Defense of a Treatise Touching the Suffering and Victory of Christ, Part 2

Defense of a Treatise Touching the Suffering and Victory of Christ · Part 2

p. 149That Chriſt after his death on the Croſſe went not downe into Hell in his Soule.

THe 2. part of our Controverſie is this, That Chriſt after his death on the Croſſe went not downe into Hell in his Soule. Where note firſt,Notes that we vnderſtand Hell properly and locally (as our common ſpeach in Engliſh doth vſually take it) for the very place of the Damned after this life. Now againſt them that belieue Chriſtes Soule did go down locally into Hell, thus I reaſon.Reaſons gainſt Ch… Deſcendi… locally is Hell. Firſt, If there be a good and ſound generall reaſon in Christian faith that Christes Soule leaving his Body aſcended vp to Heaven and there remained till his Reſurrection, and if there be no ſpeciall reaſon 1of authority to the contrary that his Soul now deſcended downward: then ſurely every good Christian ought to believe that his Soule aſcended to Heaven, and deſcended not locally into Hell. Two ma… points to noted.But both thoſe former pointes are moſt true: Firſt, There is a good ſound generall reaſon in Christian faith that Christes Soule after death Aſcended 1to Heaven, & remayned there till his Reſurrection. Namely the Analogy of faith requireth that the Head ſhould bee there where the members were: and where they remaine till their Reſurrection, that there he tary till his Reſurrection. It ſeemeth alſo theſe texts wil prove itaaIoh. 1…John 1 Where J am, there alſo ſhall my ſervant be. bbcap. 17I will that where I am, there they alſo ſhall be with me. I ſee not but that he promiſeth heere his ſervants even a locall accōpanying of him after this life, & that alſo generally whither ſoever he went. Moreover this the FathersccOnly A… wavereth where af…ming, fo… where d…ting. all with one voyce (I may truly affirme) do teach and believe: even that Chriſt after death went no whither, but where his faithfull and holy ſervants were: yea and there remayned till his Reſurrection. To which conſent of men ſomewhere you aſcribe exceeding much, ſo thatddPerpe…vern epiſ… 10. you plainly avouch the cōtrary alwayes to be a notorious, if not a pernicious novelty. To which purpoſe alſo other Scriptures doe make very much: as where Chriſt, being in the paines of death and preſently about to end his life, ſaith Father into thy hands I commend my Soule. This being ſpoken at ſuch a time, in the depth of ſuch wofull ſorrowes, and by ſuch a perſon, in all good reaſon Gods hands p. 150whereinto he commendeth his Soule (according to our common vſe of ſpeach) muſt be Gods ioyfull peace, and Heavenly glory. which is alſo ſuteable to the ſcripture phraſe, as " already I have ſhewed:…reat. 1. …g. 151. …g. 361. neither ſhew * you any thing againſt this. For what if Gods hands on other occaſions do ſignifie his Power, and generall protection only. Doth it follow that therefore Holy men (oppreſſed with paines, and now about to Dy) when they ſay, Father into thy handes I commend my Soule, they meane not the ioyes of Heavē? You aske was David dying when he ſpake thoſe words? He might bee in deadly ſorrowes or dangers, for any thing you know to the contrary. But ſuppoſe he were not thē in danger to dy. Yet the Prophets generall ſentence may fitly be applyed to this more ſpeciall caſe of Chriſt: as all men know. Howſoever then David were when he ſpake thus, yet Chriſt (now dying, & ready to come out of moſt wofull paines) doth ſurely meane when he ſaid ſo, (as other holy men do in like caſe) namely, to go to Heav…n. To like purpoſe ſerveth that comfort, given to the Theefe and common to himſelfe: This day ſhalt thou be with me in Paradiſe. As touching † Austius divers opinion and yours,…our p. 360 …ag 29. ſee "before. Be you reconciled vntounto him, and then let him ſpeake for you. Laſtlie, where the eternal and generall Ordinance of God is ſhewed to be ſuch,…k. 16.26. that * none can goe out of Heaven downe to Hell, nor come from Hell vp to Heaven. The text excepteth heere not one. This therefore I doubt not is in truth a cleere point (againſt which wee ſhall find not a worde in ſcripture) that Christes Soule after death was there where the holy Patriarkes deceaſed were, & there remayned till his Reſurrection. So that how you will doe to maintaine that Chriſt c went indeed vntounto them,…. 220.361. but preſently left them that hee might go to Hell, I know not. In this I doubt you walke f without your guide. …g. 91.But to proceed, I adde that which is a cleere and certaine:…. 189.193 …. 219. yea that which g your ſelfe rightly beleeveth and profeſſeth with vsus, though againſt the opinion of the Fathers, That the Soules of the holy Patriarkes dead before Christ were not beneath, but above; not in Limbo, but with God in peace, ioy, & bliſſee even in Paradice, …. 192.203.that is h Heaven. The which to be a doctrine moſt true (againſt the Popiſh errour heerein) I have briefly i heerto fore,…eat. 1. …g. 131. yet (I hope) ſufficiently proved. Therefore hence I conclude, that Chriſts Soule after his death Aſcended indeede, and p. 151deſcended not downward beneath vsus heere. 2. Only except there 2be ſome ſpeciall reaſon of good authority to the contrary: which is the ſecond point of importance heere to be conſidered. Touching which this I ſay, without expreſſe and evident Scripture there is in the worlde no ſound nor meet authority to diſprove our former Reaſon, and Concluſion. This alſo Austin himſelfe avoucheth well and faithfully: that is, ſuppoſing there is no expreſſe nor plaine Scripture for Chriſts Deſcending, then (ſaith he)aaEpiſt. … Miror ſi quam ad ros cum d… diſſ… aſſer… auderet. it were marvailous bouldnes that any ſhould dare ſay he went down to Hel. And againebbSerm. … temp. 14 Nemo de Christo credat niſi quod de ſe credi voluit Christus. No man ought to believe any thing concerning Chriſt, but what himſelf (in his word) would have vsus to believe. Now I aſſume this, and by Gods helpe ſhall make it manefeſt,No Scrip… at al y^t Ch… Soule aſ… death d… ſoended. That there is in all the Scripture no one place whereby it may bee proved by any ſhew of reaſon that Christs Soul after this life went locally downward from hence, or diverſly from the Soules of all good men deceaſed beſides. Yea whatſoever is pretended from the Scripture expreſly to prove that he did Deſcend, is but very little, and exceeding weake.Script. pr… ded. Only there are 2. or 3. places ſenſibly wreſted and drawen to this purpoſe. 11.ccYour pa… 212. That, where Chriſt is ſaid to havedd…ph. 4. come downe into the lowest partes of the earth. **Treat. … pag. 14…But I have largely and plainly ſhewed that this place ſpeaketh not a whit neither of Hell, nor of Chriſts Soule deſcending locally; neither before his death, nor after. It noteth only Chriſts ſenſible and apparant Humiliation to the laſt and loweſt point, that is to the Grave. According to the Hebrue phraſe, which the Apoſtles frequented in their Greeke writings very much. So that no reaſon appeareth why or how this place may ſhew that his Soule after death went downward. The rather ſeeing you, will have Chriſtes going downeddPag 41 to Hell the firſt, and that a notable part of his exaltation and triumph. But this was manefeſtly (as I ſaid) his loweſt abaſement. Therefore this toucheth not his going down to Hell. WhereeePag. 2… you expound the text, & ſay, He deſcended to the lowest and aſcended to the highest that he might fill all places with the preſence of his Manhood: you ſpeake bothffIn reſpe… vbiquita… inconveniently, and far from the Apoſtles meaning. Who ſignifieth only Chriſtes fillingggEphe. 1. & ….19.Eph 1 all his Church with the giftes of his Spirit, which by his Aſcending hehhIoh. 16.7… Luck. 24.4…John 16:7 promiſed to doe, andiiAct. 2.33.Acts 2:33 ſo did indeed. Heere is nothing about his filling all (places) with the p. 152preſence of his manhood. Much leſſe is there expreſly in the text that which k you adde to it (with his preſence) very deceitfully in a differing letter like the text and togeather with the text.…g. 212. What cenſure this deſerveth the godly doe knowe. Wherefore yet wee muſt be ſo ſcrupulous ſtill, as to ſtick at the phraſe of Christs Deſcending in Soule: for as yet wee ſee no worde in all the whole 2Scripture any thinge neere, much leſſe equivalent therevnto. If you will vrge that, where Chriſt is ſaid to have a ben 3. dayes & 3. nightes in the heart of the earth,…at. 12.40. there is nothing els then as before,…ag. 21…. even his Buriall. Your exception that b Christes ſepulchre was in the higher partes of the earth fruſtrateth not the maner of the Hebrue phraſe, after which the Scripture ſpeaketh both here, and in the laſt before: as I c have declared plainly in my 1. Treatiſe. It ſeemeth,…. 144.146 your not conſidering (or not caring for) the vſe and maner of the Hebrue toung cauſeth your miſtaking as in theſe places, ſo likewiſe in all, or moſt of the reſt: yea indeed it cauſeth your errour in this maine queſtiō, as after it will more appeare 1. Third. you d make much of that,…ag. 213. which doeth you not a pinnes worth of good: where it is asked e who ſhall deſcend into the deepe? …om. 10.7.that is, to bring Chriſt againe from the dead. If the deepe heere did ſignifie Hell, (which yet certainly it doeth not) but ſuppoſe it doeth: Howe will that follow (which you preſume) that Christ dying deſcēded into the deepe. The text ſaith no ſuch thing. It ſaith he was with the dead, and that from thence he came: and therfore by this I rather conclude, it was thither only that he deſcended. Which alſo is ſignified elſwhere in the ſame words,…ph. 1.20. f frō the dead. Thus I ſay the dead heere importeth the generall condition and ſtate of all the Dead, as it is oppoſed to the ſtate of the Living, and ſo it ſheweth Chriſtes loweſt and laſt Humiliation, as the other places did before: ſaving that before his Grave particularly is intended, heere the ſtate of death may bee applyed to his whole humane Perſon, and to both partes thereof diſſolved. Yea it is not vnlikely that the former word g the deepe is vſed alſo heere by the Apoſtle to ſignifie (not Hell,Abyſſus. but) even this condition and ſtate of death which is as a Gulfe bottomles, never ſatisfied, & vnrecoverable. Like as Sheol in Hebrue doth likewiſe properly ſignifie: as after we ſhall further declare. This meaning the Syriak Tranſlator (an ancient writer, of no ſmall credit) ſeemeth to have, p. 153ſith he turneth it Abyſſum Sepulchri, the deepe of the Grave. And then the deepe ſignifying heere the ſtate and condicion of Death, the Apoſtle ſeemeth to expreſſe his meaning to that effect more clearely in theſe next words, this is to bring Christ againe from the dead: that is, to fruſtrate Chriſtes Death, wherevnto he deſcended for our ſakes. We may conſider alſo that this word heere the deepe many times is referred to the vaſt Gulfes & deepe pits of the earth, and likewiſe to the vnknowen, deepe, and furtheſt partes of the ſea. Now the Apoſtle may ſeeme to vſe this large ſignifying word of purpoſe to expreſſe the infinit ſearching about of an incredulous and comfortles minde which ſeeketh iuſtice before God by the keeping of the Lawe. Who indeed thereby getteth nothing, but maketh void vntounto it ſelfe the Goſpell and all Chriſtes benefits therein; His Death and Reſurrection, his Aſcention, &c. The Apoſtle then may inſinuat in this word all theſe ſenſes and ſignifications thereof: namely I ſay, (with other) even ſuch a ſeeking to the deepeſt and fartheſt partes of the Sea, to learne ſomewhere (if it might be) among all the Creatures of God how to fulfill and keepe the Law. For ſo Moſes (whom heere he doeth cite)**Deu. 30 13.Deut 30:13 expreſlie ſignifieth: then ſo the Apoſtle alſo ſignifieth the very ſame. For theſe 3. things the Apoſtle delivereth heere togeathet:

1. That the Law and the Goſpell do greatly differ, & namely in that the Law doeth not ſave vsus, but the Goſpell doeth.

2. He ſheweth the cauſe heereof, for that no fleſh can keepe the Law, nor ever could: as he confirmeth by this out of Moſes, where men thinking to live by the Law, are noted to ſeeke and ſearch every where far and neere, by all wayes & meanes, that they might ſatisfie their own hearts, and finde how to keepe it: which proveth that their owne heartes beare witnes that they keepe it not, neither can keepe it.

3. Hee ſheweth that thus by ſeeking to live by the Law, they looſe the life of God coming by Chriſtes Death and Reſurrection in the Goſpell.

