho' in words he denies it yet I cannot conceive his meaning to be so P. 124. Mr. W. says secondly the same things which he said before in his first and must have the same Answer viz. That the Resurrection of the Person removes and and alters all this second pretended Absurdities P. 125. Thirdly Mr. W. says The Beasts are Sick and Groan and Die for Man's Sin or Sinfulness I reply That I cannot grant him this conceiving that if Man had not sinned yet the Beasts should have been sick and groaned and dyed as well and as much as they do now and the Doctrine of the Resurrection is a full Answer to this pretended Absurdity His Fourth pretended Absurdity is to be answer'd after the same manner His pretended Fifth Absurdity is answer'd by the Resurrection as before is said P. 126. Mr. W. says That without a Revelation from God concerning the Resurrection of the whole Man Men could not expect the Rewards or Punishments after Death unless their Souls have a Seperate Subsistence and this I am ready to agree to him and if there be no Resurrection I do also agree that Men have been very much deceived in their Expectation of Recompences after this Life and that upon the supposal of no Resurrection they have been Wiser who indulg'd themselves in their Pleasures than those who have restrained their Appetites in consideration of Recompences expected after this Life 1 Cor. 15.19 If in this Life only we have hope in Christ we Christians are of all Men most miserable but the Dead shall rise as certainly as Christ was rais'd and if these Resurrections of Christ and the Dead be not both true then all Christian Religion is Vain and all those who are fallen asleep in Christ are Perished P. 127. He says If the Heathens had no reason to believe the Immortality of the Soul and had no Revelation at all of a Resurrection given them how then says Mr. W. Could they be brought to a Reformation in their Manners I put the Question concerning the Gospel of Christ If there be no Name given under Heaven by which Men can be saved but that of Jesus Christ and the vastest numbers of Men in the World never heard of that Name and other vast Numbers who have heard of it do not yet believe it nor have the Faith propounded to them in such manner as they have reason to believe it I may demand of Mr. W. what shall become of all these People as well as he demands of me How Men should order themselves who never had the Resurrection revealed to them And I think that in both these Cases alike Men must order their Works according to the best of their Knowledge and God will make such Allowances to them as their Cases may require P. 127. Mr. W. pretends to perswade Men That the World hath been kept in Awe by pretence of Recompence after this Life whereas the Scripture tells us the Patriarchs as well as the Jews under the Mosaical Law were more practically good and had fewer great Faults among
Christian Churches continued throughout the World and therefore Men must have very strong Arguments if they hope to prevail in rejecting this Opinion I answer and grant that this Argument is good and strong for the proving of his Opinion and seems to be of more Power and Strength than all that he hath said before for the maintaining of it but yet I do not perceive that Strength in it which may be able to support his Tenet against those Reasons and those Scriptures which may be brought against the Rationality and Truth of it and of which I intend to make a short detail when I come to his following Head where he makes and delivers Objections against his own Doctrine P. 152. Mr. W. begins to relate certain Sayings or Speeches of Reformed Martyrs who it seems died in the Opinion of the Souls Seperate Subsistence which may be admitted to add some small Strength to his former Arguments drawn from the Opinion of the more Ancient Fathers I do not find it strange that Men should retain to the end of their Days divers Opinions which they had before imbibed in their Youth and by their Education hath been radicated in them especially such as do not appear to have an evil effect upon their Practices And I think that divers Learned Men of most high Esteem even in the Primitive and Apostolical Churches have delivered some Doctrines to their Disciples which upon strict examination may be found inconsonant to the stream or current of Scripture and the natural reason of Mankind which Doctrines I conceive the Writers of them did believe to be true upon the ground of such Tradition as they had received and which by Education and Custom had obtain'd an absolute assent of their Minds in such Cases And tho' I shall here name only the Millenary Opinion yet if I thought fit here to digress to that purpose I could add divers other particulars thereunto P. 153. Mr. W. proceeds to make farther Proof of his Opinion by some Representations in Dreams and others in Shades or Shadows of Persons departed unto which I have in a former Treatise made Answer that I do not deny there may be verity in divers of those Relations and yet I do not conceive any thing of that kind hath ever been performed by departed