Written was the most Learned amongst the Apostles and of a Sublime Natural Genius But there appears no likelihood that they were of St. Matthew's Opinion in this matter of the Souls Seperate Subsistence which if our Lord had mentioned in this Doctrine I conceive they would not have failed to take great notice of it because it was a Subject of high Speculation not fit to be let fall to the Ground without notice and delivering of the same to the Christians of that time If our Lord's Doctrine worded as it is by St. Matthew were truly the same as that Evangelist hath reported it And upon these grounds I am apt to conceive that St. Matthew's Words Are not able to kill the Soul are likely to have sprung from his own Opinion of the thing and are not otherways the very true Expressions and Words wherein our Lord delivered this Doctrine to his Disciples And therefore I am apt to Appeal from the Text of St. Matthew to that which is reported to us in the Text of St. Luke's Gospel Thirdly I conceive that the Text of St. Luke wordded at it is doth more fully express our Lords meaning as in this Doctrine than the Text of St. Matthew's doth For Luke says That after Men have Killed they have no more that they can do or can do no more harm to the Killed Person or can Bring no more Sufferings upon him by any thing that they can do I think St. Matthew's Words Are not able to kill the Soul do not so well or fully express our Lords meaning as St. Luke's do For that those who maintain the Souls Seperate Subsistence do say all that it retains the Faculties of Intellect and Memory as the Natural Powers thereunto properly belonging Whence it seems Inferrible that they may and do remember such Relations and Friends as they left behind them on Earth and are likely to be so much concerned for them as to rejoyce at their Well-fare and be grieved at their Sufferings For of this we are informed from the Parable of Dives if it have a Power of Proving or Teaching in such cases for Dives tho' Wicked and in Torments yet had so much good Nature in him as to remember his Relations upon Earth and have care to prevent those Sufferings which they was otherwise likely to fall under and prays Lazarus may be sent out to obviate by his Instructions the Calamity which was like to befal them and make some Addition to those Sufferings under which himself now lay and from hence we may Collect that Men who have Killed can still make some Additions to the Sufferings of the Dead by Tormenting or persecuting their Relations or Friends upon Earth which possibility is quite taken away by the Words of St. Luke's Text After Killing the Person Men have no more that they can do they can do no more harm to the Dead Person who is now gone quite out of the reach of any but God and I doubtingly conceive there is neither Soul nor Body left of him for Men or Devils to prey upon And from what is before delivered I am ready to conceive That St. Luke's Words do more fully and properly express our Lord's meaning than those of St. Matthew do and consequently that it is probable our Lords Doctrine was deliver'd in the Words of St. Luke's Gospel rather than in those Words which St. Matthew hath Recorded and if this prove a truth it will utterly remove the proving force of St. Matthew's Text which is otherways the Principal Foundation upon which the Opinion of the Souls Seperate Subsistence is Built Hereupon I do not doubtingly but fully conceive That Mr. W. and his partakers will openly exclaim against my proceedings in offering or pretending to prove or conceive that any sort of Scripture Words or Expressions can be Erroneous and yet it seems both clear and common that Words Sayings and Texts of Scripture have been often and are Daily brought and alledged for the Proof of Erroneous Opinions and Doctrines I confess my self not so much to Idolize the Words and Expressions of Scripture as to receive for an Oracle every Saying or Sentence which I find Written in the Bible or to believe every such Saying or Sentence to be an irrefragable truth and the very Word of God 1 John 4.1 Believe not every Spirit but try the Spirits whether they are of God I conceive there is no other way to try Mens Pretences to the Spirit of God but either by the miraculous Works of such Persons as pretend to it or by the Fruits of the Spirit which appears in their Works and Actions amongst Men and the Tryals by either of these means proceed upon grounds of Humane Understanding and the results thereof as a Parable and Paraphrase to St. John's Text I conceive it may be said Believe not every Saying and Sentence which ye find Written in Scripture But try first whether that Saying or Sentence be the Word of God or no. And in this Tryal it seems there are but two ways or means to be used The first is by comparing it by other Scriptures or Texts or the Analogy Current or Stream of Doctrine which runs and continues through the whole Scriptures from the Beginning to the End thereof And if any particular Sentence oppose the Analogy or Stream of Doctrine which runs through the whole Scriptures Men may rest assured that Saying or Sentence neither is nor can be the Word of God Next if we meet with Sayings or Sentences of Scripture which are opposed by other Sayings or Sentences thereof it seems we may have good Reason to doubt on which side the truth stands and by the most fair and easie Constructions that we can use bring them to such an Agreement as by workings of Reason they can be brought unto And I am apt to infer That if by Constructions of Reason they cannot be made stand together in such manner as both them may be true I think it a reasonable Result of such Tryal to think as it must needs be that there is Error or Mistake in one of them The other means for trying the Truths of the Scripture Sayings or Sentences proceeds from the grounds of Natural Principles viz. The common Sensations and Reasons of Men radicated in their Natures and confirmed unto them by certain and often Experiences And it seems that if Men meet with such Sayings or Sentences in Scripture as are opposite to Natural Principles and the common Sense and Reason of Mankind confirmed to them by Practice and Experience we may with assurance enough conclude that such Sayings or Sentences ought not to pass among us for the Word of God And yet I am apt to believe that my Opinion in this Point will not find an easie acceptance amongst those who practice the Reading and Magnifying of the Scriptures which is also without doubt a very Beneficial and Laudable Practice And yet I think I may justly apply thereunto the common Proverb of Omne
