Chapter 4

Of the Resurrection of the Body.

Though the immortality of the soul may be known by the light of nature, yet not the resurrection of the body; the one arises from the nature of the soul itself; but the other does not arise from the constitution of the body, but depends, upon the sovereign will and power of God: now the will and purpose of God, or what he has determined to do, is secret, and cannot be discovered by the light of nature, and is only known by divine revelation. It might be known by the light of nature, that God can raise the dead if he will, because he is Almighty, and nothing is impossible to him; though it has been asserted by some heathen writers, that it cannot be done by God himself: one says,⁴¹³⁴¹³Plin. Nat. Hist. l. 2. c. 7. it is not in the power of God to raise the dead; and says another⁴¹⁴⁴¹⁴Palaephat. de Incredib. p. 56. it seems to me, that no one can make one that is dead to live again: which is false; since by the light of nature, and the works of nature, are known the eternal power and Godhead, or that God is eternal and infinitely powerful. Indeed, it cannot be known by the light of nature, that God will raise the dead; this is of pure revelation: hence heathens, destitute of it, had no knowledge of the resurrection of the body: that that was mortal they all agreed; and that the soul was immortal, the wiser part of them especially, affirmed: but that the body, when dead, should be raised to life again, this Tertullian says,⁴¹⁵⁴¹⁵De Praescript. Haeret. c. 2. was denied by every sect of the philosophers. Those, the most refined among them, and who pretended to a greater degree of knowledge than others, as the philosophers of Athens, were so ignorant of this doctrine, that, as some think,⁴¹⁶⁴¹⁶Chrysostom. & Oecumen. in Act. 17. they took Jesus, and αναστασις, the word used by the apostle Paul for the resurrection, when preaching to them, to be the names of some strange deities they had never heard of before; and therefore said, “He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods” (Acts 17:18). The heathens had no faith in this doctrine, nor hope of it; and therefore are sometimes described as without “hope” (Eph. 2:12; 1 Thess. 4:13, 14), that is, of the resurrection of the body, neither of their own nor of their deceased relations;⁴¹⁷⁴¹⁷αςελπιστοι, τε θανοντες. Theocrit. Idyll. 4. and this may be rather thought to be, at least part of the sense of the apostle in these passages; since in his defence before Felix and Agrippa he represents the resurrection of the dead as the object of the hope of the Jewish fathers (Acts 24:15; 26:6-8). Yea, the Gentiles, not content with barely denying this doctrine, have treated it with the utmost scorn, calling it a dream, fancy, and madness,⁴¹⁸⁴¹⁸Plin. Nat. Hist. 1. 7. c. 55. an old wives’ fable;⁴¹⁹⁴¹⁹Caecil. in Minut. Fel. Octav. p. 10. as abominable and detestable;⁴²⁰⁴²⁰Celsus in Origen. contr. ibid. p. 240. and of all the tenets of the Christians, it was held in the utmost contempt by Julian the apostate;⁴²¹⁴²¹Cyril. Alex. contr. Julian. l. 7. the abettors of it were always accounted by the heathens vain, trifling, babbling fellows,⁴²²⁴²²Tatian. contr. Graecos Orat. p. 146. as the apostle Paul was by the Athenian philosophers of the Epicurean and Stoic sects,⁴²³⁴²³Antoninus the emperor, of this sect, says, “When men are dead they exist no more, but are entirely extinct,” De Seipso, l. 12. c. 5. (Acts 17:18, 32); it was so contrary to the reasonings of the unenlightened Gentiles, that they judged it quite incredible, and pronounced it beyond all belief of rational creatures; hence, says the apostle Paul, when before Festus the Roman governor, and king Agrippa, a Sadducee, why should it be thought a thing “incredible with you that God should raise the dead?” as it seems it was,⁴²⁴⁴²⁴The Indians of North America used to say when this doctrine was mentioned, “I shall never believe it,” Mather’s History of New England, b. 3. p. 192. though the inhabitants of Virginia and Louisiana are said to believe it; but perhaps this is a mistake. See Hody’s Resurrection, p. 45, 46, 49. (Acts 26:8).

Some have thought the Gentiles had knowledge of the resurrection of the dead, which they conclude from some notions of theirs, which seem to bear some semblance to it, as is thought; as that the soul after death has a perfect human shape, and all the same parts, external and internal, the body has; that they both have an equal duration after death; that there is a transmigration of souls into other bodies, especially human; that man may be translated, soul and body, to heaven, of which they give instances; which, perhaps, take rise from the translations of Enoch and Elijah, communicated by some tradition or another; and particularly, that after certain periods and revolutions, when the stars and planets are in the same configuration and aspect to one another they formerly had, the same men shall appear in the world, and the same things in succession be done in it as formerly have been. ⁴²⁵⁴²⁵Of these notions of the heathens, see Hody’s Resurrection of the same body, p. 3, &c. and Gale’s Court of the Gentiles, par. 1. b. 3. c. 7. p. 81, 82. and par. 2. b. 2. c. 8. p. 189. But I must confess, I cannot see any likeness between any of these notions and the Christian doctrine of the resurrection of the dead: and at most and best, they are only hints borrowed from the Jews and their writings; or are the broken remains of some tradition, received from their ancestors, originally founded on divine revelation; so Plato ⁴²⁶⁴²⁶In Phaedone, p. 53-55. & in Philebo, p. 536. seems to speak of it, as an ancient tradition, that the dead shall live again. Likewise the belief of this doctrine among the pagans is argued from their account of future punishments; as of Aridaeus, and other tyrants, having corporal punishments inflicted on them; of Sisyphus, Ixion, Tantalus, and others; which may arise from the above notion of the soul having the same parts with the body. Some passages are also produced out of the heathen writers in favour of this doctrine; as some Greek verses of Phocylides, whose poem, perhaps, is the work of a Christian, or of some Jewish writer; and the opinion of the Persian “magi,” that men shall live again; which they doubtless had from Zoroastres, their founder, said to be originally a Jew, and a servant of one of the prophets. Some particular persons are mentioned as raised from the dead to life; the most remarkable of which is the case of one Er Pamphilius, who, after he had been dead twelve days, revived on the funeral pile; and which seems to be credited by Plato: ⁴²⁷⁴²⁷De Republ. 1. 10. p. 761. but if such stories as these can be believed, why should the doctrine of the resurrection be judged incredible? ⁴²⁸⁴²⁸See more of these things in Serms. on the Resurrec. s. 1. p. 5, 6, &c.

