but that it must be the fame material fubftance which was vitally united to the foul here; i. e. as I understand it, the fame individual particles of matter, which were, fome time or other during his life here, vitally united to his foul.

All

Your firft argument to prove, that it must be the fame body in this fenfe of the fame body, is taken from these words of our Saviour, that are in the graves fhall hear his voice, and fhall come forth. + From whence your lordship argues, That thefe words, all that are in their graves, relate to no other fubftance than what was united to the foul in life; because a different fubftance cannot be faid to be in the graves, and to come out of them. Which words of your lordship's, if they prove any thing, prove that the foul too is lodged in the grave, and raised out of it at the laft day. For your lordship fays, Can a different fubftance be faid to be in the graves, and come out of them? So that, according to this interpretation of thefe words of our Saviour, No other fubftance being raised, but what hears his voiee; and no other subflance hearing his voice, but what being called, comes out of the grave; and no other fubftance coming out of the grave, but what was in the grave; any one muft conclude, that the foul, unless it be in the grave, will make no part of the person that is raifed; unless, as your lordship argues against me t, You can make it out, that a fubftance which never was in the grave may come out of it, or that the foul is no fubftance.

But fetting afide the fubftance of the foul, another thing that will make any one doubt, whether this your interpretation of our Saviour's words be neceffarily to be received as their true fenfe, is, That it will not be very eafily reconciled to your faying, you do not mean by the fame body, The fame individual particles which were united at the point of death. And yet, by this interpretation of our Saviour's words, you can mean no other particles but fuch as were united at the point of death; because you mean no other substance but what comes out of the grave; and no fubftance, no particles come out, you fay, but what were in the grave; and I think, your lordship will not fay, that the particles that were feparate from the body by perfpiration before the point of death, were laid up in the grave.

But your lordship, I find, has an answer to this, viz. That by comparing this with other places, you find that the words [of our Saviour above quoted] are to be understood of the fubftance of the body, to which the foul was united, and not to (I fuppofe your lordship writ, of) thefe individual particles, i. e. thofe individual particles that are in the grave at the refurrection. For fo they must be read, to make your lordThip's fenfe entire, and to the purpose of your answer here: and then, methinks, this laft fenfe of our Saviour's words given by your lordship, wholly overturns the feufe which we have given of them above, where from those words you prefs the beliet of the refurrection of the fame body, by this ftrong argument, that a fubftance could not, upon hearing the voice of Chrift, come out of the grave, which was never in the grave. There (as far as I can understand your words) your lordship argues, that our Saviour's words are to be understood of the particles in the grave, unlefs, as your lordship fays, one can make it out, that a subBlance which never was in the grave, may come out of it. And here your

John v. 28, 29. + 28 Anf. tib. lib.

ib. lordship

lordship exprefly fays, That our Saviour's words are to be understood of the fubftance of that body, to which the foul was [at any time] united, and not to thofe individual particles that are in the grave. Which put together, feems to me to fay, That our Saviour's words are to be underflood of thofe particles only that are in the grave, and not of those particles only which are in the grave, but of others alfo, which have at any time been vitally united to the foul, but never were in the grave.

The next text your lordship brings to make the refurrection of the fame body, in your fenfe, an article of faith, are thefe words of St. Paul; * For we muft all appear before the judgment feat of Chrift, that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad. To which your lordship fubjoins t this question: Can these words be understood of any other material fubftance, but that body in which these things were done? Antwer. A man may fufpend his determining the meaning of the apoftle to be, that a finner fhall fuffer for his fins in the very fame body wherein he committed them; because St. Paul does not fay he fhall have the very fame body when he fuffers, that he had when he finned. The apoftle fays indeed, done in his body. The body he had, and did things in, at five or fifteen, was, no doubt, his body, as much as that, which he did things in at fifty, was his body, though his body were not the very fame body at thofe different ages: and fo will the body, which he shall have after the refurrection, be his body, though it be not the very fame with that, which he had at five, or fifteen, or fifty. He that at threefcore is broke on the wheel, for a murder he committed at twenty, is punished for what he did in his body, though the body he has, i, e. his body at threefcore, be not the fame, i. e. made up of the fame individual particles of matter, that that body was, which he had forty years before. When your lordship has refolved with yourself, what that fame immu table he is, which at the laft judgment fhall receive the things done in his body, your lordship will eafily fee, that the body he had when an embryo in the womb, when a child playing in coats, when a man marry. ing a wife, and when bed-rid dying of a confumption, and at laft, which he fhall have after his refurrection, are each of them his body, though neither of them be the fame body, the one with the other.

