suffered these things For all these things have been done upon me by the Lord. Of all which I am conscious my Eye has seen 'em and not another and they have been all done unto me in my Bosom For raise up my Skin the Alexandrian Copy has And he shall raise up my Body But Origen's Copies agreed with that which is published St. Clement of Rome reads it thus Thou shalt raise up my flesh which has suffered all these things The Chaldee Paraphrase has it thus And I know that my Redeemer lives and hereafter his Redemption will arise upon the Dust. And after my Skin shall be puft up this shall be And in my Flesh I shall see God again Whom I am to see for my-self and my Eyes shall see him and not another My Reins are consum'd within me The Syriack thus I know indeed that my Saviour lives and that in the End he will appear upon Earth And these things straiten'd or encompass'd my Skin and my Flesh. If my Eyes shall see God they will see light My Reins are quite perish'd within me This has nothing at all relating to the Resurrection And the learned Grotius and others are very positive that this place cannot be understood of the Resurrection without wresting the Hebrew very much The Translation which he gives us of it is different from all others And he expounds it of Job's sudden restitution to his former Health and temporal Prosperity You may read this Exposition oppos'd in our learned Bishop Pearson's Comment on the Creed He calls it a very new one But in that he 's mistaken For 't is no more than what St. Chrysostom long ago thought on and did not dislike Having laid these several Translations and Expositions before you I shall leave this Text to your Judgment without pretending to decide the Controversy If you will not understand it of the Resurrection yet what I undertook to make out seems from other places sufficiently clear I shall close this part of my Discourse which is concerning the Traditions of the Jews and the Testimonies of the Old Testament with an observation concerning that Argument which our Saviour makes use of out of the Books of Moses to prove the Resurrection against the Sadduces As touching the Resurrection says he of the Dead have you not heard that which was spoken unto you by God saying I am the God of Abraham the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob God is not the God of the Dead but of the Living The most that this Argument proves is the Immortality of the Soul that the Souls of Abraham Isaac and Jacob did not die with their Bodies as the Sadduces believ'd From whence I observe that it was not so much the Resurrection of the Body as the Immortality of the Soul that the Sadduces stuck at and that if it could be once prov'd out of the Books of Moses that the Soul was Immortal and did not die with the Body they were ready and willing to grant that there would be a Resurrection of the Body Our Saviour thought it would be enough to convince 'em of the Resurrection of the Body if they could but be convinc'd of the Immortality of the Soul If the Doctrine of the Resurrection were not so clearly reveal'd to the Jews as to be always own'd as a necessary Article of Faith if they saw it through a Glass but darkly and obscurely yet it is not so with Christians If they knew but in part and prophesy'd but in part yet he being come which is perfect that which was only in part is to us done away I shall now in the next place demonstrate the Doctrine of the Resurrection of the same Humane Body to be the Doctrine of the Gospel And this I shall do by shewing First That it is the Doctrine of the New Testament Secondly That it is the Doctrine of the Primitive Fathers The Arguments which I shall draw from the New Testament are these First Our Saviour's own Testimony concerning the place from whence the Resurrection is to be Marvel not at this For the Hour is coming in the which all that are in the Graves shall hear his Voice and shall come forth they that have done Good unto the Resurrection of Life and they that have done Evil unto the Resurrection of Damnation This is a plain and express Declaration that the Body that lies in the Grave is to rise again To the same purpose St. John in the Revelations And the Sea gave up the Dead which were in it and Death and Hell i. e. the Grave deliver'd up the Dead which were in them And they were judg'd every Man according to their Works 'T is confess'd by Origen himself that the Bodies to which our Souls are to be united in the Resurrection will be rais'd up out of the Graves where the Dead are reposited Yet he advances an Hypothesis which supposes a diversity of Particles He tells us as St. Methodius and St. Jerom represent his Opinon that as a Grain of Corn that is sown has a a Natural Principle or Faculty by which it attracts the Particles of Matter that lie near it and so grows up and produces new Corn So in the Substance of our Bodies that lies dissolv'd in the Grave there remain certain semina resurrectionis a certain Power and Faculty by which in the Day of Judgment at the sound of the Trump the Dead shall in a moment grow up There shall spring up he says from those Seeds not the same Flesh but another and with a form different from what we now have The same Hypothesis he maintains in his Work against Celsus We say that as the Blade springs up from a grain of Wheat so in the Body there is a certain natural Principle or Faculty which as it is never corrupted it-self so there springs up from it an incorruptible Body And the same we find again in a Fragment produced by Pamphilus out of his Second Book concerning the Resurrection Yet there he says that after the Resurrection we shall be the very same Men. The Foundation of this Hypothesis of Origen is St. Paul's comparing our Resurrection to the growing of Corn of which I shall speak by and by and shew how unreasonable it is to argue against the Identity of the Body from that Comparison To shew the Absurdity of this Hypothesis let us suppose that the Body was never buried but expos'd in the Air or perfectly burnt to Ashes or drown'd and dissolv'd in the Sea and let this be done some Thousands of years ago I would ask an Origenist Where are then his principia resurrectionis 'T is impossible to conceive any such semina resurgendi unless we will suppose that there always remains some little part of the Body undissolv'd And therefore some of the Jews who will have the Body to be made up in the Resurrection by growing as out of a Seed and from whom
