an other place he asserts that Souls departed live not the life of Spirits and adds that it is contrary to Scripture to assert otherwise And further If souls lived thus it could not be said that the dead ARE NOT because they ARE as is their chief part If you would know the ground of this opinion it is this The Soul they say can't live without the Body and therefore when this dies the other doth so too The foresaid Author expresses it thus As the body without the spirit is a carkase so the spirit without the body can exert no actions i. e. is as it were a carkase is dead and in an other place he is as peremptory Slichtingius labours to prove that humane souls live not on this side of the last and general Resurrection which appears from their not having a Sense of any thing between the time after their departure hence and the Resurrection The dead are not sensible saith he and accordingly Separate Souls having no sense and perception are concluded to have no life Again in an other place in his Commentary he saith the Souls of the just are not sensible of Happiness till after the Resurrection Volkelius would seem at first to be a Trimmer for he tells us the Soul neither dies nor lives it is neither mortal nor immortal But when he comes to explain himself he lets us see that he is no dissenter from his brethren but concludes with them that the Souls of the departed are insensible of any thing before their re-union with the bodies Nay as you shall hear afterwards he improves this Insensibility into an Extinction I will mention Crellius in the last place though he is a Racovian of the first Rate he gives it us as his perswasion that the souls of the dead have no perception no knowledg of any thing And in an other place he determines that the departed Saints enjoy not the Happiness of Heaven before the End of the World And afterwards he undertakes the Proof of this and produces Eight Arguments for this purpose but he generally founds it on this Hypothesis that there is no Perception without the Body and therefore till there be a Reunion of soul and body the deceased can have no feeling of Celestial Joys they remain destitute of all sâ—…se Thus they all agree that Humane Spirits after death have no Life or Activeness for one is synonymous with the other no capacity of exerting themselves But what can be more contrary to those discoveries which are made to us in the Sacred and Inspired Writings Our Blessed Saviour saith God is not the God of the dead but of the living Mat. 22. 32. which words are spoken of Abraham Isaac and Jacob who are long since departed this life wherefore it is undeniably evident that these Patriarchs live But they do not live as to their bodies therefore it must be meant of their Souls The same Infallible Instructer ascertains us that he who hears his word and believes in him who sent him is passed from death to life John 5. 24. Which words though they may be interpreted concerning a state of spiritual death and spiritual life in this world yet they have a fuller meaning and comprehend in them the passing of believers at their death into a better life than they had before viz. that which is Everlasting of which he speaks in the very same verse And such are said to be passed as if it were already done which is usual in the Scripture-stile because of the Certainty of the thing hereafter But the Socinian Theology runs counter to this they say believers pass from life to death to a state that is wholly uncapable of sense life or action Those words of our Saviour this day shalt thou be with me in paradise Luke 23. 43. prove that the Soul enjoys it self immediately after death and is in a state of Bliss and Happiness The Apostle had a desire to depart and to be with Christ Phil. 1. 23. and assigns this as a reason which is far better that is far better than to abide in the flesh to continue in this world which he speaks of both before and after these words But according to Socinus's followers it is far worse for after the Soul's departure from the body it hath no understanding no perception at all of Christ or any thing appertaining to him Again these men confront not only Scripture but reason they shew themselves as bad Philosophers as Divines for if they had a right apprehension of the Nature of Humane Souls they would not talk after this rate Their notion destroys the very Soul of man for it deprives it of its Essential and Inseparable Quality which is Thinking And besides they grosly imagine that the Body helps the Soul in its operations yea that this cannot subsist without the assistance of that whereas according to the best notions we can form of the body as it is now corrupted it is a hindrance to the operation of the Soul And as for the Soul it is so far from being worsted by its Separation that it is in a much better condition as to its actings than it was Death is but snuffing of this Candle so 't is call'd Prov. 20. 