riveted into the very nature it self of these men Whence now ariseth this Intellectual Congruity with some Opinions and an Antipathy and Incompatibility with others unless their Souls did praeexist and came down into this state or condition thus prepossessed with a certain kind of affection to these or the other principles and with an inbred hatred to the contrary The same may be observed also about those things unto which many incline as being very prone to some certain exercises and peculiar operations of which determinations singularly tending to many specialties there can be rendred no sufficient reason unless it be this that the Souls of these people had formerly appeared and acted on another Theater before they came down into this where they were addicted to some certain kind of actions which was very analogous or agreeable to this very sort which they are observed to affect here in which if they had been more than ordinarily delighted and were exercised any long while they then acquired a habit and its probable that they retained in themselves always some certain reliques concerning them and some glimmerings and fragments as it were and when the Reason and the other faculties of these Souls came to Maturity who can deny but that these might be excited afresh again to choose them and to love them a new and by a new recovery as it were to call them back again into use 12. Whatsoever Opinion floweth forth from the very Nature it self of Duration that is a true Opinion This is such c. The minor is proved because whatever is capable of infinite duration from a respect of what 's to come the same is also capable of infinite duration in respect of what is past and that in its own Nature which in it self containeth nothing which is repugnant to this its former duration but such is the Soul Therefore c. CHAP. III. Containing Arguments drawn from Authority and indeed chiefly that of Scripture AUthority is either Sacred or humane and that is such either simply as are the Scriptures or else according to a certain respect and consideration as is that of the Fathers That of the Philosophers is humane The Arguments derived from the Authority of Scripture are either to prove the Praeexistency of all Souls or of the Soul of the Messiah only The former shall be produced in this Chapter 1. In Deut. 29.14 15. Neither with you only do I make this Covenant and this Oath But with all who stand here with us this day before the Lord our God and also with all that are not here with us this day From whence the Jews do thus argue Those with whom God hath made a Covenant they are not meer non-entities because a Covenant doth require two real relatives But God hath made a Covenant with Israelites who were not yet born Therefore they who were not yet born were not meer non-entities and then by consequence their souls either lurked in the Souls of their Parents which above is proved to be absurd or else they already did praexist 2. Isaiah 57.16 For I will not contend for ever neither will I be always wroth For the Spirit should fail before me and the Souls which I have made From whence the Jews fetch this Argument If God himself testifieth that he made Souls for Posterity with which he will not contend then those Souls before that time came in which the Spirit ought to hide or cover men did already praeexist But from the Text the first is true Therefore also is the latter true 3. Jeremiah 1.5 Before I had formed thee in the Belly I knew thee or rather I implanted knowledge into thee and before thou camest forth out of the Womb I sanctified thee and ordained thee a Prophet unto the Nations Whence say the Jews Whomsoever God so knew as that he implanted knowledge into him and sanctified him and ordained him for a Prophet he must needs be in being But God did bestow all this upon one before he was formed in the Womb Therefore one did exist before he was formed in the Womb and if it was thus with one what hinders that it may not be so with all because duration is one and the same to all created Spirits 4. Ecclesiast 4.2 3. Wherefore I praised the dead which are already dead more than the living which are yet alive Yea better is he than both they which hath not yet been who hath not seen the evil work that is done under the Sun Whence is this Argument compare this with Matth. 26.24 To whom is given but the least Drachm of happiness to him it cannot be denyed that he is in being But to him that is not yet born such happiness is given Therefore c. 5. Job 38.21 Knowest thou because thou wast then born and the number of thy days is great Or else by way of questioning thus Didst thou know or not that then thou shouldest be born and the number of thy many days From either sense floweth out a Praeexistency to the Soul of Job in as much as he is concluded to be present at the beginnings of things 6. Wisd 8.19 20. For I was a witty child and had a good Spirit Yea rather being good I came into a body undefiled Now he who cometh into a body being already good certainly the making of his Soul began not with that of his body 7. John 9.2 3. And his Disciples asked him saying Master who did sin this man or his Parents that he was born blind Jesus answered neither hath this man sinned nor his Parents but