always suffer it to be held in Prison but will free it from its Bonds and bring it into its ancient Country neither will he cease to keep it till his Promise be perfectly fulfill'd And agreeably to this in another Book he says that of the Souls which are dwelling in the Air some are Angels and others descending into the Body as it were into a River are sometimes overwhelm'd in its rapid Gulphs and sometimes bearing briskly up against 'em do first swim out and then fly back to the place from whence they came These says he are the Souls of those who are taught some Philosophy from on high which continually from the Beginning to the End desire the dissolution of that Life which is by conjunction with the Body that they may obtain an Incorporeal and an Incorruptible Life with the Unbegotten and Incorruptible God But those which are drown'd are the Souls of other Men who neglecting Wisdom give themselves up to the uncertain blasts of Fortune which do not appertain to our better Part but only to our Bodies or else to such Things as are voider than they of Life such as Glory and Riches and Power and Honour and those other things which Men that look not on that which is truly Good do fansie and paint to themselves by false and erroneous Notions Thirdly That many of the Jews who held the Immortality of the Soul did not own the Resurrection of the Body may be further gather'd form a place of Cornelius Tacitus the Roman Historian where he describes the Customs of that Nation He says thus of 'em in general Animasque proelio aut suppliciis peremptorum aeternas putaâ—…t They believe that the Souls of such Jews as are slain in Battle or put to Death by the Enemies of their Religion are immortal Tho' he speaks in the same Place of their Custom of burying their dead Bodies contrary to that of the Romans who were wont to burn their Dead yet he speaks not a Word of their believing the Resurrection of those Bodies Which he could not have omitted if he had known that they believ'd it it being so singular and extraordinary a Thing and he could not one would think have been ignorant of it if the Jews had so generally held it as they did the Immortality of the Soul Fourthly There were among the ancient Jews certain natural Philosophers whom the Rabbins are wont to call Sapientes Mecar from their searching or enquiring after natural Causes To which appellation St. Paul the Apostle seems to have had Respect in those Words to the Corinthians Where is the Wise Where is the Scribe Where is the Searcher or Enquirer the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we in our Translation render the Disputer of this World So St. Jerom indeed has render'd it Ubi enim Sapiens Ubi Grammateus Ubi causarum Naturalium Scrutatores Of them it s affirm'd by one of the learned Rabbins that they denied the existence of Daemons and that some of them asserted that all living Things not only Men but all other Animals shall after Death rise again their Souls returning into other Bodies after a certain space of many Thousands of Years This Opinion concerning the Revolution of Souls they borrow'd of the Heathens and tho' it were originally grounded on a Tradition concerning the Resurrection yet the Doctrine is not the same Fifthly Another Sect that denied the Resurrection was that of the Sadduces That they denied it I need not endeavour to prove I shall only here tell ye that tho' they did so yet in the Time of our Saviour and his Apostles they were not look'd upon as Hereticks by the Jews but were properly Members of their Body and Communion This I shall prove by and by Sixthly There was another Sect of the Jews call'd Hemero-Baptists who agreed as Epiphanius assures us with the Sadduces in denying the Resurrection and in their other Tenets only in this they dissented from 'em that they esteem'd it necessary for the cleansing themselves from Sin to bathe themselves every Day both Winter and Summer From whence they had their Name Seventhly That the Prophet Ezechiel himself did not fully rely on the Doctrine of a future Resurrection but doubted once a little of it as a Doctrine at that time not sufficiently reveal'd or almost forgotten may be gathered from the Answer which he return'd to that Question of God Almighty Son of Man can these dry Bones live If the Doctrine of the Resurrection had been at that time the common and receiv'd Doctrine as it was afterwards in the time of our Saviour and the Prophet had been fully assur'd of it he would not have answer'd as he did Lord God Thou knowest But roundly as Martha answer'd our Saviour concerning the Resurrection of her Brother Lazarus I know Lord that they can and will 'T is true the Words thou knowest are capable of another interpretation and may be so understood as to signifie thou knowest that they can But the true meaning seems to be otherwise and they seem to import thus much Thou knowest whether they can or no I do not Eighthly To these we may add the Samaritans who tho' they were not of the Communion of the Jews were however the Followers of the Law of Moses If we may believe some of those ancient Writers who have given an account of their Opinions they were not only ignorant of the Doctrine of the Resurrection but rejected likewise that of the Immortality of the Soul This is positively asserted by Leontius and long before him by Origen But it does not seem to be true For in the Chronicon Samaritanum they expresly own the Immortality of the Soul and Rewards and Punishments in the next Life and it 's plainly intimated by St. Cyril Bishop of Jerusalem that they did not deny the Immortality of the Soul but only doubted of it But tho' they did not deny the Immortality of the Soul yet certain it is that they deny'd the Resurrection of the Body In this all Authors agree with Origen and Leontius above-cited as St. Cyril Epiphanius the Author of the Recognitions ascrib'd to St. Clement and the Talmudists Secondly tho' the Doctrine of the Resurrection was not always receiv'd by the Jews as a necessary Article of Faith or Term of Communion as appears from some of the foregoing Instances yet 't is certain that about the time of our Saviour as well before as after it was the receiv'd and common Doctrine of that Nation This evidently appears from the following Examples 1. In the Answers which the Seven Martyrs give their Tormenters which we read recorded in the Second Book of Maccabees there 's a clear and open Profession of this Doctrine And it plainly appears from the Answer of the Third of those Martyrs that the Resurrection which they expected was of the same Humane Body Being call'd to his Torments and holding out his hands
any that can deliver out of my Hand After the dead Body is put into the Grave they bow themselves backward three times and throw Grass over their Heads signifying their hope of the Resurrection with these Words out of Isaiah And your Bones shall bud as the Grass After that in the Porch of the Synagogue God shall destroy Death for ever and wipe away all Tears from their Eyes and will take away their Reproach from all the Earth for the Lord hath spoken it If I had a mind to transcribe the Observations of others I could add to these the Testimonies of 500 other Rabbinical Writers but I content my-self to have presented you with my own Observation And from what has been laid before you it abundantly appears First That the Doctâ—…ine of the Resurrection has been lookâ—… upon by the Jews as a necessary Article of their Creed from before the Date of their Talmuds Secondly That tho' it was not receiv'd by 'em as an indispensible Article of Faith in the time of our Saviour and for some time before and after yet even in those times it was the common and receiv'd Doctrine Thirdly That by the Resurrection they always understood not barely the re-conjunction of the Soul with a Body after Death but the resuscitation of the same Humane Body I shall only add that the Resurrection is acknowledged not only by the Rabbinists or the Followers of the Talmud which are much the greater Number but also by those that are call'd Karraites who follow only the Scripture disallowing Traditions and are therefore reckon'd by the Talmudists as Hereticks These are said to be descended from the ancient Sadduces