future State of Bliss or Misery and see there God the righteous Judge ready to render to every one according to his Deeds to them that by patient Continuance in well-doing seek for Glory and Honour and Immortality eternal Life but to every Soul that doth evil Indignation and Wrath Tribulation and Anguish To him I say who hath a Prospect of the different State of perfect Happiness or Misery that attends all Men after this Life depending on their Behaviour here the measures of Good and Evil that govern his Choice are mightily changed Ibid. § 60. Our Saviour requires the Obedience of his Disciples to several of the Commands of the Moral Law he afresh lays upon them with the Enforcement of unspeakable Rewards and Punishments in another World according to their Obedience or Disobedience Reasonab of Christian. p. 234. The Son of God would in vain have come into the World to lay the Foundation of a Kingdom and gather together a select People out of the World if they being found guilty at their Appearance before the Judgment-Seat of the righteous Judge of all Men at the last Day instead of Entrance into eternal Life in the Kingdom he had prepared for them they should receive Death the just Reward of Sin which every one of them was guilty of This second Death would have left him no Subjects Ibid. p. 211. Open Mens Eyes upon the endless unspeakable Joys of another Life and their Hearts will find something solid and powerful to move them to live well here The View of Heaven and Hell will cast a Slight upon the short Pleasures and Pains of this present State and give Attractions and Encouragements to Vertue which Reason and Interest and the Care of our selves cannot but allow Ibid. p. 291 292. Thus Mr. Lock OBSERVATIONS As to the Article of the Resurrection the first Enquiry must be Whether there are to be found any such express Words in the Scripture as that the Body shall rise or be raised or the Resurrection of the Body where the general Resurrection is spoken of If when Mr. Lock denies that such express Words are found in the Scripture see his Third Letter p. 210. his Meaning be that those very express Words are not found I grant that they are not but if he mean farther that express Words which signifie the very same thing are not to be found the contrary will easily appear In Rom. 8. 23. there are these express Words the Redemption of our Body and Mr. Lock in Reasonab of Christian. p. 206. tells us that thereby 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 In the same Chapter v. 11. we find these express Words Quicken your mortal Bodies He that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal Bodies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall make them to live restore them to Life after Death as he restor'd the crucified Body of Christ to Life so that to quicken our mortal Bodies is the same with raising them And Mr. Lock in his Third Letter p. 199. saying that in the New Testament it is said Raise the Dead Quicken or make alive the Dead the Resurrection of the Dead clearly makes to Quicken and to Raise to signifie the same And St. Chrysostom not to mention Occumenius and Theophylact who follow him gives a Reason why St. Paul says Quicken or give Life to our mortal Bodies rather than raise them viz. Because he here speaks only of those who should be raised to Life i. e. a blissful or happy Life viz. the Faithful who have the Spirit of God dwelling in them not of the Wicked who shall also be rais'd but says he unto Punishment not unto Life There is a third Text which hath so near a Resemblance to these that it may well be join'd with them viz. Phil. 3. 21. Who shall change our vile Body that it may be conformed to his glorious Body When shall the Saviour the Lord Christ effect this wonderful Change that our vile Body shall be made conformable to his glorious Body Surely then when he shall quicken or raise it and that will be when he comes from Heaven to judge the World see v. 20. Here is not indeed the Word Raise but it is plainly imply'd The Blessed Jesus when he comes from Heaven will raise our vile Body and make it conform'd to his own glorious Body Will Mr. Lock say that the general Resurrection is not spoken of in these Places He cannot say it of the first viz. Rom. 8. 23. without retracting his own express Words in Reasonab of Christian. p. 206. He cannot say it of the third viz. Philip. 3. 21. because the immediately foregoing Verse points us to the Time of Christ's coming from Heaven to judge the World He may perhaps say it of the second viz. Rom. 8. 11. because some before him have said that the general Resurrection is not spoken of in that Text particularly Calvin and Piscator Calvin in loc hath these Words Mortalia corpora vocat quicquid adhuc restat in nob is morti obnoxium ut mos illi usit at us est crassioram nostri partem hoc nomine appellare Unde colligimus non de ultima resurrectione quae momento fiet haberi sermonem sed de continua Spiritus operatione quae reliquias carnis paulatim mortificans caelestem vitam in nobis instaurat He tells us that by mortal Bodies is understood whatsoever remains still in us obnoxious to Death which we may grant him for our Souls are not obnoxious to Death and therefore our mortal Bodies contain all that remains in us liable to Death He tells us also that it is the Apostle's usual manner to call the grosser part of us by that Name i. e. by the Name of Body and we may likewise grant him this for every one grants that the Body is the grosser part of us But now what would he gather from this Whence says he we collect that the last Resurrection is not spoken of His Argument put into Form is this The Apostle by mortal Bodies understands whatsoever remains still in us obnoxious to Death therefore the last Resurrection is not spoken of Mr. Lock may try if he pleases whether he can find out any thing to tie this Antecedent and Consequent together but I can pronounce that it will not be very easie for him to do it Piscater's Words are these Quum certum sit Apostolum hic non lequi de resurrectione corporum sed animarum Tho' our own Eyes tell us that the Apostle uses the word Bodies not Souls yet if we will believe Piscator it is certain that here he speaks not of the Resurrection of Bodies but of Souls And how is it certain Mr. Calvin hath said it that is all the Assurance that I know of He that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal Bodies these