Souls thinking it probable that there are no such Beings in the World but I am willing to ascribe such Actions to the Powers and Performances of inferiour Spirits without pretending to determine whether good or bad and that they jussu aut permissu superiorum do represent and act according as the occasions wherein they are imploy'd may require P. 158. Mr. W. produces divers Objections which he says are made against the Souls Seperate Subsistence amounting to the Number of Fourteen divers of which I a gree not to be very material and tho' I intend to mention each of them that I may not seem to disregard any thing that he hath Written yet very little shall be said concerning them my Design being only to insist upon those which I think material and to add unto them such other Objections as Mr. W. in his Catalogue hath omitted P. 158. Mr W's first Objection says That what of the first Adam it was that sinned that of Adam died but both the Soul and Body died therefore c. To this he Answers That he must not take Life and Death here in their proper Sense but that the word Death here only intends a miserable Life which however he doth not deny to be Life and I do not conceive how Death and Life can stand together in the same subject and therefore I think his Description of Death by a miserable Life is not reasonable nor allowable in this Case conceiving it agreeable to Reason that the Curse pronounced against Sin should extend to the Person that sinned and accordingly the Persons which sinned did both die for it or after it without any appearance of leaving Souls to survive after the Death of their Persons P. 159. Mr. W. will not agree that their Souls did die as well as their Bodies because God says That Dust thou art and to Dust thou shalt return Then he assumes the Soul was not made of Dust which is a thing before disputed between us I pretending there was no such Soul made as he says there was I say my sort of Soul is material and may return to the Dust and Air as it was which he will deny and thereupon we must examine all that has been spoken which neither of us can design to do in this place but leave this Objection to be farther discussed Mr. W's second Objection from Eccles 3. where Solomon compares Men with Beasts P. 161. He pretends that Text says The Spirit of Man goes upward and the Spirit of a Beast downward which I think it doth not say but makes a doubt whether the truth of the thing be so or no it seems Solomon speaks more deliberately concerning Mens Souls in this Text than he does in his Twelfth Chapter and yet I pass this Objection lightly over without laying any great weight upon it P. 162. Mr. W. raises a third Objection from Matth. 26.38 where our Lord says My Soul is exceeding sorrowful even unto Death from whence some Men may pretend to inferr that his Soul might die I profess to be none of those who make this Objection for I conceive that Christ by the word Soul intended his Person or himself in the same Sense as if he had said I am sorrowful unto Death and therefore I pass this over as a weak Objection against Mr. W's Opinion P. 164. Mr. W. raises a fourth Objection against himself from Acts 2.27 Thou wilt not leave my Soul in Hell nor suffer thy Holy one to see Corruption Here he says some will have Christ's Intellectual Soul to be meant and by Hell or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Grave to be meant I profess to be none of those some who would have Christ's Intellectual Soul to be here meant but I do rather conceive that by my Soul in this place is intended my Person or my Self and as if he had said thou wilt not leave me in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Grave without intention to speak of an Intellectual Soul or any other Soul at all and therefore I pass this over as a very light Objection against Mr. W's Opinion P. 169. The fifth Objection which Mr. W. brings against his own Opinion is raised from 2 Cor. 5. Where Paul speaks of being cloathed upon with his House from Heaven I have said before that this Expression respects that Translation of their Bodies which the Saints who are alive upon Earth at Christ's coming shall receive when they shall be disrobed of their Earthly Bodies and have them chang'd into Heavenly or Spiritual Bodies and yet I do not find any great Strength in this Objection against Mr. W's Opinion but pass it away as a very weak one without