that c. whence is this argument Whatever opinion when the most fair occasion was given Christ did not refute nor reproved it as erroeous in that opinion is contained no unsoundness nor danger nor errour But this of the Praeexistency is such an opinion Therefore c. 8. Those who in Scripture are said to be lost they were sometime not lost For every thing which is said to be lost thereby presupposes that it was sometime in his power and possession who after that lost it for that which was never in possession can never be said to be lost But all men in Scripture are said to be lost Therefore all men were sometime not lost And consequently were in the power and possession of the supream Lord The minor is proved by Psalm 119.176 Jeremiah 50.6 Ezek. 34.16 Luk. 15.9 24. chap. 19.10 Matthew 15.24 18.11 9. Whoever are said to be erred and strayed like lost sheep they are to be presupposed to have been in the flock But in Scripture men are said to erre and stray from the flock like lost sheep 1 Pet. 2.25 Joh. 11.52 Therefore they were in the flock once and by consequence did praeexist 10. Whoever are stransters and Foreigners in the Earth They had their rise from elsewhere than in the Earth and have their Countrey elsewhere But in Holy Writ men are said to be strangers in the Earth Therefore
apple whether it be melted or whether it be congealed there is nothing that will be lost from that substance which was our flesh whether it should be turned and attenuated into the consistence of Air or of Aether 8. If the Soul did praeexist at first in an Aerial vehicle it follows that after death also the like must be given unto it lest it be forced to make a leap But such a vehicle would be altogether incommodious to departing pious Souls because the Air is the habitation of Devils and full of Tempests Answer There are divers degrees in the Air nor is there any need that pious Souls should be after death shut up within the Atmosphere of the earth where these inconveniencies are but there may be found much higher places in the Air where is greater quiet 9. If the Hypothesis of Praeexistency is true it follows that a man may die oftener than once for if when a man departeth out of this life his vital aptitude to an earthly body be not yet expired it will be necessary that he should return unto such a like body untill a vital aptitude to an Aerial body shall awaken in him and upon this account he ought to die oftener than once which is absurd as Heb. 9.27 Job 16.22 2 Sam. 12.23 Answer 1. The saying of Heb. 9.29 that it may rightly be understood we must distinguish 1. betwixt the term Man largely taken for the Soul in what state or condition soever it be and more strictly for the Soul united with the body made out of the earth 2. Betwixt universal and particular judgment Paul therefore is thus to be unfolded that whatsoever Soul is united with its earthly vehicle it is appointed to it Once to be dissolved from this vehicle and then it must stand before a particular judgment where the Divine Justice inquireth whether he hath so lived as that he is to return to his former state or condition or not For the universal judgment followeth not upon the deaths of particular men 2. As to what is said in Job 16.22 it is answered that that is particular and speaks only of the Death of Job animadverted in himself that the end of his vital aptitude to a terrestrial vehicle did draw near therefore as an Holy man there was no need for him to fear a return to this earthly tabernacle Now from a particular to an universal the Consequence is never good 3. The argument out of 2 Sam. 12.23 doth in like manner labour under a fallacy called in Logick an argument from what is said limitedly to what is said simply For it was a particular case that the Soul of David's young Son was not so to return into an earthly vehicle so as again to become the Son of David and in the very daies of David should return unto him yet from thence we may not argue universally 10. From this Hypothesis of Praeexistency it follows That the Heavenly glory of the life to come is unconstant and may be lost For if Souls can fall down from their former glory what hinders but that they also can fall from that which is to come Answer The promises in the Holy Scriptures do hinder in which an incorruptible Crown is promised to the faithful for a special reward 1 Cor. 9.25 and that which never will fade away 1 Pet. 5.4 Whence it is that Paul testifies that we shall rise again in incorruption 1 Cor. 15.42.52 And this corruptible must put on incorruption and this mortal immortality vers 53. that Death may be swallowed up in victory vers 54.55 together with Sin the sting thereof Hosea 13.14 11. From this Hypothesis it follows that divers Souls may enter into one body because they are said to want the use of reason and sense nor actually to have any but a plastick faculty which cannot discern whether any other Soul is entred in already or not Answer We must distingish betwixt a formative entrance and that which is not formative the first is when the vital centre of the Soul obtaineth its place in that point of matter in which the spirit of the Universe hath already determined the primary seat of the soul Although therefore a thousand Souls should enter