1. The sting and curse of it is taken from them.

2. Their dying is the result of God’s love to them; and that in three

respects,

(1.) As they are thereby freed from sin and misery.

(2.) As they are made capable of farther communion with Christ in glory,

beyond what they can have in this world.

(3.) As they shall immediately enter upon that glorious and blessed

state when they die.

I. God has determined, by an unalterable purpose and decree, that all

men must die. Whatever different sentiments persons may have about other

things, this remains an incontestable truth. We have as much reason to

conclude that we shall leave the world, as, at present, we have that we

live in it. _I know_, says Job, _that thou wilt bring me to death, and

to the house appointed for all living_, Job xxx. 23. and upon this

account the Psalmist says, _I am a stranger with thee, and a sojourner,

as all my fathers were_, Psal. xxxix. 12. And if scripture had been

wholly silent about the frailty of man, daily experience would have

afforded a sufficient proof of it. We have much said concerning man’s

mortality in the writings of the heathen; but they are at a loss to

determine the origin or first cause of it; and therefore they consider

it as the unavoidable consequence of the frame of nature, arising from

the contexture thereof, as that which is formed out of the dust must be

resolved into its first principle; or that which is composed of flesh

and blood, cannot but be liable to corruption. But we have this matter

set in a true light in scripture, which considers death as the

consequence of man’s first apostacy from God. Before this he was

immortal, and would have always remained so, had he not violated the

covenant, in which the continuance of his immortality was secured to

him; the care of providence would have prevented a dissolution, either

from the decays of nature, or any external means leading to it. And

therefore some of the Socinian writers have been very bold in

contradicting the express account we have hereof in Scripture, when they

assert that death was, at first, the consequence of nature;[118] for

which reason man would have been liable to it, though he had not sinned;

whereas the apostle says, _By one man sin entered into the world, and

death by sin, and so death passed upon all men, for that all have

sinned_, Rom. v. 12.

We have a particular account of this in the sentence God passed on our

first parents immediately after their fall; when having denounced a

curse upon the ground for their sake, he says, _Dust thou art, and unto

dust shalt thou return_, Gen. iii. 19. And it may be observed, that as

this is unavoidable, pursuant to the decree of God, so the constitution

of our nature, as well as the external dispensations of providence, lead

to it. This sentence no sooner took place, but the temperament of human

bodies was altered,[119] the jarring principles of nature, on the due

temperament whereof life and health depends, could not but have a

tendency by degrees to destroy the frame thereof; if there be too great

a confluence of humours, or a defect thereof; if heat or cold

immoderately prevails; if the circulation of the blood and juices be too

swift or slow: or if the food on which we live, or the air which we

breathe be not agreeable to the constitution of our nature, or any

external violence be offered to it; all these things have a necessary

tendency to weaken the frame of nature, and bring on a dissolution.

David includes the various means by which men die, in three general

heads, speaking concerning Saul, _The Lord shall smite him, or his day

shall come to die, or he shall descend into battle, and perish: the Lord

shall smite him_, 1 Sam. xxvi. 10. denotes a person’s dying by a sudden

stroke of providence, in which there is the more immediate hand of God;

and his _falling into battle_, a violent death by the hands of men; in

both which respects men die before that time which they might have lived

to, according to the course of nature; and what is said concerning his

_day’s coming to die_; that is, a person’s dying what we call a natural

death, or when nature is so spent and wasted that it can no longer

subsist by all the skill of the physicians, or virtue of medicine; and

then the soul leaves its habitation, when it is not longer able to

perform the functions of life.

We might here consider those diseases that are the fore-runners of

death, which sometimes are more acute; and by this means, as one

elegantly expresses it, nature feels the cruel victory before it yields

to the enemy. As a ship that is tossed by a mighty tempest, and by the

concussion of the winds and waves, loses its rudder and masts, takes

water in every part, and gradually sinks into the ocean: so in the

shipwreck of nature, the body is so shaken and weakened by the violence

of a disease, that the senses, the animal and vital operations decline,

and, at last, are extinguished in death.[120] This seemed, so formidable

to good Hezekiah, that he utters that mournful complaint, _Mine age is

departed and removed from me as a shepherd’s tent: I have cut off like a

weaver, my life; he will cut me off with pining sickness: from day even

to night, wilt thou make an end of me. I reckoned till the morning, that

as a lion, so will he break all my bones: from day even to night wilt

thou make an end of me_, Isa. xxxvii. 12, 13.

We might here consider the empire of death as universal; as the wise man

says, _One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh_,

Eccl. i. 4. and then they pass away also, like the ebbing and flowing of

the sea. Death spares none; the strongest constitution can no more

withstand its stroke, than the weakest; no age of man is exempted from

it. This is beautifully described by Job; _One dieth in his full

strength, being wholly at ease and quiet: his breasts are full of milk,

and his bones are moistened with marrow: and another dieth in the

bitterness of his soul; and never eateth with pleasure: they shall lie

down alike in the dust, and the worms shall cover them_, Job xxi. 23-26.

We might also consider the body after death, as a prey for worms, the

seat of corruption; and lodged in the grave, the house appointed for all

living; and then an end is put to all the actions, as well as enjoyments

of this life; and, as the Psalmist speaks, _In that very day_ all _their

thoughts perish_, Psal. cxlvi. 4. Whatever they have been projecting,

whatever schemes they have laid, either for themselves or others, are

all broken: as the historian observes concerning the Roman emperor, that

when he had formed great designs for the advantage of the empire,[121]

death broke all his measures, and prevented the execution thereof.

We might also consider it as putting an end to our present enjoyments,

removing us from the society of our dearest friends, to a dismal and

frightful solitude. This was one of the consequences thereof, that was

very afflictive to Hezekiah, when he says, _I shall behold man no more

with the inhabitants of the world_, Isa. xxxviii. 11. It also strips us

of all our possessions, and the honours we have been advanced to in this

world, as the Psalmist speaks, _When he dieth he shall carry nothing

away, his glory shall not descend after him_, Psal. xlix. 27.

We might also consider the time of life and death as being in God’s

hand. As we were brought into the world by the sovereignty of his

providence, so we are called out of it at his pleasure; concerning whom

it is said, _Our times are in his hand_, Psal. xxxi. 15. So that as

nothing is more certain than death, nothing is more uncertain to us than

the time when. This God has concealed from us for wise ends. Did we know

that we should soon die, it would discourage us from attempting any

thing great in life; and did we know that the lease of life was long,

and we should certainly arrive to old age; this might occasion the

delaying all concerns about our soul’s welfare, as presuming that it was

time enough to think of the affairs of religion and another world, when

we apprehend ourselves to be near the confines thereof; and therefore,

God has by this, made it our wisdom, as well as our duty, to be waiting

all the days of our appointed time, till our change come.

From what has been said under this head, we may learn,

1. The vanity of man as mortal. Indeed, if we look on believers as

enjoying that happiness which lies beyond the grave, there is a very

different view of things; but as to what respects the world we have

reason to say as the Psalmist does, _Verily, every man at his best

estate is altogether vanity_, Psal. xxxix. 5. We may see the vanity of

all those honours and carnal pleasures which many pursue with so much

eagerness, as though they had nothing else to mind, nothing to make

provision for but the flesh, which they do at the expence of that which

is in itself most excellent and desirable: We may also infer,

2. That this affords an undeniable and universal motive to humility;

since death knows no distinction of persons, regards the rich no more

than the poor; puts no mark of distinction between the remains of a

prince and a peasant; and not only takes away every thing that men value

themselves upon, but levels the highest part of mankind with common

dust: They who boast of their extract, descent, and kindred, are

obliged, with Job, to say, _to corruption, Thou art my father; to the

worm, Thou art my mother and my sister_, Job xvii. 14. Shall we be proud

of our habitations, _who dwell in houses of clay, whose foundation is in

the dust?_ chap. iv. 19. Are any proud of their youth and beauty? this

is, at best, but like a flower that does not abide long in its bloom,

and when cut down, it withers. The finest features are not only spoiled

by death, but rendered unpleasant and ghastly to behold; and accordingly

are removed out of sight, and laid in the grave.

3. From the consideration of man’s liableness to death, and those

diseases that lead to it, as the wages of sin, we may infer; that sin is

a bitter and formidable evil. The cause is to be judged of by its

effects. As death, accompanied with all those diseases which are the

forerunners of it, is the greatest natural evil that we are liable to;

sin, from whence it took its rise, must be the greatest moral evil; we

should never reflect on the one without lying low before God in a sense

of the other. The Psalmist, when meditating on his own mortality, traces

it to the spring thereof; and ascribes it to those rebukes with which

_God corrects men for their iniquities_, that they die, and their

_beauty consumes away like a moth_, Psal. xxxix. 11. And elsewhere, when

he compares the life of man to the _grass_, which _in the morning

fourisheth, and groweth up; and in the evening is cut down and

withereth, he immediately adds; thou hast set our iniquities before

thee, our secret sins in the light of thy countenance_, Psal. xc. 6, 8.

And when Hezekiah had an intimation of his recovery, after he had the

sentence of death within himself, he speaks of his deliverance from the

_pit of corruption_, Isa. xxxviii. 17. as that which was accompanied

with God’s _casting all his sins behind his back_. And since we cannot

be delivered from these sad effects of sin, till the frame of nature is

dissolved, and afterwards rebuilt; it should put us upon using those

proper methods whereby we may be freed from the guilt and dominion

thereof; and accordingly it should have a tendency to promote a life of

holiness in us.

4. From the uncertainty of life, let us be induced to improve our

present time, and endeavour so to live, as that, when God calls us

hence, we may be ready. And therefore, we ought to pray with the

Psalmist, _So teach us to number our days, that we may apply our hearts

unto wisdom_, Psal. xc. 12. that by this means, that which deprives us

of all earthly enjoyments, may give us an admission into a better world,

and be the gate to eternal life. This leads us to consider,

II. That death has a sting and curse annexed to it, with respect to

some. Thus the apostle expressly says, _The sting of death is sin_, 1

Cor. xv. 56. As sin at first brought death into the world; so it is the

guilt thereof, lying on the consciences of men, which is the principal

thing that makes them afraid to leave the world; not but that death is,

in itself, an evil that nature cannot think of without some reluctancy.