Thus the Apoſtle rightly keepeth him ſelfe to the whole matter and meaning of Moſes, whoſe wordes (though ſhortened) he citeth and diſcourſeth vponupon. But then it is not poſſible that the deepe heere ſhould have any reference at all to Hell. For what colour is there to make a man penſive about keeping the Law to aske, who ſhall goe downe for him among the Divells and damned ſpirtis to bring it thence vntounto him? or to imagine that the keeping p. 154of the Law might be rather there, then in his owne heart? or that any meanes might be got from thence to helpe men, that they might keepe it? There is no likelilyhood for this out of doubt. Therefore alſo the deepe heere ſignifieth not Hell any way: ſeeing the Apoſtle doubtles retayneth Moſes ſenſe, as is aforeſaid. Laſtly I may not omit to ſhew how you deale heere againe with the text. You alleage it a He deſcended into the deepe, …ag. 220.all with ſpeciall letters differing from the reſt of purpoſe, to ſhew that Christs deſcent into Hell (for ſo you take the deepe) is found written in the very Scripture. But He is cūningly added to the text: neither are theſe words meant of Him, but of a Phariſaical Meritmōger, ſearching everywhere for righteouſnes by works,…ag. 153. b as is before declared. The like practiſe c you vſe againe in the Pſalme:…ag. 147. …ſa. 139.8. where the d text hath only veatsignah Sheol, If J lodge, or, if J ſpread my couch in Sheol, thou art there. There is no word to expreſſe beneath, which you put into the text of your own head. The ſame alſo I noted in e you before.…ag. 152. …fore pa. 66 Somewhere you charge me (but f vainly) with falſifying of Ierom. If I had by overſight don ſo, yet that were not like this falſifying: which is not of men, but of Gods owne word; not by overſight, but of purpoſe for advantage.

Theſe are all the Scriptures that can be brought, to make anie ſhewe of Chriſtes Soule deſcending locally after his death. Which being abuſed to this purpoſe ſo palpably, as before we hauehave ſeene, I muſt in earneſt ſay, I marvaile that any will beleeve it as an article of faith, that Christes Soule deſcended: Specially conſidering our next reaſon which followeth.

Our 2. and moſt principall Reaſon is this:…aſon. 2 If there bee not one place of Scripture to prove that Christes Soule was in Hell, then you ought to deny that opinion. But you have not indeed any one place that proveth it. Therefore it ought to be denyed.

Againſt this Argument you " ſay you have one place,Pag. 167. Act 2: 27. Euen onelyonly one, where you thinke it is plaine that Chriſt ſaith, He reioyceth becauſe God would not leaue his ſoule in Hell. …r one only …e neede …e paſſing …re, and be… all ex…ion: as this …t.For ſo you muſt hauehave it heere tranſlated (in Hell) even becauſe you will. But if men with reaſon reſiſt your will, and proue vntounto you that it ought not to bee taken heere for Hell, then I pray take it patiently, and vſe not ſuch raging & deſpitefull termes as againſt me you do: as if I were not worthy to ſpeake of thoſe matters that p. 155you ſpeake of, vnleſſe I would be bound to ſay your words. How be it I beſeech you giuegive vsus leave. This ſentence taken out of Davids aaPſal …Pſalmes & alleadged in the Actes, ſignifieth the verybbPag. … ſame thing in both places. The Hebrew word controverſed is Sheol, the Greeke Hades. Now muſt the word Sheol and Hades needes ſignifie Hell, being applied to ſoules departed hence? So indeede youccPa. 1 …02. avouch more confidently then truly: and heerevpon it ſeemeth youddPa. 1… pawne the triall of this Queſtion, ſaying; Till we bring you ſome one good proofe out of the Scriptures that the Soules of the righteous before Christes comming were in Sheol or Hades, you will rest in your opinion, that by this only plaine place Chriſtes Soule was in Hell. We hope then, when this proofe (which you asko for againſt your opinion) is ſhewed, you will correct your opinion in this point. Let it therefore bee conſidered, I pray, which the Pſalmiſt alſo hath elſwhere of this matter.Sheol & attribut… the Soul… iuſt after Let vsus interpret the Pſalmes by the Pſalmes. Firſt this we obſerve in them, howe it is written““Pſa. … What man liveth and ſhall not ſee death? Shall he deliver his ſoule from the hande of Sheol? Heere now the Soule attributed to every man living, muſt be properly taken as well as in the former place, where you take it for Chriſts very Soul. For,eePag. 1… This rule muſt be helde ††Much in one a… ſame W… in one a… ſame ma… and ma… ſpeach.thoughout the Scriptures, that we divert not frō the native and proper ſignifications of the wordes, but when the letter impugneth the grounds of Christian faith and charitie. Otherwiſe we ſhall leave nothing ſound & ſure in Gods word, if we may avoid all things by figures that pleaſe not our humours. So long then as the proper ſenſe of the Scriptures may ſtand with the Analogie of faith and direction of charitie, we offer violence to the word of God if we wrest it to a figurative vnderſtanding. Now then it is apparant that heere the ſoules of all mē living, both good & bad (after death) are appointed to Sheol. For there is none whoſoever that can poſſibly eſcape it, ſaith y^e text. Yet many good men there are & then were, who could & did eſcape Hell. Therefore in the Script. Sheol and hades applied to departed ſoules, is not always Hell, but the Cōdition or place, aſwell where the iuſt mens ſoules are after death, as that where the dāned are. Wherefore we hope that you wil keepe your word, that is, to acknowledge Sheol and Hades may be applyed to the Soules of iuſt and bleſſed men deceaſed. And withall that Chriſts Soule after his death (having Sheol applyed to it by p. 156the Pſalmist, who applyeth the very ſame alſo to all iuſt mens Soules in the worlde when they dy) ought not therefore in any wiſe to be thought to have ben in Hell: even becauſe he was the iuſteſt and holyeſt man that ever was. Vnles ſome other ſcripture (more plaine then this) doe affirme it. Which becauſe there is vtterly none, I ſay not one, that doeth leane any thing towards ſuch a ſenſe; therefore you ought not ſtifly to maintayne that Christes Soule was locally in Hell, as hitherto you hauehave done. But Austin a collecteth this opinion from this place in the Actes.…g. 253. Oh, then this point of faith is groūded on Austin: it is his collection (not the text it ſelf without him) that ſerves your turne. Certainly ſo it is. But this thē agreeth not to your worthy proteſtations noted b before:…ag 28. 29. …r pag 91 … this becometh not ſuch good wordes. I beſeech you, be not you of them qui virtutē verba putāt. Then touching Austins authoritie,…fore pag … c you know how you leave him, when you think good: & regard not his d ſcant probable proofes, & coniecturall inclinations. Finally,…r pa. 169 … that heere Austin hath no better then ſcant probable proofes and meere coniectures, we ſhall plainly declare (God willing) after we have ſhewed a generall conſent and correſpondence of all Authors for our ſenſe of Sheol & Hades: which I hope preſently you ſhall ſee.

But firſt you muſt note that we goe not about to prove Sheol & Hades to be Heaven. We never thought it, neither need we ſo to thinke. The more is your iniurie, when you hauehave nothing to reprove, yet with skoffes, and floutes, & bitter reproches to diſgrace me as you doe, and that even for this your owne meere conceit. Neither yet can your e witty reaſon prove,…g. 146. that Limbus heereby can not be avoided. Conſider a word of like vſe in Latin: Defuncti ſignifying the Dead, may be applyed generally to the Soules of men deceaſed. Yet notwithſtanding this, I hope Limbus may be eaſily avoyded. Alſo I pray, are Defuncti none other but the Damned onelyonly in Hell? The bleſſed in Heaven may be likewiſe called Defuncti, I ſuppoſe. Howbeit not in reſpect of their being in Heaven:Note. but only in reſpect that they hauehave done with this life, and are gone hence. The word is properly generall: ſignifying by it ſelfe neither the Bleſſed nor the Damned, neither to be in Hell nor in Heaven. Yet reſtrained by Circūſtances (ſuch as they may be) it ſignifyeth either. Certainly ſo doth hades, & alſo Sheol▪ All p. 157theſe (the Latin, the Greeke,The prope… ſenſe of Sh… and Hades and the Hebrew) wordes are indifferent and common in them ſelves; ſignifying in deed no poſitive thing properly, but a meere privation of this life, and of a former viſible being heere ſometime. And ſo it is, that the Pſalme ſaith, Even the iuſt mens Soules, and all, muſt come to Hades & Sheol. Moreover, thus in effect they are all one with Thanatos, Death: but that Thanatos belongeth properly to Bodyes. Hades & Sheol ſometimes to Bodyes, ſometime to Soules of Men indifferently. Yea ſometime theſe 2. are applyed (though more rarely) to other things alſo which are in this viſible world, namely whē they com to Deſtruction, and No being any more: as anon we ſhall better vnderſtande.

Now let vsus proceed, and ſhew further even by the Scriptures firſt, that Sheol and Hades are (as I ſay) more then once vſed for the generall condition of death wherein even iuſt mens ſoules are held, or the manſion of ſoules departed aſwell good as bad. Then afterward the common conſent of others will availe the more.