But though the doctrine of the resurrection is above reason it is not contrary to it; though it is out of the reach of the light of nature to discover it, yet being revealed, it is not repugnant to it; it is entirely agreeable to the perfections of God, knowable by it, and is no contradiction to them; for considering the omnipotence of God, with whom nothing is impossible, it is what may be: and though there are some things which argue imperfection and weakness, and imply a contradiction, which God cannot do; yet the resurrection of the dead is not an instance of either; it is no contradiction, that dust formed out of nothing, and of it a body made, and this reduced to dust again, that this dust should again form the body it once constituted: and this can be no instance of imperfection and weakness; but a most glorious instance of almighty power: and if God could, out of the dust of the earth, form the body of man at first, and infuse into it a living and reasonable soul; then much more must he be able to raise a dead body, the matter and substance of which now is, though in different forms and shapes; and reunite it to its soul, which still has a real existence: and considering the omniscience of God, who knows all things, it is not impossible nor improbable that the dead should be raised; since he knows all the particles of matter bodies are composed of; and when dissolved and transmuted into ten thousand forms, knows where they are all lodged, whether in the earth, air, or sea; and his all-discerning eye can distinguish those which belong to one body from those of another, and his almighty hand can gather and unite them, what are necessary, and range them in their due place and order. Nor is it beneath or unworthy of God to raise the dead; for if it was not unworthy of him to make a body out of the dust of the earth, which became subject to infirmities, corruption, and death; it cannot be unworthy of him to raise weak, inglorious, corruptible bodies, as they are when laid in the grave, powerful, glorious, and incorruptible. Nor is it inconsistent with the goodness of God; for by this he does no injury to any of his creatures; neither to those that are raised, nor to others, rational or irrational. Not to the angels; for the children of the resurrection will be like unto them: nor to the brute creation, who will not be; and who, if they were, would not suffer by it: nor will any injury be done to those that are raised, neither to the righteous nor to the wicked, since both will then receive a recompence for the deeds done in the body, whether good or evil. Some such like reasonings as these are used by that ancient learned apologist, Athepagoras. ⁴²⁹⁴²⁹De Resurrectione, p. 49. 5. See serm. 1. on the Resurrection, p. 11, 12, &c. where these things are more enlarged on. Besides, the justice of God seems to make it necessary that the bodies both of the righteous and the wicked should be raised; that being united to their souls, they may partake with them of the glory and happiness provided for the one, and they are made meet for; and of the punishment justly inflicted on the other; having been partners together either in sufferings or in sins.

However, the doctrine of the resurrection is most certainly a doctrine of pure revelation; the Jews were first peculiarly favored with it; having “the oracles of God committed” to them, in which this doctrine is clearly revealed; and yet there were some among them who disbelieved it; as the Sadducees, who “erred, not knowing the Scriptures,” which assert it; nor “the power of God,” which can effect it: and of the same sentiment were the Hemerobaptists ⁴³⁰⁴³⁰Epist. contr. Haeres. l. 1. haeres. 17. and the Essenes: ⁴³¹⁴³¹Joseph. de Bello Jud. l. 2. c. 8. s. 11. also the Pharisees, at least some of them, held the Pythagorean notion of the transmigration of souls into other bodies: ⁴³²⁴³²Ibid. s. 14. et Antiq. l. 18. c. 1. s. 3. but it is more surprising, that since Christ has abolished death, by his own resurrection from the dead, and by the gospel brought to clearer light this doctrine of the resurrection; that some very early, who bore the Christian name, should deny it; as some in the church at Corinth, and Hymenaens and Philetus (1 Cor. 15:12; 2 Tim. 2:18), who were followed by Simon Magus, Saturninus, Basilides, Carpocrates, Valentinus, and others, too numerous to recite: and of late is rejected by Socinians and Quakers. Nevertheless, since it is a doctrine of such great importance, on which all other doctrines of the gospel depend, as well as the faith, hope, and comfort of the saints (1 Cor. 15:13-19), it should be held fast, abode by, and defended to the uttermost. The resurrection to be treated of is not a figurative one; neither civil, like that of the Jews restoration from captivity, represented by a resurrection (Ezek. 37:1-28), nor spiritual, as the resurrection of the soul from the death of sin to a life of grace: but the resurrection of the body, in a literal sense, the quickening of mortal bodies; and not a particular resurrection, or a resurrection of particular persons; of which there are instances both in the Old and New Testament; but the universal resurrection; the resurrection of men, both just and unjust; of which,

1. I shall give the proof from the sacred writings. It appears to have been the faith of the saints in all ages, according to the scripture account of them. It was the faith of Abraham, the father of the faithful (Heb. 11:19; Rom. 4:17-20), and of Joseph, as appears by the orders he gave concerning his bones, and his carefulness about the interment of them (Heb. 11:22), and of Moses, in celebrating the divine perfections in his song (Deut. 32:39), with which words the mother of the seven brethren, who suffered martyrdom in the times of the Maccabees, animated them while suffering; ⁴³³⁴³³Joseph. de Maccabaeis, s. 20. and of Hannah, in her song, expressed in much the same language, and more explicit (1 Sam. 2:6). This was the faith of Job, which he expresses, not only in the famous text hereafter to be considered (Job 19:25-27), but also in Job 14:12, 14, 15. And likewise of David, who not only speaks of the resurrection of Christ, when representing him (Ps. 16:10), but in his last words, where he expresses his strong faith of his complete salvation, of soul and body, in the everlasting covenant (2 Sam. 23:1, 5). And also of Isaiah, and other prophets, who speak of the resurrection of Christ, and his people with him; which they either expressly make mention of, or allude unto, when they foretell figurative resurrections (Isa. 26:19; Hosea 6:1, 2; Ezek. 37:11-14; Dan. 12:2). This was the faith of those who suffered martyrdom in the times of the Maccabees, who refused deliverance that they might obtain “a better resurrection,” even the resurrection of the just (Heb. 11:35), and in the Apocrypha: “For though for the present time I should be delivered from the punishment of men: yet should I not escape the hand of the Almighty, neither alive, nor dead.” (2 Maccabees 6:26) “And said courageously, These I had from heaven; and for his laws I despise them; and from him I hope to receive them again.” (2 Maccabees 7:11). And this was the faith of the Jewish fathers and of all the Old Testament saints (Acts 26:6-8; Heb. 11:13). This was the faith of Christ and his apostles, as declared in the writings oil the New Testament; to give the whole compass of the proof of this would be to transcribe a very considerable part of them. The doctrine of the resurrection of the dead will admit of proof from scripture types; as the deliverance of Isaac from death; from whence Abraham received him in a figure: the budding and blossoming of Aaron’s dry rod, thought by some to be an emblem of it: the reviving of the dry bones in Ezekiel’s vision; but especially Jonah’s lying three days and three nights in the whalers belly, and his deliverance from it. However, if God could save Isaac when so near death; cause a dry rod to bud, blossom, and bring forth almonds; make dry bones to live; and deliver Jonah out of the whale’s belly, it need not be questioned that God can raise the dead. To which may be added, the several instances of particular persons raised from the dead; as the widow of Zarephath’s son, by Elijah; the child of the Shunammite, by Elisha; and the man cast into his sepulchre on the touch of his bones; those who came out of their graves at our Lord’s resurrection, and who were raised by him in his lifetime; as the daughter of Jairus, the widow of Naim’s son, and Lazarus; Dorcas by Peter; and Eutychus by the apostle Paul: and if these particular resurrections are to be credited, as doubtless they are, then the resurrection of all the dead need not be thought incredible, But this doctrine may be further proved,

1a. First, from express passages of scripture. As,

1a1. From Genesis 3:15 which gives the first intimation of the Messiah and his work, which was to bruise the serpent’s head, to destroy the devil and all his works; among which, death, the effect of sin, is a principal one. This Christ has abolished in himself by raising himself from the dead; and will abolish it in his members, and even in all men, by the resurrection of them at the last day; when, and not before, all that is meant in the above passage will be accomplished (1 Cor. 15:21, 54).