And therefore the apostle Paul, although he expresses that assurance

which he had of happiness in another world, which he _groaned_ after,

and _earnestly_ longed to be possessed of; yet had it been put to his

choice, he would have wished that he could have been _clothed upon with

the house which is from heaven_, 2 Cor. v. 2. that is, had it been the

will of God, that he might have been brought to heaven without going the

way of all the earth, this would have been more agreeable to nature. But

when the two evils of death meet together, namely, that which is

abhorrent to nature, and the sting which makes it much more formidable,

this is, beyond measure, distressing. In this answer, the sting and

curse of death are both put together, as implying the same thing.

Accordingly, it is that whereby a person apprehends himself liable to

the condemning sentence of the law, separated from God, and excluded

from his favour, so that death appears to him to be the beginning of

sorrows; this is that which tends to embitter it, and fills him with

dread and horror at the thoughts of it. Which leads us,

III. To shew that it is the peculiar privilege of the righteous, that

though they shall not be delivered from death, yet this shall redound to

their advantage. That they shall not be exempted from death is evident;

because the decree of God relating hereunto, extends to all men. We

read, indeed, of two that escaped the grave, viz. Enoch, who was

translated that he should not see death, and Elijah, who was carried to

heaven in a fiery chariot; but these are extraordinary instances, not

designed as precedents, by which we may judge of the common lot of

believers. And the saints that shall be found alive at Christ’s second

coming, shall undergo a change[122], as the apostle speaks; which though

it be equivalent to death, it cannot properly be styled a dying;

inasmuch as he opposes it thereunto, when he says, _We shall not all

sleep, but we shall all be changed_, 1 Cor. xv. 51. and he speaks of it

as a future dispensation of providence, which does not immediately

concern us in this present age. Therefore we must not conclude that

believers are delivered from the stroke of death; nevertheless, this is

ordered for their good, as the apostle says, with a particular

application to himself, _For me to die is gain_, Phil. i. 21. And when

he speaks of the many blessings that believers have in possession or in

reversion, he says, _Death is yours_; as though he should say, it shall

redound to your advantage; and this it does if we consider,

1. That the sting of death is taken away from them. This is the result

of their being in a justified state; for since a person’s being liable

to the condemning sentence of the law is the principal thing that has a

tendency to make him uneasy, and may be truly called the sting that

wounds the conscience; so a sense of his interest in forgiveness through

the blood of Christ, tends to give peace to it; such an one can say, who

shall lay any thing to my charge? It is God that justifieth; or though I

have contracted guilt, which renders me unworthy of his favour; yet I am

persuaded that this guilt is removed; and therefore iniquity shall not

be my ruin; and even death itself shall bring me to the possession of

those blessings that were purchased for me by the blood of Christ, which

I have been enabled to apply to myself by faith; and with this

confidence he can say with the apostle, _O death, where is thy sting? O

grave, where is thy victory?_ 1 Cor. xv. 55.

2. Their dying is an instance of God’s love to them. As those whom

Christ is said to have _loved in the world, he loved unto the end_ of

his life; so he loves them to the end of theirs, John xiii. 1. And as

nothing has hitherto separated them from this love, nothing shall be

able to do it. There are _three_ instances wherein the love of God to

dying believers discovers itself.

(1.) In that they are hereby freed from sin and misery; this they never

were, nor can be till then. As for sin, there are the remainders thereof

in the best of men, which give them great disturbance, and occasion for

that daily conflict which there is between flesh and spirit, as has been

before observed. But at death the conflict will be at an end, and the

victory which they shall obtain over it, compleat. There shall be no law

in the members warring against the law of the mind; no propensity or

inclination to what is evil; nor any guilt or defilement contracted;

which would be inconsistent with a state of perfect holiness. And as it

is a state of perfect happiness, there is an entire freedom from all

those miseries which sin brought into this lower world. These are either

internal or external, personal or relative; none of which shall occur to

allay, or give any disturbance to the saints’ blessedness after death.

But more of this will be considered under a following answer; in which

we shall be led to speak of the happiness of the righteous at the day of

judgment, both in soul and body[123]; and therefore we proceed to

consider,

(2.) That the death of a believer appears to be an instance of divine

love, in that hereby he is made capable of farther communion with Christ

in glory. Persons must be made meet for heaven before they are admitted

to it. Though our present season and day of grace is a time in which God

is training his people up for glory; and there is an habitual

preparation for it, when the work of grace is begun; which is what the

apostle intends when he speaks of some who are _made meet to be made

partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light_, Col. ii. 12. when

they were first translated into Christ’s kingdom: nevertheless this

falls very short of that actual meetness which the saints must have when

they are brought to the possession of the heavenly blessedness. Then

they shall be made perfect in holiness, as will be observed in the next

answer; otherwise there can be no perfect happiness.

And besides this, the soul must be more enlarged, that hereby it may be

enabled to receive the immediate discoveries of the divine glory, or to

converse with the heavenly inhabitants, than it can be here. The frame

of nature must be changed; which is what the apostle intends, when he

says, _Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, neither doth

corruption inherit incorruption_, 1 Cor. xv. 50. accordingly he adds,

ver. 53. _This corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal

must put on immortality_; whereby he intimates, that frail, mortal, and

corruptible man, is not able to bear that glory which is reserved for a

state of immortality. Therefore the soul must be so changed as to be

rendered receptive thereof; and in order thereto, all its powers and

faculties must be greatly enlarged; otherwise it can no more receive the

immediate rays of the divine glory, than the weak and distempered eye

can look steady on the sun shining in its meridian brightness. In this

world our ideas of divine things are very imperfect, by reason of the

narrowness of our capacities, and God condescends to reveal himself to

us in proportion thereto; but when the saints shall see him as he is, or

have a perfect and immediate vision and fruition of his glory, they

shall be made receptive of it; this is done at death; whereby they are

rendered capable of farther communion with Christ in glory.[124]

(3.) At death believers immediately enter upon, and are admitted into

the possession of this glory. At the same time that the soul is enlarged

and fitted for the work and enjoyment of heaven, it is received into it;

where it shall have an uninterrupted communion with Christ in glory;

which is the subject insisted on in the following answer.

Footnote 118:

_Sequela naturæ._

Footnote 119:

_Before this there was what some call_ temperamentum ad pondus, _which

was lost by sin; and a broken constitution, leading to mortality

ensued thereupon_.

Footnote 120:

_See Dr. Bates on Death, chap._ ii.

Footnote 121:

_Vid. Sueton. in Vit. Jul. Cæs. Talia agentem atq; meditantem mors

prævenit._

Footnote 122:

_See more of this in Quest._ lxxxvii.

Footnote 123:

_See Quest._ xc.

Footnote 124:

The belief of a separate state is very ancient. Cicero and Seneca have

asserted, that all nations believed the immortality of the soul. Yet

we know there were not only individuals, but sects who were

exceptions. Saul the first king of Israel believed that the soul

survived the death of the body, or he would neither have made laws

against necromancers, nor have applied to one in his distresses. If

Samuel was raised, it is a fact, directly in point, but the words

though express, are probably an accommodation to the sentiments of

men. The son of Sirach who lived two hundred years before Christ, says

that Samuel prophesied after he was dead. (Ecclus. c. 46. v. 20.) And

Josephus in his account of the life of Saul, shows his belief to be

that Samuel actually arose. The same feats of apparitions which the

disciples had, still exist with the common people, and are proofs that

they entertain the same sentiment.

Some of the Pharisees, who are represented as believing a separate

state, thought souls might return to other bodies. This was the

opinion of Josephus with respect to the virtuous; and also of those

Jews, who supposed that Jesus was Elijah or Jeremiah; but the question

of the disciples, whether a man had been born blind for his own sins,

implies a possibility of a return also of the wicked into other

bodies. Nevertheless the prevailing opinion of the Pharisees was of a

separate state; otherwise Paul’s professing their sentiments, which

must have been known to him, was disingenuous; nor, if they had known

the difference, would they have protected him. The approbation of the

multitude when he proved the doctrine from the words of Jehovah to

Moses at the bush, (Matt. xxii. 32.) and the parable of Lazarus and

the rich man, evince that the common opinion was such.

This subject, has been enlightened, not first brought to light,

through the Gospel, but plainly asserted: _this day shalt thou be with

me in paradise. At home in the body, and absent from the Lord, absent

from the body, and present with the Lord_, is descriptive but of two

states. The desire _to depart to be with Christ_, shows an immediate

expectation. And otherwise it cannot be said that the spirits of just

men are _made perfect_.

The Jews, Greeks, and Romans assigned the Heaven to the gods, earth to

men, and under the earth (שאול, αδης, inferi) to the dead. The

passages “the spirit shall return to God,” and “the spirit of a man

goeth upwards” are not exceptions, for then they would prove that the

evil, as well as the good, went to heaven. That the spirit is disposed

of by God, and that the spirit of a man survives the death of the

body, seem to be all that is respectively implied. Samuel was believed

to come out of, and return to his place under the earth; and Saul was

to be with him, below the earth; but, possibly, in a different

apartment. Thus Abraham and Lazarus were in sight of, and only divided

from the man in torments by a gulph.

Under the gospel the place of separate saints is represented to be in

Heaven. Heaven had been always assigned to God among the Jews, and

even the heathens thought it the most honourable place: Virgil

assigned it to Cæsar. Jesus declared he came from thence, and would

return thither; and for the comfort of his disciples, told them, he

would prepare a place for them, and take them to himself. They saw him

actually ascend. He is to come from thence, and to bring them with him

to judgment.

This change of representation implies no contradiction, for pure

spirits are not confined to place. Our souls are connected with our

bodies, and therefore go and come with, or rather in them. But when

the connexion is broken, the soul cannot be said to be in one place

more than another, except as it is occupied with material objects. It

can attend to one thing only at once, and therefore when in, it cannot

be out of the body, and must be wherever occupied, but not in any

_place_, except concerned with material objects. The infinite Spirit

had no connexion with space in all the eternity which preceded

creation; since time began as every thing is known and supported by

him, he is said to be in all places. But the idea of place is not

necessary to our conceptions of Spirit.

To speak of the planets as the residence of spirits, and to talk of

souls flying through the _visible_ Heavens in quest of paradise is

idle. If all souls must ascend to Heaven, from India they go in a

direction opposite to our course thither.

There is no sun nor moon enjoyed by saints in glory; the Lord is their

light. And spiritual bodies are not flesh and blood, nor belly, nor

meats; nor corruptible nor mortal; but fit for the society of spirits.

The soul at death is discharged from the prison of these bodies, and

not confined to place. It receives new faculties, which entertain it

with more than substitutes for the sensations it had in the body; it

obtains a perception of light more vivid than in dreams, and

permanent. It enjoys the discernment, society, and communion of other

Spirits; the presence of God and the Redeemer; and progresses in the

knowledge and love of God, and so in holiness and happiness forever.

