together with Jesus of Nazareth's being the Messiah are all the Faith requir'd as necessary to Justification Ibid. p. 293 294. Otherwhere he mentions his Suffering and having fulfill'd all things that were written in the Old Testament concerning the Messiah adding that those that believ'd this and repented should receive Remission of their Sins through this Faith in him Ibid. p. 190. Thus Mr. Lock had shewn what the Fundamental Articles of the Faith are or rather had shew'd how wavering and uncertain he himself is concerning them assigning sometimes only one sometimes two sometimes more He brings the Words of Tertullian de Virg. Velan to shew how little different the Faith of the ancient Church was from the Faith he hath mention'd but 1. It would have been more for his Reputation if the Faith which he mentions had not been at all different from that of the ancient Church 2. Tertullian's Words there do not shew that the Faith of the ancient Church differ'd little from his For by comparing the Rule of Faith which he lays down here with that which he gives us in Lib. de Praescript adv Haeret. and in Lib. adv Praxeam it fully appears that he did not design this for a complete Account of the Faith of the ancient Church for some things that are in this are omitted in the other as Omnipotentem a Word certainly very material is left out in both of them and more things are added as Universa de nihilo produxerit per Verbum suum Id Verbum Filium ejus appellatum c. Carnem factum c. Misisse vicariam vim Spiritus Sancti is all added in Lib. de Praescript and so Sermo ejus per quem omnia facta sunt sine quo factum est nihil Ex ea i. e. Virgine natum hominem Deum mortuum sepultum Qui miserit Spiritum Sanctum is all superadded in Lib. adv Praxeam Tertullian therefore will not be found to be a Friend to Mr. Lock who might rather have said that it may be seen in Tertullian how far different the Faith of the ancient Church was from the Faith he hath mention'd He tells us that the Apostles Creed is the Faith he was baptiz'd into and that he hath not renounced one tittle thereof that he knows But hath he not renounced the Article of the Resurrection of the Body when he tells us that in his next Edition of his Essay of Humane Understanding he will have the Word Body blotted out and change these Words of his Book The dead Bodies of Men shall rise into these The dead shall rise See his Third Letter pag. 210. CHAP. XXX Of Vertue and Vice Self-denial and Education GOD hath by an inseparable Connexion join'd Vertue and publick Happiness together and made the Practice thereof necessary to the Preservation of Society and visibly beneficial to all with whom the vertuous Man has to do Mr. Lock Essay l. 1. c. 3. § 6. The Laws that Men generally refer their Actions to to judge of their Rectitude and Obliquity seem to me to be these three 1. The Divine Law 2. The Civil Law 3. The Law of Opinion or Reputation if I may so call it By the relation they bear to the first of these Men judge whether their Actions are Sins or Duties by the second whether they be criminal or innocent and by the third whether they be Vertues or Vices By Divine Law I mean that Law which God has set to the Actions of Men whether promulgated to them by the Light of Nature or the Voice of Revelation Vertue and Vice are Names pretended and suppos'd every where to stand for Actions in their own nature right or wrong and as far as they really are so apply'd they so far are coincident with the Divine Law above-mention'd But yet whatever is pretended this is visible that these Names of Vertue and Vice in the particular Instances of their Application through the several Nations and Societies of Men in the World are constantly attributed only to such Actions as in each Country or Society are in Reputation or Diseredit Thus the measure of what is every where call'd and esteem'd Vertue and Vice is this Approbation or Dislike Praise or Blame which by a secret or tacit Consent establishes it self in the several Societies Tribes and Clubs of Men in the World whereby several Actions come to find Credit or Disgrace among them according to the Judgment Maxims and Fashions of that place By this Approbation and Dislike they establish among themselves what they will call Vertue and Vice Esteem and Discredit Vertue and Vice do yet in a great measure every where correspond with the unchangeable Rule of Right and Wrong which the Law of God hath established there being nothing that so directly and visibly secures and advances the general Good of Mankind in this World as Obedience to the Laws he hath set them and nothing that breeds such Mischiefs and Confusion as the Neglect of them And therefore Men without renouncing all Sense and Reason and their own Interest which they are so constantly true to could not generally mistake in placing their Commendation and Blame on that side that really deserv'd it not Nay even those Men whose Practice was otherwise fail'd not to give their Approbation right few being deprav'd to that degree as not to condemn at least in others the Faults they themselves were guilty of whereby even in the Corruption of Manners the true Boundaries of the Law of Nature which ought to be the Rule of Vertue and Vice were pretty well preserv'd So that even the Exhortations of inspir'd Teachers have not fear'd to appeal to common Repute Whatsoever is lovely whatsoever is of good Report if there be any Vertue if there be any Praise c. Ibid. l. 2. c. 28. § 7 8 10 11. The Foundation of Vice lies in wrong measures of Good Ibid. l. 4. c. 19. § 16. Reputation is not the true principle and measure of Vertue for that is the knowledge of a Man's Duty and the satisfaction it is to obey his Maker in following the Dictates of that Light God has given him with the hopes of Acceptation and Reward I place Vertue as the first and most necessary of those Endowments that belong to a Man or a Gentleman as absolutely requisite to make him valued and belov'd by others acceptable or tolerable to himself without that I think he will neither be happy in this nor the other World Of Education p. 61 157. It seems plain to me that the Principle of all Vertue and Excellency lies in a Power of denying our selves the Satisfaction of our own Desires where Reason doth not authorize them This Power is to be got and improved by Custom made easie and familiar by an early Practice He that has not a Mastery over his Inclinations he that knows not how to resist the Importunity of present Pleasure and Pain for the sake of what Reason tells him is fit
after thirty Reasonah of Christian. p. 300. The Epistles resolving Doubts and reforming Mistakes are of great Advantage to our Knowledge and Practice I do not deny but the great Doctrines of the Christian Faith are drop'd here and there and scatter'd up and down in most of them But 't is not in the Epistles we are to learn what are the Fundamental Articles of Faith where they are promiscuously and without distinction mixed with other Truths We shall find and discern those great and necessary Points best in the Preaching of our Saviour and the Apostles to those who were yet Strangers and ignorant of the Faith to bring them in and convert them to it Ibid. p. 298. Many Doctrines proving and explaining and giving a farther light into the Gospel are published in the Epistles to the Corinthians and Thessalonians These are all of Divine Authority and none of them may be disbeliev'd by any one who is a Christian. Second Vindicat of Reason of Christian. p. 319. Generally and in necessary Points the Scriptures are to be understood in the plain direct meaning of the Words and Phrases such as they may be suppos'd to have had in the mouths of the Speakers Reasonab -of Christian. p. 2. He that will read the Epistles as he ought must observe what 't is in them is principally aim'd at find what is the Argument in hand and how managed he must look into the drift of the Discourse observe the Coherence and Connexion of the Parts and see how it is consistent with it self and other parts of Scripture The observing of this will best help us to the true meaning and mind of the Writer Ibid. p. 294. The Scripture gives light to its own