1a2. From Exodus 3:6 produced by Christ himself in proof of this doctrine; “As touching the resurrection of the dead,” says he, “have you not read that which was spoken to you by God; saying, I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob; God is not the God of the dead but of the living?” (Matthew 22:31, 32). Let it be observed, that it is not said, “I was,” or “will be;” but, “I am the God of Abraham,” &c. which, as it relates to covenant interest, respects a covenant in being, and an abiding one, even the covenant of grace; which is concerned, not only with the souls of men, but their bodies also, their whole persons; wherefore, as the souls of the above patriarchs now live with God, who is the God of the living only, in the enjoyment of the promised good; it is necessary their bodies should be raised from the dead, that, with their souls, they may enjoy the everlasting glory and happiness promised in the covenant; or otherwise, it would not appear to be ordered in all things and sure.

1a3. From Job 19:25, &c. “I know that my Redeemer liveth,” &c. None of the Jewish writers, ⁴³⁴⁴³⁴Vid. Menasseh Ben Israel de Resurrect. l. 1. c. 3. s. 6. indeed, understood these words of a real, but of a figurative resurrection; and suppose, a deliverance from his afflicted state, and a restoration of him to his former health, honour, and happiness, is meant; in which sense they have been followed by some learned Christian interpreters; ⁴³⁵⁴³⁵Calvin. Mercer, &c. at which the Socinians ⁴³⁶⁴³⁶Enjedinus, p. 51. Volkel. de Relig. ver. l. 3. c. 11. p. 59, 60. have greedily caught: but Job’s restoration is not expressed by such phrases as here used; (see Job 42:10, 12) and against this sense may be observed, that Job was so far from any faith, hope, and expectation of such a restoration, that he utterly despaired of it; (see Job 6:11; 7:7, 8; 10:20; 16:22; 17:1, 14, 15) and even he expresses the same in this very chapter (Job 17:10, 11). Besides something of greater moment seems to be meant, as the solemn preface shows; “O that my words were now written!” &c. and what he had in view appears to be future, at a great distance, after death, the consumption of his body by worms, and was his comfort under his afflictions; and was an answer to what Bildad said, (Job 18:12-14), and the vision, with the eyes of his body he expected, is not suited to any state in this life; but rather to the state after the resurrection, when the saints shall see God in Christ, and Christ in the flesh, with the eyes of the body. To which may be added, Job speaks of the awful judgment, between which and death there must be a resurrection from the dead (Job 19:29). Upon the whole, it is an observation of an ancient writer, ⁴³⁷⁴³⁷Hieron. ad Pammach. tom. 2. p. 59. 1. “No one since Christ speaks so plainly of the resurrection as this man did before Christ.” Though Spinosa ⁴³⁸⁴³⁸Philosoph. S. S. Script. c. 8. p. 102. foolishly says, the sense of the text is confused, disturbed, and obscure.

1a4. From Isaiah 26:19. “Thy dead men shall live,” &c. which words are an answer to the prophet’s complaint (Isa. 26:14). “They are dead, they shall not live,” &c. and which answer is made by the Messiah, to whom the characters given (Isa. 26:4, 12, 13), agree; assuring the prophet, that his people, though dead, should live again, either at the time of his resurrection, or in virtue of it; for the words are literally true of Christ’s resurrection and of theirs by him; “With my dead body shall they arise,” as many of the saints did, at his resurrection; or, “as my dead body,” after the exemplar of it; or, “as sure as my dead body;” Christ’s resurrection being the pledge of his people’s; and the following phrases confirm this sense; “Awake, ye that dwell in the dust,” &c. (see Daniel 12:2). “Thy dew is the dew of herbs,” compared with Isaiah 66:14. “The earth shall cast forth her dead;” (see Revelation 20:13). The Jews ⁴³⁹⁴³⁹Aben Ezra et Kimchi in loc. T. Bab. Sanhedrin, fol. 90. 2. refer this prophecy to the resurrection of the dead.

1a5. From Daniel 12:2. “And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake;” which is generally understood of the resurrection of the dead, both by Jewish and Christian interpreters; only Grotius, after Porphyry the heathen, interprets the passage of the return of some of the Jews to their cities and habitations, after the generals of Antiochus were cut off: but surely this return was not of any of them “to everlasting shame and contempt,” but the reverse; nor of any of them “to everlasting life,” seeing they are all since dead: nor is it true that the Jewish doctors, from that time, shone illustriously; but, on the contrary, their light in divine things became dim, and they taught not the doctrines of the scriptures but the traditions of men. On the other hand, the whole agrees with the resurrection of the dead, as described by our Lord (John 5:28, 29). And when the bodies of the saints will be raised in incorruption, power, and glory, they will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Besides these, there are other passages of scripture referred to by the apostle, in 1 Corinthians 15:54, 55 as proofs of this doctrine; as Isaiah 25:8 and Hosea 13:14 which will have their full accomplishment at the general resurrection. The passages out of the New Testament are too numerous to recite, and so plain as to need no explanation; and many of them will be made use of in other parts of this subject.

1b. Secondly, this truth may be proved from various doctrines contained in the scripture; as from the doctrine of election, which is of the persons of men, souls and bodies, unto everlasting happiness; and therefore their bodies must be raised, that they, united to their souls, may enjoy that happiness, or the end will not be attained: from the gift of the same to Christ, and who was charged, when given to him, to lose none, but raise them up again at the last day; which must be done, or his trust not discharged, nor his Father’s will be fulfilled: from their union to Christ, whose “bodies are members of him,” and a part of his mystical body, by virtue of which union they will be raised; or else he must lose a constituent part of those who are his mystical body and his fulness: from the redemption of them by Christ, which is both of soul and body; both are bought with the price of Christ’s blood, and therefore their bodies must be raised from the dead, or Christ must lose part of his purchase: also from the sanctification of the same persons, in soul and body, by the Spirit of God, in whose bodies he dwells, as in his temple; and therefore, unless raised, he will lose that which he has taken possession of as his dwelling place, and a considerable part of his glory as a sanctifier. Moreover, the general judgment, which is a most certain thing, requires the resurrection of the dead, as necessary to it: nor will the happiness of the saint’s be complete, nor the misery of the wicked proportionate to their crimes, without the resurrection of their bodies: but the grand and principal argument used by the apostle (1 Cor. 15:1-58), in proof of this doctrine, with so much strength, is the resurrection of Christ. To which may be added, that there will be need of and uses for some of the members of the body in heaven; as the eye, to see Christ in the flesh, and one another; the ear, to hear the everlasting songs of praise; and the tongue, to sing them: as well as we read of men being cast into hell with two eyes, two hands, and two feet; yea, even the whole body. Nor may it be improper to observe, the translations of Enoch and Elijah, soul and body, to heaven; and the saints that rose at our Lord’s resurrection, and went to heaven in their risen bodies; and the saints who will be alive at Christ’s coming, and be caught up into the air to meet him, and be for ever with him. Now it is not probable that some saints should be in heaven with their bodies and others without them; and therefore a general resurrection must be asserted and allowed. ⁴⁴⁰⁴⁴⁰Of the proof from scripture passages and doctrines more largely, see my Sermons on the Resurrection, serm. 1. p. 17-30. I proceed,

