Habitation of Men. There was no Mansion proper for Men none sufficiently suited to their Nature till Christ ascended up thither in his Body He then created one proper for the reception of his own Humane Nature and for the Habitation of our Bodies This I take to be that New Earth or Habitable Orb which is spoken of by St. Peter and St. John There Christ at present remains from thence as he says he will come to judge this World and the Good he will carry up with him to live there for ever in unspeakable Happiness I know that St. John seems to intimate that that new Earth which he speaks of is not in Heaven For he says that the New Jerusalem came down on that Earth from Heaven But we ought not to understand the Descriptions contain'd in the Revelations too strictly By the New Jerusalem coming down from Heaven on that new Earth he seems to mean only this that in that new Earth the Throne of God or his most especial Presence will be among Men. I leave these things to your Consideration and proceed to The Fifth and last Objection which is concerning the uselessness of a Humane Body in the next Life and the unnecessariness of raising up the same that died Our Adversaries perhaps are willing to grant that there is no impossibility in the Resurrection and that the Body being purified and exalted to the highest degree of Humane Perfection may be worthy of the Heavenly Mansions But however say they it is not agreeable to the Divine Wisdom to raise up the same Humane Body Why not Why he acts says the Etherealist in all things wisely and for some end But to what purpose should he raise up the same Body when a new one will serve as well and to what purpose should he again invest the Soul with a Humane Body when the several Parts of it are useless In answer to this it s commonly alledged that the same Humane Body must rise again and be united to the Soul that together with the Soul it may be either rewarded or punish'd for the Good or Evil we did in this Life It would be Injustice they say for God to punish or reward the Soul alone for what it did not alone but together with the Body This Argument is commonly made use of not only by the School-men and other Modern Divines but by almost all the Ancients Athenagoras Tertullian Greg. Nazianzen St. Chrysostom the Author of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy Epiphanius St. Ambrose Theodoret Aeneas Gazaeus Johannes Damascenus Nilus Photius and several others of the ancient Greeks and Latins They all agree that God is obliged in Justice to reward or punish the Body together with the Soul The same is asserted in one place which I have produced by Origen himself And this is the reason assigned for the Resurrection by the Talmudists in the Tract Sanhedrin I desire as much as any Man to pay a just Deference and Regard to the Judgments of the ancient Fathers But it must be confes'd that tho' their Authority be great in Matters of Tradition yet the Reasons and Arguments which they produce to confirm their Doctrines are not always convincing If we seriously and impartially consider this Assertion we shall find it not to be true My reasons in short are these First To speak properly the Body is not capable either of sinning or doing well It is only the Instrument of the Soul And the Arm that stabs sins no more than the Sword 'T is the Soul only that is the Murderer Neither Secondly is the Body capable of any Reward or Punishment 'T is the Soul only that is sensible and nothing but what is sensible can be capable of Rewards and Punishments Thirdly If it be Injustice in God to punish the Soul alone without the Body in conjunction with which she committed the Sin then all the Matter which constituted the Body when the several Sins were committed must be rais'd again and be re-united to the Soul For if some why not all But what Monsters of Men should we be in the Resurrection if all the Substance of which our Bodies consisted from our Childhood to our Deaths should be gather'd together and form'd into a Body 'T was the Opinion of some of the ancient Hereticks That the Souls of Men Die and are dissolv'd together with the Body and revive and rise again with it in the Resurrection Which Opinion supposes the Soul to be material as well as the Body which many of the ancient Christians who were not look'd upon as Heretical believ'd Eusebius tells us of certain Christians of Arabia in the Third Century who advanc'd and taught this Opinion concerning the Soul's Dissolution and Resurrection and that it was condemn'd by a Synod there call'd on purpose in which Origen was present by whom he says they that maintain'd it were re-converted Gilbertus Gaulminus in his Notes on the Book De vitâ morte Mosis says that the Arabick Historians ascribe this Opinion that the Soul dies together with the Body to Origen himself But that Origen did not hold that Opinion appears very evidently from a Hundred places in his Works Tatianus who was Scholar to Justin M. and lived before these times tho' he held that the Souls of the Good do not die together with the Body yet he asserts that those of the Wicked do and that being dissolv'd they are rais'd up again together with the Body in the Day of Judgment There were others who maintain'd that the Soul tho' it does not properly die together with the Body yet after its separation from the Body it sleeps as it were and remains altogether insensible That it is not capable of any perception without the concurrence of an Organical Body These are call'd Psychopannychites St. Maximus speaks of this as a prevailing Opinion in his time which was about the middle of the Seventh Century We are told by some but I think untruly that P. John XXII maintain'd it Stephanus Gobarus speaks of some who maintain'd that the Soul never leaves the Body but remains always in it and is buried together with it and is raised up with it in the Resurrection Whether these maintain'd that it properly dies and is dissolv'd or that it only remains insensible he does not say Tertullian himself tho' in other places he asserts the sensibility of separated Souls and that of it-self it is capable of Rewards and Punishments and is actually in some measure rewarded or tormented before the Resurrection yet in his Apology against the Heathens he expresly affirms that the Soul is not capable of suffering at all but in union with the Flesh and that that is one Reason why the Flesh is to rise Again in his Book de Testimonio Animae To enjoy everlasting Happiness or to sustain everlasting Torments it is necessary that thou
THE Resurrection OF The same Body ASSERTED FROM The Traditions of the Heathens the Ancient Jews and the Primitive Church WITH An ANSWER to the OBJECTIONS brought against it By HUMPHRY HODY D. D. Fellow of Wadham College in Oxford and Chaplain to His Grace JOHN Lord Arch-Bishop of Canterbury Non enim levia sunt illa de quibus contendimus sed ejusmodi ut illa scire praestantius sit ignorare turpissimum St. Methodius de Resurrectione LONDON Printed for Awnsham and John Churchill at the Black-Swan in Pater-Noster-Row 1694. REVERENDO ADMODUM IN CHRISTO PATRI AC PRAESULI Edvardo Stillingfleet Grandi Nomini HISTORIAM HANC Resurrectionis Corporis Sacellanus nuper semper Cultor Ejus Devotissimus HUMFREDUS HODY D. D. C. TO THE READER THis Treatise contains a History of the Resurrection of the Body The Grand Design of it is to prove the Doctrine of the Resurrection of the same Humane Body to be the Doctrine of the Gospel If that be prov'd the Truth of it is sufficiently demonstrated and that is all the Author desires should be granted him What he lays down concerning the Heathens and Jews and that which he advances concerning the Resurrection its being once a General Doctrine deriv'd down from Noah and the Ante-diluvian Patriarchs all that is ex abundanti and design'd only for the more Curious There is one thing more which he bad me say and that is this That he treads not in any Man's Steps but the Entertainment which he has here prepared for thee is wholly and in all its Parts new at least his own May â—…6 1694. THE CONTENTS PART I. Concerning the Opinions of the Heathens That they held many Opinions which were grounded on a Tradition concerning the Resurrection and that some of them hold the Resurrection in the true Christian Sense THeir gross Notions concerning the Soul in its state of separation that it has all the same Parts that the Body has p. 3. A Mistake of St. Justin Martyr p. 4. Their Opinion concerning the Transmigration of Souls p. 6. Their Opinion concerning the duration of the Soul as long as the Body lasted and its adherence to the Body after Death p. 11. They believe thâ—… some Men have aâ—…cended up into Heaven in their Bodies there to live for ever p. 13. That others have done so even after Death upon a Re union of their Souls and Bodies p. 15. The Opinion of the Pythagoreans and Platonists c. concerning the Restitution of our Bodies and of all other things in the World to their former state after the revolution of maâ—…y Ages by a new Birth or production p. 16. The Opinion of some of the Genethliacal Writers that the Soul returns and is united to the same Body in the space of 440 Years p. 20. The Opinion of the Stoicks concerning the reproduction of all the same Men c. after the general Conflagration p. 20. That Democritus asserted the Resurrection Epicurus's Opinion concerning the restauration of the very same Bodies after a great space of time p. 26. Merick Casaubon's Mistake concerning the Opinion of the Emperor M. Antoninus p. 23. The Resurrection asserted in the same sense as we understand it by the ancient Magi and by the present Heathen Gaurs of Persia the Relicts of the ancient Magi p. 29. By some of the ancient Arabians p. 31. By some of the Banians of India p. 33. By the present Inhabitants of the Island of Ceylon p. 36. Of Java p. 37. Of Pegu p. 37. Of Transiana p. 37. By some amongst the Chinese p. 37. By the Arderians in Guinnee p. 45. And by the ancient Prussians p. 45. These Traditions concerning the Resurrection not receiv'd from the Jews but transmitted down from Noah and the Ante-diluvian Patriarohs p. 49. PART II. Concerning the Opinions of the ancient Jews p. 53. to 107. THE Doctrine of the Resurrection no Article of Faith or Term of Communion among them 'till about 100 Years after Christ p. 53. c. Not own'd by the Essens p. 54. nor by Philo p. 56. yet the common and general Doctrine long before that time p. 64. Their not making it a Term of Communion no Argument against the certainty of it The Soul's Immortality it self no Term of the Jewish Communion in those times The Sadduces own'd as true Jews p. 89. The Opinion of Josephus p. 66. Of the Sapientes Mecar p. 60. the Hemero-Baptists p. 61. and the Samaritans p. 62. They that held the Resurrection understood it to be of the same Humane Body The Opinion of some of the Jews concerning the passing of their Bodies under-ground to the Holy Land and their Custom of carrying the Bones of their Dead thither p. 70. The Transmigration of Souls held by many of the Jews p. 78. and by some of the Pharisees in the time of Josephus p. 81. Whether held by any in our Saviour's time p. 82. They that own the Transmigration acknowledge withal a Resurrection p. 87. Testimonies for the Resurrection out of the Old Testament p. 96. PART III. Concerning the Doctrine of the Primitive Church THE Resurrection of the same Humane Body demonstrated from the New Testament p. 107 c. and from the Doctrine of the Primitive Writers which flourish'd before the time of Origen such as St. Clement of Rome p. 133. Justin M. p. 141. Irenaeus p. 142. Athenagoras p. 143. Theophilus of Antioch p. 144. The Churches of Lions and Vienna p. 144. Clemens Alex. p. 145. Tertullian p. 145. and others And from the Creeds of the Primitive Church and others in several Ages p. 171. The Inconsistences and Contradictions of Origen p. 108 109 152 to 168. That he himself in some places of his Works own'd the Resurrâ—…ction of the same Humane Body p. 152. That the Primitive Fathers would never have embraced the Doctrine of the Resurrection of the same humane Body if it had not been evidently Apostolical 180. PART IV. Objections answer'd The Qualities of the Body in the Resurrection The Reason why it is to rise p. 184 c. The principal Errata are these PAge 9. Line 17. for their Souls read the Soul p. 23. l. 22. r. Merick p. 30. l. 12. r. Years which Ibid l. 9. r. Guebres p. 53. l. 8. r. of the number p. 58. l. 25. r. will free p. 59. l. 9. r. dissolution p. 93. l. 12. for Rights 〈◊〉 Rites p. 100. l. 9. r. unwilling Ibid l. 15. r. do not conâ—…in p. 109. l. 1. r. represent p. 171. l. 24. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from St. Austin The Resurrection of the same Body asserted THE Resurrection is defin'd by Maimonides to be The return of the Soul into the same Body from which it had been separated and agreeable to this Definition the Catholick Faith spread throughout the whole Christian World is this That the same Body which died consisting of the same Particles shall rise again out of its Grave in the Day of Judgment and be re-united to the Soul But
Origen heretofore as you rightly observe my dear Philalethes and some other late Opinionists have been pleased to advance another Notion That the Body to which the Soul shall be united in the next Life shall not be a Human Body but a thin and Etherial one and that too consisting of new Particles In asserting the truth of the Catholick Doctrine the Task you are pleased to impose on me I shall use all possible Plainness and observe this Method I. I shall shew it to be probable from the Traditions even of the Heathens themselves convey'd down to 'em from Noah and his Posterity II. I shall prove it from the Authority of the Old Testament and the Traditions of the Ancient Jews and shew it from thence to be if not certain yet more than probable III. I shall demonstrate it from the Authority of the New Testament and the Unanimous consent of the Primitive Church before the time of Origen and prove it from thence tobe certain IV. I shall answer the Objections rais'd against it To pretend to make out the Probability of the Doctrine of the Resurrection from the Opinions and Traditions of the Heathens may seem perhaps a very vain Attempt But it is no more than what many of the Ancients have endeavour'd to do and Photius mentions an Author who published a large Work in Fifteen Books to prove That the Doctrine of the Resurrection with other Christian Doctrines was own'd by many of the Gentiles The several â—…tions whose Opinions that Author produced were as Photius tells us the Greeks Persians Thracians Egyptians Babylonians Chaldaeans and Italians What success either He or any other Author that attempted the same might meet with I am not concern'd to enquire but I think I shall be able to shew that many of the Notions and Opinions of the Heathens were grounded on a Tradition concerning the Resurrection nay that many of the Heathens in Ancient Times acknowledged it and that many of 'em do so to this Day I shall first lay before you some Opinions embraced by the Heathens which I think carry with them no small resemblance of the Doctrine of the Resurrection And in the Second place shall present you with others which plainly express it The first Opinion which I shall take notice of is concerning the Human Shape and Actions attributed to the Soul in its State of Separation It was anciently the common and receiv'd Opinion of the Gentiles and so it is at this time throughout the whole Heathen World That the Soul or Manes which remain after Death has a perfect Human Shape and all the same Parts both External and Internal that the Body has and that when it leaves the Body it Eats and Drinks and does all the same things that a living Man does Now from whence can we imagine this odd Opinion should arise and be so generally propagated all over the World I shall leave it to be considered by you whether it were not grounded on an Ancient Tradition That the Soul after Death shall be united to a Human Body Justin Martyr to prove that the Doctrine of the Resurrection was known to Homer produces his description of Tityus's Punishment after Death and what he says of the Punishments of Sisyphus and Tantalus Their Punishments says he suppose not a Soul only but also a Body The same sort of Argument he makes use of to prove that Plato held the same Doctrine He observes that Plato in the Story which he relates concerning Eris speaks of those that were punished in Hell as of Men compounded of Body and Soul with the same Parts and Countenances which they had when living here on Earth that he makes Aridaeus and other Tyrants to be bound Neck and Heels and to be Flea'd and then to be drag'd through Thorns and Briars Now says he for Plato to say that the Soul is judged with the Body can signify nothing else but that he believ'd the Doctrine of the Resurrection For how could Aridaeus and the rest be punished after that manner in Hell if they had left their Bodies their Heads Hands and Feet on Earth Sure they will not say that the Soul has a Head a Skin and Hands and Feet But this is a Mistake of that excellent Person The Reason why the Heathens described the Punishments of the Damn'd after this manner was not because they thought that their Bodies were not left here on Earth but partly because it was the vulgar Opinion that the Soul had all the same Parts that the Body has and partly because such Descriptions do more easily move and affect us and it is not easy to describe the Torments of the Soul after any other manner Our Lord in the Parable of Dives and Lazarus speaks of them in the same manner as if they had Bodies tho' what is related of 'em is supposed to be before the Resurrection and their Bodies are suppos'd to be yet in their Graves I might mention others of the Ancient Christians that have made use of Arguments of the like nature but it is not my Business to confute those who have written for the Resurrection I shall therefore pass them by From what has been said concerning our Saviour's speaking of the Soul of Lazarus as if it had a Body tho' he did not believe it had you may possibly imagine that the Heathens did not really believe that the Soul has all the Parts of a Human Body though they are wont to speak of it as if they believ'd it But it evidently and undeniably appears that that was and is at this time their real Opinion Hence the Custom so general in the World of leaving Meat and Drink on the Graves of the Dead and of burying together with the dead Bodies all sorts of Utensils Houshold-Stuff and Weapons which they think the Soul will make use of in the next Life Hence also the Custom in so many Countries of putting to Death the Wives and Slaves of the deceased that they may wait upon 'em and serve in the same Capacities in the other World For Brevity sake I am content to seem a little Immodest and to take it for granted that you believe I can prove what I have asserted The Second Opinion that deserves to be consider'd is that of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Transmigration of Souls out of one Body into another 'T was you know the Opinion not only of the Pythagoreans and Platonists and some of the Stoicks amongst the Greeks but of many whole Nations of the ancient Gentiles and 't is still the received Opinion of the greatest part of the Eastern Heathens and of many other Countries in divers parts of the World that when a Man dies his Soul passes into another Body either the Body of a Man or of some other Creature Now on what could this Opinion be grounded but on some broken and imperfect Tradition concerning the Resurrection of our Bodies How came so strange an Opinion to obtain in so