are the Apostle's Words If when he says he raised up Christ from the dead he speaks of the Resurrection of his Body not of his Soul how can we be certain that when he says Shall quicken your mortal Bodies he speaks of the Resurrection not of their Bodies but of their Souls We see then that if Mr. Lock fly to this to say that the general Resurrection is not spoken of Rom. 8. 11. he will not be much help'd either by Calvin or Piscator I confess that there is one who makes the Words to be capable of a two-fold Sense and that is Crellius According to him they may be interpreted either of the future raising or quickening our mortal Bodies or of the spiritual quickening them which consists in this that they live unto Righteousness and unto God But he makes the former the principal Sense the latter only secundary As Mr. Lock says of the Resurrection of the Body so he says of the Resurrection of the same Body viz. That he does not remember any Place in the New Testament where it is so much as mention'd see his Third Letter p. 166. And my Answer will be the same viz. That these very express Words The Resurrection of the same Body are not to be found but there are Words that signifie so much or from which it may be clearly and necessarily inferr'd I may instance in the three Places above-cited Rom. 8. 11 23. Phil. 3. 21. where St. Paul by our Body our vile Body and our mortal Bodies certainly understood the Bodies which he and the Romans and the Philippians then had and says of these that they should be redeemed quickned changed Who shall change our vile Body that it i. e. that vile Body may be conformed to his glorious Body Philip. 3. And as I have observ'd before Mr. Lock Reasonab of Christian. p. 206. says That by the Redemption of our Body Rom. 8. 23. is plainly meant the Change of these frail mortal Bodies into spiritual immortal Bodies at the Resurrection when this mortal shall have put on immortality 1 Cor. 15. 54. Thus he It is observable also that in his Third Letter p. 197. when the Words of that Text 1 Cor. 15. 53 54. were urged to prove the Resurrection of the same Body he returns no Answer to them and did very prudently in returning none For doth not St. Paul expresly affirm that this corruptible must put on incorruption and this mortal must put on immortality i. e. this corruptible this mortal must be rais'd to a Life of Incorruption and Immortality And doth he not also repeat it When this corruptible c. What can be more plain This corruptible this mortal which are the Apostle's repeated Expressions these frail mortal Bodies which is Mr. Lock 's own Expression shall be rais'd the Light of the brightest Day cannot be more clear Some perhaps will say that Mr. Lock does by no means deny that the same Bodies shall be raised at the last Day they are his own Words in his Third Letter p. 195. To which I answer 1. If he do not deny it why doth he dispute so earnestly against it Why doth he endeavour to the utmost of his Power to baffle the Arguments that are urged for the Proof of it A great many Pages of his Third Letter being taken up in the discussing this one Point 2. He says he does by no means deny it but does he believe it If he do believe it it is not upon the Account of any Argument drawn from Reason for he tells us more than once in his Essay that the Resurrection of the Body is above Reason Reason has directly nothing to do with it but it is purely Matter of Faith see his Essay l. 4. c. 17. § 23. and c. 18. § 7. He must then believe it upon the Account of some Arguments drawn from Scripture or being convinced by some Texts of Scripture which teach this Truth If so he deserves to be sharply reprehended for that he would not acquaint us what Texts of Scripture they are that teach it so clearly Especially having taken so much Pains to shew that the Places of Scripture alledged by others did not prove it he ought to have directed us to those Scriptures which did and by the Cogency of which he was brought to believe it But the Truth is he says plainly that there are no Scriptures that do prove it affirming that the Scriptures propose to us that at the last Day the Dead shall be raised without determining whether it shall be with the very same Bodies or no see his Third Letter p. 168. Tho' therefore he does say that he by no means denies that the same Bodies shall be rais'd at the last Day yet it clearly appears that he does not believe that they shall for according to him there are no Arguments either from Scripture or Reason to induce him to believe it Mr. Lock 's Doctrine concerning Adam's Fall and our Redemption by Christ is this God told Adam that in the Day that he did eat of such a Tree he should surely die where by Death Mr. Lock can understand nothing but a ceasing to be the losing all Actions of Life and Sense Such a Death came on Adam and all his Posterity by his first Disobedience under which Death they should have lain for ever had it not been for the Redemption by Jesus Christ who will bring them all to Life again at the last Day see for this Reasonab of Christian. p. 3 6 11. But then he tells us p. 15. that 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 if God had not found out a way to justifie some The Reason of which he gives in a Parenthesis For as much says he as here again i. e. after the Resurrection Death must have seiz'd upon all Mankind all Mankind must have died and ceas'd to be the second time because all had sinned for the Wages of Sin is every where Death which Death is a ceasing to be as well after as before the Resurrection This Death after the Resurrection is that which p. 211. he calls the second Death which says he would have left Christ no Subjects if God had not found out a way to justifie some As to those who at the Resurrection shall be found unjustified that second Death shall seize upon them and sweep them away so that according to Mr. Lock they shall cease to be i. e. be annihilated for I can find out no other Sense that these Words Cease to be are capable of Tho' I confess I do not see that this Sense can be consistent with several other Expressions which he uses viz. that dreadful Estate of Misery the infinite Misery the exquisite Misery of an immortal Soul the perfect Misery the Indignation and Wrath Tribulation and Anguish which shall be