weak people in this World and was thereat so much grieved that he breaks forth and says I praised the dead which are already dead more than the living which are yet alive yea better is he than both they which hath not yet been who hath not seen the evil work that is done under the Sun Chap. 9.3 The heart of the sons of men is full of evil and madness is in their heart whilst they live and after that they go to the dead for to him that is joyned to the living there is hope for a living dog is better than a dead lyon for the living know that they shall die but the dead know not anything neither have they any more a reward for their memory is forgotten their love hatred and envy are perished Ver. 10. Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do do it with thy might for there is no work nor device nor knowledge in the grave whither thou goest Thus we find Solomon expresseth himself much to the same purpose that Job before hath done declaring that Death and the Grave put an end to the doings and sufferings of Men without taking notice of any rewards or sufferings likely to befal men soon after their departures forth of this World which is in my apprehension a sort of evidence that his words The Spirit returns to God who gave it did not intend the going of Mens Souls to Judgment before God soon after their departures out of this Life I quote likewise in Corroboration of Solomons fore-cited Text and Opinion a Concurrent Evidence out of the Prophet Isaiah 38.18 where Hezekiah praying to god says The Grave cannot praise thee Death cannot celebrate thee they that go down into the Pit cannot hope for thy Truth The living the living he shall praise thee as I do this day Mr. W. hath quoted these Texts of Solomon and Isaiah and made out of each of them an Objection against his Opinion but I have made one Objection out of them both because I find them tend to the same purpose and do not so much labour to increase the number of my Objections as to fortifie and strengthen those which I make against him Mr. W. hath made the Text now quoted out of Isaiah his Tenth Objection against his Opinion and thereunto answers That Hezekiah 's meaning in these words is that Men after Death cannot praise God as they do whilst they are in this World and in the Congregations of Men but that still they can and do praise God after Death in Heaven Thereunto I reply He seems to make Hezekiah mean what himself pleases but that King's words seem plainly to declare That Men after Death neither do nor can celebrate or praise the Name of God without mention of such a meaning as he pretends or any need of such a meaning that I can perceive and therefore I read and take the plain Sense of his words to be as he hath delivered them In his Eleventh Objection he quotes the Text of Solomon The Dead know not any thing and thereunto answers That Solomon's meaning in these words is That Dead Men do not know any thing of what is done under the Sun after their Deaths I reply The words of the Text are general words The Dead know not any thing at all and therefore I cannot allow of his restraining them to Things done under the Sun which he hath excogitated on purpose to serve his Design in this Point Wherefore I leave this Exposition as a needless and erroneous Invention and proceed farther to consider the whole Objection now propounded against Mr. W's Opinion And we find that Solomon in the Texts of this Objection before quoted speaks of Death as of a Rest from Mens Labours and Sufferings and says There is no device nor knowledge in the grave whither thou goest the living know that they shall die but the dead know not any thing not any the most common or knowable thing not a thing so well known as that Men must die or that they must rise again These are things the most commonly known to Men when they are alive but when they are dead they know not any thing at all and to this King Hezekiah adds they cannot act any thing they cannot so much as Praise and Celebrate the name of God which Mr. W's Party will have to be the proper work of their good Souls departed Our Text tells us in absolute and plain Terms the Dead cannot do so comprehending under the name of Dead the Person and all that belong'd to the Composition thereof And from these Premisses I take leave to conclude that from these Texts is raised a strong Objection against the Souls Seperate Subsistence A Fifth Objection against Mr W's Tenet I raise from Eccless 11.8 If a Man live many Years and rejoyce in them all yet let him remember the days of Darkness for they shall be many and then he gives Liberty to the young Man to rejoyce in the days of his Youth and use his Liberty but withal bids him know that for these things God will bring him into Judgment so Chap. 12.14 After he had said the Spirit returns to God who gave it he adds Fear God and keep his Commandments for God shall bring every work into Judgment with every secret thing whether it be good or whether it be evil Here Solomon exhorts Men to remember the day and time of their Deaths The miserable as well pleased to rest under that dark Shadow and the young and joyful he exhorts to remember those times as days of Darkness and says that they shall be many subjoyning thereunto that after those days God will call Men to Judgment for all that they have done in this World tho' it be never so secretly acted and even for every idle word at the Day of Judgment an Account must be made and much more of Mens smallest Actions whether the same be good or whether they be evil by the days of Darkness which Solomon here mentions seem somewhat clearly to be intended the days which immediately succeed the death of the Person they are days of Darkness as Darkness it self covered and made dark with the shadow of Death and our Text says those Days shall be many and therefore he exhorts Men in their greatest Jollity to remember them but our Opposers contrary to the Tenor of this Text endeavour to perswade us that there are no days of Darkness at all in Death for that when the Breath of Man goeth forth or ceaseth in him his Substantial Intelligent and then Seperated Soul or Spirit either returns to God or goes before him to Judgment or is carried by Angels or is hurried by Devils into very different places concerning which I do not find they are well agreed among themselves but howsoever that may fall out they are all very well agreed that their Seperate Intelligent Spirit is at greater liberty and is more active and knowing than it was during its confinement to the