If so it appears that the Sadduces themselves were at last convinced of their Errour and made Proselytes to the Doctrine of the Resurrection 'T was about the end of the first Century after our Saviour's Nativity that the Doctrine of the Resurrection began to be reckon'd among the Jews as a necessary Article of Faith I gather it thus That it was not an Article of Faith till after the time of Josephus who liv'd till near the end of that Century appears from hence that neither the Essens nor the Sadduces were in his time accounted Hereticks And that it was receiv'd as a part of their Creed before the Year 140 appears from what we read in Justin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho p. 306 307. It appears from thence that the Doctrine of the Resurrection and that too of the same Humane Body was at that time acknowledged by all such Jews as were accounted Orthodox and that the Sadduces who denied it were at that time rejected as Heretioks I should here Philalethes have dismiss'd this Point but it comes now into my Mind that there are two things relating to the Opinion of the Jews of which you desire particularly to be satisfied which ought to be consider'd in this Place Your Queries are concerning the Transmigration of Souls out of one Body into another by a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Whether that be not held by many of the Jews and if so Whether they that hold it do not deny the Resurrection of the Body How that Opinion can be consistent with this To the First of these Queries I must answer in the Affirmative It is very true that the Transmigration of Souls out of one Body into another is by many of the Jews both ancient and modern maintain'd They call it The Revolution of Souls or The secret of the Revolution Leo Modena speaks of it as of a common Opinion but he adds withal that there are many that do not believe it And the Author of The Present State of the Jews in Barbary takes notice of it as receiv'd by the Jews of those Parts Another Traveller observes that it 's likewise receiv'd among the Jews of Asia Of the learned Jews that assert it Menasseh Ben-Israel is one and the famous Abarbinel another It 's likewise asserted by the ancient Cabbalists in the Zoar and by the Talmudists themselves The Cabbalists tell us that the Soul of Adam David and the Messias is one and the same We are told by others that Phineas the Grand-Son of Aaron and Elias the Prophet were the same Man By which they must mean either that the Soul of Phineas pass'd into the Body of Elias or that Phineas did not die but that having lain hid for many Ages or having been translated he afterwards appear'd again and was call'd Elias It may seem more probable that they believ'd the first and it 's generally taken for granted by learned Men that they did so Yet I cannot be confident of it for I find that some of the Rabbins had this Tradition and Opinion amongst 'em that Phineas liv'd many Ages The Reason they give for the Transmigration of Souls is the same with that which is generally assign'd by the Heathens viz. That the Soul may be purg'd and amended But they do not hold as the Heathens did that the Soul Transmigrates into many Bodies They restrain it to Three Thus the Soul of Adam they will tell ye was purg'd by passing into the Body of K. David and by passing again into the Body of the Messias will be fully and perfectly purified A modern Traveller tells us that this was the Opinion of certain Jews of Asia with whom he convers'd that the Soul if it has not at first forgiveness is twice more sent into a Body to amend and become better and then is rejected or receiv'd by God according to its Deserts That the Soul is to pass into Three several Bodies they prove from those Words of Job Lo all these things worketh God thrice which we render oftentimes with Man And of the Transmigration they understand the Chaldee Paraphrase of Isaiah Chap. 22. v. 14. where mention is made of the second Death Neither is it only the Transmigration of the Soul into other Human Bodies that is own'd and receiv'd among the Jews There are some amongst 'em that like thorough-pac'd Pythagoreans make it pass into the Bodies of Brutes Holstenius assures us that he himself had convers'd with some in Italy that asserted it very zealously and prov'd it from the Story of K. Nebuchadnezar whose Soul they affirm'd to have really past into the Body of a Beast They prov'd it likewise from those Words of the Psalmist Deliver my Soul from the Sword my Darling from the Power of the Dog Where the Prophet say they begs of God that his Soul being loos'd from its Body might not pass into a Dog or any other Brute It appears from the Testimony of Josephus that the Opinion of the Transmigration of the Soul into another Humane Body by a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was receiv'd among the Jews even in his time and that too by many of the Pharisees themselves In his Second Book concerning the Jewish War where he gives us a particular account of the Dogma's of the
that we shall not all die but some will only be chang'd What can be more plain than those Words of the same Apostle The Dead in Christ shall rise first then we i. e. they which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the Clouds to meet the Lord in the Air And so shall we ever be with the Lord. Now since the Bodies of that Generation which shall be living at the last Day are to consist of the same individual Particles how is it credible that the Bodies of those that are rais'd shall be made up of New Is it Credible that there will be in Heaven such a Disparity that some shall retain their old Bodies others have new Ones The Dead says the Apostle shall be rais'd Incorruptible and they that are living shall be chang'd The Reason he gives is the same for both For this Corruptible must put on Incorruption c. And from thence it is evident that as are the Bodies of those that are only changed such will be the Bodies of those that rise But how does this agree with that Comparison which the same Apostle makes between the Resurrection of our Bodies and the growing of Corn The Apostle observes that the Corn which is sown is not the same with that which shall be and he plainly applies this to our Resurrection Does not that prove that the Body which rises will be no more the same with that which died than Corn is the same with that from whence it sprung This is that Place as I have already said on which Origen and the rest of our Adversaries chiefly groun'd their Opinions My Answer is this There is no necessity we should take the Comparison in all respects strictly You know we have a Maxim in the Schools that no Similitude walks on Four Feet The meaning is that Similitudes and Comparisons are always Lame and ought to be understood loosly and only in some respect And so ought this Comparison which the Apostle uses All that he means by it is this That as a Grain of Corn which springs up differs from that which was sown so the Body which rises shall not be altogether the same but shall differ in some Respects from that which was buried I observe that the Question which the Apostle answers is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with what sort of Body the Dead shall rise I observe the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with what sort of Body as to its