meaning by one place compar'd with another Vindicat. of Reasonab of Christian. p. 22. Thus Mr. Lock OBSERVATIONS How happy would it be if Mr. Lock and I and all of us could presently condemn and quit any Opinion of ours so soon as it is shew'd that it is contrary to any part of Scripture I do not know any one that affirms that all or most of the Truths contain'd in the Epistles are Fundamental Articles so necessary that without an explicit Belief of them none can be a Member of Christ's Church here or admitted into his eternal Kingdom hereafter Mr. Lock without any necessity takes upon him to determine a Chronological Question and is very positive in his Determination Most of the Epistles says he were not written till above twenty years after our Saviour's Ascension and some after thirty But there are who refer our Lord's Ascension to his thirty third Year and the Date of the First and Second Epistles to the Corinthians to An. Dom. 53 that of the First to the Thessalonians to An. Dom. 49 making the Second to the Thessalonians to have been writ shortly after it the Date of S. Peter's First Epistle to An. Dom. 44 as there are who refer that of the First Epistle to the Corinthians and of both the Epistles to the Thessalonians to An. Dom. 50 so that according to them here are five Epistles of which it cannot be said that they were not written till above twenty years after our Saviour's Ascension If Mr. Lock say Suppose it were so that these five were not written above twenty years after the Ascension it is true still that most of the Epistles were not written till above twenty years after it I reply That a Person that is so positive should not barely say it but also prove it How knows he that there are not some other Epistles which were not written after twenty years after Christ's Ascension As to that which he adds That some were written after thirty years from our Saviour's Ascension it may be observ'd that he is so prudent as not to let us know what Epistles they are And farther the Martyrdom of S. Peter S. Paul and S. James is supposed by some not to have been after thirty years from our Lord's Ascension and their Epistles were certainly all writ before their Martyrdom and therefore it is impossible that their Epistles should be writ later then the thirtieth year after Christ's Ascension it being suppos'd that that their Martyrdom was not later then that year According to Jos. Scaliger the Martyrdom of the two great Apostles S. Peter and S. Paul was exactly thirty years after the Lord's Assension according to Syncellus nine and twenty according to Lydiat eight and twenty and S. James's Martyrdom according to all of them preceeded theirs so that if we follow the account of these three great Masters in Chronology the Epistle of S. James the two Epistles of S. Peter and those of S. Paul could not be writ after the thirtieth year from Christ's Ascension There remain the Epistles of S. John and S. Jude and how will Mr. Lock prove that those were writ after thirty years from our Saviour's Ascension One that spent much time and pains in the Study of the Chronology of the Old and New Testament says That among all the Apostolick Epistles there is none about whose time of writing we are so far to seek as about those of S. John If Mr. Lock say That there are who give other Accounts of the time of the writing the First Epistle of S. Peter and of those to the Corinthians and Thessalonians as also of the time of S. Peter's suffering and S. Paul's different from those that are given here of them I grant it but what can be inferr'd from this Disagreement of Expositors or Chronographers but the Uncertainty of the time of the Date of the Epistles which should caution Men not to be so positive in such things as too many are Many of the things which Mr. Lock saith of the Epistles may be apply'd also to the Gospels For instance All or most of the Truths contained in the Gospels are not to be look'd on as Fundamental Articles so necessary that without an explicit belief of them none can be admitted into Christ's Church here or his eternal Kingdom hereafter Also Fundamental Articles are promiscuously and without distinction mixed with other Truths in the Gospels So he that will read the Gospels as he ought must observe what 't is in them that is principally aim'd at find what is the Argument in hand and how managed must look into the drift of the Discourse observe the Coherence and Connexion of the Parts and see how it is consistent with it self and other parts of Scripture Finally There are some Fundamental Articles that are distinguish'd from other Truths in the Epistles As in Rom. 10. 9. If thou confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus and believe with thy heart that God rais'd him from the dead thou shalt be saved So 1 Tim. 1. 15. It is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation that Christ Jesus came into the World to save Sinners And so Heb. 11. 6. He that cometh to God must believe that he is and that he is a rewarder of them
Scriptures Second Vindication of Reasonab of Christian. p. 341. The Ideas of one Body and one Place do so clearly agree and the Mind has so evident a Perception of their Agreement that we can never assent to a Proposition that affirms the same Body to be in two distant Places at once however it should pretend to the Authority of a Divine Revelation Since the Evidence 1. That we deceive not our selves in ascribing it to God 2. That we understand it right can never be so great as the Evidence of our own intuitive Knowledge whereby we discern it impossible for the same Body to be in two Places at once Essay l. 4. c. 18. § 5. OBSERVATIONS Mr. Lock often repeats it That the Confession made by St. Peter St. Matth. 16. 16. was the Rock on which Christ would build his Church We have it in his Reasonab of Christian. not only in the Places already alledg'd but also in p. 102 103 and 104 105. If he would inferr thence that this Article alone That Jesus is the Messiah is necessary to make Men Christians or that only these two Articles That he is the Messiah and That he is the Son of God are so necessary he may know that this cannot be deduced from it If he argue thus The Church is founded upon these Articles as upon a Rock therefore only the Belief of them is necessary to make a Man a Member of the Church I deny his Consequence for more than the believing the first Foundation of the Church may be necessary to make a Man a Member of it As to the Words This Rock it is acknowledged that sundry of the ancient Expositors have interpreted it to be the Faith which St. Peter confess'd Upon this Rock will I build my Church i. e. the Faith which thou hast confess'd so St. Chrysost. in St. Matth. Homil. 55. Christ called this Confession a Rock c. For it really is the Rock of Godliness so St. Basil. Seleuc. Orat. 25. What is this upon this Rock I will build my Church Upon this Faith on that which is said Thou art Christ the Son of the living God so St. August Tract 10. in primam Joannis I may add Theophylact Peter having confess'd the Son of God he i. e. Christ saith This Confession which thou hast confess'd shall be the Foundation of Believers Thus Theophyl in loc But tho' these and other ancient Writers do by this Rock understand the Faith which was confess'd yet there want not among them those who make it to be the Author and Finisher of our Faith viz. Christ. Upon those Words 1 Cor. 3. 11. Other Foundation no Man can lay than that which is laid which is Jesus the Christ. Theodoret says thus Blessed Peter laid this Foundation or rather the Lord himself For Peter having said Thou art the Son of the living God the Lord said On this Rock I will build my Church Be not ye therefore denominated from Men for Christ is the Foundation The Interlineary Gloss in St. Matth. 16. 