2. To consider the subjects of the resurrection, who they are, and what that is of them that shall be raised.

2a. First, who they are that shall be raised; not the angels, who die not, and therefore cannot be the subjects of the resurrection; nor the brute creatures, as say the Mahometans ⁴⁴¹⁴⁴¹Pocock, Specim. Hist. Arab. p. 145. & Not. Miscel. in Port. Mosis. c. 7. p. 269. Reland. de Relig. Moham. l. 1. p. 53, 54. and some Jewish doctors; ⁴⁴²⁴⁴²Drus. Observ. l. 4. c. 6. since they have no immortal spirits for their bodies to be raised and united to; nor would they be of any use, nor is there any service for them in a future state. Only men shall rise from the dead, and not all of them; some have been translated, that they should not see death, and so cannot be said to rise from the dead; and others will be alive at Christ’s coming, and will be changed, but not die; which change cannot be called a resurrection. But all the dead, all that are in their graves, whether in the earth or sea, shall rise and come forth, and those whether righteous or wicked; the resurrection of both is strongly asserted by Christ (John 5:28, 29) and by the apostle Paul (Acts 24:15). The distribution of the persons to be raised are of these two sorts, the just and the unjust; that the just, or righteous ones, will be raised from the dead there can be no doubt; since the resurrection of the saints is called “the resurrection of the just” from them (Luke 14:14), it being peculiar to them; and “the first resurrection” (Rev. 20:6), because they will rise first; and “the better resurrection” (Heb. 11:35), being better than that of the wicked; and of which only some are counted worthy (Luke 20:35), and is what the apostle Paul desired to attain unto (Phil. 3:11), called εξαναστασις, “a resurrection out from” the dead, the wicked dead. The arguments before used to prove the resurrection in general being such as chiefly regard the resurrection of the just, the proof of this need not be further enlarged on. But the resurrection of the wicked being denied by some of the Jewish writers, in which they have been followed by the Socinians, though they care not to speak out their minds fully; and to which the Remonstrants and Arminians have shown a good liking; it will be necessary to confirm this. The arguments of the one and the other against the resurrection of the wicked are taken,

2a1. From reason: they reason from the mercy of God, that if he will not eternally save them, yet surely it cannot be thought that he will raise them from the dead merely to torment them; it will be enough to be deprived of happiness in heaven. The answer to which is, that though God is naturally and essentially merciful, yet the displays of his mercy to his creatures are according to his sovereign will and pleasure (Rom. 9:15; Isa. 27:11). Besides, he is just as well as merciful; and it is necessary from the justice of God, as will be observed hereafter, that the bodies of the wicked be raised, not merely to be tormented, but that his justice might be glorified in the righteous punishment of them. They further argue, that Christ is the meritorious cause of the resurrection; and since he has merited nothing for the wicked or reprobate they shall not be raised. The answer to which is, that Christ is the meritorious cause of the resurrection of life, but not of the resurrection of damnation; the saints will rise to life by virtue of union to Christ, through his merit, and the power of his resurrection: not so the wicked; they will rise, not through his merit, and by virtue of union to him, but by his almighty power. They also urge, at least some, that the wicked die an eternal death, and therefore rise not from the dead; which they think is a contradiction: but it should be observed, that eternal death, which is the second death, in distinction from the death of the body, and is a casting of both body and soul into hell, is not inconsistent with the resurrection of the body; yea, it requires that: and though corporal death is one part of the punishment of sin, which punishment is perpetual; nor is it removed by the resurrection of the wicked, since their bodies will be raised in such a state as to bear eternal punishment.⁴⁴³⁴⁴³See Sermon 2. on the Resurrection, p. 40, &c.