even down to latter times and the same Conception seems to have a Being and Substance in the Minds of some learned Persons until this time My Discourse concerning this sort of Spirit hath been deliver'd with intent to discover and evince That Solomon's Spirit returning to God who gave it was spoken and meant by him concerning this last sort of Spirit and I intend to recite some Arguments for the proving of this Construction First I Argue from the words or terms of the Text it self and say That it Solomon intended such a Soul as Mr. W. has described the Text it self seems not to be properly worded because I think nothing can be properly said to return to another thing except it had been a part or concomitant of that other thing before but Mr. W.'s sort of Soul seems never to have been a part or concomitant of God before its being put into the Body for the enlivening and acting of the Person I do not therefore well perceive how such a â—oul can be properly said to return to God but the Expression therereunto properly belonging should have been worded The Spirit goes to or goes before God with expectation to receive his Judgment and Sentence according to the demeanour of its Person upon Earth and I do not perceive how this Souls going to God for Judgment can be properly call'd a return to God who gave it Secondly I Argue I find not so much as one Text in Scripture which says the Souls of dying Persons go presently to God for Judgment nor any Text from whence this Opinion may be drawn by a rational Inference and that which makes nearest approaches to it of any that I know is the Parable of Dives where it is said the Begger died and was carried by Angels into Abraham's Bosom I know my Opposers will think it needless to ask them what is intended by the words The Begger was carried by the Angels into Abraham's Bosom and doubt not but they will soon make a bold Answer It neither was nor could be the Begger himself that was so carried in his whole Person Body and Soul into Abraham's Bosom and yet the Words of the Text seem to import that his whole Person Soul and Body was carried thither But if we shall grant their gloss upon this Text to be true that his Soul only was carried by Angels into Abraham's Bosom we may draw these inferences from that Relation either that his Soul was so ignorant as it knew not how to find a way to that Habitation or else was so weak and impotent as it was not able to pass thither without the Support and Ministry of Angels How then can we conceive that such a Soul as this should make its return to God presently upon the Death of its Person without mention of any other Assistance to be given it We hear nothing of Dives in the Parable but that being in Hell he lift up his Eyes and saw Lazarus in another place without mention of the means by which he came there and if we shall follow the common Conjecture that as Lazarus was carried to one place by Angels so Dives was hurried to the other by Devils it will appear very unlikely that Mr. W.'s sort of Soul is able to make its way and return to God at its Pleasure And here we Read the Begger 's Soul was carried by Angels into Abraham's Bosom without mention of its being carried or returning to God at all whence it seems probable that when Solomon speaks of the Souls returning to God he doth not intend such a Soul as Mr. W. hath described but rather such a Spirit as had first been a part oâ— parcel of the â—pirit of Nature or of God sent out for the enlivening and acting of a particular Person upon whose Death that Spark or Parcel of the Deity returns with a strong inclination to God who sent it out from himself for the enlivening â—nd acting of that particular Body and joyn'd it self again to its Totum as Water presently incorporates with Water and the particles of Air neither will nor can be seperated from the incorporating one of them with an other Thirdly I Argue That if Solomon had intended by the Words Returns to God who gave it a going of the Soul to God or before God for receiving the Doom of his intermediate Judgment it seems a matter of such great Moment as required a more full Discourse upon the same and giving us more Light in it than his very few words there do afford us And however it is very probable that he would not have immediately subjoyned to his Discourse which intimates an intermediate Judgment a Declaration and Description of the General Judgment for that would have been playing Judgment upon Judgment which must needs have past for false Heraldry We find in this Chapter that as soon as Solomon had writ the Words The Spirit returns to God who gave it he ceases to speak any further concerning the State of Man after Death till he come to the 14th or last verse of the Chapter where he sayes as a conclusion of his whole matter Fear God and keep his Commandments for God will bring every work into Judgment with every secret thing whether it be good or whether it be evil I think it not reasonable to conjecture that Solomon by his Returning of the Spirit to God who gave it did intend such a returning to God to be a going to him or before him for an intermediate Judgment for that if he had so intended he would not have immediately have mentioned and related the Certainty and Effect of the General Judgment as in this we see plainly he hath done and thus I leave Solomon's Words and the descant upon them to the further Consideration and Judgment of the Intelligent Reader Mr. W. goes on to quote Eccl. 3 20. Where he saith Solomon affirms that the Spirit of a Man goeth upward when he dieth adding that Solomon brings it in with an Intrrogation Who knoweth Not as if he doubted it for he cannot be said to doubt it since he delivered it most positively in the other verse intending as I conceive the Text last before quoted out of his 12th Ch. Hereupon I again declare I am no way satisfied with the manner used by our Author in his Quotations of Scripture The Text which in this place he quotes says thus Who knoweth the Spirit of Man that goeth upward and the Spirit of the Beast that goeth downward to the Earth Which to my understanding hath the same signification as if he had said Who knows the certain Truth of this Opinion That the Spirit of Man goeth upward and the Spirit of the Beast goeth downward to the Earth Or who knows whether this difference between the Spirits of Men and Beasts be real and true or not And further it seems to me that this Interrogation is Pregnant with a Negative and seems to have the same sense as if had said
