'em unsearchable to us and as Job tells us he giveth not account of any of his Matters 'T is his part to act ours to admire and submit and as long as our Reason and our Senses are not plainly contradicted we are only to enquire What not How or Why I would fain know of those who deny the Resurrection of the same Humane Body because they do not know what use we can have of the particular Parts of such a Body in the life to come whether they deny or doubt of the Existence of all other things the Reason of which they cannot comprehend I should undertake to quiet all the Scruples of those Men and to satisfie all their queries if they would be but pleas'd to undertake to answer a few Questions of mine I could ask 'em the Reason of a hundred Things both in Nature and Divinity but to bring my Questions home to the Case before us If they will not believe that in the Life to come we shall have Humane Bodies because they cannot see to what uses our several Parts can then serve let 'em tell me to what real Uses all the Parts of our Bodies serve here in this Life By that time they are able to do that I believe I may be able to assign them the uses of the several Parts of our Bodies in the Life to come If they please to cast their Eyes down on their own Bodies they may there see certain Parts of which there is no real Use such as were bestowed on their Bodies for Resemblance Sake only Why therefore might not God give us Humane Bodies in the next Life meerly for this Reason Suppose if you please that there is no other that they that Rise may Resemble or be like those that Died or be such as they were I would ask the Etherealist a Question or two more Let him tell me for what Reason God gave us a Body here in this Life why he made us Corporeal Beings since only to have created so many Souls or Spirits might have conduced as much or for ought we can see more to His Glory and our Happiness than to make us as he has done of Body and Soul Let him tell me for what Reason we shall have in the Life to come any Body at all as he himself grants we shall have an Ethereal one since the Soul is in its own Nature and without any sort of Body Capable of Rewards and Punishments In a Word the same Reason God had for making us what we are the same he will have for making us what we shall be viz. His good Pleasure â—…om readest thou Go learn to be modest Enquire first what God has promis'd then judge of his Wisdom by his Promises I fansie my-self talking Philalethes to a bold Refiner on the Promises and Decrees of God Almighty one of those little Dothings that call themselves Philosophers who first form to themselves Notions and Idea's then deal with Revelation as the Tyrant did with the poor Innocents on his Bed either violently stretch it beyond its natural Reach or chop off a Part to make it commensurate to their Inventions This I know is what You are not guilty of You pursue the quite contrary Method As a real Lover of Truth and as becomes a true Christian Philosopher you first search the Scriptures and then the Traditions of the Primitive Church and on these agreeing together as on a sure and certain Foundation you raise and build the System of your Belief Those Doctrines which you find clearly reveal'd you do not endeavour to puzle with nice Objections and Scruples nor pervert with anyp rivate Glosses and Conceits of your own But as you find 'em so you embrace ' em You firmly believe and humbly acquiesce and leave the Contrivance and the Reasons to God Concerning the Doctrine of the Resurrection of the same Humane Body which in Obedience to your Commands I have endeavour'd to confirm and establish I shall here for the close of all add That among all the Doctrines of Christianity you understand me of such as are grounded only on Revelation there is not any one either more plainly deliver'd in Scripture or more clearly convey'd down to us by the Traditions of the Primitive Fathers or more universally receiv'd by the Catholick Church than this is 'T is indeed so clearly deliver'd down to us and so universally receiv'd that to deny it and yet at the same time profess the Christian Faith seems to imply a Contradiction He that would preach the one must likewise maintain the other We must do as St. Paul did at Athens Preach Jesus and not only the but This Resurrection FINIS * Cohort ad Grac. p. 26. * De Provid Fatâ—… ap Phot. Cod. CCXIV. a Bel. Gal. 