Qualities And as the Question is only concerning the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Quality of the Body so ought the Answer to be understood to intend no other There is nothing more certain than that of all Arguments the weakest are those that are taken from Comparisons so loosly are Comparisons wont to be used I shall crave your Leave to give you here a few Instances relating to the Subject now before us The Resurrection of our Bodies is compared to the growing of Corn not only by the Apostle but by almost all the Fathers yet they at the same time own expresly the Identity of the Body The Greek Church uses boil'd Wheat as a Symbol of it In their great Festivals after the Sacrament they have usually an Entertainment for the Congregation which they call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the offering of the Colyba which is boil'd Wheat mixt for the better relish with some other things The Priest goes about with a Charger full of it and distributes it to all that are present as a Symbol of the Resurrection and in Memory of the Dead The Arch-Bishop of Philadelphia Gabriel Severus has left us a particular Treatise concerning this Rite of the Greek Church We are told indeed by some Writers that in the beginning this Custom had no respect to the Resurrection But whatever was the meaning of those that first instituted it 't is certain that they who now continue it referr it to the Resurrection The Muscovites are wont to use Eggs as Symbols of the Resurrection Every Year against Easter they die or colour Red a great Number of Eggs of which every Man and Woman gives to the Priest of the Parish upon Easter Day in the Morning The Common-People use to carry in their Hands one of these red Eggs the Persons of Quality Gilded Ones on Easter Day and Three or Four Days after And meeting their Friends one takes the other by the Hand and one of 'em saying The Lord or Christ is risen the other answers It is so of a Truth Then they kiss one another and exchange their Eggs. The Jews make Grass to be a Symbol of it Some of the ancient Fathers are pleas'd to tell us that Trees and Plants putting forth Leaves and Flowers in the Spring-Time and bearing Fruits are Types and Emblems of it Some compare it to the healing of Wounds Others and those too some of the chief of the ancient Doctors of the Church to the revolution of Night and Day Darkness and Light to one Month's following another and one Year's arising from another Nay they tell us that these Alternations are manifest Proofs and Demonstrations of the resurrection Now from such Symbols and Comparisons as these who would not be apt to conclude that they do not believe the Resurrection of the Same Body Yet certain it is that they all profess and assert this Doctrine That St. Paul meant the very same Body as to Substance will further appear from what I shall observe hereafter concerning the Incredulity of the Corinthians in the time of St. Clement Bishop of Rome VIII My Eighth Argument shall be taken from the Example of our Saviour's Resurrection The Apostle tells us That Christ was The first Fruits of those that slept that by him came the Resurrection of the Dead that as in Adam all die so in Christ shall all be made alive Every Man in his own Order Christ the First-Fruits afterwards they that are Christ's at his coming Again to the Romans he says that He that rais'd Christ from the Dead shall also quicken our mortal Bodies And in his Epistle to the Philippians he assures us in the most express Terms That Jesus Christ whom we look for from Heaven shall change our vile Body that it may be fashioned like to his Glorious Body From all which I inferr that as was our Saviour's Body after his Resurrection such will ours be in our Resurrection Now that the same Body of Christ which was crucifi'd and buried was rais'd again and that it continu'd a true Humane Body there is no one I think can doubt who truly believes the Scripture or our Saviour's own Words For what if by His Divine Power He was pleas'd to convey Himself into a Room when the Doors were or seem'd to be shut What if he vanish'd away out of the Sight of those that convers'd with him This was done to demonstrate his Power I shall not alledge with a late learned and
Words produced by St. Jerom We confess the Resurrection of Bodies and of those too which were laid in the Graves or burnt to Ashes that the Body of Paul shall rise and be united to the Soul of Paul and that the Body of Peter shall rise and be his Body again and so for all others For it is not equitable that the Soul which sinn'd in one Body should be punish'd in another Neither does it become a just Judge to reward a Body when it was not that but another which suffer'd for Christ. In his Second Book Concerning the Resurrection he had these Words That the promise of the Resurrection of the Dead is concerning this Body that â—…en appears from many places of the Holy Scriptures and particularly from the Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ who is styl'd the First-born from the Dead In the same Book he adds that it is certain that our Saviour arose with that very Body which he receiv'd from Mary Again in the same If the Bodies of Mankind be corrupted they are able to exist again being kept and preserv'd by the Power of God to the time of their Resurrection Now that they are to be restor'd wheresoever they are in whatsoever place they be John thus declares in his Revelation And the Sea gave up the Dead which were in it and Death and Hell gave up the Dead which were in them For by Sea there seems to be meant all Waters in general by Hell the Air seems to be understood by Death the Earth Innumerable other places says Pamphilus He has to this purpose in his Work Concerning the Resurrection To these I shall add another out of the 28th Book of his Comments on Esaiah on those words The Dead shall be rais'd up and they that are in the Graves shall rise It is better says he to say that we shall all rise that the Wicked may go into that place where is weeping and gnashing of Teeth and the Just may receive every one in his Order according to the Merits of their good Deeds when their mortal Bodies shall be fashion'd like to his Glorious Body By the Graves of the Dead here in this Place and in many others are to be understood not only those which are made on purpose for the reception of the dead Bodies either cut out in Rocks or dug in the Earth but all Places whatsoever in which either the whole Body of a Man or any part of it lies And though it may happen that the several Parts of one and the same Body may lie dispers'd in many Places yet it is not absurd to call all those places in which any part of the Body lies the Graves of that Body For if we do not so understand it they that are not bury'd in a Grave but are drown'd in the Sea or lie expos'd in some desart Place could not be reckon'd amongst those of whom it is said That they shall be rais'd up out of their Graves Which would be very absurd As he asserts in these Places the Resurrection of the Same numerical Substance so in many other Places of his Works he plainly asserts that the Body when it rises will be truly flesh and retain its old Form and Shape His Apologist in Photius reckons this as one of those Tenets which were falsly charg'd upon him That he denied the Resurrection of the