18. says This Rock i. e. Christ in whom thou believest And our Anselm Ibid. as plainly On this Rock i. e. upon my self I will build my Church q. d. Thou art so Peter from me Petra the Rock as that yet the Dignity of being the Foundation is reserv'd for me But St. Austin tho' he was alledged as favouring the former Exposition yet is otherwhere as clearly and fully for this as you can desire Therefore the Lord saith On this Rock I will build my Church because Peter had said Thou art Christ the Son of the living God Therefore says he on this Rock which thou hast confess'd I will build my Church Christ was the Rock upon which Foundation even Peter himself was built for other Foundation no Man can lay than that which is laid to wit Christ Jesus The Church therefore which is founded on Christ c. St. August Tratat 124. in Joannem And again Thou art Peter and on this Rock which thou host confessed on this Rock which thou hast known saying Thou art Christ the Son of the living God I will build my Church i. e. upon my self the Son of the living God I will build my Church I will build thee upon me not me upon thee Men that were willing to be built upon Men said I am of Paul I of Apollos I of Cephas i. e. Peter but others who would not be built upon Peter but upon Petra a Rock said I am of Christ. Thus St. August de Verbis Domini see Matth. Serm. 13. These plainly make this Rock to be Christ himself Besides these already mention'd there occurrs in the Writings of some of the Fathers a third Interpretation of the Rock here spoken of viz. That which makes St. Peter to be the Person to whom Christ makes Promise of so great a Dignity that he would build his Church upon him The Romish Writers abound with Citations to this purpose and tho' because some of them are out of Writings that are not judg'd to be of sufficient Authority and in others of them they have not shew'd that Fidelity they ought to have done many of them are of no weight yet it is granted that some of the Ancients have inclin'd to this Sense of the Place and therefore there is no Necessity that I should give my self the trouble to transcribe their Words Mr. Lock may perhaps say that this Exposition is so much for the Advantage of the Papal Interest and in favour of the Bishop of Rome's Universal Pastorship that Protestants must not admit of it But I answer Why is it more for the Advantage of the Papal Interest that St. Peter should be the Rock on which Christ would build his Church than it is that he would give him the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven Why do they who say that these Words On this Rock I will build my Church were spoken personally of Peter more favour Popery than they who will have those Words To thee I will give the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven to be said personally to Peter For why may we not argue as strongly for the universal Pastorship from the latter Words as from the former And yet Mr. Lock himself tells us expresly that the latter Words were said personally to Peter see his Reasonab of Christian. p. 105. I think it not amiss here to transcribe the Words of Episcopius in loc-Concedi atque indulgeri posse putaverim Pontificiis quod per Hanc Petram intelligatur ipsa persona Petri idque quia probabilibus valde nituntur argumentis At vero dicet quis sic datur Pontificiis quod volunt Id vero pernegatur consequi Etsi enim Petro hic aliquid promittatur aut de eo aliquid futurum affirmetur id tamen non fit cum aliorum Discipulorum aut Apostolorum exclusione Aliud enim longe est Petro hoc dici aliud soli Petro ea dici quae aliis non competant aut eodem saliem
jure aliis Discipulis tribui nequeant Prius concedi posse putamus posterius vero negamus id enim sufficit plusquam satis ad Primatum Petri quae ei si quis fuisset ridicule admodum stolide superstruitur Pontificis Romani Praerogativa evertendum Thus Episcopius And there are Protestant Divines of great Esteem for their Learning and Judgment and who have engaged as zealously as any other against the Papal Interest who have gone farther have not only made the Person of St. Peter to be meant by the Rock but also somewhat peculiar to be granted him and yet shew that this affords not the least Advantage to the Pope's Pretensions that he is Universal Pastor To omit some of our English Divines they that please may consult Cameron either in his Praelections in St. Matth. 16. 18. or in the great Criticks Episcopius says that this That the Church should be built on him as on a Rock was granted to Peter in common with the other Apostles And to the same purpose speaks Origen Tractat. 1. in Matth. If thou thinkest that the whole Church was built upon Peter alone what wilt thou say of John the Son of Thunder and every one of the Apostles Shall we dare to say that the Gates of Hell could not prevail against St. Peter only but could prevail against the rest And a little after If that saying To thee I will give the Keys was common to the other Apostles why was not the rest which was then said as to Peter common to them too So that this may be a fourth Exposition that by the Rock is meant St. Peter not alone but together with the other Apostles As he made that Confession Thou art Christ the Son of the living God not for himself only but also in the Name of the other Apostles so according to this Sense he receiv'd this Grant for the rest of the Apostles as well as for himself I have alledged the foresaid Testimonies to satisfie Mr. Lock That Persons of approved Piety as well as Learning have judged our Saviour's Words On this Rock I will build my Church capable of other Interpretations than that which is mention'd by him viz. That the Faith which was confessed by St. Peter 〈◊〉 those Articles That Jesus is the Christ and That he is the Son of the living God are the Rock on which the Church is built This is the only Interpretation that can do Mr. Lock any Service and therefore he takes no notice of the rest But he should not be himself guilty of that which he condemns so much in others i. e. the imposing his Interpretations of Scripture upon us And therefore he must not be displeas'd if we do not grant that which Mr. Lock here affirms without any Proof that this Proposition That Jesus is the Messiah the Son of the living God was that Rock on which our Lord said that he would build his Church Mr. Lock says that the Evidence that we deceive not our selves in ascribing a Revelation to God can never be so great as the Evidence of our own intuitive Knowledge where if his Meaning be that we can never be so certain that any Revelation suppose the Scripture is from God as we are of the Object of our intuitive Knowledge I must deny it for I firmly believe that there have been and may now be those who are as certain that the Scriptures are the Word of God as they can be of that which they clearly see and distinctly perceive by any other of their Senses And I am confirm'd in this Belief by the Words of Mr. Chillingworth c. 1. § 9. To those says he that believe and live according to their Faith God gives by degrees the Spirit of Obsignation and Confirmation and to be as fully and resolutely assur'd of the Gospel of Christ as those which heard it from Christ himself with their Ears which saw it with their Eyes which look'd upon it and whose Hands handled the Word of Life CHAP. XXIX Of Fundamentals and the Apostles Creed GOD alone can appoint what shall be necessarily believ'd by every one whom he will justifie and what he has so appointed and declared is alone necessary No body can add to these Fundamental Articles of Faith nor make any other necessary but what God himself hath made and declared to be so And what these are which God requires of those who will enter into and receive the Benefits of the New Covenant has already been shewn An explicit Belief of these is absolutely requir'd of all those to whom the Gospel of Jesus Christ is preached Mr. Lock Reasonab of Christian. p. 301. The Primitive Church admitted converted Heathens to Baptism upon the Faith contain'd in the Apostles Creed A bare Profession of that Faith and no more was required of them to be receiv'd into the Church and made Members of Christ's Body How little different the Faith of the ancient Church was from the Faith I have mention'd may be seen in these Words of Tertullian Regula fidei una omnium est sola immobilis irreformabilis credendi scilicet in unicum Deum omnipotentem mundi conditorem Filium ejus Jesum Christum natum ex Virgine Maria crucifixum sub Pontio Pilato tertia die resuscitatum a mortuis receptum in