but an old Tradition concerning our future Resurrection a little alter'd by the dropping of a part of it as it passed in a long series of time through the Mouths of several Persons It appears from the Testimony of R. Abraham Bar Chaia cited by Abarbinel that this same Opinion concerning the Restitution of all things to their former State after the return of the Planets to their former Configuration was likewise received by many of the Philosophers of India Some of 'em held that this should happen after the Term of 4320000 Years other assign'd 360000 Years others 49000 others 36000 others 12000 others 7000 And Bar Châ—…ia declares that he thinks they form'd this Notion from the Tradition which they had received from their Ancestors concerning the Resurrection M. Varro the great Roman Writer in the Books which he publish'd De Gente Populi Romani speaks of certain Authors whom he calls Genethliaci whose Opinion it was that the Soul returns and is united to the very same Body to which it had been formerly conjoyn'd by a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the space of 440 years His Words are these Genethliaci quidam scripserunt esse in renascendis hominibus quam appellant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Graeci hanc scripserunt confici in annis numero quadringentis quadraginta ut idem Corpus cadem anima quae fuerant conjuncta in homine aliquando eadem rursus redeant in conjunctionem Amongst others even of the Greek Philosophers we find this Tradition preserv'd more entire The Stoicks though they look'd upon the Doctrine of the Resurrection as preach'd by St. Paul at Athens to be nothing but Babble yet they themselves as least some of 'em tell us all the same things that the Egyptians but now mention'd and the Pythagoreans and the Platonists taught But in this they come up nearer to us that they do not make the World Eternal but say as we do that the World shall be destroy'd by Fire and that this Resurrection or Restitution of all things shall be after the general Conflagration My Author for this is first of all Origen and he a very good one in these Matters who observes not without good Reason that tho they did not call it by the Name of a Resurrection yet the Thing was the same The Stoicks says he hold that after a certain revolution of Time the Universe will be destroy'd by a Conflagration and that immediately upon it all things will be restored to what they were before without any manner of Change But there are some amongst 'em that do not come up altogether to this Opinion and They hold that there will be some small Alteration and for some short Time These Men tell us that after the Conflagration Socrates for Example shall be born again an Athenian the Son of Sophroniscus and Phenarete And therefore tho' they do not call it by the Name of a Resurrection yet they mean the same Thing He shall be bred up say they at Athens and shall teach Philosophy there as before So that Philosophy it self is as it were to rise again and be in the same State as formerly Anytus and Melitus shall rise again and be Socrates 's Accusers and the Council of the Areopagites shall condemn him And what is more ridiculous than all this Socrates is to wear the same Cloths that he did before live in the same Poverty and with all the same Circumstances So Phalaris shall again play the Tyrant and torment the same Persons in his Brazen Bull. And Alexander the Pherean shall exercise his Cruelty on the same Persons that he did heretofore Tatianus mentions the same Opinion of Zeno that the World shall be renewed by a Conflagration that the same Men shall rise and do the very same Things Anytus and Melitus shall accuse Socrates again Busiris murder his Guests Hercules undergoe the same Labours c. Lactantius produces these Words of Chrysippus whom Cicero stiles the Prop of the Porch of the Stoicks out of his Book of Providence This being so it is manifâ—…st that it is not at all impossible but that after a certain revolution of Time even We may be restored from Death to what we now are The Philosopher Numenius calls it in express Terms a Resurrection 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. That Resurrection which makes that which is call'd the greatest Year This Opinion of the Stoicks concerning the Renovation of things after the Conflagation is mention'd by many others as by Tully Philo Judeus Justin Martyr Athenagoras Clemens Alexandrinus c. The Emperor M. Antoninus who was chiefly addicted to the Sect of the Stoicks writes doubtingly concerning the Life to come to this purpose How comes it to pass says he That the Gods who have order'd all things well and with singular love towards Mankind have neglected this one thing to take care that Men especially the Good and those who maintain'd as it were a frequent Correspondence with 'em and by their pious Works and holy Offices contracted a kind of familiarity with 'em that those Men when once they are dead do no longer exist but are extinct for ever 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If it be so the reason you must know is because it ought not to be otherwise This Place the learned Merich Casaubon understands so as if it had respect to the Resurrection of the Body in the true Christian Sense and the Words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he renders thus should never be restored to Life That Antoninus says he intends it of the Body for the Soul if not immortal yet that it remain'd a long time after Death they believ'd not of the Body alone but of the Body and Soul to be join'd again into one and the same Person may appear because he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as soon as ever dead 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to be restored to Life again to wit the Man consisting though not a precise Stoick in that of Body and Soul for ever That the Emperor intended such a Resurrection he further confirms by another Passage in his Book where he says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 You will easily be persuaded that I am not at all prejudiced against this Opinion of that learned Man But let Truth prevail above all things It must be confess'd that he did not understand Antoninus's meaning and that he was mistaken in two Respects 1. If Antoninus had intended a Resurrection he ought to have been understood only of such a Resurrection as I have shewn the Stoicks generally believ'd 2. It is not true that he intended a Resurrection in any Sense In this last place he only alludes to that Opinion which the Stoicks commonly taught not asserts it And in the other Place he only speaks of the duration of the Soul after Death of which he himself doubted It must be acknowledged that that Philosopher had too mean an Opinion of
which I cannot undertake to defend On the contrary it must be confess'd that among the Ancient Jews there were many that did not ac-acknowledge it who were lookt upon nevertheless as true Israelites 'T will be worth our while to enquire into this matter and the love of Truth which has all along been and I hope will always be my Guide obliges me to do it I shall shew 1. That it was not always receiv'd among the Jews as a necessary Article of Faith or term of Communion and who they were that did not acknowledge it 2. That tho' there were some amongst 'em that did not acknowledge it and it was not always lookt upon as a necessary Article of Faith yet it was the common and receiv'd Opinion of that Nation about the time of our Saviour as well before as after 3. That the Doctrine of the Immortality of the Soul was not receiv'd among the Jews of those times as a necessary Article of Faith or Term of Communion From whence it follows that the Doctrine of the Resurrection is not therefore the less certain because it was not always lookt upon by the Jews as a necessary Article of Faith 4. I shall shew that the Doctrine of the Resurrection is plainly alluded to in the Prophecies of the Old Testament and by them confirm'd First That the Doctrine of the Resurrection was not always receiv'd among the Jews as a necessary Article of Faith or Term of Communion will appear from some of the following Examples of such as did not acknowledge it 1. The Essens a famous Sect among the Jews consisting of no less than about 4000 in number That they did not acknowledge a Resurrection nor the re-union of the Soul with any kind of Body may be easily gather'd from that account which Josephus gives us of their Doctrines concerning the Soul In his Second Book of the Jewish War where he speaks very largely of 'em having taken an occasion to speak of their being tormented by some of the Roman Soldiers In the midst says he of their sufferings they smil'd and laughing at them that inflicted their Torments they gave up their Souls with a great deal of Constancy and Chearfulness as Men that expected to recover 'em again This last Expression may seem to intimate that they expected that their Souls would be again united to their Bodies but from that which follows it appears that our Author's meaning was otherwise For they have says he a most certain Opinion amongst 'em that their Bodies indeed are corruptible and that their Matter shall not be perpetual but that their Souls shall always have a being that coming from out of the subtle Ether they are drawn down into their Bodies by a natural sort of Attraction and there are detain'd as it were in Prisons but when they are freed from the bonds of Flesh as it were from a long Enslavement with a great deal of Joy they â—…ee away on high And as for good Souls they agree with the Greeks that they dwell beyond the Ocean in a perfect enjoyment of Happiness in a Country free from all kind of Grievance from Showers Snows and Heats made insinitely pleasant by the Western Gales arising out of the Ocean But as for the Souls of the Wicked they are sent into certain Places expos'd to Cold and Tempests there to remain in everlasting Misery and Torment Josephus tells us that in his Youth he had made it his Business to enquire into the Doctrines of the Particular Sects the Essens the Sadduces and the Pharisees and to learn their Customs and Ways of living being conversant amongst 'em with great perseverance and application that having inform'd himself of their several Rules and Placits he might adhere to that Sect which should please him best It is therefore evident that he could not be ignorant of the true Opinion of the Essens And this we must of necessity grant that those Essens at least with whom he had Convers'd profess'd the aforesaid Opinion It is not enough to say that Josephus was a Court-Writer and likely to misrepresent their Opinions that they might seem to agree with the Greeks and Romans among whom he liv'd For that the aforesaid Opinion might be really the Opinion of the Essens will appear very probable from the next Example which is that of Philo Judaeus Secondly That Philo the famous Jew who liv'd in the Time of the Apostles and is call'd by his Country-Man Josephus a Man every way Glorious and was in his own Time so highly esteem'd by the Jews of Alexandria where he liv'd as to be sent their chief Embassador to Rome to defend their Cause against their Enemies that he did not own the Resurrection of the Body or that the Soul is hereafter to be united for ever to another Body is from many places of his Works undeniably evident It is certain that according to the Doctrine of Plato he look'd on the Body as the Prison of the Soul and he expresly asserts that the purer Sorts of Souls do fly from the Body as their Gaol and live for ever in a State of Separation If on any account it be true what was commonly said of him by the Greeks it is chiefly so in relation to the Soul Either Plato Philonizes or Philo Platonizes either Plato learn'd his Philosophy of the Jews or else Philo was a Follower of Plato The last is the truth Let us hear now what Philo says In his Book Concerning Dreams his Philosophy is this 〈◊〉 That the Air between the surface of the Earth and the Concave of the Moon is the place of the Habitation of Souls which are there innumerable Of these there are some which descend to be join'd and united to mortal Bodies as many as are nearer to the Earth and desirous of union with ' em After the time of separation assign'd by Nature and their return again up into the Air there are some still retain a desire of Life and re-union and these are again united to a Body by a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but others are weary of the vanity of Life and flee from the Body as a Grave or a Prison and nimbly flying into the upper Regions of the Ether there fix their Abode and Habitation In another place of the same Book having cited those Words which God spake to Jacob in his Dream And behold I am with thee and will keep thee in all places whither thou goest and will bring thee again into this Land For I will not leave thee until I have done that which I have spoken to thee of On those Words And I will bring thee again into this Land according to his allegorizing way he thus Comments This Place says he is perhaps to be understood of the Immortality of the Soul for the Soul having left its Heavenly Place and Travelling into the Body the Father promises it that he will not
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
Resurrection shall not be the same Humane Body as you imagine but a new one and of a quite different kind 4. It manifestly appears from this obstinate unbelief of some in that Church that they did not understand St. Paul of a new Ethereal Body That the Soul after Death is invested with an Ethereal Body was the common and receiv'd Opinion of the Greeks themselves the Pythagoreans and the Platonists And though they commonly believ'd that the Soul has an Ethereal Body or Vehicle in its state of Prae-existence and that it retains the same even whilst it is united to the Humane Body and also after Death yet they did not think it necessary that it should always be invested with the same which it had before its separation from the Humane Body Plato asserts that The Soul will always have a Body but sometimes of one Kind and sometimes of another And Porphyry affirms that according as the Soul is affected so it assumes a Body suitable to its present Condition that being thoroughly purged it assumes a Body of the purest Sort the next in degree to Immateriality And with that according to his Philosophy it lives for ever in Heaven The Conclusion is that if the Apostles had intended not the same Body that died but another Ethereal One 't is impossible that their Doctrine should meet with so great Opposition as it did Was this the Doctrine that the Corinthians could not believe Could that which their own Philosophers had taught 'em seem so strange and incredible a Thing when preach'd by the Apostles It is plain from St. Paul that the Corinthians to whom he wrote thought the Resurrection a strange and incredible Thing and after they had receiv'd St. Paul's Epistle they still continued to think it so They still thought it as is evident from what St. Clement answers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 strange and wonderful Thing Was the Union of the Soul to an Ethereal Body after Death so strange and wonderful a Thing to the Corinthians that they could not believe St. Paul but forced St. Clement to write again and again to 'em to convince ' em Was it for this that St. Clement to convince 'em was forc'd to insist so much on the Almighty Power of God If the Epistle ad Tarsenâ—…es were genuine to St. Clement we might add St. Ignatius who was constituted Bishop of Antioch by the Apostles themselves In that Epistle they who assert that this flesh is not to rise are reckon'd amongst the Ministers of Satan But since that Epistle is spurioâ—…s we must pass by Him unless you will grant that those Words of his concerning his being condemn'd to be devour'd by wild Beasts had some respect to the Resurrection of the Body I am the Wheat says he of God and am ground small by the teeth of Beasts that I may be â—…ound pure Bread II. At the same time flourish'd St. Polyâ—… who was Disciple to St. John the Evâ—…ngelist When he was bound to the Sâ—…ake to be burn'd he thanked God that he was now to suffer Martyrdom and to partake of the Cap of Christ in order to the Resurrection of everlasting Life both of Soul and Body You may read his Prayer in the Epistle of the Church of 〈◊〉 which is Extant in Eusebius III. At the same time also lived Papiaâ—… Bishop of â—…rapolis St. Irenâ—…s tells us that he was Disciple to St. John the Evangelist and a familiar Acquaintance of St. Polyâ—…p's This is certain that he liv'd in the time of those who had been conversant with the Apostles and had made it his Business to collect the Doctrines of the several Apostles from the Mouths of such as had convers'd with ' em Now that He asserted the Resurrection of the same Humane Body Eusebius plainly intimates when he tells us that according to his Opinion Christ is to reign here corporally upon Earth after the Resurrection from the Dead a Thousand Years St. Maximus affirms that he held that after the Resurrection we shall eat and drink as before Such an Opinion as this could never be built on meer Air. Whether true or false it plainly shews that the Apostles did not preach the Resurrection of an Airy or Ethereal Body IV. The Sibylline Oracles publish'd by some Christian not long after these times within about Thirty Years after St. John the Apostle's Death say That God after he has destroy'd the World and all mankind by Fire will restore their Ashes and Bones and form 'em again as they were before And the Verses which tell us thus much are extant not only in the Volume which now we have but also in the ancient Apostolical Constitutions where they are cited V. St. Justin Martyr who flourish'd in the Year 140 and was first instructed in the Christian Faith by one that was not only of Man's Estate but of a considerable Age when St. John was yet living not only speaks in several places of his Works of the Rising Body as of the very same and truly Humane but in his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew he gives him this Caution that if he met with any that had the Name of Christians but denied the Resurrection of the Dead he should not esteem them Christians For I says he and all those Christians who in all respects hold the true Opinions do know that there will be a Resurrection of the flesh He says expresly The Resurrection of the flesh And the same Word he used in the Title of a Book which he wrote professedly on this Subject Concerning the Resurrection of the flesh They did not call it in those Days The Resurrection of the Body because some of the Hereticks who denied the Resurrection of the Flesh pretended however to believe the Resurrection of the Body but that all might know that they intended the Verâ—… same Humane Body they call'd it in downright Terms The Resurrection of the flesh VI. Tatianus Syrus who was Disciple to Justin M. in his Oration against the Gentiles We shall be restored says he to what we are and be judg'd by God the Creator This we believe tho' you look upon us as silly triflers and bablers for it For as once I had no being and then was begotten so being born and again reduced by Death to what I was I I shall be restored to my being again Tho' all my Flesh shall be consum'd by Fire yet the World contains the evaporated Matter Though I should be drown'd and dissolv'd in a River or the Sea or be devoun'd by wild Beasts yet I am laid â—…p in the Repositories of God The Ignoranâ—… indeed and the Atheist know not where my Substance is reposited but God who reigns and who alone sees it will restore it in his due Time to its former State VII St. Irenâ—…us who was born before the Death of St. John and was Scholar to St. Polycâ—…rp one of his Disciples affrms