Intent thereof and even to have exterminated the same out of the Apprehensions and Memories of such Men. And hereupon I do again agree that it is very sutable to the Justice of God and his equitable Dealings with Men that there should be a distribution of Rewards and Punishments after this Life and I do with great Assurance believe that the same will fall out accordingly not bestowing those Rewards and Punishments upon Souls Subsisting in a State of Seperation from the Body but that rather as our Lord himself tells us John 6. Those who fear God and work Righteousness shall by Christ be raised up at the last Day in their full Compositum of Soul and Body and in their own Persons shall receive Rewards according to their Works done and their Faith professed in this World and that the like measure shalt be dealt to the Wicked at the Resurrection of the last Day whose Punishments shall be equally distributed to their Persons as is before said to be done in the case of the former Raised and Righteous Persons P. 156. The Doctor says He cannot but wonder that Plato having asserted God to be a Mind Divine and Incorporeal should contradict himself in affirming that Man's Soul was a Particle taken from the Substance of God himself he will not engulph himself in the Bottomless Sea of Difficulties concerning the Original and Extraduction of Man's Soul but he conceives the Soul cannot be produced from Matter because it is Immaterial but however it is plain that it hath its Beginning and Origine with the Body and yet being Incorporeal it is not capable of perishing with it P. 159. He confesses a great decay of Intellect in Mens very old Age but says that Decay grows from the weakness of the Fancy and Imagination and the Organs thereof and not from the Decays of the Intellect or Soul it self Answering I say it seems rather to grow from the Heaviness and Unaptness of the Blood of old People to be so vigorously Inflamed and Acted as it used to be in their younger Years and greater strength of their Bodies and Concoction P. 173. The Doctor says It is not necessary that when at Death the Soul is breathed into the Air that the Air should be thereby Animated because then it should act without the Mediation of any Organs at all but he asserts that neither in the Air nor any other Body whatever can the Soul either meet with or create those Dispositions that are requisite to Vital Information P. 174. He says The Soul makes use of the Vital Spirits as Servants for the effecting of Life Sense and Motion I say Nature makes use of them for the effecting Life Sense Motion Understanding Memory and all other Powers of Cogitation whatsoever P. 180. The Doctor says As to the Particular or Manner of the Souls Knowledge after Death I remit you to Sir K. Digby's sublime Speculations concerning the condition of a Seperate Soul in which tho' you may not meet with such Satisfaction as you expect yet you will meet with more than I can now give you without repeating his Notions To this I answer that I have perused those Notions without meeting with any Satisfaction at all in them P. 183. The Doctor says That the Cement which joyns the Body and Soul together is the Blood especially the Spiritual and most refin'd part thereof and he quotes a Saying of Critius Sentire Maxime Proprinus esse Anima atque hoc in esse propter sanguinis Naturam P. 184. He says The Blood is the first pact of the Body that is generated and moved and the Soul is excited and kindled first from the Blood and the Blood is that in which the Operations Vegitative and Sensitive do first manifest themselves The Doctor says That he thinks it likely that the Soul having its first and perhaps principal Residence in the Blood and that Blood by Circulation flowing like a River of living Water round the Body penetrating into and irrigating the Substance of all the Parts and at the same time communicating to them both Heat and Life so as the Soul having its principal Residence in the Blood in respect thereof may very well be conceived to be Tota in toto tota in qualibet parte so as there is an Intimate presence of the Soul in the Blood and by that means a Conjunction of them together 169. The Dr. says That in the Progression towards Death the Vital Heat or Flame being either almost suffocated by Putrefaction of the Blood the only Fewel by which it is maintained in Diseases or exhausted