〈◊〉 6. c. 14. b Bel. Celtico * l. 2. c. 123. †Sir Paul Ricaut of the Turkish Empire l. 2. c. 12. p. 133. * Aen. 6. v. 751. †De tempore Serm. 139 142. a De Resur c. 1. Sed Platonici immortalem animam 〈◊〉 contrario reclamant immo adhuc proxime etiam in Corpora remeabilem affirmant etsi non in eadem etsi non in humà na tantummodo ut Euphorbus in Pythagoram Homerus in Pavum recenseantur Certè recidivatum animae corporalem pronunciaverunt tolerabilius mutatâ quà m negatâ qualitate pulsatâ saltem licet non aditâ veritate Ita saeculum resurrectionem morcuorum nec quum errat ignorat b Sic etiam conditionem renascendi sapientium clariores Pythagoras primus praecipuus Plato corruptâ dimidiatâ fide tradiderunt Nam corporibus dissolutis solas animas volunt perpetuò manere in alia nova corpora saepius commeare Addunt istis illa ad retorquendam verjtatem in pecudes aves belluas hominum animas redire Non Philosophi sane studio sed mimico vitio digna ista sententia est Sed ad propositum satis est etiam in hoc sapientes vestros in aliquem modum nobiscum consonare c L. 7. c. 23. Quâ de anastasi Philosophi quoque dicere aliquid conatâ—… sunt tam corruptè quà m Poetae Nam Pythagoras transire animas in nova Corpora disputavit c. * Observ. de locis memorab in Asiâ c. †De Luctu * Orat. 5. p. 312. Orat. 7. p. 408 409. a Orat. 4. p. 289. †De praetermissis ab Homero * In Romulo * Vitâ Apollonii l. 8. c. 12. †Plutarch in Romulo Herodotus l. 4. c. 13 14 15. * l. c. †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 35. * Contra Celsum l. 5. p. 245. a Vita Pythag. p. 188. b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 * Ap. Pecock Not. in Portam Mosis p. 146. †Ap. S. Aug. de Civ XXII 28. a C. Celsum l. 5. p. 245. †P. 208. He says it was the Opinion of the Stoicks not that things should be numerically the same but only in likeness not
the Spaniards carried away many of 'em to work in the Gold Mines by persuading 'em that they should be carried away to the Seats of the Blessed where their deceas'd Ancestors were and there live among them But these things may be resolv'd into that gross Notion which those ignorant People entertain'd of the Materiality of the Soul That the Peruvians acknowledged the Resurrection of the Body before ever any Christians came into those Parts is confidently asserted by several Authors by Joh. Hugo Linschoten Honorius Philoponus Le Blanc Lerius and others and a French Writer tells us that most Authors affirm it But I fear there are few or none that speak upon their own Knowledge He whom all the rest follow is the Author of the General Hist. of India cited for it by Lerius That Historian relates That when the Spaniards rifled the Graves of the Dead for the Treasures that were wont to be buried with 'em and carelesly threw about their Bones the Peruvians entreated them not to scatter the Bones of the Dead lest it should hinder their Resurrection This is very plain and express But I cannot I confess but doubt of the truth of it For I find that Josephus Acosta a very good Author expresly asserts the quite contrary That tho' the Peruvians held the Immortality of the Soul and that the Good are rewarded after Death and the Wicked punished yet they were not come to the knowledge of that Point that the Bodies shall rise and be again united to their Souls Neither do I find any thing concerning the Resurrection in the large Royal Commentaries of the Inca Garcilasso You see Philalethes I am not willing to abuse you by imposing upon you an Argument which I think I have reason to doubt of And moreover I must tell ye that it is not improbable but that there may be some others amongst the Modern Instances which I have laid before you as particularly that of the Virginians that hereafter may be found to be grounded on Mistakes The truth is the First Authors of Reports of this nature are oftentimes such as are either too Ignorant of the Language of those whose Opinions they give an Account of to understand 'em aright or not sufficiently Knowing and Judicious to distinguish rightly one Opinion from another But upon the whole if you please to reflect on all that has been hitherto said and consider all things together I am of Opinion you will be very apt to lay down this Proposition at the Foot of the Account That the Doctrine of the Resurrection as we now understand it is an old Universal Doctrine deriv'd down from Noah and grounded on the more ancient Revelations of the Antediluvian Patriarchs But why deriv'd down from Noah Why grounded perhaps you may ask on the ancient Revelations of the Antediluvian Patriarchs Might not the Heathens receive this Notion from the Jews I know many Modern Writers and some of the Ancients who contend that the Doctrine of the Resurrection was in some measure known to the Gentiles give this account of it that they learnt it of the Jews by reading the Scriptures or by conversing with some of that Nation But I leave it to your serious Judgment whether this Account which I have given you of it be not much more probable How could so many different Nations Nations so Ancient and so remote from Judaea receive this Doctrine or their broken Traditions concerning it from the Jews I could offer you many Arguments and I think pretty good ones to confute that common and ill-grounded Opinion That most of those Notions in which the Ancient Heathens agreed