v. 4. But to wave this Whereas Mr. Lock so often saith that by examining what the Apostles preach'd all through their History he had found that the Word preach'd by them was nothing but this that Jesus was the Messiah I have just now shew'd that it is easie for any one to find the contrary by examining only that part of the History of the Apostles which we have Acts 10. from v. 34. to v. 44. and Acts 13. from v. 23. to v. 42. where by Mr. Lock 's own Confession they treated of the Miracles Death Resurrection and Dominion of our Saviour and of his coming to judge the World as also of Remission of Sins by him See him in Reasonab of Christian p. 41. and Second Vindication p. 307. In his Reasonab of Christian. p. 194. Mr. Lock says Above threescore Years after our Saviour's Passion St. John knew nothing else required to be believ'd for the attaining of Life but that Jesus is the Messiah the Son of God But will he hold to this that St. John knew nothing else requir'd to be believ'd and admit of no Limitation or Exception Did he not know that it was necessary to believe One Only True God St. John 17. 3. Did he not know that it was necessary to believe that God rais'd the Lord Jesus from the dead But what shall we say to the Words of St. John 20. 31. which Mr. Lock alledges Ibid. p. 193. and from which he inferrs this These are written that ye may believe that Jesus is the Messiah the Son of God and that believing ye may have Life in his Name I answer That it may be said 1. That here it is as much required that we believe Jesus to be the Son of God as 't is to believe him to be the Messiah 2. That these that Jesus is the Messiah and that he is the Son of God are two principal Articles and therefore mention'd by St. John but he does not say These are written that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God and only this neither does he say And that believing this alone ye may have Life But And that believing in general i. e. believing all that the Holy Ghost makes necessary to be believ'd If thou believe in thine Heart that God rais'd the Lord Jesus from the dead thou shalt be saved Rom. 10. 9. Because in these Words our Lord's Resurrection is solely insisted on Mr. Lock will not conclude that St. Paul knew nothing else requir'd to be believed for attaining Life but that And then why should he conclude concerning St. John that he knew nothing else requir'd to be believ'd but these two Articles that Jesus is the Messiah and that he is the Son of God because St. John 20. 31. he mentions only these I know that Mr. Lock does not allow us to call them two Articles but I am so little moved with his saying and not proving that Messiah and the Son of God are two Expressions signifying one and the same thing that I make bold to do it without his License Mr. Lock perhaps will think that I neglect him if I do not take notice of his Chronology He says That above threescore Years after our Saviour's Passion St. John knew nothing else required to be believ'd His Reason is Because St. John's Gospel was written so long after as says he both Epiphanius and St. Jerom assure us I shall grant that St. John's Gospel might perhaps be writ so long after our Lord's Crucifixion for St. Hierom in Catalogo and in Lib. 1. con Jovinian says That Ecclesiastical History makes St. John to have liv'd threescore and eight Years after the Lord's Passion But I cannot but take notice of Mr. Lock 's Caution some may call it his Prudence in not referring us to the Places where Epiphanius and St. Hierom assure us that it was writ so late As to Epiphanius it is true that in Haeres 51. he says that St. John writ his Gospel after the ninetieth Year of his Age and if he had also told us how old St. John was at the time when our Saviour was crucified we might have known whether according to Epiphanius St. John writ his Gospel above threescore Years after our Lord's Passion but I do not remember that Epiphanius hath any where told us St. John's Age at the time of our Saviour's Suffering And as to St. Hierom I have not found that he doth acquaint us either in what Year of his own Age or how long after his Lord's Passion it was that St. John writ his Gospel CHAP. XXIII Of Saving Faith and Vnbelief THey that believe Jesus to be the Messiah their King but will not obey his Laws and will not have him to rule over them they are but greater Rebels and God will not justifie them for a Faith which doth but increase their Guilt and oppose diametrically the Kingdom and Design of the Messiah who gave himself for us that he might redeem us from all Iniquity and purifie to himself a peculiar People zealous of good Works Tit. 2. 14. And therefore St. Paul tells the Galatians That that which availeth is Faith but Faith working by Love and that Faith without Works i. e. the Works of sincere Obedience to the Law and Will of Christ is not sufficient for our Justification St. James shews at large Chap. 2. Only those who believe Jesus to be the Messiah and take him to be their King with a sincere Endeavour after Righteousness in obeying his Law shall have their past Sins not imputed to them and shall have that Faith taken instead of Obedience Mr. Lock 's Reasonab of Christian. p. 213 214 215. None are sentenced or punish'd for Unbelief but only for their Misdeeds They are Workers of Iniquity on whom the Sentence is pronounced Every where the Sentence follows doing or not doing without any mention of believing or not believing Not that any to whom the Gospel hath been preach'd shall be sav'd without believing Jesus to be the Messiah for all being Sinners and Transgressors of the Law and so unjust are all liable to Condemnation unless they believe and so through Grace are justified by God for this Faith which shall be accounted to them for Righteousness But the rest wanting this Cover this Allowance for their Transgressions must answer for all their Actions and being found Transgressors of the Law shall by the Letter and Sanction of the Law be condemned for not having paid a full Obedience to that Law and not for want of Faith That is not the Guilt on which the Punishment is laid tho' it be the want of Faith which lays open their Guilt uncover'd and exposes them to the Sentence of the Law against all that are unrighteous Ibid. p. 243 245 246. Thus Mr. Lock OBSERVATIONS Of the Expression Justified for Faith whereas the Scripture-Language is Justified by Faith I took notice before Chap. 19. and 21. Here I cannot but observe how apt Men are
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