coelis sedentem nunc ad dextram Patris venturum judicare vivos mortuos per carnis etiam resurrectionem Hac lege Fidei manente caetera jam disciplinae conversationis admittunt novitatem correctionis Tert. de Virg. Velan in princip This was the Faith that in Tertullian's time sufficed to make a Christian. And the Church of England only proposes the Articles of the Apostles Creed to the Convert to be baptiz'd and upon his professing a Belief of them asks whether he will be baptiz'd in this Faith and upon the Profession of this Faith and no other the Church baptizes him into it The Apostles Creed is the Faith I was baptiz'd into no one tittle whereof I have renounced that I know And I heretofore thought that gave me title to be a Christian. Second Vindicat. p. 177 178 182. Thus Mr. Lock OBSERVATIONS Mr. Lock tells us in Reasonab of Christian. p. 301. that it had been already shewn what the Fundamental Articles of Faith are But I ask How had it been shewn He had sometimes affirm'd positively that this that Jesus of Nazareth is the only gospel-Gospel-Article of Faith that was requir'd Reasonab of Christian p. 195. that Salvation or Perdition depends upon believing or rejecting this one Proposition that Jesus was the Messiah Ibid. p. 43. that this was all the Doctrine the Apostles propos'd to be believ'd Ibid. p. 93. At other times he had said that it was also requir'd for the attaining of Life that they should believe that Jesus is the Son of God Ibid. p. 194. He had also spoken of concomitant Articles viz. Christ's Resurrection Rule and coming again to judge the World saying that these
that diligently seek him CHAP. XIV Of the Preaching of Christ as also the Commission he gave to his Apostles and the LXX Disciples and their Preaching THE Religion our Saviour and his Apostles proposed consisted in that short plain easie and intelligible Summary which I set down in my Reasonab of Christian. in these words Believing Jesus to be the Saviour promised and taking him now raised from the Dead and constituted the Lord and Judge of Men to be their King and Ruler Mr. Lock Vindicat. of the Reasonab of Christian. p. 28. As to our Saviour and his Apostles the whole aim of all their Preaching every where was to convince the unbelieving World of these two great Truths First That there was one eternal invisible God Maker of Heaven and Earth and next That Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah the promised King and Saviour Second Vindicat. of the Reason of Christian. p. 237. Our Saviour preach'd every where the Kingdom of God and by his Miracles declar'd himself to be the King of that Kingdom The Apostles preach'd the same and after his Ascension openly avow'd him to be the Prince and Saviour promised Ibid. p. 252. By these and the like places we may be satisfied what it was that the Apostles taught and preach'd even this one Proposition That Jesus was the Messiah Ibid. p. 282. This one Doctrine That Jesus was the Messiah was that which was propos'd in our Saviour's time to be believ'd as necessary to make a Man a Christian The same Doctrine was likewise what was propos'd afterward in the preaching of the Apostles to Unbelievers to make them Christians Ibid. p. 318. There is yet one Consideration remaining which were sufficient of it self to convince us that it was the sole Article of Faith which was preach'd and that is the Commissions of those that were sent to preach the Gospel Our Saviour's Commission or End of his being sent and the Execution of it both terminated in this That he declar'd the good News that the Kingdom of the Messiah was come and gave them to understand by the Miracles he did that he himself was he So the Commission that he gave the Apostles was that they should acquaint their Hearers that the Kingdom of the Messiah was come and let them know by the Miracles they did in his Name that he was that King and Deliverer they expected And his Commission to the Seventy whom he sent to preach was so exactly conformable to that which he had before given to the Twelve Apostles that there needs but this one thing more to be observed to convince any one that they were sent to convert their Hearers to this sole Belief that the Kingdom of the Messiah was come and that Jesus was the Messiah Ibid. p. 289 290 296 299. Accordingly the preaching of the Apostles every where in the Acts tended to this one Point to prove that Jesus was the Messiah Reasonab of Christian. p. 31. What that Word was through which others should believe on Christ S. Joh. 17. 20. we have seen in the preaching of the Apostles all through the History of the Acts viz. this one great Point that Jesus was the Messiah Ibid. p. 186. OBSERVATIONS It is strange that Mr. Lock should say in so many places without any Restriction or Limitation that this that Jesus is the Messiah is the sole Doctrine that one Point or Article which was preach'd when he himself otherwhere puts so many Restrictions and Limitations upon it As 1. When in his Reasonab of Christian. p. 195. he says This was the only gospel-Gospel-Article of Faith which was preach'd to them He doth not say The only Article of Faith but the only Gospel-Article He grants that the Apostles preach'd the Article of one true eternal and invisible God Maker of Heaven and Earth see Reasonab of Christian p. 43 44. but he doth not call this a Gospel-Article 2. When he says that it was the only Article necessary to be believ'd to make a Man a Christian the sole Doctrine upon their assent to which or Disbelief of it Men were pronounced Believers or Unbelievers and accordingly receiv'd into the Church of Christ. Ibid. p. 195. 3. He limits to the Preaching of our Saviour and his Apostles to those who were yet Strangers and ignorant of the Faith to bring them in and convert them to it Ibid. p. 298. See also p. 295. and 297. It is strange also that he should contend so much that this was the only Article of Faith that was preach'd when he acknowledges that several other Articles were preach'd Indeed now after his Death his Resurrection was also commonly required to be believ'd as a necessary Article So Mr. Lock Ibid. p. 31. Their great business was to be Witnesses to Jesus of his Life Death Resurrection and Ascension which put together were undeniable Proofs of his being the Messiah So the same Mr. Lock Ibid. p. 188. speaking of the Apostles who certainly did not fail to execute their great Business which was to preach or bear witness to the Articles of Christ's Life Death Resurrection and Ascension and not only that of his being the Messiah In the next Page viz. 190. he hath these words We see what it was that was to be preach'd to all Nations viz. That he was the Messiah that had suffer'd and rose from the Dead the third day and fulfill'd all things that was written in the Old Testament concerning the Messiah and that those that believ'd this and repented should have remission of Sins through this Faith in him And p. 191. he tells us that S. Paul preached that Jesus was the Messiah the King who being risen from the Dead now reigneth and shall more publickly manifest his Kingdom in judging the World at the last day Surely nothing can be more plain than that by Mr. Lock 's own Acknowledgment the Apostles preach'd the Articles of our dear Lord's Suffering Rising the third Day fulfilling all the Prophecies of the Old Testament concerning him now reigning and future coming to judge the World and that those who truly believe and repent shall receive remission of Sins through Faith in him and not one Article only And therefore he very fitly calls them concomitant Articles since the Apostles in their preaching often join'd them with that Article that Jesus is the Messiah The belief of Jesus of Nazareth reth to be the Messiah together with those concomitant Articles of his Resurrection Rule and coming again to judge the World c. Thus Mr. Lock Reasonab of Christian. p. 293 294. To reconcile these Acknowledgments with his Doctrine of one Article he tryeth many ways but all in vain 1. As to the Article of the Resurrection he would persuade us that the Article of Jesus's being the Messiah and it are but one These two important Articles are inseparable and in effect make but one For believe one and you believe both deny one of them and you can believe neither So Mr. Lock in his
