now in Hell seeing you seeme to belieue no torments for Damned soules save only at the Resurrection For thus you reason b Pag. 25 As the Body hath ben the instrument of the Soules pleasure in sinne so it shal be of hir paine c Pag. 20â— But all provocations and pleasures of sinne the soule taketh from her body all acts of sinne she committeth by her body Therefore the iustice of God both temporally and eternally punisheth the Soule only by the Body Or Therefore all the Soules paine for sinne both temporally eternally is by the Body This is your owne reason which being true why should you care for corporall fire in Hell before the last iudgment Your striving to a Pag. 34â— confute my allegations of Fathers I hope I have refuted sufficiently before And then b Pag. 35 Sir Refuter endeth as be began with egregious lyes What lyes began he with and with what doth he end In the begining our lyes have proved tales of truth and in the end your wordes will prove iniurious at least I said that not som or the most or best but even all every one both Churches Writers in the world who are Protestants teach as we do except only your selfe or happily som after you since the year 1597. What ly is there in al this Why name you not in al the world one man of those whom we call Protestants of your minde that it may appeare who deserveth such rebukes Nay in this being the very point of the matter you are silent in revilings outcryes and accusations you exceed Where I avouch that c Treat â— pag 8â— only the hoatest and cunningest Papists Iesuits Priests Fryars have alwayes vntill this day had this controversie with all Protestants and all Protestants against them namely Bellarmin Campian English Rhemists c. To al this scanalous suspicious argument you reply not a syllable What shall we thinke of such doctrine which in this learned age hath none but such defenders And yet among the Papists I noted 2 Cusanus and Ferus as liking of the Protestants doctrine heerein which also they do in some other matters Now these 2. and only these though more there are c you cite at large 〈◊〉 140.141 whose wordes indeede especially the Fryars seeme excessive But our owne most worthy and learned Teachers d M. Fulke â—rea 1. p. 88 M. Deering M. Whitakers which against you I alleaged you vouchsafe not a looke towards them Nor to M. Nowels Catechisme nor to the Synod authorising it â—efore pag. 42. nor to the Archb great * approbation thereof Not to our Common Bibles note authorised publikly to be read thorough out England Only against my alleaging of our Homilyes e you take exception Pag 355. but I trust I have before fully and cleerely defended them to bee for vs and against you Neither doeth any such matter appeare in them as f you avouch Pag. 136. Thus then I end our 1. Question being sorry that I have ben so long But I trust the friendly Reader will pardon me considering how I have ben occasioned therevnto A brief Collection containing the whole effect of our Doctrine before delivered brought into 4. Assertions God himselfe in his Iustice properly punished Christ for our sinnes See pag. 8. 9. 75. 82. Christ even as other men consisted of a perfit Humane immortall Spirit and a mortall living Body and so was by nature capable of suffering sorrows for sinne from Gods hand aswell in his Spirit peculiarly and properly as also in his Soule and Body togeather sith other men do thus suffer for sinne pag. 8. 48 52. 61. 74. Gods exact and immutable Iustice spared his Sonne in nothing but did punish him in all severity as he punisheth sinners I meane Hee punished him in All his partes of nature apt to suffer that is in his Spirit peculiarly and properly and in his Soule and Body togeather also Againe God punished him with all the Whole Generall Curse not with all the particular Curses and punishments with the Generall Curse in all the whole Nature and substance of it not with all the Circumstances with all the meere Paine and Sorrow thereof not with the sinfull Adherents and concomitants in it pag. 8 13 74 86. Gods exact immutable Iustice spared not Christe in these Circumstances of Punishment with he suffered not For either in exact Iustice he could not or necessarily hee needed not to punish him so In exact Iustice he could not punish Christ in such respects as were simply and absolutly impossible It was simply impossible that any touch of Sinne should once come neere his person or Eternall suffering or all the Particular punishments in the world All which come not to any one man though Damned neither can come Finally that Christ should necessarily have suffered after this life or locally in Hell there was no cause seeing these are but meerâ— Circumstances of Gods Iust PunishmeÌ„t of sinne whether now or then whether heere or there These alter not the nature of Gods wrath which is the strength of Hell The whole substance nature of that Punishment he might feele in this life aswell as any parte God is able to inflict it aswel heere as heereafter The rather seeing Christ came and was sent of God Extraordinarily of purpose to suffer for sin all that he might suffer Thus then only in this life Christ might and did suffer all For so was Gods ordinance and will as it is plainly expressed vnto vs in his word Therefore so we professe and so we believe by the certaine rule of Gods word and the proportion of faith Christ shunned for our sake nothing which the Damned suffer except only Circumstances and Accidents impossible or vnnecessary not any Substantiall point of Gods Punishment decreed against sinue pag 13. 