2a2. There are other arguments and objections against the resurrection of the wicked, taken from various passages of scripture, as from Psalm 1:5. “Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in judgment;” which words are rendered in the Septuagint and Vulgate Latin versions, “Shall not rise again in judgment;” but admitting these versions were agreeable to the Hebrew text, as they are not; it will not follow that the wicked shall not rise again from the dead, but shall not rise again so as to appear in the congregation of the righteous at the day of judgment, as in the next clause; for they will not rise when the righteous do, at the first resurrection, the resurrection of the just; besides, the word used does not intend the resurrection of the wicked, but their standing before God in a judicial sense, when raised; and the meaning is, they shall not stand before him with confidence, nor be able to justify themselves and vindicate their cause, and so must fall and not stand in judgment. Another scripture made use of is in Isaiah 26:14. “They are deceased, they shall not rise:” which must be understood either of those wicked lords who had formerly dominion over the people of Israel, but now dead, and should not rise again and live on this earth to tyrannize over them; or of the people of Israel themselves, and of the death of great numbers of them; and express the prophet’s complaint of their present state, and of his distrust of their revival and restoration from it; and it may be also of their future resurrection, to which there is an answer (Isa. 26:19), as has been observed; and considered either way, cannot support an argument against the resurrection of the wielded. The words of the prophet Daniel (Dan. 12:2), before observed, though a plain proof of the resurrection of the dead, both righteous and wicked, yet are improved by some against the resurrection of the wicked; since not “all” but “many” are said to awake, and those many are only a few, and those only the righteous Israelites: to which may be replied, the “many” may be understood universally, as in Romans 5:19 and in other places; ⁴⁴⁴⁴⁴⁴Vid. Aug. de Civ. Dei, l. 20. c. 23. who instances in Gen. xvii. 5. compared with Gen. xxii. 18. or in a comparative sense with respect to the few that shall be alive when the dead are raised; or rather distributively, many shall awake to everlasting life, and many to everlasting shame and contempt; and besides may respect the different times of rising, many at the first resurrection to the former, and the rest a thousand years after to the latter. Many can never design a few; as the Israelites were the fewest of all people, especially the righteous among them; and even the righteous of all nations are but few in comparison of the rest; besides the prophet speaks of some awaking to everlasting shame and contempt, which can only be understood of the wicked; so that the prophecy is a clear proof of their resurrection. Others object that passage in Ecclesiastes 7:1. “Better is the day of death, than the day of one’s birth;” since if the wicked rise again, it must be worse with them at death than at their birth; but the words are not spoken of the wicked or reprobate, who, it would have been better if they had never been born, or had died upon their birth, than to have lived to aggravate their condemnation by a continuance in sin, and with whom it will be worse at death; but of the righteous, who die in the Lord, and are blessed in their death, being freed from sin and sorrow, and are with Christ; which is far better than coming into, and continuing in a troublesome world. Even the words of the apostle, in 1 Thessalonians 4:16. “The dead in Christ shall rise first,” are urged by some against the resurrection of the wicked; since such that die in Christ are only believers in him, and therefore they, and not the wicked, shall rise: the answer is, that though the apostle is speaking only of those that die in Christ, true believers in him; yet not here, nor any where else, is it said, that these only rise. Besides, the apostle says of these, that they shall rise first; which supposes, that others shall rise afterwards, who have no claim to this character; a first resurrection of believers in Christ, supposes a second resurrection of those who are not such. ⁴⁴⁵⁴⁴⁵See Sermon 2. p. 36-40. But that the wicked shall rise, is not only to be proved from express passages of scripture, before observed (Dan. 12:2; John 5:28, 29; Acts 24:15), but also from reason; as from the justice of God, which requires, that sins committed in and by the body, as most sins are, should be punished in the body; that being not only an necessary, but a partner with the soul in sinning, and an instrument by which sin is committed, and so deserving of punishment: and whereas the wicked do not receive in this life the full reward of punishment in their bodies; it seems necessary from the justice of God, that their bodies should be raised, that with their souls they may receive their full recompence of reward. Besides, it may be concluded from the general judgment; when some will be “cast into the lake of fire” (Rev. 20:12, 15), which must be understood of the wicked; and if all must “appear before the judgment seat of Christ,” to receive for what has been done in the body, then the wicked must appear there, that they may receive for the bad things they have done in the body; to which appearance and reception, there must be a resurrection of them from the dead. The scriptural account of the punishments and torments of the wicked, manifestly supposes a resurrection of their bodies, signified by outer darkness, weeping, wailing, and gnashing of teeth; by a furnace and lake of fire and brimstone, and by being cast into it, with two eyes, hands, and feet; and be these metaphorical and proverbial speeches, there must be something literally true, to which they refer. Besides, Christ exhorts his disciples, “to fear him, who is able to destroy body and soul in hell” (Matthew 10:28). To which may be added, that this notion that the wicked rise not, must have a tendency to licentiousness, to take off all restraints from wicked men, and embolden them in a vicious course of life, according to 1 Corinthians 15:32. From all which it may be concluded, there will be a resurrection of the wicked, as well as of the righteous; ⁴⁴⁶⁴⁴⁶Ibid. p. 33, &c. indeed there will be a difference between the resurrection of the one and of the other; the righteous will rise first, at the appearance of Christ; the wicked not till a thousand years after: saints will rise by virtue of union to Christ; the wicked merely by his power; their resurrection will differ in their adjuncts; though the bodies of the wicked will be raised immortal, and in such a state as to bear perpetual punishment, yet will not be clothed with glory; whereas the bodies of the saints will not only be raised immortal and incorruptible, but powerful, spiritual, and glorious, even fashioned like to the glorious body of Christ. The end will be different also; the one will rise to everlasting life; the other to everlasting shame and contempt; hence the one is called the resurrection of life, and the other the resurrection of damnation. I go on,

2b. Secondly, to inquire, what of men shall be raised? Man consists of two parts, soul and body. It is not the soul that is raised, for that dies not. There were some Christians in Arabia, ⁴⁴⁷⁴⁴⁷Euseb. Eccl. Hist. l. 6. c. 37. Aug. de Haeres. c. 83. Isidor. Orig. l. 8. c. 5. so Hobbes’s Leviathan, c. 38, 44. who held, that the soul dies with the body, and at the resurrection revives, and returns to its own body; but that is an immaterial and immortal substance, as has been proved in a former chapter; but it is the body which dies, that shall be raised from the dead; it is that only that is mortal, and shall be quickened; it is that only which is laid in the grave, and shall come forth from thence; it is that which sleeps in the dust of the earth, and shall be awakened from thence; for,

2b1. The body is not annihilated, or reduced to nothing at death, as say the Socinians; ⁴⁴⁸⁴⁴⁸Vid. Calov. Socinism. Profligat. s. 10. art. 1. controv. 1. p. 1017. which is contrary to reason and scripture; at death there is a disunion of soul and body; but neither are reduced to nothing; the body returns to the earth, and the soul to God that gave it; and though the body after death passes under many changes and alterations, yet the matter and substance of it will remain in some form or another: ⁴⁴⁹⁴⁴⁹“Nil enim est, quod perire funditus possit,” &c. Servius in Virgil. Georgic. l. 4. p. 334. death is sometimes expressed by returning to dust; but then dust is something: and by seeing corruption; but that supposes something in being, which is corrupted, matter and substance still remaining; but annihilation leaves nothing: and by sowing seed in the earth, which rots; by pulling down a house; and putting off a tabernacle. But seed sown, though it dies and rots, it does not lose its being, nor its nature; but being quickened, in due time, it buds, and puts forts its seminal virtue: and so a house pulled down, and a tabernacle unpinned, the matter and substance, and the various parts of them, remain. And if the body was reduced to nothing at death, Christ would lose part of his purchase, and the Spirit his dwelling place (1 Cor. 6:15, 19, 20). To which may be added, if this was the case, the resurrection would not be a resurrection, but the creation of a new body. As for those scriptures which speak of the dead as “not” (Jer. 31:15), the meaning is, not that they do not exist; but they are not where they formerly dwelt, having their former possessions and friends; but they are somewhere; their souls are either in heaven or in hell; and their bodies in the grave: and when the apostle says, “Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats; but God shall destroy both it and them:” the sense is, not that the body, or any part of it, as the belly, should be destroyed, as to its substance, but as to its use, in receiving food to supply the natural wants of the body, as now; though it will be necessary as a constituent part, and for the ornament of it.

2b2. The body, at the resurrection, will not be a new, aerial, and celestial body, as Origen and others thought; or a spiritual one, as to its nature and substance. It will be different from what it is now, as to its qualities, but not as to its substance: when the apostle compares it to seed sown in the earth, which is “not the body that shall be” (1 Cor. 15:37, 38), he designs not a difference of substance, but of qualities; such as is between the seed sown, and the plant that springs from it; which differ not in their specific nature, but in some circumstances and accidents; as the difference in the risen body lies in incorruption, glory, power, and spirituality (1 Cor. 15:42-44). The same comparison is made of Christ’s body (John 12:24), and yet it was not a spiritual body, when raised, as to substance, but consisted of flesh and bones, as before (Luke 24:39), and such will be the bodies of the saints; and though the body will be raised a spiritual one, as the apostle affirms, yet it will not be changed into a spirit, and lose its former nature; but will be subject and subservient to the soul, or spirit; be employed in spiritual services, and delight in spiritual objects; and will not be supported in a natural way, and by natural means, but be like the angels (Luke 20:36), and though it will consist of flesh and blood, yet be neither sinful, nor frail and mortal; which is the sense of 1 Corinthians 15:50 but pure and holy, incorruptible, and immortal (1 Cor. 15:53). If the body was a new, aerial, celestial body, different in substance from what it is, it would not be a resurrection, but a creation; nor would it be consistent with the justice of God, that such new, created bodies, which never sinned, should be everlastingly punished; nor can such be, said to be truly human bodies, that are without flesh and blood; nor such to be men, who are incorporeal; nor can the same persons who have sinned, be said to be punished; nor the same who are redeemed be glorified, unless the same body is raised. Wherefore,

