Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
spirit_n	body_n	call_v	soul_n	13,519	5	5.4839	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A50867	An account of Mr. Lock's religion, out of his own writings, and in his own words together with some observations upon it, and a twofold appendix : I. a specimen of Mr. Lock's way of answering authors ..., II. a brief enquiry whether Socinianism be justly charged upon Mr. Lock.	Milner, John, 1628-1702.; Locke, John, 1632-1704. Selections. 1700.	1700 (1700)	Wing M2075; ESTC R548	126,235	194

than a mere Vital Spirit and that it subsisted and acted in a separate State To all which Mr. Lock in his Reply in his Third Letter p. 440 441. says nothing at all nor does he take the least notice of it But Mr. Lock to justifie his using the Word Spirit in such a Signification alledges the Authority of one greater than Cicero or Virgil or the most enlightned Person of the Heathen World viz. Solomon himself Eccles. 3. 19 21. That which befalleth the Sons of Men befalleth Beasts even one thing befalleth them as the one dieth so dieth the other yea they have all one Spirit Who knoweth the Spirit of a Man that goeth upward and the Spirit of a Beast that goeth down to the Earth See Mr. Lock 's First Letter p. 71. To which I answer 1. How appears it that these are Solomon's Words and not the Sayings of others which Solomon only repeats Is it probable that Solomon would affirm absolutely as his own Sense that Man hath no Pre-eminence above a Beast Which Words we have v. 19. tho' they are omitted by Mr. Lock If they be not Solomon's Words then it is clear that he hath not the Authority of Solomon yea then he hath not the Authority of our Translators who this being suppos'd applied not the Word Spirit to Beasts but they whose Words the Preacher repeats apply'd the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to them which Word our Translators render Breath v. 19. and Spirit v. 21. 2. But let it be supposed tho' not granted that they are Solomon's Words and Sense I need only borrow once more Mr. Lock 's Words As I take it Solomon never us'd the English Word Spirit and tho' it be true that the Hebrew Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is often rendred Spirit yet that therefore Spirit in English hath exactly the same Signification that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath in Hebrew I think Mr. Lock will not say for then Spirit must signifie the Wind Breath c. since 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is apply'd to these In vain therefore doth he pretend that he hath the Authority of Solomon And yet he seeks to justifie his use of the Word also by the Authority of one greater than Solomon When our Saviour says he after his Resurrection stood in the midst of them they were affrighted and suppos'd that they had seen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Spirit S. Luke 24. 37. But our Saviour says to them v. 39. Behold my hands and my feet that it is I my self handle me and see for a Spirit hath not flesh and bones as you see me have See Mr. Lock First Letter p. 71 72. who forgot to tell us who the They and Them are but they are the Apostles and from our Saviour's words to them he here argues And if he would argue directly he must do it in this or the like form If our Saviour say that a Spirit hath not Flesh and Bones then he useth the word Spirit as signifying something from which Matter is not excluded But Mr. Lock must have invented a new Logick before he could have made good this Consequence He therefore goes another way to work both in his First and in his Third Letter I shall briefly examine what he says in both In his First Letter p. 72. he says that these words of our Saviour's put the same distinction between Body and Spirit that Cicero did in the place above cited viz. That the one was a gross Compages that could be felt and handled and the other such as Virgil describes the Ghost or Soul of Anchises Ter conatus ibi collo dare brachia circum Ter frustra comprensa manus effugit imago Par levibus vent is volucrique simillima somno Thus Mr. Lock So that in short according to him in those words of our Saviour an Image is call'd a Spirit And can we not conceive an Image that doth not include Matter I may instance in those Ideas or Images which are the immediate Objects of Mr. Lock 's Mind in thinking are they material Likewise in the Images that we see in our Dreams which latter Instance I the rather mention because Virgil in these very Verses compares the Image of which he speaks to Sleep or to an Image appearing in Sleep formam apparentem in somnis as some interpret it In his Third Letter p. 444 he says that from these words of our Saviour a Spirit hath not Flesh and Bones it follows that in Apparitions there is something that appears and that that which appears is not wholly immaterial Thus Mr. Lock In Answer to it I shall remind him that in his Second Vindication of the Reasonab of Christian. p. 228. he mentions