ThataaPſalm. 4…Ps 4 Pſalme which intreateth wholy of Death, of the impoſſibility to eſcape it, of the power which it hath over the wicked whoſe ioy and pompe is only in this world, in that it cutteth of all their hopes, it endeth their pleaſure, and marreth all their bewty. I ſay in this Pſalme, where all expreſſe circumſtances do ſhew that the Prophet ſpeaketh of this death, not of Hell, yet David heere ſaith:**verſe. 1… notwithstanding God ſhall deliver my ſoule from the power of Sheol (that is death, or the ſtate of death) when hee ſhall reoeave mee most mightily. So Tremelius turneth it, noting heere Davids hope of the Reſurrection, which I think he hath well vnderſtood in this place. Otherwiſe David might heere comfort himſelfe in this, that hee knew God would ſave him alive from this common death, not alwayes as you friuolouſly obiect, but oftentimes: yea alwayes till he ſhould enioy the Kingdome, which indeed God did for him when he was neere death not ſeldome, and when his enemies & the wicked were caught therewith. Againe, thatbbPſal. 8…Ps 8 Pſalme ſheweth it alſo where it is thus written, My Soule is filled with ſorrowes, and my life draweth neere to Sheol. By his life he meaneth his ſoule the proper cauſe and fountayne of life in him, which alſo in the firſt parte of the ſentence hee expreſly named. As the manner of phraſe in the Pſalmes is; in the 2. parte of p. 158the ſentence commonly to ſpeake of the ſame things that are vttered in the former, but varying the termes. That life heere ſhould ſignifie the body diſtinctly from the ſoule, there is no ſuch likelyhood nor reaſon. Indeed I deny not but life may ſignifie heere the whole perſon of man,As in theſe …eſaide Pſal. …, 48. & 49, … & 10, 16. al …116, 8. & in …y many …aces of ſcrip…e beſides. and ſo may c nepheſh the ſoule alſo very wel: and then Sheol and Hades ſignifie not peculiarly and diſtinctly the Grave which only is for the carcaſe, but the condition of the Whole mā after he hath no being in this world. In which regard, choſe what ſenſe you will, either that nepheſh and chai ſhall in all theſe places of the Pſalmes before handled ſignifie ſtrictly the ſoul, as very fitly it may, or the whole perſon of man conſiſting both of a ſoule and of a living body, contrary to which eſtate Sheol and Hades is very often taken,g That is, if it …re not ſtrictly …d peculiarly …e habitation …ſ…y Souls, yet …s the condi… ur of y^e whole …ſon, that is, …h of Soul & …dy ſepara… by Death. …ob. 30.23. and d peradventure ſo it is vnderſtood heere in theſe places. In which ſenſe Sheol & Hades are far from ſignifying hell, yea or heaven either, yea or only and meerely the Grave: but it ſignifieth destruction from out of this world, & no-being here any more as afore time to the whole perſon, that is, both to the Soule and to the Body. And thus Sheol and Hades Iob reſembleth to a houſe or Habitation, where he nameth it † Beth m… gned lecol chai: the habitation (after this world) appointed for every perſon, or (if you will) for all living things. The ſame alſo Iob wiſheth and deſireth of God to himſelfe, that God would hide him " Biſheol in this world of the deceaſed, …ob. 14.13.& would give him terme till his wrath was overpaſt. In another place he comforteth himſelfe thinking quickly to enioye it, ſaying, † Jf I have any hope, Sheol or Hades, …ob. 17.13.the world of the deceaſed ſhalbe my habitation. He ioyneth therevnto alſo particularly the grave: but as touching Sheol ſeeng Iob ſpeaketh of it as his continuall habitation till the worldes end, it cannot be meant only of the Grave for his body, which indured but a very ſhort time; neither had his fleſh any being at all after it was turned to very earth and wormes. He ſpeaketh heere therefore alſo of his ſoules continuing habitatiō, or manſion in another world.Gen. 37.35 becauſe they …ch dy, their …ons do fall …vne, according to y^e Latin …taſe, cadere, …idere, occū …, to Dy.Gen 37:35 And in greateſt reaſon this is that which Iaacob meaneth, when he ſaith, " He will goe downe mourning to his ſonne i… Sheol. That is, He will mourne till he dy: for this he meaneth by * going downe heere ſpeaking of death. And then he hopeth to enioye the ſocietie of his deare ſonne in ſoule. For his body hee thought was devoured and digeſted in the bellies of wilde beaſts, p. 159therefore he would goe to the ſoule of his ſonne in Sheol. Or els vnderſtanding heere the diſſolution & paſſage of his Whole perſon, he may meane partly his going downe to the graue as touching his body, and yet alſo the enioying of the ſocietie of his deare ſonne in Sheol, which ſurely (as J ſaid) could not bee in body but in ſoule. Thus Sheol heere hath reſpect to the changed eſtate of Iacobs whole perſon diſſolved, and not to one parte thereof only, his body, but to his ſoule alſo: and it hath reſpect likewiſe to the eſtate of his dead ſonnes ſoule, where this loving Father hoped againe to hauehave ſociety with him (not any where els) without which he could not be comforted. Albeit in another place it ſeemes hee limiteth Sheol to the graue only: but that we doe ſo vnderſtand by reaſon of the Circumſtances,aaGen. 42.Gen 42 you will bring my Gray Head with ſorrow to the Grave. But againe to follow our purpoſe: Good Hezekiah alſo looked for Sheol to be his habitation likewiſe after this life. I ſaid (ſaith““Iſay. 38. … 11, 12.Isa 38:11Isa 38:12 he) I ſhall goe to the gates of Sheol (the Land of the dead:) I ſhall not ſee the Lord in the Land of the living; I ſhall ſee Man no more among the inhabitāts of the world: My habitation, or Manſion is tranſlated and removed from me as a ſheapheards tent, &c. This heere cannot be the Grave, nor Hell which he deſcribeth. For he thought he ſhould thē have dyed: and thus his habitation he thought ſhould hauehave ben removed and tranſlated from him: that is, I take it, his body ſhould be remoued from his ſoule, which was the manſion or habitation of his ſoule while he lived, but now he ſhould hauehave another age,““D…r… … age, my co…nuance, or during, o… my māſiō, or induring, or Manſion, and be remoued to another place. This can not be vnderſtood of his Carcaſe, rotting and waſting away to nothing in the graue, and therefore indureth not as the word ſignifieth: therfore he meaneth it of his Soules removing and abiding elſwhere. Alſo he expreſly oppoſeth the land of the living to Sheol: therfore Sheol is the land of the dead, not the graue only, nor Hell only,**Which al… to be collec… of that in Prophet to…ing Chriſt, ſcinditur… râ viventi… Iſai. 53.8.Isa 53:8 but as large and as generall to the dead, and as fit to receaue both the partes of men, yea both good and bad men, (but ſeparated, and diſſolved) as the land of the living is to receave both thoſe partes vnited and knit togeather. Againe Hezekiah was a godly man, therefore hell was not for him: alſo though hee ſhould not ſee the Lord in the land of the living, which was the thing he deſired, yet thereby hee ſeemeth to inſinuate that in the land of the dead hee p. 160might ſee him, whither he was about to go: and that muſt needes be the place of bleſſed Soules, even that which heere is noted by the word Sheol. …g. 150.It is a moſt vaine reaſon that you give, that "ſheol heere is to be taken for Hell and ſo to be tranſlated becauſe death to the wicked is the paſſage to Hel, which death Hezekiah was now neere vntounto. It is vntrue that Hezekiah was neere vntounto that death which the wicked dy, or that he feared that kind of death, or that there is no ſound differēce betwene the death of the godly & the death of the wicked, or that by any meanes according to ſound divinity the death of the godly may be named or taken for Hell. This is ſo vaine that I will not ſtand any longer to anſwere it. Another obiection of yours a is as weake,Pag. 400. where you ſay Sheol heere muſt be the Grave, becauſe it is ſaid b afterward,ver. 18. Sheol doth not confeſſe the, death cannot praiſe thee &c. Though I grant that the Grave is not heere excluded eſpecially in the words next after, They that go down to the pit cannot hope for thy truth: yet I affirme that Sheol namely in the former place verſ. 10. cannot exclude the manſion of good mens ſoules departed hence, & that for the reaſons aboue noted. Neither heere doth this circumſtance limite it to the Grave onelyonly, becauſe it is ſaid Sheol confeſſeth not thee. For it is evident that He Zekiah meaneth not abſolutly that there is no praiſing of God in Sheol, but onelyonly hee vnderſtandeth that which c hee ſo greatly deſired,…hich was y^t …inary great …re of the …lly gene…y: pſal. 42. & 84.1. the outward frequenting of the Temple, the holy Ceremonies and Sacrifices, & ioyning to the viſible congregation, and publiſhing of Gods goodnes to others. Which hee expreſſeth immediatly to be that praiſing of God that he meaneth & cannot be in Sheol, by knitting cloſe to the former theſe words, d The living, …ſa. 38.19.the living, he ſhall confeſſe thee, as I do this day: the Father to the Children ſhall declare the truth. This is that which he denieth of ſheol: that none there doe praiſe God to the example and edifying of others. He denyeth not ſimply nor abſolutly that there is none in ſheol at all, in any reſpect, that praiſe God. The very ſame David expreſſeth alſo very plainly,Pſal. 116.9.Ps 116:9 ſaing, e I ſhall walke before the Lord in the land of the living, Pſal. 118.17Ps 118:17and f I ſhall not dye but live and declare the workes of the Lord. Where vnleſſe they meant only this viſible prayſing of God to others edifying, otherwiſe theſe holy men had no cauſe ſo greatly to deſire to praiſe God heere, for they knew very wel, how that (for their own parts) p. 161they ſhould prayſe him much better, and more perfitly in the next world.

The Se… gint vſe … in y^e fan….To the very ſame purpoſe the Septuagint vſe hades in other places alſo, beſides in their tranſlating of theſe aforeſaid. For it is truly and well acknowledged by you,ggPag 4… that both theſe wordes Sheol and Hades are iuſt all one. Now the Septuagint I ſay in other places do ſhew thus much alſo.hhPſal. 9 … after the … tuagint.Ps 9 Jf the Lord had not holpen me, my ſoule had almost dwelt in Hados: in Hebrue it is in ſilence. Which is not meant of hell for there is weeping, and wayling, and gnaſhing of teeth: but of the ſtate of death. Nor yet of the Grave, onelyonly, becauſe heere it is named to bee the Habitation of the Prophets ſoule, whither it was almoſt come when he was like to have dyed. Againe,iiPſal. 7…Ps 7 My ſoule was filled with ſorrowes, and my life drew neere to hades. How my ſoule and my lift heere, are taken for the ſelfe ſame, I have ſhewed before. As alſo in that of Iob,kkIob. 3…Job 3 his life (or ſoule) is in hades, in the world of the Dead.