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
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
shouldest be restored to thy former Substance because thou art not capable of feeling either Pleasure or Pain without Flesh. If this Opinion were true That the Soul is not capable in its own nature without an organiz'd Body of any Perception I take no notice here of that other Opinion concerning the death and dissolution of the Soul we should not need to look any further for a reason why God has ordained that the Soul should be again united to a Humane Body since it would not otherwise be capable after death of being either Rewarded or Punished And it must be confess'd that this Notion is very consistent with the Doctrine of the Resurrection and the general Judgment which is to follow the Resurrection But here lies the difficulty I know not how to make it consistent with some other Places of the Scripture The Scripture is plainly against it When our Saviour tells the penitent Thief upon the Cross This day thou shalt be with me in Paradise He seems to intimate that he should be sensible of that happiness That Wish of St. Paul in the 1 st of the Philip. That he might depart and be with Christ seems yet more clear and convincing The Apostle seems plainly to intimate that being with Christ he should be sensible of it That St. Paul believed that the Soul after its Separation from the Body remains sensible and is capable of perceiving without any Organs of Sense I inferr moreover from that Place where he speaks of his being rapt up into Heaven which others I think do not usually take notice of He says that he could not tell whether he was rapt up into Heaven and saw there those unspeakable Sights in the Body or out of the Body Now he could not have doubted of that if he had not believed that the Soul is sensible when out of the Body To this we may add that Place of St. John in the Revelations where he says that he saw in Heaven The Souls of them that were slain for the Word of God and they cried with a loud Voice saying How long O Lord c. There are other places in that Book which confirm the same thing Tertullian in his Book De Resurrectione Carnis where he owns that separated Souls do not Sleep but are sensible and are actually punish'd or rewarded before the Resurrection says they are punish'd or rewarded before the Resurrection for those good or bad things which they did without the concurrence of the Body as for good or bad Thoughts Desires and Contrivances and he seems to intimate that tho' the Soul is in its own nature capable of Rewards and Punishments yet it is not in its own nature so capable as when it is united to the Body It is capable he says of greater Pleasure or Torment when united to the Body than when in a State of Separation and therefore for those things which the actually did in concurrence with the Body the must be punished or rewarded in the Body that the Pleasure or Torment may be perfect But this is very precarious and if once it be granted that the Soul is in its own nature without an organiz'd Body capable of Rewards and Punishments it cannot be denied but that it is of its self capable of being fully rewarded or punished We have not yet found out a Reason for this Decree of God Almighty concerning the Resurrection If we would give a true account of it it is necessary we should mount a little higher and look a little farther I shall pass by many Conjectures which we find in the Schools and in some of our ancient Writers and among the Jewish Masters and shall lay before you my own Thoughts If it be not Presumption to take upon one to search into God's Counsels and the Reasons of his Decrees I should think that one Reason why he has been pleas'd to decree that the Soul in the Day of Judgment shall be again united to a Humane Body may be this That as we are Men when we sin or do well so we may be Men when by a judicial Sentence we are punish'd or rewarded for it But we cannot be Men unless we have Humane Bodies St. Paul tells us that we must all appear before the Judgment-Seat of Christ that every Man may receive the Things done in the Body according to that he hath done whether it be good or bad And as we are to give an account for what we did in the Body so in the Body we shall give an account If it be reasonable that we should be Men when we are punish'd or rewarded for what we did when Men it seems much more reasonable that we should be then the same Men But we cannot be the same Men unless we have the same Bodies 'T is a great Mistake to imagine that the Identity or Sameness of a Man consists wholly in the sameness of the Soul If Euphorbus and Homer and Ennius had had one and the same Soul yet they would not have been one and the same but Three distinct Men. In what the Identity or sameness of the Body consists that That of the Rising Body can consist in nothing else but in the Restauration of the same Numerical Particles which made up the dissolved Body to their former Construction I have already told you Another Reason why God has been pleas'd to ordain that the same Humane Body that died shall rise again and be reconjoin'd to the Soul I take to be this and this indeed I take to be the First and the Chief Reason of that Decree We had all been Immortal Men if Adam had not sinn'd 't was God's design that we should never die but that our Souls should remain for ever united to their Bodies This gracious Design being frustrated by Adam's Transgression he was graciously pleas'd to ordain that as in Adam all die so by the Merits of Christ the second Adam we should all at last triumph over Death and be restored to those Bodies and that Humane Nature which he first design'd should be Immortal By the Death and Resurrection of Christ our Losses are to be repair'd which Adam's sinning occasion'd but our Losses cannot be repair'd unless we are restor'd to those Bodies which by his sinning we lost Will neither of these Reasons satisfie the Etherealist Well then I will give him another I will give him a most certain Reason why God will restore us to our Humane Natures and why he will raise up the very same Body he will because he will A very bad Reason to be given for the Actions of Man but a very good one for God's He will because he hath promis'd I am the Lord and I have said it says he and who can say What doest thou There is nothing that God does but He does for a very good Reason But who are We that we should call him to an Account for what he does His ways and his Counsels are many of
'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
many Countries They had doubtless heard from their Ancestors the Descendants of Noah that after Death the Soul should be reunited to a Body and not knowing by reason of the imperfectness of the Tradition how it was to be done they invented a way for it and imagin'd it was to be by a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or by being born again And as Error is always fruitful in Inventions and one having taken Root there is presently a Superfoetation of many others they afterwards carried it on farther and fansy'd a Transmigration of the Soul not only into another Human Body but also into the Bodies of other living Creatures and even into Trees and Plants But the Transmigration of the Soul into the Bodies of irrational Animals was never so generally receiv'd as its Transmigration into another Human Body The Author of the Book De Spermate ascribed to Galen tells us that the Philosopher Porphyry maintain'd That the Soul of a Beast passes into a Beast but the Soul of a Man into a Man And Hierocles affirms that the Soul of a Man passes only into a Man Of the same Opinion was Timaeus Locrus with divers others of the Pythagoreans And the same was likewise the Opinion of the ancient Gauls as may be gather'd from what Caesar says of ' em Imprimis say he hoc volunt persuadere non interire animas sed ab aliis post mortem transire ad alios atque hoc maxime ad virtutem excitari putant metu mortis neglecto Appian writes of the ancient Germans that they contemn'd Death 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through the hopes they had of reviving or living again Which I understand not immediately of the Resurrection but of the Transmigration of the Soul into another Human Body And in the same Sence I understand Lucan where he speaks of the Opinion of the Sâ—…ythians Populus quos despicit Arctos Felices errore suo quos ille timorum Maximus haud urget lethi metus inde ruendi In ferrum mens prona viris animique capaces Mortis ignavum rediturae parcere vitae That the Opinion of the Transmigration was grounded on a Tradition concerning the Resurrection will appear more Probable if we consider what Herodotus writes of the Doctrine of the Egyptians That the Soul being departed this Body after many Removes into the Bodies of all kinds of Animals and after a long Time viz. 3500 Years assumes again the Body of a Man And to this Day there are great Numbers in Grand Caire and some in other parts of the World that assert very near the same thing and agree with those ancient Egyptians almost exactly in the Number of Years They will tell ye that theâ—… Soulâ—… having passed into several Beasts of the same Kind and wander'd out of the Body of one to animate another it will at last after the Circle of 3365 Years return again to a Human Body more purified and refin'd than in its first Principles What is this but a broken Tradition concerning the Re-union of our Souls with our Bodies at the end of the World But others of the Ancients come up yet more close to us They tell us that the Souls of those that are in Heaven or Elysium continue there a long time a Thousand Years or the like and then shall come again into the World and be united to a Human Body Thus Virgil from the Traditions of the Ancients Quisque suos patimur manes Exinde per amplum Mittimur Elysium pauci laeta arvae tenemus Donec longa dies perfecto temporis Orbe Concretam exemit labem purumque reliquit Aetherium sensum atque aurai simplicis ignem Has omnes ubi mille rotam volvêre per annos Lethaeum ad fluvium Deus evocat agmine magno Scilicet immemores supera ut convexa revisant Rursus incipiant in corpora velle reverti Clauclian 2. Ruff. Quos ubi per varios annos per mille figuras Egit Lethaeo purgatos flumine tandem Rursus aâ—… humanae revocat primordia formae St. Austin mentions this as the Opinion of the greatest Philosophers That the Souls says he of bad Men pass immediately into other Bodies and that the Souls of good Men are a long time in Rest but after a great while come down from Heaven and assume Bodies again Hoc dixerunt valde magni Philosophi I shall add no more concerning these Opinions but only put you in mind that Tertullian Minucius Felix and Lactantius no less Men than they were of my Opinion That the Doctrine of the Transmigration was founded on a Tradition concerning the Resurrection The Third Opinion which I think deserves to be taken notice of is that concerning the equal duration of the Body and Soul that the Soul should indeed remain after Death but not unless the Body did so too This was the Doctrine of some of the Stoicks and my Author is Servius Animam says he tamdiu durare dicunt quamdin durat Corpus The Egyptians had an Opinion amongst 'em much the same with this It is commonly said by those that speak of the Custom of the Egyptians of embalming the Bodies of their Dead such as Petrus Bellonius and others that the Reason why they were so careful to preserve their Bodies was because they expected a Resurrection But this indeed was not the Reason The true Reason was this They believ'd the Soul never left the dead Body but always adher'd to it as long as it lasted how long soever that were and after the dissolution of the Body they believ'd the Soul was to enter into another For this also Servius is my Author So others tell us that they were wont to keep the dead Bodies of their Friends in their Houses and their Closets and to set 'em at Table as Guests at Meals with 'em believing that they had there the whole Man not only the Body but the Soul too Luâ—…ian assures us he himself had din'd in Egypt with such Guests Hence Silius the Poet Aegyptia tellus Claudit odorato post funus stantia saxo Corpora à mensis exanguem haud separat umbram The Fourth Opinion which I shall recommend to your Consideration is this That these very Bodies of ours are capable of being made Immortal and Incorruptible and of being translated up into Heaven there to inhabit everlastingly in Union with the Soul Did any of the Heathens believe thus much They did so 'T was the Doctrine of the Chaldaick Philosophers and likewise of the Greeks themselves Psellus in his Gloss on the Chaldaick Oracles tells us that it was a Doctrine of those Philosophers That a Man's Body may by the Works of Religion Lustrations and the like be so purged and attenuated the impure Matter being consumed by the Heavenly Fire as that the Soul may carry it up to Heaven with it That Hercules and Helena and others amongst the Greeks and
Romulus amongst the Romans were translated like Enoch and Elias into Heaven in their proper Bodies we read in divers of our Ancient Authors The Emperor Julian mentions the Assumption of Hercules He went up says he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tho' he will not acknowledge that his Body with which he ascended was a Body of Flesh but intimates according to the Notion of the Chaldaick Philosophers that the gross parts of his Body were consumed by Heavenly Fire or Lightening That the Romans when Romulus was murder'd were made believe that he had been taken up in his Body into Heaven I need only mention not endeavour to prove It is what you know very well and many of the Writers of the Roman History speak of it The Emperor Julian believ'd it tho he says as he does of Hercules that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the mortal part of his Body was consum'd or lick'd up 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the Heavenly fire or Lightning That Helena being like to be murdered was taken up publickly into Heaven Isaacus Porphyrogennetus relates from the Traditions of the Ancient Greeks Plutarch tells us that it was the common Opinion of the Greeks that Cleomedes Astypalensis was translated in his Body into Heaven and that many others had been so translated Thus Philostratus doubts whether his greatly admir'd Apollonius Tyaneus ever died and tells us of a Report that going into a Temple in Lindus he was never seen afterwards He mentions moreover a Tradition of the Cretans that he was taken up into Heaven out of a Temple in Crete a Voice being heard in the Temple as of Virgins singing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Come from the Earth come into Heaven come Fifthly They did not only believe that many had been translated like Enoch and Elias into Heaven but they also believ'd that the Souls of some others had been after Death re-united to their Bodies and that so by a Resurrection they had been taken up into Heaven That this was generally believed of Aristaeus the Proconnesian is asserted by many Heathen Writers And Plutarch assures us that it was commonly believ'd that the Body of Alcmena the Mother of Hercules was taken up into Heaven after her Death It happened as they say when it was carried out to be interr'd Thus says he they exalt those things which are by nature Mortal among the Gods He does not believe these Reports himself on the contrary he calls it a Foolish thing to place Earth in Heaven The Soul says he only is from the Gods from them it came and to them it returns not with the Body but separated wholly from it perfectly pure clean and freed from Flesh. The Soul as Heraclitus says flies from the Body as Lightening does from a Cloud While it is in the Body like a heavy and cloudy Vapour it is difficultly kindled and with great difficulty it ascends to the things above Therefore the Bodies of Good Men ought not by any means to be placed in Heaven contrary to their Nature but we ought to believe that the Soul alone ascends up thither He disputes against this Belief and these Traditions of the Heathens in the very same manner as he would have disputed against Christians The Sixth Opinion of the Heathens which I shall present you with is concerning a Resurrection of the very same Human Body after its dissolution In this only it differs from our Christian Doctrine that it makes the Soul return not immediately to those Particles from which it was separated by Death and which were laid in the Grave so as that those who died Men should rise of the same Stature but first to those Particles which were unîted to it in the Mothers Womb And afterwards those Particles that constituted the Body in its several Ages are according to this Opinion to rise again and be united all in their due time to the same Soul 'till at last the same Particles that were buried shall be all re-united together and constitute the Body in the very same manner as formerly They tell us that after the expiration of many Thousands of Years when all the same Stars and Planets shall return to the same Configuration and Respect that they formerly had to one another there shall be a Resurrection of all things to their former State not only of Men but all other things in the World Socrates for Example shall be born again of the same Mother and grow up in the same manner with all the same Circumstances teach Philosophy at Athens to the self-same Scholars eat the self-same Diet and wear the self-same Cloths be accused by the same Accusers condemn'd by the same Judges and die by the same Poison You and I my Friend are according to them to live here again in all the same Circumstances Our Friendship the same and the same Correspondence between us You are to send again to me to know what I have to say for the Doctrine of the Resurrection I am to send you this very same Treatise written on the same Paper and with the same Pen and Ink and the Hair that now makes this Blot must make the same again Thus all things must go on in a continual Round and Revolution and by a continual successive Resurrection But who are they that tell us these things Who were they that taught this Opinion The Pythagoreans and the Platonists amongst the Greeks and many of the Priests or Philosophers of Egypt from whom the Greeks learnt it Would you have me quote my Author It is Origen and not he only tho' he alone were enow but I have likewise several others The Followers of Pythagoras and Plato says Origen say that after a certain Revolution of the Stars when they shall return to the same Configuration and Respèct to one another which they formerly had there will necessarily be the very same Face of Things here on Earth which there had been before when the Stars were in the same Position And according to this Notion when the Stars shall return to the same Order which they were in in Socrates 's time Socrates must be born again and suffer the same things which he did before the same Anytus and Melitus accusing him and the same Areopagites passing Sentence upon him And the same is the Dctrine of the Egyptians For Pythagoras Porphyry likewise is my Witness It is well known to all says he first that he asserted the Immortality of the Soul and that he asserted that the Soul passes into several kinds of Creatures and moreover that he taught that after certain Revolutions of the Stars those things which once had been shall be again and that there is nothing properly new For Plato I might produce his own Words and the Testimonies of others such as Proclus c. But who has not heard of Plato's great Year I need not put you in mind that this can be nothing else