Quest. LXXXVI.

QUEST. LXXXVI. _What is the communion in glory with Christ, which

the members of the invisible church enjoy immediately after death?_

ANSW. The communion in glory with Christ, which the members of the

invisible church enjoy immediately after death, is, in that their

souls are then made perfect in holiness, and received into the

highest heavens, where they behold the face of God in light and

glory, waiting for the full redemption of their bodies, which, even

in death, continue united to Christ, and rest in their graves as in

their beds, till at the last day they be again united to their

souls: Whereas the souls of the wicked are at death cast into hell,

where they remain in torments and utter darkness, and their bodies

kept in their graves, as in their prisons, till the resurrection and

judgment of the great day.

Having considered the soul as separated from the body by death; the next

thing that will be enquired into, is what becomes of it, and how it is

disposed of in its separate state? and here we find that there is a vast

difference between the righteous and the wicked in this respect: the

former have communion with Christ in glory, the latter are in a state of

banishment and separation from him; being cast into hell, and there

remaining in torments and utter darkness. Both these are particularly

insisted on in this answer. In speaking to which, we must consider,

I. That there is something supposed; namely, that the soul of man is

immortal; otherwise it could not be capable of happiness or misery.

II. We shall consider the happiness which the members of the invisible

church enjoy; which is called communion with Christ in glory.

III. The misery which the souls of the wicked endure at death; which is

contained in the latter part of the answer.

I. To speak concerning the thing supposed in this answer; namely, that

the soul of man is immortal. This is a subject of that importance, that

we must be first convinced of the truth of it before we can conclude

that there is a state of happiness or misery in another world. But

before we proceed to the proof of it, it is necessary for us to explain

what we are to understand thereby; accordingly let it be premised,

1. That we read, in scripture, of the death of the soul, in a spiritual

sense, as separated by sin, from God, the fountain of life and

blessedness, and as being destitute of a principle of grace; whereby it

is utterly indisposed to perform any actions that are spiritually good,

as much as a dead man is unable to perform the functions of life. In

this sense we are to understand the apostle’s words, _She that liveth in

pleasure is dead while she liveth_, 1 Tim. v. 6. And in this respect

unregenerate persons are said to be _dead in trespasses and sins_, Eph.

ii. 1. and a condemned state, which is the consequence hereof, is a

state of death. Now that which is opposed hereunto, is called, in

scripture, a spiritual life, or immortality; but this is not the sense

in which we are to consider it in our present argument.

2. Immortality may be considered as an attribute peculiar to God, as the

apostle says, _he only hath immortality_, 1 Tim. vi. 16. the meaning of

which is, that his life, which includes his Being, and all his

perfections, is necessary and independent; but in this respect no

creature is immortal; but their life is maintained by the will and

providence of God, which gave being to it at first.

3. When we speak of creatures being immortal, we must consider them

either as not having any thing in the constitution of their nature, that

tends to a dissolution, which cannot be effected by any second cause; or

their eternal existence, pursuant to the will of God, who could, had he

pleased, have annihilated them. It is in both these senses that we are

to consider the immortality of the soul.

That it is in its own nature immortal, has been allowed by many of the

Heathens, who have had just conceptions of the spirituality of its

nature, possessed due regards to the providence of God, and those marks

of distinction that he puts between good and bad men, as the consequence

of their behaviour in this life. That the soul survives the body, has

been reckoned, by some of the Heathens, as an opinion that has almost

universally obtained in the world[125]. Thus Plato introduces

Socrates[126] as discoursing largely on this subject, immediately before

his death: and, in some, other of his writings, not only asserts, but

gives as good proofs of this doctrine as any one, destitute of

scripture-light, could do. One of his followers, in the account he gives

of his doctrine, recommends and insists on an argument which he brings

to prove it, which is not without its weight, namely, that the soul acts

from a principle seated in its own nature, and not by the influence of

some external cause, as things material do[127]. And Strabo speaks of

the ancient Brachmans, among the Indians, as entertaining some notions

of the immortality of the soul, and the judgment passed upon it in its

separate state; agreeable to what Plato advances on that subject[128].

Some, indeed, have thought that this notion took its rise from Thales,

the Milesian, who lived between two and three hundred years before

Plato, and about six hundred years before the Christian Æra, from an

occasional passage mentioned by Diogenes Laertius, in his life, which is

hardly sufficient to justify this supposition; which he brings in only

as matter of report[129]: And Cicero[130] supposes it was first

propagated by Pherecydes, who was cotemporary with him; though Diogenes

Laertius makes no mention of it. But it may be inferred from many things

in Homer, the oldest writer in the Greek tongue, who lived above three

hundred years before Thales, that the world had entertained some

confused ideas of it in his time: As we often find him bringing in the

souls of the deceased heroes appearing in a form, and speaking with a

voice like that which they had when living, to their surviving friends.

And he not only supposes, but plainly intimates that their souls existed

in a separate state[131]. And in other places he represents some

suffering punishment for their crimes committed here on earth[132];

which plainly argues, whatever fabulous account we have of the nature of

punishment, or the person suffering it, that it was an opinion,

generally received at that time, that the soul existed in a separate

state.

And, indeed, this maybe inferred from the doctrine of Dæmons, or the

superstitious worship of the heathens, which they paid to the souls of

those heroes who formerly lived on earth, and had done some things which

they thought rendered them the peculiar favourites of God, and the

objects of worship by men; and that their souls existed with God in

great honour and favour in a separate state[133]. But passing this by,

it may be farther observed, that whatever notions some of the heathens

had of the immortality of the soul in general; they were very much at a

loss, many of them, in determining the place, or many things relating to

the state in which they were; and therefore many of them, with

Pythagoras, asserted the doctrine of transmigration of souls, or their

passing from one body to another; and being condemned to reside in vile

and dishonourable bodies; which, though it perverts, yet doth not

overthrow the doctrine of the soul’s immortality; and others seemed to

doubt whether, after four or five courses of transmigration of souls

from one body to another, they might not at last shrivel into nothing.

It must also be acknowledged, that there was a considerable party among

the heathen that adhered to the sentiments of Epicurus, who denied the

immortality of the soul, as supposing it to be material. And the

Sadducees are represented, in scripture, as imbibing that notion; who

are said to deny both angels and spirits, Acts xxiii. 8. In this respect

they gave into his philosophy, as to what concerns his denying the

immortality of the soul, or its existence in a future state[134]: But

passing this by, we may observe, that notwithstanding all that has been

said concerning this doctrine, by the better and wiser part of the

heathen in their writings; yet their notions seem very defective, if we

trace them farther than what concerns the bare separate existence of the

soul; or, if they attempt to speak any thing concerning its happiness in

a future state, they then discover that they know but little of this

matter; and many of them, though they cannot deny the soul’s

immortality, yet they seem to hesitate about it; and therefore we may

say with the apostle, that _life and immortality is brought to light

through the gospel_, 2 Tim. i. 10. that is, if we would be sure of the

immortality of the soul, and know its state and enjoyments in another

world, we must look farther than the light of nature for it: and in

seeking for arguments in scripture, we shall find great satisfaction

concerning this matter, which we cannot do from the writers before

mentioned.

That some of the heathen were in doubt about this important truth, is

very evident from their writings; for Plato himself[135],

notwithstanding the many things which he represents Socrates as saying,

concerning a state of immortality after death, endeavouring to convince

his friend Cebes about that matter, and apprehending that he had so far

prevailed in the argument, as that his antagonist allowed that the soul

survived the body, but yet held the transmigration of souls into other

bodies; this he seems to allow him, and adds, that it is uncertain

whether the soul, having worn out many bodies, may not at last perish

with one that it is united to[136]. And he farther says to him, that I

must now die, and you shall live; but which of us is in the better state

God only knows[137].

As for Aristotle, though, in many places of his writings, he seems to

maintain the immortality of the soul; yet in others it appears that he

is in doubt about it; and seems to assert, that neither good nor evil

happens to any man after his death[138]. And the Stoicks, who did not

altogether deny this doctrine; yet they supposed that in process of

time, it would be dissolved[139]. And even Cicero himself,

notwithstanding all that he says, by which he seems to give into this

doctrine; yet sometimes speaks with great hesitation about it[140]. And

notwithstanding what Seneca says concerning the immortality of the soul,

as has been often before observed; yet he speaks doubtfully of it[141];

so that we must have recourse to scripture, and those consequences that

are deduced from it, as well as those things that may be inferred from

the nature of the soul to prove that it is immortal. And,

(1.) For the proof of this doctrine, let it be considered, that the soul

is immaterial; which appears from its being capable of thought, whereby

it is conversant about, and takes in ideas of things divine and

spiritual, which no creature below man can do. It has a power of

inferring consequences from premises, and accordingly is the subject of

moral government, capable of conversing with God here, and expecting

rewards or punishments from him hereafter; all this cannot be produced

by matter or motion: As for matter, that is in itself altogether

unactive; and when motion is impressed upon it, the only change that is

made therein, is in the situation and contexture of its parts, which

cannot give it life, sensation or perception, much less a power of

judging and willing, or being conversant about things spiritual and

immaterial.

(2.) This power of thinking or reasoning was not derived from the body

to which it was united; for that which has not in itself those superior

endowments, cannot communicate them to another: Its union with the soul

cannot impart them to it; for whatever sensation the body has, (which is

below the power of reasoning,) is derived from the soul, as appears from

its being wholly destitute thereof, when the union between the soul and

body is broken: And therefore, since those superior powers, or

excellencies of the soul, are produced by another cause, we must

conclude, that they are immediately from God: This evidently appears

from scripture; the body of Adam was first formed, and then it is said,

_God breathed into his nostrils the breath of life_, Gen. ii. 7. that

is, he put into it that soul which was the spring and fountain of all

living actions; and then it follows, man became a living soul: And it is

considered as a peculiar display of the glory of God, that he _formeth

the spirit of man within him_, Zech. xii. 2.

(3.) It follows from hence, that the dissolution of the body makes no

alteration in the powers and faculties of the soul; which is not hereby

rendered subject to death. For, as it did not derive those powers from

the body, as was before observed, it could not be said to lose them in

the ruin of the body: Thus our Saviour speaks of the soul as not being

affected with those injuries that tend to the bodies destruction, when

he says, _Fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill

the soul_, Mat. x. 28.