by old Age goes out like a Lamp by degrees ceasing first to enliven or irradiate the parts that are most remote from the Focus or Heart and then failing in its conserving Influence more and more till at length suffering an Extinction in the very Heart as it were in the Socket it leaves that also Cold and Lifeless so that Death is as an Extinction only of the Vital Flame not of the Soul I say That it is an Extinction of that Vital Flame which I conceive to be the Soul or Spirit or the first Principal of Life and Motion in the Person I think that by the Doctor 's Words in this last Quotation he seems fully to agree with what I have often repeated that the total Extinction of the Vital Flame in the Blood is the Death of the Person and the very thing which turns that which was the living Body into a dead Carcass whence he says That Death is an Extinction of the Vital Flame and yet denies this to be an extinguishment of the Soul whence it seems to me that he was resolved to maintain the Subsistence of the Soul after the death of the Person altho' the Nature and Reason which he pretends to follow convinced him not so to do or that he found any natural need of his so doing but because he thought it might be prov'd by Scripture and was maintain'd by the Divines That the Soul of Man had a Seperate Subsistence after death of the Person and therefore was Immortal and that he stood so perswaded from Scripture Grounds he testifies Pag. 185. where he says That the Soul is an Immortal Substance and that its Immortality is not only credible by Faith or upon Authority Divine but also demonstrable by Reason or the Light of Nature From these Words I collect That his Belief of the Souls Immortality was grounded first upon Faith and Divine Authority as he thought and being thus fully perswaded of the Truth of that Opinion he set himself on work to maintain it by such Deductions as he was able to make from the Principles of Nature and Reason his Performances wherein have before been examined and shewn not be of so great weight as he perhaps conceived them to be The Treatise now examined was publish'd so long ago that I doubt before this time his Flame of Life hath been extinguish'd or that he may not be
he rightly terms an Absurd One for he pretends there are some that say That the Soul may die when the Body dieth though it be not slain when the Body is killed To this I say I am none of those who so Argue nor did I ever yet meet with a Writing or Person that did so Next he produces another Objection of some who he supposes may say That the killing of the Soul here may intend that they cannot kill it for ever All I can say to this is That if any Man or Men have so Argued they are not at all of my mind who do not intend to make or offer any such Arguments P. 63. Mr. W. sets down an Objection offer'd against the Text of St. Matthew in the Words Are not able to kill the Soul from Luke 12.4 Be not afraid of them that kill the Body and after that have no more that they can do He says He hath kown some very confidently affirm that there is no Force in St. Matthew's Text because that of St. Luke delivers the same Doctrine of our Lord in Words from which no clear Argument can be deduced for the Soul 's Seperate Subsistence I say I do not Affirm in that manner viz. That there is no proving Force in St. Matthew's Text because St. Luke differs from him in relating the Words of our Lord's Doctrine But yet I own my self to think that from the manner of Wording this Doctrine of our Lord in these two Texts a strong Objection may be rais'd against the absolute Authority of St. Matthew's words in this Point Upon the Consideration and comparing these two Texts one with the other the only Variance between them is in the Words of St. Matthew's Are not able to kill the Soul compared with those of St. Luke Have no more that they can do for that in the following Words where Matthew says Fear him who is able to destroy both Soul and Body in Hell and those which Luke mentions Fear him who after he hath killed hath power to east into Hell I conceive the Difference to be small or none at all They both begin our Lord's Doctrine in the same Words Fear not them that kill the Body where they both speak figuratively And I therefore believe our Lord himself did so but I say the Body in this place must needs intend the Person or the Compositum of Soul and Body together for that our Sense and Reason sufficiently assures us That what is dead cannot be killed but the Body without the Soul or Spirit of Life is dead And therefore the Body taken singly or not acted by the Spirit of Life is a dead Body and therefore cannot be killed Whence I infer that when our Evangelists speak of killing the Body they must certainly intend the same as if they had said Cannot kill the Person And hence I Collect That when St. Matthew speaks of casting the Soul and Body into Hell he intends casting the Compositum of them both or the Person into Hell St. Luke words it thus Who after he hath killed hath power to cast into Hell I think this intends as much as if he had said Hath Power to