14. 16. 43. 66. 75. 87. 134. 135. That Christ after his death on the Crosse went not downe into Hell in his Soule THe 2. part of our Controversie is this That Christ after his death on the Crosse went not downe into Hell in his Soule Where note first Notes that we vnderstand Hell properly and locally as our common speach in English doth vsually take it for the very place of the Damned after this life Now against them that belieue Christes Soule did go down locally into Hell thus I reason Reasons gainst Châ—â— Descendiâ—â— locally is Hell First If there be a good and sound generall reason in Christian faith that Christes Soule leaving his Body ascended vp to Heaven and there remained till his Resurrection and if there be no speciall reason of authority to the contrary that his Soul now descended downward then surely every good Christian ought to believe that his Soule ascended to Heaven and descended not locally into Hell Two maâ—â— points to noted But both those former pointes are most true First There is a good sound generall reason in Christian
yeeld vs an easier passage thorough the rest behind To com then to that which hee first * Pag. 2â— beginneth with where he laboureth very much to shew that hee mistooke not his Text wherevpon first he grounded his doctrine This I say that “ Gal. â— pag. 1. this Text whereon he * Pag. 3 groundeth and setteth downe the doctrine of the wholl meritorious contents of Christes Crosse as likewise of †Pag. 42 those effectes therof which he in his Treatise handleth I am perswaded is mistaken and that this place of Scripture intendeth not these things Gal. 6.12 It is manefest that the Apostle * heere reproveth the false teachers for mingling the pure doctrine of the Gospell because they were loth to taâ—t persecution which then followed the true and sincere professors thereof And so incourageth the godly to beare all Afflictions for this persecuted truth and for Christes sake Thus the Crosse of Christ here signifieth I grant Christ crucified Christ afflicted Christ persecuted not in his owne person only but also in his members Hee doth heere iointly togeather vnderstand by Christs Crosse the afflictions of the whole mysticall Body of Christ both Head and members which they commonly have in the world Which many shunned euen with Shipwracke of sincere Religion but Paul reioyced therein so much as in no worldly ioy like to it For so he meaneth when he saith God forbid that I should reioyce but in the Crosse of Christ not that hee makes it a thing detestable to reioyce in any thing ells Pag 227 as you imagine him to do It is lawfull to reioyce in other things besides the Crosse of Christ but it is not lawfull to reioyce in any worldly ioy so much or we are not to reioyce in comparison of our ioy which we ought to haue in this our shame and afflictions sustained for Christ for his Servants and for the purity of the Gospell Paul had very great cause thus exceedingly to reioyce heerein For 1. this was a token to men that he walked in the perfit way and a meanes also to himselfe so to doe 2. Because this his doing rebuked the corrupters and minglers of the Religion who would sustaine in the world no disgrace which followed the sincere course he thus incouraged also the weake professors to suffer willingly for the same 3. This indeed Crucified the world vnto him and him vnto the world as still it doth vs also These causes are both evident in the text and sufficient for Paul so exceedingly to reioyce in suffering for the pure Gospell Now hee cannot heere respect the meritorious and propitiatory Contents of Christs Crosse and so make it detestable to reioyce in any thing ells as propitiatory besides this suffering heere expressed which is the sense that you give vnto it I say this Paul cannot respect in this Word if hee include his own the Godlies afflictions But it appeareth by that before that indeed he doth include them all the circumstances imediatly following do also declare it 1. That which I touched before By suffering in the world for Christ for his simple truth Church sake the * Which your pâ—â— Text v â— world was Câ—ucified to him and he indeed vnto the world Also an other reason sheweth it †v 15. For in Christ Iesus neither circumcision nor vncircumcision avayle any thing but a new Creature That is a sincere vpright conversation being the fruit of a sincere and pure faith and profession which matter hee nameth a little before “ Gal. 5. Faith working by loue So by this Fruit he incourageth men as I said though there com shame and trouble therewith Also in the next place thus * v 16. And as many as walke according to this rule both