Billeder på siden
[ocr errors]

So that if we believe Mofes, we have we have a very plain and exprefs Proof of the fpiritual and immortal Nature of human Souls, without concerning our felves with the uncertain Reafonings and Conjectures of Philofophy, which are great Secrets to us. For he tells us, that the Soul was not made of Matter, but was immediately created by God, and breath'd into the Body, which was form'd of Duft: That it is this Breath of Life, which gives Life, and Senfe, and Motion to the Body and therefore as it receives not Life from the Body, but gives Life to it, fo it does not depend on the Body for Life, but can live without it; nay, that it has a Principle of a true Divine Life, being made after the Image and Likenefs of God; and therefore is capable of fuch divine Enjoyments and Pleafures, as have no Dependance on the Body: That Man was made to be immortal; and, had he preferv'd his Innocence, would never have fuffer'd fuch a Separation of Soul and Body as we call Death. But however, that the Sentence of Death related to the mortal Part of Man, tó his Body which was form'd of the Duft, and muft now return to Duft again; But the Soul is immortal still, and lives in a feparate State; where good Men when they dye meet each other again; as the Scripture affures us, That they are gather'd to their Fathers.

This is the Mofaical Philofophy concerning the Nature and Origin of human Soul, which agrees with the wifeft and beft Philofophers in their Doctrine of the Soul's Immortality. And this is the beft Confirmation of the Reafonings of Philofophy; that, as to their main Conclufion, they are confirmed by the moft authentick Hiftory of the Creation. And I hope it may reconcile fome wanton Philofophical Wits to Mofes; that in the molt concerning Point of all, the Immortality


of the Soul, his Account is fo ftrictly Philofophical. And when we have the agreeing Teftimony both of Reafon and Revelation, I hope this will confirm us in the Belief of this most important Article, the Immortality of the Soul.

SECT. II and ben

Concerning the Univerfal Confent in the Belief of a Future State, and the Natural Defires of Immortality.




[ocr errors]

HE fecond natural and moral Argument for a future State, I told you, was the univerfal Confent of Mankind in this Belief. And if this be a good Argument, the Jews had the best Evidence of it, from the conftant Faith and Tradition of their Fathers. They knew all their Progenitors from Adam to Abraham, and through all fucceffive Generations and there was not an Infidel in their whole Line. They were Men of great Piety and Virtue, who worshipp'd the one Supreme God; and God frequently vouchfafed them his Prefence, and convers'd familiarly with them; as the Hiftories of Abraham, Ifaac, and Jacob, abundantly witness. So that they could refolve their Faith into a Tradition as old as Adam. And if Adam believ'd another Life after this, he must learn it either immediately from God, or from the Dictates of Nature; and could not be mistaken in either. For though Adam was fall'n, we must not think that he immediately loft all that natural Knowledge, wherewith he was created: For the Fall has not that Effect upon us even at this Day; and there is no Reason to doubt, but that Adam understood the Philofophy of Nature better than all the Experi



ments and Obfervations fince can teach us. Trial God made of his Knowledge of Creatures, when he brought them to him to fee by what Names he would call them, is a good Evidence of this ; and makes it very probable, that Adam understood the Immortality of his own Nature from the Principles of Nature and Philosophy, with which he was fo intimately acquainted.