2b3. It may be proved, that the same body that now is, will be raised from the dead; this is fully expressed by Job (Job 19:26, 27), who firmly believed, that “this body” of his, which would be destroyed by worms, should be raised again; and in that very “flesh” of his he should see God incarnate, and that with the selfsame eyes he had, and not another’s; and which is as strongly asserted by the apostle Paul (1 Cor. 15:53, 54). “This mortal must put on immortality; this corruption, must put on incorruption;” pointing to the present mortal and corruptible body he then had; and which is confirmed by what follows; “So when this corruption,” &c. which would not be true if another, and not the same body was raised: and elsewhere he says, that Christ will change “our vile body;” but if not the same body, but another, it will not be our vile body that will be fashioned like to the body of Christ. For the further confirmation of this, let the following things be observed.

2b3a. The notation of the word “resurrection;” which signifies a raising up again that which is fallen; ⁴⁵⁰⁴⁵⁰“Sic et resurrectionis vocabulum non aliam rem vindicat, quam quae cecidit,” Tertull. ad v. Marcion. l. 5. c. 9. by death the body falls (2 Sam. 3:38; John 12:24), now if another, and not the same body, is raised, which fell, it will not be a resurrection; but a creation.

2b3b. The figurative phrases, by which it is expressed, show it; as by quickening seed sown; and by awakening out of sleep: now as it is the same seed that is sown and dies, which springs up, and appears in stalk, blade, and ear, as to nature and substance, though with some additional circumstances; so it is the same body that dies, is quickened and raised, though with additional glories and excellencies; the same it that is sown in corruption; the same it that is sown in dishonor; the same it that is sown in weakness; the same it that is sown a natural body, is raised in incorruption, in glory, in power, and a spiritual body; or there is no meaning in the apostle’s words (1 Cor. 15:42-44), and as it is the same body that sleeps that is awaked out of it in a literal sense; it is the same body that falls asleep by death, which will be awaked and rise at the resurrection.

2b3c. The places from whence the dead will be raised, and be summoned to deliver them, prove the same; our Lord says, “All that are in the graves shall come forth:” ⁴⁵¹⁴⁵¹See a trifling criticism of Mr. Locke’s on this text exposed in Serm. 2. on the Resurrection, p. 62, 63. Now what of men are laid in the grave but their bodies? and what else can be thought to come forth from thence? and what but the same bodies that were laid there? the sea, death, and the grave, are said to deliver up the dead in them, which must be the same that are buried in the earth and sea; for what else can such expressions design?

2b3d. The translations of Enoch and Elijah, were in the very same bodies they had when on earth; the bodies of the saints, which arose out of their graves, when opened at Christ’s resurrection, were the same that were laid in them; the bodies of the living saints, at Christ s coming, which will then be changed, will be the same they had before that change: now it is not reasonable to suppose, that some of the saints in heaven should have the same bodies they had on earth, and others not.

2b3e. The resurrection of Christ’s body is a proof of this truth; since he rose from the dead with the same body he suffered on the cross, and was laid in the grave; as appears from the print of the nails in his hands and feet, seen by Thomas after his resurrection: nor was it an aerial nor spiritual body, as to its substance, since it consisted of flesh and bones, which a spirit does not, and might be felt and handled (John 20:25, 27; Luke 24:39, 40). Now Christ’s resurrection is the exemplar of the saints; according to which their vile bodies, and so surely not new, spiritual, and celestial ones, will be fashioned. Nor can it be reasonably thought that Christ, who partook of the same flesh and blood with the children, should be raised and glorified in the same body, and not they in theirs, for whose sake he assumed his.

2b3f. It seems quite necessary from the justice of God that not others, but the same bodies Christ has purchased, the Spirit has sanctified, and which have suffered for the sake of Christ, should be glorified; and that those, and not others, should be punished, that have sinned against God, blasphemed the name of Christ, and persecuted his saints.

2b3g. This may be concluded from the veracity of God, in his purposes, promises, and threatenings; for if the good things he has appointed for, and promised to his people, are not bestowed upon the same persons; and the punishment threatened is not inflicted on the same persons, where is his veracity? and how they can be the same persons, without having the same bodies, is not easy to understand.

2b3h. It would be a disappointment to the saints, who are waiting for the redemption of their bodies, if not the same, but others, should be given them.

2b3i. If the same bodies are not raised, the ends of the resurrection will not appear clearly to be answered; as the glorifying the grace of God in the salvation of his people; and of his justice, in the damnation of the wicked; or how shall everyone receive in his body for what he has done, either good or evil, if the same bodies are not raised which have done those things?

2b3j. If the Christian doctrine of the resurrection of the dead is not of the same body, it seems to be no other nor better, than the old Pythagorean notion of the transmigration of souls into other bodies. The objections to the identity of the risen body, will be considered hereafter. I go on,

3. To observe the causes of this stupendous affair.

3a. The efficient cause is God: a creature is not equal to it; it is always ascribed to God (Rom. 4:17; 2 Cor. 1:9), it is a work of almighty power; and being a work “ad extra,” is common to the three divine Persons. As the resurrection of Christ is frequently attributed to God the Father, so is the resurrection of the saints (1 Cor. 6:14; 2 Cor. 4:14). Christ, as God, is a coefficient cause of it; both of his own and of theirs (John 5:22), of his own (John 2:19; Rom. 1:4), and of theirs: he has the keys of the grave, and can open it at his pleasure; and at his commanding voice the dead shall come forth; and he will change the vile bodies of his saints, and fashion them like his own (Rev. 1:18; John 5:28; Phil. 3:21). The Spirit God also will have a concern in this affair (Rom. 8:11).

3b. Christ, as the Mediator, is the meritorious cause of it; it will be in virtue of his death and resurrection, which is the earnest and pledge of it; as sure as he is risen, so sure shall his people rise; he is the first fruits of those that sleep: and, as man, he is the exemplar of it; the bodies of the saints will be raised like his, incorruptible, immortal, powerful, and glorious.

3c. The instrumental cause, or means, the voice of Christ, and the sound of a trumpet; the same with the voice of the archangel, and the trump of God (John 5:28; 1 Thess 4:16; 1 Cor. 15:52). But whether this voice will be an articulate voice, like that at the grave of Lazarus; or be a violent clap of thunder, called the voice of God (Ps. 29:1-11), and whether this trumpet will be blown by angels; and the shout made, be the shout of all the angels, is not easy to say.