of pure profession and conversation peace shal be vpon them c. howsoever in the world they have shame and trouble Lastly †v 17. hee willeth that no good Christian heerafter should put him to busines by seeking resolution of him whether for the pretended peace of the Church vnprofitable Caeremonies should be retayned with the Gospel for lo saith he my example sheweth you all my minde J beare about me the markes of the L. Jesus that is Afflictions for the sincere truths sake which I could by policy and wisdom avoyd aswell as those corrupters of Religion if I had no more care of the sincerity of the Gospell then they have This being thus it cannot be possibly that the Apostle should heere minde to name the particular kindes and all the meritorious partes or Contents of Christs suffering in this place but only hee incourageth men as I said to indure all afflictions for Christ and his truth sake Thus you are answered also in that * Pag. 22 you deny the Crosse of Christ in Scriptures to be taken for the Afflictions of the godly You see the Apostle “ ver 17 heere calleth the Afflictions of the godly the markes of the Lord Iesus also the afflictions of Christ in * Coll. 1. â— another place And in another “ 2 Cor. â— the dying of the Lord Iesus What are these in truth but the Crosse of Christ vnlesse you imagin some mysterie in the divers wordes when apparantly the matter is all one Also the very worde Crosse * Gal. 5.1 a litle before signifieth the Shame and hatred of Christ slaine on the Crosse togâ—ather with the shame of his ServaÌ„ts And thus also “ Pag. 22 your maine obiection is answered where you argue that Paul cannot be vnderstood * ver 12. to say that those false teachers would not suffer persecution for the Afflictions of the godly He may be vnderstood to say that he would not suffer persecution for commending the Afflictions and shame of good Christians for Christes sake which they ought to have done Then what sense or reason wanteth this exposition I knowe the roote and originall of their Hatred and disdaine was against Christ himselfe namely for his ignominious death on the Crosse But this excludeth not indeed it includeth in the Crosse of Christ Christs members the faithfull which are his owne Body and so consequently all their Afflictions for Christes sake Which the wicked and corrupt professors I say wil not commend as Paul did by suffering persecution in their own persons they will not by Suffering win credit and reverence to that way in the world Pa. 229 The Fathers which you bring hereabout overthrow not this sense but iustifie it rather Wherefore you cannot avoyd it yet but that it is still an oversight in you to vnderstand heere by the Crosse of Christ the Contents of his sufferings and to note his wholl and intire Passion in every part thereof as he merited thereby for vs which evidently the Apostle intendeth not neither is he about that in this place You say * Pa. 226 you drew no reason from these words of
the Soule of Christ which you can never prove Howbeit this I acknowledge indeed that the Iewish Figures though they be applyable vnto Christ the substance of those shaddowes yet wee ought to apply them in the particulars soberly and warily and not without some plaine proportion of the Figure with the thing Figured Wherefore my meaning is none other in these Iewish figures which the Scripture doth not any where expresly interpret but to shew what I thinke to be indeed most probable and likely knowing that yet som such matter as we aime at they do signifie without question And this is sufficient to deny your Assertion which against our saying that the sufferings of Christes Soule may be signified by the Scapegoat is but meerely coniecturall and presumed The very like are * your 3. reasons brought to shew that the Holocaust cannot signifie the sufferingâ—s of whole Christe Pag. 236. and therefore not of his Soule any way Lev. 1. 6. Your former reason is because the Holocaust was 1. slaine and after burnt for then if the burning signifieth Christs paines and sufferings Christ must seeme to suffer after his death But this is a weake inference Is there any Figure or similitude concurring in all points and circumstances with the thing signified Sure there is no man of knowledge so vnexpert or so vnreasonable as to require it Many times where they agree only but in one principall respect that sufficeth to make the similitude Againe many similitudes and Figures there are in the olde Law having as great disparagemeÌ„t to the things signified by them as this in the Holocaust which you talke of The Bodies of beasts first slaine Lev. 4.11 2. 