cast the Person into Hell so as it seems the Sense of both our Evangelists is the same both in the Premises and in the Conclusion of this Doctrine and the Variance between them lies as before hath been said in the Words Are not able to kill the Soul of St. Matthew and the Words Have no more that they can do of St. Luke If we shall consider the proper Intent of both these Texts we must find it to be as Mr. W. says The encouraging of our Lord's Disciples not to fear the Persecution of Men for the doing of their Duty but rather to fear God who can punish and reward after Death as well as in this Life And the Texts of both our Evangelists Agree punctually to that Intent in delivering Words of the same Importance and to the same Intent and Purpose But then if Mr. W. or any other Person will draw out of them Proofs of any other Collateral thing which is not properly within the Intent of our Lord's Doctrine I conceive they speak and may intend differently concerning that Collateral Point which Men may design to prove by them It seems somewhat clear to my Understanding St. Matthew's Words prove his Opinion to be That Humane Souls have a Life and Subsistence in a state of Seperation from the Body and I conceive that in his Text he worded our Lord's Doctrine according to his own Opinion of the thing We find that St. Luke hath worded it in a different and varient manner so expressing our Lord's Doctrine as that he gives no ground for proving the Souls Seperate Subsistence from his Text which in the whole Tenour of it doth not name the Soul And therefore upon this difference I think it needful to enquire or demand What were the very precise Words wherein our Lord deliver'd this Doctrine If St. Matthew hath rightly worded this Doctrine then it is a strong Proof of the Souls Seperate Subsistence The most substantial and nearest to an Affirmative of any that the Bible affords us but if St. Luke hath rightly worded our Lord's Doctrine then was there in that Doctrine no Proof at all of a Souls Seperate Subsistence nor any thing said in it whereby that Opinion can be maintain'd I do not pretend to determine any thing concerning this Point but am ready to Argue that there lies a Probability for St. Luke's Text against that of St. Matthew The Point in Question concerning the Seperate Subsistence is as was said collateral to the Intent of our Lord in this Doctrine who it seems did not here mean to teach any thing which might direct Mens Judgments in that Collateral Point which remains utterly unmentioned in the Text of St. Luke This moves me to apprehend That the putting it into St. Matthew's Text grew from his own Opinion of the thing rather than from the Words which our Lord then delivered The intent of our Lord seems plain in both those Texs and therein what hath been said seems true they are at a perfect Agreement between themselves and we find no intention of meaning in our Lord to speak or teach any thing about the Souls Seperate Subsistence and therefore I surmise it came into St. Mathew's Text by Accident and Sprung rather from his own Opinion than from our Lords Doctrine or the Words and Expressions thereof Secondly I say That St. Matthew was by Profession and Practice a Publican a Trade which no Man of Quality or Learning amongst the Jews of that time would indure to Practice whence Matthew might more easily fall into the Opinion appearing in his Text. That Souls did Live and Subsist after the Departure and Death of the Person But of St. Luke we read That he was a Learned Man and a Physician and Paul from whose Mouth he is said to have
Written was the most Learned amongst the Apostles and of a Sublime Natural Genius But there appears no likelihood that they were of St. Matthew's Opinion in this matter of the Souls Seperate Subsistence which if our Lord had mentioned in this Doctrine I conceive they would not have failed to take great notice of it because it was a Subject of high Speculation not fit to be let fall to the Ground without notice and delivering of the same to the Christians of that time If our Lord's Doctrine worded as it is by St. Matthew were truly the same as that Evangelist hath reported it And upon these grounds I am apt to conceive that St. Matthew's Words Are not able to kill the Soul are likely to have sprung from his own Opinion of the thing and are not otherways the very true Expressions and Words wherein our Lord delivered this Doctrine to his Disciples And therefore I am apt to Appeal from the Text of St. Matthew to that which is reported to us in the Text of St. Luke's Gospel Thirdly I conceive that the Text of St. Luke wordded at it is doth more fully express our Lords meaning as in this Doctrine than the Text of St. Matthew's doth For Luke says That after Men have Killed they have no more that they can do or can do no more harm to the Killed Person or can Bring no more Sufferings upon him by any thing that they can do I think St. Matthew's Words Are not able to kill the Soul do not so well or fully express our Lords meaning as St. Luke's do For that those who maintain the Souls Seperate