(4.) We have a particular account in scripture, of the soul when

separated from the body, as disposed of in a different way from it; it

does not go down to the earth as the body does, from whence it was, but

_returns to God who gave it_, Eccl. xii. 7. Its return to God supposes

that it was accountable to him for its actions performed in the body, or

the way and manner in which the faculties were exerted; and accordingly,

when separate from it, it is represented as returning to God to give an

account of its behaviour in the body, and to reap the fruits and effects

thereof. And as it is said to return to God; so believers breathe forth

their souls, and resign them by faith into the hand of God, as our

Saviour expresses it, _Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit_, Luke

xxiii. 46. or, as Stephen says, _Lord Jesus receive my spirit_, Acts

vii. 59.

(5.) The soul’s immortality may be proved from the extent of the

capacities thereof, and the small improvement men make of them in this

world, especially the greatest part of mankind. What a multitude are

there who never had the faculties of the soul deduced into act, in whom

the powers of reasoning were altogether useless, while in this world; I

mean in those whose souls are separated from their bodies as soon as

they are born; others die in their childhood, before reason comes to

maturity; and how great a part of the world live to old age, whose souls

have not been employed in any thing great or excellent, in proportion to

their capacities? Were these made in vain? or did God design, when he

brought them into, or continued them either a longer or a shorter time

in the world, that they should never be employed in any thing that is

worthy of these noble faculties? Therefore we must conclude that there

is another state, in which the soul shall act more agreeably to those

capacities which it is endowed with.

(6.) This may be farther proved, not only from the natural desires,

which there are in all men, of immortality; but more especially those

desires, which the saints have, of enjoying some things in God, which

cannot be attained in this life. The natural desire of immortality is

what belongs to all: With what reluctancy does the soul and body part;

which arises from a natural aversion to a dissolution, unless there be a

well-grounded hope of a life of blessedness that shall ensue? Moreover

there is not only a desire but an expectation of the soul’s living for

ever, when separated from the body, in a state of happiness; which

believers are made partakers of, as a peculiar blessing from God:

Therefore we must conclude, that he that gave them will satisfy them; so

that as they have a thirst after happiness, which is the effect of a

supernatural power, they shall not be disappointed or destitute of it;

which they must be if the soul does not survive the body.

(7.) The immortality of the soul may be proved from the justice of God

as the Governor of the world. This divine perfection renders it

necessary that rewards and punishments should be distributed according

to men’s behaviour in this life. We observe, under a foregoing head,

that man is supposed to be accountable to God, from the consideration of

the spirit’s returning to him: And it also follows, from what was said

under another head, concerning the soul’s being the subject of moral

government: But this argument will be farther improved under a following

answer, when we consider our Saviour’s coming to judge the world[142].

All the use therefore that we shall at present make thereof, is, that

the soul being thus accountable to God, has reason to expect some

peculiar marks of favour beyond what it receives in this world; or to

fear some punishment as the consequence of crimes committed, from the

hand of the supreme Judge of all: Thus it is said, _God will render to

every man according to his deeds_, Rom. ii. 6. And elsewhere, _Every one

shall receive according to what he hath done in the body, whether it be

good or bad_, 2 Cor. v. 10. Now that which makes for our present

argument, is, that the best men in the world do not receive those

peculiar marks of divine favour, as to what respects their outward

condition therein, as some of the vilest men often do: This the prophet

Jeremiah takes notice of, when he says, _Righteous art thou, O Lord,

when I plead with thee; yet let me talk with thee of thy judgments:

Wherefore doth the way of the wicked prosper? Wherefore are all they

happy that deal very treacherously?_ Jer. xii. 1. And the Psalmist, when

observing the prosperity of the wicked, says, _They are not in trouble

like other men; neither are they plagued like other men_, Psal. lxxiii.

5. that is, not exposed to those rebukes of providence, as to what

concerns outward things, as good men are.

That which is alledged by some to solve this difficulty, is, that virtue

has its own reward; and therefore, the good man cannot but be happy,

whatever troubles he meets with in this life, since he has something

within himself that makes him so. But to this it may be replied, that

this cannot give the least satisfaction, that the divine distributions

are just and equal, to those who are destitute of this inward comfort;

and the principal ingredient in that internal happiness which arises

from the exercise of religion and virtue, consists in the divine

approbation, and the interest which such have in that love, which shall

discover itself more fully, when the soul, being separate from the body,

shall enjoy the happiness resulting from it in another world: Therefore,

this is so far from militating against the doctrine we are maintaining,

that it affords a considerable argument to support it.

If it be objected also, on the other hand, that sin brings its own

punishment along with it, in that uneasiness which the wicked find in

their own breasts; concerning whom it is said, _They are like the

troubled sea when it cannot rest; whose waters cast up mire and dirt_,

Isa. lvii. 20. This also proves the immortality of the soul; inasmuch as

this fear arises from a sense of guilt, whereby persons are liable to

punishment in another world, who are not in the least concerned about

the punishment of sin in this, and are ready to conclude themselves out

of the reach of human judicature; therefore, that which they are afraid

of, is God’s righteous judgments in another world, which they cannot, by

any means, free themselves from the dread of. We must therefore conclude

that this is as natural to man, considered as sinful, as the hope of

future blessedness is to one that is righteous; and both these are the

result of a divine impression enstamped on the souls of men, which

affords an evident proof of their immortality.

The objections against this doctrine, are generally such as carry in

them the lowest and most abject thoughts of human nature in those who

may truly be said to despise their own souls. When they pretend, as was

before observed, that they are material, this is to set the soul on a

level with the body; for matter, how much soever it be refined, when it

is resolved into the particles of which it consists, has no excellency

above other material beings.

As to the objections that are brought against this doctrine from

scripture, by which the frailty of this present life is set forth: These

do not in the least tend to overthrow the immortality of the soul. Thus,

when it is said in Eccles. iii. 19, 20. _That which befalleth the sons

of men, befalleth beasts, even one thing befalleth them: As the one

dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man

hath no pre-eminence above a beast; all go unto one place; all are of

the dust, and all turn to dust again._ It is plain, that Solomon here

speaks of the inferior part of man, in which he has no pre-eminence

above the beasts, as the body is resolved into dust, as well as the

bodies of the brute creatures; but then the following words sufficiently

confute the objection, in which it is said, _the spirit of man goeth

upward_; whereby he asserts, not only the superior excellency, but the

immortality of the soul.

Again, when it is said in chap. ix. 5. _The living know that they must

die, but the dead know not any thing; neither have they any more a

reward; for the memory of them is forgotten._ This is sufficiently

answered by only reading the following words; by which it appears, that

their memory is forgotten; and they are said to have no farther reward

in this world; or, as it is expressed, _They have no more any portion

for ever, in any thing that is done under the sun_; but this does not in

the least intimate that they have no portion in what respects the things

of another world; and, indeed, their labour being unrewarded here,

affords us an incontestible argument, that they shall have it hereafter,

when the soul leaves this world.

And as for other scriptures, that seem to intimate as though death put

an end to all those actions of religion which were performed by good men

in this life, as in Psal. xxx. 9. ‘When I go down to the pit, shall the

dust praise thee, shall it declare thy truth?’ and, ‘The dead praise not

the Lord; neither any that go down into silence,’ Psal. cxv. 17. and

what Hezekiah says to the same purpose, ‘The grave cannot praise thee;

death cannot celebrate thee; they that go down to the pit cannot hope

for thy truth,’ Isa. xxxviii. 18. These and such-like expressions intend

nothing else but this; that the praises of God cannot be celebrated by

those who are in the state of the dead, in such a way as they were by

them while they lived in this world, _viz._ in the assemblies of his

saints, from which they are separated, being no longer considered as

members of the militant church; neither are they apprized of, or

affected with the things done in this lower world, in which respect they

are said to know nothing: But this does not in the least, militate

against their praising God with the church triumphant, and having those

privileges conferred upon them, which are adapted to a state of

immortality and eternal life.

As to what is farther objected by others, that the immortality of the

soul respects only the righteous; because the apostle says in 1 John ii.

17. ‘The world passes away, and the lust thereof, but he that doth the

will of God abideth for ever.’ This sense given of the words contradicts

all those scriptures that speak of the punishment of sin in another

world; for if none are said to _abide for ever_, but the righteous, or

they who do the will of God; the wicked must necessarily go unpunished.

Therefore we must understand the word _abiding_ in the same sense as the

Psalmist does, when he says, ‘The ungodly shall not stand in the

judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous,’ Psal. i. 5.

which does not signify their not existing in a future state, but not

being admitted into the congregation of the righteous, or made happy

with them therein.[143]

II. We shall consider the happiness that the members of the invisible

church enjoy; which is called communion with Christ in glory, as it

includes in it perfect holiness; accordingly we read of _the spirits of

just men made perfect_, Heb. xii. 23. This perfection consists in the

rooting out all those remainders of corruption, and those habitual

inclinations to sin, that they were never wholly freed from in this

world. The most that can be said concerning a believer at present, is,

that he has a principle of spiritual life and grace, which inclines him

to oppose, and stand his ground against, the assaults of sin that

dwelleth in him, whereby it is mortified, but not wholly destroyed. The

work of sanctification is daily growing to perfection, though it does

not fully attain to it: But when the soul leaves the world, it arrives

to perfection in a moment; so that the power which man had at first, to

yield sinless obedience, which was lost by the fall of our first

parents, is regained with great advantage. For this perfection of

holiness not only denotes a sinless state, but the soul’s being

confirmed therein; and accordingly it is said to be received into the

highest heaven, the place into which no unclean thing can enter; where

there is spotless purity, as well as everlasting happiness; and here

they are described as beholding the face of God in light and glory.

These things need not be particularly insisted on in this place, since

the same privileges are said, in a following answer, to belong to

believers after the day of judgment, both in their souls and bodies,

when they shall be received into heaven, and be made perfectly holy and

happy, and be blest with the immediate vision of God[144]; Therefore all

that we shall consider at present, with relation hereunto, is,

1. That the soul is immediately made partaker of this blessedness on its

separation from the body.

2. It is farther described as waiting for the full redemption of the

body, which is still supposed to continue under the dominion of death,

though united to Christ, and consequently under his special protection:

Upon which account believers are said, when they die, to rest in their

graves as in their beds, till their bodies are again united to their

souls at the last day.

1. We shall consider that the soul is made partaker of this blessedness

immediately after its separation from the body, as it is observed in

this answer; which seems to militate against three opinions that have

been advanced relating to the state of separate souls.

