Law of Moses (a) (as the Sadducees) cast off all Hope of enjoying any Good after this Life. The Greeks who derived their Learning from the Chaldeans and Egyptians, and who had some Hope of The Weathe naother Life after this, (b) spoke very doubtfully concerning it, as is evident (c) from the Disputes placed thew of Socrates, and from the Writings of (d) Tully, hope in Earthy gratification, ...

(a) As the Sadducees, &c.] Matt. xxii. 23. Luke in Acts 8. Josephus: "The Sadducees argue, that the Soul "perishes with the Body." And in another Place, "They deny the Soul's Immortality, and Rewards and Punishments "in another Life." Jerom says of them, "That they believe "the Soul perishes with the Body,"

(b) Spoke very doubtfully, &c.] This is observed by Chrysostom, on 1 Cor, i. 25.

(c) From the disputes of Socrates, &c.] In Plato's Phædon: "Now I would have you to understand, that I hope to go amongst good Men; but I will not be too positive in affirming it." And afterwards, "If those Things I am speaking of should prove true, it is very well to be thus persuaded concerning them; but if there be nothing after "Death, yet I shall always be the less concerned for the present Things of this Life; and this my ignorance will "not continue long (for that would be bad) but will shortly "vanish." And Tertullian concerning the Soul: "From "such a firm Steadiness and Goodness of Mind, did that "Wisdom of Socrates proceed, and not from any certain Dis66 covery of the Truth." The same is observed of Socrates in the Exhortation amongst the Works of Justin,

cr

(d) Tully, &c.] In his First Tusculan Question: "Shew me first, if you can, and if it be not too troublesome, that "Souls remain after Death; or, if you cannot prove this "(for it is difficult) declare how there is no Evil in Death." And a little after. "I know not what mighty Thing they "have got by it, who teach, that when the Time of Death comes, they shall certainly perish; which if it should be, "(for I do not say any Thing to the contrary) what Ground "of Joy or Glorying does it afford?" And again, "Now

66

86

suppose the Soul should perish with the Body, can there be any Pain, or can there be any Sense at all in the Body "after Death? Nobody will say so." Lactantius, Book VII. Chap. 8. cites the following Passage out of the same Cicero, spoken after a Dispute about the Soul: Which of these "Opinions is true, God only knows."

Seneca,

(a) Seneca (b) and others. And though they searched diligently for Arguments to prove it, they could offer nothing of Certainty. For those which they alledge, (c) hold generally as strong for Beasts as they do for Men. Which when some of them considered, it is no Wonder that they imagined that Souls (d) passed out of Men into Beasts, and out of Beasts into Men. Again; because this could not be proved by any Testimonies, nor by any certain Arguments, and yet it could not be denied but that there must be some End proposed for Man; therefore others were led to say, (e) that Virtue was its own Reward, and that a wise Man was very happy, though in Phalaris's Bull. But others disliked this, and not without Reason; for they saw very well, that Happiness, especially in the highest Degree (unless we regard only the Sound of Words, without any Meaning) could not (f) consist in that which is attended with Dan

ger,

(a) Seneca, &c.] Epistle LXIV. "And, perhaps (if the "Report of wise Men be true, and any Place receives us) "that, which we think perishes, is only sent before."

(b) And others, &c.] Justin Martyr says, in general, in his Dialogue with Trypho: "The Philosophers knew Nothing of "these Things, nor can they tell what the Soul is."

(c) Hold generally as strong for Beasts, &c.] As that Argument of Socrates to Plato, that "That which moves of itself "is Eternal." See Lactantius in the forementioned Place.

(d) Passed out of Men into Beasts, &c.] As the Brachmans of old, and now also; from whom Pythagoras and his Scholars had it.

(e) That Virtue was its own Reward, &c.] See Tully's Second Tusc. Quest. And Lactantius's Institutions, Book III. Chap. 27. where he strenuously disputes against this Opinion; and Augustin, Epist. III.

(f) Consist in that, &c.] Lactantius, Book III. Chap. 12. "Virtue is not its own Happiness, because the whole Power "of it consists, as I said, in bearing Evils." And a little

after,

ger, Loss, Torment and Death: And therefore they placed the chief Good and End of Man in sensual Pleasure. And this Opinion, likewise, was solidly confuted by very many, as a Thing which overthrew all Virtue, the Seeds of which are planted in the Mind; and degraded Man, who was made for nobler Purposes, to the Rank of Brute Creatures, who look no further than the Earth. In so many Doubts and Uncertainties did. Mankind at that Time wander, till Christ discovered the true Knowledge of their End; promising to his Disciples and Followers another Life after this, in which there should be no more Death, Pain, or Sorrow, but accompanied with the highest Joy: And this not only to one Part of Man, that is, his Soul, of whose Happiness after this Life there was some Hope, partly from Conjecture, and partly from Tradition; but also to the Body, and that very justly, that the Body, which oftentimes ought to endure great Losses, Torments, and Death, for the Sake of the Divine Law, might not go without a Recompence. And the Joys which are promised, are not such mean Things (a) as those Feasts, which the duller Jews hoped for after this Life, (b) and the Embraces which the Mahometans promise to