27. it makes it shine the brighter When the Soul leaves the Body it becomes more brisk and active than ever being freed from that fleshly clog and luggage which depressed it This is True Philosophizing but the other is the very dregs of Epicurism It degrades the Rational Part of Man especially that of Good Men for all Separate Souls according to them go to the same place the wicked and the godly are alike as to that there is no difference between them till the Resurrection and Last Judgment Which is a great deal worse than the doctrine of the Church of Rome which assigns different Limbus's to the good and bad And then they are all equal as to this that they are Senseless and uncapable of knowing or acting or any ways exerting themselves Though the Soul exists yet it is as if it were not it hath nothing of its True Nature which is in a manner thrusting the Rational Spirit out of its being Who doth not see that the belief of the Insensibility and Inactivity of the Soul makes way for the belief of its Non-subsistence after the death of the body And so all Religion is dampt and the hopes of a Future State are quite laid in the dust The Socinian Writers verge upon this thus from the pen of one of the Authors before mention'd we have such words as these concerning the Soul Properly speaking it neither dies nor lives but only causes Life as long as it is joyn'd to the Body wherefore properly speaking it can't be said to be Immortal for Immortality belongs only to those beings which themselves actually live And speaking another time concerning the Souls that are separated from their bodies he
nothing is rais'd but what fell or was laid down for Rising answers to these but that Matter which is supposed to be substituted in the room of our bodies did not fall was not laid down therefore it cannot Rise and consequently there is no Rising again at all This Argument is thus represented by a Great Man The Identity of the body rais'd from death is so necessary that the very name of the Resurrection doth include or suppose it so that when I say there shall be a Resurrection of the dead I must intend thus much that the bodies of Men which lived and are dead shall revive and rise again For at the death of man nothing falleth but his Body the spirit goeth upward and no other body falleth but his own and therefore the body and no other but that body must rise again to make a Resurrection So that it follows hence that those who disbelieve the Resurrection of the same body in effect deny the Article of the Resurrection of the body for the same body must rise or none at all This is evident from 2 Cor. 5. 10. We must all appear before the judgment-seat of Christ that every one may receive the things done in his body The same individual body that died must revive that the same bodies wherein sin was committed may be punished for sinning And who can resist the force of those plain words Rev. 20. 13. which are spoken of the general Resurrection at the last day The sea shall give up the dead that are in it and death and the grave deliver up the dead which are in them What means this giving and delivering up the dead in those places unless the very same bodies that fell are to rise For bodies might be made and shaped out of matter in any other Places if the dead were not to appear at the day of Judgment in their own bodies in the very bodies they laid down in the grave or in the sea or any other Place It is true they shall not be the same as to their condition and quality for this corruptible must put on incorruption and this mortal immortality but their identity shall be preserv'd in respect of their nature and substance these being the same that they were at their fall This doctrine saith that Excellent Writer before named is most agreeable to the language of the Scriptures to the Principles of Religion to the constant Profession of the Church And being so it is no wonder that it is disrelish'd by the Persons I am speaking of who are wont to disregard the Sacred Writings to subvert the Principles of Christianity and to slight the suffrage of the Universal Church In all which they manifest an Irreligious temper and more especially in disbelieving and opposing this Explication of the Article of the Creed they have shew'd an Atheistical Spirit which always disgusts that Truth which flows from the Scriptures and is revealed to us by the Holy Spirit in them for herein they let us see that they are backward to give credit to the Supreme Truth God himself And besides there is a farther Tang of Impiety in this Opinion of theirs because it bereaves God of the Glory of his Infinite Power in reuniting the same bodies to the same souls at the last day it eclipses the honour of his Mercy in rewarding believers in the same flesh wherein they serv'd and worship'd him in this life it obscures his Justice in punishing sinners in those very fleshly Vehicles which they had here on earth and wherein