Divinitatis alicujus opinionem quam sententiam nos falsam esse arbitramur And one Reason why he thought thus was because not only some single Persons but also whole Nations are found which have no sense or suspicion of a Deity He instances in the Province of Brasil or Bresil as he calls it and appeals to Historians for the Truth of it How near Mr. Lock comes to this the Reader may judge who in his Essay l. 4. c. 10. § 1. says expresly that God hath stamp'd no original Characters on our Minds wherein we may read his Being and his first and principal Reason for this l. 1. c. 4. § 8. is because besides the Atheists taken notice of among the Ancients there have been whole Nations amongst whom hath been found no Notion of a God He instances as in other places so in Brasil and appeals to Navigators and Historians for the Truth of it The Socinians say that the Soul separated from the Body hath no Sense cannot perform any Action or enjoy any Pleasure till the Resurrection Smalcius frequently inculcates this Spiritus a corpore separatus nullo sensu praeditus est nulla voluptate fruitur ante adventum Christi And again Spiritus sine corpore nullas actiones exercere potest So Smalcius de extremo judicio § 3. and in Examine Errorum Error 88. Non credimus Spiritum qui ad Deum redit aliquid sentire aut beatitate aliqua frui ante Christi adventum In like manner Socinus himself in his 5th Epistle to Volkelius declares it to be his firm Opinion Post hanc vitam animam hominis non it a per se subsistere ut praemia ulla poenasve sentiat vel ista sentiendi sit capax See also to this purpose Crellius in Heb. 11. 40. And Slichtingius in 1 Cor. 15. 32. As to Mr. Lock they that have leisure may enquire whether his words in his Reasonab of Christian. p. 6. do not look toward this when he says that Death is the losing of all Actions of Life and Sense For it is not easie to conceive how this can be true unless when Men die the Soul lose all Actions of Life and Sense as well as the Body doth Socinus and his Followers deny Original Sin and the Corruption of our Nature because of Adam's Transgression Concludimus nullum peccatum originale esse i. e. ex peccato illo primi parentis nullam labem aut pravitatem universo humano generi necessario ingenitam esse sive inflictam quodammodo fuisse So Socinus in his Praelectiones Theolog. cap. 4. He is follow'd by the Racovian Catechism Cap. 10. Quaest. 2. Peccatum originis nullum prorsus est nec e Scriptura id peccatum originis doceri potest Et lapsus Adae cum unus actus fuerit vim eam quae depravare ipsam naturam Adami multominus vero posteriorum ipsius posset habere non potuit To the same purpose are the Words of Volkelius De vera Religione l. 5. c. 18. Mr. Lock is not so positive as they are but he says that the New Testament doth not any where take notice of the Corruption of Humane Nature in Adam's Posterity nor tells us that Corruption seiz'd on all because of Adam's Transgression as well as it tells us so of Death The Socinians say that the same Bodies shall not arise at the general Resurrection Corpora haec quae nunc circumferimus resurrectura non credimus sed alia nobis danda esse ab Apostolo edocti statuimus So Smalcius in Examin Errorum Err. 89. Corpora in quibus reviviscent venient mortui non ea sunt corpora in quibus mortales vixerunt quorum corruptione mortui sunt sed illa sunt longe istis praestantiora Slichtingius Comment in 1 Cor. 15. 37. Illi vim argumentationis Apostolicae convellunt qui in eisdem numero corporibus nos aliquando resurrecturos statuunt Crellius Comment in 1 Cor. 15. 13. They that please may also consult Volkelius De vera Religione l. 3. c. 35. As to Mr. Lock a large Account hath been given above Chap. 31. of what he saith as to this Particular viz. the same Bodies being rais'd Where we may also see that he proceeds farther than perhaps the Socinians do saying that he finds no such express words in the Scripture as that the Body shall rise or be raised See the Third Letter p. 210. To which something hath been said in the forecited Chap. 31. and now by way of farther Answer I desire that 1 Cor. 15. 42 43 44. may be consulted It is sown in Corruption it is rais'd in Incorruption it is sown in Ignominy it is rais'd in Glory it is sown in Weakness it is rais'd in Power it is sown a natural Body it is rais'd a spiritual Body Now I ask What is it that is rais'd in Incorruption in Glory in Power and a Spiritual Body Mr. Lock will surely answer that it is the Body And if the Body be so necessarily understood it is the same as if it was express'd Besides the words v. 44. may be rendred The Body is raised Spiritual and so we have the express words that the Body is raised The Wicked's suffering eternal Torments after this Life is deny'd by the Socinians Impios futuros immortales nempe in aeternum opprobrium nec usquam sacrae Literae comprobant nec quicquam ex illis afferri posse videtur unde sententia illa probari possit So Smalcius in Refut Frantzii p. 415. Ut Deus in omnibus justitiae tenax est ita hic quoque super neminem extendet paenam meritis ejus majorem Nulla autem esse possunt peccata tam gravia quae sempiternis cruciatibus possunt aequari Wolzogenius Comment in Matth. 24. 46. The like hath Ernestus Somnerus in his Demonstration intituled Demonstratio Theologica Philosophica quod aeterna impiorum supplicia non arguant Dei justitiam sed injustitiam As to Socinus himself that he was of the same Opinion appears sufficiently from his Disputation with Puccius and the Letters which past between Volkelius and him about it What Mr. Lock 's Opinion is as to this I shall not determine On the one hand his making the Death which was threatned to Adam and which he says is the Wages of Sin as well after as before the Resurrection not to be an eternal Life in Misery or the being kept alive in perpetual exquisite Torments but a Ceasing to be may incline us to think that in this great Point he holds the same that the Socinians do See his Reasonab of Christian. p. 5 6 15. On the other hand How far his mentioning infinite Misery exquisite Misery unspeakable Punishments perfect Misery Tribulation and Anguish Indignation and Wrath which shall be after this Life and his transcribing the words of our Saviour in which he speaks of everlasting Fire and everlasting Punishment may argue that he doth not hold with them I know not FINIS
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-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