[1.] That of the Papists, who maintain that the soul is not made perfect

in holiness at death, but enters into a middle-state, which they call

purgatory, in which it is to endure exquisite torments, designed partly

as a punishment inflicted for those sins committed in this life, which

have not been expiated by satisfaction made by them, and partly to free

them from the sin which they brought with them into that state.

[2.] Another opinion which seems to be opposed in this answer, is what

was maintained by some of the ancient Fathers; namely, that the souls of

believers do not immediately enter into the highest heaven before they

are reunited to their bodies, but into paradise; not to suffer, as the

Papists pretend that they do who are in purgatory; but to enjoy those

pleasures which are reserved for them in a place not much inferior to

heaven.

[3.] There is another opinion which is subversive of the doctrine

contained in this answer; namely, that the soul, at its separation from

the body, sleeps till the resurrection; and consequently, in that

intermediate space of time in which it is separate, it is no more

capable of happiness or misery than the body that lies in the grave. The

absurdity of these opinions we shall take occasion farther to consider.

And,

[1.] That of the Papists concerning a middle-state, into which they

suppose, souls enter at death, in order to their being cleansed from the

remainders of sin, whereby they are made meet for heaven. This doctrine,

how ludicrous and ungrounded soever it may appear to be, they are so

fond of, that it will be as hard a matter to convince them of the

absurdity thereof, as it was of old to convince the worshippers of Diana

at Ephesus, of their stupid idolatry; because it tends to promote their

secular interest. They first endeavour to persuade the poor deluded

people, that they must suffer very great torments after death, unless

they be relieved by the prayers of their surviving friends; and then, to

induce them to shew this favour to them, as well as that they may merit

some abatement of these torments or a speedy release from them, they

tell them, that it is their duty and interest to leave their estates, by

their last will and testament to pious uses; such as building of

churches, endowing of monasteries, &c. by which means they have got a

great part of the estates of the people into their own hands. And to

carry on this cheat, they give particular instances, in some of their

writings, of souls being released from this dreadful place by their

prayers.

The account they give of this middle-state, between heaven and hell, is

not only that they are not admitted into the immediate presence of God;

but are exposed to grievous torments by fire, little short of those that

are endured in hell; and if they are not helped by the prayers of the

church, they are in danger of being sent from thence directly to hell,

from whence there is no release. They also add, that the punishment, in

this state, is either longer or shorter, in proportion to the crimes

committed in this world; for which satisfaction has not been made by

penances endured, or money given to compensate for them. Some, indeed,

are allowed, by them, to pass immediately into heaven, without being

detained here; namely, those who have performed works of supererogation;

or if by their entering into a vow of poverty, they have parted with

their estates, while living in the world, for the use of the church, in

which case no end could be answered, by telling them of this fable of

purgatory. Others are told that they may escape it, by entering into a

vow of chastity and canonical obedience; which belongs more especially

to the priests, when entering into holy orders; whereby they take care

to make provision for themselves, that so the deluded people may have a

greater regard to their prayers, since they will find none in purgatory

to perform that service for them. This is so vile and absurd an opinion,

that it cannot but expose the church of Rome to the scorn and contempt

of all who are not given up to strong delusions.

But though it sufficiently appears, that secular interest is the main

foundation of this doctrine; yet there are some arguments, which they

take from scripture, to support it; which is the only thing that

requires our notice.

One scripture brought to this purpose, is in Isa. iv. 4. where the

prophet speaks concerning the _Lord’s purging the blood of Jerusalem

from the midst thereof, by the spirit of judgment, and by the spirit of

burning_; supposing that this should have its accomplishment when the

soul left the body, and was detained in this place of torment. But this

is very remote from the design of the Holy Ghost herein; for it only

contains a metaphorical description of some judgments which God would

inflict on people in this life, and as a means to reclaim them from

them: therefore we often read, in the prophets, of God’s refining his

people _in the furnace of affliction_, Isa. xlviii. 10. and accordingly

it is said, that _the Lord’s fire is in Zion, and his furnace in

Jerusalem_, chap. xxxi. 9. denoting the sore judgments they should

undergo in this world, as a punishment for their idolatry.

Another scripture, which is miserably perverted, to support this

doctrine, is that in Zech. ix. 11. _By the blood of thy covenant have I

sent forth thy prisoners, out of the pit wherein is no water_; which

they suppose, is to be understood of some state after this life; because

it is called _the pit_; and it is also described as a place of misery,

inasmuch as there is no water, that is, no refreshing comforts; and they

add, that the prophet does not speak of hell because some persons are

described as _sent forth_, or released from it; therefore it must needs

be understood of this middle-state, between heaven and hell. But this is

far from being the sense of the text, since it contains a prediction of

their being delivered from the Babylonish captivity, which, in a

metaphorical way of speaking, is called _the pit, wherein is no water_,

to denote the great distress that the people were to be brought under

therein; thus the prophet Isaiah, speaking of their deliverance from the

captivity, says, _The captive exile hasteneth that he may be loosed, and

that he should not die in the pit_, Isa. li. 14. Or else it denotes some

future deliverance, which the church was to expect after great

calamities undergone by them; and this is said to be _by the blood of

the covenant_, denoting that all the happiness the church shall enjoy in

this world, as well as the other is founded in the blood of Christ,

pursuant to the covenant of grace: and if the text must necessarily be

understood of a deliverance from evil after death, it may be considered

as a prediction of our being delivered from eternal destruction, by the

blood of Jesus.

Again, another scripture which they bring to support this fabulous

doctrine, is in 1 Cor. iii. 13, 14, 15. _Every man’s work shall be made

manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by

fire; and the fire shall try every man’s work, of what sort it is, If

any man’s work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a

reward. If any man’s work shall be burnt, he shall suffer loss; but he

himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire_. The reason why this

scripture is forced into that cause which they maintain, is, because we

read of persons being _saved so as by fire_; and this they suppose to

respect that which should follow after the particular judgment of every

one at death in which, a scrutiny shall be made concerning their works,

or their behaviour in this world; and if they are found faulty, they

may, notwithstanding, be saved after they have endured those sufferings

which are there allotted for them.

But there is nothing in the text that gives the least countenance to

this notion, since the apostle seems to be speaking concerning those

ministers who preach false doctrines, that is, propagate errors not

directly subversive of the fundamental articles of faith, but such as

tend to embarrass the consciences of men, and, in many respects, lead

them out of the way; or of others, who have been perverted by them, and

have embraced pernicious errors, which, in their consequences, are

subversive of the faith, but yet do not hold those consequences: these

may be saved, but their salvation shall be attended with some

difficulty, arising from the mistaken notions which they have imbibed.

Some compare this to a person whose house is in flames, and he saves his

life with difficulty, being scorched thereby. God will, in his own time,

take some method to discover what notions we have received in religion;

and he is said to do it by fire. Whether this, as a learned writer

observes, is to be understood of the clear gospel-dispensation,[145] or

else respects some trying dispensation of providence, accompanied with a

greater measure of the effusion of the Spirit, that shall lead men into

the knowledge of their mistakes, and set them in the right way, I will

not determine. But whether the one or the other of these senses of the

texts seems most agreeable to the mind of the apostle, it is

sufficiently evident that no countenance is given, either in this or any

other scripture, to this absurd doctrine of the Papists.

Another scripture which they bring for the proof of this doctrine, is in

1 Pet. iii. 19. in which it is said, that our Saviour _went and preached

unto the spirits in prison_. The sense they give of that text, compared

with the foregoing verse, is, that as our Saviour, after his death,

visited those repositories, where the Old Testament-saints were lodged,

and preached the gospel to them, which they embraced; and pursuant

hereupon, were admitted into heaven: so he went down into this

subterraneous prison, and preached to them also; but whether this was

attended with the same success, or no, they pretend not to determine;

but only allege this as a proof that there is such a place: and to give

countenance to this sense they say, that by the prison here spoken of,

the prison of hell cannot be intended; inasmuch as there is no hope of

salvation there, and consequently no preaching of the gospel. And it

cannot be meant of his preaching to any in this world; for they suppose,

that he went after he left the world, and _preached to spirits_, that

is, to persons, whose souls were separate from their bodies; therefore

he went, as they argue, and preached to those that are in purgatory: but

in giving this sense of the text, they are obliged to take no notice of

what follows, which, if duly considered, would plainly overthrow it.

The meaning of this scripture therefore is this, that our Saviour

preached by his Spirit, to the old world, in the ministry of Noah, while

he was preparing the ark; but they being disobedient, were not only

destroyed by the flood, but shut up in the prison of hell; in which

respect it is said he preached to those that are now in prison: so that

this scripture makes nothing for that doctrine which we are opposing;

nor any other that is or can be brought; so that all the arguments

pretended to be taken from it, are a manifest perversion thereof.

However, there is one method of reasoning which they make use of, that I

cannot pass over; inasmuch as they apprehend that it contains a

_dilemma_ that is unanswerable; namely, that there is some place in

which persons are perfectly freed from sin, which must be either this

world, or heaven, or some middle state between them both. It is allowed

by all, that there is no perfect freedom from sin in this world; and to

suppose that persons are perfectly freed from sin after they come to

heaven, is to conclude that that is a state of probation, in which the

gospel must be preached, and persons that attend upon it, inclined to

embrace it, which is not agreeable to a state of perfection: and this is

contrary to scripture, which speaks of no unclean thing entering

therein. Therefore it follows, that the state in which they are fitted

for it, must be this which they plead for, to wit, a middle-state, in

which they are first purged, and then received into heaven.

But to this it may be replied, that it is true, believers are not

perfectly freed from sin in this world, nor do they enter into heaven,

either with the guilt or pollution of their sins upon them; but they are

made perfect in an instant, in passing out of this world into heaven:

the same stroke which separates the soul from the body takes away the

remainders of corruption, and fits it for the heavenly state; it passes

out of this world perfect, though it was imperfect while in it; in like

manner as the body being raised out of the grave is rendered

incorruptible thereby, so that we have no occasion to invent a middle

state, into which the saints are brought. Therefore it follows, as it is

expressed in this answer, that the souls of believers, immediately after

death, are made perfect in holiness.

[2.] There is another opinion embraced by some of the Jews, and several

of the Fathers, in which they are followed by some modern writers;

namely, that the souls of believers, at death, enter into paradise,

where they continue till they are reunited to their bodies, and, after

the day of judgment, are received into the highest heaven: thus they

understand our Saviour’s words to the penitent thief on the cross, _To

day thou shalt be with me in paradise_, in a literal sense, as

contra-distinguished from heaven. And these assert, that the soul of our

Saviour, when separate from his body, went immediately into paradise,

and not into heaven, till after his resurrection. This is supposed to

import the same thing as _Abraham’s bosom_ does in the parable; and

indeed, the Greek word,[146] in the metaphorical sense thereof, which we

translate _bosom_, signifies a port or haven; which is, as it were, a

bosom for shipping.