they did so much mischief in the world And lastly it being such a Diminishment of the doctrine of the Resurrection it is to be fear'd it will have too great an influence on the lives and conversations of men They being dissetled as to the full belief of this they will waver in their Faith of the Future State they will be regardless of that Mighty Concern and they will be backward to fit themselves for it Thus the Racovian doctrine is an impediment to Religion and a nourisher of Vice and Ungodliness CHAP. V. Their false apprehensions concerning the Last Judgment are detected They are not consentaneous to the design of that Great Transaction They are contrary to that Description which is given of it in Scripture They are a gratification to Atheists It is their belief and profession that the Ungodly after the Resurrection shall not suffer Torment but shall be Annihilated This is disproved from Luk. 10. 14. Mat. 18. 8. Mark 9. 44. 2 Cor. 5. 10. An Objection answered The Perniciousness of this doctrine and its tendendency to Atheism on several accounts Iâ—… is no wonder that Socinianism for the sake of this doctrine is plausible Nevertheless the doctrine is irrational and groundless and exploded by some of the Wisest Pagans THIS will be further discover'd in their notion concerning the Last Judgment which say they consists not in any Trial or Judging of the World in any calling them to Account but only in assigning them their different lots and conditions To be judg'd saith Slichtingius is to be rewarded or punish'd Volkelius makes no distinction between the Judging and Punishing of the wicked The Judg knows who are to be saved and who to be damn'd and therefore need not use any Formal Citation or lay open mens lives But those who talk thus should remember that human actions are to be exposed at that day not because God hath not a perfect knowledg of them but because it is his Pleasure that Men should be acquainted with them that the Good Actions of the righteous may be applauded and that the Evil ones of the unrighteous may be condemned in the face of the whole World That this is the will of God we learn from the Sacred Writ and where can it be learnt but there Therefore for these men to Argue and reason the matter notwithstanding the express will and appointment of God is a sign of a very perverse and irreligious frame of mind Is not the Transaction of the Last day represented to us as a Formal Judiciary Process Doth not the Scripture speak of the Judg Acts 10. 42. 2 Tim. 4. 8. Heb. 12. 23. Jam. 5. 9. of the Judgment-seat Rom. 14. 10. 2 Cor. 5. 10. or the Throne or Tribunal for Judgment Rev. 20. 11 and yet will there be no Judging Is it not said with particular respect to that day that God will bring to light the hidden things of darkness and make manifest the counsels of the hearts 1 Cor. 4. 5. Is it not said he will bring every work into Judgment with every secret thing whether it be good or whether it be evil Eccl. 12. 14. And do we question then whether there will be this Judicial Action which we properly call Judging or Trying Iâ—… there shall be this Manifestation of the Hearts and Actions of Men can we imagine that rewarding and punishing at that day are the very same with Judging Further
Author whom I cited was unmindful oâ—… that in his hot pursuit after his Lordship of Worcester and by the ambiguous matching of Self-existent with Unoriginated labours to fetch his Lordship into the noose which he thought he had prepar'd for him But because this Modern Racovian may make some shew of evading my Charge by pretending his Words were spoken in another's Person and not his own I will not any further insist upon it because the Reader shall thereby be made apprehensive that I am averse from contending in any dubious matter I proceed therefore to the next Attribute viz. the Spirituality of God the denial of which I tax'd the Racovians with And here I will first prove the Charge and then briefly represent the Unreasonableness and Absurdity of this notion which the Socinians frame of God For the sake of the English Reader I will translate out of the Latin the very Words of one of their Principal Authors When we saith he name a Spirit we understand a Substance void of all Grossness such as we behold in visible bodies Thus we say that Angels are SPIRITS and so we call our Diviner Part which Philosophers rather call a SOUL and the Air though it lie open to some of our Senses as the Touch and other bodies like to this Every one of which hath so much the more this name viz. SPIRIT allotted to it by how much it is the more subtile Again he expresses it thus Spirit or Spiritual Essence is that which is opposed to that Essence which is Corporeal that is which is Crass viz. of such things which we behold with our Eyes especially of those that are Terrene And a third time he vouches this for he reckons God and Angels and the Souls of Men in the same rank