the Body to propose it as a thing to be wonder'd at why the Bodies of good Men are not to be rais'd again And the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on which Casaubon lays a great Stress and which seems to be the Foundation of his Error signifies not only again as he renders it but amplius or in posterum So in Philo Judaeus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the time to come in Isocrates 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies Posterity In the same Sense it is used by Plato and others I might here observe that the Philosopher Heraclitus more ancient than the Stoicks speaks not only of the general Conflagration but says that they that have lived ill in this Life shall be purged by that Fire I might likewise observe that both he and Anaximenes and Diogenes Apolloniates believ'd That after the destruction of this World there will be another Created and so on to all Eternity But I rather chuse to entertain you with some thing that I think will be more surprizing and more to our Purpose Should I tell you that those two great Atomical Philosophers Democritus and Epicurus believ'd that our Bodies will hereafter be restor'd again and be made up of the very same Particles should I tell you thus much you would take me perhaps to be rather pleasant than serious But how strange soever you may think it it is nevertheless true at least if my Authors were not mistaken They believ'd that this will happen after a vast distance of time and aâ—…ter innumerable changes by a Second fortuitous concourse of the very same Particles Democritus as I suppose form'd this Notion from what he had learnt concerning the Instauration of all Things by conversing with the Egyptians among whom we know he lived many Years to be instructed in their Philosophy And from him it is likely Epicurus receiv'd it But how does it appear that those two great Corporealists who believ'd that the Soul and Body diâ—… both together asserted this kind of Resurrection For Democritus Pliny is my Author for Epicurus St. Jerom. Pliny in his Nat. Hist. opposes and derides this Opinion of Democritus so he does also the Immortality of the Soul Similis est de asservandis corporibus hominum ac reviviscendi promissa Democrito vanitas qui non revixit ipse Quae malum ista dementia est iterari vitani morte S. Jerom's Words concerning Epicuruâ—… aâ—…e these Vide hoc novum est jam faâ—…um est in seculo quod fuit ante nos Cum superioribus autem congruit quod niâ—…il novum in mundo fiat nec sit aliquis qui possit existere dicere ecce hoc novum est siquidem omne quod se putaverit novum ostendere jam in prioribus seculis fuit Nec putemus signa atque prodigia multa quae arbitrio Dei nova in Mundo fiunt in prioribus seculis esse jam facta locum invenire Epicurum qui asserit per innumerabiles periodos EADEM eisdem in locis per â—…osdem fieri There is no reason we should change the Reading and for Epicurus read Chrysippus as a learned Man suspects we ought since as has been shewn Democritus himself whose Philosophy Epicurus follow'd and from whom the Ancients tell us he borrow'd a great many of his Notions maintain'd either the same or a like Opinion I shall conclude these Opinions with those receiv'd among some of the Ancient Arabians The Harbanists an ancient Sect among the Heathen Arabians held That after the space of 36425 Years all the Species of Living Creatures that are in the World shall be destroy'd and the Nature of the Universe shall again produce Two Pair of every Species for every Climate of the Earth And after this manner the World is to continue by several Revolutions to Eternity There were others among the Arabians that agreed with the Pythagoreans and Platonists or rather came up more home to the Christian Doctrine than they did They believ'd that after certain Circulations of the Heavenly Bodies the Soul will return and will constitute the same Individual Man and that the Man thus constituted anew will remember what had past in the former Life Abrahamus Ecchellensis mentions this as the Opinion of some Ancient Hereticks amongst the Mahometans in Egypt and elsewhere And you know the Mahometans of Egypt were originally Arabians We have made I think by this time a pretty tolerable Progress and from the View we have already taken I believe you begin to be convinced that the Doctrine of the Resurrection of the Body was known and generally embrac'd in the first Ages of the World We will now extend our View and look a little farther abroad into the World and shew that the Heathens had not only some Opinions amongst 'em which were built on a Tradition concerning the Resurrection and that carry with 'em a very great resemblance of our Doctrine but that many of 'em in several parts of the World have held the same Doctrine with us and do to this day believe it in the same sense as we understand it I mean that they hold That the Particles of the Body which died will be rais'd again and without a new Birth be united to the Soul and constitute the very same Man I shall not here take any notice of those Greek Verses which are extant under the Name of Phocylides that they plainly assert the Resurrection in regard those Verses are by all learned Men attributed not to the Ancient Phocylides but to some Jewish or Christian Author The First Instance which I shall present you with is that of the Persian Magi. I need not tell you that the Magi were the Priests and Philosophers of the Ancient Persians Theopompus and Eudemus Rhodius two very Ancient Authors in D. Laertius tell us that the Magi taught That Men shall revive and be Immortal 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And Plutarch assures us out of the Books of Zoroastres that according to their Doctrine there will be a time when the Earth shall be made plain and level and all Mankind shall live blessedly together on Earth in one common Society and shall speak but one Language This is almost expresly the Millennarian Doctrine of the Resurrection They add according to Theopompus that this shall happen after the term of 6000 Years Which is the same number of Years that the Ancient Jews and most of the Christian Fathers allow for the duration of the World before the Resurrection And that the Bodies of Men in that State will not have need of Food but will be pure and pellucid or as he expresses it will cast no Shadow Thus Aeneas Gazaeus affirms that Zoroastres foretold that there will come a time when there shall be a Resurrection of all the Dead And this says he Theopompus attests To this I shall add what is also very remarkable
that the same Doctrine is at this day preserv'd amongst the Heathen Gavrs or Guebers at this time living in Persia the Remains of the Ancient Magi or Persians My Author is a late Traveller of good Credit who gives us this Account That according to their Doctrine there shall be an Universal Resurrection And at that time all the Souls either in Paradise or Hell shall return to take possession of their Bodies that the Earth shall be made level and Men shall have every one their Apartment answerable to the Good which they did in their Life time but that their chief Delight shall be to behold and praise God and Zoroastres their Prophet They add that before the Resurrection those that are in Paradise do not behold the Face of God They likewise say that their Prophet did not die but was carried up in his Body into Heaven My second Instance is of some of the Arabians I shew'd but just now that some of the ancient Arabians came up very near to our Doctrine I shall now add that there were others of that Country which is very spacious and contain'd very different Sects that made a further Advance and came up fully to us That the most ancient Arabians acknowledged the Resurrection in the Christian Sense we may probably gather from that noted Place in Job concerning the Resurrection at least if the Words be rightly understood and were really spoken by him I need not tell you that Job was an Arabian But you perhaps will tell me that that was spoken by him only as an inspir'd Person I see no Reason for that But this is not the only Argument I have to prove that the old Arabians expresly own'd our Doctrine I have the express Testimony of several Arabick Writers that some of 'em did so There were some among the Heathen Arabians says Gregorius Abulpharajius that acknowledged the Resurrection of the Dead He adds that they used to kill a Camel on the Graves of the Dead that when they should rise to Judgment such was their Ignorance mixt with the Knowledge they had of the Truth they might ride upon it The same is asserted by other Arabick Authors I know that one Kossus He of whom is that Arabick Proverb More Eloquent than Kossus is reported by some to have taught the Arabians the Doctrine of the Resurrection as also the Unity of the God-head But that is to be understood only of some not of all the Arabians that own'd it My Opinion is that Kossus was no other than a Christian Presbyter who first preach'd the Gospel in some part of Arabia For so the Word Kos or Kas signifies in the Arabick Tongue I mean it signifies a Presbyter and his eloquent Preaching might very well occasion the above mention'd Proverb Now it does not seem very probable that they who are spoken of by Abul-pharajius who were wont to have a Camel buried with 'em were descended from any who had been enlighten'd by the Gospel My Third Instance is of some of the Banians of Cambaia in the East-Indies A Traveller of our own Nation tells us that a Banian of Cambaia gave an Acquaintance of his this Account of their Faith relating to the next Life Law says he they hold none but only seven Precepts which they say were given 'em from their Father Noe not knowing Abraham nor any other 1. To honour Father and Mother 2. Not to steal 3. Not to commit Adultery 4. Not to kill any Thing living 5. Not to eat any Thing living 6. Not to cut their Hair 7. To go bare-foot in their Churches They hold there shall be a Resurrection and all shall come to Judgment but the Account shall be most strict insomuch that but one of 10000 shall be receiv'd to Favour and those shall live again in this World in great Happiness The rest shall be tormented And because they will escape this Judgment when any Man dies he is burnt to Ashes and thrown into a River And by this means they hope to escape the Judgment to come As for the Soul that goeth to the Place from whence it came but where the Place is they know not That the Body should not be made again they reason with the Philosophers saying that of nothing nothing can be made beholding the course of Nature that nothing is made but by a means as by the Seed of an Animal is made another and by Corn cast into the Ground there cometh up new Corn. So say they a Man cannot rise again except some part of him be left undissolv'd and therefore they burn the whole For if he were buried in the Earth they say there is a small Bone in the Neck which would never be consum'd Or if he were eaten by a Beast that Bone would not consume but of that Bone would come another Man and then the Soul being restored again he should come to Judgment whereas now the Body being destroy'd the Soul shall not be judged For their Opinion is That both Body and Soul must be united together as they have sinn'd together to receive Judgment and therefore the Soul alone cannot Their Seven Precepts which they keep very strictly they do not keep for any hope of Reward they have after this Life but only that they may be blessed in this World They say the Three chief Religions in the World are of the Christians Jews and Mahometans and yet but one of them True But being in doubt which is the truest of the Three they will be of None For they hold that all these Three shall be judged and but few of them which be of the True shall be saved the Examination shall be so strict They say these Three Religions have too many Precepts to keep them all well and therefore wonderful hard it will be to give an Account because so few do observe all their Religion aright This Account is the more considerable for what it mentions of Noah and I should be glad to tell you that I find it confirm'd by other Relations of those Parts But that I must own I cannot as yet do On the contrary I know that the Banians of Cambaia and of other Parts do not generally talk after this manner or own explicitly a Resurrection but the Transmigration of Souls into other Bodies Nevertheless it is not improbable but that among those many Sects of the Banians or Gentiles of Mogulistan whose Opinions we find describ'd in our more vulgar Relations there may be some particularly in Cambaia who have these Traditions and Notions And this is th more credible because as I shall by and by shew there are other Nations in the Indies which assert a Resurrection Those Brachmans of India of whom we read in the Histories of Alexander the Great were either of that Country which is now call'd Cambaia or of a Country bordering upon it And Palladius in his Treatise of the Brachmans makes Dandamis the most Famous and Considerable amongst 'em
speak of the Resurrection He in his Discourse with Alexander has these Words Thou shalt not lie hid from God neither shalt thou have any Place to which thou mayest flee at the time of the Resurrection Neither shalt thou escape his Vengeance But as that Discourse is altogether fictitious so the Author's Judgment who makes him talk after this manner deserves not to be regarded My Fourth Example is the Inhabitants of the Island of Ceylon in the East-Indies These People says another Traveller of our own Nation who liv'd amongst 'em no less than 19 Years and could not but be very well acquainted with their Belief do firmly believe a Resurrection of the Body and the Immortality of Souls and a future State They hold that in the other World those that are good Men tho' they be poor and mean in this World yet there they shall become high and Eminent But wicked Men they say will be turned into Beasts The Fifth is the Inhabitants of Java another of the East-Indian Isles who believe as Le Blanc affirms that after their Flesh is wholly consum'd their Souls will re-unite to the Body and remain in Peace to all Eternity The Sixth is the People of Pegu another Country in the East-Indies It 's affirm'd by a Roman Missionary who lived amongst 'em some years that they believe a Vivification of the Body after Death and re-union with the Soul The Seventh is the People of Transiana a Country adjoining to Pegu on the North of it who when they bury a dead Body burn the Heart and Bowels as a Sacrifice to their Duma or God then put the Ashes within the Corpse again That nothing as they say may be wanting at the Day of Resurrection The Eighth is some of the Chinese Gaspar Da Cruz gives us this Account of the Opinions of some of that Nation They make says he many Heavens some where there is Meat and Drink and fair Women whither all living things do go And to these they say all Men do go that are not of the Religious They place others higher whither they say the holy Priests do go that live in the Wildernesses and all the Felicity they give them there is to sit refreshing themselves with the Wind. They place others yet higher the Gods of which they say have round Bodies like Bowls those that go to these Heavens have round Bodies as the Gods themselves have The same Author tells us That they wear their Hair long holding that by it they shall be carried to Heaven That the Priests are generally shaven for they say They need no help to carry them to Heaven This might pass I presume with many for a full and sufficient Proof that they own a Resurrection But I do not my-self rely on it These Opinions might be grounded on the gross Notion they might have of the Materiality of the Soul I mention'd in the beginning of this Discourse that the Heathens generally believe that the Soul has all the same Parts that the Body has They believe that the Parts of the Soul when the Soul is united to the Body are diffused throughout all the Parts of the Body that if a man's Body has Hair his Soul has Hair too and that if you cut off his Hair you cut off