This is described as very distinct from the Popish doctrine of

purgatory; for it is not a place of suffering, but of delight and

pleasure. Tertullian, who gave into this notion,[147] describes it as a

place of divine pleasure, designed for the reception of the spirits of

holy men, being separate either from the world, or other places near it,

by an inclosure of fire, designed to keep the wicked out.

This is what they suppose the apostle Paul speaks of when he says, that

he was _caught up into paradise_, 2 Cor. xii. 5. and they conclude that

this vision or rapture which he mentions, includes in it what he

experienced at two several times; and that this is agreeable to what he

mentions in verse 1. where he speaks not of one single vision, but of

_visions_ and _revelations_. Accordingly they suppose that he had first

of all a vision of the glory of heaven, and then he had another of

paradise: thus a late writer understands the text.[148] However, I

cannot think that this can be sufficiently inferred from the apostle’s

words, which are, as it were, a preface to introduce the account which

he gives of himself, when he says, _I will come to visions and

revelations_; that is, I will now tell you how God sometimes favours his

people with extraordinary visions and revelations: then he proceeds to

give an instance hereof in himself, as being _caught up into the third

heaven_, or into paradise; for I cannot suppose that he speaks of two

visions, or distinguishes paradise from heaven; and therefore I am

obliged not to pay that deference to the sentiments of the Fathers he

mentions, as he does, but must conclude the notion to be altogether

ungrounded, though it is supported by the credit of Irenæus, Tertullian,

Epiphanius, Methodius, as well as of several Jewish writers; such as

Philo, and some others,[149]

[3.] We shall now consider another doctrine, maintained by some, which

is inconsistent with what is said in this answer, concerning the souls

of believers being made perfect in holiness, and entering immediately

into heaven, when separate from their bodies, _viz._ that at death the

soul sleeps as well as the body, till the resurrection, when one shall

be raised, and the other awakened out of its sleep. These do not suppose

that the soul ceases to exist; but that it enters into, and continues

in, a state of inactivity, without any power to exercise the faculty of

thinking, and, as a consequence thereof, whilst remaining in this state,

it must be incapable either of happiness or misery. These do not assert

that there shall be no rewards and punishments in a future state; but

that there will be a deferring thereof until the last day.

This doctrine was generally maintained by the Socinians, as may be seen

in several of their writings referred to by a learned author, who

opposes them;[150] and the arguments by which it is usually supported,

are taken partly from the possibility of the soul’s being destitute of

thought, and partly from those scriptures that compare death to a sleep;

by which they understand not only a cessation of action in the body, but

likewise in the soul. In defence of the former of these, _viz._ that it

is possible for the soul to be without the exercise of thought, they

argue, that the soul of a new-born infant, (or, at least, before it is

born,) has no ideas: though there be a power of reasoning, which is

essential, to the soul; yet this is not deduced into act, so as to

produce thought, or actual reasoning, from whence moral good or evil

would proceed, and a sense of happiness or misery, arise from it. And

this notion is carried somewhat farther by a late celebrated

writer;[151] who, though he takes no notice of the tendency of his

assertion to support this opinion concerning the soul’s sleeping at

death; yet others make a handle of it, to defend it with a greater shew

of reason than what was formerly discovered in maintaining this

argument.

He asserts, that the souls of those that are adult do not always think;

and particularly when a person is in a sound sleep, that he has no

thought; how much soever there may be the exercise of thought, though

confused and irregular, in those who, between sleeping and waking, not

only dream a thousand things which they never thought of before, but

also remember those dreams when they awake. That a person, in a sound

sleep, has no dreams, and consequently is destitute of thought, he

attempts to prove; inasmuch as when any one is suddenly waked out of a

sound sleep, he can give no account of what he had been thinking of; and

he supposes it impossible for a person who was thinking, to forget the

next moment what his thoughts were conversant about. This is the

principal argument whereby he supports this notion; and he has so far

the advantage thereof, as that it is impossible for us to prove the

contrary from any thing that we know or experience concerning ourselves:

Nevertheless, it will not appear very convincing, when we consider that

there are innumerable thoughts which we have when awake, that we can

hardly give an account of the next minute: And if the thoughts are very

active in those that dream, (who are as much asleep as others that do

not dream; though the sleep may not be so refreshing as if it were

otherwise,) I cannot see how this consequence can be inferred, that

sleep is inconsistent with thought. Moreover, a person who is delirious,

or distracted, undoubtedly thinks, though his thoughts are disordered;

but when the _delirium_ or distraction is over, he can no more remember

what he thought of, than a person that is waked out of the soundest

sleep: This argument therefore tends rather to amuse, or embarrass the

cause they maintain, than to give sufficient conviction.

Now from this method of reasoning it is inferred, that when the soul is

separated from the body, it is altogether destitute of the exercise of

thought, which is what they mean by the soul’s sleeping: And to give

farther countenance to this matter, they produce several scriptures, in

which death is compared to a sleep; as when God speaks of the death of

Moses, he says, _Behold, thou shalt sleep with thy fathers_, Deut. xxxi.

26. and Job speaks of _sleeping in the dust_, Job vii. 21. And

concerning the resurrection after death, he says, _That man lieth down

and riseth not, till the heavens be no more, they shall not awake nor be

raised out of their sleep_, chap. xiv. 12. and David prays, _Lighten

mine eyes, lest I sleep the sleep of death_, Psal. xiii. 3. and our

Saviour, speaking concerning Lazarus, when dead, says, _Our friend

Lazarus sleepeth; but I go that I may awake him out of sleep_, John xi.

11. which he afterwards explains, ver. 14. when he says, _Lazarus is

dead_. There are several other scriptures to the like purpose, they

bring to prove that the soul sleeps in death, taking the word in the

literal sense thereof.

But to this it may be replied, that as to what respects the possibility

of the soul’s being rendered incapable of thinking, when separate from

the body; it is no just way of reasoning to infer from the possibility

of a thing, the actual being of it: Therefore if it could be proved to a

demonstration, (as the author above-mentioned supposes he has done,

though, I think, without sufficient ground,) that sleep deprives a

person of thought; yet it will not follow from hence, that the soul,

when separate from the body, ceases to think. When the powers and

faculties of the soul are deduced into act, experience tells us, that

they are greatly improved and strengthened; and therefore the exercise

thereof cannot be so easily impeded as is pretended; especially when we

consider that it does not derive this from the body, which contributes

very little to those ideas it has of things immaterial, which are not

the objects of sense; and how much soever bodily diseases may weaken or

interrupt the soul in its actings, we do not find that they so far

destroy those powers, but that, when the distemper ceases, the former

actings return, like the spring of a watch, which may be stopped by

something that hinders the motion of the wheels, which, when it is

removed, continues to give motion to them as it had done before: The

body, at most, can be considered but as a clog and impediment to the

activity of the soul; and consequently it may be argued from thence,

that in a state of separation the soul is so far from being impeded in

its actings, that it becomes more active than before.

But that which I would principally insist on, as what will sufficiently

overthrow this doctrine, is, the account which we have in many

scriptures; and several just consequences which may be deduced from

them, by which it will appear, that nothing that has been said

concerning the possibility of the soul’s being unactive, when separate

from the body, can enervate the force of the argument taken from thence

to support the contrary doctrine. It is true, the scripture oftentimes

represents death as a _sleep_, as in the places before-mentioned; and it

is sometimes described as a state of rest, which is of the same import

with sleep; but this is explained as a state of peace, holiness, and

happiness, and not a cessation from action. Thus it is said, _He shall

enter into peace, they shall rest in their beds, each one walking in his

uprightness_, Isa. lvii. 2. which is plainly meant of the death of the

righteous, as appears from the preceding verse, where it is said, _The

righteous perisheth, and no man layeth it to heart_. Now these are said

to _enter into peace_; which supposes that they are capable of the

enjoyment of those blessings which the soul shall then be possessed of,

and they are said to _walk in their uprightness_; which signifies their

being active in what respects the glory of God, which is very

inconsistent with the soul’s sleeping, when separate from the body. Rest

and sleep are metaphorical expressions, when applied to this doctrine;

and nothing is more common than for such figurative ways of speaking to

be used in the sacred writings; and therefore it is very absurd for us

to understand the words otherwise in this instance before us.

We will now proceed to consider those proofs we have from scripture, of

the soul’s being in a state of activity when separate from the body.

The first scripture that may be brought to prove this, is what the

apostle says in 2 Cor. xii. 2, 3, 4. when speaking concerning himself as

_caught up into the third heaven_; and not knowing whether he was at the

same time, _in, or out of the body_. If he was in the body, his senses

were locked up, and he must be supposed to have been in a trance; which

militates against the supposition that the soul’s power of acting may be

impeded either by sleep or some bodily disease, in which there is not

the exercise of the senses. Or if, on the other hand, he was _out of the

body_, his _hearing unspeakable words_ plainly proves our argument,

_viz._ that the soul is capable of action, and consequently of enjoying

the heavenly glory, when separate from the body.

Moreover, this is evident from our Saviour’s words to the penitent thief

on the cross, _Verily I say unto thee, to day shalt thou be with me in

paradise_, Luke xxiii. 43. To _be in paradise_ is certainly to be in

heaven in a state of compleat blessedness, where the soul delights

itself in the enjoyment of God, which is altogether inconsistent with a

state of insensibility. Were it otherwise, it ought rather to have been

said, thou shalt be with me in paradise after the resurrection of the

body, than to day. The method which some take to evade the force of the

argument, who say, that _to day_, refers not to the time of his being

admitted into heaven, but to the time when Christ spake these words, is

so low and trifling, that it doth not deserve an answer.

There is another scripture which fully proves this doctrine, namely,

what the apostle says, _I am in a strait betwixt two, having a desire to

depart and to be with Christ, which is far better_, Phil. i. 23. In

which he takes it for granted, that as soon as he departed out of this

world, he should be with Christ; which denotes that he should be in his

immediate presence, beholding his glory; which is inconsistent with the

supposition that the soul sleeps at death. And this is farther evident

from what he says, that this is _far better_, which could not be said to

be, if the notion we are opposing were true; for it is so much better

for a saint to be serving Christ’s interest in this world, and made so

eminently useful in promoting his glory, as the apostle was, than to be

in a state of inactivity, wherein the soul is not capable of doing any

thing for him, nor enjoying any thing from him, that there is no

comparison between them; and whereas he was _in a strait_ which of these

two he should chuse, had it been referred to him, the matter might

easily have been determined in favour of his continuing in this world;

for there he was useful; whereas, in the other, he would not only be

useless, but incapable of enjoying those privileges which he was made

partaker of here.