with Air and Subtile Bodies telling us that these are Spirits in the proper and strict sense Our Home-Socinians think and speak the same as is apparent from J. Bidle who openly declares that God is of a Visible and Corporeal Shape Thus it is plain that the Immaterial Nature of the Deity is discarded by them and the best Notion that they can frame of him is that he is a Thin Airy Body Which how disparaging it is to the Divine Being cannot but be conceiv'd by every Serious Thinking Man For let Matter be never so fine and subtile yet still it is Matter The Animal Spirits as they are generally call'd are bodies as well as any others and when they are never so Agile and Brisk they have still a Corporeal Nature and being such they are Finite and Circumscribable which is unworthy of the Nature of the Supreme Being Therefore this was the rational dictate of Improv'd Minds that God is Incorporeal this was the sense of Plato as Tully tells us and of the all Ancient Philosophers by whom he was acknowledg'd to be an Incorporeal and Infinite Mind Again all Matter of it self is Unactive and Dull because it hath no inward Principle to act and inform it Whatever motion and agitation it hath is from without first of all all its Influence is put into it by another Which to conceive of God is the greatest Blasphemy as well as Absurdity Further all Matter or mere Body is in its own Nature void of Sense and Perception and it is not the Fineness and Agility of it that will make it Think and Apprehend The reason is because Cogitation or Apprehension is another distinct thing and quite different from a Material Being and therefore it is ridiculous to imagine that what is merely Corporeal hath a faculty of Thinking or Conceiving of Understanding or Willing To be Cogitative is far different from being Divisible or Extended and the notion of Cogitation doth not in the least involve in it the notion of Division There is such a disparity between the Ideas of these things that no rational man can bring it into his thoughts that Matter is capable of Perceiving or Performing the acts of the Mind There is an absolute necessity therefore of asserting God to be Incorporeal we must be forced to subscribe to what our Infallible Instructer who was also God himself hath taught us that God is a Spirit John 4. 24. Which Words it is observable Socinus most grosly depraves merely to avoid the acknowledgment of this Attribute Because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not in the Greek he makes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Accusative Case and will have it refer to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the foregoing verse as much as to say Goâ—… seeks a Spirit This extravagant work doth he make although the words are a plain Proposition and the Grammer of them is easie and obvious But I have already taken notice of these mens palpable Abusing of Scripture for their own Ends. The next Attribute of God which Socinus's Scholars disallow of is his Omnipresence I had leisure only just to mention this before now I will produce some Evidence of what I said It is not necessary to believe that the Essence of God is Immense saith their Great Patriarch And he hath these strange words in a Fragment of his Catechism Though God's power and wisdom be not circumscribed by any limits yet it follows not thence that his Essence is infinite as if his Essence and Attributes were not alike as to Infinity He hath more of this nature in another place of his Catechism and in other parts of his Writings Smalcius and Crellius two of his fast Friends deny that God is present every where by his Nature and Essence Vorstius limits the presence of God by absolutely denying the Ubiquity of his Essence And Episcopius who is to be taken into the number of the Racovians as I observ'd before from their own words enclines this way telling us that it is not necessary to believe that God is present every where as to his substance and entity and he proceeds to bring Arguments such as they are to maintain what he saith And other Authors not excepting the Moderns might be alledged to the same purpose but I think it will not be required because their Opinion in this case is so well known But how derogatory is it to the Excellent and Perfect Nature of the Deity It is no other than limiting and confining the Divine Being and making that Finite which is Infinite If God's Ubiquity be denied his Infiniteness must be so too And yet which shews the Absurdity and Inconsistency of their notions these foresaid Writers pretend to acknowledg that his Wisdom and Power are infinite as if Infinite Perfections could be seated in a finite subject Or rather these Perfections may be said to be God Himself and therefore if they be Infinite the Nature of God must needs be such His Transcendent Nature is of that kind that it hath no bounds no dimensions and what is so is Every where and in all places though not circumscribed by any But they have such