Againe, it ſuffiſeth for our purpoſe, that Hades and Sheol are often vſed even indifferently for““Sheoll … Hades a… …ſed often … only Dea… effect. Thana… mors. Death and as being in effect the ſame, or for the ſtate and Condicion of Death, or the Power of Death. Which alſo ſometime we may likewiſe conceave of the Latin Inferi: which is by the Tranſlatours and other writers vſed for Sheol and Hades, though (I deny not) very daungerouſly and corruptly in deed. Firſt, foraaPro. 2…Prov 2 miſheol, the Greeke hath ek thanátou from death, reckoning Death and Sheol to be all one. So in Eccleſiastes bbEccle.Sheol andccve…s Hammethim the dead are in effect all one. And the very ſame doeth Eſai callddIſa. 3…Isa 3 Shagnare Sheol, the gates of sheol, which theeePſa. 9.….107.18.Ps 9 Pſalmes andffIob. 3…Job 3 Iob doe call Shagnare maueth, the gates of Death. In the**P…o. 3… and 27… Proverbes he meaneth Death, not Hell nor the Grave ſtrictly taken; where, by an excellencie the greedines of it is noted for being Neuer ſatisfied. For Death generally cra…eth more then either Hell or the Grave ſtrictly taken, do. So likewiſe Abakuk coupleth them togeather as being in effect alone,““Aba… Like sheoll and Death it will not be ſatisfied. Thus alſo it will appeare that that whichggPſal. … David reioyſeth for, the very ſame in effecthhPſal. … Chriſt heere reioyſeth for. Only with this difference, David reioyſeth that God had delivered his ſoule from death thē, when he was likely to have dyed: Chriſt reioyſeth becauſe God would deliuer his ſoule from the Condicion of Death (sheol) after he was p. 162in it, & ſpeedily even before his fleſh ſhould corrupt. This might be evidētly ſhewed in infinit places mo, but that it is vtterly needles. In this ſenſe it is that the Reprobates and the Elect after death are ſaid to be togither.…n. 28.19 a To morrow thou & thy ſons ſhalbe with vsus, ſaith the ſuppoſed Samuel to Saul. Not that there is any poſitive thing common to the Elect and Reprobates after death (which b you obſerve wel:…g. 396. … Simp…li. …qaeſt. 3. …g. 209.) but only that they be alike dead, and alike remain in death. Yet I ſay, they are not like any further. This c Auſt. very well ſheweth whom you d bring: ſaith he, mortuus mortem vivo proenuntiabat: Fathers … it me our … of Hadeathat is, being dead he foreſhewed death to him that yet lived. So that it was the ſame condition of death both to Saul and Samuell, but not the ſame fruition of happines. Thus the old Latin Tranſlatour vſeth Infernum, as cōmonly for Hades, ſo ſometimes for e Thanatos death,…ct. 2.24. … Cor. 15.55 … Act. 2.24. …piph. in …nacephal: … Anchor. …uſtin. In …yph.Acts 2:24 and ſometimes f Mors death for Hades. Epiphanius readeth the g Text indifferently h Thanátou or i Hadou, as reckoning thē in effect all one. Justin Martyr long before, ſaith, k Chriſt a little before his death noted the folly of thoſe men tôn nomizónton me êinai auton Christon all hegonménon thanatôſein auton, kai hós koinon ánthropon en hadou menein: that thought him not to be Christ, but that he ſhould dy and remaine in Hades as a common man. Hee meaneth not heere as a wicked man in Hell, but as any common man (whether good or bad) dying abideth in Death, or in the Dominion of Death, or in the world of the Dead. Irenaeus ſaith, l Heerein Christ (legem mortuorum ſervavit) did but as others do that Dy, …nae. lib. 5. …. vlt.& converſed 3. dayes vbi erant Mortui (ſancti) where the dead (Saintes) were. And this hee calleth Locum inviſibilem the vnſeene World. What meaneth this but Hades, …es an invi… place of y^e …ed Soules.as we take it? Yea a little before he expreſly calleth it Paradiſe. Nevertheles I grant that he thought this vnſeene world was indeed beneath in the earth: wherein his proofes do vnterly faile him, as your ſelfe do fully grant, and profeſſe in that point aſwell as wee. Againe m hee further ſheweth: that in the n Scripture he taketh Hades to be all one with Death, …ib. 5.13.3.38. … Cor. 15.55or the Dominion of Death, where he readeth the Text thus, Abſorpta est mors in victoriâ, vbi est mors aculeus tuus? vbi est o mors victoria tua?… Greek. …des. Death is ſwallowed vp in victorie, Death where is thy ſting? Death where is thy victory? And he addeth, Haec autem iustè dicentur tunc, &c. Theſe thinges ſhall truly be ſpoken then, when this p. 163mortall and corruptible fleſh, (about which Death is, and which is holden down by a certaine Dominion of Death) ariſing vp into life ſhall put on incorruption and immortality. Then verily ſhall death be overcome, when the fleſh which is holden by it, ſhall come foorth out of the Dominion thereof. Thus he taketh heere Thanatos and Hades for one and the ſame thing in effect, that is for Death, and the power of death, and nothing els. Tertulian doth likewiſe: foraaTerrul… Anima. … ſpeaking of Inferi, which he taketh for the ſame that Hades is, hee noteth it as the place Quò vniverſa Humanitas trahitur, whither all mankind must go. And therefore of Chriſts going thither he ſaith,bbCap. 5… Quia & homo, mortuus ſecundum Scripturas & ſepultus ſecundum eaſdem, hic quo que legi ſatisfecit formâ humanae mortis apud inferos functus: Becauſe alſo he was a man (therefore) he dyed according to the Scriptures & was buryed according to the ſame, alſo heere he ſatisfied the common law (of nature) by following the forme of mens Dying (and going) to the world of the Dead, Tertullian is for vsus yet further. Hee taketh Hades in thecc1 Cor. … Newe Teſtament meerely for Death, or the Dominion of Death, even as Irenaeus before did. Thus he readeth the Text & that often times,ddDe R… carn c. 4… 54. Vbi est mors aculeus tuus? Vbi est ““Hade…mors contentio tua? Aculeus autem mortis delinquentia: virtus autem delinquentiae Lex. O Death where is thy ſting? O Death where is thy force? The ſting of Death is ſinne: the force of ſinne is the Law. And againe,eeAdver… cion. 5. Scriptum est apud ffHoſe.Creatorem, Vbi est ggSheol … Hades.mors victoria, vel contentio tua? Vbi est mors aculeus tuus? Verbum autem hoc Creatoris est apud Prophetam. It is written by the Creatour, Death where is thy victory, or thy force, or ſtrife? Death where is thy ſting? This is the worde of the Lord God by the Prophet Ozee. Still he maketh Hades & Sheol nothing els but Death in theſe places. And ſaith he, Deo gratias dicit (hh1 Cor. … Apoſtolus) quod nobis victoriam vti que de morte preſtitit. The Apoſtle in the New Teſtament applying words of the Prophet to the Reſurrection, giveth thanks to God becauſe he cauſeth vsus to get a victory indeed of Death. So ſtill he maketh Hades to be Death and not Hell. Which yet is further moſt cleerely to be ſeene:iiDe Ido… cap. 13 … See alſo … before p… Lazarus apud inferos in ſinû Abrahae refrigerium conſecutus, &c. Lazarus in the world of the Dead inioyeth comfort in Abrahams boſom, contrariwiſe the Rich man is in the torments of fire, both of them (there) receaving their divers rewardes. How cleere is this, p. 164that he maketh Hades and Inferos even in a Luke alſo,…e 16.23 to be nothing but the common ſtate and world of the Dead. Wherevpon the learned Junius noteth thus, Obſervandum autem quod ait Apud Jnferos etiam de Lazaro. Nam inferos Latini Patres (vt Graeci Haden) pro omni loco aut ſtatû mortuorum dixerunt promiſcuè. At que in hunc ſenſum Lazarus & Dives apud inferos collocantur. … before …g 162. …m de …it. … anima, …. 55.Quomodo b Irenaeus, & c Chryſostomus ex verbis Luc. 16.23. locuti ſunt, & Tertullíanus locis quamplurimis. This therefore it is that Tertullian ſaith in another place, d Constituimus omnem animam apud inferos ſequestrari in diem iudicij: We determine that every mans Soule is kept apart in the worlde of the dead til the day of iudgment. And, Are all ſoules thē in the power of the kingdom of Death, penes inferos? Will you nill you, there you ſhall finde puniſhments and comfortes, as in Lazarus and the Rich man. For why ſhould you not thinke that the Soule may be both puniſhed and comforted in inferis, in the Worlde of the dead? Neither doth he c Montanize in this (as f you obiect) but conſenteth with Irenaeus before and with others after him as ſhall appeare,… Innius … on this chap. 188. who were no Montanists. Notwithſtanding it is true, that ſomewhere he taketh inferos, pro locali determinatione (as he ſpeaketh) for the peculiar and determinat place of the wicked deceaſed, that is, Hell ſtrictly and properly.…. 4. Thus he doth in that g againſt Marcion, wth you cite pag. 201. Alſo in that h obiection of certaine Haeretikes whom hee confuteth,… anima 55. not the true Chriſtians, as i: you k miſconceave. They argued thus (as you do) in hoc Christus Jnfiros adiit, ne nos adiremus. 188. … title of …ooke in …elius & …s editiō.Christ therefore went to Hell, to the ende that wee might never come there. He aunſwereth them that it is falſe that Chriſte went to Jnferos in that ſenſe, that is to Hell: for then what difference is there betweene the wicked Heathens and the godly Chriſtians, if one & the ſame priſon after death were for them both. Taking it for a thing generally granted in the church, that Chriſt being dead went onelyonly thither where the godly Dead were, and therefore that it were a wicked and Haereticall thing to thinke he went where the Damned were, that is into Hell. And ſo he quite overthroweth your opinion togeather with the reaſon thereof, as an opinion, whiche if any helde, they were ill thought of in thoſe dayes.… 99. De …eſ. ad lit. …. 33. Thus alſo is Augustin well l vnderſtood, where he denyeth that the Patriarkes were apud inferos, in Hell, namely the place of the Damned, becauſe they were in Abraha…s boſom. p. 165Which yetbbEpiſt. 5… De civi. … 20.15. elſwhere he graunteth vntounto, that they might be apud inferos in the world of the Dead, & namely where the Godly dead ſhould be. So that thus if you had but diſtinguiſhed theſe and other Fathers like words as you ought to hauehave done, there needed no ſuch folly of Contradiction to be imputed vntounto them, asccPag. 18… 200. 204 you doe lay to their charge in this point, altogeather vndeſervedly. Which being well obſerved you ſhall ſee that all the Fathers (as M^r Iunius ſaith) both Greeke & Latin, do take Hades and inferos ddPromiſ…indifferētly for the ſtate of the Dead, as wel pertayning to y^t Soules of the Godly, as to the Damned likewiſe. Athanaſius alſo ſayingeeAthanaſ. incar. Ch… vbi tenebatur anima humana in morte, ibi exhibuit humanam ſuam animam: Where Humane Soules were held by Death, there he brought his humane Soule, Meaneth nothing els but that his humane Soule came vnderunder the ſame condicion of death, as other mens Soules did: not that he went to the place of the Dāned. Neiter muſt he be vnderſtood afterffPag. 179 186. 214. your partiall tranſlatiō, but after his owne language the Greek. When you ſay ex Orco, out of Hell, him ſelfe ſaith exhadou, out of the power of Death. So thatggDe ſalu… vent. Ch… hee ſaith not a word that Chriſt was in Hell, but onelyonly that his Soule was in Hades, in the Dominion of Death, ashhAd no… ſimilitud… other good mens Soules were alſo: whence he by his victorious returne conquering DeathiiDe ſalut advent. C… ſt…. brought vsus immortalitie, and wrought reſurrection for vsus. Heere Hades being ennemy and oppoſit to the Immortalitie and Reſurrection of mens perſons, cannot by any meanes be Hell: For Hell agreeth with Immortalitie and Reſurrection, & in Hell ſhalbe immortalitie and reſurrection as well as in Heavē. But it is the common Death and diſſolution of our perſons, which is contrarie to the immortalitie and reſurrection of them. For as Reſurrection is nothing els but a reſtoring and revniting of the Soule to the Body, ſo the contrarie is nothing els but meerely the diſſolution and ſeparation of the Soule from the Body: which is Death, and not Hell. Now in this death (ſaieth Athanaſius) Chriſt was held till he ſpoyled and conquered it; thereby giving vsus reſurrection and immortalitie. This can not be Hell out of queſtiō. Hilarius verily hath this meaning alſo, ſaying;kkHilar. … Pſal. 13…Ps 13 This is the Law of humane neceſſitie, that their bodyes goe down to the Grave, their Soules to the world of the Dead, ad inferos. Which deſcent the Lorde did not refuſe, that he might prove him ſelfe in every point to bee a true p. 166man. His going to Hell proveth him not to be a true man: but his Soul to com vnderunder the power of Death, as well as his body to com to the Grave,… koino… …ôpos, …em mor… ſerva… that right well proveth him in deed to have bene a true man, and wholy in nature like all other men. Alſo this was indeed the Lawe of humane neceſſitie, (after the like phraſe as a Iustin, …gi ſatisfa… forma hu… mortis …us. …ag 157. …efore. … Death & …es a…e v…or y^e ſame.b Irenaeus, and c Tertullian alſo ſpeake:) but not to goe to Hell. Now this Death properly belōgeth to the Body of Men; d as it is left without life. Alſo no leſſe properly it belōgeth to the whole Perſon of men, as it is diſſolved and deſtroyed thereby. Thirdly, by conſequence it belōgeth to both the diſſolved partes: yea even to the immortall Soule (though bleſſed; not as it is in bleſſednes, but) as it remayneth held from the Body by the force of Death. And ſo all theſe laſt named are very excellent places to prove (which afterward I ſhall further ſhew) that all thoſe articles of the Creed He Dyed, was Buryed, and deſcended to Hades do indeed ſignifie but one thing in effect, that he was a true man: ſeeing thus it befell him as it doeth all other men by the Law of our Nature: that is, to Dye. And therefore that it was cleane left out in all ancient Creedes, (where both thoſe other clauſes are ſpecified) as being no divers point in effect from Dead and Buryed. Which Creedes nevertheles are worthily deemed to be abſolute and perfit touching Chriſtes workes of Redemption which hee hath wrought for vsus. Since perhaps, when it came into the Common Creed, they ſignified heereby Chriſtes going to Limbus. Which opinion indeed men generally inclined vntounto (though erroneouſly) for many yeares: yet that the Ancients put this Deſcending to hades, (meaning Limbus, or howſoever) into the vulgar Creed diſtinctly from both the other foreſaid clauſes, I beleue not. The contrary is proved afterwardes: as anon we ſhall ſee. But to proceed heere:…ryſ. Hom. …ivit & de … bol Tom. in 1. Cor. Hom. 40. …aſil. in … 48. …mbr. de … mort. … 10. …rom. in … 1….14. …uffin. in …bol. …. 413.414 c Chryſostom and d Baſill likewiſe (with the reſt of the Greeks) may be noted, how they yeeld Hades to the Soules of the godly and iuſt men deceaſed remayning in ioyes. Alſo Ambroſe is to be conſidered, who right according to all the reſt, ſaith, e Soules departed from their Bodyes did go to Hades, that is, to an inviſible place, which in Latin we call Infernum. And Ierome, f Infernus is a place where the Soules are included, either in rest or paines. And Ruffinus vpō g Deſcendit ad inferna giveth this ſenſe Deſcendit in Mortem, He ſubmitted vntounto Death. All the reſt which h you cite (or can cite) hauehave nothing contrary, but rather p. 167conſenting heerewith. So that it is certaine by all the Fathers generally,

1. That Hades and Sheol are taken for Death, No….the Cōmon ſtate of Death, or the inviſible world of the dead common to the Souls both of good and bad, though their particular places were far ſeparat and diſtinct.

2. That Chriſt went not into Hell the place of the Damned, as you holde: but to the Habitation of the bleſſed deceaſed (called alſo by them Abrahams boſome:) which we knowe (and you alſo) was indeed Heaven: according to that worde of Chriſt,““Ioh. 16 16.John 16:16 I leave the Worlde, and goe to the Father.

Which I have prooued further before, pag. 149. 150. I doubt not but they erred generally (as““Pag. 21 your ſelfe alſo holdeth) in thinking that this Habitation of the bleſſed Souls was beneath in the earth, or that it was not heaven: nevertheles this is the point wherein we agree, and wherein they erred not, and which I cite them for, and which is directly againſt you, that hades (which alſo is ſheol) belonged to the Bleſſed ſoules deceaſed, aſwell as to the Damned: and namely that Chriſtes going to Hades was to go to be Bleſſed deceaſed. Which in Latin alſo they called Jnfernū, but ſo vnproperly and ſo vnaptly in reſpect of the truth, that even this ill terme ſurely both ſprang from error, and began in them their error, or confirmed and ſpread farther this error.