together into one material body yet only one amongst them all could obtain the formative ingress viz. such a one as whose vital point should possess or occupy the primary point of the matter which seeing it is indivisible cannot be obtained by more than one nor can it possibly be said that more or many can together possess one and the same point or be homocentrick for should it be so that would come to pass either of purpose or by chance the first cannot be because the use of Reason and Sense is absent nor can the other be because the matter of the vehicles which are not to be laid aside without a reason or cause doth hinder in which notwithstanding that this homocentricity be allowed penetration of dimensions cannot be avoided 12. From this Hypothesis it will follow that the other Planets also are to be inhabited by men Because that some of them being nearer to that place of happiness from whence these Souls are fallen down are greater than this earthly Globe Answer The consequence is denyed because that there will be a want of seminal matter duely prepared For God placed Adam in this Globe of Earth as the first preparer of such matter out of the bounds of which men from thenceforth will not be CHAP. VIII Containing the Arguments of the adverse part which they take from holy Scripture 1. THe first place is out of Genesis 1. vers 28. thus Whoever by the power of Gods command Increase and multiply do multiply themselves according to their kind they no less propagate themselves as in respect of Soul as well as of body because to the constitution of the species or kind of things animate there as much belongeth a Soul as a body But men by vertue of Gods command do multiply themselves according to their species or kind Therefore c. and by consequence Souls do not praeexist Answer We allow the whole Argument but deny the consequence to the conclusion For men can propagate themselves also as to Soul though the Soul be not taken from out of their substance for a man whilst he generateth prepareth nothing but matter convenient to the introducing of a Soul and so he is a cause without which the effect cannot be produced by reason of the introduction of Souls just as he who prepares matter or fewel for the fire is the cause without which the fire cannot be introduced and thus also he multiplieth fires which notwithstanding come from without thus also magnetical bodies or Loadstones can by rubbing only multiply themselves if viz. they be rubbed upon Iron although the subtile matter which combineth therewith cometh from without 2. These things being thus premised in a humane manner we answer to the minor proposition by denying it for
may Be re-install'd in her kindly Sacred Throne Which she had left as exil'd wandring down 7. St. Augustine also speaks favourably of this opinion in his 1. Book of Free-will Whether the Soul lived another kind of life before her conjunction to this body is a great question and a great secret Also in the 3. Book when he came to speak of the Praeexistency of Souls he saith thus If we think of God that he is any other than he is our intention driveth us not into beatitude but into vanity but if we think of the Creature any thing otherwise than he is so long as we do not hold that opinion for that that is known and commanded there is no danger And in the discussion of that fourfold question Whether viz. the Soul be propagated or created Whether or no it was sent from God from some secret receptacle where it praeexisted or that it fell down hither by or of its own proper motion he saith thus Either that same question is not as yet by the Catholick Writers of Divine Books because of its obscurity and perplexity brought and illustrated as it deserves or else if it be already performed their Letters have not as yet arrived at my hands 8. St. Basil also c. And 9. Gregory Nazianzen who that they were not adversaries to this opinion appears from hence that out of Origen's Writings they collected a very remarkable Treatise on which they put the title of Origen's Philocalia in which are found places not a few which partly implicitly partly explicitly affirm the Praeexistency of Souls 10. John of Hierusalem 11. Phil astrius 12. Boethius may be added to the rest CHAP. VI. Containing Arguments derived from the Authority of the Philosophers THe Testimony of the Antients is indeed found to exceed all others let us turn our eyes which way soever we please 1. In Aegypt the most Antient Nurse of occult sciences we have Trismegistus assenting thereunto as is apparent out of his Fragments 2. As also the Gymnosophists with whom the Brachmans of India and the Persian and Chaldean Wisemen had to do as is manifest from the Magical or Chaldean Oracles upon which Pletho and Psellus wrote Commentaries 3. To these add the abstruse Philosophy of the Jews which they call the Cabbala whose Author was Moses the chiefest of all the Philosophers who ever were Whence Manasseh Ben Israel concerning the Creation Prob. 15. s 5. out of Gemara Hagigae citeth the following words In the Empyrean Heaven are Mansions of life and peace and of the Souls of the Just and of Spirits and also of those Souls which are to come into the world And out of Bereschith Rabba alledgeth that testimony that the Jewish Doctors do expound that place of Psalm 139.5 After and before thou formedst me concerning the Creation of Adam that is of men which was done first on the first day and then on the sixth day 4. Hither also doth especially belong Philoâ— the Jew in whom nothing is more familiarly treated on than this opinion that the Quotations are needless We may add 5. Zoroaster 6. Pythagoras 7. Epicharmus 8. Empedocles 9. Cebes of Thebes 10. Euripides 11. Plato 12. Euclid 13. Virgil. 