flesh So also his Apologist Pamphilus who produces the following places to prove that he asserted it in his Comment on the First Psalm As we retain says he the same species of Body from our Infancy to our old Age though the Characters may seem to be much alter'd so we ought to understand that the very same Species which now we have will remain in the Life to come but chang'd very much for the better For 't is necessary that the Soul which inhabits in Corporeal Places should have such Bodies as are suited to those Places in which it lives And as if we were to live in the Sea our Bodies would be doubtless so order'd and constituted as is proper for such an Habitation as the Bodies of those Creatures are which do there inhabit so now since we are design'd for the Celestial Habitations it follows that the qualities of our Bodies should be suited to the Glory of those Places Notwithstanding this the former Species will not be destroy'd though it be made more Glorious For as the Species of the Lord Jesus or of Moses or of Elias was the same in their Transfiguration with what it was before so the Species of the Saints will remain the same though made more Glorious In his Comment on the XVth Psalm on those Words My Flesh shall rest in Hope The Lord Jesus Christ says he speaks this whose Flesh first rested in Hope For being crucified and become the First-born of the Dead and ascending up after his Resurrection into Heaven he carried up with him his â—…arthly Body so that the Heavenly Powers were amaz'd and astonish'd seeing flesh ascend up into Heaven For of Elias it is written that he was taken up as it were into Heaven and of Enoch that he was translated yet it is not said that he ascended up into Heaven Let who ever will be offended with what I say I confidently affirm that as Christ was the First Born from the Dead so he First carried up flesh into Heaven Hence they say Who is this that cometh from Edom i. e. from among those that are born on the Earth with Garments died Red from Bozrah For they saw the Marks of the Wounds which were made in his Body From Bozrah i. e. in the Flesh which he took upon him Alittle after Because my Flesh shall rest in Hope In what Hope not barely that it shall rise from the Dead but that it will also be taken up into Heaven Here Pamphilus deservedly cries out What can be said by any one more evidently and clearly concerning the Resurrection of the flesh which he says will not only rise from the Dead but will also be taken up into Heaven if it were the Body of a good Man following him who being the First Begotten from the Dead first carried up the Nature of flesh into Heaven There were some that fansied that our Saviour ascended up in his Body no farther than to the Sun and that there he left his Body Which ridiculous Fancy they grounded on those Words of the Psalmist according to the Greek In the Sun He placed his Tabernacle This Opinion was ascribed by some to Origen but Pampâ—…ilus shews that he was so far from maintaining that Opinion that he expresly oppâ—…s it and confutes it Paâ—…lus concludes his defence of Origen concerning the Resurrection with these Words Let them now cease to be Impudent who say that Origen confesses indeed the Resurrection of the Body but denies the Resurrection of the Flesh. Let them now leave off reproaching him when they see that he places the
Saxon Characters at the end of the Acts of the Apostles a Manuscript of above a Thousand Years old In the Church of Aquileia they had one Word peculiar to themselves For instead of the Resurrection of the Flesh they read to make it more express because some of the Origenists would talk of a new Flesh The Resurrection of this Flesh. The several Councils which were call'd in the Fourth Century relating chiefly to the Controversies of the Arians the confessions of Faith which they publish'd have not for the most part any thing express concerning the Resurrection of the Flesh. The Nicene Creed and those of most of the Synods of that Age express only thus much That Christ will Come to judge the Quick and the Dead But that the Resurrection of the Flesh was the Doctrine of the Council of Nice may particularly appear from that Confession which the Heretick Arius and the rest of his Party of Alexandria presented to the Emperor Constantine after they had been condemn'd by that Council to perswade him that they were truly Orthodox and came up fully to the Doctrine of the Council In that Confession it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So also in the Confession of the Synod of Antioch and in that of Marcellus Bishop of Ancyra And in that of the Eighty Eastern Bishops who sided with the Arians at Sardica In the Creeds of the Second and Sixth General Councils and in that which in the time of Epiphanius was wont to be recited by the Converts that were to be baptized it is only The Resurrection of the Dead In that ascribed to St. Athanasius we profess that all Men shall rise again with their Bodies That of P. Damasus delivers it thus We believe that we shall be rais'd up in the same Flesh in which we now live I need not mention that of St. Jerom. What his Belief was appears sufficiently from the several places where I have already cited him He is positive in this that it is not possible to understand the Doctrine of the Resurrection as profest by the Catholick Church any otherwise than of a true Humane Body Ruffinus in the same Age being suspected with John Bishop of Jerusalem as favouring the Opinion of Origen to clear himself and the Bishop from that Scandal makes this Profession of Faith in his own and the Bishop's Name in the Preface to his Translation of Pamphilus's Apology for Origen We believe as it has been deliver'd down to us from the Holy Fathers that the Son of God arose from the Dead in the very same Flesh in which he suffer'd by which he gave us also hope of a Resurrection We speak of the Resurrection of the Flesh not in a shuffling and deceitful manner as some falsly accuse us but we believe that this very Flesh in which we now live shall rise not another instead of it neither do we mean any other Body besides this of Flesh. If therefore we say that the BODY shall rise we speak according to the Apostle for he uses that Word If we say that the FLESH is to rise we make our Confession according to the Tradition of the Creed 'T is a foolish thing to accuse us as if we thought a Humane Body could be any thing besides Flesh. Whether therefore that which shall rise be called FLESH according to the Creed or BODY according to the Apostle it is so to be believ'd as the Apostle has set it forth that that which shall rise shall rise in Power and Glory and shall rise an Incorruptible and a Spiritual Body that Corruption shall not inherit Incorruption Saving therefore these Prerogatives of the Body or Flesh in the other Life the Resurrection of the Flesh is to be believ'd wholly and perfectly so that both the same nature of Flesh may be retain'd and the state and glory of an incorrupted and spiritual Body may not be violated For so it is written These things are preach'd in Jerusalem in the Church of God by the holy Bishop John These things I together with him profess and maintain If any one either believes or teaches any other Doctrine or thinks that we believe any other than this we have now set forth let him be accurs'd The