together with it the Hair of the Soul That some in that great and populous Empire acknowledge a Resurrection is more plainly asserted by others Pinto tells us of a Sect named Trimechau who are of Opinion That so long as a Man lives in this World so long shall he remain under Ground 'till at length by the Prayers of the Priests his Soul shall reassume the Body of a Child of Seven Days old wherein he shall live again till he shall grow so strong as to re-enter into the old Body which he left in the Grave and so be translated into the Heaven of the Moon where they say he shall live many Years and in the end be converted into a Star which shall remain fixt above in the Firmament for ever The same Author if he deserve that Name and be not rather in this as he is in a great many of his Stories a Romancer has another Relation which makes directly to our Purpose It is somewhat long and I fear you will think it tedious perhaps ridiculous but however I shall here present you with it because as I remember you have not the Author in your Library I must ingenuously confess I do not my-self much believe it But I must not make my Judgment the Rule of other Men's It may perhaps be true at least some part of it tho' the Prejudice which I have against the Relator makes it seem very doubtful to me If after you have read it you think it unworthy of this place before you shew these Papers to any of your Friends be pleas'd to strike it quite out or let it be lookt upon only as a Parenthesis He tells us of a place in Pequin the chief City of China called the Treasure of the Dead in which are many little Houses according to the Report of the Chinese no less than 3000 full of dead Men's Skulls with Two great Mounts of their other Bones That there is a Register kept of those Bones and Skulls to whom they belong'd In that place says he there are Two great Idols call'd The Blowers of the House of Smoak so the Chinese use to call Hell and the Figure of a Monstrous Serpent call'd The gluttonous Serpent of the House of Smoak with a great Bowl of Iron on his Head as if it had been thrown at him from some other place and near it another great Figure in the form of a Giant holding a great Iron Bowl aloft in his Hands and beholding the Serpent with a frowning and angry Countenance he seems as if he would throw his Bowl at him Round about this Figure is a number of little Idols on their Knees with their Hands lifted up as if they would adore it But what means all this long Story What you will say are these Houses of Skulls these Giants Serpents and Bowls to our Purpose The Explication he gives of all these things is this All this great Edifice says he was consecrated to the Honour of this Idol call'd Mucluparon whom the Chinese affirm'd to be the Treasurer of all the dead Bones and that when the Gluttonous Serpent before-mentioned came to steal them away he made at him with the Bowl which he held in his Hands whereupon the Serpent in great fear fled away to the bottom of the profound House of Smoak whither God precipitated him for his great Wickedness And farther they affirm'd that he had maintain'd a Combat with him 3000 Years already and was to continue the same 3000 Years more so that from 3000 to 3000 Years he was to employ Five Bowls wherewith he was to make an end of killing him Hereupon they added that assoon as this
Serpent should be dead the Bones that were there gathered together would return to the Bodies to which they appertain'd formerly and so should go and remain for ever in the House of the Moon To these Opinions adds my Author they join many others such like unto which they give so much faith that nothing can be able to remove them from it For it is the Doctrine that is preach'd unto them by their Bonzees who also tell them that the true way to make a Soul happy is to gather the Bones of the Dead together into this Place by means whereof there is not a day passes but a Thousand or Two Thousand Bones are brought thither Now if some for their far distance cannot bring all the Bones whole together they will at leastwise bring a Tooth or Two and so they say that by way of an Alms they make as good satisfaction as if they brought all the rest Which is the reason that in all these Charnel-Houses there is such an infinite multitude of these Teeth that one might lade many Ships with them Thus far Pinto I wish I could quote you a better Author Tho the silence of all other Travellers who have given an Account of that Country and particularly of the City of Pequin and the oddness of the Story it self be enough to perswade one that the whole is no better than an idle Fable yet that which he says of the Combat maintain'd with the Devil 3000 Years already and to be continued 3000 Years more comes up so near to the Opinion of the Ancient Magi those great Theologists of the East which Plutarch gives an account of that from thence it may be concluded that the whole is not fabulous but that there may be some truth in it For it is not likely that so illiterate a Person as Pinto knew what Plutarch relates of the Magi. I shall leave the whole to your Judgment and to the Enquiries of such as shall hereafter visit that City Kircher mentions a Sect of the Chinese call'd Lanzu which says he Paradisum spondet ex animâ corpore constitutis in suis templis quorundam effigies exponunt quos hac ratione ad Coelos evolasse fabulantur Ad eam rem consequendam exercitationes quasdam praescribunt positas in vario sedendi ritu certisque precationibus imo etiam pharmacis quibus spondent unà cum suorum Divorum favore vitam in mortali corpore longiorem We read in Joh. Ludovicus Gotofridus that the Chinese celebrate the Memory of Twelve certain Philosophers who they say were for their Vertue Translated into Heaven And another affirms of the Chinese in general That they believe a Resurrection And he brings this Argument to prove it That sometimes they will lend Money to be repaid 'em in the other World This is reported of some amongst 'em by several Travellers But whether it be a sufficient Argument I leave to the Judgment of others The Ninth is the Eastern Tartars who inhabit on the North of China Pinto whom I but now quoted has a Relation concerning them much the same with what he has given us of the Chinese He tells us that he saw in that Country about the Temple of a Celebrated Idol a great many Houses full of the Skulls and Bones of dead Men the Idol very vast and monstrous with a great Bowl of Iron in his Hands and this is the Account he gives of it from the Mouth as he says of a Tartar of no mean Quality That that Idol or God is the Treasurer of the Bones of all those that are born into the World to the end that at the last Day when Men come to be born again he means rise again he may give to every one the same Bones which he had upon Earth And that the Bowl he holds in his Hands is to fling at the Devil when he should come thither to steal away any of those Bones I have told you my Author one as I have already hinted whose Relations I dare not Insure Out of Asia we will pass if you please into Africa and then into the other two parts of the World and see if those parts afford us any other Examples My Tenth Instance is the People of Arder a Country in Guinnee near Rio da Volta They believe as the Dutch Relations assure us that the Bodies of such as are slain in the Wars do rise again within Two Days after they are buried and go to another Life and this they averr they have found by experience This Opinion is cherish'd by their Fetisero's or Priests who steal as we may suppose the dead Bodies out of their Graves They say that in the Bodies of those that are not slain in the Wars the Blood congeals and therefore they are not to expect a Resurrection The Eleventh is the Prussians here in Europe That they before they were converted to the Christian Faith believ'd not only the Immortality of the Soul but also the Resurrection of the Body is asserted by Christophorus Hartknochius in his Borussia Vetus Nova The Twelfth is the Virginians in America A French Author tells us That they have a small glimpse of this sacred Truth And a Traveller of our own who lived long among 'em and has written a large Account of their Country and Manners seems to intimate the same thing His Words are as follows They think that their Werowances i. e. their Governors and Priests when they are dead go beyond the Mountains towards the setting of the Sun and ever remain there in form of their Okee i. e. their God to whom they attribute a Human Shape with their Heads painted with Oyl and Ponones a Herb so called finely trimmed with Feathers and shall have Beads Hatchets Copper and Tobacco doing nothing but dance and sing with all their Predecessors But the Common People they suppose shall not live after Death but rot in their Graves like dead Dogs In a Marginal Note he calls this expresly their Resurrection The Inhabitants of Louisiana another Country in the Northern America lately discover'd by the French seem to hold That the Soul after Death shall be re-united to its Body My Author's Words are these Animas superstites esse corporibus fatentur in Regione amoena resumptis Corporibus venaturos esse mortuos nugantur eâque de causâ instrumenta arma sepultis addunt horumqúe utensilium spiritum etiam revicturum esse aiunt Jarricus relates That the Brasilians enslav'd by the Portuguese used to boast that their Friends who died some Centuries of Years ago would come thither again in a Ship and free their Posterity from slavery and root out the Portuguese And had this Opinion current among 'em That no one that believ'd this would be excluded Heaven but they that did not would be rent in pieces by wild Beasts It 's storied of the People of Hispaniola and the adjacent Isles that
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
These I had says he from Heaven and for his Laws I despise 'em and from him I hope to receive 'em again This happen'd about 165 Years before Christ. 'T is true I am not fully perswaded that these Words were really spoken by that Martyr Since there were not any Jews then present who might think it worth their while to commit the Words of those several Martyrs to Memory it may be reasonably suppos'd that the Speeches ascrib'd to 'em were made by the Author of the History as is usual with other Historians Thus Josephus in his History of those Martyrs makes 'em speak quite different Speeches so likewise the Arabick History which is extant in the Polyglot Bible and if I well remember the Hebrew Ben Gorion all differing both from the Book of Maccabees and from one another Yet this at least is to be concluded from these Words that when the Second of Maccabees was written this Doctrine was generally receiv'd and 't was also then taken for granted that at that time when those Martyrs suffer'd it was the general and receiv'd Doctrine How ancient that Book is we do not certainly know but we know from Clemens Alexandrinus who cites it that it was extant within 150 Years after our Saviour's Pasâ—…ion and from the First and Second Chapters it may easily be gather'd that it was written long before his Nativity before the Jews were conquer'd by the Romans 2. We read in the same Book that Razis the Jew when he pluck'd out his own Bowels and cast 'em with his Hands upon the Throng call'd upon the Lord of Life and Spirit to restore him those again 3. I know that he shall rise again in the Resurrection at the last day Thus Martha concerning her Brother Lazarus when our Saviour had told her that tho' he then lay dead and buried yet he should rise again She knows it she says and does not at all doubt of it 4. That it was the common and receiv'd Opinion of the Jews at that time that the Body in the Resurrection would be truly a Humane Body is farther evident from that Question of the Sadduces concerning the Woman that had been married to Seven Brethren Whose Wife she should be in the Resurrection 5. It 's evident likewise from that Saying of one of the Jews at the Feast where Christ was present in the House of one of the chief Pharisees When Christ had told the Pharisee that if he invited the Poor c. he should be recompens'd at the Resurrection of the Just one of those that sate at Meat with him made him this Answer Blessed is he that shall eat Bâ—…ead in the Kingdom of God Their Opinion was that they should Eat and Drink in the next Life as well as in this 6. Josephus the learned Jew who was born in the Thirty Seventh Year after Christ professes himself a Follower of the Pharisees and in another place he tells us the place I shall produce hereafter that the Pharisees own'd a Transmigration of the Soul out of one Body into another It should therefore seem that he himself also held it But it is not necessary that because he chose rather to adhere to the Sect of the Pharisees than to that of the Essens or Sadduces he should therefore be in all things a Pharisee In his Third Book of the War he seems to intimate that the Souls of the Wicked shall not after Death be re-conjoin'd to a Body but he plainly asserts that those of the Good shall And from this consideration he endeavours to disswade his Companions from laying violent Hands upon themselves Such Souls says he as are pure and obedient obtain the most Holy place of Heaven whence after the great Revolution of the World or after the circumvolution of many Ages they shall return and again inhabit Chast Bodies But they who lay violent Hands upon themselves their Souls are cast into Hell and God punishes their Sin in their Posterity Whether he held the Resurrection or only the Transmigration of the Soul we cannot from this place certainly conclude But from another place of his Works if he were the true Author of the Book call'd Maccabaica it appears very evidently that he own'd the Resurrection For he cites there that place of the Prophet Ezechiel where he speaks of the raising up of the dry Bones He tells us that the Maccabees were encouraged by their Mother with the hopes and assurance of a future Life She propos'd says he to her Sons the Saying of Solomon That God is the Wood of Life to them that do his Will And that of Ezechiel Can these dry Bones live Neither did she omit that Saying of Moses in his Song I will kill and I will make alive And from hence it likewise appears that Josephus believ'd that at that time when those Martyrs suffer'd the Doctrine of the Resurrectiâ—…n of the same Humane Body was the common and establish'd Doctrine And that this was the common Opinion in his time may be further gather'd from what he says concerning the Opinion of the Sect of the Essens That they had a most certain Opinion amongst 'em that their Bodies indeed were corruptible and that their Matter should not be perpetual This had been a very idle Observation if some others had not asserted the Perpetuity of the Body as well as of the Soul He therefore takes notice of that Opinion of theirs because it was contrary to the receiv'd and general Opinion 7. In the Targum or Chaldee Paraphrase of Jonathan who is placed by some in the same Age with the Apostles there is mention made of the Second Death in Hell and that too of the Body For thus he paraphrases the Sixth Verse of the Sixty Fifth Chapter of Isaiah Their Vengeance shall be in Hell where the Fire continually burns Behold it is written before me I will not give 'em an end in this Life but will be revenged on 'em for their Sins and deliver their Bodies to the Second Death And here I shall observe by the bye That tho' Josephus seems to intimate that the Wicked are not to rise and many of the Rabbins affirm the same thing Yet from hence it is manifest that among the Ancient Jews there were others of the contrary Perswasion And that in the time of the Apostles this was the general and receiv'd Opinion of the Jews is apparent from those Words of St. Paul in his Apology to Felix But this I confess unto thee that I have Hope towards God which they themselves the Jews also allow that there shall be a Resurrection of the Dead both of the Just and Unjust 8. The Chaldee Paraphrase of the Canticles has these Words C. 8. V. 5. The Prophet Salomon said When the Dead shall revive it shall come to pass that the Mount of Olives shall be cleft and all the Dead of Israel shall come out from thence And the Just too that died in
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