They deny that the dead shall rise with the same Bodies It is unreasonable to deny this merely because of some Difficulties that attend it Though we should suppose an Annihilation of humanâ—… bodies yet God can raise them the same Much more may we conceive the same bodies to be rais'd out of something The very notion of Resurrection implies the rising again of the same Individual Body This doctrine is founded on the evidenâ—… testimony of Scripture It is shew'd iâ—… what respects the contrary opinion is an argument of Impiety THirdly I proceed to consider the Groundless and Irreligious Sentiments of these Men concerning the First Man and the State he was in at his first Creation They all agree in this thaâ—… though Adam had a natural ability to do what God enjoyn'd him yet he was not created in a State of Uprightness He is said to be made upright Eccl. 7. 29. because he was not created depraved but if we speak properly he had no Natural Rectitude or Righteousness So Socinus And therefore he gives us his judgment very decisively thus Let us conclude that Adam even before he transgressed the commandment of God was not truly Just. Ostorodus hath the very same thoughts of him and another Warm Gentleman who is much applauded and admired by the Party tells us plainly but in no very clean language that it is an old stinking Fable that the first Man was adorn'd from his very creation with holiness and supernatural gifts But what if this Fable be in Scripture Yes most certainly that which he in such vile terms represents as such is the doctrine of the Old and New Testament God created man in his own image Gen. 1. 27. And that we may be more ascertain'd of it it is repeated in the very same place in the image of God created he him And that this Image consists in Holiness and Righteousness is clear from Eph. 4. 24. and Col. 3. 10. where the Apostle speaking of the Image of God in which man was at first created places it in Righteousness and true holiness as well as knowledg How then can it be said by these Writers that the Image of God wherein our first Parents were created did not consist in Sanctity and Righteousness how can it with truth be said by them that there was no Positive Moral Goodness and Rectitude in them This is directly contrary to what the Inspired Writers deliver concerning them Let the Reader now judg on which side the Fable is and at the same time let him judg how impiously the foresaid Writer represents the Word of God as an Old stinking Fable To proceed There being according to these New Theologists no Original Righteousness in the first Man his posterity can't be deprived of it and accordingly they deny Original Sin i. e. though they hold man's nature is corrupted and depraved yet they say it was not at all derived from our First Parents there is no defect blemish or depravity propagated to their posterity Socinus frequently vouches this and so do several of his Partizans who appear in great throngs upon this occasion and with one consent profess that by Adam's Apostacy the nature of man is not depraved men are not born with a propension and inclination to that which is Vitious by reason of that First Defection The contrary opinion is according to Socinus an arrant Cheat and Imposture for these are his own words Whatever evil effects in mankind the EVANGELICKS i. e. the Protestants and PAPISTS attribute to the first sin of our First Parent it must needs be that they are Vain Fictions and Dreams of men Whatever Divines dispute about Original Sin it is all of it clearly to be reckon'd as the mere invention and forgery of humane wit And then he pretends in another place to trace its Pedegree and to give you the Rise of it That Device of Original Sin is a Jewish Fable and brought into the Church from Antichrist If this be true then St. Paul's doctrine is fabulous By one man sin enter'd into the world Rom. 5. 12. By one man's disobedidience many were made Sinners v. 19. And this Great and Infallible Apostle himself must be reputed Judaical and Antichristian when he adds that death enter'd by sin i. e. by that One Man's Sin spoken of before and so death passed upon all men for that all have sinned viz. in that first Man And again v. 17. By one man's offence death reigned by one Hence it is evident that Adam and his race became Mortal because of this First Transgression But Socinus is of another opinion for it is the first thing you meet with in his Prâ—…lections that the first man before his fâ—… was by nature mortal Smalcius will by no means grant that Adam was created in a state of Immortality but that he was naturally Mortal and though he had not sinn'd yet he should have died With whom agrees Volkelius confidently asserting that Mortality is not the effect and punishment of the Fall And the rest of them hold that Adam's Sin endamaged himself but no body else his posterity suffer'd not