a Request which Mr. Chillingworth puts up to Mr. Knot and I think it no less necessary to be put up to him Sir I beseech you when you write again do us the favour to write nothing but Syllogisms for I find it an extreme trouble to find out the concealed Propositions which are to connect the parts of your Enthymems As now for example I profess to you that I have done my best endeavour to find some Glue or Sodder or Cement or Thread or any thing to tie the Antecedent and this Consequent together Thus Mr. Chillingworth Here Mr. Lock 's Enthymem is this A Spirit hath not flesh and bones ergo In Apparitions there is something that appears and that which appears is not wholly immaterial If Mr. Lock can find some Glue or Sodder to join the Antecedent and this Consequent together it is well but if he cannot I shall make bold to add that no body else can Neither can he evade by saying that it was not from those words only viz. A Spirit hath not flesh and bones but from the whole Text S. Luke 24. 37 39. that he draws that Consequence that what appears is not wholly immaterial for the case is the same This may suffice as to his Authorities which are found to do him no service at all He subjoins in his First Letter p. 72 73. I would not be thought hereby to say that Spirit never signifies a purely immaterial Substance In that Sense the Scripture I take it speaks when it says God is a Spirit and in that sense I have us'd it and in that sense I have prov'd from my Principles that there is a spiritual Substance and am certain that there is a spiritual immaterial Substance Thus Mr. Lock But might he not have left out those words I take it and affirm'd positively that when the Scripture says God is a Spirit the word Spirit signifies a purely immaterial Substance He tells that he is certain that there is a spiritual immaterial Substance and I therefore hope that he is certain that God is such and if it be a certain Truth that God is a spiritual immaterial Substance in what sense can the Scripture be judged to say that he is a Spirit but in this God is a Spirit and

the Signification of the Word Spirit IF that will not serve his turn I will tell him a Principle of mine that will clear the Soul's Immortality to him and that is the Revelation of Life and Immortality by Jesus Christ through the Gospel Mr. Lock Answer to Remarks p. 5 6. Perhaps my using the Word Spirit for a thinking Substance without excluding Materiality out of it will be thought too great a Liberty but the most enlightned of all the ancient People of God Solomon himself speaks after the same manner Nor did the way of speaking in our Saviour's time vary from this I would not be thought hereby to say That Spirit does never signifie a purely immaterial Substance In that Sense the Scripture I take it speaks when it says God is a Spirit and in that Sense I have proved from my Principles That there is a Spiritual Substance and am certain that there is a Spiritual Immaterial Substance The First Letter p. 68. 71 72 73. OBSERVATIONS Mr. Lock in his Answer to Remarks p. 5. hath these Words I suppose this Author i. e. the Author of the Remarks will not question the Soul's Immateriality to be a Proof of its Immortality Doth he not then by taking so much Pains to persuade us that its Immateriality cannot be demonstratively prov'd manifestly weaken one Proof of its Immortality Mr. Lock in Essay l. 4. c. 3. § 6. says That he would not any way lessen the Belief of the Soul's Immateriality But he cannot expect that we should believe Words against the Evidence of Deeds Yet in his Essay l. 2. c. 23. § 18. he hath let fall some Words from which I think the Soul's Immateriality may be prov'd The Ideas we have belonging and peculiar to Spirit are Thinking and Will Thus Mr. Lock Now say I if Thinking and Willing are peculiar to Spirit then the Soul which thinks and wills is a Spirit And that by Spirit he in that Chapter means an immaterial Substance is evident for he opposeth Spirit to material Substance Besides the complex Ideas we have of material sensible Substances we are able to frame the complex Idea of a Spirit So Mr. Lock § 15. And so what he in the very next Sentence calls immaterial Substances in his Margin he calls spiritual Substances If then Thinking and Willing are peculiar to Spirit the Soul which thinks and wills is a Spirit or spiritual immaterial Substance I cannot reconcile the Immortality of the Soul with Mens ceasing to be when they die Mr. Lock who useth that Expression of ceasing to be more than once see above Chap. 15. must invent some unknown Sense of it which may reconcile them I shew'd just now That Mr. Lock in Essay l. 2. c. 23. did by Spirit understand an immaterial Substance and indeed he doth own that he doth so in his Third Letter p. 430. I shall transcribe his Words at large From the Ideas of Thought says he and a Power of moving of Matter which we experience in our selves there was no more difficulty to conclude there was an immaterial Substance in us than that