3d. The final cause, is the glory of the grace and mercy of God, in the complete salvation of his people, soul and body; and of his justice, in the punishment of the wicked, soul and body (John 5:29).

As to the time of the resurrection, it cannot be exactly fixed; nor does it become us curiously to inquire into it, any more than into the time of the kingdom and the hour of judgment (Acts 1:6, 7; Matthew 24:36), in general, it is said to be at “the last day” (John 6:39, 40, 44, 54; 11:24), at the last day of the present world; at the coming of Christ, they that are his will arise; when he shall descend from heaven, the dead in him will rise first; when the present earth shall be burnt up, and a new one formed, in which the saints will reign with Christ a thousand years; at the close of which the wicked dead wilt be raised (1 Cor. 15:23; 1 Thess. 4:16; Rev. 20:5).

4. There are many objections made to this great and glorious doctrine; the principal of which will be attended to.

4a. That maxim, or aphorism, is sometimes alleged; “a privatione ad habiturn non datur regressus;” from a total destruction of any being, there is no restoration of it to its former state and condition: this may be true of things according to the common course of nature, and by the power of nature; yet will not hold good of what may be done in an uncommon and extraordinary way, and by the power of God. Besides, the bodies of men at death are not totally destroyed, in any way whatever, with respect to their matter or substance; whether reduced to ashes by fire; or cast into the sea, and devoured by fishes; or interred in the earth, and crumbled into dust; yet they are in being, and are something; out of which, it is not impossible, they may be raised by the power of God.

4b. It is objected, that the body is dissolved into so many, and such small particles, and these scattered about, and at a great distance, and united to other bodies; that these should be distinguished, and separated from those to which they are united; and be gathered together, and replaced in their proper order; and that they should meet in their proper places in the body, as if it was with choice and judgment, seems incredible, if not impossible. But, as it has been already observed, considering the omnipotence and omniscience of God, who knows where every particle of matter lies, and can collect and range them together in proper order, the resurrection cannot be thought neither incredible nor impossible. Besides, it has been observed by some, that particles as numerous and more minute, as those of light be, are governed by, and subject to, certain fixed laws, when they seem to be in the greatest disorder; and may be separated from others, and be collected in “camera obscura,” in a dark chamber, into the exact image of a man: and then what impossibility is there, that the parts of a body, though dispersed, and mingled among others, should be brought together again, and compose the same body; any more than the particles of light do the figure of it, after so many mixtures with, and percussions against other particles? ⁴⁵²⁴⁵²Nieuwentyt’s Religious Philosopher, vol. 3. contempl. 28. s. 5. p. 1041, 1042. Ed. 4th. And it is further observed, that the parts of which the visible body is composed, were as much scattered over the whole earth, almost six thousand years ago, as they will be many years after death, or at the end of the world; and so not more impossible in this case, than at first to collect the parts so dispersed, and to bring them into order. And moreover, let the bones of a skeleton, or the wheels and parts of a watch, be jumbled and thrown together in the utmost disorder; yet a good anatomist can put all the bones of a skeleton, and a good watchmaker all the wheels and pieces of a watch, into the same structure again, so as to compose the very same skeleton and watch; and of infinitely more wisdom and power is the great Artificer of all possessed, to put the human body, though its parts lie ever so dispersed, and in disorder, into the same structure again. ⁴⁵³⁴⁵³Ibid. s. 3. p. 1037. & s. 5. p. 1040. And as to the union of the particles of the body, with other bodies, and the difficulty of the separation of them, those that are well versed in chemistry, are able to produce innumerable examples of things that adhere and unite closely with one another, which are yet easily separated, by the addition of a third. ⁴⁵⁴⁴⁵⁴Ibid. s. 7. p. 1046. see contempl. 29. p. 1078, 1079.

And as to the distance of the parts of the body, and the unlikelihood of their meeting at the same places of the body to which they belong, as if they acted with choice and judgment; it is observed, that the lodestone will draw iron when at a distance from it; and that the heavenly bodies, which are at a great and almost immeasurable distance, are subject to a law that brings them towards each other; and such is the virtue of the lodestone, that let iron, lead, salt, and stone, be reduced to a powder, and mixed together, and hold the lodestone to it, it will draw the iron only, and as it were by free choice out of this composition, leaving all the rest of the bodies untouched. ⁴⁵⁵⁴⁵⁵Ibid. s. 9, 10. p. 1048, 1049. And surely then, the great Alchemist of the world, and he who is the Author of the lodestone, and has given it the virtue it has, is capable of doing as great, and greater things, than these; he can gather together the particles of the dissolved body, though ever so distant and dispersed, and separate and distinguish them from other bodies they have been united to, and put them in their proper place, in their own body.

4c. The various changes and alterations the body undergoes are objected to the same body being raised; it is observed, that in the space of seven years all the particles of the body are changed; some lost and others got; and it seems impracticable that the same body should be raised, since its particles are not the same in youth as in old age, nor when emaciated as in better circumstances; and therefore being raised according to which, it may, it cannot be the same. It may be observed, that though the body has not always the same fleeting particles, which are continually changing, as the fluids are, yet it always has the same solid and constituent parts; and so a man may always be said to have the same body and to be the same man; it is the same body that is born that dies, and the same that dies that shall rise again; the several alterations and changes it undergoes, with respect to tallness and largeness, fatness or leanness, do not destroy the identity of the body. Moreover, it is not requisite that all the particles of matter of which the body of a man has been composed, throughout his lifetime, should be collected, to constitute the risen body; it is enough that all the necessary ones should be collected and united together; otherwise it must rise in a gigantic form. It is a good distinction made by a learned writer, ⁴⁵⁶⁴⁵⁶Nieuwentyt’s Religious Philosopher, vol. 3. contempl. 28. s. 2023. p. 1058, &c. of an “own” or “proper” body, and of a “visible” one; the visible body consists both of fluids and of solids; the former of which change and alter, according to difference of years, of constitutions, and other circumstances; but the latter continue the same: an own or proper body, consists almost only of solids; as of skin, bones, nerves, tendons, cartilages, arteries, and veins; which continue the same from infancy to the age of maturity, and so on, excepting the strength and size of them; and so sufficient to denominate the same body, notwithstanding the change of the fluids, and of the flying off and accession of the fleeting particles. And as every animal, so man, has a first principle, or “stamen,” which contains the whole own body; and which, in growth, is expanded or unfolded, and clothed, as it were, and filled up with other particles continually; so that it is enough if this stamen is preserved, and at the resurrection unfolded and filled up, either with the same matter that belonged to it before, or with such other matter as it shall please God to constitute the same body; let one die, as it may, when a child, or full grown, or with a loss of a leg or an arm, or with any defect; since all will be filled up in the expanded “stamen,” as observed. ⁴⁵⁷⁴⁵⁷Ibid. s. 24, 25, 28. p. 1063, &c.