they derived no Infection no Stain no Depravity from him But are the English Socinians of this mind Yes for the Effects and Consequences which we ascribe to Adam's Fall are flatly denied by Bidle in his Scripture-Catechism chap. 3. And in one of their late Prints the Natural Depravity of man i. e. his propensity to evil and his aversness to good are represented as false and absurd And a little before they peremptorily deny that Adam's race have any sin derived much less imputed to them and that they are punish'd for it God cannot possibly do this they say yea they have the confidence to add these horrid words that this is the just character of an Almighty Devil Accordingly they cry down Original Sin as a mere Sham and Imposture And hence issue a great many Unsound Assertions which are in great vogue with all Socinians If there be no Corruption convey'd to Adam's race if they receiv'd no hurt by his Fall then they have as he had a natural power to do all that God requires of them They still have an ability by nature to imbrace all good and to avoid all evil which are the express terms used by their Writers And hear what their Catechism saith Qu. Is there not need of the inward gift of the Holy Spirit that we may believe the Gospel A. Not at all And the reason is assigned afterwards namely because this is a gift that is confer'd upon such as already believe the Gospel Here you see what is the Racovian Divinity It is not the Spirit of God that enlightens mens minds and enables them to receive the Truth the Spirit of God is not the original of all Grace in us This is clear from that notion which they form concerning the Holy Spirit by which is meant say they
in the writings of the New Testament first the Gospel secondly a firm and certain hope of eternal life This is the only acception of the word Spirit in the New Testament so far as we that are under the present dispensation of the Gospel are concern'd As for the former all Christians enjoy it as to the latter it is given only to those that believe and obey the Gospel whence it necessarily follows that it is not requisite before our belief or obedience There is no such thing as the Spirit in order to these i. e. in order to the producing of them in our hearts and lives But though they thus in plain terms renounce the Spirit is there not some Divine Help necessarily requisite for the begetting of faith and holiness in us Yes they grant there is an Outward Help vouchsafed viz. the Promises and Threatnings in the Scripture And there is an Inward one but what is that It is no other than this God's sealing what he hath promised in the hearts of those that obey him which is the same with what was mentioned before viz. a certain hope of eternal life and this is wrought in those that already believe and obey So that it is manifest when they speak of the Spirit and Divine help they mean no previous assistance or operation in order to believing and obeying These spiritual acts according to them are not the product of Divine Grace and the Help of the Spirit for they do not follow these but go before them This is the exact account of the Racovian Perswasion concerning this matter The present Set of Unitarians hold the same they scoff at the particular aids and efficacy of the Spirit in order to Conversion they mock at the inward word which God speaks to the heart whereby the word written or preach'd is rendred effectual whereby Sinners are first convinc'd and then reclaim'd They with Nicodemus profess that they know nothing of this marvellous doctrine they can't imagine what kind of thing this inward word is They will not by any means allow that all is done in Religion by the Grace of God and the assistance of the Spirit beginning continuing and perfecting good actions in us This was the very Heresie of Pelagiâ—…s he and his abettors held it was in every man's natural power to believe and repent without any inward operation of the Grace of God or influence of the Holy Ghost In this the Socinians agree with the Old Pelagians if the Writers of those times give us a true account of them These let us know that it was confidently affirmed by them that it is in the power of man to choose spiritual good without the special assistance of God yea that it is possible to keep the Commandments so strictly and exactly that they shall not stand in need of Pardon that they may arrive to such a Perfection in this life that they shall be able to live without sin as St. Jerom and St. Augustin who narrowly inquir'd into the Sentiments of these men expresly inform us That the Socinians have a Touch of this last to say no more might easily be proved from what is said by Smalcius and Crellius and Bidle and others of them and indeed it partly follows from the abovesaid Principle But the falseness and impiety of it are discernible by those who regulate their thoughts and apprehensions by the Holy Scriptures and who attend to that