we had material Parts These Ideas of Thinking and Power of moving of Matter I in another Place shew'd did demonstratively lead us to the certain Knowledge of the Existence of an immaterial Thinking Being in whom we have the Idea of Spirit in the strictest Sense in which Sense I also apply'd it to the Soul in that 23d Chapter Thus Mr. Lock And yet in his First Letter p. 68. he tells us of his using the Word Spirit not in that which he calls the strictest Sense but for a thinking Substance without excluding Materiality out of it He sets himself also to defend his using it thus This he doth first by the Anthority of Cicero and Virgil Ibid. p. 69 70. who as he says call the Soul Spiritus and yet do not deny it to be a subtile Matter But supposing this which he says to be true we may return Answer in his own Words in his Third Letter p. 126. That Latin Sentence Nil tam certum est quam quod de dubio certum being objected he taking it to be a Saying of the Romans answers thus As I take it they i. e. the Romans never use the English Word Certainty and tho' it be true that the English Word Certainty be taken from the Latin Word Certus yet that therefore Certainty in English is us'd exactly in the same Sense that Certus is in Latin that I think you will not say The very same say I As I take it Cicero and Virgil never us'd the English Word Spirit and tho' our Word Spirit be from the Latin Spiritus yet that therefore Spirit in English is us'd exactly in the same Sense that Spiritus is in Latin Mr. Lock I think will not say If he thought this a sufficient Answer to others why should it not be a sufficient Answer to him But farther Mr. Lock having said in his First Letter p. 69. that both Cicero and Virgil call the Soul Spiritus in answer hereto it was suggested concerning Cicero That in his Tusculan Questions in the Entrance of the Dispute about the Soul he takes Animus for the Soul and neither Anima nor Spiritus and that Spiritus is taken by him for Breath Now if this be true that is not which Mr. Lock says that Cicero calls the Soul Spiritus What says he in his Third Letter to this Not a Word nor doth he take the least notice of it neither doth he in that long Reply in his Third Letter p. 431 c. produce one place out of Cicero wherein he useth Spiritus for the Soul If it be said that he had done that in his First Letter I answer that he there cites only one place where he takes the Words on trust and sets them down thus Vita continetur corpore spiritu see him p. 70. But if he had consulted Cicero himself he would have found in Orat. pro Marcello vers fin the Words to be these Nec haec tua vita dicenda est quae corpore spiritu continetur illa inquam illa vita est tua Caesar quae vigebit memorio Saeculonum omnium quam posteritas alet quam ipsa aeternitas semper intuebitur Let Mr. Lock himself now judge whether Spiritus here must be necessarily understood to signifie the Soul and whether it can be more fitly interpreted than in the Sense in which Cicero most constantly useth it as signifying Breath even the Breath of our Nostrils without which the Body cannot live and which is so necessary to preserve this mortal Life which the Orator tells Caesar was not his Life As to Virgil Mr. Lock only cites these Words out of him Dum Spiritus hos regit artus saying that he speaks of the Soul see his First Letter p. 70 In answer to this he was told that Spiritus is there taken for the Vital Spirit and that Virgil did believe the Soul to be more

future State of Bliss or Misery and see there God the righteous Judge ready to render to every one according to his Deeds to them that by patient Continuance in well-doing seek for Glory and Honour and Immortality eternal Life but to every Soul that doth evil Indignation and Wrath Tribulation and Anguish To him I say who hath a Prospect of the different State of perfect Happiness or Misery that attends all Men after this Life depending on their Behaviour here the measures of Good and Evil that govern his Choice are mightily changed Ibid. § 60. Our Saviour requires the Obedience of his Disciples to several of the Commands of the Moral Law he afresh lays upon them with the Enforcement of unspeakable Rewards and Punishments in another World according to their Obedience or Disobedience Reasonab of Christian. p. 234. The Son of God would in vain have come into the World to lay the Foundation of a Kingdom and gather together a select People out of the World if they being found guilty at their Appearance before the Judgment-Seat of the righteous Judge of all Men at the last Day instead of Entrance into eternal Life in the Kingdom he had prepared for them they should receive Death the just Reward of Sin which every one of them was guilty of This second Death would have left him no Subjects Ibid. p. 211. Open Mens Eyes upon the endless unspeakable Joys of another Life and their Hearts will find something solid and powerful to move them to live well here The View of Heaven and Hell will cast a Slight upon the short