Creed of the First Council of Toledo in the Year 400 has thus We believe there will be a Resurrection of the Flesh of Mankind That of the Fourth Council of Toledo in the Year 633. We are to be rais'd up by Christ in the same Flesh in which we now live and in the same Form in which he himself rose That of the Eleventh Council of the same Church in the Year 675. According to the Example of our Head i. e. Christ we confess that there will be a true Resurrection of the Flesh of all the Dead Neither do we believe that we shall rise in an Aereal or any other kind of Flesh as some have delirously fansied but in that in which we live have our being and move Boetius in his Confession of Faith This is principally requir'd in our Religion that we believe not only that our Souls do not perish but also that our Bodies themselves which are dissolv'd by death are restored in the life to come to their former state Vigilius Tapsensis If any one says that a Man will not rise in the Day of Judgment in the Body as God made him let him be accurs'd To conclude tho' the Church of England in the vulgar Translation of the Apostles Creed uses only these Terms The Resurrection of the Body yet in her Form of Publick Baptism the Person to be baptized is askt in his Representative the Godfather Dost thou believe the Resurrection of the flesh I have now But I cannot yet say I have now done Before I put an end to this History I shall crave your leave to offer to your Consideration what I had almost forgotten an Observation or two relating to some of those Primitive Writers whose Authorities we have above produced My first Observation is this That the greatest part of 'em were not only bred up in the Prejudices and Infidelity of the Heathens but were likewise by Profession Philosophers and Lawyers And what Opinion the Philosophers and learned Greeks had of the Doctrine of the Resurrection as profest by the Christians is very notorious I have shewn in the beginning of this Discourse that even among the Greeks there were many Opinions which were founded on an ancient Tradition concerning the Resurrection and that it was in some sense believ'd by many of their Philosophers Notwithstanding it is certain that as it was understood by the Christians it was by all the Greeks in general exploded Not any one Christian Doctrine so generally and with so much contempt rejected There was not any one Sect says Tertullian among all the Philosophers but what denied it They did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with
fed his Fishes with the Bodies of his Slaves whom he threw into his Ponds that he might feed at second Hand on Man's Flesh. Now since the substance of one Man's Body becomes the substance of another Man's Body how you will say can the Bodies of both be rais'd again This Objection is a very considerable one and has been all along urg'd against the Doctrine of the Resurrection not only by our later Scepticks but anciently as I but now observ'd by the Heathen Philosophers I shall not deny as Athenagoras seems to do that the substance of one Man's Body when eaten by another turns to nourishment and becomes the Flesh of that other that eats it It sufficiently appears that they that eat Humane Flesh to satisfie their Hunger are reliev'd and cherish'd and of consequence nourish'd by it But my Answer is this That God Almighty who has engag'd his Promise that the Bodies of all Men shall rise again will take care so to order all things relating to our Nourishment as that that may not hinder his Promise from being fullfill'd He will take care that the Particles of One Man's Body shall never so become the Particles of another Man's Body as that the Resurrection of either should be thereby render'd impossible 'T is an Observation of the most accurate Sanctorius grounded on infallible Statick Experiments that not above the Fiftieth Part of what a Man takes into his Body turns to Nourishment From hence I make this following Inference Should an Ox for Example feed only on such Grass as grew in that Field which was impregnated by the Dead Bodies of the Cimbrians but now mention'd as the Grass would not consist wholly of those Particles which belong'd to the dead Bodies but would chiefly consist of other more common Particles those of Rain and the like so not above the 50th Part perhaps a much less proportion of the Grass which is eaten would become the Flesh of the Ox and not above the 50th Part of that Flesh of the Ox which is eaten by a Man would be turn'd into the Substance of the Man Should a Man feed on Corn that grew in such a Field as the Corn would consist not wholly of the Humane Particles but chiefly of others so not above the 50th Part of the Corn so eaten would become the Flesh of him that ate it The same may be said of him who â—…ed his Fishes with the Bodies of his Slaves As the Fish must be suppos'd to receive their Nourishment from those Bodies not wholly but only in part so not above the 50th part of the Substance of the Fish you may say much less considering the unfitness of Fish for Nourishment would become the Flesh of the Eater It is plain that even according to the common course and nature of Nutrition were there no particular Providence concern'd in the matter there would be in such Cases but very few Particles in any Man's Body which belong'd before to another Should one Man devour another wholly in this the great Strength of the Objection lies it appears from Sanctorius's Observation that not above the 50th part of the Flesh of the Person devour'd would become the Flesh of him that ate it And besides the other 49 parts of the Flesh there would remain all the Bones untouched which make up a great the most substantial part of the Body It is further to be consider'd that though the same Body that died is to rise again yet it is not necessary that all the Particles of it should be rais'd up 'T is enough that such Particles are rais'd as made up the integrant and necessary Parts of the Body By necessary Parts I mean those which remain after the utmost degree of Maceration without which the Body would not be Integral but Imperfect And these are chiefly the Bones the Skin the Nerves the Tendons the Ligaments and the Substance of the several Vessels As long as these and all that are necessary to Life remain the Body is truly Whole though never so much macerated All the Flesh that is added makes nothing at all to the Wholeness or Integrality of the Body tho' it conduce to Strength and Ornament And this is that Flesh which would chiefly turn to Nourishment if the Body were devour'd The Substance of the Vessels Tendons c. are not so apt for Nourishment If the dying Body be extremely macerated I do not doubt but that in the Resurrection it will be restor'd by foreign and adventitious Matter to its due and just Proportion So in Bodies that are full and fleshy there 's a great deal of substance that is not necessary which if it become the Flesh of another Man the Body may be rais'd up without it and yet be still Physically Whole and truly the same In Bodies that are Fat and Grass there is doubtless a great deal superfluons which will never be rais'd up though it were never made the Ingredient of another Man's Body To sum up all in a word I say that God Almighty who has promis'd that the Bodies of all Men shall be rais'd up again to Life will so