Article of our Church The condition of man after the fall of Adam is such that he cannot turn and prepare himself by his own natural strength and good works to faith and calling upon God Wherefore we have no power to do good works pleasant and acceptable to God without the grace of God by Christ preventing us that we may have a good will and working with us when we have that good will There is nothing plainer and clearer in the New Testament than this that man can do nothing without the particular assistance of God that will be available to his Salvation And if any man asserts the contrary he makes void the Undertakings of Jesus Christ for he came to redeem us and save us because we were not able of our selves to effect any such thing Wherefore to say we that can of our selves and by our own natural strength do the things that are acceptable to God and will be conducible to our Eternal Salvation is to render the Redemption of Christ useless and unnecessary And this is that which the persons I am speaking of drive at and thereby undermine Christianity it self In brief judg of the Doctrines of the Socinians from what we find in one of the Heartiest Souls of them all who in his Commentary on the Epistle to the Ephesians reckons these following Particulars among Vain and Lying Words i. e. Groundless and False Doctrines viz. Justification by the grace of God and not by good works Christ's Obedience and his dying for our sins Faith in Christ Confession Repentance Remission of Sins Baptism and the other Sacrament Also he reckons up among these the Fall of Adam Divine Predestination and Election and afterwards false opinions concerning God and Christ and the Holy Spirit i. e. according to his meaning the believing of the Sacred Trinity Need I now come with my old Charge Do not these men talk like Infidels Fourthly I proceed to display their strange conceptions concerning the Future State and those things which relate to it and to examine whether upon that account they deserve the Character that was given them I will reduce all to these Four Heads viz. their perswasions concerning the Souls of the deceased concerning the General Resurrection concerning the Last Judgment and concerning the Punishment that follows it And the Reader will soon perceive that their apprehensions about all these speak them to be Irreligiously disposed Nay it will be as plain and evident as any Demonstration in Mathematicks that these Writers promote the Cause of Atheists in the world First As to the Souls of those that are dead Socinus holds that till the Resurrection they are devoid of all perception and sensation In these formal words he speaks The Soul of Man after this life doth not so subsist of it self as that it is sensible of any rewards or pains or that it is capable of feeling them And he adds that this is his firm opinion And that we may not mistake him he adjoyns this It sufficiently appears that my sentiment is this viz. that the soul of man doth not so live after his death as that of it self it is capable of rewards and punishments His friend Smalcius is more positive and down-right for these are his words We firmly believe that the deceased Saints exist not for as he explains himself the body perishes and the soul hath no life and perception therefore it may be said that the Saints exist not at all nullâ—… modo In
intimates their Non-Existence for a time for he applies those words to this purpose for to be rais'd from the dead is no other than to exist again after a ceasing to be And you heard before what another of their Writers said viz. that the Saints departed exist not Why is this said but to shake the belief of the Soul's Immortality and to make men stagger about this Important Point It is said that Servetus held the Soul to be Mortal and One of their late Writers a German Noble Man who left his Countrey and came over to Racovia one that hath a Great Encomium from the Party makes way for this Epicuréan notion by publishing to the world that though it be easily granted that the Soul is not made of bone or flesh or muscles or nerves c. yet it remains doubtful whether it be not a very Thin Body consisting of Vapour or Air or Ether diffused through this Crass Body And indeed if God himself be but a Finer Sort of Body as these Racovian Writers represent him it is no wonder that they imagine the Soul of Man to be such for why should they exalt it above the nature of the Supreme Being So the everlasting subsistence both of God and of the Souls of Men is hereby shock'd As to the latter of which I desire it may be observed that though Smalcius one of their Great Scribes will by no means be thought to deny the Immortality of them because that may seem a little too gross yet he industriously and purposely evades yea opposes and so do some others of the Perswasion those Texts of Scripture which are made use of by Divines to prove the Soul's Immortality and Subsistence