16 27 Heb 13.11.12 ver 13. Lev. 1.9 were after caryed out of the Host Now these signified Christs going out of Jerusalem * to be slaine but being yet alive Againe the beasts carying out by others after they were slaine is likened to our voluntary and free leaving of the world in this life Lastly the * burning of the beastes after they were dead was a sacrifice of a sweet favour vnto God Which in truth is Christs very death Fphe 5.2 and nothing don by him afterward whereby Gods anger is fully pacified towarde vs. Wherefore your first exception is very vaine The 2. is like to it The Holocaust was consumed in one the same sire But Christ was tormented wholly not with one kind of suffering as we maintaine but with 2. kindes that is with bodyly spirituall sorrowes First I say this also if it were true is as weake an exception as the former and altogeather like it See Though Christ indeed suffered divers and sundry kindes of sorrowes yea even of those which were meerely outward and bodily Even that meerely in the Soule viz. when it grew vehement as also of those that were meerely Spirituall and inward yet we plainely affirme that one the same torment afflicted his whole manhood by sympathy For his Soule also was sore grieved I doubt not even with his proper Bodily torments likewise his Body when his trickling sweat was clots of bloud was crushed and broken vnspekeably with his inward and spirituall sorrowes though his flesh then felt outwardly no paine So your 2. exception is also nothing The 3. is no better where you argue from a Treaâ— pag. 1â— my words that the Bodyes of beastes could not prefigure the immortall reasonable Soule of Christ. And it is like to that which b pag. â— afterward you cite from my words about the Sacraments Earthly Elements cannot set out spirituall and invisible effectes in Christ. Hence you thinke that I cannot defend that the firy consuming of the Holocaust may signifie the sorrows both of the Soule and Body of Christ You shall see that I can full easily and without any trisling It is evident that I meane in those former places that bodily thinges generally and for the most part doe-represent the meere bodily externall parts of Christes sufferings but not alwayes and altogeather Which you might haue easily seene by my answere to the c Treaâ— pag. â— Assumption and by the instances which there I give to this purpose Againe the very instances which I give viz the Scapegoat the Holocaust afterward the bread broken in the communion these I say doe not in that respect as they are Bodily things represent the Soule of Christ or any matter pertayning to it But the peculiar vsage and maner of action about them doth lively represent the suffering of his soule and not of his body only As not the Goat representeth Christes soule vnles only in respect of the escaping of it wheÌ„ the other Goat dyed also in respect of the sustayning and bearing vpon himself of our sinnes And not the body of the Holocaust but the vtter consuming by fire of the whole signifieth the sufferings of whole Christ Lastly the bread may signifie the whole Christ who is the intire and perfit bread of life but the Breaking thereof into pieces representeth more lively the breaking crushing in pieces as it were of the soul rather theÌ„ of the body Which was pierced through but was not in case of being broken in pieces so likely as the Soul was Yet you will say the Hol may signifie that whole Christe suffered but some bodily afflictions the Soul feeling the griefs paines of the Body For how wil it follow that the proper and immediat sufferings of Christs Soule might be signified by the Holocaust Surely according to the proportion of the Holocaust so whole Christ then his very Soule chiefly was as it were chopt or broken into pieces and as it were quite consumed and swallowed vp in his firy sorrowes onely the assistance of his Godhead sustained his Soule and withall his body or els he could not have borne it â—reat 1. â—ag â—8 as a I noted M. Whitakers to have truly taught This can not bee but the Soules peculiar suffering of Gods very wrath far beyond all bodily sufferings and yet not those paines of Hell â—ag 8. c. as b you grosly vtter it Your other senses that you give heereof the 1. hindreth not mine â—ag 237. that is c the Acceptation of Christes death The 2. that is Christs fleshes incorruption after death is very hard and far fetcht And Sacrifices had their respect to Christes death not to any thing further or afterwards As for another sense out of Austin that it should signifie our perfection and burning charity it cannot be true for the Holocaust-sacrifice out of question primarily signified the person of Christ not ours See it is vntrue that any man besides Christ alone is or can bee perfect in this life that he should bee wholly consumed with Heavenly love according to the proportion of the consuming of the Holocaust Also you both heere do seeme double vnderstanding by the Holocaust both incorruption after death a perfect