several Sects among the Jews he affirms of the Pharisees in general that they held That all Souls are immortal That those only of good Men pass into another Body but those of bad Men are eternally punished And agreeably to this in the Eighteenth Book of his Antiquities where he likewise gives an account of the Opinions of the several Sects The Pharisees says he believe that the Souls of Men both Good and Bad are immortal That they have judgment pass'd upon 'em under the ground according to their behaviour in this Life and that those of bad Men are retain'd in perpetual imprisonment but to those of the good there is given the power of returning to Life From the words of Philo Judaeus which I but now produced it appears that he likewise acknowledg'd it 'T is believ'd by some learned Men that this Opinion of the Transanimation was commonly receiv'd even in the time of our Saviour among the Jews But I am rather of Opinion That this part of the Platonical Philosophy began to be receiv'd just after our Saviour's time and that Philo and those Pharisees with whom Josephus had convers'd were the first that taught it That it was not known to the Jews in the time of our Saviour I gather from the Answer which Nicodemus the Pharisee made him when he had told him that no Man can see the Kingdom of God except he be born again A Man be born again It seem'd to the Pharisee a very strange Saying How says he can a Man be born again Can he enter the Second time into his Mother's Womb and be born Had the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereof we discourse been at that time known and acknowledged among the Jews how could he who was a Master in Israel express so much wonder at the hearing of a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mentioned To this we may add that there is not any Argument produced to shew that this Pythagorean 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was receiv'd among the Jews in the time of our Saviour but what is ineffectual and grounded on a Mistake In the Gospel of St. Matthew it is said that our Lord asking his Disciples Whom do Men say that I the Son of Man am They told him that some said he was John the Baptist some Elias and others Jeremias or one of the Prophets In the Gospel of St. Mark it is plainly intimated that the most common Opinion concerning him was That he was John the Baptist. He askt his Disciples Whom do Men say that I am And they answer'd John the Baptist. But some say Elias and others one of the Prophets This Opinion of the People concerning our Saviour some learned Commentators as Munster Maldonatus and Drusiâ—…s take to be grounded on the Pythagorean 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as if they imagin'd that the Soul of John the Baptist or of Elias or some other of the Prophets had entred into his Body in his Conception But how could they imagine it of the Soul of John the Baptist whom they knew to be just then put to Death 'T is very certain that they who took him to be John the Baptist believ'd that John who was beheaded a little before had risen again out of his Grave And that this was their Opinion appears moreover from what St. Matth. says of King Herod that hearing of the fame of Jesus he said unto his Servants This is John the Baptist He is risen from the Dead and therefore mighty Works do shew forth themselves in him St. Luke expresly asserts that the People who took him to be John the Baptist believ'd that the Baptist had risen from the Dead Now Herod the Tetrarch heard of all that was done by him and he was perplext because it was said of some that John was risen from the Dead And of some that Elias had appeared And of others that one of the old Prophets was risen again As for those that thought him to be Elias their Fancy was grounded on the expectation the Jews had of the coming of that Prophet again upon Earth according to that of the Prophet Malachi Behold I will send you Elias the Prophet They believ'd he would come again not by a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but in the same Body in which he was translated When St. Luke says that they thought Elias had appear'd he plainly intimates that they thought he had descended in his Body not been born again It is said in St. John that the Jews sent Priests and Levites from Jerusalem to John the Baptist to know who he was whether Christ or Elias or that Prophet Grotius in his Comment on this place believes that when they askt him whether he was Elias they imagin'd he might be Elias sent down from Heaven but they says he that askt him that Question shew'd plainly that they did not â—…ow of what Father and Mother he was born or at least doubted of it But in another place of his Comments his Opinion is otherwise He proves from this place that the Jews before Christ acknowledged a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and from them he thinks that Pythagoras borrow'd his Opinion That they could not think John to be Elias any otherwise than by a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he proves from this Consideration that he being of the Sacerdotal Order they could not but know him very well But to this I answer that tho' he was of the Sacerdotal Order yet he might very well be unknown to the Jews that then dwelt at Jerusalem How could that be St. Luke will answer for me From his Youth he was in the Deserts 'till the day of his shewing unto Israel Another place from whence some inferr that the Transmigration of Souls was receiv'd among the Jews in those times is St. John ix 2. where we read that Jesus passing by and seeing a Man who was blind from his birth his Disciples askt him saying Master who did sin this Man or his Parents that he was born blind But it is not necessary that because the Disciples believ'd that he sinned before he was born they should therefore believe that his Soul had been before that united to a Body It is much more probable that they thought his Soul might have sinned in its solitary state of Pre-existence and was therefore sent down into such a Body That this was their fancy is agreed by most Commentators St. Cyril of Alexandria and Grotius himself and it cannot be denied but that the Doctrine of the Pre-existence of the Soul was in those times receiv'd among the Jews Sure I am it is at this time their common and established Doctrine I mention'd but now certain Natural Philosophers among the Jews who were call'd Sapientes Mecar and that there seem to have been some so call'd in the time of the Apostles It is probable there were such even before those times It may seem from what I said
of 'em that some of 'em believ'd the Pythagorean 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But granting that some of 'em did so yet it does not appear that those that did so were some of the most ancient such as lived in our Saviour's time or before They might live long after those times and I am of opinion that they did To your Second Query which is concerning the consistency of the two Opinions this of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that of the Resurrection How one can be consistent with the other My Answer is this Those Jews that hold the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do all as well as the rest acknowledge the Resurrection but with this difference They do not acknowledge the Resurrection of all Humane Bodies for that cannot be but they tell ye that either the first or the last of those Bodies to which the same Soul has been united shall rise Abarbinel is of Opinion that the Resurrection is to be of the first but so is not Menasseh Ben-Israel he alledges that this does not agree with the Doctrine of the ancient Zoar. The Cabbalists there declare for the last And their Words are these R. Hisquiha says If you tell me that all Bodies shall awake and rise again pray tell me what will be become of those Bodies which were inform'd by one and the same Soul R. Joseph answer'd As for those Bodies which have deserv'd nothing nor done any good they shall be so dealt with as if they had never had a Being and because they were as a dry Tree in this World they shall also be as such in that which is to come But the last Body that was inform'd by the Soul shall rise again because it was planted and brought forth Fruit and took Root as it ought I am now in the next place to shew that tho' the Doctrine of the Resurrection was not receiv'd by the Jews as a necessary Article of Faith 'till after our Saviour's time yet it ought not to be lookt upon as the less certain on that account And this I shall make out by shewing that 'till after our Saviour's time there was nothing among them thought a necessary Article of Faith or Term of Communion but only the believing and owning the Law of Moses and the worshipping in the Temple of Jerusalem that the Immortality of the Soul it-self was not receiv'd by 'em as a necessary Article of Faith or Term of Communion The truth of this will evidently appear if we can prove that the Sadduces who denied not only the Resurrection of the Body but also the Immortality of the Soul were admitted by the Jews of those Times as Members of their Communion and true Israelites Now that this was so is apparent from these following Considerations First In the Acts of the Apostles it is said that when Peter and John were preaching to the People in the Temple The Priests and the Captain of the Temple and the Sadduces came upon 'em being griev'd that they taught the People and preach'd through Jesus the Resurrection of the Dead And in the Chapter following that there being a continual flocking of the People to the Apostles the High-Priest rose up and all they that were with him which is the Sect of the Sadduces and were fill'd with Indignation By which two places it appears that the Sadduces in those Days were the Companions and Associates of the Captain of the Temple and the Priests and not only so but were also the most intimate Associates of the High-Priest himself Which surely could never have been had they been look'd upon as Hereticks and out of their Communion Secondly It appears from the 23 Chap. of the same Book that a part of their Sanhedrin it self their great and Sacred Council consisted of Sadduces that one part was Pharisees and the other Saddnces Nay from thence we may gather that the Doctrine of a future Life might as well have been condemn'd by the Sanhedrin as the contrary Doctrine Else how could St. Paul cry out to the Pharisees that concerning the Hope and Resurrection of the Dead he was there call'd in Question He means not strictly the Resurrection of the Body but the Immortality of the Soul and the Life to come Thirdly The Sadduces were not only the intimate Associates of the inferior Priests and the High-Priests themselves and Members likewise of the Sanhedrin but they were also advanc'd to the dignity of High-Priests and own'd as such by all the Jews in general Josephus is my Witness that Ananus the younger who was High-Priest in the time of the Emperor Nero was by Sect a Sadduce and that long before him above 100 Years before Christ a Hyrcanus the first of that Name from a Pharisee became a Sadduce Fourthly Josephus tells us that though the Sadduces were but few in Number yet generally the better sort of People or Persons of considerable Quality were of that Sect. A learned Jew with whom I once discours'd concerning this Point in answer to these Arguments was pleas'd to tell me that the Reason why in those times the Sadduces were admitted into the Sanhedrin and into the High-Priesthood was because of the over-ruling and arbitrary power of the Heathen Governours and that Sect being in an especial manner encouraged by the supream Governours it was on that account embrac'd by such as were of the greatest Quality In Answer to which I might observe that in the time of Hyrcanus Judaea was not in subjection to any Heathen Governour neither does it appear that the Sadduces were peculiarly favour'd and promoted by the Roman Prefects If they were how came it to pass that in so long a time and among so many High-Priests there was only one Sadduce advanced to that Dignity But I pass by these Considerations and for a full reply to this Evasion shall referr you to the following Arguments Fifthly Though ' the Sadduces were members even of the holy Sanhedrin and one of the High-Priefts had openly declar'd for that Sect and another that openly profess'd it had been advanc'd to that Honour yet we do not any where read that any of the learned Jews thought it unlawful or remonstrated against it Josephus indeed tells us that the Sadduces had not any Power to speak of in the Government but that when they were advanc'd to any place of Command though unwillingly and by compulsion they profess'd themselves Pharisees because the Common People would not otherwise endure ' em This place may seem to make directly against me but in reality it does not On the contrary it makes directly for me For First It appears from hence that they were not peculiarly favour'd and upheld by their Heathen Governours Secondly It appears that it was not the learned part of the Nation but only the Common People 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that would not endure to be under ' em Though â—…t was not a matter of Conscience yet the People who had firmly
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
Origen seems to have borrow'd his Notion tell us that there is a certain little Bone in the Body of a Man they call it Luz which can never be dissolv'd But in such cases as we suppose it is highly probable that there may not be remaining after so many Motions and Transmutations any two Particles or Atoms united together which were united in the Body when alive At least it cannot be imagin'd that there can remain so many Particles united together as are necessary to the making up of such a Semen To this you may add that the Earth is the proper and natural Matrix of the Seeds of Corn and the like in which it is design'd by Nature that they should germinate and produce their kind But the Body of a Man is naturally begotten and form'd after a quite different manner It is therefore very absurd to imagine that because the Grains of Corn contain such semina within 'em as may germinate and bring forth in the Earth therefore likewise in the Particles of a Man's Body there may be such natural Semina from whence a new Body may rise I need not observe that if our Bodies had any such natural Semina it must thence follow that the Body which rises or springs up would be not of a different kind from that which was buried as Origen would have the rising Body to be but altogether of the same since the Seeds of all things do naturally produce their own Kind From a Humane Body there would spring up a Humane Body not a Subtle and Ethereal one The Socinians who deny the Resurrection of the same Body to avoid the force of this Argument which has been urg'd for it are forc'd to deny that our Saviour there speaks of the real Resurrection They affirm that he only spake of a spiritual Resurrection and that only the Graves of Ignorance and Impiety are there intended But this Evasion is very well confuted by a very great Man who observes that this Exposition cannot possibly agree with what Christ says He speaks expresly of bringing Men to Judgment and divides those which are to come out of their Graves into two Ranks neither of which can be so understood The first are those which have done good before they come out of the Graves these therefore could not be the Graves of Ignorance and Impiety from which no good can come The Second are those which have done evil and so remain as evil Doers and therefore cannot be said to have come sorth out of the Graves of Ignorance and Impiety or to rise by the preaching of the Gospel to newness of Life because they are expresly said to come forth unto the Resurrection of Damnation And that those Words ought to be understood not of a spiritual Resurrection but of that which shall be at the last Day is confess'd and proved by some of the Socinians themselves I need not add that the Words of St. John which I have cited out of the Revelations are beyond all dispute concerning the real Resurrection in the Day of Judgment Neither shall I observe that if both these places were to be understood in a Metaphorical sense yet even the Allusion or Metaphor would afford a sufficient Argument For our Saviour or St. John would not have alluded to this Doctrine after such a manner if it had not been true II. My Second Argument shall be taken from those Words of our Saviour in St. Mat. And fear not them which kill the Body but are not able to kill the Soul but rather fear him which is able to destroy both Body and Soul in Hell Here he plainly declares that the Body which will be in Hell is the same with that which might have been kill'd III. My Third Argument is those Words of our Saviour in the same Evangelist And if thy right Eye offend thee pluck it out and cast it from thee Fot it is profitable for thee that one of thy Members should perish and not that thy whole Body should be cast into Hell And if thy right hand offend thee cut it off and cast it from thee For it is profitable c. He tells us here not only that the Body which will be cast into Hell is numerically the same but also that it will have all the same Limbs and Parts To these express Testimonies of our Lord we may add these two following Observations concerning Him IV. First that when he had told Martha that her Brother Lazarus should be rais'd up out of his Grave to Life and she replied That she knew that he would rise again in the Resurrection at the last Day speaking plainly of the very same Body that then lay dead He seems by his silence to assent to what she said V. Secondly That when the Sadduces propos'd him the Question concerning the Seven Brethren who had married the same Woman Whose Wife she should be in the Resurrection He does not take notice of any Error the Jews were guilty of in supposing the Body would be a Humane Body but only corrects 'em as to their Fancy concerning Marriages in the next Life For in the Resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage but are as the Angels of God in Heaven As the Angels of God in Heaven Yes But he does not mean as Origen understands it in respect to the nature and substance of their Bodies but in reference to marriage which was the Subject of the Question Had he intended the nature and substance of their Bodies or if he had dislik'd the common and receiv'd Opinion concerning the Humanness if I may use that Word of the rising Body he would not have used those Words but such as these For in the Resurrection they neither marry nor have humane Bodies as your Question supposes but are c. VI. My Sixth Argument shall be the express Testimony of St. Paul This corruptible must put on incorruption and this mortal must put on Immortality That Body which in this Life is Mortal and Corruptible the same in the next Life shall devest it-self of those qualities and put on others those of Immortality and Incorruptibility To the same purpose are several other places of the same Apostle VII The Seventh shall be taken from the Testimony of the same Apostle concerning those that shall be living at the Day of Judgment He tells us that they who are then living shall not die but only be chang'd or alter'd It is therefore certain that the Bodies of those that shall be then living will continue the very same as to substance tho' changed or alter'd as to Qualities It cannot be imagin'd that the change will be of all the Substance that the whole Body will be in a Moment destroy'd and the Soul be invested with new Matter For the Soul to be separated from all the Substance of its Body together what is that else but to die But the Apostle expresly assures us