My next argument shall be taken from what is said in 2 Cor. v. 8. _We

are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and

to be present with the Lord_; where one infers the other, without any

intimation of his waiting till the soul is united again to the body,

before he is admitted into Christ’s presence.

Again, this farther appears from the words of Solomon, in Eccl. iv. 2.

_I praised the dead which are already dead, more than the living which

are yet alive._ By which we are to understand, that the state of

believers, when they die, is much more happy than it can be in this

life; which supposes that they are capable of happiness, and

consequently that the soul, when separated from the body, is not in a

state of insensibility; which is altogether inconsistent with happiness.

And to all this we may add what our Saviour says in the parable of the

rich man and Lazarus; the _beggar died, and was carried by angels into

Abraham’s bosom: The rich man also died and was buried, and in hell he

lifted up his eyes, being in torments_, Luke xvi. 22, 23. In which

parable we have an account of the different state of the souls of the

righteous and wicked at death, and not barely what shall follow upon the

resurrection of the body; for when the rich man is represented as being

in torments, he says, in a following part of the parable, _I have five

brethren_; and he would have _had Lazarus sent to testify to them, lest

they should also come into that place of torment_; to which it is

replied, _They have Moses and the prophets, let them hear them_, ver.

28, 29. which plainly intimates, that the parable refers to the state of

separate souls, before the resurrection, whilst others enjoyed the means

of grace; and consequently it proves that the soul, when separate from

the body, is capable of happiness or misery; and which is more, is fixed

in one or the other of them.

As to those scriptures that speak of the happiness or misery of men, as

deferred to the end of the world. It is intimated in the parable of the

tares, that _the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from the

just_, Mat. xiii. 9. and the former are said to be _cast into a furnace

of fire_, ver. 49, 50. and the latter, _viz._ the righteous, to _shine

forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father_, ver. 43. which

respects the dealings of God with man, in the end of time. Moreover our

Saviour speaks of his people as _blessed and recompensed at the

resurrection of the just_, Luke xiv. 14. And the apostle Paul expresses

his hope of a _crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous

Judge, should give him at that day_, 2 Tim. iv. 8. that is, the day of

his coming to judgment; and several other scriptures that speak of what

is consequent to the resurrection. To this it may be replied, that these

scriptures respect not the beginning, but consummation of the happiness

of the saints, or their compleat blessedness in soul and body, which is

not inconsistent with the happiness that separate souls enjoy before the

resurrection. Nor is the misery that is consequent upon the

resurrection, inconsistent with that which sinners endure before it,

when their souls are separate from their bodies. Thus concerning the

happiness of the souls of believers at death; which leads us to

consider,

2. What is farther observed in this answer, concerning the soul’s

waiting for the full redemption of the body; which though it continues

under the dominion of death, is notwithstanding united to Christ; and

accordingly believers are said to rest in their graves as in their beds,

till the resurrection.

The souls of believers are described as waiting for the full redemption

of their bodies; which is the same expression that the apostle uses,

Rom. viii. 23. where redemption denotes a full discharge from that

prison, or state of confinement in the grave; in which the body was

rendered incapable of answering the end for which it was redeemed by

Christ, and, at the same time, the soul was destitute of that happiness

which its re-union therewith shall convey to it. Its enjoyments were all

spiritual, and, in their kind perfect; but yet it was naked, or, as the

apostle expresses it unclothed; inasmuch as it wanted that which was

designed to be a constituent part, necessary to compleat the human

nature; without which it was indisposed for those actions and enjoyments

which arise from its union with the body. This it is said to wait for,

as a desire of re-union therewith is natural to it. Nevertheless it

waits without impatience, or any diminution of its intellectual

happiness.

(2.) As to what respects the bodies of believers, they are said to

continue united to Christ, which is the result of their being redeemed

by him, and of his condescending to dwell in them by his Spirit.

Accordingly his love extends itself to their lower part, as well as to

their souls; and, as the apostle says, _Nothing shall separate_ a

believer _from his love_, no, _not death itself_, ver. 38, 39. upon

which account they are said to _sleep in Jesus_, 1 Thes. iv. 14. or to

_die in the Lord_, Rev. xiv. 14. They are indeed buried in the grave,

and seem to lie neglected like common dust: nevertheless it is said,

_Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of his saints_, Psal.

cxvi. 15. Christ reckons every particle of their dust among _his

jewels_, Mal. iii. 17. and is no more ashamed to own them as his

peculiar care, than he was when they were in their most flourishing

state in this world; and for this reason they are also said to rest in

their graves as in their beds. This is a scripture-expression, as the

Psalmist says, _My flesh shall rest in hope_, Psal. xvi. 9. and the

prophet Isaiah, _He shall enter into peace, they shall rest in their

beds_, Isa. lvii. 2. The body, indeed, remains, at the same time, under

the external part of the curse due to man for sin; yet it is freed from

that which is the most bitter ingredient therein; which will be

abundantly demonstrated when death shall be compleatly swallowed up in

victory. In this the bodies of believers have the advantage of all

others. The frame of nature indeed is dissolved; there is no visible

mark of distinction from the wicked put upon them in the grave; yet

there is a vast difference in God’s account, which one elegantly

compares to the removing of the tabernacle in the wilderness: when the

Israelites changed their stations, all the parts thereof were carefully

taken down and delivered to the Levites’ charge, in order to its being

raised again with honour; whereas, the house incurably infected with the

leprosy, was plucked down with violence, and thrown into an unclean

place with execration. The bodies of the saints are committed to the

bosom of the earth, as the repository Christ has appointed for them;

from whence he will call them forth at last, when their souls shall be

again united to them in the glorious morning of the resurrection. This

leads us to consider,

III. The misery which the souls of the wicked endure at death, which is

contained in the latter part of this answer.

We have here a different scene opened, the final estate of the wicked

described in words adapted to strike dread and terror into those who

have, at present, no sense of their future misery: their souls are

considered as cast into, or shut up in hell; their bodies imprisoned in

the grave, and both, the objects of divine wrath. We shall have

occasion, under a following answer,[152] farther to speak concerning the

punishment that shall be inflicted on sinners, whose torments shall be

inexpressible, both in body and soul, after the day of judgment: and

therefore we shall, at present, consider the misery which the souls of

the wicked shall undergo before they are united to their bodies. The

soul, which carries out of the world with it the power of reflecting on

itself as happy or miserable, immediately sees itself separate from the

comfortable presence of God, the fountain of blessedness. And that which

tends to enhance its misery beyond what it is capable of in this life,

will be the enlargement of its faculties; as the apprehension shall be

more clear and its sensation of the wrath of God more pungent; when it

is not oppressed with that drowsiness and stupidity as it was before;

nor will it be possible for it to delude itself, with those vain hopes,

which it once conceived, of escaping that misery, which it is now

plunged into; when all the waves and billows of the Almighty shall

overwhelm and swallow it up. The soul is, in a peculiar manner, the

subject of misery, as it is made uneasy by its own thoughts; which are

compared to the worm that dieth not. While it looks backwards, and calls

to mind the actions of his past life, and all his sins are charged upon

him, this fills it with such a sense of guilt and confusion as is

inexpressibly tormenting; and when he looks forward, there is nothing

but what administers despair, which increases his misery to the highest

degree. These torments the soul endures before it is reunited to the

body, and thereby rendered receptive of others, which we generally call

the punishment of sense, that are conveyed by it.

The place of punishment is the same that is allotted for soul and body,

_viz._ hell; and this is called utter darkness; which is an expression

used to signify the greatest degree of misery. As for their bodies, they

dread the thoughts of being united to them again; inasmuch as that will

bring with it new accessions of torment. These are considered as liable

to a double dishonour; not only that which arises from their being in a

state of corruption in common with all mankind; but in their being

detained in the grave, as prisoners to the justice of God, from whence

they shall not be released as persons acquitted or discharged, but

remanded from that prison to another, from whence there is no

deliverance. But more of this under a following answer.

Footnote 125:

_Vid. Senec. Epist. 117. Cum de animarum immortalitate loquimur, non

leve momentum apud nos habet consensus hominum, aut timentium inferos,

aut colentium. Utor hac persuasione publica. Et. Cic. Tusc. Quest.

Lib. 1. permanere animos arbitramur consensu nationum omnium; qua in

sede maneant, qualesque sint ratione discendum est._

Footnote 126:

_In Phæd._

Footnote 127:

_Vid. Alcin. de doct. Plat. Cap._ xxv. Αυτοκινητον δε φησι την ψυχην·

οτι συμφυτου εχει τηυ ζωηυ, αει ενεργσσαν καθ αυτην.

Footnote 128:

_Vid. Strab. Geog. Lib._ xv. Παραπλεκσι δε και μυθους, ωσπερ και

πλατωγ περι τε αφθαρσιας ψυχης, και τωγ καθ᾽ αδη χρισεων, και αλλα

τοιαυτα, περι μεγ τωγ βραχμαναν ταυτα λεγει.

Footnote 129:

_Vid. Diog. Laert. in Vit. Thal._

Footnote 130:

_Vid. Cic. Tusc. Quæst. Lib. 1._

Footnote 131:

_Vid, Hom. Iliad. 23._ _lin. 65. & seq._

Ήλθε δ᾽ επι ψυχη Πατροκληος δειλοιο,

Παντ᾽ αυτω μεγεθος τε και ομματα καλ᾽ εικυια,

Και φωνην. και τοια πρι χροι ειματα εστο.

Στη δ᾽ αρ᾽ ὑπερ κεφαλης, και μεν προς μυθον ἑειπεν.

_In which, after he had killed Hector, he addresses himself to his

friend Patroclus, signifying that he had done this to revenge his

death; upon which, the poet brings in Patroclus as appearing to him._

Footnote 132:

_Vid. Odys. Lib._ xi. _lin. 575._ & seq. _in which he speaks of the

punishment of Tityus and Tantalus. In this, as well as many other

things, he is imitated by Virgil. See Æneid. Lib._ vi. _lin. 595_, &

seq.

Footnote 133:

_See this argument managed with a great deal of learning and judgment

by Mede, in his apostasy of the latter times, who proves that the gods

whom the heathens worshipped, were the souls of men deifyed or

cannonized after death, from many of their own writers, chap._ iv.