p. 9. Thus Mr. Lock OBSERVATIONS Expositors are not agreed what Death it is which God threatned to Adam upon his eating the forbidden Fruit. Mr. Lock if I mistake him not can by Death here understand nothing but that which we call the Death of the Body or a natural or temporal Death And I believe few will deny that this Death was threatned in the words Thou shalt surely die Gen. 2. 17. The great Objection against this is that which Mr. Lock intimates viz. that it is said In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die whereas it was above nine hundred years after his eating that Adam died this Death But hereto it may be answer'd 1. That in the day that he did eat taking the words in the strict sense this Death became due to him or he became a Child of Death God might have said to him as Solomon to Abiathar 1 Kings 2. 26. Thou art worthy of death but I will not at this time put thee to death 2. In that day he became liable to Diseases which were Harbingers of this Death which did by degrees weaken the strength of Nature and at last introduce Death 3. St. Hierom and Theodoret do testifie that Symmachus instead of Thou shalt surely die translates Thou shalt be mortal and the rendring is approv'd and commended by S. Hierom in Tradit Hebr. in gen Now according to it there is no difficulty for Adam did become mortal that day 4. Some say that Adam repented and that upon his Repentance the Execution of the Threatning was respited as others say that it was respited upon the account of the Remedy which God had prepared viz. The Seed of the Woman Lastly There is no necessity that the words In the day be taken so strictly we may understand them more largely viz. At what time thou shalt eat thereof know assuredly that thou shalt die the death As Solomon says to Shimei On the day thou goest out and passest over the Brook Kidron thou shalt know for certain that thou shalt surely die 1 Kings 2. 37. It could not be Solomon's Meaning that Shimei should surely die the very same day that he passed over Kidron for he could not foresee that Shimei would return to Jerusalem the self same day or that word would be brought to him the self same day that he had passed over he only tells Shimei that if he should pass over he would forfeit his Life and be certainly put to Death whensoever he should please to give order for the execution of the Sentence Therefore notwithstanding the foremention'd Objection we may conclude that Adam was to die that Death which we call the Death of the Body or a natural Death and thus far Mr. Lock is in the right The Question is Whether he be in the right when he says that by the Death threatned Gen. 2. 17. he can understand nothing but this Death What thinks he of a Death of Afflictions outward Sufferings and Calamities May not this be comprehended under the word Death Gen. 2. Is not the Word Death taken in this Sense in other places of Scripture When S. Paul says of himself that he was in Deaths oft may we not interpret it in Sufferings oft See 2 Cor. 11. 23. In like manner when he says 1 Cor. 15. 31. I die daily may we not suppose that he had respect to the Afflictions and Sufferings that came daily upon him for the sake of Christ But most plainly the Word is thus to be understood Exod. 10. 17. where Pharaoh says to Moses and Aaron Intreat the Lord your God that he may take away from me this Death only Here by Death is understood nothing but the Plague of Locusts With respect to these Afflictions and Calamities one says Incipimus enim si forte nescis tum mori cum primum incipimus vivere mors cum vita protenditur And thus Adam begun to die i.e. to be liable to the Afflictions and Miseries of Life that very day that he sinn'd But Mr. Lock informs us more particularly what he cannot understand by Death Genesis 2. saying 1. Some will have it to be a state of Guilt wherein not only he but all his Posterity was so involv'd that every one descended of him deserv'd endless torment in Hell-fire 2. They would have it be also a state of necessary sinning and provoking God in every Action that Men do see Reasonab of Christianity p. 4 5. whereas he cannot subscribe to either of these significations of the Word Death But I must acknowledge my self so ignorant as not to know the Authors of these two Interpretations It would have been more satisfaction to his Readers if Mr. Lock had given us the Names of them together with their express Words and directed us to the places where we might have found them But he not having done this it cannot be expected that any notice should be taken of what he says concerning them There are who say that by Death Gen. 2. we are to understand not only that natural Death and that Death of external Afflictions and Sufferings of which we have spoken but also a spiritual Death so they call the loss of so much of the Image of God as consisted in perfect Righteousness and true Holiness and of that Light and Strength which Adam had before his Fall and likewise of everlasting Death They conceive that all these are comprehended under the Penalty threatned Gen. 2. And if Mr. Lock had disputed against these I should perhaps have consider'd his Arguments It may be said that he doth argue against those who make everlasting Death to be comprehended in that Threatning for that which we call eternal Death he calls eternal Life in Misery His words are these It seems a strange way of understanding a Law which requires the plainest and directest words that by Death should be meant eternal Life in Misery Could any one be suppos'd by a Law that says for Felony you shall die not that he should lose his Life but be kept alive in perpetual exquisite Torments Thus Mr. Lock Reasonab of Christian. p. 5. labouring to expose those who make a double Death both of Body and Soul not only temporal but also eternal to be threaten'd to Adam but it cannot be said that he argues against them for here is nothing that looks like an Argument 1. He says It is strange that by Death should be meant eternal Life in Misery but instead of Eternal Life in Misery he should have said Eternal Death in Misery for a Life in perpetual exquisite Torments and Misery is more truly a Death than a Life The Margin of our Bibles Gen. 2. 17. instead of Thou shalt surely die hath Dying thou shalt die which Words seem very properly to express Mens dying everlastingly 2. I cannot say that he doth say but I believe that he would have said that he who says for Felony thou shalt die cannot be suppos'd to mean not that he