But farther, to your lordship's question, Can these words be understood of any other material fubftance, but that body in which these things were done? I anfwer, Thefe words of St. Paul may be understood of another material fubftance, than that body in which these things were dene, because your lordship teaches me, and gives me a ftrong reason fo to understand them. Your lordship fays, That you do not fay the fame particles of matter, which the finner had at the very time of the commiffion of his fins, fhall be raised at the laft day. And your lordship gives this reafon for it; | For then a long finner muft have a vast body, confidering the continued fpending of particles by perspiration. Now, my lord, if the apoftle's words, as your lordship would argue, cannot be understood of any other material fubftance, but that body in which thefe things were done; and no body, upon the removal or change of fome of the particles that at any time make it up, is the fame material fub

* 2 Cor. v. 10,

† 2d Anf. +ib.

ib.

ftance,

ftance, or the fame body; it will, I think, thence follow, that either the finner must have all the fame individual particles vitally united to his foul when he is raised, that he had vitally united to his foul when he finned; or elfe St. Paul's words here cannot be understood to mean the fame body in which the things were done. For if there were other particles of matter in the body, wherein the things were done, than in that which is raised, that which is raised cannot be the fame body in which they were done: unless that alone, which has juft all the fame individual particles when any action is done, being the fame body wherein it was done, that alfo, which has not the fame individual particles wherein that action was done, can be the fame body wherein it was done; which is in effect to make the fame body fometimes to be the fame, and sometimes not the fame.

Your lordship thinks it fuffices to make the fame body, to have not all, but no other particles of matter, but fuch as were fometime or other vitally united to the foul before; but fuch a body, made up of part of the particles fome time or other vitally united to the foul, is no more the fame body wherein the actions were done in the diftant parts of the long finner's life, than that is the fame body in which a quarter, or half, or three quarters of the fame particles, that made it up, are wanting. For example, A finner has acted here in his body an hundred years; he is raifed at the laft day, but with what body? The fame, fays your lordship, that he acted in; becaufe St. Paul fays, he muft receive the things done in his body. What therefore mut his body at the refurrection confist of? Muft it confift of all the particles of matter that have ever been vitally united to his foul? For they, in fucceffion, have all of them made up his body wherein he did these things: No, fays your lordship, that would make his body too vaft; it fuffices to make the fame body in which the things were done, that it confifts of fome of the particles, and no other, but fuch as were, fome time during his life, vitally united to his foul. But according to this account, his body. at the refurrection being, as your lordfhip feems to limit it, near the fame fize it was in fome part of his life, it will be no more the fame body in which the things were done in the diftant parts of his life, than that is the fame body, in which half, or three quarters, or more of the individual matter that then made it up, is now wanting. For example, Let his body at fifty years old confift of a million of parts: five hundred thousand at leaft of thofe parts will be different from thofe which made up his body at ten years, and at an hundred. So that to take the numerical particles, that made up his body at fifty, or any other feafon of his life, or to gather them promifcuoufly out of those which at different times have fucceffively been vitally united to his foul, they will no more make the fame body, which was his, wherein fome of his actions were done, than that is the fame body, which has but half the fame particles: and yet all your lordship's argument here for the fame body, is, because St. Paul fays it must be his body, in which these things were done; which it could not be, if any other fubftance were joined to it, i. e. if any other particles of matter made up the body, which were not vitally united to the foul when the action was done.

* zd Anf

Again, your lordship says, * That you do notway the fame individual particles [fhall make up the body at the refurrection] which were united at the point of death, for there must be a great alteration in them in a lingering difeafe, as if a fat man falls into a confumption.' Becaufe, it is likely, your lordship thinks thefe particles of a decrepit, wafted, withered body, would be too few, or unfit to make fuch a plump, ftrong, vigorous, well-fized body, as it has pleafed your lordship to proportion out in your thoughts to men at the refurrection; and therefore fome fmall portion of the particles formerly united vitally to that man's foul, fhall be reaffumed to make up his body to the bulk your lordship judges convenient; but the greatest part of them fhall be left out, to avoid the making his body more vaft than your lordship thinks will be fit, as appears by these your lordship's words immediately following, viz. That you do not fay the fame particles the finner had at the very time of commiffion of his fins; for then a long finner must have a vast body.'