after the death of the body This shews what they are inclinable to this acquaints us that they have but an indifferent opinion of the Immortality of Humane Souls which the very Pagan Philosophers with great earnestness and concern asserted Is not here then 〈◊〉 great defect of Religious Principles iâ—… not here a demonstration of the Impioâ—… Disposition of their Minds Do they noâ—… discover a tendency to that receiv'd doctrine of the Atheists that the Soul is of 〈◊〉 perishing condition and survives not thâ—… funerals of the body Which opens 〈◊〉 broad door to all Licentiousness and Prophaneness Then as to the Resurrection which iâ—… the next thing I am to speak of theâ—… have been some of the Socinian Way thaâ—… absolutely denied the Resurrection of thâ—… Wicked and in order to that their subsisting after this life Let any man impartially scan what their Adored Patriarchâ—… and what Ostorodus saith and he wilâ—… suspect them to have enclin'd this way But it is true the former of these professes himself unwilling to give offence to some and therefore doth not wholly deny that the Impious shall rise at the last day I confess I find not any of their Celebrated Writers plainly and expresly asserting this yea one or two of them very expresly declare against it But this is that which may unexceptionably be laid to their Charge that though generally they own a future Rising from the dead both of the just and unjust yet they deny that they shall rise with the same bodies They are the express words of Smalcius We believe not that these bodies which we now carry about us shall rise again Volkelius expresses the sense of the rest when he tells us that our bodies which shall be raised at the last day shall have not only other qualities but another matter of substance and in plainer terms Other bodies shall be substituted in their room And what is the reason because saith he these bodies which we now have shall vanish perish and consequently we shall never more have any thing to do with them These Great Pretenders to Reason cannot digest the Identity of the Dying and Rising body because they think it is a doctrine too hard to be conceiv'd it contains many Difficulties in it which it is not easie to solve But what then must it therefore be counted Unreasonable and Incredible I deny the Consequence for there are many things which are hard to be understood and yet we freely give assent to the truth of them We meet with several Occurrences of which we can't give an exact and punctual account Some Secrets in Nature are inveloped with an impenetrable Veil God hath done more than we are in a capacity to comprehend He is pleas'd to reserve some things from our clear and distinct knowledg and yet every wise man believes the reality of them It is so here a Christian man believes that the same flesh which was dissolved by death shall be united to the soul at the last day although he is not able to assign the Manner and Way of it But he looks upon the thing it self as very Reasonable because raising of the Same Flesh is possible with Him with whom nothing is impossible Suppose the bodies of the dead to be reduced to nothing notwithstanding this he can bring them again into being for this was the case of all things at first they were not and afterwards they were by God's Almighty Power Shall we then think it impossible for him to resuscitate the same body though we should grant it to have been for a time annihilated It is true God cannot make the same body to be and not to be at the same time because this is a plain Contradiction but he can make the body to exist at the last day which had lost its existence for a time And so all the Objections about humane bodies being eaten and devour'd by men or beasts and those beasts eaten by Men c. are easily removed But we need not go so high to solve the Phoenomenon for supposing no Annihilation it is sufficient to say that He that made the body of nothing will much more raise it again when it is something or with another of the Ancients He that made all things with a Word can easily Restore Man's body for it is much easier to renew what is decay'd than to make those things which are not without Materials And as another Primitive Writer argues It is more difficult to begin that which is not than to iterate that which was And again in the same place that doth not perish with God which is taken out of our Sight The body is chang'd this and that way and seems to disappear but it is kept safe by the Great Guardian of the Elements he that takes care of all bodies And thence he concludes that there shall be a Resurrection of the same individual body at the last day And truly this is so Reasonable a thing that if we deny it we deny the Resurrection it self for if the rais'd bodies at the last day shall not have the same substance that they now have they will not be Our Bodies and consequently there is no Rising again of our bodies For