with the Jews were borrowed from them But this is not a proper time for it Are you apt to suspect that the Notices of the Resurrection which we find among the Heathens of these present Times were received from the Missionaries which the Church of Rome has of latesent abroad into the several Parts of the World I must needs say that if I know any thing of these Matters I know that that could not be Will you say they were received from some Christians or Mahometans who in former times arriv'd in those Countries This I grant may be true of some of ' em But if you consider that before the times of Christianity there were manifest Foot-steps of this Doctrine to be found amongst the Heathens in divers Parts of the World as well as in these Days and that the ancient Magi of the East did plainly assert it as you will be forced to acknowledge that the whole cannot be accounted for that way so I think it will seem very probable that the present Heathens themselves are beholding to their first Ancestors and not to any Christians or Mahometans for what they know concerning it I take no notice of another Opinion very common amongst the Fathers That the Doctrine of the Resurrection may be learnt from Natural Reason I should be very glad to have it well prov'd that the Doctrine of the Resurrection might be discover'd to those Heathens of whom we have spoken by that light of Nature But for my part I utterly despair of it I know of no Natural Reason no light of Nature so bright and shining as to discover this Mystery and have therefore purposely forborn to make use of any of those Arguments which the Fathers and some of our Modern Writers are wont to produce from it I look on this Doctrine as one of those that could never be discovered but by an extraordinary Revelation Should God be pleas'd to ask me as he did the Prophet Son of Man can these dry Bones live I can only appeal to him for the truth of it and must humbly answer in the Prophet's Words Lord God thou knowest I shall conclude this Argument with a Testimony of a St. Peter which confirms the Notion which we have advanc'd He affirms That the Resurrection was foretold by the Prophets from the very beginning of the World The Heavens says he must receive Christ untill the time of the Restitution of all things Of which God hath spoken by the Mouth of his Holy Prophets 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 since the World began or from the beginning of the World These Traditions preserv'd among the Heathens I have placed here in the first Station as an Out-guard upon my Main Force the Authorities of Scripture which contains the same Tradition of the Resurrection derived down first from Noah and again confirmed and ratified anew by other Revelations I shall now in the next place draw this out and give you a full view of it I begin with the Testimonies of the Old Testament and the Common Opinion of the ancient Jews 'T is confidently asserted by Menasseh Ben Israel that the Doctrine of the Resurrection was always so receiv'd by the Ancient Jews as that any one that denied it was rejected out of number of the Israelites But this is an Assertion
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
all imaginable opposition contend against it says the Author of the Questions and Answers ad Graecos Thus St. Austin affirms that there was nothing in the Christian Religion so vehemently so pertinaciously and with so much contention and earnestness opposed as the Resurrection of the Flesh. Of the Immortality of the Soul says he many of the Heathen Philosophers have discoursed at large And in very many of their Writings they assert it But when they come to the Doctrine of the Resurrection of the Flesh they do not so much as hesitate about it but vehemently oppose it and they say that 't is impossible that this earthly Flesh should ascend up into Heaven Pliny affirms that 't is beyond the Power even of God himself to raise up a Body to life when once it is dead And 't is Madness to him to believe there will be any such thing To Celsus this Doctrine seem'd abominable or worthy to be spit at as extremly impure St. Cyril of Alexandria tells us that the Emperor Julian derided this above all the Tenets of the Christians They mock'd at it says the author of the Apostolical Constitutions And Origen says it was a common subject of Laughter Cecilius in Minucius Felix calls it an old Wife's Tale. And Tatian assures us that the Heathens were wont to look upon the Christians as pitiful Triflers and Bablers for asserting it My conclusion is this That if the Doctrine of the Identity or Resurrection of the very same Body had not been lookt upon in those Primitive Times as firmly establish'd on the Authority of Christ and his Apostles if it had been look'd upon only as a Scholastical Doctrine or a Dogma that might be dispensed with those learned and acute Men of whom