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
for the Life of the Body It seems the Instances which he brings do all apply to the Life of the Person and not of the Body only for all men know that the Body can have no Life without the Soul and therefore these which he pleases to apply to the Body only ought really to be intended of the whole Humane Person The Instances which he brings to prove the 4th Acceptation of the Word Soul to signifie sometimes a Dead Carcass he offers to prove by these Words Ye shall not make any Cuttings in your Flesh for the Soul Here he pretends the Word Soul signifies nothing but the Dead Carcass But I refuse to Agree with him in it conceiving as I do that the Word Soul here intends the Dead Person for I do nor believe men to have been so sottish as to have made Cuttings in their Flesh for the Dead Carcasses of their Friends as he supposes but that rather they made such Cuttings in their Flesh for Grief and Remembrance of their Dead Friends not for any of their Parts but for the whole Persons of them His 5th Signification of the Word Soul which he takes to intend singly the Rational Immortal Soul of Man he proves by Instances Psal 19.7 The Law is perfect converting the Soul He pretends the Word Soul in this Place signifies Man's Immortal Soul singly consider'd and without the Body This I deny and say this converting of the Soul inrends converting of the Person or of the whole Man as he is a Compositum of Soul and Body Again he Quotes Deut. 11.18 Lay up these my Words in your Soul which I think somewhat plainly to signifie as if he had said Lay up these my words in your hearts or in your selves constituted and compounded of Soul and Body He Quotes again Deut. 13.3 Love the Lord with all your Soul To which he might have added with all your Heart and all your Strength Which make this Text clearly appear to intend Love the Lord with all the eminent Faculties of your Person Then he says There are more Significations of the Word Soul in Scripture besides those Five which he hath named and which by Examination of his Instances have been found to run all into one which intends the whole Humane Person as it is a Compositum of Soul and Body He instances as one of his other Significations the Words Deliver me not up to the Soul of my Enemies Which I think intends To be not deliver'd up to the Persons or Powers of his Enemies He says again The word Soul sometimes signifies some one Power of the Sensative Soul as the Breath of Man or Beast and sometimes for some single Power of the Rational Soul which I think he should have termed some single Power of the Mind or of the Man And therein I am ready to agree with him that the World Soul in Scripture doth divers times signifie the vehement Desires or Affections of the Person but I do not remember that the Word Soul is any where used in Scripture to signifie the Soul of Man by our Author intended except only that Text of St. Matthew which says Men are not able to kill the Soul P. 11. He says further he takes the Word Soul to signifie Man's Intellectual Soul because in no other sense can the Soul be said to be Immortal And I deny that in that sense it can truly be said to be Immortal Then he says further That the Soul which is now plainly alive while in our Bodies shall never cease to live or be annihilated And this I conceive to be the thing which he undertakes to prove and when he hath so done in a sufficient convincing manner I do fully intend to be his Proselite and to submit my Belief to his Direction in this Point P. 12. He discourses of the Soul's Annihilation by the Power of God which as a thing not now question'd or controverted nor very material in this present Disquisition I pass over without farther Observation thereupon CHAP. III. PAge 13. Mr. W. says I shall now lay down Five Propositions which I conceive have a great Tendency to Clear up this great Truth Of the Soul's Immortality The First wherof is this That the Soul and Body of Man are not one and the same Being but are Beings really distinct Because says he they were created one after the other and not at one and the same time And this he says is evident from Gen. 2 the Words whereof run thus in our Translation The Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and man became a living soul He says it should have been thus render'd God breathed into Adam 's nostrils the breath of life or soul of life or living soul But I am more ready to rely upon the Authority of our Translators than upon the single Credit of a Person engaged in Controversie and to whose Cause this sort of Translation may be helpful Both of us have before concluded and agreed that the Word Soul in Scripture doth often intend and signifie the Person and so I do fully believe and conclude it doth in this Text and bears the same Sense as if it had been said in proper Words God formed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and man became a living person He says and pretends that these Words in Gen. are a clear Demonstration of the Soul 's being created by God after the Body finished that he knows not what to add to make it more clear And I am very apt to believe that he speaks Truth in it and really doth not know what more to add to make it more clear to the Understandings of Men for if he did I see no cause to believe that he would be sparing of his Pains to that Purpose I am not able my self to collect out of this Text that the Soul and Body of Adam were created one after the other no nor that any Soul at all was created for Adam either before or after the Consummation of his Body The Words themselves of the Text do not express that God created a Soul for Adam but say God breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and by breathing that breath into him he became a living person Gen. 1.5 The Text says God made the beast of the earth after his kind and cattle after their kind and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after their kind as he had before created great whales and fishes in the water and fowls to flye in the midst of Heaven Our daily Observations may assure us the Lives of all these are maintained by the ambient Air and the Breath which from thence they draw and without which they cannot subsist or live for the space of some few moments which hath been often experienced by the Air-Pump in the case of Infects thereinto injected This Brutal Breath Eccles 3.19 is
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
