Part 41

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.