OBSERVATIONS UPON Mr. WADSWORTH's BOOK OF The Souls Immortality and his Confutation of the Opinion of the Souls Inactivity to the Time of General Resurrection 80. Printed London 1670. IN his Epistle to the Reader Page 2. he says There are certain sober Professors of Christianity who tho they deny the Existence of the Soul separate from the Body yet they maintain the Resurrection of the whole Man at the Last Day to receive Recompences according to their deservings in this life and thereupon asks the Question Is not that sufficient to uphold Religion and a due Reverence of God in the World In answer to which Question he says There are some Professors among us who deny the Resurrection of the Body as some of the Quakers are said to do but yet believe the Returning of the Spirit to God who gave it and then concludes That between one of these Opinions and the other all Recompences future to this life may come to be discredited and exploded Upon which his manner of arguing I observe That he seems to set up if not invent the Opinion of Denying the Resurrection of the Person and yet believing that Humane Spirits return to God who gave them Concerning which Opinion I say I never heard of the like before which makes me think it may be an Invention and the rather because he gives no better Confirmation of the Truth of it then that some of the Quakers are said to hold it whereas I rather apprehend the truth to be that neither the Quakers nor any other Christians ever did or do deny the Resurrection of the Dead and further I conceive that no reasonable man who reads and believes the Scriptures can deny or very much doubt the truth of that Prime Article of our Faith The Resurrection of the Dead and further I conceive That if the Souls Immortality had any thing near a like clear proof in Scripture that we find in it for the Resurrection of the Dead both I and all other Doubters of such Immortality would be ready to assent and submit to that Opinion whence I apprehend he pretends to set up that which he calls the Quaking Opinion on purpose to discredit and deâ—ery the Practice of mens setting up their rest and expectation upon the clear and undeniable Article of the Resurrection of the Dead But that Article is too well founded and too clearly evidenced by the Scripture to be shaken or brought in question by any Inventions of Men whatsoever Page 4. Mr. W. says Having sometimes found my own mind hopled and troublesomely intangled with the perplexity of conceiving how my Soul could possibly exist in a separate state from my Body to which I 〈…〉 so strictly united and with which I found it by experience so much so sympathize in this its union Thus he conâ—â—â—â— himself to have doubted of the Humane Soul 's Separate Subsistence adding That he believed divers others might be troubled with the like doubtings and his intent in writing this Book was to propound to them such Arguments as had satisfied the doubts of his own mind Hereupon I observe That this Author was by Profession a Minister of the Gospel as appears by the Title Page of his Book that he was a man of great Reading Wit and Industry as plainly appears in the tenour and course of his Writing that he was a true and sincere Professor of the Christian Religion and knew very well as in some places of this Book he testifies that the Primitive Christians and later Churches both Romish and Reformed the Mahometane Churches the Heathen Priests Poets and Philosophers and a great number of the Jews and Proselytes of that Church have professed with a great Unanimity and Universality to hold and believe the Natural Subsistence of the Humane Soul in a State of Separation from the Body and yet the Natural Evidences of the strict Union betwixt the Soul and Body and the necessary Assistance which the one of them gives to the other for the production of Life and Action in the Person appear'd so strong to the Rational Mind or Faculty of this Writer as they had power to make him doubt of the possibility or at least the probability of the Souls Natural Subsistence in a State of Separation from the Body and hence I am apt to infer that if a Man framed de meliori luto so munited and assisted as this Writer was did fall into doubts concerning the Natural Subsistence of the Humane Soul in a state of Separation from the Body it seems nothing strange or wonderful that other persons less fortified should fall into the like doubts and scruples that he did without falling from the sincere Profession of the Christian Religion because perhaps they may recover from those doubts and errours wherein they are now involved and next because such Errour as may be in this Opinion seems meerly Speculative and to have little or no influence upon the Lives and Practices of Men however some may put a higher value thereupon then perhaps the thing it self may deserve for that it commonly seems to affect more the terror of the dying than the restraining evil persons from sinning and even at mens deaths it seems to lay more terrour upon the weak and fearful than upon the most sinful and wicked persons and in the practices of men it seems provable and granted by all parties that what will make a happy Immortality will likewise make a happy Resurrection and what will make the one miserable will make the other so too because the Tree lies as it falls and as Death leaves us so shall Judgment find us and therefore I conclude that if men do happen to fall under such scruples and do even doubt the Natural Subsistence of the Humane Soul in a state of Separation from the Body and for obtaining better satisfaction thereupon do declare such doubts and scruples to the world with the reasons and grounds upon which the same is founded they may not for their so doing really deserve to be black'nd with the Names and Titles of Epicure Sadducee Deist Atheist and other odious Epithets which men of eager Spirits do frequently use to bestow upon others who differ from them in any sort of Opinions which may be controverted amongst them and seems to be a practice very much opposing Charity and the Doctrines of the Gospel Page 5. Mr. W. saith His Mind in this Treatise is to confirm the faith of those who believe the Souls Immortality or to raise up those that are fallen into the doubts and scruples before mentioned of which sort he was informed there are not a few among the otherwise serious Professors of Christianity in England who notwithstanding such scruples might pass with our Author for good Christians who are to stand and fall by their Masters Judgment in such Cases without being subjected or subjecting themselves to the sharp Censures of other violent or uncharitable persons He says Besides such doubters there are other