or out of the body I cannot tell Ver 3. And I knew such a man whether in the body or out of the body I cannot tell how that he was caught up into Paradise and heard unspeakable words not lawful to be uttered Hence Mr. W. says he argues That what is capable of being seperated from the Body and in this Seperate State to be in Paradise and in this Paradise to hear Words spoken that must needs be immortal but the Soul is capable of all this Ergo First he pretends to prove the Souls Capacity of being seperated from the Body which all Readers will presently perceive to be the very Point hitherto disputed between us but the best Proof which he brings thereof is his own Supposal that the Apostle knew it to be so seperable and thereupon he says The Apostle thought there was some such part of himself as might be seperable from his Body for no Man can ever doubt the Being of a Thing which he knows is uncapable to be And hereupon he thinks the Apostle doth evidently suppose his Soul was capable of being out of the Body which amounts to thus much that he supposes the Apostle supposes the thing to be as he would have it whereas in the Text we find no mention of such things as he supposes for in St. Paul's Words there is no mention made of a Soul or any other Part of the Person that ever did or can subsist in a State of Seperation from the Body Next there is no mention made of a Seperation of any thing from the Body Nor is it said that any Part or Parcel of St. Paul's Person was seperated from himself or that there was any one Parcel of him divided from his Person and much less that the Divided Part could subsist in a State of Seperation from the Body Whence I conceive that what he here says concerning a Seperation of one Part of St Paul from another springs from his own pregnant Invention without finding any good ground for it in the Text or that St. Paul did by his Words either in the Body or out of the Body intend to teach or discover to his Proselites that the Soul could be seperated from the Body and much less that it could subsist by its self in such a State of Seperation from the Body But I conceive with some Clearness our Apostles Meaning in those Words In the Body or out of the Body was very different from Mr. W's Supposals and intended only to express thus much That himself had been caught or rapt up into the Third Heavens where he heard unspeakable Words not lawful to be uttered and that he was in some doubt whether this Rapture was of his whole Person or of his Mind or Intellect only The things which were revealed to him in this Rapture he had so clear and perfect a Perception of as he thought he could not more clearly and fully have understood them if they had been perceived by his Bodily Senses of Hearing and Seeing and therefore he apprehended that this Rapture might be of his whole Person and that he did hear and see with his Bodily Organs those things which were then revealed to him and yet because such Raptures of the Person had not before been known he thought there was great Reason to doubt of that kind of Rapture and from grounds of Reason and Practice to conceive That this Rapture was more likely to be of his Mind and Intellect only than of his whole Person Body and Soul together And for the better proving the Apostles Intent in this Place to be such as before is said some other Texts of Scripture shall be produced wherein Facts parallel to this Rapture are related Acts 10.9 says Another great Apostle St. Peter went up upon the Tanner's House to pray and there he fell into a Trance and saw Heaven opened and a Vessel descending unto him like a great Sheet fastened at the four Corners and there came a Voice to him saying Peter Kill and Eat Peter excused himself upon which a second Voice called to him saying What God hath cleansed call not thou common And it seems these things were perceived by St. Peter as if he had seen and heard them by his Bodily Organs and they were as well imprinted upon his Memory For he told Cornelius and his Company that God had shewed him lately that he should not call any Man common or unclean This Apostle might be well enough assured that this was not a Raptuâ—e of his whole Person but a Trance or Transport of his Mind only and yet he perceived things as perfectly as if he had heard and seen them with his Bodily Organs Numb 24.334 Balaam took up his Parable and said the Man whose Eyes are opened hath said He hath said which heard the Words of God which saw the Vision of the Almighty falling into a Trance but having his eyes open Ver. 15. He repeats the same Words of falling into a Trance and having his Eyes open and then reveals to Balak and his Court the utter Destruction of Amalek by Saul and that Ships shall come from the Coast of Chittim and afflict Ashur and Eber Which seems to intend the Macedonian Invasion of the East and possibly the Roman also Ver. 17. says I shall see him but not now I shall behold him but not nigh there shall come a Star out of Jacob and a Scepter shall rise out of Israel By which great things shall be done commonly interpreted to intend Christ and his Kingdom the space of 1500 years before the same appeared It seems though Balaam in this Trance had his Eyes open yet he saw not these Revelations or Visions with his Bodily Eyes but by the perceptive Power of his Mind which was all this while intranced and though the Body was Partaker of this Trance yet were the Bodily Senses no Acters in it but all was done by the perceptive Powers of his Mind intranced 1 Kings 22 19. The Prophet Micaiah the Son of Imiah says thus to the Kings of Israel and Judah I saw the Lord sitting on his Throne and all the Host of Heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left And then he saw also a Spirit which came and stood forth before the Lord and declared how he would entice Ahab to go up and fall at Ramoth-Gilead It seems hereupon that this Prophet was rapt into Heaven as St. Paul was for that in any other Place he could not have seen the things here related and which he says he saw and perceived as clearly as if he had seen them with his Bodily Eyes and Ears and was full of Confidence that they would prove true as they did And yet I conceive that this Rapture was only of his Mind and that to him so intranced all these things were perfectly revealed Rev. 4.1 John looked and behold a door was opened in Heaven and he heard a Voice as it were of a Trumpet which said