Second Vindication p. 309. But every one sees that all he could say is that in effect they make but one and that with the same breath he expresly calls them two Articles There is therefore no necessity of our insisting upon this they that please may see what he himself saith in the same Vindication p. 25 26. 2. He insists much upon it that our Saviour's Crucifixion Death and Resurrection are mentioned and made use of as Arguments to persuade men of this Fundamental Truth viz. That Jesus was the Messiah they were not propos'd as Fundamental Articles which the Apostles principally aim'd at and endeavour'd to convince men of Second Vindicat. p. 268 269. So again p. 323. he urges that his Death and Resurrection were Matters of Fact which happen'd to him in their due time to compleat in him the Character and Predictions of the Messiah and demonstrate him to be the Deliverer promised they were no more necessary to be believ'd to make a man a Christian than any other part of Divine Revelation c. Thus Mr. Lock But the Question is not Whether the Crucifixion Death and Resurrection of Christ were propos'd by the Apostles as the Fundamental Truths which they principally aim'd at and endeavour'd to convince their Hearers of but whether they were not propos'd by them as Fundamental Truths Whether this That Jesus is the Messiah be the principal Article and whether it was the only Article preach'd by the Apostles as necessary to the making Men Christians are different Questions Mr. Lock in his Reasonab of Christian. p. 31. says expresly of the Article of Christ's Resurrection that it was also commonly requir'd to be believ'd as a necessary Article Where we may observe the Word Also which denotes that not only the Article of Jesus's being the Messiah but also this of the Resurrection was commonly requir'd as necessary And accordingly the same Mr. Lock says presently after That our Saviour's Resurrection is necessary now to be believ'd by those who would receive him as the Messiah It is true that in a place lately cited viz. his Second Vindication p. 323. he says That the Articles of Christ's Death and Resurrection are no more necessary to be believ'd to make a Man a Christian than any other part of divine Revelation but then it immediately follows But as far as they have an immediate Connexion with his being the Messiah and cannot be denied without denying him to be the Messiah And so he plainly grants That so far as they have such a Connexion with his being the Messiah they are necessary to be believ'd to make a Man a Christian which is as much as we need desire for thence it follows that this that Jesus is the Messiah was not the sole Doctrine that was preach'd as necessary to be believ'd to that end I must not forget that Mr. Lock also saith That our Saviour's Crucifixion Death and Resurrection were mention'd and made use of to prove that Jesus was the Messiah If so these Articles that Jesus was Crucify'd that he Died and that he Rose from Death were the Premisses and this that he was the Messiah the Conclusion Now it must be acknowledg'd that the Premisses are necessary to be believ'd before we can believe the Conclusion and therefore this makes against Mr. Lock not at all for him If we cannot believe that Jesus was the Messiah unless we believe that he rose from the dead which Mr. Lock confesses then the Article of the Resurrection was necessary to be preach'd and believ'd to make a man a Christian. 3. He says that his Resurrection and some other Articles are put for his being the Messiah and proposed to be believ'd in the place of it but I shall â—â—ve occasion to examine this very shortly To proceed then How can Mr. Lock say that this that Jesus was the Messiah was the only gospel-Gospel-Article preach'd by the Apostles to Unbelievers to bring them to the Faith when he grants that in some of their discourses it was omitted yea and other Articles at the same time insisted on Thus in his Reasonab of Christianity p. 31. he says that Christ's Resurrection was sometimes solely insisted on So in his Second Vindication p. 284. he plainly confesses that in the Story of what Paul and Barnabas said at Lystra the Article of the Messiah is not mention'd tho' at the same time they preached the Article of the one living God See also Ibid. p. 307. where he says that 't is not at all to be wondered that his Resurrection his Ascension his Rule and Dominion and his coming to Judge the quick and the dead should sometimes in Scripture be put alone as sufficient Descriptions of the Messiah Thus Act. 10. our Saviour in Peter's discourse to Cornelius when he brought him the Gospel is described to be the Messiah by his Miracles Death Resurrection Dominion and cocoming to judge the quick and the dead Here he grants in express words that our Lord's Resurrection Ascension Dominion and judging the quick and dead are sometimes put alone and if they be sometimes put alone then the Article of his being the Messiah is sometimes omitted To the same purpose he says Ibid. p. 308. These where they are set alone for the Faith to which Salvation is promised plainly signifie the believing Jesus to be the Messiah Here he grants again That the four Articles just now mention'd are sometimes set alone and that the Article of Jesus's being the Messiah is only signified viz. by those four Articles and not express'd And indeed this is Mr. Lock 's usual Evasion that tho' other Articles are only insisted on in some places yet the Article of our Saviour's being the Messiah is signified by those Articles the believing them is put for believing him to be the Messiah they are proposed to be believ'd in the place of it see his Second Vindication p. 307 327. Where we may be sure that his Meaning is not that the other Articles were to be believ'd and the Article that Jesus is the Messiah was not to be believ'd tho' the words Proposed to be believ'd in place of it are capable of that sense but if I do not mistake his Meaning is that those Articles were propos'd to be believ'd that believing them they might believe also that Jesus was the Messiah because those were convincing Proofs of this But whatever his Meaning is this is manifest that they were proposed by the Apostles to Unbelievers as necessary to be believ'd to make them Christian And this is sufficient for the Confutation of those who say that only one Gospel-Article was preached as necessary to be believ'd to that end Before I leave this I must not omit to take notice that Mr. Lock doth assign a Reason why Paul and Barnabas did not mention the Article of the Messiah which I shall set down in his own words Having says he begun their preaching with that of one living God they had not time to proceed farther
God but nothing of this is in the Text. Besides the Word that is here translated Right is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which as is well known signifies License or Power as well as Right and not only by the Vulgar but also by the Syriack Arabick and AEthiopick it is rendred Power And this Signification agrees exactly with the Text Blessed are they that do his Commandments that they may have Power or Licence to eat of the tree of Life In this place therefore there is nothing concerning any Claim of Right and consequently it is not at all to the purpose I might have added that Mr. Lock speaks of exact Obedience to the Law and perhaps he would not find it an easie matter to prove that by Doing his Commandments here is meant such exact unsinning Obedience But tho' Rev. 22. 14. will not prove his Claim of Right yet if he use those words in a larger sense as they may denote a Right by Promise I do not deny that his former Text viz. Rom. 4. 4. may prove it To him that worketh the reward which God is suppos'd to have promised in the Covenant of Works is reckon'd as debt he may lay claim to it as his Right by virtue of that Promise But if he take them in the strict sense as if exact Obedience had properly merited the Reward and might have claim'd it of Right tho' no such Promise or Covenant had interven'd he will hardly prove that from Rom. 4. Yea our Saviour seems to have determin'd very plainly against such a Claim S. Luke 17. 