confident in the Merit of their Actions who I think make the greater Number of People in the World his Opinion of the Souls Immortality and the immediate passing from Death to Judgement and fiery Condemnation of ill deserving People gives Terror and Affrightment rather than Comfort and Support to by far the greatest part of People in the World and if the Tenet be not true and cannot be sufficiently proved to the Understandings and Consciences of Men it may then pass for a Scare-Crow to the Bad and a Staff of Reed to such good People as may put their Confidence in it Mr. W. further demands Can any hearty Lover of the Lord Jesus think of the Interruption of his Communion with him from Death to Judgment without great Regret and Trouble of Mind And he says He is sure the Generation of the Righteous think it much otherwise To this I Answer That the Generation of the Righteous may think some one thing and some another and thereupon I conceive that divers of them will be very well contented with such a Portion of Happiness as the Spirit in the Revelation tells us they shall enjoy in the Words Yea saith the Spirit they rest from their Labours and their Works do follow them and at the end of that Rest shall overtake them and be joined again to them at the end and time of their intended Resurrection P. 5. He further demands Is this enough to quiet the fervent Longings of the Divine Nature in us after Immortality and to satisfie our lively Hope of an Eternal Life with God and the Lamb Away says he This is but to trifle with the greatest Concernments of the Lords People To which I Answer This seems but a Rhetorical Flourish without any true Substance in the matter of it It seems a kind of Cant which I do not well understand when he speaks of quieting the servent Longings of the Divine Nature in us after Immortality This may perhaps seem plain to Men of his Kidney and Constitution but to me it looks like a Riddle me what is this For I know of no Divine Nature in one man more than in another and I do not conceive it natural for Men to be troubled with such Longings after Immortality as he pretends here to describe I think Men do sometimes long for things which they do desire and have a likely and very strong Hope to obtain but those who entertain no Hopes of an Intermediate State betwixt Death and the Resurrection must be very weak in their Rationals if they trouble themselves with any Longings after such a State or receive any Disappointment upon their going without it P. 6. Mr. W. enters into somewhat a long Discourse wherein he largely Censures and Condemns such as maintain the Souls Extinguishment at the Dissolution of the Humane Person I will spend no Time in giving particular Answers thereunto but content my self with only saying thereupon that it all wants Proof and passes with me for a Non sequitur which hath no strength of Argument in it concerning that Question about which we now differ P. 7. Mr. W. quotes that Prophecy which gives A Woe to those who make the Hearts of the Righteous sad whom the Lord hath not made sad and Applies those Words to those who oppose his Opinion of the Souls Immortality And thereupon this seems to be the Case those who maintain a Point of Doctrine contrary to Truth which may make the Righteous sad the Woe pronounced by this Prophet pertains to that Maintainer whence if the Souls Extinguishment at the Death of the Party be not true it may probably make the Hearts of some Righteous People sad whom God hath not made sad and then our Prophets Woe may justly be imposed upon such Maintainers But if otherwise it should so fall out that this Opinion be True and that of the Souls Immortality be an Error Then those whose Hearts are made sad by that Doctrine which I conceive are by far the greatest Number of People in the World are so sadned by an Erroneous Tenet deliver'd without a sufficient Warrant from God And in this manner the Hearts of such People will be made sad whom God hath not made sad And thereupon I conclude that if the Doctrine of the Soul's Immortality be not True the Woe delivered in this Prophecy will as justly take hold of the Maintainers of it as it will do upon their Opposers if they maintain an Errour altho' they may think themselves to have the Right in this Point P. 7. He pretends that we have or may have once learn'd to know that God hath framed us for an uninterrupted perpetuity of living I say to this I am assured in my self and both can and do assure my Reader that if I did know or believe what he says in this Place to be true I would readily submit to his Dictator-ship in it without any further proceeding in a Dispute of this Nature But I do neither know nor believe the Truth of what he says in this Place conceiving it still more probable that the Soul extinguisheth at the Death of the Person and is neither Immortal nor Intelligent having no other Place of Subsistence but in the Body CHAP. II. PAge 8. Mr. W. says That he will enquire into the divers Acceptations of the Word Soul in Scripture or what is there usually intended by that Term and says in Scripture there are five Significations thereof First he says The Soul is there taken for the whole Person of Man Secondly Soul is there taken for the Body of Man only Thirdly Soul is taken for the Life of the Body Fourthly he says Soul is taken for the dead Carcass of a Man Fifthly The Word Soul is taken for the Rational Soul of Man whereby he stands in a kind of Level with Angels By which I suppose he intends the Humane Soul producing Life and Action in the Person which he says is Immortal and labours to prove it so and therefore brings Instances out of Scripture to shew the Truth and Practice of these Significations And hereupon I observe That his first Acceptation of the Word Soul for the whole Person of Man constituted of Soul and Body is very common throughout the whole Course of the Scripture well proved by the Instances which he gives to which Hundreds more might be added if any need should arise for the so doing But the Instances of his Second Signification seem not to prove what he intends by them for that the Iron entering into Joseph's Soul seems not to be intended only of his Body but of his Person for that his Body without a Soul could not be sensible or capable of suffering thereby His next Instance is of sending Leanness into the Souls of those that eat the Quails It seems the Word Soul here doth also intend the whole Persons of the Eaters for that Bodies cannot eat or be nourished without their Souls Concerning his Third Saying That Soul is taken