_and Voss. de orig. &c. idol. Lib. 1. cap._ xi, xii, xiii. _who refers

to Lanct. Lib. 1. de fals. Relig. cap._ v. _his words are these; Quos

imperiti, & insipientes, tanquam Deos & nuncupant, & adorant, nemo est

tam inconsideratus, qui non intelligat fuisse mortales. Quomodo ergo,

inquiet aliquis, Dii crediti sunt? Nimirum quia reges maximi, ac

potentissimi fuerunt, ob merita virtutum suarum, aut munerum, aut

artium repertarum, cum chari fuissent iis, quibus imperitaverunt, in

memoriam sunt consecrati. Quod si quis dubitet, res eorum gestas, &

facta, consideret: quæ universa tum poetæ, tum historici veteres,

prodiderunt. Et August. de Civ. Dei, Lib._ viii. _cap._ v. _Ipsi etium

majorum gentium Dii, quos Cicero in Tusculanis, tacitis nominibus

videtur attingere, Jupiter, Juno, Saturnus, Vulcanus, Vesta, & alii

plurimi, quos Varro conatur ad mundi partes, sive elementa transferre

homines fuisse produntur. Et Cic. Lib. 1. de nat. Deor. Quid, qui aut

fortes, aut potentes viros tradunt post mortem ad Deos pervenisse;

eosq; ipsos quos, nos colere, precari, venerariq; soleamus?_

Footnote 134:

_Some have wondered how the Sadducees could deny angels, and yet

receive the five books of Moses, in which there is so frequent mention

of the appearance of angels; and it might as well be wondered how they

could make any pretensions to religion, who denyed the immortality of

the soul; but as to both these, it may be said concerning them, that

they were the most irreligious part of the Jewish nation. To make them

consistent with themselves, is past the skill of any who treat on this

subject. Some suppose that they understand all those scriptures that

speak concerning the appearance of angels, as importing nothing else

but a bodily shape, appearing for a time, and conversing with those to

whom it was sent, moved and actuated by the divine power, and then

disappearing and vanishing into nothing._

Footnote 135:

_In Phæd._

Footnote 136:

_His words are these_; Κεβης δε μοι εδοξε τουτο μεν εμοι ξυν χωρειν,

πολυχρονιωτερον γε ειναι Ψυχην σωματος᾽ αλλα τοδε αδηλον παντι, μη

πολλα δη σωματα και πολλακις κατατριψασα η ψυχη, το τελευταιον, σωμα

καταλεπουσα νυν αυτη απολλυνται και η αυτο τουτο θανατος, ψυχης

ολεθρος επει σωμα γ εξει απολλυμενον ουδεν παυεται.

Footnote 137:

Ὁποιεροι δε ημων ερχονται επι αμεινον πραγμα, αδηλον παντι πλην η τω

θεω.

Footnote 138:

_Vid. ejusd. moral. Lib._ iii. _cap._ ix.

Footnote 139:

_Vid. Diog. Laert. in Vit. Zen._ Την ψυχην μετα θανατον επιμενειν,

φθαρτον δε ειναι; _upon which occasion Cicero says, That though they

assert that they shall continue a great while in being, yet they deny

that they shall exist for ever. Vid. ejusd. in Tusc. Quæst. Lib. 1.

Stoici usuram nobis largiuntur, tanquam cornicibus; diu mansuros

animos ajunt; semper negant._

Footnote 140:

_Et ibid. Ea quæ vis, ut potero, explicabo, nec tamen quasi Pythius

Apollo certa ut sint, & fixa quæ dixero, sed ut homunculus unus e

multis, probabilia conjectura sequens; ultra enim quo progrediar quam

ut verisimilia videam, non habeo; which Lactantius observes, speaking

of him as in doubt about it. Vid. Lactant. de Vit. Beat. Lib._ vii. _§

8. And elsewhere he says, in Lib. de Amicitia. Sin autem illa vetiora,

ut idem interitus sit animorum, & corporum, nec ullus sensus maneat:

Ut nihil boni est in morte, sic certe nihil est mali; & in Lib. de

Senect. Quod si in hoc erro, quod animos hominum immortales esse

credam, libenter erro: Nec mihi hunc errorem, quo delector, dum vivo,

extorqueri volo. Sin mortuus, ut quidam minuti philosophi censent,

nihil sentiam; non vereor, ne hunc errorem meum philosophi minuti

irrideant: Quod si non sumus immortales futuri, tamen extingui hominem

suo tempore, optabile est._

Footnote 141:

_Epist. 102. Credebam opinionibus magnorum virorum rem gratissimam

promittentium, magis quam probantium._

Footnote 142:

_See Quest._ lxxxviii, lxxxix.

Footnote 143:

The doctrines of the immortality of the soul, and of the resurrection

of the body equally rest upon the will and word of God. But when

viewed with the eye of natural reason, they have been deemed to

possess very unequal grounds of probability. The properties of matter

and of mind are so very different, they have been distinguished by

almost all. If the mind be not matter, no argument for its

extermination can be drawn from the dissolution of the body; and as

its materiality has never been shown, no premises have been found from

which its death can be inferred. Some wise men who had not the

scriptures, have indeed withholden their belief; but the reason is

discernible, they have demanded proofs which the God of nature has not

vouchsafed; and their rejection of the preponderating evidence of

probability, argues weakness and fastidiousness.

The resurrection of the body has been held to be impossible. If so,

the impossibility should either consist in the absolute incapacity in

the dead body to be raised; but this it does not, for death can only

reduce the body to its first element, and the dust which has been a

body is not any more unfit to be reanimated, than it was to receive

life in the first instance; or it must be owing to some detect of

wisdom or power, or of both in him, who should raise the body; but God

is unchangeable, and in all respects as able to raise him from the

dead, as to create man at the first; and there is no contradiction

implied in the thing, which should prevent the exertion of his power;

a resurrection is therefore possible.

The usual arguments for its probability drawn from analogy to the

return of day, of spring, of vegetation, &c. are not conclusive. But

those drawn from the resurrection of Christ, from the identity of man

considered as a compound from the removal of moral evil, from which

natural evils arise, from the earnest expectation of animal nature for

a better condition, and from the perfection of the future state, seem

to raise a presumption which is probable; yet these are not

appreciated by the natural man; hence the world has so generally

denied a resurrection of the body.

The testimony of the Holy Spirit on both points has been always the

same, but not with equal lustre.

Jesus Christ explicitly affirmed both, and brought his proofs from the

old testament, pressed them as motives of comfort or terror to saints

and sinners, and so connected their truth with that of his own

character, that every thing which proves the latter, is a proof of the

former. Not only did his actually raising the dead, and arising

himself, prove that the dead shall rise, but every prophecy

accomplished in him, and every miracle wrought by him and his

apostles, the continuance of his church, the purity of his system of

doctrines, the doctrines of election, redemption, justification,

regeneration and perseverance, as well as the express declarations on

this subject, both in the old and new testament, all form a solid mass

of evidence upon which the hopes of the Christian may firmly rest.

Footnote 144:

_See Quest._ xc.

Footnote 145:

_See Dr. Edward’s exercit. Part II. on 1 Cor._ iii. _15. who, to give

countenance to this opinion, produces two scriptures, viz. Mark_ xiv.

_54. and Luke_ xxii. _56. where the word_ φως, _is put for fire; from

whence he supposes, that_ φως _and_ πυρ, _are used promiscuously_.

Footnote 146:

Κολπος. Sinus, _a bosom, coast, or haven_.

Footnote 147:

_Vid. Tertull. Apologet. Cap._ xlvii. _Et si paradisum nominemus,

locum divinæ amænitatis recipiendis sanctorum spiritibus destinatum,

materia quadem igneæ illius Zonæ segregatum._

Footnote 148:

_See Whitby in loc._

Footnote 149:

_See also his notes on Luke_ xxiii. 43.

Footnote 150:

_Vid. Hoornbeck Socin. Confut. Tom. III. Lib._ v. _Cap. 1. who quotes

some passages out of several Socinian writers, among whom I shall only

mention what is said by two of them, with whom several others of their

brethren agree herein. Vid. Socin. in Epist._ v. _ad Volkel. Tantum id

mihi videtur statui posse, post hanc vitam, animam, sive animum

hominis non ita per se subsistere ut præmia ulla pænasve sentiat; vel

etiam ista sentiendi sit capax, quæ mea firma opinio facile potest

colligi ex multis quæ a me dicuntur_, &c. _Et Smalc. in Exam. Error.

Pag. 33. Animam vel spiritum hominis post mortum aliquid sentire, vel

aliqua re perfrui, nec ratio permittit nec scriptura testatur: ut enim

corpus sine anima, sic etiam anima sine corpore, nullus operationes

exercere potest; & perinde sic ac si anima illorum nulla esset, etiamæ

suo modo sit, quia scilicet nullius rei sensum habeat, aut per se

voluptate aliqua fræ possit. And elsewhere the same author is so hardy

as to term the contrary doctrine no other than a fable, in Lib. de Dei

filio, Cap._ vi. _Pag. 43. Quod vern de vita animarum disserit, hoc

instar fabulæ est_, &c. _Spiritum hominis ad Deum redire testatur

sacra scriptura, at eum vivera vita, ut ait Smiglecius, spirituum, &

vel aliquid intelligere, vel voluptate frui hoc extra, & contra

scripturam dicitur._

Footnote 151:

_See Locke’s Essay concerning human understanding, Lib._ ii. _Chap.

1._ § ix. _to the_ xix.

Footnote 152:

_Quest._ lxxxix.

Quest. LXXXVII.

QUEST. LXXXVII. _What are we to believe concerning the

resurrection?_

ANSW. We are to believe, that at the last day there shall be a

general resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust; when

they that are then found alive, shall, in a moment, be changed; and

the self-same bodies of the dead which were laid in the grave, being

then again united to their souls for ever, shall be raised up by the

power of Christ; the bodies of the just, by the Spirit of Christ,

and by virtue of his resurrection, as their head, shall be raised in

power, spiritual, incorruptible, and made like to his glorious body;

and the bodies of the wicked shall be raised up in dishonour, by

him, as an offended Judge.

In the foregoing answers, we have considered the soul and body as

separated by death, the body turned to corruption, and the soul

immediately entering into a state of happiness or misery; and are now

led to insist on the doctrine of the resurrection, when these two

constituent parts of man shall be reunited. And accordingly we shall

endeavour,