But befides this, though we cannot certainly tell how much Adam understood of that Promise which God made him after his Fall, That the Seed of the Woman should break the Serpent's Head; yet we may reasonably think, that a Man of fo great Underftanding and Sagacity muft apply this to the Redemption of Mankind from Death. The Serpent by his Subtilty had deceiv'd our first Parents into, the Tranfgreffion of the Divine Law, which brought Death upon them and their Pofterity; and therefore to break the Serpent's Head, is to deliver Mankind from Death, that Curfe of the Law, which his Malice and Subtilty had betray'd them to. And I cannot fee how Adam at that time could understand any thing lefs by it, if he thought it a Promife of Grace and Favour: For nothing but a Promife of a new Life could fupport and comfort him under the Sentence of Death. And then this Promise did not only affure Adam of the Immortality of his Soul after Death, but gave him reasonable Hopes of the Resurrection of his Body too: For the Death of the Body is that Curie which the Serpent had brought upon him; and therefore the Refurrection of the Body effectually disappoints his Malice, and breaks his Head. And thus St. Paul expounds it in the second of the Hebrews, 14 and 15 v. For as much then as the Children are partakers of Flesh and Blood, he also himSelf likewife took part of the fame, that through Death be might destroy him, who bath the power of Death,.



that is, the Devil; and deliver them, who through fear of Death were all their Life-time fubject to Bondage. Which plainly relates to this Promife of breaking the Serpent's Head. And it seems very probable to me, that good Men, even in thofe Days, were not wholly ignorant of the Doctrine of the Refurrection. I can give no other tolerable Account of what Job tells us, Job 19. v. 25, 26, 27. For I know that my Redeemer liveth, and that be fhall ftand at the latter Day upon the Earth; and though after my Skin Worms deftroy this Body, yet in my Flesh fhall I fee God; whom I shall fee for my felf, and mine Eyes fhall behold, and not another, though my Reins be confumed within me. That our Church understands this in a literal Senfe of the Refurrection of the Body, appears from that place fhe has given it in the Office of Burial. And whereas others expound this as a Prediction and Prophecy of that happy and flourishing State, which he should be restored to in this World; I have two Objections against it, which I cannot anfwer. I That had he known how happy and profperous God intended to make him in this World, as a Reward of his prefent Sufferings, this must have filenc'd all his Complaints, even with respect to his prefent hard Ufage, which yet in this very Chapter he is full of; which makes it most likely, that he knew nothing how near the End of his Troubles, and his future Felicity was. Nor is it likely that God fhould discover this to him; because these Afflictions were intended as a Trial of his Faith and Patience, and to make him a greater Example of both to the World. But had he certainly known what a happy End his Sufferings fhould have, even in this Life, his Patience and Submiffion to the Will of God had not been fo exemplary and wonderful. For, I believe, there are but few Men, did they know it beforehand, but would be contented to endure all that

Job did, for fo fhort a time as he did, to enjoy fo great and fo long a Profperity in this World in Recompence of it. My fecond Objection is, That, in the plain and literal Senfe, thefe Words fignify a Refurrection of the Body, after it is destroy'd by Worms, and diffolv'd into Duft; 'and therefore cannot be mere Metaphors to reprefent temporal Happiness and Profperity by. For this is contrary to the Ufe of Scripture, that mere Metaphors fhould have more Truth and Reality in them, than the Things they are intended to represent. Temporal Deliverances, and Temporal Profperities, are many times made ufe of in Scripture as Types and Metaphors, to reprefent the fpiritual Bleffings of the Meffias; for thefe fpiritual Bleffings are much greater than all the prefent external Pomp, and Glory, and Riches of a temporal Kingdom. But to rise again from the Dead, after the Worms have destroy'd this Body, is infinitely a greater thing, than to be very profperous in this World after fome fevere Trials and Afflictions. And there is no other Example in Scripture, wherein the Type and Figure has more Truth and Reality than its Antitype has. Thefe, I think, are very reasonable Objections against this metaphorical Interpretation : And the only Objection I know against the expounding thefe Words of Job, of the true and proper Refurrection of the Body after its Death and Diffolution, is the general Perfuafion, That the Doctrine of the Refurrection was not then known to the World. And it is most probable that this was not then generally known: But yet, as I have fhewn you, this might have been known from that Promife God made to Adam, That the Seed of the Woman should break the Serpent's Head: And from thefe Words of Job, which will not reafonably admit of any other Senfe, it feems most probable that fuch wife and good Men as Job was,

K 2


« ForrigeFortsæt »