14. M. T. Cicero 15. Plotin 16. Jamblichus 17. Proclus 18. Porphyrius 19. Psellus and a many others And amongst the Moderns 20. Marsilius Ficinus 21. Also Johann Fernelius who adjoyneth to himself Hippocrates and Galen viz. in Book 2. c. 4. of his concerning the hidden causes of things 22. Cardan of the immortality of Souls p. 235.239 c. 23. Pomponatius who notwithstanding is little favourable to the immortality of the Soul And lest we should leave out any body we will here also recount 24. even Aristotle himself who in his tract of the Soul l. 1. c. 3. when he speaks of the necessary quality of a body of being to be actuated by a Soul he inveigheth against them who handle this matter so negligently as if it were possible according to the Pythagorick Fables that any Soul might enter into any body for to every Animal blongeth a proper species or kind as also to be of a peculiar form But they who teach otherwise do say the same as if any one should affirm that the Smith's art goes into the pipe which is made for every art must use its own instruments and every Soul it s own Body Where certainly Aristotle doth not inveigh against the Opinion of Transmigration which includes in it self that of Praeexistency but that the Soul of man can enter into the body of a Brute and on the contrary This is that absurdity which Aristotle rejecteth tacitly approving of the other part of the opinion Yea in his tract of the generation of Souls l. 3. c. 11. he speaks out more clearly Out of the Earth and its humidity are generated Plants and other living creatures because in the earth is a moisture and in the moisture a Spirit and in the whole Universe an animal heat so that all things are in a manner full of Souls Also in l. 2. c. 3. where he especially handleth the Question of the Praeexistency of sensitive and rational Souls whether viz. both of them may be said to praeeist or the Rational only he thus concludes It remains then that the Rational Soul only doth enter from without as that which alone is divine and with whose operation that of the body hath nothing in common In which words he expresly followeth the Opinion of his Master Plato Part II. Being Confutatory CHAP. VII Containing objections from the adverse part and answers to them 1. BUt here some argue to the contrary thus If the Soul should be united to the body for a punishment then that union would not be natural nor would be a good thing and a perfection of nature but rather something that is evil as is all punishment which would be most absurd The Answer 1. As for instance it is injoyned also to man for a punishment that in the sweat of his brows he should eat his bread that a woman shall bring forth in pain that the earth shall bring forth Briars and thorns and yet notwithstanding neither the sweat nor the pain of Child-bearing nor the bryars and thorns in respect of the earth do cease to be natural yea this very gross and inglorious body it self instead of that glorious one in the state of innocency is given to a man for a punishment and yet is a thing natural 2. It is therefore a Fallacy taken from what is said with limitation to what is said simply For simply the Soul is not united to the body for a punishment but restrictively and this union according to the 9. Thesis of this Hypothesis is not granted to the Soul only for a punishment but also for an advantage that viz. an occasion for the Soul to return unto its former state and condition should not be wanting unto it 2. In every thing that is first which is natural and
in Holy Writ is no such addition that man was to multiply according to his species or kind but it is nakedly put thus increase and multiply which are indifferent phrases without all determination of the principal efficient cause 2. From Gen. 5. vers 3. If Adam begat a Son according to his own image likeness it follows then that his Son was also begotten by him as to his Soul But the first is true therefore also is the latter so Answer We deny the antecedent because likeness may be understood to be external by reason of the body to the corruption of which the Soul was also subjected although it came into it from without 3. From Gen. 46. vers 26. whatsoever went forth from out of the loyns of the Parent that did not praeexist but the Souls of the sons c. Therefore c. Answer In this Saying is a Synecdoche of one part for another where the Soul is taken for the body as the Scripture also speaketh elsewhere as Psal 16.10 He will not leave my soul in the Grave c. 2. In this also may be said to be a metonymy of the form for the thing formed of the Soul for the thing animated 3. If the acception were proper this absurdity follows that the Soul is propagated from the Father only the Mother contributing nothing 4. From Job 14.4 