should lose his Life but that he should be kept alive in perpetual exquisite Torments But the cases are not parallel for they that expound the Words Thou shalt surely die of a double Death say that he should both lose or depart out of this present Life and also after his Departure suffer those perpetual exquisite Torments Besides an earthly Lawgiver who can only kill the body when he says Thou shalt die cannot be supposed to mean that the Person should suffer such Torments but it cannot be inferr'd hence that when the heavenly Lawgiver who after he hath kill'd is able to destroy both Soul and Body in Hell says Thou shall die he may not fitly be suppos'd to threaten Eternal Death as well as Temporal But that which gives greatest Offence is still behind and that is that he describes that which we call a natural or temporal Death not only by losing all actions of Lise and Sense but also by ceasing to be His words are these By Death here I can understand nothing but ceasing to be the losing of all actions of Life and Sense see Reasonab of Christian. p. 6. And so again p. 15. This being the case that whoever is guilty of any Sin should certainly die and cease to be That when Men die their Bodies lose all actions of Life and Sense we need not be told but ceasing to be is a quite different thing and according to the known sense of the words can signify nothing but the being annihilated It will therefore concern Mr. Lock to find out some other Sense of the Words which we know not of for it seems very strange that he should make Death an Annihilation When Mr. Lock says that none are truly punished but for their own deeds Reasonab of Christian. p. 9. we may gather from that which immediately follows that his Meaning is that there will be no Condemnation to any one at the great Judgment but for his own Deeds but that Persons have suffer'd otherwise for the Sins of others there are sundry Instances in Holy Writ and Mr. Lock here alledges the Words of the Apostle affirming that in Adam all die CHAP. XVI Of the Law of Nature and of Moses's Law THe Law of Nature is a Law knowable by the Light of Nature i. e. without the help of positive Revelation It is something that we may attain to the knowledge of by our natural Faculties from natural Principles Mr. Lock Essay l. 1. c. 3. § 13. The existence of God is so many ways manifest and the Obedience we owe him so congruous to the Light of Reason that a great part of Mankind give Testimony to the Law of Nature Ibid. § 6. Every Christian both as a Deist and as a Christian is obliged to study both the Law of Nature and the revealed Law that in them he may know the Will of God and of Jesus Christ whom he hath sent Second Vindication p. 77. The Civil and Ritual part of the Law delivered by Moses obliges not Christians tho' to the Jews it were a part of the Law of Works it being a part of the Law of Nature that Man ought to obey every positive Law of God whenever he shall please to make any such Addition to the Law of his Nature But the moral part of Moses's Law or the moral Law which is every where the same the eternal Rule of Right obliges Christians and all Men every where and is to all Men the standing Law of Works Reasonab of Christian. p. 21 22. No one Precept or Rule of the eternal Law of Right which is holy just and good is abrogated or repeal'd nor indeed can be whilst God is an holy just and righteous God and Man a rational Creature The duties of that Law arising from the Constitution of his very Nature are of eternal obligation and it cannot be taken away or dispens'd with without changing the nature of things and overturning the Measures of Right and Wrong Ibid. p. 214. Thus Mr. Lock OBSERVATIONS It is known to be Mr. Lock 's darling Notion That there are no innate Ideas and no innate Law and consequently according to him the Law of Nature is not innate but he tells us that the knowledge of it is attain'd by the light of Nature or by our natural Faculties from natural Principles But I would ask him Whence we have these natural Principles from which by our natural Faculties we attain to the Knowledge of the Law of Nature for he denies all innate Principles Will he say then that we owe them to the Superstition of a Nurse or the Authority of an Old Woman or our Educations for these he mentions Essay l. 1. c. 3. § 22. and 26. where he is giving an account how Men commonly come by their Principles If he say this I would know why he calls those which are taught us by Old Women or our Nurses Parents and School-Masters natural Principles If Mr. Lock please to satisfie us as to these Queries I may possibly farther consider his Description of the Law of Nature Farther I believe that there have been many that have not made use of the Light of Reason and the natural Faculties which God hath given them as they should have done and withal have not had the advantage of any Revelation or of being taught who yet have had some Knowledge of the Duties and Dictates of the Law of Nature and have assented to them as just and good as soon as they were proposed to them CHAP. XVII Of Natural and Revealed Religion or of the Light of Reason and that of Revelation IT is not to be wonder'd that the Will of God when cloath'd in words should be liable to that Doubt and Uncertainty which unavoidably attends that sort of Conveyance And we ought to magnifie his Goodness that he hath spread before all the World such legible Characters of his Works and Providence and given all Mankind so sufficient a light of Reason that they to whom this written Word never came could not whenever they set themselves to search either doubt of the being of a God or of the Obedience due to him Since then the Precepts of Natural Religion are plain and very intelligible to all Mankind and seldom come to be controverted and other reveal'd Truths which are convey'd to us by Books and Languages are liable to the common and natural Obscurities incident to Words methinks it would become us to be more careful and diligent in observing the former and less magisterial positive and imperious in imposing our own Sense and Interpretations of the latter Mr. Lock Essay l. 3. c. 9. § 23. Whatsoever Truth we come to the discovery of from the Knowledge and Contemplation of our own clear Ideas will always be certainer to us than those which are convey'd to us by Traditional Revelation for the Knowledge we have that this Revelation came from God can never be so sure as the Knowledge that we have from our own clear and