Pleasures and Pains of this present State and give Attractions and Encouragements to Vertue which Reason and Interest and the Care of our selves cannot but allow Ibid. p. 291 292. Thus Mr. Lock OBSERVATIONS As to the Article of the Resurrection the first Enquiry must be Whether there are to be found any such express Words in the Scripture as that the Body shall rise or be raised or the Resurrection of the Body where the general Resurrection is spoken of If when Mr. Lock denies that such express Words are found in the Scripture see his Third Letter p. 210. his Meaning be that those very express Words are not found I grant that they are not but if he mean farther that express Words which signifie the very same thing are not to be found the contrary will easily appear In Rom. 8. 23. there are these express Words the Redemption of our Body and Mr. Lock in Reasonab of Christian. p. 206. tells us that thereby is plainly meant the Change of these frail mortal Bodies into the spiritual immortal Bodies at the Resurrection when this Mortal shall have put on Immortality In the same Chapter v. 11. we find these express Words Quicken your mortal Bodies He that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal Bodies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall make them to live restore them to Life after Death as he restor'd the crucified Body of Christ to Life so that to quicken our mortal Bodies is the same with raising them And Mr. Lock in his Third Letter p. 199. saying that in the New Testament it is said Raise the Dead Quicken or make alive the Dead the Resurrection of the Dead clearly makes to Quicken and to Raise to signifie the same And St. Chrysostom not to mention Occumenius and Theophylact who follow him gives a Reason why St. Paul says Quicken or give Life to our mortal Bodies rather than raise them viz. Because he here speaks only of those who should be raised to Life i. e. a blissful or happy Life viz. the Faithful who have the Spirit of God dwelling in them not of the Wicked who shall also be rais'd but says he unto Punishment not unto Life There is a third Text which hath so near a Resemblance to these that it may well be join'd with them viz. Phil. 3. 21. Who shall change our vile Body that it may be conformed to his glorious Body When shall the Saviour the Lord Christ effect this wonderful Change that our vile Body shall be made conformable to his glorious Body Surely then when he shall quicken or raise it and that will be when he comes from Heaven to judge the World see v. 20. Here is not indeed the Word Raise but it is plainly imply'd The Blessed Jesus when he comes from Heaven will raise our vile Body and make it conform'd to his own glorious Body Will Mr. Lock say that the general Resurrection is not spoken of in these Places He cannot say it of the first viz. Rom. 8. 23. without retracting his own express Words in Reasonab of Christian. p. 206. He cannot say it of the third viz. Philip. 3. 21. because the immediately foregoing Verse points us to the Time of Christ's coming from Heaven to judge the World He may perhaps say it of the second viz. Rom. 8. 11. because some before him have said that the general Resurrection is not spoken of in that Text particularly Calvin and Piscator Calvin in loc hath these Words Mortalia corpora vocat quicquid adhuc restat in nob is morti obnoxium ut mos illi usit at us est crassioram nostri partem hoc nomine appellare Unde colligimus non de ultima resurrectione quae momento fiet haberi sermonem sed de continua Spiritus operatione quae reliquias carnis paulatim mortificans caelestem vitam in nobis instaurat He tells us that by mortal Bodies is understood whatsoever remains still in us obnoxious to Death which we may grant him for our Souls are not obnoxious to Death and therefore our mortal Bodies contain all that remains in us liable to Death He tells us also that it is the Apostle's usual manner to call the grosser part of us by that Name i. e. by the Name of Body and we may likewise grant him this for every one grants that the Body is the grosser part of us But now what would he gather from this Whence says he we collect that the last Resurrection is not spoken of His Argument put into Form is this The Apostle by mortal Bodies understands whatsoever remains still in us obnoxious to Death therefore the last Resurrection is not spoken of Mr. Lock may try if he pleases whether he can find out any thing to tie this Antecedent and Consequent together but I can pronounce that it will not be very easie for him to do it Piscater's Words are these Quum certum sit Apostolum hic non lequi de resurrectione corporum sed animarum Tho' our own Eyes tell us that the Apostle uses the word Bodies not Souls yet if we will believe Piscator it is certain that here he speaks not of the Resurrection of Bodies but of Souls And how is it certain Mr. Calvin hath said it that is all the Assurance that I know of He that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal Bodies these