"But

after, when he had quoted a Place of Seneca's, he adds: "the Stoics, whom he follows, deny that any one can be happy "without Virtue. Therefore the Reward of Virtue, is a happy "Life if Virtue, as is rightly said, makes Life happy. Vir"tue, therefore, is not to be desired for its own Sake, as they ‚“ affirm, but for the Sake of a happy Life, which necessarily "attends Virtue: Which Argument might instruct them what "is the chief Good. But this present bodily Life cannot be "happy, because it is subject to Evils, by Means of the Body." Pliny, in his Nat. Hist. Book VII. Ch. 7. says well, That no mortal Man is happy."

(a) As the Feasts, &c.] The places are quoted beneath in the Fifth Book.

(4) And the Embraces, &c.] See the Alcoran, Azoara, II. V. XLVII. LIV. LXV. LXVI.

them,

The bleping

are to

are

themselves; for these are only proper Remedies for the Mortality of this frail Life; the former, for the Preservation of particular Animals, and the latter for the Continuance of their Species: But the Body will be in a perpetual Vigour, and its Brightness will exceed the Stars. The Mind will have a Knowledge of God and of, Divine Provi-ternaldence, and of whatever is now hidden from it, without any Mistake: The Will will be. calm, employed in Wonder and Praises, in beholding God; in a Word, all Things will be much greater and better, than can be conceived by comparing them with the greatest and best here.

SECT. X.

A Solution of the Objection taken from hence, that the Bodies after their Dissolution cannot be restored.

BESIDES the Objection which we have now answered, it is commonly alledged, that the Bodies of Men, after their Dissolution, cannot be restored to the same Frame again; But this is said without the least Foundation. (a) For most Philosophers agree, that though the Things be never so much

(a) For most Philosophers agree, &c.] If any one be not satisfied with this Account of Grotius, he may be answered, that it is not at all necessary, that the Matter which is raised, should be numerically the same with that which the dying Man carried to the Grave with him: For he will be as much the same Man, though his Soul were joined to Matter which it was never before joined to, provided it be the same Soul, as a decrepid old Man is the same as he was when a Child crying in a Cradle, though perhaps there is not, in the old Man, one Particle of that Matter there was in the Infant, by reason of the continual Effluvia which fly from the Body. It may very well be called A Resurrection of the Body, when a like one is formed by God out of the Earth, and joined to the Mind; therefore there is no Need of reducing ourselves to so great Straits, in order to defend too stiffly the Sameness of the Matter. Le Clerc,

changed,

changed, the Matter of them still remains capable of being formed into different Shapes; and who will affirm, that God does not know in what Places, though ever so far distant, the Parts of that Matter are, which go to the making up of a human

God on his Body & Or, that he has not Power to bring them Infinite

back and reunite them? And do the same in the Universe, that we see Chymists do in their FurPowes can naces and Vessels, collect those Particles which are четве restore then of the same Kind, tho' separated from one another. And there are Examples in Nature, which show, oo that though the Shape of Things be ever so much Lemored changed, yet the Things themselves return to their original Form; as in Seeds of Trees and Plants. Nature on Neither is that Knot, which is objected by so many, it out in such as cannot be loosed; viz. concerning human Bodies passing into Nourishment of wild Beasts and Montse Cattle; who, after they are thus fed, are eaten again by Men. For the greatest Part of what is caten by us, is not converted into any Part of our Body, but goes into Excrements or Superfluities, such as Spittle and Choler: And much of that which has nourishment in it, is consumed by Diseases, internal Heat, and the ambient Air. Which being thus, God, who takes such Care of all Kinds, even of dumb Creatures, may have such a particular Regard to human Bodies, that if any Part of them should come to be Food for other Men, it should no more be converted into their Substance, than Poison or Physic is; and so much the rather, because human Flesh was not given to be Food for Men. And, if it were otherwise; and that something which does not belong to the latter Body, must be taken from it; this will not make it a different Body; (a) for there happens a greater

(a) For there happens a greater Change, &c.] See Alfenus, in Lib. Proponebatur. D. de Officiis." If any one should

"think,