order all things relating to our Nourishment as that those Particles of which the necessary Parts of one Man's Body were compounded shall never become the Particles of the necessary Parts of another Man's Body At least he will take care that they may not continue to be so at the time of his Death If Providence has decreed that not only the necessary Particles but that all the Particles of the dying Body shall be rais'd up again it will take such care of our Nourishment as that the Particles of one Man's Body shall never continue to be part of another Man's Body at the time of his Death God will take care that no one shall die whilst his Body contains any Particles that belong to another But as I said it is not at all necessary that we should believe thus much Mr. Boyle in his Treatise concerning the Possibility of the Resurrection in answer to this Objection which we have now examin'd alledges that it is not necessary that any of the same Flesh should be rais'd up 'T is enough he says if the Bones are rais'd up and cloth'd with new Flesh. And this he proves from the Prophet Eccechiel's Description of the Mystical Resurrection where says he only the same Bones were rais'd up and the Flesh c. was made up of new Matter But how does it appear that in that Resurrection the Flesh is to be understood to be made up not of the former but of new Particles He alledges moreover that the Body which rises may be said to be the same with that which was buried though it contain in it but a very small part of the same Substance He observes that St. Paul's comparing the Resurrection to the growing of Corn seems to justifie the supposition of a Plastick Power in some part of the matter of a deceased Body whereby being Divinely
excited it may be enabled to take to it self fresh Matter and so subdue and fashion it as thence sufficiently to repair or augment it-self This is wholly the Hypothesis of Origen He adds that the Alcalisate Ashes of a certain Plant like our English red Poppy being sown in a Garden has been known to produce certain Plants larger and fairer than any of that Kind that had been seen in those Parts Which seems says he to argue that in the saline and earthy i. e. the fixt Particles of a Vegetable that has been dissipated and destroy'd by the Violence of the Fire there may remain a Plastick Power enabling them to contrive dispos'd Matter so as to re-produce such a Body as was formerly destroy'd However to this Plastick Power residing in any Portion of the destroy'd Body itself he is not willing to have recourse He rather believes that God by his Omnipotenâ—…e will perform the thing and work up some of the Particles of the deceas'd Body together with the adjacent Matter into a Humane Body And the Body which is so work'd up may be call'd as he tells us the same Body This is not to deâ—…end the Doctrine of the Resurrection but to give it up to it's Adversaries and to advance another Doctrine instead of it For it is not true that a Body so made up may be call'd the same with that which died How can a Grain of Corn that is grown up be said to be the same with that which was sown I have own'd already that the Identity of our Bodies in this Life does not consist in the Identity of Particles I have granted that our Bodies in our old age are the same with those which we had when Infants or in our Mothers Womb tho they have not in 'em any one Particle the same But I said withall and the same I say here again that it does not therefore follow that the rising Body may be the same with that which was buried tho it have not any or but few of the same Particles The Identity of the Body here in this Life consists in a sit Construction and Organization of successively fleeting Particles of matter The Identity of the Rising Body or it's sameness with that which died can consist in nothing else but in the Restauration of the same Particles of Matter which made up the necessary Parts of the dying Body to their former Construction Another Objection concerning the Difficulty of the Resurrection is this We are told by some that allowing Five or Six Foot deep in Church-yards and Burying-places and One Foot deep in other parts of the Earth where the Particles of Humane Bodies may be supsos'd to have been drop'd and scatter'd by the Wind there will hardly be fit Matter enough in the whole Surface of the Earth to make up so many Humane Bodies as there have been and will be in the World Should I shew that here in England alone which is but a very small Part of the Globe of the Earth if you go but One single Foot deep there is as much Substance as would make up all the Bodies of Mankind that ever were or ever will be tho' the World should last in all 10000 Years should I shew thus much I suppose it would be granted that the weakness of this Objection would be sufficiently expos'd I shall not only undertake to prove that but I shall undertake to demonstrate that in less than the 17th Part of the Kingdom which is much less than the biggest of our Counties there is more than enough to do it I demonstrate it thus 1. It appears by the best Calculations that there are in England about Forty Millions of Acres In every Acre there are 43560 square Feet There are therefore in the whole Kingdom about 1742400000000 Square Feet 2. It s suppos'd by the most Judicious that in all the World there may be living at one time old and young about Three Hundred Millions of People It appears by the Weekly Bills that there are born and die every Year about the Thirtieth Part of Mankind Therefore Thirty Years must be allow'd for one Age. Now if we multiply Three Hundred Millions by as many Thirties as are contain'd in 10000 Years the whole Number of Mankind in 10000 Years will amount to but little more than 99999000000 which is not the Seventeenth Part of the Number of square Feet contain'd in England By allowing three hundred millions one Age with another I have allow'd much more than three hundred Millions to be at this time living in the World For in the first Ages of the World and after the Floud there were but very few 3. A solid Foot of common Earth contains in it Substance more than enough to make up a Humane Body Men Women and Children consider'd one with another For it weighs about Fivescore and Thirteen Pound whereas the weight of an ordinary Man is no more than Ten Stone or Sevenscore Pound If therefore allowance be made for the Bodies of Women who generally weigh much less than Men and for those of Children under Sixteen Years of Age who are half the Number of Mankind Infants under Five Years of Age who weigh but very little are reckon'd one Quarter of Mankind I say if we make this allowance it will plainly appear that the weight of a Humane Body taking one with another is not so great as the weight of a Solid Foot of common Earth It is manifest therefore that in less than the Seventeenth Part of England if you go but One Foot deep there is as much Substance as would make up all the Humane Bodies that ever were are and will be tho' the World should last in all 10000 Years We will give the Objector leave to suppose that the World will last in all 20000 Years and that there are in the World one Age with another Six Hundred Millions of Humane Bodies yet in less than one Quarter of the Kingdom of England there would be within a Foot of the Surface more Earth than would weigh down all I need not here put him in mind that the Sea has devour'd many Millions of Bodies It appears from what has been said that the Resurrection of all the Bodies of Mankind is not impossible And since it is not impossible there is not any difficulty in it For all things that are possible are equally easie to an Omnipotent Agent 'T is an Assertion of Pliny's as has been already observ'd That God himself is not able to raise up a dead Man to Life But whatever he thought of his Gods and whatever were his Notions concerning the Power of the Deity there is no one now can doubt of God's Power and Sufficiency I need not endeavour to demonstrate that he is able to distinguish and to gather together the confus'd and scatter'd Particles of our several Bodies howsoever blended and workt in with other Matter and to range and mould 'em as they were before I need not