10. When ye shall have done all things which are commanded you say We are unprofitable servants we have done that which was our duty to do CHAP. XX. Of Faith in general FAith is nothing else but an Assent founded upon the highest Reason Mr. Lock Essay l. 4. c. 16. § 14. The Matter of Faith being only Divine Revelation and nothing else Faith as we use the Word call'd commonly Divine Faith has to do with no Propositions but those which are suppos'd to be divinely revealed So that I do not see how those who make Revelation alone the sole Object of Faith can say that it is a matter of Faith and not of Reason to believe that such or such a Proposition to be found in such or such a Book is of divine Inspiration unless it be reveal'd that that Proposition or all in that Book was communicated by divine Inspiration Without such a Revelation the believing or not believing that Proposition or Book to be of divine Authority can never be matter of Faith but matter of Reason and such as I must come to the Assent to only by the use of my Reason Things beyond the discovery of our natural Faculties and above Reason are when revealed the proper matter of Faith Whatever Proposition is reveal'd of whose truth our Mind by its natural Faculties and Notions cannot judge that is purely matter of Faith Where the Principles of Reason have not evidenced a Proposition to be certainly true or false there clear Revelation as another Principle of Truth and ground of Assent may determine and so it may be matter of Faith Ibid. c. 18. § 6 7 9. Faith has as much Certainty as our Knowledge it self Faith is a settled and sure Principle of Assent and Assurance and leaves no manner of room for Doubt or Hesitation Essay l. 4. c. 16. § 14. To talk of the Certainty of Faith seems all one to me as to talk of the Knowledge of Believing a way of speaking not easie to me to understand Bring Faith to Certainty and it ceases to be Faith When it is brought to Certainty Faith is destroy'd 't is Knowledge then and Faith no longer The Second Letter p. 95 96. My Bible Heb. 10. 22. expresses the highest degree of Faith which the Apostle recommended to Believers in his time by Full Assurance I find my Bible speaks of the Assurance of Faith but no where that I can remember of the Certainty of Faith though in many places it speaks of the Certainty of Knowledge and therefore I speak so too and shall not I think be condemned for keeping close to the Expressions of our Bible The Third Letter p. 122 123. I say with Mr. Chillingworth c. 6. § 3. that I do heartily acknowledge and believe the Articles of our Faith to be in themselves Truths as certain and infallible as the very common Principles of Geometry and Metaphysicks But that there is not requir'd of us a Knowledge of them and an Adherence to them as certain as that of Sense or Science and that for this Reason among others given both by Mr. Chillingworth and Mr. Hooker viz. that Faith is not Knowledge no more than three is four but eminently contain'd in it so that he that knows believes and something more but he that believes many times does not know nay if he doth barely and merely believe he doth never know These are Mr. Chillingworth's own Words c. 6. § 2. That this Assurance of Faith may approach very near to Certainty and not come short of it in a sure and steady influence on the Mind I have so plainly declar'd Essay l. 4. c. 17. § 16. that no body I think can question it There I say of some Propositions wherein Knowledge i. e. in my sense Certainty fails us that their Probability is so clear and strong that Assent as necessarily follows it as Knowledge doth Demonstration Ibid. p. 124. Herein lies the Difference between Probability and Certainty Faith and Knowledge that in all the parts of Knowledge there is Intuition each immediate Idea each Step has its visible and certain Connexion in Belief not so Essay l. 4. c. 15. § 3. To say that Believing and Knowing stand upon the same grounds would be I think to say that Probability and Demonstration are the same thing The Third Letter p. 223. He that says he barely believes acknowledges that he assents to a Proposition as true upon bare Probability Ibid. p. 159. I think it is possible to be certain upon the Testimony of God where I know that it is the Testimony of God because in such a case that Testimony is capable not only to make me believe but if I consider it right to make me know the thing to be so and so I may be certain For the Veracity of God is as capable of making me know a Proposition to be true as any other way of Proof can be and therefore I do not in such a case barely believe but know such a Proposition to be true and attain Certainty Ibid. p. 133. Faith as contradistinguished to Reason is the Assent to any Proposition not made out by the Deductions of Reason but upon the Credit of the Proposer as coming immediately from God Essay l. 4. c. 18. § 2. Faith is nothing but a firm Assent of the Mind which if it be regulated as is our duty cannot be afforded to any thing but upon good
Reason and so cannot be opposite to it He that believes without having any Reason for believing may be in love with his own Fancies and seeks not Truth as he ought Ibid. c. 17. § 24. Where I want evidence of things there yet is ground enough for me to believe because God hath said it The First Letter p. 227. S. Paul in his Epistles often puts Faith for the whole Duty of a Christian. Reasonab of Christian. p. 199. Thus Mr. Lock OBSERVATIONS When Mr. Lock says that the Matter or Object of Faith is only Divine Revelation and nothing else if by Divine Revelation be meant the whole Scripture the Historical part of it together with the rest for all Scripture is given by the Inspiration of God 2 Tim. 3. 16. writ by Men inspired and guided by his infallible Spirit it is very true And as to that which he infers that then it cannot be said that it is matter of Faith and not of Reason to believe that such or such a Proposition to be sound in such or such a Book is of Divine Inspiration unless it be reveal'd that that Proposition or all in that Book was communicated by Divine Inspiration we need not contend much with him about it since in the place just now alledg'd viz. 2 Tim. 3. 16. we have a Divine Testimony or Revelation that all the Books of Scripture which were writ and receiv'd before the writing of the Second Epistle to Timothy which as is concluded by all was writ very late are divinely inspir'd Mr. Lock sometimes saith that Faith hath as much Certainly as our Knowledge it self and that it leaves no manner of Doubt or Hesitation yet other where he declaims against the Certainty of Faith Now I would know how he can reconcile himself to himself in this He says that to talk of the Certainty of Faith seems all one as to talk of the Knowledge of Believing that Certainty destroys Faith when it is brought to Certainty Faith is destroyed 't is Knowledge then and Faith no longer For to him to know and be certain is the same thing see his Second Letter p. 93. and Certainty the same thing with Knowledge see his Third Letter p. 122. Now if this be so if Certainty and Knowledge are the same thing then as he says that to talk of the Certainty of Faith seems all one as to talk of the Knowledge of Believing so he might have said that to talk of the Certainty of Knowledge seems all one as to talk of the Knowledge of Knowing and that to talk of certain Knowledge seems all one as to talk of known Knowing a way of speaking not easy to be understood Yea as often as Mr. Lock useth these Expressions Certainty of Knowledge and Certain Knowledge so oft he confutes this Fancy of his that Knowledge and Certainty are the same thing As when we say a certain Persuasion or a certain Truth these Expressions imply that there may be a Persuasion or a Truth not so certain so when we say Certain Knowledge it seems to imply that there may be a Knowledge not so certain And so when Mr. Lock says We certainly know and We have a more certain Knowledge Essay l. 4. c. 10. § 6. doth he not plainly imply that there is a Knowledge less certain So that it is clear from his own Expreshons that Knowledge and Certainty are not the same thing But that which I chiefly desire to know is How Mr. Lock will reconcile his denying Certainty to Faith with his saying that Faith hath as much Certainty as our Knowledge it self Whereas Mr. Lock says that he finds his Bible speaks of the Assurance of Faith but no where that he can remember of the Certainty of Faith I desire that he would please to let us know the difference between Assurance and Certainty or between Full Assurance and Certainty As to the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. 