by him become the Father of a great People which should possess the Land of Canaan The thing promis'd to him was no more but a Son by his Wife Sarah and a numerous Posterity by him which should possess the Land of Canaan These were but temporal Blessings and except the Birth of a Son very remote suchas he should never live to see But because he question'd not the performance of it but rested fully satisfied in the Goodness Truth and Faithfulness of God who had promis'd it was counted to him for Righteousness The Faith whereby those Believers of old i. e. before our Saviour's time pleased God was nothing but a stedfast reliance on the Goodness and Faithfulness of God for those good things which either the light of Nature or particular Promises had given them grounds to hope for This was all that was requir'd of them to be persuaded of and embrace the Promises which they had They could be persuaded of no more than was propos'd to them embrace no more than was reveal'd They had a Belief of the Messiah to come they believ'd that God would according to his Promise in due time send the Messiah to be a King and Deliverer All that was requir'd before the Messiah's appearing in the World was to believe what God had reveal'd and to rely with a full Assurance on God for the performance of his Promise and to believe that in due time he would send them the Messiah this anointed King this promised Saviour and Deliverer according to his Word Thus Mr. Lock p. 23 24 247 249 252 253 254. of his Reasonab of Christianity OBSERVATIONS Here in Reasonab of Christian. p. 23. Mr. Lock says This Faith for which God justified Abraham as p. 24. he says Ahraham was justified for his Faith and in like manner p. 22. God justifies a Man for believing Now as it was observ'd above Chap. 19. this is not the Scripture-Language he constantly reads in his Bible Justified by Faith not for it It may therefore be justly wonder'd that Mr. Lock who is so much for keeping close to the Expressions of his Bible and thinks it our Duty to do it see his Third Letter p. 123. and 210. should affect to say so often that God justifies for Faith But perhaps he will correct it in his next Edition It is also just matter of Wonder that he should say that no more than temporal Blessings were promis'd to Abraham and that the Faith which God counted to him for Righteousness was nothing but his believing those Promises and resting fully satisfied of their Performance See Reasonab of Christian p. 24. and 249. especially when speaking of those Believers of old mention'd Heb. 11. of whom Abraham is one he says expresly that they had a Belief of the Messiah to come and that they believ'd that God would according to his Promise in due time send the Messiah see Ibid. p. 253 254. And he that consults the New Testament will find that as to the Promise of the Messiah and the Belief of it there is more said of Abraham than of the rest Abraham saw Christ's day and rejoyc'd S. John 8. 56. In thy Seed shall all the Kindreds of the earth be blessed Act. 3. 25. To Abraham were the Promises made and to his Seed which is Christ Gal. 3. 16. CHAP. XXII Of our Faith under the Gospel THE Belief of one invisible eternal omnipotent God Maker of Heaven and Earth c. was requir'd before the Revelation of the Gospel as well as now The Gospel was writ to induce Men into a belief of this Proposition that Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah which if they believ'd they should have Life After his Death his Resurrection was also commonly requir'd to be believ'd as a necessary Article and sometimes solely insisted on Salvation or Perdition depends upon believing or rejecting this one Proposition That Jesus was the Messiah I mean this is all is requir'd to be believ'd by those who acknowledge but one eternal and invisible God the Maker of Heaven and Earth For that there is something more requir'd to Salvation besides believing we shall see hereafter All that was to be believ'd for Justification was no more but this single Proposition that Jesus of Nazareth was the Christ or the Messiah This that Jesus was the Messiah was all the Doctrine the Apostles propos'd to be believ'd Above three score years after our Saviour's Passion S. John knew nothing else requir'd to be believ'd for the attaining of life but that Jesus is the Messiah the Son of God Whoever would believe him to be the Saviour promised and take him now rais'd from the dead and constituted the Lord and Judge of all Men to be their King and Ruler should be saved Mr. Lock Reasonab of Christian. p. 25 29 31 43 47 93 194 304. That this that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah is the sole Doctrine pressed and required to be believ'd in the whole Tenour of our Saviour's and his Apostles preaching we have shew'd through the whole History of the Evangelists and the Acts. And I challenge them to shew that there was any other 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 or else kept out of it Ibid. p. 195. Thus Mr. Lock OBSERVATIONS Mr. Lock challenges others to shew any other Doctrine when he shews it himself He says that our Lord's Resurrection was also commonly requir'd to be believ'd as a necessary Article Reasonab of Christian p. 31. What can be more plain So The Belief of one invisible eternal omnipotent God Maker of Heaven and Earth c. is requir'd Ibid. p. 25. We must believe him to have been raised from the dead and constituted the Lord and Judge of all Men and to be our King and Ruler for if we do not believe these how can we take him now rais'd from the dead and constituted the Lord and Judge of all Men to be our King and Ruler which he expresly requires Ibid. p. 304. He says Ibid. p. 30. that we may gather what was to be believ'd by all Nations from what was preached to them by the Apostles Now he expresly tells us that the Apostle S. Paul preached that Jesus being risen from the dead now reigneth and shall more publickly manifest his Kingdom in judging the world at the last day Ibid. p. 191. In like manner p. 190. We see what it was our Saviour preached to the Apostles and what it was that was to be preached 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 who believ'd this and repented should receive Remission of their Sins through this Faith in him Here Mr. Lock plainly testifies that beside this one Article That Jesus is the Messiah the Apostles preach'd