for his general phrase implying that al the Deceased both good bad were apud inferos vou do so whip him handle him g Your pâ—â— 387. 3â— heere that it seemeth you forget by whom your selfe hath profited and that even he in time past hath ben your Teacher I will not now enter into any defense of Cicero his speach and language will defend it selfe Also that were to leave our maine purpose But it is the lesso strange that you vse Cicero thus for others also have had the like correction at your handes with him â—â—g 310. a Before Torence scaped not And b heere Plato and Socrates and other Greekes have also their partes 〈◊〉 374.378 for their vsing and taking of the Greeke worde Hades so largely as the naturall Etymologie thereof doeth beare But let them defend them selves whether they speake vsuall and right Greeke and Latin or no I will leaue them in that They are eloquent enough they can speake in this case for them selves Only I will take their wordes at their handes evens as c I finde them and so I refer the iudgement of all to the learned and wise Reader 〈◊〉 also all 〈◊〉 forenoted â—â—â—ned Wâ—â—â— have loud 〈◊〉 vsed 〈◊〉 likewise â—â—g 385. Also for that charge against me of d lewd lying and open falsifying of Plato I remit all to the indifferent Reader Yet I can not but smile truly for offended I will not be that Mai. Bilson is so strongly perswaded that c I am of Platoes and Ciceroes religioÌ„ touching Hell â—â—g 370. 〈◊〉 389. Heaven the Gods and wicked Spirites and that I seeke indeed to bring in their fantasticall Hell into our Christian Creed This fantasticall conceit of his let him feed him selfe with it and let him perswade it to whom he can Thus much the sober and indifferent Reader will consider and acknowledge that the Holy Apostles doe teach the Heavenly trueth with the very wordes and Grammar of the Heathen men wherevnto that serveth which is written of them f We every man heare them speake in our owne tounges and languages wherein we were borne 〈◊〉 2.8 11. Then the Apostles surely spake according to the currant speach before their times and in their times and yet thereby never g Canonized the fables and fancies which the nations implyed in their wordes â—â—g 368. Whosoever he be that will say otherwise knoweth not what he saith neither shall any credit or greatnes which he hath get him credit in so saying Yet in a certaine place you most strangly and confidently avouch h That neither with the ancient Maisters of the Greeke tounge which were Poets â—â—g 410. 〈◊〉 1. Treat 〈◊〉 97.98 â—â—to in â—â—done â—m iliad 1 â—â—lutarch â—rallel â—â—nsol ad 〈◊〉 nor with the 70. nor with the Writers of the New Testament nor with the people of that time Hades did ever signifie the world of Souls without any limitation of state or place I thought that those fewe allegations which I brought of * Plato †Homer and Plutarch for the Greeke and of Latins for the Latin would haue suffised to cause you not to deny so cleere and manifest a trueth which heere you denie even against your owne knowledge as after shall appeare Wherfore to demonstrat this point a litle further to you and to al men if any yet doe believe this your assertion which is most vntrue I will not thinke it to much to note some more places out of the Heathen authentike Greekes for that is the principall controversie that Hades with theÌ„ did signifie the World of Soules with out any limitation in the very word it self either of state or place But as all men know that by reason of Circumstances it often signifieth with theÌ„ Hell determinatly Note so by reason of circuÌ„stances also it signifieth with them many times determinatly the HabitatioÌ„ of the Soules of good men in ioyes and pleasures which was to them as their Heaven And for this I will only put you in minde of some places which you know well enough already First note that common epithet or title of Hades Hades tâ—â— worlde Soules 〈◊〉 the Auther Greeks a Lycopâ—â— Hades pandokeus or pandocheus The vnseene worlde or state of Death that receaveth all both good and bad b Hom. 〈◊〉 15. Heâ— in Theâ—â— Others imagin Hades a God or mighty power power of Death do cal him eneroisin kataphthimenoisin anassôn Ruler not of Hell only but of all that ' Dy. And therefore to this place com not the wicked and damned onely but the noblest and best also as Achilles saith being dead and being in Hades c Hom. 〈◊〉 λ. Aidós de katélthemen éntha te nékroi Hither into hades all we that are dead do come This d Plato Gorgiaâ— Plutarcâ— Consolâ— Apolloâ— Plato and Plutarch do acknowledge in that place which e Pa. 37â— you cite at large togeather with a number mo both of the Poëts Philosophers And this also it is that Homer shewing how Iupiter cast down his rebellious Angels into Hell Tártaron with them the proper place of the Damned hee describeth it to be so much beneath Hades the place of the other Dead f Hom. hoson ouranos esti apo gaies as heaven is from the earth So in regard of this it is that g Sophoâ— Aiant another maketh it to be much better to be in hades as it is the common place and condicion of the dead not Hell then to be sicke vnrecoverably kreissôn aida keuthôn e nosôn mátan And so Plutarch maketh Hades not Hel but the place of the Dead or the stare of the dead in generall to be a soveraigne comfort to the afflicted miserable in this world h Plutarcâ— swering Aeschyâ— O Thanate paian iatros molois Limen gar ontôs aidas an' aian Aiden d'echôn boethon ou tremo skias Lastly that which i Pag. 37â— you bring of Orpheus describing the true God that he is King both of the Vnseene world aithéros ed'aïdou and also of this present visible worlde ponton gaiéste tyrannos confirmeth