10. 22. which is translated Full Assurance I suppose the Translators if they had pleased might have rendred it Full Certainty or Full Persuasion or Certain Persuasion as Erasmus and others render it by Certitudo As Mr. Lock craves leave to use the Words of Mr. Chillingworth so he ought to crave his Reader 's Pardon for not transcribing his Words so largely as he ought to have done For though it sufficiently appears from so much as he hath cited from him that Mr. Chillingworth makes against and not for him yet it would have been more apparent if he had alledg'd him more fully Mr. Chillingworth as Mr. Lock cites him says that there is not requir'd of us a Knowledge of the Articles of Faith and an Adherence to them as certain as that of Sense or Science In which Words if by an Adherence to them be meant an Assent to or Belief of them Certainty is plainly ascrib'd to Belief or Faith which Mr. Lock will not allow though not a Certainty equal to that of Sense or Science But let us take a view of Mr. Chillingworth's Words at large I do says he heartily acknowledge and believe the Articles of our Faith to be in themselves Truths as certain and insallible as the very common Principles of Geometry and Metaphysicks But that there is requir'd of us a Knowledge of them or an Adherence to them as certain as that of Sense or Science that such a Certainty is requir'd of us under pain of Damnation so that no Man can hope to be in the state of Salvation but he that finds in himself such a degree of Faith such a strength of Adherence this I have already demonstrated to be a great Errour and of dangerous and pernicious Consequence Thus Mr. Chillingworth c. 6. § 3. We see now what it is that this great Man saith viz. That a Certainty equal to that of Sense or Science is not requir'd of all Men under pain of Damnation so that no Man can be in a state of Salvation that hath it not But God may grant that degree of Certainty to some which he doth not require under pain of Damnation of all Mr. Lock farther tells us that there is not required of us a Knowledge of the Articles of our Faith and an Adherence to them as certain as that of Sense or Science and that for this reason among others viz. that Faith is not Knowledge no more than Three is Four but eminently contain'd in it so that he that knows believes and something more but he that believes many times does not know nay if he doth barely and merely believe he doth never know These are Mr. Chillingworth's own words Thus Mr. Lock And I grant that the words Faith is not Knowledge c. are Mr. Chillingworth's but these And that for this reason among others are not his but Mr. Lock 's own Mr. Chillingworth would never have offer'd such a Reason to prove that there is not requir'd of us a Knowledge of the Articles of our Faith and an Adherence to them as
certain as that of Sense and Science He and other worthy Men of our Church who writ in his time were not wont to argue so loosly and withal he gives it as a Reason of something else see him cap. 6. § 2. There every one may also see that when he says Faith is not Knowledge he takes the word Knowledge in a different Sense from that in which he takes it § 3. where he speaks of the Knowledge of the Articles of our Faith When he speaks of Knowledge of the Articles of Faith he by Knowledge understands only an Apprehension or Belief but when he says Faith is not Knowledge he takes the Word properly and exactly in the Sense in which he uses the Word Science By this time Mr. Lock may see what the Task is that he hath set himself viz. He is to prove this Consequence Faith is not Knowledge therefore there is not requir'd of us under pain of Damnation an Apprehension or Belief of the Articles of Faith as certain as that of Sense or Science But since Mr. Lock mentions Mr. Hooker together with Mr. Chillingworth as if they countenanced his Notion of Faith and Certainty I have consider'd that which they say of this Matter and find that he hath no countenance at all from those excellent Persons He makes Knowledge and Certainty to be the same thing and Faith to be only Probability let him shew where either Mr. Hooker or Mr. Chillingworth doth either of these He distinguishes between Assurance and Certainty yea he makes full Assurance of Faith to come short of Certainty I would know where those excellent Persons do this He ridicules the Certainty of Faith but Mr. Hooker and Mr. Chillingworth ascribe a Certainty to Faith They both of them speak of a Certainty of Evidence and a Certainty of Adherence and when Mr. Hooker in his Sermon upon Heb. 1. 4. says that this Certainty of Adherence is greater in us than the other he plainly implies that both the one and the other Certainty is in us but not both in the same degree And as to Mr. Chillingworth when he says of this Hypothesis that all the Articles of our Faith were revealed by God we cannot ordinarily have any rational or acquired Certainty more than moral see him c. 1. § 8. he grants that we may have a moral Certainty of that Hypothesis But § 9. he adds Yet this I say not as if I doubted that the Spirit of God being implor'd by devout and humble Prayer and sincere Obedience may and will by degrees advance his Servants higher and give them a Certainty of Adherence beyond their Certainty of Evidence But what God gives as a reward to Believers is one thing and what he requires of all Men as their duty is another and what he will accept of out of Grace and Favour is yet another To those that believe and live according to their Faith he gives by degrees the Spirit of Obsignation and Confirmation which makes them know though how they know not what they did but believe and to be as fully and resolutely assur'd of the Gospel of Christ as those which heard it from Christ himself with their ears which saw it with their eyes which look'd upon it and whose hands handled the Word of Life If Mr. Lock will say thus much with Mr. Chillingworth more will not be requir'd of him I said that Mr. Lock makes Faith to be only Probability and I have in this Chapter transcrib'd sundry Passages from him which make this out Herein lies the Difference between Probability and Certainty Faith and Knowledge says he in Essay l. 4. c. 15. § 3. where as Knowledge is in his Sense Certainty so Faith is Probability So again He says he that says he barely believes acknowledges that he assents to a Proposition as true upon bare Probability And again To say that Believing and Knowing stand upon the same grounds is I think to sâ—y that Probability and Demonstration are the same thing See his Third Letter p. 159 223. Mr. Lock in his Third Letter p. 124. haâ—h these Words That this Assurance of Faith may approach very near to Certainty and not come short of it in a sure and steady influence on the Mind I have so plainly declar'd Essay l. 4. c. 17. § 16. that no body I think can question it If you ask in what words he declares it he tells us that speaking of some Propositions wherein Knowledge i. e. in his sense Certainty fails us he says that their Probability is so clear and strong that Assent as necessarily follows it as Knowledge does Demonstration Thus Mr. Lock But how does he so plainly declare that the Assurance of Faith may approach very near to Certainty and not come short of it in a sure and steady influence on the Mind when neither in the Words which he cites nor in that whole Section out of which he cites them there is any mention either of the Assurance of Faith or of Faith it self He speaks indeed of probable Mediums the probability of some of which may be so clear and strong that Assent necessarily