4d. The grossness and gravity of bodies, are objected, as rendering them unfit to dwell in such a place as heaven, all fluid, and purely ethereal. As for the grossness of raised bodies, they will not be so gross as may be imagined, or as they now are; though they will not be changed into spirits, as to substance; they will be spiritual bodies, in the sense before explained; they will be greatly refined and spiritualized; and will not be supported in such a gross manner as with food, drink, &c. as now; and will be light, agile, and powerful, and capable of breathing in a purer air. As to the gravity of them, a learned man observes, ⁴⁵⁸⁴⁵⁸Hody’s Resurrection of the same Body asserted, p. 205. “There is no such thing as gravity in regions purely ethereal, which are above the reach and activity of particular orbs; there is no high and low in such places; our bodies will be there sustained, as the globe of the earth, and the several celestial orbs, are now sustained in the “air” and “ether”.” And he further observes, that perhaps, after all, our heaven will be nothing but an heaven upon earth; or some glorious solid orb, created on purpose for us, in those immense regions which we call heaven; and he says, this is no new opinion, but embraced by many of the ancients: and certain it is, that the raised saints will, quickly after their resurrection, inhabit a new earth for a thousand years, prepared for them. As for the objection, taken from the impurity of bodies, and their unworthiness and unfitness to be united to souls; and their being a prison and a burden to them; and so would make the condition of souls worse: these are only heathenish notions, and cannot affect the minds of Christians, and require no answer. But,

4e. There is another objection, of more importance, which must be removed; which is taken from human bodies being eaten by men, either through necessity, as in distressed cases; or of choice, as by cannibals, or man eaters; whereby the flesh of one man is turned into the flesh of another; and one human body becomes a part of another; and so there cannot be a distinct resurrection of each of these bodies, with the proper parts belonging to them. In answer to which, there is no need to say, as an ancient learned apologist ⁴⁵⁹⁴⁵⁹Athenagoras de Resurrectione, p. 44, 48. seems to do, that the substance of one man’s body, when eaten by another, does not turn to nourishment, nor become the flesh of the other that eats it; it being not designed by providence for food; since it is certain, men have been nourished by it, as when in distress, as well as otherwise: let it be observed, that it is a very small part of the food a man takes into his body, which turns to nourishment; not above the fiftieth part of it, according to the accurate Sanctorius: ⁴⁶⁰⁴⁶⁰In Hody, p. 186. and daily experience teaches, that what we use for food, belongs only to the “visible” body of an animal, and the fluids and juices thereof; and not its solid parts, its bones and nerves: nor is a cannibal, or man eater, nourished with withered and dried bones, and with nerves and membranes, divested of their juices; ⁴⁶¹⁴⁶¹Nieuwentyt ut supra, s. 33. p. 1072, 1073. and so is nourished, not with the own proper body; but only with the “visible” one, and the fluids thereof. Besides, the nourishment of the bodies of men, is without their will and knowledge, and entirely depends upon the will and pleasure of God; in whose power it is to hinder that no one essential particle of a body should belong to another, through nourishment by it, and that even after a natural manner; there is no impossibility in it, since by numberless chemical experiments, as further observed, it will appear, that though a body has the property of uniting itself to another, yet it can be hindered by the addition of a third, and by other ways too, from doing the same: ⁴⁶²⁴⁶²Ibid, s. 11. p. 1051, 1052. and God, who has promised to raise the bodies of all men, will take care that nothing relating to nourishment should hinder the performance of it; and that the particles of one man’s body shall never so become the particles of another, as that the resurrection of either should thereby be rendered impossible. ⁴⁶³⁴⁶³Hody ut supra, p. 185, 186. And it is observed by a learned writer, that if even a cannibal, during his whole life, had fed upon nothing but the matter of the visible bodies of men, and it had only pleased God to hinder the “stamina” of all those whom he had devoured from being converted into food; but that they should have passed through his body, with other excrementitious matter; what impossibility is there that the particular “stamen” of each person (supposed to be his “own proper” body) should be separated from thence, and be filled up again by other proper matter? Thus likewise, may the “stamen” of the cannibal himself remain alone, without any of its expanding fluids, and be filled up with others at the resurrection; and he accordingly may rise likewise in his “own” body.—To conclude, adds he, since the “own” body must be considered abstractly from any humors and juices; and since all that serves for the food and nourishment of a man eater, must only be divided from the “visible” body of the person devoured; it is plain, that although a cannibal had devoured hundreds of “visible” bodies of other men; it would likewise happen, according to the common course of nature, that the solid particles, divested of all their juices, or the own bodies of the devoured persons, would be discharged, or cast out, unmingled with those of the devourer; and consequently, that each of them might appear separate and entire, at the time of its resurrection. ⁴⁶⁴⁴⁶⁴Vid. Nieuwentyt, ut supra, s. 29. p. 1067, 1068, & s. 33. p. 1073. So that upon the whole, there can be nothing in the above objections, to a rational man, who believes the power, promise, and providence of God.

To conclude, this doctrine appears to be of great importance and usefulness, and therefore to be abode by. It is one of the articles of the creed of the ancient Jews; it is reckoned among the first principles of the doctrine of Christ; it is a fundamental article of the Christian faith. The resurrection of Christ stands and falls with it; the whole gospel is connected with it, and depends on it (1 Cor. 15:13-17), without this, there is no expectation of a future and better state (1 Cor. 15:18, 19), practical religion greatly depends on the truth and belief of it. It has been observed, ⁴⁶⁵⁴⁶⁵“Nemo enim tam carnaliter vivit, quam qui negant carnis resurrectionem,” Tertull. de Resurrectione, c. 11. that the opposers of it have always had bad lives; it is a natural consequence, what the apostle observes of the denial of it (1 Cor. 15:32). Whereas, a firm belief of it, promotes a studious concern of a holy life and conversation, as may he observed in the experience and practice of the apostle Paul (Acts 24:15, 16). It is very useful to instruct in various things. It serves to enlarge our views of the divine perfections; as of the omnipotence and omniscience of God, of his holiness and justice, of his immutability in his counsels and purposes, and of his faithfulness in his promises and threatenings. It teaches us to think highly of Christ, as God over all, and as possessed of all divine perfection, since he has so great a concern in it; and serves to endear the Spirit of God, and teach us not to grieve him, by whom we are sealed to the day of the redemption of our bodies. And it may be a means of encouraging our faith and trust in God, in the greatest straits and difficulties, as being able to deliver out of them (Rom. 4:17; 2 Cor. 1:9, 10). And it may direct us to a due and proper care of our bodies, while living, that they are not abused through avarice or intemperance; and to provide or give orders for the decent interment of them after death. This doctrine affords much comfort; hence, in the Syriac version of John 11:24 it is called, “the consolation at the last day”. It may be of great use to support saints under the loss of near relations (1 Thess. 4:13, 14), and under their various trials and afflictions, and under present diseases and disorders of body; from all which they will be freed at the resurrection; and in the views of death, and of the changes the body will undergo after death; and yet, after all rise again, and see God, and enjoy the company of angels and saints (Job 19:26, 27).