Now thus your vaine boaſting ofaaPag. 41 all the Fathers is but a bubble: and that All the Fathers without exception do touch and teach Christes locall Deſcent to hell. So that if you bee content (as““Pag. 41 you ſay) to be tryed by all the Fathers Greeke and Latin, they quite overthrow you, notwithſtanding your great words. For the truth is, they are all againſt you: and with vsus, in ſuch ſort as I ſaid. Only Austin doubtingly and waveringly differeth from all the reſt: who ſomwhere ſeemeth to think that Inferi cannot be attributed to iuſt mens Soules departed. For thus doubtingly he ſpeaketh,ccAug de … ad liter. ca. Illud me nondum inveniſſe confiteor &c. I confeſſe I hauehave not yet found that Inferi are named where the iust mens Souls are at peace. Yes ſurely the Ancientes named the places for all the deceaſed both good & bad Inferos, like as they named (where both wicked and good do live in the world)ddArnob. Pſal 137.Ps 137 Superos. And Austin (if hee had marked it well) might have founde even this (which he ſaith hee found not) in the Latin tranſlation of the Scripture:““Pſa. 88. Lat. edit.Ps 88 Quis eſt homo, qui vivet, &c. What man is there that (ever) ſhall live and ſhall not ſee death? Shall he deliver his Soule from the hande of Inferi, p. 168that is Death. For he can not heere vnderſtand Inferi to bee the Grave, becauſe then the Soule muſt ſignifie the dead body: which a you ſay is more then abſurd.…g 168. Wherefore the Soule heere being taken properly for the Soule, then Inferi is found applyed to iuſt mens Soules deceaſed, as well as to the wicked: which Augustin might have obſerved.…piſt 57. … civit Dei, ….15. Yea he him ſelfe b elſwhere graunteth alſo that the iuſt in peace might be in inferis after death. And heere he denyeth it but coldly & waveringly, Proinde vt dixi nondum inveni, & adhuc quaero, nec mihi occurrit inferos alicubi in bono poſuiſſe Scripturam. Now this is Austins difference heerein: let the Reader iudge,Pag. 363. Before pa. 56. Pag. 175. if you ſay truely that c Austin iudicially and reſolutely affirmeth it. Or is it not rather (as I call it) his † Cōiecturall inclination: yea his only. For d Fulgentius denyeth not inferos to the godly deceaſed, nor that Chriſt was locally with them onelyonly in inferis. So that in ſaying, He was where the wicked are tormented, he meaneth that in reſpect of the Cōmon place; which in whole hee calleth infernum. Thus then we may ſee that Austins differing heerein is to little purpoſe.

1. Becauſe it is contrary to all the auncient Fathers before him, with him, and ſince him.

2. Becauſe we muſt not eſteeme his ſaying by the Latin Inferi, but by the originall Sheol and Hades, which are more againſt him: as before I have ſhewed.

3. Becauſe it is waveringly delivered, & with doubt in him ſelfe; yea contrary to him ſelfe, as I have ſhewed.

4. Becauſe he ſecketh to maintaine it erroneouſly.

For he giveth this reaſon and end of Chriſtes going to Hell (the place of the Damned) that he might deliver ſome of the damned ſinners out of Hell torments, quos eſſe ſolvendos occultâ ſuá iusticiâ iudicabat. Which moſt ſtrange conceit of his your ſelfe e doe confute rightly.Pag. 199. But either graunt this end and reaſon to be true, or els ſay his maine opinion is falſe alſo, that Chriſt went thither: feeing he maketh that the reaſon of this. And why may not Austin erre as well in ſaying that he went to Hell after death, as in ſaying that he went thither to looſe out of paines ſuch and ſuch? It ſeemeth Auſtin was carried into this conceit,Vt ne que frutrà ill…c decendiſſe exiſtimetur nulli …orum proſu…urus qui ibi erant. Epiſt. 99. becauſe hee could not imagine what f els Chriſt ſhould doe in Hell: and that he was there in deed he thought, becauſe he gheſſed (contrary to all antiquity beſides) that the meaning of inferi and hades could not be applyed to the eſtate of bleſſed ſoules after this life. Which miſtaking of his (as p. 169alſo yours with him) is plentifully convinced (I hope) before. Wherein I deſire the learned to iudge. As for Austins oppoſing againſt this our ſenſe of Hades, ſaying: In graecà linguâ origo nominis quo appellātur inferi, ex eo quòd nihil ſuave habeant, reſonare perhibetur. It ſheweth his miſtaking more: yea the very grounde of all his miſtaking, as I thinke. Firſt it appeareth by this, that Austin had very litle knowledge in the Greek: ſeeing hee thinketh that Hades ſhould originally ſignify nihil ſuave, nothing ſweet. I coniecture that he thinketh Hades is made of hedys ſweet, and α the Privative. Wherein then he miſſeth much: for hades in Greeke hath alwayes iôta written vnderunder,The natur Hades. which ſheweth that in the true originall whence hades cometh, there is the letter iôta expreſſed. But in hedys ſweet there is none. The trueth is, it cometh from foreign to ſee, and α the privative: as all Graecians (Plato, Plutarch, &c.) yea the Fathers, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Ambroſe, &c.) do ſhewe: and that it ſignifieth, An inviſible ſtate after a viſible being in this world, and ſomtime Darknes, or a place of darknes. Not that the ſtate of all the Dead generally was thought to be in darknes, but becauſe Death tooke them out of this cheerefull worlds light, and covered them (as it were) with darknes and oblivion from the worlds ſight and knowledge heere. This etymologie of hades was moſt familiar and frequent with all Grecians, with whom it ſeemes Austin was not much acquainted: as by this his wide coniecture we may thinke. Neither impute this (I pray) as arrogancie to me, for ſo iudging of ſuch a man. I think all men will ſo iudge of him likewiſe, and yet derogat nothing from his great deſert in Gods Church. Him ſelf doth ſoberly acknowledge it of him ſelfe, ſaying,““Contr… Pe…il. 2… Ego quidem Graecae linguae perparùm aſſecutus ſum, & propè nihil. Truly J have but litle Greck: yea almoſt none. Neither would he heere have ſaid perhibetur, thus it is reported, touching the Etymologie of Hades: if he had pretē ded any skill in that toung. Yea Poſſidonius in his Life teſtifieth, that he had no love to the Greeke language. Beſides many other argumentes heereof, if it were likely that I wronged him in iudging thus of him. Wherefore ſeeing it was thus, no marvaile if Austin eaſily miſtooke the proper & right meaning of hades: &c then much ſooner of Inferi, for the reaſon**Pag. … Treat. 105. before noted. Thus alſo he might readily imagin heervpon, that Hades and Inferi (in p. 170Scripture ſpecially) were no where applyed to bleſſed Soules. Which overſight in him is much more pardonable, then it can be in you: who I doubt not in the languages want no skill, if you would but ſincerely iudge according to that you do vnderſtand. Yea and in compariſon of my ſelfe, I vnfainedly confeſſe, that I ſuppoſe I hauehave not ſeene many bookes in the learned tounges, which you are likely to have read and ſtudied. Nevertheles I am well aſſured that in the ſenſe of theſe words Hades and Sheol; you are greatly over hot: and moſt of all in this vnſavoury opiniō coming therefrom, that Chriſtes ſoule after death went to Hell. As I hope it hath hitherto well appeared. Yet you will ſay, Austin ſpeaketh marveilous reſolutely,piſt. 99. that a None but an infidell will denie that Christes Soule was in inferis. So he may well, vnderſtanding heere Jnferos to expreſſe Hades in Greeke: for that is the Scripture in deed. Which to denie were infidelitie. But hee is no inſidell that denieth inferos to be a fit Latin worde for Hades in Greck:… ſome have … …t ſimply … the ſtate … cath. pa. …3. &c. … Graeca …ua origo …nis, &c. or * admitting the tranſlation, yet denyeth in Engliſh that Chriſt was in Hell. After all, yet I may not forget how Aust. heere "would have in this cōtroverſie the very nature & proper Etymologie of Hades to be regarded and preciſely followed: notwithſtanding that him ſelf miſtooke it much. How then is it, that you skornfully cal this indeavour (touching the H…brue Sheol) b Rabbinicall Grammar obſervations, …g. 153.and (touching Hades in Greeke) the Poets fantasticall imaginations? In this therefore Austin alſo is not a litle againſt you. Other exceptions of his touching the matter, we ſhall afterwards conſider togeather with yours.

Now I come from the Ancients to the later learned Writers: that we may not neglect their iudgment in this queſtion.… late De…ors of the …ll con… o… ex…ion. Who as they were generally freer from errour then thoſe of olde for the moſt part, ſo they teſtifie this point with me more clee…ly & more conſtantly then they. Who were obſerved * before. Yet becauſe you let them go without (as it were) ſaluting them, and as if they were not worthie (belike) that you ſhould caſt a looke on them:… cat. 1. therefore they ſhalbe noted once more, that I may preſſe you with thē, and that others at leaſt wiſe, may conſider them better. Bucer ſaith, The " Scripture no where ſpeaketh of Hades or Infernum, but as being common aſwell to the bleſſed as to the damned. … in Mat. … 50.But Gehenna is proper only for the damned. Againe, In that we acknowledge p. 171that the Lord went down to Infernum, we vnderstand that in his Soule he ioyned to the ſociety of the ſoules of the dead Saints, even as in his body hee was ioyned to their bodyes by Buriall. P. Ma…tyr,aaP Mart Symbo. That Christ deſcended to Inferos (or Hades) ſignifieth nothing els, but that he did vndergoe the ſame ſtate as other ſouls do that depart this life. Mollerus, (touching Sheol, Hades, and Infernum aſcribed to ChriſtbbMoller. Pſalm 1…Ps 1 ſaith, they do ſignifie but that Chriſt dyed: and to be no more, then as if he ſhould ſay in the Pſalme, Therefore I reioyce becauſe I know that although I dy yet I ſhall riſe to life againe. Bulinger (ſpeaking of Chriſt & indifferētly of the godly) ſhewethccBullin D 1.7. & 8. that To go to Inferos, is to go to Abrahams boſom, that is into Heaven, not into Hell: and that Inferi and Hades do make difference only betweene the Living and the Dead, & nothing els. Lavater ſaith,ddLavat. E…ech ca… 31.18. Hades in Greeke is a generall worde for the condition of the dead both in torments and in peace. Tremellius ſaith,eeAnno…a… Pſal. 49.Ps 49 This Hebrew word Sheol doth ſignifie any ſtation or ſtate of the 'Dead in generall in very many places of Scripture: and Hell it may ſometime ſignifie, but by a figure ſynecdoche. Laſtly Iunius in his note vponupon Tertullian ffPag. 16before rehearſed, doth confirme all this moſt fully. Theſe men I thinke every wiſe and faithfull Chriſtian will highly eſteeme and prefer, for their learning and namely for their skill in the toung…s, for their ſyncerity and ſoundnes in Religion, for their vnity and conſe…n this point, for their diligence, faithfulnes, and m…d…ſty in all thinges.