failed in the Proof of it He hopes his Adversaries will not be such Blasphemers as to deny the truth of Solomon's Words The Spirit returns to God who gave it Concerning which Words I have before fully declared my Conceptions and have no design to repeat them again here Further he quotes again Eccl. 3. as if Solomon there said That when Man dieth his Body goes one way and his Spirit another and whether he quotes this Text truly shall be left to Judgment Then Mr. W. puts an Objection against himself Supposing some may say If all Souls return to God that gave them the Souls of the Wicked do so too and he grants that so they do and for solution of this Objection he says That tho' God be in his highest Heavens and keep his Sessions there yet there are some other parts of the Heaven where he keeps a particular Sessions to which Evil Spirits may approach as they did in Micaiah's Vision where God may pass Sentence upon the Souls of the Wicked without bringing them into Heaven and he thinks God hath a glorious Presence in the lower Heavens with his Angels and that there he doth Transact many Affairs relating to the Government of this World and quotes for this the Devils Appearance in the Case of Job and says If Devils may appear before God so may the Souls of the Wicked do too In Answering I declare to agree with his last Expression That if there be Seperate Souls of Wicked Men Subsisting by themselves they may appear before God as his quoted Texts testifie Devils have done but I demand as clear Texts and Testimonies of Scripture for the appearing of wicked Souls before God as are quoted for the appearing of Devils before him But he brings not one Text to Prove that he saith Truth concerning the appearing of wicked Souls before God And I confide that no one Text of Scripture can be brought which gives an Assertory Testimony of that Fact or says there was ever such a thing done in the World And for what he says of God's keeping his Sessions of Judgment sometimes in Heaven and sometimes in other particular Parts of Heaven I am apt to demand Proofs thereof from Texts of Scripture but he brings not one to this purpose And therefore I think it may be concluded that these several Sessions of God for Judgment are but a Device of his own Brain which hath no real Truth in it And thus by Mens Devices they strive to heal cover and confirm their Erroneous Opinions which I look upon as a great Fault in a good Man But notwithstanding those Humane Inventions I am apt to conclude that if the good Souls go to God for Judgment in Heaven that bad Souls do also somewhat evidently do the like Solomon says The Soul returns to God who gave it The Soul returns are Words that intend indefinitely and seem therefore equivalent to an Universal and signifie as much as if it had been said All Souls return to God who gave them And this Sense of the Words our Author hath lately granted Whence I conclude that as God says All Souls are mine which I think intends Persons so all Souls are intended to return to God who gave them as well and as much the Bad as the Good for any thing that I can perceive either in the words of the Text or any thing that is true in our Author's Discourse of it P. 60. He puts a Second Objection against this Opinion which I think he doth set up as a Man of Straw that he may have the battering of it down again He pretends some say that he hath indeed proved the Soul and Body to be seperated at Death and that one of them goes to one Place and the other of them goes to the other Place but that he hath not yet proved the Soul to live in that State of Seperation Hereupon I observe That after he hath said The Soul and Body are seperated at Death he adds That they go to two different Places Which Saying I think the Text doth not warrant for it doth not say that either of them go to any Place And first we may be sure a dead Body cannot go any whither The Text says It returns to the Earth as it was and of which before it received Life it was a Part So for the Spirit the Text says It returns not goes to God who gave it I have before offer'd an Apprehension That Solomon might intend this Spirit returned to God in a natural and easie manner as a Part doth to its Totum and the Parcels of Air or Water return to and incorporate with their Elements and that as the Body returns to the Earth as it was and as a Part doth to its Totum so the Spirit returns to God from whom it came and of which I suppose Solomon might think it to have been a Part But I grant That if the Soul in our Author's Sense do go to God after Death then the Objection which says he did not prove it alive in a seperate State is vain and frivolous and may easily be overthrown without putting our Author to the Trouble of Defending his Opinion against it In the Close of this Argument Mr. W. asks What hath the Living God to do with dead Spirits And I say so too and therefore grant that if the Intelligent Seperate Spirit of a Man be dead it can with no Propriety or Truth be said to Return to God who gave it P. 61. Mr. W. says So I shut up this Third Argument and with it my Proofs from the Old Testament And concerning these Threee Arguments I say the First is measurably Confuted the Second is Disregarded and the Third is otherways Expounded and in such a manner as Opposes Mr. W's Pretensions thereupon The Fourth Argument PAg. 61. Mr. W. quotes here that Text of Scripture whereby the Opinion of the Souls Seperate Subsistence is principally supported and upon which it is with a great measure of Clearness grounded and which arises near unto an Assertion that the thing is so and I think Mr. W. doth from thence rightly Argue That if the Soul cannot be killed by killing the Body or Person it seems to be a reasonable Inference drawn from this Text to Argue That the Soul must needs have a Seperate Subsistence of its own after the Death of the Person And further Mr. W. observes well the Reason why our Lord deliver'd this Doctrine to his Disciples viz. To encourage them against the Fears of such Persecutions as were likely to fall upon them in the Prosecution of their great Duty the Preaching of the Gospel encouraging them not to sear what Harm Men could do unto them upon that account because Men could only kill the Body intending the Person but were not able to kill the Soul or lay any other sort of real Punishment upon Men after their departure out of this world P. 62. Mr. W. produces an Argument which I think