we speak when converted from their Heathenism would never have embraced it as I have proved they did In the Second place it is worthy to be observ'd that those Books out of which I have taken their Testimonies were many of 'em written professedly in Answer to the Objections of the Heathen Philosophers And if the Doctrine of a new Ethereal Body which Origen afterwards made bold to advance could have been warranted by the Scripture and the Traditions of the Apostles how gladly would those Fathers have taken hold of it That the Soul is never without an Ethereal Body was as we have already observ'd a common Opinion of the Greek Philosophers Now how easie had it been for those Fathers to answer all the Cavils and Objections and Flouts of their insulting Adversaries by proposing this Notion How easie had it been to remove that great Stumbling-Block which lay in their way to Christianity They were too learned and too acute Philosophers not to think on it but they knew it was not agreeable to the Doctrine deliver'd to the Saints Perhaps it may be alledged that the Reason why the Primitive Fathers believ'd the Resurrection of the same Humane Body was because they believ'd that after the Resurrection Christ is to come upon Earth and the Saints are to abide with him here a Thousand Years Perchance you may be apt to suspect that this was the chief Foundation of that gross Notion which they so generally entertain'd of the rising Body To remove such a Suspicion as that is I need only tell you that not only the Patrons of the Millennarian Doctrine but such also as rejected that Doctrine asserted the Resurrection of the same Humane Body Tho' many of those ancients whose Authorities we have produced asserted the Millennium such as Papias the Author of the Sibylline Oracles Justin M. Irenâ—…us Tertullian and Hippolytus Yet others there are amongst 'em that did not embrace that Doctrine It does not at all appear that either St. Clement of Rome or St. Ignatius or Theophilus of Antioch or Tatian or Minucius Felix were asserters of it On the contrary it appears that the wise and learned Athenagoras did not believe it I observe that he asserts that after the Resurrection there will be no such Things as Inanimate Beings which is plainly repugnant to the Doctrine of the Millennium In his Discourse of the Resurrection he argues after this Manner If God says he is unwilling to raise the Dead it is either because it is Unjust or because it is Unworthy But it is not Unjust for if it be so it must be an Injury either to those that are rais'd or to some other being It cannot be an Injury to any other Being For Intellectual Beings or Angels are not at all damnified by it neither can it be an Injury to Irrational or Inanimate Beings For after the Resurrection there will be no such Beings And to that which is not there can be no Injury done But admit that there should be such things then in being yet the Resurrection of Mankind would be to them no Injury c. Neither was Clemens Alexandrinus an asserter of the Millenium I know it is suspected by some learned Men that he was But that he was not I gather from a place in his Treatise concerning the Salvability of Rich Men. He was made says he speaking of the young-Man re-converted by St. John a Trophy of the Resurrection that is hoped for when in the end of the World the Angels shall carry up those who are truly Penitent to the Supercelestial Habitations I have now done with my History and Proofs of the Doctrine of the Resurrection And by this time I hope you are so well satisfied of the Truth and certainty of it as to be ready to ask me that Question of St. Paul How say some among You that there is no Resurrection The fourth and last thing I propos'd to do was to answer the Objections of such as say there will be no Resurrection And this I shall now in the next place endeavour to do The First Objection is taken from the Difficulty of it There are not only many Men whom Necessity and Famine have forc'd to devour one another but there are many whole Nations in the World that are wont to feed ordinarily on Humane Flesh. You may add that we are all in some sense Canibals and Man-eaters we devour one another we eat our dead Neighbours our Brothers our Fathers the succeeding Generation swallows down the former though we prey not upon 'em in the same manner as some other Canibals do yet by a subtle Cookery of Nature we eat 'em at second Hand This is true in some Measure From the Bodies of the Dead springs up Grass this when eaten by the Ox is turn'd into Flesh this we eat and the Flesh of the Ox becomes ours Plutarch tells us that when the Cimbrians were defeated by Marius there fell so great a Number of 'em that the whole Field was dung'd as one may say with their dead Bodies and afforded the next Season an extraordinary rich and plentiful Crop Others tell us of a certain Roman who