The lear… Heathen thout… cō our ſenſe Hades.The rather this ſenſe of Hades we are to acknowledge, becauſe it hath ben the ancient phraſe and common vſe of ſpeach before Chriſtianity: that this worde ſhould ſignifie the generall ſtate of D…ath applyed even to the Soules both of the Bleſſed & Damned Which ſufficiently I ſhewed““Treat. … 97 98. before out of Plato, Homer, and others. Yea no leſſe I ſhewed alſo touching the Latin worde Inferi out of**Pa. 100 108. Cicero: though this word naturally implyeth an error, wch Hades doth not, as before alſo I have declared. What is your anſwer to this? Forſooth (I thinke becauſe you have ben a maſter of Grammar) you go about to teach Cicero Latin, & for his general phraſe implying that al the Deceaſed both good & bad were apud inferos, vou do ſo whip him & handle himggYour p… 387. 3… heere, that it ſeemeth you forget by whom your ſelfe hath profited, and that even he in time paſt hath ben your Teacher. I will not now enter into any p. 172defenſe of Cicero: his ſpeach and language will defend it ſelfe. Alſo that were to leave our maine purpoſe. But it is the leſſo ſtrange that you vſe Cicero thus: for others alſo have had the like correction at your handes with him.…g. 310. a Before Torence ſcaped not. And b heere Plato and Socrates and other Greekes have alſo their partes,…. 374.378 for their vſing and taking of the Greeke worde Hades ſo largely as the naturall Etymologie thereof doeth beare. But let them defend them ſelves whether they ſpeake vſuall and right Greeke and Latin, or no: I will leaue them in that. They are eloquent enough, they can ſpeake in this caſe for them ſelves. Only I will take their wordes at their handes evens as c I finde them, and ſo I refer the iudgement of all to the learned and wiſe Reader.… alſo all … forenoted …ned W… have loud … & vſed … likewiſe. …g 385. Alſo for that charge againſt me of d lewd lying, and open falſifying of Plato, I remit all to the indifferent Reader. Yet I can not but ſmile truly (for offended I will not be) that Mai. Bilſon is ſo ſtrongly perſwaded, that c I am of Platoes and Ciceroes religiō touching Hell,…g 370. …. 389. Heaven, the Gods, and wicked Spirites: and that I ſeeke indeed to bring in their fantasticall Hell into our Christian Creed. This fantaſticall conceit of his, let him feed him ſelfe with it: and let him perſwade it to whom he can. Thus much the ſober and indifferent Reader will conſider and acknowledge, that the Holy Apoſtles doe teach the Heavenly trueth with the very wordes and Grammar of the Heathen men: wherevnto that ſerveth which is written of them, f We every man heare them ſpeake in our owne tounges and languages wherein we were borne. …. 2.8, 11.Then the Apoſtles ſurely ſpake according to the currant ſpeach before their times and in their times, and yet thereby never g Canonized the fables and fancies which the nations implyed in their wordes.…g. 368. Whoſoever he be that will ſay otherwiſe, knoweth not what he ſaith: neither ſhall any credit or greatnes which he hath, get him credit in ſo ſaying. Yet in a certaine place you moſt ſtrangly and confidently avouch, h That neither with the ancient Maisters of the Greeke tounge which were Poets, …g. 410. … 1. Treat. …. 97.98. …to in …done. …m. iliad. 1 …lutarch. …rallel. & …nſol. ad …nor with the 70. nor with the Writers of the New Testament, nor with the people of that time Hades did ever ſignifie the world of Souls without any limitation of ſtate or place. I thought that thoſe fewe allegations which " I brought of * Plato, † Homer, and " Plutarch for the Greeke, and of Latins for the Latin would hauehave ſuffiſed to cauſe p. 173you not to deny ſo cleere and manifeſt a trueth, which heere you denie even againſt your owne knowledge, as after ſhall appeare. Wherfore to demonſtrat this point a litle further to you, and to al men, if any yet doe believe this your aſſertion, (which is moſt vntrue) I will not thinke it to much to note ſome more places out of the Heathen authentike Greekes, (for that is the principall controverſie) that Hades with thē did ſignifie the World of Soules, with out any limitation (in the very word it ſelf) either of ſtate or place. But as all men know that by reaſon of Circumſtances it often ſignifieth with thē Hell determinatly,Note. ſo by reaſon of circūſtances alſo it ſignifieth with them many times determinatly the Habitatiō of the Soules of good men in ioyes and pleaſures, which was to them as their Heaven. And for this I will only put you in minde of ſome places, which you know well enough already. Firſt note that common epithet or title of Hades:Hades t… worlde Soules … y^e Auther Greeks. aaLycop…Hades pandokeus or pandocheus. The vnſeene worlde or ſtate of Death that receaveth all, both good and bad. bbHom. … 15. He… in The…Others imagin Hades a God or mighty power power of Death, & do cal him, eneroiſin kataphthimenoiſin anaſſôn, Ruler (not of Hell only, but) of all that 'Dy. And therefore to this place com not the wicked and damned onelyonly, but the nobleſt and beſt alſo, (as Achilles ſaith being dead and being in Hades)ccHom. … λ. Aidós de katélthemen éntha te nékroi: Hither into hades all we that are dead do come. ThisddPlato Gorgia… Plutarc… Conſol… Apollo… Plato and Plutarch do acknowledge in that place whicheePa. 37… you cite at large: togeather with a number mo both of the Poëts & Philoſophers. And this alſo it is that Homer ſhewing how Iupiter caſt down his rebellious Angels into Hell (Tártaron, with them the proper place of the Damned) hee deſcribeth it to be ſo much beneath Hades the place of the other Dead,ffHom. hoſon ouranos esti apo gaies: as heaven is from the earth. So in regard of this it is thatggSopho… Aiant. another maketh it to be much better to be in hades, as it is the common place and condicion of the dead (not Hell) then to be ſicke vnrecoverably: kreiſsôn aida keuthôn e nosôn mátan. And ſo Plutarch maketh Hades (not Hel, but) the place of the Dead or the ſtare of the dead in generall to be a ſoveraigne comfort to the afflicted & miſerable in this world,hhPlutarc… ſwering Aeſchy… O Thanate paian iatros molois, Limen gar ontôs aidas an' aian: Aiden d'echôn boethon, ou tremo skias. Laſtly that whichiiPag. 37… you bring of Orpheus deſcribing the true God, that he is King both of the Vnſeene world p. 174aithéros ed'aïdou, and alſo of this preſent viſible worlde ponton gaiéste tyrannos, confirmeth all that is before ſaid. For aither aides heere is to be conſtrued togeather, not ſeparatly; and ſo he ſignifieth thereby that the true God indeed is Lord and King not onelyonly over this whole Viſible world (which he vnderſtandeth by the Sea and Land) but alſo over the whole Inviſible world or ayer, that is over all the Dead both good and bad. I marvaile therefore very much what you meane to ſpeake ſo plainly contrary to the truth and to your owne knowledge, that Hades did never ſignifie the world of Soules without any limitation of ſtate or place, no not with the ancient Maiſters of the Greeke toung which were the Poets. The rather this your ſpeach is directly againſt your knowledge becauſe you expreſly collect and confeſſe the contrary, that is the ſame which I do:…ag 403. thus you ſay. a Hades before (the Apoſtles time) extended to good and bad. pag. 371.And " within Plutoes kingdom vnderunder the earth which they call Hades, as well the places and pleaſures for the Good, …ag 379. …d, in Ho…r, Ʋirgil, …iſtophanes …pides and …ers you ſhal the World …he Dead, …he world of …es be they … or bad to …in Plutoes …gdo which Greek… …ts call …les.as the priſons and puniſhmentes for the bad are in their conceit prepared and ſetled. Againe, b Hades with them was the Ruler or place of Soules, were they in rest or paine. Where you make a ſtrange anſwer, that Christian Religion will aſſure, that this place must needes be Hell. What? That place where ſome good mens ſoules deceaſed are in reſt? Is this Hell? Yea is it Hell in Christian Religion? Who then henceforth will care for Hell, if ſome ſoules hauehave reſt and pleaſures in Hell? But you ſay alſo that thoſe Heathen Greekes did thinke that this place of Soules was c vnderunder the Earth. It is true, they thought ſo indeed: and it was their "error, as alſo the very ſame was the Chriſtian Fathers errour likewiſe. Which they drew certainly from their acquaintance with thoſe Heathens,… 379.381 … Hades it …fe impor…g no ſuch …ng. but no where at all from the Scriptures. Yet none of theſe thought this place to be very Hell, where ſoules were in reſt. There is ſmall reſt, and few pleaſures in Hell. But theſe Heathens d vnderſtood Hades chiefly for Pluto the Ruler of this place vnderunder the earth.… 371.374 So that though the place were alſo called Hades, yet this was but ſecondarily. I anſwer: This is queſtionles vtterly vntrue. For rather the Place or the Estate of the Dead was firſt & originally called Hades. The God thereof (whom afterward they idolatrouſly imagined) they did conceave ſecondarily in reſpect of the place or thing. Which beſide the evidence of the matter, I p. 175am perſwaded that Plato & Plutarch do ſhew alſo plaine enough, even heere where you cite them. Howſoever: this is not maternal, nor to any purpoſe, whether the place and ſtate were with thē firſt and chieflie called Hades, or whether the fayned Power of death, and Ruler of the Dead (as they imagined) were firſt and principally ſo called. This is certaine, that this Power or Ruler which they conceaved to be over the Dead, as they like Idolators made it a God, ſo their meaning was to eſteeme him as the God of the Dead in Generall, and his ſtate and kingdome to be theccWhich … ing a pri… pall pom… our qua… is fully g… ted by y… before. Habitatiō of the Dead in generall, not of the wicked only in Hel, but of the good alſo in their Elyſian happines: which was to them in their eſtimation and reckoning, that which Heaven indeede is to vsus. But““Pag. 39 you ſay, there is no one place in truth common to all ſoules departed this life, but ſom are in Hel, and ſom in Heaven. I doubt not but the bleſſed in Heaven & the Damned in Hell are both in cōdition & ſituation ſeperated a funder exceeding far. Yet nevertheles as they are ſomwhere w^th in the cōpaſſe of the created world ſo they are in a cōmon place; oppoſi… indeed to this viſible earth & world of the living, but cōmon to al the Dead, namely in this only reſpect as they are Dead & departed hence, & are vnſeene, & vtterly exempted frō all mutual medling togither with vsus that do live. Moreover we ſtande not ſo much on this, that by Hades muſt be vnderſtood any one place cōmon to all the Dead, but the State and condition of death among the Dead, or the Power and Dominion of Death which very aptly alſo it ſerveth for, and fitteth our purpoſe aſwell as to vnderſtand there by a common place. But indeed all this I doubt not Hades very well may ſignifie, when it is referred to men, according to the circumſtances of the authour where it is read. But this Hades you ſay in thoſe Heathen authors““Pag. 3… 378.41… is the very Divell himſelfe. Therefore his Kingdome muſt bee needes nothing but Hell. I anſwer, The Heathen in their conceit thought him not to be a Divell but a**V…z y^t … or of d… w^c by … is ſom… ſignifie… God, even the God and Ruler over all the Dead: and ſo they worſhipped this foule Idoll. Therefore his whole kingdome & region they reckoned to be the World of the Dead or Dominion of Death, which alſo they called Hades: It may beffPag. 37… Porphyrie meaneth that they held him to bee Lorde and Ruler over Hell and all the wicked Spirits and Divells therein: yet he ſaith not but that Hades or Pluto was thought by p. 176them to have power over all the Dead: his rage againſt men, and the feare that men had of him, ſignified the vnmercifulnes of Death ſparing none, and how it is to the nature of all men a thing most terrible. So that they eſteemed a part indeed of his Dominion to be Hell peculiarly: but a part alſo to be the Region of the Happy, which was their Heaven. But you ſay, this was the Divell. Yea even as the reſt of their Gods were alſo very Divells indeed, & nothing els. So was their Higheſt Jupiter, and ſo was Apollo, and ſo was Mercury, and all the reſt of the Goddes and Goddeſſes which their impiety adored. They were indeede none other, then very Divels illuding the vanity of men. And thus I grant was their Hades or Pluto likewiſe. Howbeit in their eſtimation he was not properly the Divell, but a Power or Ruler over the Dead both good and bad: and his Kingdom the Dominion and world of the Dead both good and bad.Pag. 171. But a you remit Poets and Pagans vſing this word to the alleagers. Yet Poets & Pagans are the authentike maiſters for Grammar both Greek & Latin. Yea they were yours I doubt not in time paſt.Before pag. …70. Austin (as we " ſaw) alloweth the Etymologie and naturall propertie of hades to be regarded. Yea all learned men in all ages condemne this your reiecting of Pagans and Poets for the Grammaticall vſe of wordes: whom ſtill they do regard and follow in this reſpect.