Go thy way and as thou hast believed so be it done unto thee St. Luke relates it thus This Centurions servant was ready to die and when he heard of Jesus he sent unto him the Elders of the Jews beseeching him that he would come and heal his servant And they came to Jesus desiring him to do this Kindness for the Captain because he was a worthy Person and a Lover of the Jews and Jesus went with them towards the Captain's House and when he was not far from thence the Centurion sent Friends to him saying unto him Lord trouble not thy self for I am not worthy that thou should'st enter under my Roof wherefore neither thought I my self worthy to come unto thee but say in a word and my Servant shall be healed And Jesus thereupon turn'd him about and discours'd with those that followed him and they that were sent returning to the House found the Servant whole that had been sick Upon reading these two Relations I think it plainly appears That either this Centurion came Personally to our Lord to request his Servant's Cure or he did not come Personally to Christ for that purpose but sent the Elders of the Jews to request that favour upon his behalf Without that himself came either to Sight or Speech of our Lord upon that occasion I find no ground or reasonable guess which of our Texts deliver the absolute Truth in this Circumstance of the Fact which they relate but from this Variance and the other Instances before recounted I think it may reasonably be collected That Men are not bound to take and perhaps ought not to take every Saying or Sentence which they find written in the Scriptures to be an irrefragable Truth and the very Word of God And I am ready to apply this Tenet to the Sayings now in dispute with Mr. W. viz. Are not able to kill the Soul and have no more that they can do We find an apparent Variance between these Two Sayings and that the Words of St. Luke are adaequate and answerable to the Intent of our Lord's Doctrine in this place whereas those of St. Matthew have a double Aspect and look as it were two ways For one way it insinuates that Persecutors can do no more harm after they have killed Another way it seems next to an Assertion that Mens Souls live and subsist in a state of Seperation from their Bodies I do not by the Context or any other ways conceive that our Lord did speak or had any Intent to speak of the state of Men after Death in this Doctrine whence the Words Are not able to kill the Soul in that Prospect of intending to teach the state of Men after Death seems quite besides our Lord's Meaning in this Doctrine and if not quite out of it yet very plainly collateral to it And yet from this side-wind the Maintainers of Seperate Subsistence draw the strongest Proof which they can find for maintaining their Opinion of the Seperate Subsistence I think that upon perusal of this Argument it will appear the strength of this Proof is much weaken'd and abated and will be found to be of much less force than it seems to have at the first reading or hearing thereof and in this state of debilitation I leave it to prosecute my Observations upon Mr. W's Pages as I did before P. 64 Mr. W. pretends to take the disputed Words as Comments one upon another and says that by Construction they may be made to intend one thing And I am ready to grant that by Construction they may both of them be made to serve the Meaning of our Lord in this Doctrine but then in our Collateral Point which St. Luke doth not meddle with there is a very great Variance between these two Expressions for that the one proves strongly the Soul 's Seperate Subsistence and the other proves it not nor meddles with it at all Which proves that our Lord's Doctrine did not intend to speak of that Point in this place And therefore our Question thereupon is In what Words our Lord delivered this Doctrine And the Conclusion is That if he delivered this Doctrine in the Words of St. Matthew then they are a strong Proof of the Souls Seperate Subsistence but if his Doctrine were delivered in the Words of St. Luke then there is no Proof at all in it of the Souls Seperate Subsistence And I have before enough Argued on the side of St. Luke and for the Probability that his Text sets forth to us the very Words wherein our Lord delivered this Doctrine Mr. W. confesses That Luke expresseth less than Matthew but says He never meant less Which I think intends that the Meaning of Luke in his Text was That those who kill the Body are not able to kill the Soul Which Meaning doth not at all appear in the Words of Luke's Text which do not say so And how then Mr. W. should come to know that he meant so I do not understand and therefore I reject this Gloss upon that Text as Mr. W's own Invention or Fiction The Fifth Argument PAg. 65. Mr. W. raises an Argument for the Soul 's Seperate Subsistence from the Appearing of Moses and Elias and discoursing with our Lord upon Mount Tabor and says That Moses could not appear there in his Person Soul and Body because Deut. 34.6 says Moses died in the Land of Moab and He the Lord buried him in a Valley there over-against Beth-Peor but no man knoweth of his Sepulchre unto this day P 66. Mr. W. discoursing upon this Text says That Moses appearing at Mount Tabor must be either alive in Spirit only or else his Body was raised Adding I know that some conjecture that his Body was rais'd but they cannot prove that Conjecture from Texts of Scripture And therefore he thinks it more likely that Moses appeared in Spirit only intending I suppose in his Soul subsisting in a state of Seperation after Death Which I think to be no more than a Conjecture which he is not able to prove by Texts of Scripture any more than the former Conjecture can be so Proved And to these Two Conjectures I pretend to add a Third viz. That Moses may not have died in the Mount but might be translated or transported to Heaven in Person as Enoch and Elias had before been Which I offer to Prove by his Appearing with Elias at Mount Taber It seems they appeared both after a like manner and the one as much in Person as the other Mr. W. grants that Elias did appear in Person and Arguendo a simili it appears most likely that Moses did so too As to the Text which says Moses died and was buried I think fit to consider by whom this Book of Deuteronomy might be written and if the Promises thereof might be written by Moses or his Direction yet this closing Passage of it about his own Death and Burial it seems could not be so It appears not from whence the Opinion