Subsistence do say all that it retains the Faculties of Intellect and Memory as the Natural Powers thereunto properly belonging Whence it seems Inferrible that they may and do remember such Relations and Friends as they left behind them on Earth and are likely to be so much concerned for them as to rejoyce at their Well-fare and be grieved at their Sufferings For of this we are informed from the Parable of Dives if it have a Power of Proving or Teaching in such cases for Dives tho' Wicked and in Torments yet had so much good Nature in him as to remember his Relations upon Earth and have care to prevent those Sufferings which they was otherwise likely to fall under and prays Lazarus may be sent out to obviate by his Instructions the Calamity which was like to befal them and make some Addition to those Sufferings under which himself now lay and from hence we may Collect that Men who have Killed can still make some Additions to the Sufferings of the Dead by Tormenting or persecuting their Relations or Friends upon Earth which possibility is quite taken away by the Words of St. Luke's Text After Killing the Person Men have no more that they can do they can do no more harm to the Dead Person who is now gone quite out of the reach of any but God and I doubtingly conceive there is neither Soul nor Body left of him for Men or Devils to prey upon And from what is before delivered I am ready to conceive That St. Luke's Words do more fully and properly express our Lord's meaning than those of St. Matthew do and consequently that it is probable our Lords Doctrine was deliver'd in the Words of St. Luke's Gospel rather than in those Words which St. Matthew hath Recorded and if this prove a truth it will utterly remove the proving force of St. Matthew's Text which is otherways the Principal Foundation upon which the Opinion of the Souls Seperate Subsistence is Built Hereupon I do not doubtingly but fully conceive That Mr. W. and his partakers will openly exclaim against my proceedings in offering or pretending to prove or conceive that any sort of Scripture Words or Expressions can be Erroneous and yet it seems both clear and common that Words Sayings and Texts of Scripture have been often and are Daily brought and alledged for the Proof of Erroneous Opinions and Doctrines I confess my self not so much to Idolize the Words and Expressions of Scripture as to receive for an Oracle every Saying or Sentence which I find Written in the Bible or to believe every such Saying or Sentence to be an irrefragable truth and the very Word of God 1 John 4.1 Believe not every Spirit but try the Spirits whether they are of God I conceive there is no other way to try Mens Pretences to the Spirit of God but either by the miraculous Works of such Persons as pretend to it or by the Fruits of the Spirit which appears in their Works and Actions amongst Men and the Tryals by either of these means proceed upon grounds of Humane Understanding and the results thereof as a Parable and Paraphrase to St. John's Text I conceive it may be said Believe not every Saying and Sentence which ye find Written in Scripture But try first whether that Saying or Sentence be the Word of God or no. And in this Tryal it seems there are but two ways or means to be used The first is by comparing it by other Scriptures or Texts or the Analogy Current or Stream of Doctrine which runs and continues through the whole Scriptures from the Beginning to the End thereof And if any particular Sentence oppose the Analogy or Stream of Doctrine which runs through the whole Scriptures Men may rest assured that Saying or Sentence neither is nor can be the Word of God Next if we meet with Sayings or Sentences of Scripture which are opposed by other Sayings or Sentences thereof it seems we may have good Reason to doubt on which side the truth stands and by the most fair and easie Constructions that we can use bring them to such an Agreement as by workings of Reason they can be brought unto And I am apt to infer That if by Constructions of Reason they cannot be made stand together in such manner as both them may be true I think it a reasonable Result of such Tryal to think as it must needs be that there is Error or Mistake in one of them The other means for trying the Truths of the Scripture Sayings or Sentences proceeds from the grounds of Natural Principles viz. The common Sensations and Reasons of Men radicated in their Natures and confirmed unto them by certain and often Experiences And it seems that if Men meet with such Sayings or Sentences in Scripture as are opposite to Natural Principles and the common Sense and Reason of Mankind confirmed to them by Practice and Experience we may with assurance enough conclude that such Sayings or Sentences ought not to pass among us for the Word of God And yet I am apt to believe that my Opinion in this Point will not find an easie acceptance amongst those who practice the Reading and Magnifying of the Scriptures which is also without doubt a very Beneficial and Laudable Practice And yet I think I may justly apply thereunto the common Proverb of Omne