the Signification of the Word Spirit IF that will not serve his turn I will tell him a Principle of mine that will clear the Soul's Immortality to him and that is the Revelation of Life and Immortality by Jesus Christ through the Gospel Mr. Lock Answer to Remarks p. 5 6. Perhaps my using the Word Spirit for a thinking Substance without excluding Materiality out of it will be thought too great a Liberty but the most enlightned of all the ancient People of God Solomon himself speaks after the same manner Nor did the way of speaking in our Saviour's time vary from this I would not be thought hereby to say That Spirit does never signifie a purely immaterial Substance In that Sense the Scripture I take it speaks when it says God is a Spirit and in that Sense I have proved from my Principles That there is a Spiritual Substance and am certain that there is a Spiritual Immaterial Substance The First Letter p. 68. 71 72 73. OBSERVATIONS Mr. Lock in his Answer to Remarks p. 5. hath these Words I suppose this Author i. e. the Author of the Remarks will not question the Soul's Immateriality to be a Proof of its Immortality Doth he not then by taking so much Pains to persuade us that its Immateriality cannot be demonstratively prov'd manifestly weaken one Proof of its Immortality Mr. Lock in Essay l. 4. c. 3. § 6. says That he would not any way lessen the Belief of the Soul's Immateriality But he cannot expect that we should believe Words against the Evidence of Deeds Yet in his Essay l. 2. c. 23. § 18. he hath let fall some Words from which I think the Soul's Immateriality may be prov'd The Ideas we have belonging and peculiar to Spirit are Thinking and Will Thus Mr. Lock Now say I if Thinking and Willing are peculiar to Spirit then the Soul which thinks and wills is a Spirit And that by Spirit he in that Chapter means an immaterial Substance is evident for he opposeth Spirit to material Substance Besides the complex Ideas we have of material sensible Substances we are able to frame the complex Idea of a Spirit So Mr. Lock § 15. And so what he in the very next Sentence calls immaterial Substances in his Margin he calls spiritual Substances If then Thinking and Willing are peculiar to Spirit the Soul which thinks and wills is a Spirit or spiritual immaterial Substance I cannot reconcile the Immortality of the Soul with Mens ceasing to be when they die Mr. Lock who useth that Expression of ceasing to be more than once see above Chap. 15. must invent some unknown Sense of it which may reconcile them I shew'd just now That Mr. Lock in Essay l. 2. c. 23. did by Spirit understand an immaterial Substance and indeed he doth own that he doth so in his Third Letter p. 430. I shall transcribe his Words at large From the Ideas of Thought says he and a Power of moving of Matter which we experience in our selves there was no more difficulty to conclude there was an immaterial Substance in us than that we had material Parts These Ideas of Thinking and Power of moving of Matter I in another Place shew'd did demonstratively lead us to the certain Knowledge of the Existence of an immaterial Thinking Being in whom we have the Idea of Spirit in the strictest Sense in which Sense I also apply'd it to the Soul in that 23d Chapter Thus Mr. Lock And yet in his First Letter p. 68. he tells us of his using the Word Spirit not in that which he calls the strictest Sense but for a thinking Substance without excluding Materiality out of it He sets himself also to defend his using it thus This he doth first by the Anthority of Cicero and Virgil Ibid. p. 69 70. who as he says call the Soul Spiritus and yet do not deny it to be a subtile Matter But supposing this which he says to be true we may return Answer in his own Words in his Third Letter p. 126. That Latin Sentence Nil tam certum est quam quod de dubio certum being objected he taking it to be a Saying of the Romans answers thus As I take it they i. e. the Romans never use the English Word Certainty and tho' it be true that the English Word Certainty be taken from the Latin Word Certus yet that therefore Certainty in English is us'd exactly in the same Sense that Certus is in Latin that I think you will not say The very same say I As I take it Cicero and Virgil never us'd the English Word Spirit and tho' our Word Spirit be from the Latin Spiritus yet that therefore Spirit in English is us'd exactly in the same Sense that Spiritus is in Latin Mr. Lock I think will not say If he thought this a sufficient Answer to others why should it not be a sufficient Answer to him But farther Mr. Lock having said in his First Letter p. 69. that both Cicero and Virgil call the Soul Spiritus in answer hereto it was suggested concerning Cicero That in his Tusculan Questions in the Entrance of the Dispute about the Soul he takes Animus for the Soul and neither Anima nor Spiritus and that Spiritus is taken by him for Breath Now if this be true that is not which Mr. Lock says that Cicero calls the Soul Spiritus What says he in his Third Letter to this Not a Word nor doth he take the least notice of it neither doth he in that long Reply in his Third Letter p. 431 c. produce one place out of Cicero wherein he useth Spiritus for the Soul If it be said that he had done that in his First Letter I answer that he there cites only one place where he takes the Words on trust and sets them down thus Vita continetur corpore spiritu see him p. 70. But if he had consulted Cicero himself he would have found in Orat. pro Marcello vers fin the Words to be these Nec haec tua vita dicenda est quae corpore spiritu continetur illa inquam illa vita est tua Caesar quae vigebit memorio Saeculonum omnium quam posteritas alet quam ipsa aeternitas semper intuebitur Let Mr. Lock himself now judge whether Spiritus here must be necessarily understood to signifie the Soul and whether it can be more fitly interpreted than in the Sense in which Cicero most constantly useth it as signifying Breath even the Breath of our Nostrils without which the Body cannot live and which is so necessary to preserve this mortal Life which the Orator tells Caesar was not his Life As to Virgil Mr. Lock only cites these Words out of him Dum Spiritus hos regit artus saying that he speaks of the Soul see his First Letter p. 70 In answer to this he was told that Spiritus is there taken for the Vital Spirit and that Virgil did believe the Soul to be more
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-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