Christian Churches continued throughout the World and therefore Men must have very strong Arguments if they hope to prevail in rejecting this Opinion I answer and grant that this Argument is good and strong for the proving of his Opinion and seems to be of more Power and Strength than all that he hath said before for the maintaining of it but yet I do not perceive that Strength in it which may be able to support his Tenet against those Reasons and those Scriptures which may be brought against the Rationality and Truth of it and of which I intend to make a short detail when I come to his following Head where he makes and delivers Objections against his own Doctrine P. 152. Mr. W. begins to relate certain Sayings or Speeches of Reformed Martyrs who it seems died in the Opinion of the Souls Seperate Subsistence which may be admitted to add some small Strength to his former Arguments drawn from the Opinion of the more Ancient Fathers I do not find it strange that Men should retain to the end of their Days divers Opinions which they had before imbibed in their Youth and by their Education hath been radicated in them especially such as do not appear to have an evil effect upon their Practices And I think that divers Learned Men of most high Esteem even in the Primitive and Apostolical Churches have delivered some Doctrines to their Disciples which upon strict examination may be found inconsonant to the stream or current of Scripture and the natural reason of Mankind which Doctrines I conceive the Writers of them did believe to be true upon the ground of such Tradition as they had received and which by Education and Custom had obtain'd an absolute assent of their Minds in such Cases And tho' I shall here name only the Millenary Opinion yet if I thought fit here to digress to that purpose I could add divers other particulars thereunto P. 153. Mr. W. proceeds to make farther Proof of his Opinion by some Representations in Dreams and others in Shades or Shadows of Persons departed unto which I have in a former Treatise made Answer that I do not deny there may be verity in divers of those Relations and yet I do not conceive any thing of that kind hath ever been performed by departed Souls thinking it probable that there are no such Beings in the World but I am willing to ascribe such Actions to the Powers and Performances of inferiour Spirits without pretending to determine whether good or bad and that they jussu aut permissu superiorum do represent and act according as the occasions wherein they are imploy'd may require P. 158. Mr. W. produces divers Objections which he says are made against the Souls Seperate Subsistence amounting to the Number of Fourteen divers of which I a gree not to be very material and tho' I intend to mention each of them that I may not seem to disregard any thing that he hath Written yet very little shall be said concerning them my Design being only to insist upon those which I think material and to add unto them such other Objections as Mr. W. in his Catalogue hath omitted P. 158. Mr W's first Objection says That what of the first Adam it was that sinned that of Adam died but both the Soul and Body died therefore c. To this he Answers That he must not take Life and Death here in their proper Sense but that the word Death here only intends a miserable Life which however he doth not deny to be Life and I do not conceive how Death and Life can stand together in the same subject and therefore I think his Description of Death by a miserable Life is not reasonable nor allowable in this Case conceiving it agreeable to Reason that the Curse pronounced against Sin should extend to the Person that sinned and accordingly the Persons which sinned did both die for it or after it without any appearance of leaving Souls to survive after the Death of their Persons P. 159. Mr. W. will not agree that their Souls did die as well as their Bodies because God says That Dust thou art and to Dust thou shalt return Then he assumes the Soul was not made of Dust which is a thing before disputed between us I pretending there was no such Soul made as he says there was I say my sort of Soul is material and may return to the Dust and Air as it was which he will deny and thereupon we must examine all that has been spoken which neither of us can design to do in this place but leave this Objection to be farther discussed Mr. W's second Objection from Eccles 3. where Solomon compares Men with Beasts P. 161. He pretends that Text says The Spirit of Man goes upward and the Spirit of a Beast downward which I think it doth not say but makes a doubt whether the truth of the thing be so or no it seems Solomon speaks more deliberately concerning Mens Souls in this Text than he does in his Twelfth Chapter and yet I pass this Objection lightly over without laying any great weight upon it P. 162. Mr. W. raises a third Objection from Matth. 26.38 where our Lord says My Soul is exceeding sorrowful even unto Death from whence some Men may pretend to inferr that his Soul might die I profess to be none of those who make this Objection for I conceive that Christ by the word Soul intended his Person or himself in the same Sense as if he had said I am sorrowful unto Death and therefore I pass this over as a weak Objection against Mr. W's Opinion P. 164. Mr. W. raises a fourth Objection against himself from Acts 2.27 Thou wilt not leave my Soul in Hell nor suffer thy Holy one to see Corruption Here he says some will have Christ's Intellectual Soul to be meant and by Hell or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Grave to be meant I profess to be none of those some who would have Christ's Intellectual Soul to be here meant but I do rather conceive that by my Soul in this place is intended my Person or my Self and as if he had said thou wilt not leave me in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Grave without intention to speak of an Intellectual Soul or any other Soul at all and therefore I pass this over as a very light Objection against Mr. W's Opinion P. 169. The fifth Objection which Mr. W. brings against his own Opinion is raised from 2 Cor. 5. Where Paul speaks of being cloathed upon with his House from Heaven I have said before that this Expression respects that Translation of their Bodies which the Saints who are alive upon Earth at Christ's coming shall receive when they shall be disrobed of their Earthly Bodies and have them chang'd into Heavenly or Spiritual Bodies and yet I do not find any great Strength in this Objection against Mr. W's Opinion but pass it away as a very weak one without