after the same likeness But this is a Conjecture altogether groundless and precarious And it is not I think to be doubted but that as they were translated in their Bodies so they still retain the very same and will always retain ' em And this to me is another very clear Demonstration that the Bodies to which our Souls are to be united in the next Life will be numerically the same XI I shall conclude all these Arguments with another drawn from the proper signification of the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Resurrection which is every where used in the New Testament and signifies rising again If the same Particles of Matter that were buried be not to rise if the Body is to be altogether new as to its Substance how can it be said to be a Resurrection a rising again That Body which rises again must be that which once died For nothing can be said to rise again but that which once fell If a new Body be to be created and united to the Soul if all that we are to expect be only this that after Death our Souls will be again united to a Body certainly they would never have chosen so very improper a Word to express it as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Resurrection It 's generally suppos'd by Natural Philosophers that in the space of about Seven Years all the Particles of a Man's Body are chang'd Now suppose you will say that a Man should keep his Bed for above Seven Years together and at last should recover and rise again tho' there be not one Particle in his Body when he rises the same that he had when first he began to keep his Bed yet the Body with which he rises may properly be said to be the very same The Body in such a case may properly be said to rise again I answer that there 's a great deal of difference betwixt a Body whose Particles are gradually chang'd in a continu'd union with the Soul and a Body whose Particles are chang'd not gradually but all together Altho' in the case suppos'd the Body is understood to be the same and may properly be said to rise again tho' it has not any the same Particles yet when the Soul is separated from the Body if that Body be dissolv'd and new Particles be form'd into a Body and united to the Soul it cannot be said to be the same or to rise again I appeal to the common Sense of Mankind I proceed now to shew in the Second place that our Doctrine of the Identity of the Body in the Resurrection is the Doctrine of the Primitive Fathers the successors of Christ and his Apostles The Fathers and ancient Writers of the primitive Ages whose Testimonies I shall produce are these which follow I. St. Clement Bishop of Rome the Companion and Fellow-Labourer of St. Paul the Apostle In his First Epistle to the Corinthians he endeavours to convince that People of the possibility of the Resurrection by the Example of the Phenix which he says according to the Opinion of those times was produced out of the same Matter of which the dead one was compounded He intimates that the Phenix was design'd by God Almighty as an Emblem of our Resurrection to assure us that he will certainly raise us up Why therefore says he do we esteem it a great matter and wonderful that the Creater of all things should raise up all those that have serv'd him holily since by a Bird he manifests to us the magniâ—…cence of his Promise And tho' he makes use of several other Comparisons yet he ehieâ—…y inâ—…s on this as the most apposlte and is very long and particular upon it Secondly He endeavours to eonvince the Corinthians of the possibility of it by representing to 'em the Almighty Power of God and his Veraeity that nothing is impossible to him but to lye and the like Thirdly To prove the Doctrine of the Resurrection he produces those Words of Job Thou shalt raise up my Flesh. I observe the Word Flesh. In the Greek Translation of the Book of Job it is Skin This St. Clement thought â—…it to change to express the thing more fully and 't is worthy to be observ'd that when he changed the Word he call'd it not Body but flesh Fourthly in his Second Epistle he has these Words Let no one of you say that this flesh shall not be judg'd nor rise Do you know in what you were saved in what you were converted unless it were in this Flesh We ought therefore so to keep our Flesh as the Temple of God For as ye were call'd in the Flesh so shall ye come in the flesh The Lord Jesus Christ who has saved us being first a Spirit was made Flesh and so call'd us So we likewise in this flesh than receive a Reward I know this Second Epistle is by some suspected not to be St. Clement's But as it is suspected so 't is only suspected not proved and this at least is certain that it is exceeding ancient Having thus shewn what was St. Clement's Doctrine I shall now subjoin some few Remarks 1. That the First Epistle was written by St. Clement not in his own Name only tho' his Authority alone were enough to demonstrate our Doctrine to be the Doctrine of the Church but in the Name of the whole Church of Rome This appears from the Title of it and from the Testimony of St. Irenaeus Clemens Alexandrinus Eusebius and others Clemens Alexandrinus quotes it in one place by the Title of The Epistle of the Romans to the Corinthians 2. That in most Churches it was wont to be read together with the Canonical Scriptures not only in Eusebius's time about the end of the Third Centry but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as he himself asserts in those Times which to him were the ancient Times From hence it is evident that the primitive Church in general profess'd the same Doctrine It appears from St. Epiphanius that in his time not only the First but the Second too was wont to be read in the same manner St. Clement says he in his Circular Epistles which are read in the Holy Churches c. And in the last of the Canons ascribed to the Apostles the same is mention'd together with the First as part of the Canonical Scripture 3. That St. Clement writes to the same Church to whom St. Paul had written before concerning the Resurrection Now since he found that some of the Corinthians persisted still in their unbelief notwithstanding what St. Paul had written to 'em if the Doctrine of St. Paul and the Catholick Church had been only concerning a new Ethereal Body he would have told 'em so in the plainest Terms that possibly he could not have written so to 'em as plainly to intimate if not assert the quite contrary Why are you so hard of believe Has not St. Paul already told you that the Body in the
that this was one of the Articles of the Creed receiv'd by the Church throughout the whole World to the ends of the Earth from the Apostles and their Disciples That Christ shall come and raise up all flesh And he spends a great part of his Fifth Book in proving against the Hereticks that we shall rise perfect Men with the same Body of Flesh. VIII And to prove the same against the Heathens is the whole endeavour of that excellent Treatise Concerning the Resurrection of the Dead written by Athenagoras the Christian Philosopher who was Professor in the Divinity School of Alexandria in St. Irenaeus's Time IX Athenagoras tells us there were many that had written before him on this Subject and that they were all asserters of the Doctrine of the Identity he plainly intimates He takes no Notice of any thing in which they differ'd from him but the Reason which they assign'd for the Resurrection The same Author observes that the Objection concerning one Man's feeding on another was in those days a common Objection against the Doctrine of the Resurrection From thence it appears that the Doctrine of the Identity was the Common and receiv'd Doctrine He adds that that Objection perplex'd even some of those that were admired for their Wisdom This Doctrine therefore was the common and receiv'd Doctrine not only of the Vulgar but also of the mâ—…st Wise and Learned X. Theophilus Bishop of Antioch who flourish'd at the same time with St. Irenaeus and Athenagoras in his first Book to Autolycus a Heathen maintains the same Doctrine But you deny says he the Resurrection of the Dead and say Shew me but one that has risen from the Dead and when I see him I will believe But what great Matter is it if you believe when you see a thing done Do you believe that Hercules though he burnt himself is yet living and that Aesculapius revived after he was struck with the Thunder-Bolt and yet disbelieve those things which are revealed to you by God c. XI In the same Age viz. in the Year 177 the Churches of Vienna and Lions wrote that Epistle to the Churches of Asia and Phrygia which is extant in Eusebius concerning their Persecutions In that Epistle they complain that their Persecutors would not suffer the Bodies of the Martyrs to be buried but threw 'em to Dogs to be devour'd and burn'd that which remain'd undevour'd to Ashes and threw the Ashes into the River And this say they they did as if they could master God and hinder their Resurrection that as they said the Christians might not have any hopes of a Resurrection through the belief of which they despised the greatest Torments and came willingly and with joy to their Deaths Let us now see say they whether they will rise again and whether their God can deliver 'em out of our Hands The holy Pothinus Bishop of the Church of Lions who was martyr'd at that time was not only born but was almost of Man's estate before St. John the Apostle's death XII Clemens Alexandrinus who flourish'd at the same time tho' in those Works which are now extant he speaks but very little of the Resurrection no where professedly yet that he held the same Doctrine may be gather'd from his Conjecture that Plato when he tells the Story of Eris's reviving after he had been dead Twelve Days had respect to the Resurrection XIII Tertullian who flourish'd towards the latter end of this Second Century has left us a whole Book concerning and in defence of this Doctrine entituled De Resurrectione CARNIS In another Book he affirms that this was one of those Articles of Faith which were receiv'd by the whole Church with one accord and which were immoveable and unalterable That Christ shall come to judge the quick and the dead and that by the Resurrection of the flesh XIV The Compiler of the Apostolical Constitutions who lived about the end of this Century has a large Chapter in defence of our Doctrine against the Heathens God Almighty says he will raise us up through our Lord Jesus Christ according to his Promise that cannot fail And he will raise us up together with all those that have died from the beginning of the World in the same form which now we have without any mutilation or corruption For we shall rise uncorrupted For whether we die in the Sea or have our Particles dispers'd in the Earth or are devour'd by Beasts or Birds He will raise us up by his Power by which he holds the whole World in his Hand Not a Hair says he of your Heads shall perish Through this certain perswasion we endure Stripes Persecutions and Deaths And in vain have we endured these things if we have not full assurance of those things which we preach As God created the World in the same manner he will raise us up by his good pleasure not standing in need of any assistance For 't is an effect of the same Power to make the World and to raise up the Dead When Man had no Being He made him of different Parts giving him a Soul created out of nothing And in the Resurrection he will restore to our Souls that do not die their Bodies which are dissolv'd c. XV. The Author of the Recognitions of St. Clement who lived in the same Age and is thought by a very learned Man to be Bardesanes of Syria affirms that the Souls in the Resurrection of the dead will receive their Bodies that were dissolv'd XVI About the middle of the same Age Celsus the great Adversary of the Christians publish'd that Book which Origen in the following Age answer'd He disputes against this as the receiv'd and avow'd Doctrine of the Christians That the dead shall rise again out of the Earth with the very same Flesh. 'T is true he adds that there were some even among the Christians that did not embrace this Doctrine but shew'd it to be horridly impure abominable and impossible But what sort of Christians those were whom he speaks of that they were only such as were condemn'd as Hereticks there is no one can doubt We know that many of the Hereticks denied it and wrote professedly against it and it 's usual with Celsus to mention those as Christians without any note of distinction who were even the vilest of Hereticks and own'd by none of the Orthodox He says for example in one place that the Christians affirm that Christ did not really suffer but only in appearance Which was only the Opinion of some of the Hereticks In another place he lays to the charge of the Christians a certain Opinion which was only receiv'd by the Ophiani a sort of Hereticks that were so far from being Christians that they hated Christ as much as Celsus himself and never admitted any one into their Society but such as first curs'd him Such as these perhaps
or not much better were those who denied the Resurrection as impure and abominable such perchance of whom we may say what Origen does in this latter case See what absurdity Celsus is guilty of who mentions those as of our Religion who cannot endure to hear the Name of Jesus XVII Lucian the noted Atheist a Writer of the same Age has these Words concerning the Christians Those Wretches perswade themselves that they shall be the whole Man both Body and Soul immortal and shall live for ever And on this account they contemn Death and many of 'em offer themselves voluntarily to be put to Death XVIII Minucius Felix who lived in the beginning of the following Age Who says he is so foolish and brutish as to deny that God who first made Man can form him again as he was before 'T is harder to make that which before had no Being than to restore that which once had a Being All Bodies when dissolv'd whether crumbled to Dust or dissolv'd into Moisture or reduced to Ashes or rarefied into Vapour are lost to us but to God the keeper of the Elements they are still preserv'd He brings in his Heathen objecting against the Christians that they believ'd this Doctrine of the Resurrection with so great and firm an assurance as if they themselves had risen to Life XIX The Author of the Book entituled Concerning the Cause of the Universe against the Heathens tells the Heathens that God will raise us all up not shifting the Soul out of one Body into another but raising up the same Bodies You O ye Heathens says he because you see that these Bodies are dissolv'd do not believe that they will rise again But learn you to believe For since ye believe according to Plato that the immortal Soul was made by God you ought not to disbelieve but that God is able to raise up to Life this Body which is compounded of the Elements and to make it immortal c. The Author of this Book was either Caius the Roman Presbyter or St. Hippolytus who both flourish'd in the begining of the Third Age. St. Hippolytus wrote a Book besides with this Title Concerning the Resurrection of the flesh We are now come down to the time of Origen who left the receiv'd Traditions of the worthy Fathers his Predecessors and endeavour'd to accommodate the Doctrine of the Resurrection to the Notions of the Heathen Philosophers He himself owns that the Resurrection of the flesh was the Doctrine preach'd in the Churches But he says that by the more wise it was not understood in so gross a sense as Celsus represented it If he means that the Wiser and Learneder sort of Christians did not believe that the same Humane Body is to rise it appears from the foregoing Testimonies that that is not true We have sought for Christ not among the ignorant Common-People but among the Doctors in the Temple And the Authorities which we have produced are those of the moâ—… Wise and Learned But this was not Origen's meaning He means only thus much That the wiser sort understood that the Flesh in the Resurrection would not be just the same in quality with that which was buried but would be alter'd for the better Neither we says he in his Answer to Celsus nor the holy Scriptures say that the Dead shall rise out of the Earth with the same Flesh without any alteration for the better So firmly establish'd in the Church was the Doctrine of the Resurrection of the same Body that Origen himself tho' in some places of his Works he advances an Hypothesis not agreeable to it yet in many other places he very plainly asserts 〈◊〉 In the Proem of his Books 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where he reckons up the several Doctrines which were own'd to be certain and firmly grounded on the Tradition of the Church he lays down this for one That there shall be a time of the Resurrection of the Dead when this Body that is sown in corruption shall rise in incorruption In the Second Book of the same Work Chap. 10. where he treats professedly of this Doctrine he disputes against the Hereticks that denied the Resurrection after this manner There are some says he especially among the Hereticks that are offended at the Church's Belief of the Resurrection as if we believ'd foolishly and absurdly concerning it To whom we may answer thus If even they themselves confess that there will be a Resurrection of the Dead let 'em answer us this Question what that is which died Is it not the Body The Resurrection therefore will be of the Body Let 'em tell us besides whether they think that we shall have Bodies in the Resurrection or not I think since the Apostle St. Paul says that it is sown a natural Body and shall be rais'd up a spiritual Body they cannot deny but that the Body is to rise or that we are to have Bodies in the Resurrection Now since it is certain that we are to have Bodies in the Resurrection and the Body that fell are said to rise again for nothing but that which fell can properly be said to rise again there is no doubt but that our Bodies are therefore to rise that we may be again cloath'd with ' em For this by a natural consequence follows from that For if our Bodies rise again without all doubt they therefore rise that we may be again cloath'd with ' em And if it be necessary that we should be in Bodies we ought not to be in any other Bodies but our own Now since it is true that they rise and that they rise Spiritual Bodies there is no doubt but that they are to rise again without their Corruption and Mortality For it would be in vain for any one to rise from the Dead that he may die again In his First Book Concerning the Resurrection as his Words are produced by Pamphilus in his Apology he thus disputes for it Is it not absurd that this Body which bears the Scars of Wounds receiv'd for Christ's sake and which as well as the Soul endured cruel Torments in Persecutions and suffer'd the Punishments of Prisons and Bonds and Stripes which was burnt by Fire cut with the Sword devour'd by Wild Beasts tormented on the Cross and many other ways should be defrauded of the Rewards due to it for so great Sufferings For does it not seem contrary to all reason that the Soul which did not suffer alone should be rewarded alone and its Vessel the Body which serv'd it with great labour should obtain no Reward of its Contentions and Victory that the Flesh which resists its natural vicious Inclinations and Lusts and preserves its Virginity with a great deal of labour which labour is more the labour of the Body than of the Soul or at least full as much should be rejected as unworthy in the time of Retribution and the Soul only obtain the Crown To the same purpose are those