all that is before said For aither aides heere is to be construed togeather not separatly and so he signifieth thereby that the true God indeed is Lord and King not onely over this whole Visible world which he vnderstandeth by the Sea and Land but also over the whole Invisible world or ayer that is over all the Dead both good and bad I marvaile therefore very much what you meane to speake so plainly contrary to the truth and to your owne knowledge that Hades did never signifie the world of Soules without any limitation of state or place no not with the ancient Maisters of the Greeke toung which were the Poets The rather this your speach is directly against your knowledge because you expresly collect and confesse the contrary that is the same which I do â—ag 403. thus you say a Hades
there till his Resurrection Which our Synod since very profitably hath overskipped and suppressed First then your selfe granteth that our later Synod corrected the former about this matter which in my wordes you cannot indure to heare 2. You charge these words of K. Edw. Synod with 2. pointes which are not in them 1. That it saith how the Spirits of the iust were in Hell and that Christ descending thither stayed there till his resurrection In me you would make this a great matter so to misreport the wordes of a Synod which in deed saith nothing heereof 3. It is well that you * renounce that of Peter 〈◊〉 22. â—â— 3.19 by Austins direction as making not at all for any locall being of Christ in Hell But yet heerein your selfe openly refuseth the minde of all your predecessors yea of our later Synod if they believed as you vrge that they did For if they liked Christs locall being in Hel they misliked not the applying of that in Peter therevnto as by Mai. Nowells Catechisme may appear Neither misliked they his tarying there till his resurrectioÌ„ which Austin also holdeth as firmely as that he was there All which you vtterly disclaime as wel as I. Why then do you aggravat my differing from them and see not your owne 4. That our English Cleaâ—gie generally did or doe beleeve Christes locall descent into Hell although they reade and rehearse those words so translated certainly no man will nor ought to acknowledge Every man is assured of the coÌ„trarie You can argue nothing then heerein by our vsuall naming of this word Hell in this place of the Creed Which yet is al that you * Pag. â—â— have heere So that your conclusion is vaine If Hell in English bee Hell and going downe bee descending c. Likewise is that You are content to be tryed by all the Fathers both Greeke and Latin Who all as hath ben shewed doe make against your opinion Also as touching the Scripture you are vtterly destitute thereof which yet alone must take place with vs in this matter All that you bring for your purpose are meerely mistaken mistranslated wordes of Scriptures Creedes and Fathers as I hope hath plainly bene proved This therfore may suffice for vs to refuse your doctrine in these points Wisdome shal be iustified of all her children To God only wise be praise through IESVS CHRIST for ever Rom. 16.17 FINIS Pagin Lin. Faultes Correction 13. in marg pag. 8. pag. 7. 23. 37. he they 24. 2. their the 27. 29. will well 36. 22. in marg your you 49. 24. ne  57. 7. herefore heeretofore 65. 28. externally eternally 65. 8. better buter 77. in marg b pag. 51.55 b pag 71.73 103. 33. torments torments yet no only to it The diverse Significations of the Greeke word Hades Which is haâ—â— according to the CircuÌ„stances of the places where it is vsed See pag. 177. Wherevnto also the Hebrue Sheol may be rightly compared Hades a meere PriuatioÌ„ of this visible Worlde No visible being heere any more pa. 157. c. 169. 178. applyed Natively Seldom yet somtime to All visible transitory things when they are Destroyed from out of this World are seene heere no more pag. 188. c. Often chiefly to Dead Men yea to al dead men both Good and Bad Blessed and Damned pag. 155 c. Yet only in respect that they are Dead and seene no more in this world pag. 156 162. 166. 169 177. 178. Thus somtime it signifieth coÌ„cerning theÌ„ that which Tooke them away hence and holdeth them still pa. 169. 179. 181. 192. either Death it selfe pa. 161. 1â—â— The Power Strength 〈◊〉 Force of death pag 194. their State and coÌ„dition pa. 171. 175. 178 viz of their Whole Person dissolved and taken away hence pa. 158. 177. Partes both Soul pa. 155. Body pa. 201. Place pa. 173. 181. in respect of the dissolved Paâ—tes so 〈◊〉 as they have a Being somwhere in a place after Death no Positive thing in any place but meere Privation as is said from thiâ— Visible World Figuratively by a Poeticall fiction making it sometime as it were a Place of things which in truth have no Being nor Place after they cease to be heere pag. 188. Prosopopoeia lawfully setting out the Power of death or of destruction from hence as if it were a Person having this power pa. 182. 179. 192. Idolatrously making such an imagined Person a false God 173. 179. Synécdoche so it is somtime Hell pag. 187. 171. Heaven in Plato pag. 178. the Grave pag. 159.