But heere let vsus obſerve, how the holy Apoſtles doe teach the truths of the Goſpell with the very wordes and language of the Heathens.…bſervations. There are in this point 3. or 4. thinges that muſt bee 1well obſerved and remembred. 1. The Apoſtles doe ſpeake of the myſteries of true Religion with the Heathens words (as I ſaid) yet ſo, as that when the Heathens wordes do imply ſome errour with truth, then in other expreſſe places they plentifully refute al their errours implyed in their wordes. Whereby it comes to paſſe that all the proportion of truth which the Heathen ſignified by them, is yet fully and rightly ſignified ſtill in the Apoſtles vſe of them: but nothing further, that is, none of the other fancyes & fictions of the Heathen. As for example, Zeus Iupiter, was among the Heathens their great God, & he only was their higheſt: of whom beſides they held a 1000. fables, and indeed he was none other but a Divell, as is before noted. Nevertheles the Apoſtle vſeth the ſame for the only true God the author and governour of Heaven p. 177and Earth (paſſing by all their Fables) when he applyeth the Poets verſe,aaAct. 2…Acts 2 His generation alſo we are. Tartarus whichbbPag. 3… you obiect, though rarely & ſometime perhaps a Philoſopher will note thereby the Ayer, yet indeed vſually and in a maner alwayes they meant Hell by it, with a thouſand of dreames thereto belonging. Yet Peter not canonizing nor commending their dreames and fictions of Hell, notwithſtanding ſignifyeth Hell indeed by that worde of theirs according to their common vſe thereof, and according to the proportion of truth which therein they held. So Daimonion, which alſoccPag. ib… you obiect they vſed to ſignifie by it both good and bad Spirits following and converſing with them: and the good they honoured as Gods. But indeede and in truth ſeeing theſe ſame were all Divels, therefore the Scripture holdeth not the Heathens erroneous meaning in this word: yet it doth retayne that which they vnderſtood by it truly, that is to ſignifie Divells and bad ſpirits. Againe, Theos the Heathen vſed for to expreſſe the Nature of God: but ſo as that they thought it cōmon to many ſeverall Gods. The Apoſtles vſe the word alſo for the true God, yet not vnderſtanding therein a nature common to many: which error they otherwiſe cleerely and often refute. And thus we might ſpeake of infinit mo the like wordes: as Feare, the power and ſtrength whereof they alſo fained to be a God, and of Hope and of Revenge Goddeſſes, &c. Like wherevnto is Hades, even that which preſently we have in hande.The dive… applicat… of Hade… With the Heathē it commonly and moſt vſually ſignified the ſtate of Dead men: ſomtime rarely, the Destruction of other things which periſh out of this viſible world & hauehave no more being heere. Whereof anon we ſhall ſee further. Howbeit now to conſider it as it reſpecteth men only, thus the Heathens chiefly and commonly by Hades vnderſtoode the ſtate I ſay and Condition of men both good and bad deceaſed and gone out of this world. And they meant it commonly for the Destruction of their perſons from out of this world generally and indifferently. Againe, oftentimes particularly touching their Bodyes buriall: alſo particularly many things touching their Soules ſtate being parted from the Body. Some of which they believed were in Bleſſednes, ſome in Tormentes: although they ſignified neither of theſe in the word Hades, but onelyonly (as I ſaid) their ſtate after their departure hence. Alſo they thought ſome of the Bleſſed p. 178Soules to be in the a chiefeſt Bleſſednes,…Vhich you …iect pag. …4. 376. that was in preſenſe with the Gods. Yet they were in Hades alſo, that is in an other world after they were wiped out from hence. Hither they admitted onlie Philoſophers, Treat. 1 pa. ….Heroês, & ſuch like. Thus hither it is that b Plato aſſigneth Socrates, and thus Socrates him ſelfe hopeth to goe to Hades, to the wiſe and good God. Other Soules of good men they gave Bleſſednes vntounto in the Elyſian fieldes vnderunder the earth: as they fancied, or where els I know not. And theſe were alſo in Hades. So that both theſe eſtates and condicions of bleſſed Soules deceaſed which was their Heaven (though differing very much in places) they yeeld…d to be in Hades. Whence I thinke ſome of the Fathers, and after them ſome Papiſtes, hauehave fayned divers places of reſt and ioy to the Dead. Heaven preſently to the Martyrs, but to other good Chriſtians an other place of reſt & ioy (which they called Abrahams boſome) either in the earth, or where they alſo knew not. Howbeit into the glory of Heauen and the preſence of God and of Chriſt they admit none, ſave only the Martyrs before the laſt day. But this errour and all other errors about Hades, the Apoſtles ſufficiently confute in their writings: ſo that we are not now to reſpect the ſame in the vſe of Hades. OnelyOnly we are therefore to note how much and what (beſides all errours) may bee truly retayned and meant by the Apoſtles in applying this worde Hades, as the Heathen did, to both ſortes of Soules of Dead men. They might truely vnderſtand that both have one common condicion and ſtate as touching their being in another world, as they were diſſolved, departed from and wiped out of this viſible world, & a… they were now in the world of the Dead an oppoſite eſtate & condicion to the living. This alſo the very Natural Etymologie of the word according to Grammar, doeth properly yeeld in that it ſignifieth c Vnſeene, Hades. The …ke may be …id of Sheol.or Not ſeene any more in this world, or an eſtate not ſeene heere with vsus: topos aîdes, an Ʋnſeene place, as Plato calleth it. Where note, it cannot be referred to the eſtate of Angels, becauſe Hades is the vnſeene ſtate of them that once had a viſible and ordinary being and converſation heere in this world. So that in very deed it hath properly but a Privative ſenſe, & not any thing poſitive in it: though this d you can not brooke. All this then the Apoſtles might well vnderſtand & allow in the word Hades,Pag. 396. without any taint of Heatheniſme. And therfore alſo doubtles ſo they p. 179did. But the heathens further made Hades a Divine power (whom alſo they called Pluto, as it were the God of Death, or of the Dead) becauſe (as before is ſhewed) they dreamed that he held all that were Dead, vnderunder his power, both bleſſed & damned ſoules. And becauſe no man that dyeth whether good or bad, doeth ever live heere againe: and becauſe all whoſoever without exception muſt dy, therefore they call him Hades améilichos kai adámaſtos, impla…able and vnmastered: and Nélees êtor echôn having a mercileſſo beart. In which ſenſe in Latin alſo they vſed Parca, Destiny: the ende of all, becauſe it ſpareth none. Certainly this Deifying of ſuch a Power or to make a God of it, the Apoſtles abhorred: and every where in their writinges they ſhew what Idolatry and extreame impiety it is. But yet they may and do acknowledg ſuch a power of Death, which worketh this Deſtruction of all men frō the world, & detayneth them in Death afterward. Wherefore they have in ſundry places Proſopopoeas thereof as in the Revelation the Keyes of Death and Hades: Death riding on a pale horſe, and Hades following after him: Death and Hades yeelded vp their dead, and both were cast into Hell. Likewiſe that, O Death where is thy ſting, O Power of death where is thy victory. But of theſe more anon. Hitherto the 1. obſervation is manefeſt that the Apoſtles vſing the Heathens words, yet need not, nor do nor vnderſtand in them any of their fancyes and errors, which by their doctrine otherwiſe they refute; nevertheles they may and do vnderſtand the generall truth ſignified in them, whatſoever the Heathens vſed by them to ſignifie and imply. And thus is our worde in controverſy Hades cleered. But to cleere the reſt alſo of thoſe whichbbPag. 36… you obiect: Sec: we are to obſerve that the Apoſtles tranſfer the Heathens Civill words many times to their Eccleſiaſticall 2vſe: namely keeping yet ſtill the proportion of their former ſenſe. As in theſe, Apostle, Biſhop, Deacon, Gospell, Law, Sinne, Repen…ance, Hope, Conſcience, Concupiſence, &c. Which change is ſmall and eaſy, ſith the words have a iuſt proportion ſtill togeather both in Civill and Eccleſiaſticall vſe. OnelyOnly if any difference or oddes be, it is expreſly vttered in ſome part of the Apoſtles doctrine beſides. There is no ſuch cauſe, nor matter of difference to be found in Hades. Third. The Apoſtles do vſe ſome wordes kat' éxochen 3by an excellencie, & yet in no point altering the native vſe or property p. 180of them.…a all the … before …med, or …t o… them … …e con…ed alſo …er this …e. …ag 403. a Thus Scripture is vſed commonly for the Word of God only, Diábolos for the Divell, although ſometimes other writings are called alſo Scripture, and other Accuſers and ſlanderers Diaboloi. But neither hath this conſideration any place in Hades, that in Scripture it ſhould ſignifie chiefly Hell: much leſſe only. Which thing b you avouch. Laſtly, Som think the Apoſtles altered the worde Faith from the Paſſive ſenſe of it importing 2Faithfulnes and honestie, as the Heathens commonly vſed it, to the Active ſenſe which is True beliefe or Trust vſed in the Scriptures: which you alſo obiect. But I ſuppoſe the Apoſtles tooke this Active ſenſe of the word Faith frō the Old Teſtament, meerely tranſlating the Hebrue into Greeke. For I ſee not what difference at all there is betweene c Piſtis, …om. 1.17. …bac 2.4.and d Emunah whereby the Iewes ſignified Faith to ſalvation. Which is reaſon enough for this vſe thereof in Greeke by the Apoſtles, namely if it bee a Hebraiſme, though it bee not very ſuteable to the Heathens vſe thereof. The like I iudge of Elder, Law, Sinne, &c. But Hadès for Hell hath no like reaſon. Further I think even the Heathens have vſed this word Faith, ſometime Actively as the Goſpell vſually hath it: likewiſe the Goſpel abhorreth not altogeather the Paſſive vſe of it for Faithfulnes. Laſtly, if it were ſo that the Apoſtles did follow no other reaſon, but meerely transferred that word from the Civill paſſive to the Eccleſiaſticall active vſe, we ſay on neceſſity they might do it. For having ſome Spirituall doctrine to deliver and the ordinary ſpeach wanting ſome fit word for the ſame, then they might, yea of neceſſity they were forced to take ſome word neereſt in nature and ſenſe to their purpoſe, & ſo they might give to that word a peculiar Eccleſiaſticall vſe further then anciently it had. But Hades for Hell hath no help by this reaſon: they tooke the word Gehenna from the Hebrewes, and vſed it properly for Hell. Therefore they need not alter hades for that purpoſe, for which they had another proper word. It is manefeſt then that the Apoſtles ſtil kept the proportion of the ſenſe in all their words tranſlated from the common and vſuall ſpeach of the Heathen ſo far as any reaſon of truth might be alike in both, & ſo they ſpake indeed ſtill the tounge and language of the Nations: and therefore Hades with the Apoſtles can not be properly Hell, as even with Heathens alſo properly it was never.

p. 181I ſuppoſe yet you will ſay, The Fathers take Hades for Hell. I anſweredaaPa. 1 before how they ſometime take it determinatly and ſtrictly; ſo they ſignifie Hell by it. Somtime they take it largely & generally according to the Ancient Heathens vſe: and ſo they ſignifie by it nothing but the generall ſtate of Death pertayning alike both to good and bad deceaſed, as I have declared. Thus you get nothing by them: albeit ſometime the… reſtraine the worde Hades more then they ought to reſtraine it.

Heere alſo were place to have added ſomwhat for iuſtifying that I ſaid, The Fathers do alter the ancient true vſe of ſom words both Greeke and Latin, from whom (in controverſies) we ought to appeale to their authentike vſe in Scripture and Claſſicall authors. But becauſebbPag. 3… you ſend me about Chirotonía to another place, I am content to examine what you have there to the contrary. Which, ſeeing it draweth me into further matter therevnto appertaining, I will differre for this time.

Hitherto we have tryed the nature and vſe of Hades, and have found it to be not properly Hell, asccPag. 1…. 171. 40 you avouch. No, not when it is applyed to ſoules of men deceaſed. And therefore alſo that it can not be ſo vnderſtood in Act. 2.27. where it is applyed to Chriſts Soule after he was dead. Which yet is the only place that you have to pretend.How th… in Act. … may ſi… and tr… vnderſ… Now ſomething more you bring for your purpoſe from the Circumſtances of this Text: which we muſt conſider. But firſt let vsus ſimply and plainly vnderſtād the ſame, according to our former true declaration of the nature and vſe of Hades. Where the text is, Thou wilt not leaue my Soule in Hades, or to 1Hades: we may ſimply take Hades for the inviſible ſtate or place of the deceaſed. And ſo ſupplying the defect of a word which muſt be vnderſtood, thus we may ſay eis ton topon, or chôran hadou: in the place or region of the inviſible ſtate orbbAithér dou. Or before p… 173.17. World of the Deceaſed Otherwiſe we may take it ſimply for Deaths force & ſtrength and 2power: ſupplying alſo the ſame words eis ton topon, or ten chôran hadou, in that place where the power and ſtrength of Death prevaileth and holdeth the deceaſed Soules from their Bodyes. This is the World of the Dead, implying nothing ells but ap eſtate oppoſit to our Viſible eſtate in this world. Thus may hades be fuly taken, ſith I have largely proved before how Hades & Thanato… Death are in effect all one: and may both be applyed even to iuſt p. 182mens Soules deceaſed, but hades more eaſily & naturally. Laſt of all we may take hades heere by a Proſopopoea conceaving it to be 2(as it were) ſom Perſon of vnreſiſtable power taking away & withholding from hence al mens Souls departed. Howbeit this power was controlled and looſed by God in Chriſtes Reſurrection. And then we may conſtrue it thus: eis ten chóran, topon, or oikian Hadou, in the place, region, or habitation of this mighty power. Or eis to kratos, exousian, dynamin, or epikratian tou Hadou, to the ſtrength, power, or dominion of this Deſtroyer of life. Thus howſoever we take it, (though this laſt way is not the vnlikelyeſt) Hades heere ſignifieth in effect nothing els but Death, & that Chriſts Soul (departed this life) was held therein, but could not be holden faſt.…g. 166. You obiect, c We muſt not make a Figurative ſenſe but where manefeſt need is. Heere is no need of a figurative ſenſe. Therefore heere ought to be no Figure ſuppoſed. I anſwer, Firſt wee grant your Concluſion: whether of the 2. former wayes ſoever that we take hades, ſo there is ſimply no Figure at all therein. Sec: Then your own ſenſe of Hell in this place is cleane overthrown by your ſelfe. For whenſoever hades and ſheol do ſignifie Hell, it is indeed by a Figure: namely Synékdoche, where the Whole is ſet for a part, Which I have proved at large before:…re pag. & particularly by d Tremellius a ſufficient man for his Hebrue skill. Wherefore by this reaſon Hell cannot poſſibly be meant heere, if no Figure be admitted. Third: it ſeemeth convenient and alſo likely to take hades heere by a Proſopopoea, after our 3. ſenſe before noted. Which kind of Figure ſuppoſeth (as it were) a Perſon of that thing which otherwiſe a word properly ſignifieth. So that by this figure nothing of the wordes native ſignification is diminiſhed. Thus our word hades is vſed in the Corinthians, O Hades where is thy victory? Alſo as it may ſeeme in the " Revelation Death & Hades were cast into Hell. …ther as pa. 17…Thus then it is nothing but emphatically ſignifying the power of Death. Fourth: Admit that hades and ſheol did properly ſignifie Hell, as (we ſee) they do not. Likewiſe that ſometime they ſignifie only the Grave, which alſo you acknowledg: & it is true, when it is applyed to a dead Body. Againe admit that nepheſh by a Figure may ſignifie the whole Perſon, yea e the dead Body ſomtimes.… doth … 21.1. & … & 2….4. Then I affirme, that heere in this place of neceſſity there ought to be vnderſtood a Figurative ſenſe. Heere is p. 183plainly moſt neceſſary cauſe. For take them thus literally (as you doe) and they impugne the groundes of faith and charitie. WhichffPag 1… you grant (& that rightly) is ſufficient to cauſe a Figurative ſenſe in Scripture. But how do they impugne faith or charity, being taken as you take them? Verily thus; Your ſenſe implyeth by the way and conſequently,Points in Aſſertion … trary to … cōmon … o… Faith … charity. that a good and ſinles man (yea the beſt that ever was) worthy of Paradiſe and the higheſt Heavens, yet after death did go to Hell. And further, that being in Heaven, yet he ſtayed not there (as you ſay) but immediatly came out againe to go into Hell. Againe, that a Humane ſoule being in the depth of Hell, yet ſhould feele no paines: and that being locally in hell it ſhould com out thence alſo. What can be more againſt the generall rules of the Scripture then theſe things? Yea how doth this impugne our generall charity towards all the iuſt when they dy? Beſides many other diſproportions and vnreaſonable inconveniences following withall, as anon we ſhall further ſee. Wherefore if by any meames poſſibly a Figure may be heere admitted, certainly it muſt be ſo: for theſe moſt neceſſary cauſes laſt rehearſed. The rather ſeeing no other text any where inſinuateth any ſuch peculiar matter in Chriſt, that he ſhould differ in theſe points from all good men els, as you do vrge.

