Selected quad for the lemma: glory_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
glory_n	body_n	sow_v	spiritual_a	2,871	5	9.1634	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A48890	Mr. Locke's reply to the right reverend the Lord Bishop of Worcester's answer to his second letter wherein, besides other incident matters, what his lordship has said concerning certainty by reason, certainty by ideas, and certainty of faith, the resurrection of the same body, the immateriality of the soul, the inconsistency of Mr. Locke's notions with the articles of the Christian faith and their tendency to sceptism [sic], is examined.	Locke, John, 1632-1704.	1699 (1699)	Wing L2754; ESTC R32483	244,862	490

Infant have the same Body But this is a way of Certainty found out to establish the Articles of Faith and to overturn the new Method of Certainty that your Lordship says I have started which is apt to leave Mens Minds more doubtful than before And now I desire your Lordship to consider of what use it is to you in the present Case to quote out of my Essay these Words That partaking of one common Life makes the Identity of a Plant since the Question is not about the Identity of a Plant but about the Identity of a Body It being a very different thing to be the same Plant and to be the same Body For that which makes the same Plant does not make the same Body the one being the partaking in the same continued vegetable life the other the consisting of the same numerical Particles of Matter And therefore your Lordship's inference from my Words above quoted in these which you subjoin seems to me a very strange one viz. So that in things capable of any sort of Life the Identity is consistent with a continued succession of Parts and so the Wheat grown up is the same Body with the Grain that was sown For I believe if my Words from which you infer and so the Wheat grown up is the same Body with the Grain that was sown were put into a Syllogism this would hardly be brought to be the Conclusion But your Lordship goes on with consequence upon consequence though I have not Eyes acute enough every where to see the connection till you bring it to the Resurrection of the same Body The connection of your Lordship's Words are as followeth And thus the alteration of the parts of the Body at the Resurrection is consistent with its Identity if its Organization and Life be the same and this is a real Identity of the Body which depends not upon consciousness From whence it follows that to make the same Body no more is requir'd but restoring life to the organiz'd parts of it If the Question were about raising the same Plant I do not say but there might be some appearance for making such inference from my Words as this Whence it follows that to make the same Plant no more is required but to restore life to the organized parts of it But this deduction wherein from those Words of mine that speak only of the Identity of a Plant your Lordship infers there is no more required to make the the same Body than to make the same Plant being too subtle for me I leave to my Reader to find out Your Lordship goes on and says That I grant likewise That the Identity of the same Man consists in a participation of the same continued life by constantly fleeting particles of Matter in succession vitally united to the same organized Body Answ. I speak in these Words of the Identity of the same Man and your Lordship thence roundly concludes so that there is no difficulty of the sameness of the Body But your Lordship knows that I do not take these two sounds Man and Body to stand for the same thing nor the Identity of the Man to be the same with the Identity of the Body But let us read out your Lordship's Words So that there is no difficulty as to the sameness of the Body if life were continued and if by divine Power life be restored to that material Substance which was before united by a Re-union of the Soul to it there is no Reason to deny the Identity of the Body Not from the Consciousness of the Soul but from that Life which is the Result of the Union of the Soul and Body If I understand your Lordship right you in these Words from the Passages above quoted out of my Book argue that from those Words of mine it will follow That it is or may be the same Body that is raised at the Resurrection If so my Lord your Lordship has then proved That my Book is not inconsistent with but conformable to this Article of the Resurrection of the same Body which your Lordship contends for and will have to be an Article of Faith For though I do by no means deny that the same Bodies shall be raised at the last day yet I see nothing your Lordship has said to prove it to be an Article of Faith But your Lordship goes on with your proofs and says But St. Paul still supposes that it must be that material Substance to which the Soul was before united For saith he It is sown in Corruption it is raised in Incorruption It is sown in Dishonour it is raised in Glory It is sown in Weakness it is raised in Power It is sown a Natural Body it is raised a Spiritual Body Can such a material Substance which was never united to the Body be said to be sown in Corruption and Weakness and Dishonour Either therefore he must speak of the same Body or his meaning cannot be comprehended I answer Can such a material Substance which was never laid in the Grave be said to be sown c For your Lordship says You do not say the same individual Particles which were united at the point of death shall be raised at the last day and no other Particles are laid in the Grave but such as are united at the point of death either therefore your Lordship must speak of an other Body different from that which was sown which shall be raised or else your meaning I think cannot be comprehended But whatever be your meaning your Lordship proves it to be St. Paul's meaning That the same Body shall be raised which was sown in these following Words For what does all this relate to a conscious Principle Answ. The Scripture being express That the same Persons should be raised and appear before the Judgment Seat of Christ that every one may receive according to what he had done in his Body it was very well suited to common Apprehensions which refined not about Particles that had been vitally united to the Soul to speak of the Body which each one was to have after the Resurrection as he would be apt to speak of it himself For it being his Body both before and after the Resurrection every one ordinarily speaks of his Body as the same though in a strict and philosophical sense as your Lordship speaks it be not the very same Thus it is no impropriety of Speech to say This Body of mine which was formerly strong and plump is now weak and wasted though in such a Sense a you are speaking in here it be not the same Body Revelation declares nothing any where concerning the same Body in your Lordship's Sense of the same Body which appears not to have been then thought of The Apostle directly proposes nothing for or against the same Body as necessary to be believed That which he is plain and direct in is his opposing and condemning such curious Questions