follows it and perhaps he would have us to apply this to the probable Grounds of Faith for he will not allow the Grounds of Faith to be more than probable But as he saith of probable Mediums that they cannot bring us to the lowest degree of Knowledge so probable Grounds of Faith cannot bring us to the lowest degree of Certainty and so according to him our Faith cannot advance it self above Probability as was observ'd before When Mr. Lock says in his Third Letter p. 133. I think it is possible to be certain upon the Testimony of God where I know that it is the Testimony of God should he not rather have said It is impossible for him who knows that God is true yea Truth it self not to be certain upon the Testimony of God provided he know that it is the Testimony of God And after all what is this to us who live now since according to Mr. Lock it is impossible for us unless we had an immediate Revelation from God himself to know that it is the Testimony of God and so by this Proviso he makes it impossible for us without such an immediate Revelation to be certain upon the Testimony of God though we should be suppos'd to have a certain knowledge of his Veracity CHAP. XXI Of Abraham's Faith and the Faith of those that liv'd before our Saviour's time THE Faith for which God justified Abraham what was it It was the believing God when he engaged his Promise in the Covenant he made with him The Faith which God counted to Abraham for Righteousness was nothing but a firm Belief of what God declar'd to him and a stedfast relying on him for the accomplishment of what he had promised Abraham believ'd that tho' he and Sarah were old and past the time and hopes of Children yet he should have a Son by her and
their Doings in this Life Ibid. l. 1. c. 4. § 5. and l. 4. c. 3. § 6. We groan within our selves waiting for the Adoption to wit the Redemption of our Body Rom. 8. 23. whereby is plainly meant the Change of these frail mortal Bodies into the spiritual immortal Bodies at the Resurrection when this Mortal shall have put on Immortality 1 Cor. 15. 54. Reasonab of Christian. p. 206. This being the Case that whoever is guilty of any Sin should certainly die and cease to be the Benefit of Life restor'd by Christ at the Resurrection would have been no great Advantage for as much as here again Death must have seiz'd upon all Mankind because all had sinned for the Wages of Sin is every where Death as well after as before the Resurrection if God had not found out a way to justifie some Ibid. p. 15. The Scripture is express that the same Persons shall be rais'd and appear before the Judgment-Seat of Christ that every one may receive according to what he has done in his Body The Third Letter p. 196. In the New Testament I find our Saviour and the Apostles to preach the Resurrection of the Dead and the Resurrection from the Dead in many Places and the Resurrection of the Dead I acknowledge to be an Article of the Christian Faith But I do not remember any Place where the Resurrection of the same Body is so much as mention'd Nay I do not remember in any Place of the New Testament where the general Resurrection of the last Day is spoken of any such Expression as the Resurrection of the Body much less of the same Body Ibid. p. 166. When I writ my Essay I took it for granted as I doubt not but many others have done that the Scripture had mention'd in express Terms the Resurrection of the Body but looking more narrowly into what Revelation has declar'd concerning the Resurrection I find no such express Words in the Scripture as that the Body shall rise or be raised or the Resurrection of the Body I shall therefore in the next Edition of it change these Words of my Essay l. 4. c. 18. § 7. The dead Bodies of Men shall rise into these of the Scripture The Dead shall rise Not that I question that the Dead shall be rais'd with Bodies Ibid. p. 210. Tho' I do by no means deny that the same Bodies shall be rais'd at the last Day yet I see nothing said to prove it to be an Article of Faith Ibid. p. 195. The Apostle tells us at the great Day when every one shall receive according to his Doings the Secrets of all Hearts shall be laid open The Sentence shall be justified by the Consciousness all Persons shall have that they themselves are the same that committed those Actions and deserve that Punishment for them Essay l. 2. c. 27. § 26. Christ himself who knew for what he should condemn Men at the last Day assures us in the two Places where he describes his Proceeding at the great Judgment that the Sentence of Condemnation passes only on the Workers of Iniquity such as neglected to fulfil the Law in Acts of Charity Matth. 7. 23. Luke 13. 27. Matth. 25. 42. That Men may not be deceived by mistaking the Doctrine of Faith Grace Free Grace and the Pardon and Forgiveness of Sin and Salvation by Christ which was the great End of his Coming he more than once declares to them for what Omissions and Miscarriages he shall judge and condemn to death even those who have own'd him and done Miracles in his Name when he comes at last to render to every one according to what he hath done in the Flesh sitting upon his great and glorious Tribunal at the end of the World see John 5. 28 29. Matth. 13. 14. 16. 24 c. Reasonab of Christian. p. 9. 241 242 243 244 245. I am going to a Tribunal that hath a Right to judge of Thoughts The Third Letter p. 98. The eternal Condition of a future State infinitely outweighs the Expectation of Riches or Honour or any other Worldly Pleasure we can propose to our selves The Happiness of another Life shall certainly be agreeable to every one's Wish or Desire The Rewards and Punishments of another Life which the Almighty has establish'd as the Enforcements of his Law are of Weight enough to determine the Choice against whatever Pleasure or Pain this Life can shew when the eternal State is consider'd in its bare Possibility which no body can make any doubt of He that will allow exquisite and endless Happiness to be but the possible Consequence of a good Life here or the contrary State the possible Reward of a bad one must own himself to judge very much amiss if he does not conclude that a Vertuous Life with the certain Expectation of everlasting Bliss which may come is to be preferr'd to a vicious one with the Fear of that dreadful State of Misery which 't is very possible may overtake the Guilty or at best the terrible uncertain Hope of Annibilation This is evidently so tho' the vertuous Life here had nothing but Pain and the vicious continual Pleasure which yet is for the most part quite otherwise and wicked Men have not much the odds to brag of even in their present Possession nay all things considered rightly have I think the worst part here But when infinite Happiness is put in one Scale against infinite Misery in the other if the worst that comes to the pious Man if he mistake be the best that the wicked Man can attain to if he be in the right who can without madness run the Venture Who in his Wits would chuse to come within a Possibility of infinite Misery which if he miss there is yet nothing to be got by that Hazard Whereas on the other hand the sober Man ventures nothing against Happiness to be got if his Expectation comes to pass If the good Man be in the right he is eternally happy is he mistake he is not miserable he feels nothing On the other side if the wicked be in the right he is not happy if he mistake he is infinitely miserable Must it not be a most manifest wrong Judgment that does not presently see to which side in this Case the Preference is to be given I have forborn to mention any thing of the Certainty or Probability of a future State designing here to shew the wrong Judgment that any one must allow he makes upon his own Principles laid how he pleases who prefers the short Pleasures of a vicious Life upon any Consideration whilst he knows and cannot but be certain that a future Life is at least possible Essay l. 2. c. 21. § 38 65 70. Nothing of Pleasure or Pain in this Life can bear any Proportion to endless Happiness or exquisite Misery of an immortal Soul hereafter Let a Man see that Vertue and Religion are necessary to his Happiness let him look into the