endeavour to demonstrate that he is able to provide that the Particles which compounded the necessary Parts of one Man's Body shall never belong to the necessary Parts of another or that they shall not be the Particles of another at the time of his Death He that created all the Particles that are in the Universe He that made all the Bodies that ever were out of 'em He in whose Book are all our Members and our Particles written how can he be ignorant to what uses each Particle has been put and where they are all reposited He who first created our Bodies and form'd 'em of the Dust of the Earth how can it be difficult for him to raise up the Dust of the Grave and make it declare his Truth He that first commanded Man to come as it were out of Nothing what can hinder but that he should be obey'd when he shall be pleas'd to command the Children of Men to come again If so mean a Thing as a Loadstone can distinguish and gather together the little Particles of Iron that lie confus'd and undistinguish'd in the Dust how much more shall the Almighty Magnetism of Him that made the Loadstone be able to distinguish and raise up together the confused and lost Particles of our Bodies If Mercury when dead and dissolv'd can even by the Power of Nature be reduced and restor'd to its Life and Being how much more shall the great God of Nature be able to reduce and restore our dead and dissolved Bodies to their former State I shall not any longer insist on these things There is no one can doubt of the Resurrection on the account of the difficulty of it but such as with the Athenians worship an Unknown God The Third Objection is taken from the unworthiness of these our Bodies and from their unfitness to be made the Habitation of the Soul in the next Life which is to be in Heaven and Everlasting The Consideration of the Impureness of these our Bodies made the Heathen Philosophers deride and abominate the Doctrine of the Resurrection To hope for the Resurrection of the Body says Celsus becomes rather the Worms than Men And what Man's Soul says he would ever desire to be re-united to a Body that is already rotten Thus a late Author to disgrace this Doctrine is pleas'd to call the Body a Load of Carrion and to compare it to course nasty Rags I shall not say in answer to Celsus that the Soul will ever desire to return to the Body purely for the Body's sake Neither are we to regard what the Soul might perhaps desire but what God has order'd to be done Were the Soul to wish without any regard to the Will and Good-pleasure of God I am apt indeed to believe she would hardly desire to be re-conjoined to her Body But neither would she wish to be in any Body whatever She would not be what she is not a Soul but a Seraphim But is the Clay to say to the Potter Why dost thou make me thus The Ambition of the Soul must stoop to the Pleasure of God Her Wishes and Desires must all con-center in the Will of her Almighty Maker and Preserver As she must be contented with that middle degree of Glory in which God has placed her so likewise she must be contented with that Collegue and Companion which he shall think fit to assign her When he shall be pleas'd to command her to return to her old Habitation tho' it were as to a Prison she must humbly and resignedly submit to his good Pleasure Behold the Handmaid of the Lord be it unto me according to thy Word But why should we imagine that the Soul when she shall be remanded to her Body will look upon herself as sent to a Prison That House which was once a Prison may be turned to a Palace and such a one too as the Owner of it would be glad to live in forever Were the wretched and disorderly House in which my Soul now lives to continue always just such as it is she would doubtless think herself happy in being sent for abroad and with reason be glad to continue always from home This Flesh in which we now live may at present be deservedly styl'd a Prison or a Burden or an Enemy or whatsoever else is not Declamation and Irreverence 'T is our Church in her Office of Burial that calls it the Burden of the Flesh And 't is the Author of Ecclesiasticus that tells us that the corruptible Flesh presseth down the Soul Such indeed is our Earthly House of this Tabernacle so foul so inconvenient and ruinous that I know not who would be very fond of it Who is there that can say It is good for us to be here I know that in my Flesh as at present it is there dwelleth no good thing We are now in a Body of Death as the Apostle himself calls it and well may we desire with the Apostle and with much more reason than he to be deliver'd from it But is this Body to be always thus constitution'd Is it always to remain this Needy and Impure this Passionate Lustful Restive Body We have hitherto look'd but on one Side of it let us now look upon it in the Reverse Immortal Incorruptible Powerfull Spiritual Celestial Glorious These are the Attributes of the Body that shall be rais'd And where is now the unworthiness of it Where is the unfitness to be made the Habitation of the Soul Was there heretofore a Law in our Members warring against the Law of our Minds Were there heretofore continual Feuas between the Flesh and the Spirit There is now a perpetual Peace Their Quarrels and Bickerings are all at an end They are now no longer Enemies but loving and faithful Friends It is not properly in the Nature of Flesh to oppose it self to the Soul and to revolt from its Duty and Subjection It is naturally Quiet and Passive and though in this Life the Wheels and Movements of the Noble Machine are sometimes disorder'd yet in the next they will all move regularly and in obedience to the Intelligence that governs it When God shall be pleas'd to raise it up out of the Grave it will drop all its Passions and Restiveness together with its Impurities and carry up nothing with it but its Natural Gentleness and a Will to be govern'd Those Traces which sensible Pleasures had imprinted on it will be all perfectly Obliterated and the new Impressions which it will receive will be truly worthy of Heaven and Eternity Had our Bodies heretofore many Infirmities Were they sickly or maim'd or crooked or old or otherwise deform'd These Infirmities and all Imperfections are now done away The Body is new-cast the Mold work'd better and the Mettal refin'd The whole Figure comes out with Vast Improvements though the same as to all the Ideal Rudiments yet a much more curious and delicate Piece of Workmanship Whatever it was heretofore it