Flesh of God the Word in Heaven together with God the Word I shall not here take Notice of the Dialogue against the Marcionites which is extant under Origen's Name in which the Catholick Doctrine of the Resurrection of the Same Humane Body is zealously asserted and maintain'd against those Hereticks I do not take it to be Origen's Yet t is certain that it is very ancient There are some that reckon Origen among the Asserters of the Millennarian Doctrine which Doctrine supposes a Resurrection of a true Humane Body But I think it is a Mistake Quis haec audiens resurrectionem carnis eum negare putet So St. Jerom after those Words of Origen which I but now transcrib'd from him Who would believe that Origen who in so many Places of his Works acknowledges the Resurrection of the Same Humane Body should in others advance quite contrary Notions and Opinions Whatever Pamphilus alledges in his behalf it is too too True that he did so You desire me to give you a particular account of his Opinions relating to the Resurrection Huetius I remember in his Origeniana treats largely of 'em But I have not that Work at present by me You must therefore be contented with what I have to present you of my own In short they are These 1. That in some places of his Works he advances this Opinion That the Body in the Resurrection is made up of new Particles by growing as Corn does out of a Seed I have already shewn In the First Canon of the Council of Trulla it is said that He and his Followers Evagrius and Didymus spoke wickedly and contumeliously of the Resurrection of the Dead Aristinus tells us more particularly that they foolishly said that these very Bodies that we now have are not to rise They denied says the Anonymous Author De Synodis the Resurrection of that Body which now we have They taught says another Anonymous Writer De Synodis That our Bodies are not to rise Epiphanius tells us that the Followers of Origen acknowledg'd the Resurrection of the Dead and of our flesh and of the Body of our Lord the same that was conceiv'd of the Virgin Mary yet they did not own that the same flesh shall rise but that another will be substituted by God in its Place And the same he says was the Opinion of the Hereticks call'd Hieracites that there will be a Resurrection of the flesh but not of this which now we have but another which will be substituted in its Place 2. St. Jerom says that the Followers of Origen when urg'd by the Catholicks would acknowledge the Resurrection not only of the Body but also of the flesh and if they were press'd very hard and were ask'd whether they own'd the Resurrection of this same Flesh which we now have which is seen and touch'd and walks and speaks they would assent even to that too But if they were ask'd whether they own'd that the Body in the Resurrection will have Hands and Feet a Belly Breast Teeth and the other Parts which make up a Humane Body that they denied 3. The same Author tells us that Origen in many places of his Works especially in his IV. Book Concerning the Resurrection and in his Exposition of the First Psalm and in his Stromata denied that the Body will rise with Bones Blood and flesh and such Parts and Members as now we have or with difference of Sexes and affirm'd that it will be Aereal Ethereal intangible and invisible and that whereas we now see with our Eyes hear with our Ears work with our Hands and walk with our Feet we shall then be all Sight all Hearing c. That the Body will be Subtle and Ethereal he asserts in his Comment on St. Matthew And in his Second Book against Celsus we are told that the Body of Christ after his Resurrection was so constituted as to be of a middle Temper between the fineness of the Soul and the grossness it had before his Death St. Maximus likewise observes that in some of his Books 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so I read it as a Manuscript has it not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in one of his Books he made the rising Body to be Ethereal 4. The Account which St. Methodius gives of his Opinion is this He tells us in one place that Origen taught That in the Resurrection we shall have the same species of Body the same Form or Appearance yet it will not consist of the same Matter as our Bodies in old Age retain the same Species yet have not any the same Particles which we had in our Youth In another place he says that Origen in his Comment on the LXV Psalm compared our Bodies to a Bladder full of Water if you let the Water run and keep pouring in new the Bladder retains the same form though the Water be all chang'd so says he it is with the Body in the Resurrection it is not numerically the same Body yet the Form and Figure is the same tho' made more Glorious 5. The same Author adds that according to Origen tho' the Body in the Resurrection retains the same intire Species or form yet it throws off its earthly Qualities and tho' it has the Shape and Figure of a Body of Flesh yet it is not flesh And this says he he proves from that Assertion of St. Paul that Flesh and Blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of Heaven which is spoken only of the Infirmities and Corruptions of Flesh and Blood and from other Texts of that kind 6. The same Author tells us in Photius that Origen made the Body in the Resurrection to consist of Air and Fire 7. From the same and other Authors it appears that he asserted with the Platonists that the Body is no part of the Man but the Soul alone is the whole Man and that the Body is the Pâ—…ison of the Soul into which it is sent by way of punishment for some Sin it had committed in a state of Pre-existence 8. Agreeable to this is that Fansie of his concerning the Creation of our first Parents Adam and Eve That they were created nudae mentes and had not any Bodies 'till after their Fall that then God cloath'd 'em with Bodies by way of Punishment And this he says is meant by that place in Genesis where 't is said that unto Adam and to his Wife did the Lord God make Coats of Skins and cloath'd them By Coats of Skins he understands Bodies 9. In his Books against Celsus he tells us that the reason why the Body is to rise and be united to the Soul is because the Soul cannot move without a Material Vehicle 10. In other places he tells us that the Soul is never without a Material Vehicle and that it is not capable of being rewarded or punish'd but in a Body and that before the Resurrection it is rewarded or punish'd
in an Ethereal Body 11. In other places he proceeds so far as to deny that the Soul will after Death be united to any Body whatever and to asfirm that at the end of the World all Corporeal Substance will be perfectly annihilated Photius tells us that He and his Followers Evagrius and Didymus asserted that our Bodies are not to rise but our naked Souls alone without Bodies So also says Constantinus Harmenopulus And Anastasiâ—…s Sinaita intimates the same We are told by Leontius that he own'd a Resurrection of the Body but held withal that the Soul being punish'd in the Body is purg'd by degrees and at last freed wholly from it and restored to its primitive state and condition Theophilus Alexandrinus assures us that he made the rising Bodies corruptible and mortal and asserted that after many Ages they will be annihilated That all Corporeal Substance will be at the end of the World annihilated he affirms in several places of his Books 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translated by St. Jerom in his Epistle to Avitus So St. Maximus observes that tho in some of his Books he taught a Resurrection of an Ethereal Body yet in others he denied it affirming that all corporeal Substance will be annihilated 12. In one place of his Work 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he tells us that at the time of the Dissolution of the World all Matter will be chang'd into the same Substance of which God himself consists In the same he asserts 13. That as soon as the World is dissolv'd and all Matter annihilated there will be new Matter and a new World created just like this and after that another and so on to Eternity and that before this World was created there had been innumerable others 14. That in the next World he that is now a Man may be an Angel and that which is now an Angel may be a Man by being for it's offences thrust down into a Humane Body If after it is sent down into a Body it does not behave it-self so as to deserve to be restor'd to its former State it will then says he become a Devil and according to its Merits be employ'd in divers Offices in the other Worlds if after this it desires to amend and become better it is sent again into a Humane Body and being there punish'd and purified it at last becomes an Angel as it was at first These were the Opinions of Origen relating to the Resurrection these his strange Contradictions and Inconsistences How dangerous a thing it is in matters of Religion to forsake the Traditions of the Church and to build upon ones own private Fancy we may learn from his Example If once you begin to indulge your own Fancy in Matters of Religion without a due Regard to the Traditions of the Primitive Church you know not where it will end 'T is odds but the head-strong Thing will at last after many Turns and Wanderings bring you to a Precipice No sooner were these Opinions advanc'd and publish'd but the Church began to be alarm'd Liberatus Diaconus affirms that Origen was condemn'd for 'em in his life-time His Apologist Pamphilus who flourish'd and wrote about the latter end of the same Century tells us that that which made the greatest Noise and was chiefly oppos'd was his Opinion concerning the Resurrection The same Author tells us that several had written against him on that Subject One of them was St. Methodius he whom I have several times quoted Bishop of Tyre who was martyr'd about the Year CCCIII. He wrote a Book with this Title Against Origen Concerning the Resurrection of which a great part is preserv'd in Epiphanius and Photius The Opinion which he opposes and confutes is First That the Rising Body will not consist of the same substance that was buried Secondly That it will be not a Body of Flesh but an Ethereal one Another that wrote against Origen Concerning the Resurrection was Antipater Bishop of Bostra in Arabia who flourish'd long after about the Year 460. A Third was Ammon Hadrianopolites whose Age I know not To these I might add Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria who writes against him in his Paschal Epistles Epiphanius St. Jerom the Emperor Justinian and others In the Year 399 He and his Opinions were condemn'd and anathematiz'd by a Synod of Alexandria under the Patriarch Theophilus who at the same time expell'd all those that profest 'em out of Egypt In the Year 400 he was condemn'd by a Synod call'd at Rome by P. Anastasius after that by a Synod of Antioch under the Patriarch Ephraemius a little after by a Synod of Constantinople under the Patriarch Mennas and at last by a General Council the Fifth which was held in the Year 553. I could easily fill you a Volume with the Testimonies and Authorities of the Doctors of the Fourth and the following Ages and could shew you with how great a Zeal the Doctrine of the Resurrection of the same Humane Body has been always maintain'd by the Church But I remember I am to send you not a Folio but a Manual and I think the History of the Resurrection which I have brought down through the Two first and purest Ages of the Church to the time of Origen may suffice to clear the truth of this Article of our Faith by shewing that the Fathers of those Primitive times were Seconds to the Apostles and abett the same Doctrine which we deduced from Scripture The later Doctors of the Church we will call all together to a General Council by their Creeds and so seal our Doctrine with the great and Venerable Seal of the whole Catholick Church We have shewn already from the Testimony of Irenaeus and Tertullian that in the Creed of the Catholick Church in their time the Resurrection of the flesh was one Article It is so in that which is extant in the Apostolical Constitutions It is so likewise in that which we commonly call the Apostles Creed which was generally believ'd even before the time of Ruffinus to have been written by the Apostles themselves In our English Translation we read The Resurrection of the Body but in the Originals the Greek and the Latin it is The Resurrection of the flesh So 't was read as Russinus affirms in all Churches That the Latin Churches read Carnis Resurrectio appears not only from Rufsinus but likewise from St. Jerom St. Austin Chrysologus and Maximus Taurinensis whose Expositions on the Creed are now extant and from divers others That it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Resurrection of the flesh in the Creed of the ancient Church of Jerusalem is apparent from St. Cyril Bishop of that Church It is so in the Greek Creed which is extant at the end of K. Ethelstan's Psalter in Sir John Cotton's Library and in that of the Bodleian Library which is written in
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
has now no real Deformity no Wrincle or Blemish but all is turn'd to Comeliness and Beauty At least we shall then have a truer Notion of Beauty and Deformity and that which now passes for Ugliness will then appear to be no such thing Hoec est vera resurrectionis Confessio quoe sic gloriam carni tribuit ut non auferat veritatem So †St. Jerom. And that Confession we must stand to Now how far these Bodies of ours are capable of being exalted and glorified so as still to continue truly Humane I shall not presume to determine I am not fond of walking in the Dark especially when it is to little or no purpose But because you desire to know what my Sentiments are concerning our future State and are pleas'd to ask me that Question How are the Dead rais'd up And with what Body do they come I must own my-self inclin'd to believe that our Bodies in the Resurrection will be as to their Purity Constitution and Liveliness the same with that of Adam when first it came from the Hands of its Maker with the Stamps and Characters of the Divine Goodness and Wisdom fresh upon it That was the true Exemplar and Original and Perfection of Humane Nature All the Difference I think will be this That Adam's Body after some little Time stood in need of Meat and Drink to supply its Evacuations and was fitted to make him the Father of Mankind Ours in the Resurrection will continue always the same without Perspiration or any other Evacuation The Springs will always have the same Bent the Motions will all be equally Regular the same continual Round of the same pure vigorous Spirits and the same Blood moving forever in a brisk but even Circulation The Apostles Epithets ' of Powerful and Spiritual and Celestial and Glorious and all that the Scripture says of our Transformation into the Divine likeness I take to signifie no more than this even and pure and dispassionate and incorruptible State of the Body with a perfect Refinement of all our Faculties This perhaps is much less than what some others are willing to allow to a glorified Body But I see no Reason why we should expect any higher Exaltation And if such be the State and Condition of it I know no Reason why we should desire any higher This Heavenly Frame is enough to make us truly Happy and Blessed no less than if our Bodies were Ethereal and our Souls were carried in those fine Celestial Chariots which the Heathen Philosophers talk of If Adam had not sinn'd these very same Bodies had then been Immortal and wholly exempted from Death Why then should we think it strange that the Immortal Bodies which God will bestow on us in the Resurrection should be truly Humane The Immortality of these Bodies was then intended as a Blessing and shall we not think it a Blessing worthy of the Donor to have the same Body restored to a better State than that from which it was fallen Yes This is enough and This is all I desire and This I hope to obtain Let this my Body this very same Body be made pure my Pollutions wash'd away my Passions subdu'd my Wants remov'd my Understanding clear'd my sense of true Pleasure enliven'd let this be but done and my Soul will desire no more Her old Acquaintance when blessed with these happy Transmutations will be truely welcome to her Neither She nor the Angels will ever be asham'd of his Company Let this be but done and I shall not think the grossness of it to be any Diminution of my Happiness I shall not envy the Glory of Incorporeal Beings but shall heartily thank God that I am what I am A Fourth Objection is concerning the unfitness of a Humane Body to be plac'd in Heaven on account of its Gravity How can a Humane Body that is naturally heavy be sustain'd in a pure Ethereal Heaven I answer 1. If those Regions of Heaven where the Saints are hereafter to have their Habitation be all fluid and Ethereal or even void Space yet our Bodies may without the least difficulty and without any Miracle or particular Care of Omnipotence be there supported and sustain'd There is no such thing as Gravity in Regions purely Ethereal which are above the Reach and Activity of particular Orbs. There is no High and Low in such Places Our Bodies will be there sustain'd as the Globe of the Earth and the several celestial Orbs are now sustain'd in the Air and Ether Which is not done by a Miracle for they are Naturally sustain'd there and there is not any Low to which they may encline There is nothing indeed properly speaking Heavy in its own Nature as there is not any thing Light in its own Nature And our Bodies even here in this World do not of their own Natures tend towards the Center of the Earth but they are violently haled of push'd down Had there been no external Causes of what we call Gravity contriv'd by the Creator there would have been no such Thing no High and Low in the Universe This no one can deny that considers the System of the World 2. That the place in which we are to have our Abode in the next Life is all pure Ether or Immaterial is perhaps not so true as generally suppos'd Perhaps after all our Heaven will be nothing but a Heaven upon Earth or some glorious solid Orb created on purpose for us in those immense Regions which we call Heaven It seems more natural to suppose that since we have solid and material Bodies we shall be placed as we are in this Life on some solid and material Orb. Neither is this a new Opinion but embrac'd by many of the Ancients That after the Resurrection we are to live for ever on a new Earth was as Maximus tells us the Opinion of many in his time And the same was asserted in the Third Century by St. Methodius Bishop of Tyre in his Treatise Concerning the Resurrection St. Peter himself tells us that after this World is dissolv'd there will be new Heavens and a new Earth wherein dwelleth Righteousness He adds that this the Saints look for with a plain Intimation that there they are hereafter to Inhabit St. John also in his Revelations makes mention of a new Earth where the Blessed are to have their happy abode after this World is destroy'd These places the Chiliasts produce to confirm their Opinion but they ought to be understood of the everlasting Habitation of the Blessed Our Saviour tells his Disciples In my Fathers House are many Mansions I go to prepare a place for you And If I go to prepare a place for you I will come again and receive you unto my-self that where I am there ye may be also In the Regions of Heaven tho' before our Saviour's Ascension there were many Mansions of Angels or Immaterial Beings yet those it seems were not thought fit for the