places where he hath twice before propounded them I do not find that in this Discourse he hath added any new Arguments to those which are produced in his former Treatise so as there are no new Proofs propounded in this Triumph whence I am apt thereupon to surmise that he doth Triumphum canere ante Victoriam and because his Triumphal Building seems to be principally founded upon the two before-named Assertions I collect that if the rain descend violently upon it the winds shake it the floods happen to beat upon it this Triumphal Edifice will be more likely to fall than to stand because the ground upon which it is raised seems over soft and sandy for the support thereof and for that the foundations of it are not digged deep enough by such a Search into the Scriptures as might make it appear that the Doctrine is built upon a strong Stream or clear Current of Scripture Testimonies somewhat apparently or clearly attesting the Truth thereof in some such places where there was a Design of Teaching concerning the Future State of Men after Death I do not conceive that there was a Design of speaking of such a Future State in any of the four Texts last before quoted of Solomon St. Matthew and St. Luke and therefore I do not find any great strength of Conviction in them I shall therefore pass over these and all the rest of Mr. Wadsworth 's Discourse of Faith's Triumph without speaking any farther thereunto because it seems not greatly material towards the farther proof of that Question which is now disputed between us resolving here to finish my Observations upon this Author with a hearty Bene valeas to my Intelligent Reader FINIS OBSERVATIONS UPON Dr. CHARLTONS TREATISE INTITULED The Immortality of the Humane Soul demonstrated by the Light of Nature In Two Dialogues 4to London Printed 1657. HIS first Dialogue and a good part of the second are imployed and spent in Introduction and Ceremony which last and continue till Page 78. of his Book and there he says That the Considerations which he intends to alledge for proving the Souls Immortality shall be either Natural or Moral his first Argument is this he says The reasonable Soul of Man is Immaterial and therefore it is Immortal P. 85. To prove the Souls Immateriality he says The Actions of Man as a Cogitative and Intellectual Essence are of so noble and divine a strain as that it is impossible they should be performed by a meer Material Agent or Corporeal Substance however disposed qualified or modified To this I answer it is the common Objection against the Souls Materiality viz. Men do not understand the quomodo how the Abstract Actions of the Mind and the Reflex Actions of it upon it self can be performed by Matter and Motion never so fitly Modified and Organized And therefore our Doctor in this Place walks in the common Trod and pretends to supply the want of Power in such Matter and Motion by the Introduction of an Intelligent Self-subsisting Spirit into the Person for the effecting of such Operations in Man not enough considering the Wisdom and Power of God the great Architect of the Microcosm who can by Matter and Motion fitly Organized Modified and Moved produce such Acts and Powers as Men are not able to comprehend the quomodo of and therefore to their Reason such things may seem impossible to be done which by the Wisdom and Power of God may be easily effected and performed without the Agency of such Intelligent Spirits as Men have commonly used to imagine P. 88. The Doctor says by Discourse of Reason we soon come certainly to know that the Magnitude of the Sun is at least 160 times greater than that of the Earth and here I pretend to doubt the Certainty of the Doctor 's knowledge concerning this Point from this Page to Page 100 the Doctor argues Whether the Intellect can work without the assistance of the Phansie a Question propounded by Aristotle in the beginning of his Book de Anima but both there and here that Question is left undetermined P. 102. The Doctor says the Intellect doth frequently reflect upon it self and understand its own Intelligence This I do not permit to pass for a Truth if we take the Intellect for a distinct thing from the Man conceiving that the Intellect as well as the Phantasie are Powers and Faculties of the Man and that neither of them can do any thing of themselves but that all which either or both of them do are Acts of the Person in whom they reside and that they are both of them submitted to the Guidance and Government of the Person and the Totum of that Power of which they are but a part so as to speak properly and truly we must say that the Man can considerately reflect upon the Acts and Powers of his Intellect Phantasie Judgment and Memory which is a thing which I shall easily grant but that which I think lies upon the Doctor and his Party to prove is the bare Intellect separated from the Person can reflect upon it self or do any other Action whatsoever P. 108. The Doctor says That whatsoever can frame abstracted Notions and form Universals must be above Matter and be Immaterial but the Soul and Mind of Man can act in this sort Ergo this Soul must be Immaterial In this Argument I deny his Major and say that the Man himself who is a Material Agent can form Abstractive Notions and from Singulars and Generals can extract and frame Universals and that the Intellect without the Man can perform no such Matters nor be nor act in any kind whatsoever P. 112. Here he quotes a Book written by Hieronimus Rorarius a Learned Prelate as a Collection of Arguments commonly urged to prove that many Brute Animals have the use of Reason as well as Man himself hath P. 116. Here it is affirmed That Men do not know the Intimate Nature of so much as the smallest Plant which grows upon the Ground and therefore I say we are like to fall much short of the true Nature of the Humane Soul with such Certainty as were to be desired P. 118. The Doctor says the Intellect is conversant about Spiritual Beings both of good and other Spirits and therefore is Immaterial I answer as before the Intellect can do nothing but as it is a Power and Faculty of the Person without which I do not agree that it hath either Being or Action P. 123. The Doctor here says that the old Philosophers obtained a certain Knowledge that there were Spirits by the Regular Motions of the Heavenly Bodies which they thought could not be maintained without the Assistance and Government of Intelligent Immaterial Spirits but I think they were as much deceived in their own Opinion as our Doctor seems to be in his Opinion of the Souls Immateriality P. 123. It is objected against the Doctor that when the Phansie is disturb'd the Intellect cannot act with Strength or