But then, pray, my lord, what must an embryo do, who dying within a few hours after his body was vitally united to his foul, has no particles of matter, which were formerly vitally united to it, to make up his body of that fize and proportion which your lordhip feems to require in bodies at the refurrection? Or must we believe he shall remain content with that fmall pittance of matter, and that yet imperfect body to eternity, because it is an article of faith to believe the refurrection of the very fame body, i. e. made up of only fuch particles as have been vi tally united to the foul? For it must be fo, as your lordship fays, That life is the refult of the union of foul and body,' it will follow, that the body of an embryo dying in the womb may be very little, not the thoufandth part of any ordinary man. For fince from the firft conception and beginning of formation it has life, and life is the refult of the union of the foul with the body;' an embryo, that fhall die either by the untimely death of the mother, or by any other accident, presently after it has life, muft, according to your lordship's doctrine, remain a man not an inch long to eternity; because there are not particles of matter, formerly united to his foul, to make him bigger, and no other can be made ufe of to that purpose: though what greater congruity the foul hath with any particles of niatter which were once vitally united to it, but are now fo no longer, than it hath with particles of matter which it was never united to, would be hard to determine, if that fhould be demanded.

By these and not a few other the like confequences, one may see what fervice they do to religion, and the Chriftian doctrine, who raife queftions, and make articles of faith about the refurrection of the fame body, where the fcripture fays nothing of the fame body; or if it does, it is with no fmall reprimand | to thofe who make fuch an inquiry. • But fome men will fay, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come? Thou fool, that which thou foweft, is not quickened, except it die. And that which thou foweft, thou foweft not that body that fhall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of fome other grain. But God giveth it a body, as it hath pleafed him.' Words, I fhould think, fufficient to deter us from determining any thing for or against the fame body's being raised at the last day. It fuffices, that all

* 2d Anfw. + Ibid. VOL. 1.

Ibid. 1 Cor. xv. 35, &c. .

A a

the

the dead fhall be raised, and every one appear and answer for the things done in his life, and receive according to the things he has done in his body, whether good or bad. He that believes this, and has faid nothing inconfiftent herewith, I prefume may and must be acquitted from being guilty of any thing inconfiftent with the article of the refurrection of the dead.

But your lordship, to prove the refurrection of the fame body to be an article of faith, farther afks, How could it be faid, if any other fubftance be joined to the foul at the refurrection, as its body, that they were the things done in or by the body?' Anfw. Juft as it may be faid of a man at an hundred years old, that hath then another substance joined to his foul, than he had at twenty; that the murder or drunkennefs he was guilty of at twenty, were things done in the body: how by the body' comes in here, I do not fee.

to

Your lordship adds, and St. Paul's difpute about the manner of raifing the body, might foon have ended, if there were no neceffity of the fame body.' Anfw. When I understand what argument there is in these words prove the refurrection of the fame body, without the mixture of one new atom of matter, I fhall know what te fay to it. In the mean time this I understand, that St. Paul would have put as fhort an end to all difputes about this matter, if he had faid, that there was a neceffity of of the fame body, or that it fhould be the fame body.

The next text of fcripture you bring for the fame body is, If there be no refurrection of the dead, then is not Chrift raifed.' From which your lordship argues, It feems then other bodies are to be raised as his was.' I grant other dead, as certainly raised as Chrift was; for elfe his refurrection would be of no ufe to mankind. But I do not fee how it follows, that they fhall be raised with the fame body, as Chrift was raifed with the fame body, as your lordship infers in these words annexed; And can there be any doubt, whether his body was the fame material substance which was united to his foul before?' I answer, None at all; nor that it had juft the fame diftinguishing lineaments and marks, yea, and the fame wounds that it had at the time of his death. If therefore your lordship will argue from other bodies being raised as his was, That they must keep proportion with his in famenefs; then we muft believe, that every man fhall be raised with the fame lineaments and other notes of diftinction he had at the time of his death, even with his wounds yet open, if he had any, because our Saviour was fo raised; which feems to me fearce reconcileable with what your lordship fays, || of a fat man falling into a confumption, and dying.

But whether it will confift or no with your lordship's meaning in that place, this to me feems a confequence that will need to be better proved, viz. That our bodies must be raised the fame, juft as our Saviour's was: because St. Paul fays, if there be no refurrection of the dead, then is not Chrift rifen. For it may be a good confequence, Chrift is rifen, and therefore there fhall be a refurrection of the dead; and yet this may not be a good confequence, Chrift was raifed with the fame body he had at his death, therefore all men fhall be raised with the fame body they had at their death, contrary to what your lordship fays concerning a fat man

* 2d Anfw. + 2 Cor. xv. 16.

2d Anfw.

|| Ibid.