Who can give a clean thing out of that that is unclean whence it followeth that from the impure Soul of the Father must proceed or come forth an impure Soul of the son Answer The particle From doth not always signifie the prinpal efficient cause but often times also the instrumental cause or that cause without which the effect cannot be produced and so is it to be understood in this place 5. From Psal 51. vers 5. Behold I was shapen in iniquity and in sin did my mother conceive me Answer The Text speaketh of the iniquity and sin not of the Infant but of the generating Parents but if the sin were to be understood of the infant this is then the sense or meaning Behold my Soul being already in in-iniquity from a preceding fall is received into the Womb of my Mother 6. That which is born of the Flesh is Flesh John 3.6 Answer The word or term to be born importeth no essential dependence on him who begetteth for the Soul even already before its nativity being carnal that is having gained a vital aptitude unto Flesh coming forth from carnal Parents is called Flesh even as impure water derived through impure pipes when it breaks forth is so much the more impure 7. Rom. 5.12 As by one man sin entred into the world and by sin Death so Death is passed unto all men because all have sinned from this it follows that before Adam there was no sin Answer Adam in the Allegorical History of Moses is a figure of all mankind and this very Text doth shew that death is passed unto all men not upon that account that Adam only hath sinned but in as much as every single man hath sinned The Particle One signifies the same as First doth as in Mar. 16.2 Luke 24.1 John 20.1 Acts 20.7 8. Rom. 9.11 it is said that the Children who were not yet born had done neither good nor evil whence it is concluded that Souls before this earthly life had not committed sin Answer Not being as yet born are either such as exist before the union of Soul and Body or such as exist in that union the Text speaks of these latter not of the former because first they are expresly named Children 2. The determinate time in which they had committed neither good nor evil is denoted viz. when the Lord said The Elder shall serve the Younger which he then said when they were already alive and the Infants moved in the Womb and so being not yet born they may be said to have committed neither good nor evil actually although before the union somewhat of a fall had preceded and therefore the predicate is to be limited they had done nothing of good or evil viz. in the state of the earthly union of Body and Soul 9. From 2 Cor. 5.10 They argue thus If in the place where an account is to be rendred of all sins an account is to be rendred of those only which are proper to the body as every one hath done it followeth that without the body there is no sin But the former is true and therefore also the latter Answer The Antecedent is denyed 1. Because in the Text is found no such exclusive particle Only but from the greater part viz. the actual sins is the denomination of the judgment made therefore it may also be that that account must be generally rendred of original sin 2. Granting that an account was not to be given of this sin yet it doth not follow that it was not committed because 1. it would have been obliterated already by the general oblivion in the Soul 2. It should have already suffered punishment for it viz. it s being thrust down into this earthly Dungeon or Prison 10. From Hebr. 7. v. 5.9 10. Who paid Tythes in the loins of his Father He even as to his Soul is in his Father But c. Therefore c. Answer The Antecedent is denyed for this phrase to be in the loins of his Father signifieth nothing else than not to be as yet born and yet to be in a possibility to be born therefore such as is the Nativity such also is the possibility or power of being to be born Now the Nativity doth not admit of the concurrence of the Father otherwise than as an instrumental cause to prepare the matter for the introduction of the Soul Therefore also the possibility or power of being to be born ought thus to be understood 11. From Ecclesiast 12.7 The Spirit returns to God who gave it whence they thus argue As the body is from the Earth so the spirit is from God and at the time of generation dust is given from the Earth Therefore also at that time the Spirit is given from God Answer We must distinguish between a giving which is originary and that which is participative this is meant in this place but not that For as although the body be taken out of the earth yet its matter originally does not then at last begin so although the spirit be given from God at the time of generation viz. by an universal concurrence yet it followeth not that it then at length beginneth 12. From Zach. 12.1 The Lord saith who formeth the Spirit of man in the midst of him if therefore the spirit of man is formed within him it did not praeexist Answer By Spirit in this place is to be understood the animal Spirit as often it is elsewhere Gen. 6.17 ch 7.15 compare the 15. verse importing the same sense almost of Psalm 33. even as also is the determination in the midst of him viz. it denoteth it to be in his bowels whence it is that it so follows not in respect to the Soul FINIS