But you ſay,The Cir… ſtances … againſt y… the circumſtances heere doe prove that the word muſt be Hell properly taken. That I would faine ſee. What are theſe circumſtances. Firſt, this place ſheweth**Pag. 1… a ſpecial prerogative verified in none but in Chriſt. I deny it: heere is no ſuch prerogative mentioned. Except this, that whereas ſome other men after death have returned to life againe, it was not by their owne power, as Chriſts Reſurrectiō was. Againe God in his revealed wil having ſignified by his Prophet long before that he ſhould be reſtored ſpeedily to life againe: thus it was ſimply impoſſible that Chriſt ſhould be holden faſt by the power of Death, although it had got hold of him. And ſo indeed he had a prerogative before all men ells, which alſo is heere ſhewed vsus: but no other prerogative in the world neither heere, nor any where els cā be gathered touching his returne from Hell. You adde, No fleſh (dead) was ever free from corruption but only Chriſtes. What then? Ergo his Soule was in Hell? Or ells, why bring you ſuch needles and impertinent matter. Beſides, I iudge that not to be true. Were notaaPag. 1… ſome being p. 184dead raiſed to life againe before their fleſh putrified? But non… (you ſay) in the ſepulchre. And what then? How will this inferre or prove, that ſo none but Chriſts Soul was ever ſupported in Hel, or that it was ever there. Theſe are ſimple reaſons for ſo great a concluſion. Then you ſay, Jf by Hell we vnderstand Paradiſe it was no privilege to be there not forſaken, but rather a childiſh abſurdity to thinke any Soule might be there forſaken. It is a ſtrange abſurdity ſtill to abuſe your reader calling this word Hel,…tio prin… …. which indeed is nothing but Death in effect, the Power of death, or the condition and ſtate of death. Againe to preſume that wee take it for Paradiſe or Heaven, or Hell at any time: when we referre it allwayes to the generall ſtate of the Dead, and no further immediatly. Now in this Chriſt had cauſe to reioyce that neither his Soule nor Body was left: but ſo ſoone rayſed vp to perfit life againe, and ſo ſitted to a full receaving of glory, which within few dayes after he had. Alſo beſides this cauſe (his deliverance from the condition of death) he had an other ineſtimable cauſe to reioyce that he was raiſed to life againe, namely that he might fulfill his whole work for our Salvation, which before his Reſurrection, Aſcenſion, &c: he could not accompliſh.…g. 170. Further b you obiect, that Peter maketh mention that the ſorrows of death were broken, that they ſhould not hold Chriſt nor hinder him from riſing againe. But there were none ſuch in the Grave, none in Paradiſe. Therfore in Hel Chriſts Soule was, whence he was delivered when he roſe againe. I denie vtterly this ſequele. Becauſe the text ſaith not that there were any preſent ſorrowes in Hades where Chriſt was. Heere is not a word to any ſuch purpoſe.…. 2.24. What ſaith the text, " God raiſed him vp, looſing the ſorrowes of Death, becauſe it was impoſſible for him to bee, holden fast of it. Wil you cōclude frō hence: Ergo there were preſent ſorrows in that place where Chriſt was? There is no ſtrength in this reaſon. The Apoſtle ſignifieth heere 2. or 3. things.

1. That God looſed Death frō him; wherein hee was held, but could not be holden faſt.

2. That this Death had bene a moſt ſorrowfull & painfull Death: which indeed he taſted to the full vpō the Croſſe. As this Hebraiſme, the ſorrowes of Death (for a ſorrowfull Death) may emphatically ſignifie.

Alſo he may ſet theſe 2. the ſorrowes of Death thus togeather, as the Cauſe and the Effect: ſignifying that by the violence of ſorrowes and bitter paines which he ſuffered p. 185Death came vntounto him & tooke hold of him: but it could not hold him faſt, becauſe God himſelfe looſed and diſſolved it. Thus then it can not follow by the text, that there were ſorrows now in hades where Chriſt was. Further the very text implyeth that Chriſt was holden in this which was looſed from him: I ſay, he was holden but notaaKra… to b… faſt, …en… …ctori… hold… holden fast. Now he was not holden in ſorrows, for then he could not but have felt them after death: which you will not affirme. It was therefore Death (w^ch came by ſorrows) whereof he was holdē, but not held faſt. Againe it appeareth that Chriſt was in that which was looſed and rid from him: Thou wilt notbben…a… ſai. leave my ſoule in hades. I ſay, he was now in the ſame wherein he was not left nor forſaken. But he was in no ſorrows at all now, for then I think he ſhould have††By … Sorrow… felt of … who a… them. felt them: he was in death and in the power thereof. Therefore it was Death and the power thereof, which was looſed at Chriſtes reſurrection: not any preſent ſorrowes and paines. Neither is it the nature of Sorrowes to hold and hinder frō Reſurrectiō: but it is the ſtrength of Death which doth that. ThusccPag. 1… your collection out of Auſtin is againſt the true and plaine meaning of the text, where you ſay that the ſorrowes of death (or hel) were brokē before Chriſt, & ſo he was never in thē, but as the ſnares of hunters are broken ne teneant non quia tenuerunt before““You … the ve… pa. 17… …ting …h… it. they tooke hold, not after they had taken hold. This is meerely imagined: the text plainly meaneth an other looſing and diſſolving, namely of the power of Death (as I ſaid) vnderunder the which Chriſts manhood (even the Body alſo, aſwell as the Soule) was now for a while held, but not victoriouſly holden faſt, when Gods will was that he ſhould riſe againe. Yet you mightily vrge, how that it isddPag. 1… 196. Auſtins collection from this text. I perceave your argument is from Auſtin, and not from Peter, aseePag. 13… 170. you pretend. When you cite Scripture it is enough belike, if any learned man do collect and frame an opinion from the text, whether right or wrong. You may eaſily ſee by that before, that this collection of Auſtin hath no ground nor reaſon in the text, but is indeed diſproved by it. Which may the ſooner be conceaved, if we note how he miſſed in his Tranſlation of theſe words. Thus he readeth-ſolutis doloribus inferni, Auguſt. … 99.quia impoſſible erat teneri eum in illis: whom God raiſed vp looſing the ſorrows of hell, becauſe it was impoſſible that he ſhould be held in them. But the text hath, Looſing the ſorrowes offfThanát… not Had… which he … ſtaketh fo… Hell. death, ſeeing it was impoſſible that he p. 186ſhould be g holden fast or ſtrongly holden h of it. …teisthai: … is more … Auſtins …ri to bee …ply holdē …p' a…tou: … illis, in … ſorrows, … hath it.Thus it ſeemeth Auſtin looked not to the originall, which he ought to have don: ſpecially nowe inquiring into and ſifting out an obſcure point of Chriſtian faith, as it appeareth that heere Auſtin doth. In no wiſe ought he to have leaned to a faulty Tranſlation, as this is which he followeth. Seeing therefore hee fayled in expreſſing the text, no marvaile if his Collection frō it were wide. Wherein alſo he is no where reſolut nor perſwaded indeed: therfore a weak ſtay is he alone, for our faith to reſt on in this article. Nay in the winding vp of that Epiſtle his godly modeſty is regiſtred for example to you and all Chriſtian Miniſters. He gives vsus good leave to refuſe his collection and opinion heere, ſo that we bring better reaſon. Thus he ſaith, Hec expoſitio verborum Petri cui displicet, &c. Now whether we bring reaſon to diſſent from Austin heerein or no, I referre it (not to you to iudge, who are to partiall, but) to every indifferent learned reader. The rather for that mo Circumſtances of this text doe make alſo affirmatively for vsus.…. 2.29. Firſt, a Peter plainly granteth all this matter of David aſwell as of Chriſt: except this, that David was left therein even till this day, as Chriſt was not. But David was never in Hel. Therefore neither Chriſt was ever there, whoſe figure David was. Sec: If it be altogeather heere from the purpoſe of Peter to ſpeake to the ignorant and vnbeleeving Iewes of Chriſts Souls being in hell, then there is no reaſon to take theſe wordes hades and ſheol heere for hell. But by the whole b… …2. Text it is evident, Peter had no reaſon nor purpoſe to ſpeak to the Iewes of Chriſts Souls being in hell. Therefore I ſee not how hades & ſheol (if they but might ſignifie otherwiſe) can heere ſignifie hell. His whole and direct purpoſe was to ſhew them of Chriſts Soules departure out of this world, and of his Body lying dead in the grave, as is the maner of other men when they dy, and that he was from thence mightily c rayſed vp againe to life,…. 31. more then other men were, or can be. Heere to ſpeake to them of his Soules being in hell, what were there in it?

1. They being (as I ſaid) ignorant, vnbeleeving, and ſtubborne.

2. The thing being inviſible ſtrange and vncouth, not ſubiect to ſenſe, and without all example of the like in the whole Law, & namely no Figure foreſhaddowing any ſuch matter to be fulfilled in him.

3. He intending only in all this ſpeach to ſhew them that this Ieſus whom they had ſlaine was not now dead but riſen againe, why ſhould he ſpeake heere of hell? p. 187Chriſtes being there made nothing the more to ſhew his Reſurrection, which was the**ver. … only ſcope of his ſpeach.

But being ſo diſproportioned with then former faith and vnderſtanding, it would rather hinder then further them to the Chriſtian faith. Both theſe Circumſtāces I noted before, but I ſee no anſwer to them. Wherefore I hope, they with the reſt of my aſſertions heerein are firme and good.

Thus it appeareth that hades doth not every where ſignifieaaPa. 17… 403. Hell in the New Teſtament. We have ſeene that it hath no ſuch meaning in the Actes, which yet is the only Scripture whereon you build. Alas, how litle a ſhew ſerveth your turne, when affection leadeth you. This were ſufficient to end this Argument: but yet it ſhalbe good alſo to try whether any where els Hades properly ſignifieth Hell. Verily it doth ſo ſignifie no where at all in the Scripture. Yet I grāt it is & ought to be trāſlated Hel inbbMat. 1… Luc. 16.Matt 1Luke 16 2. places. Not that the word it ſelf doth neceſſarily ſignifie Hel, but becauſe the circumſtances heere doe require that meaning, as the fitteſt & beſt for theſe particular purpoſes. In the 1. Chriſt promiſeth that y^e Gates of Hades ſhall not prevaile against his Church. He meaneth no deſtruction nor deſolation ſhall root it out, nor take it away from the world vtterly. Now ſeeing of the Churches Deſtroyers Hell is the chiefeſt, and the malice and tage of Satan is the moſt violent adverſarie: that the Church (being aſſured againſt the worſt enimie) may be confirmed and comforted againſt all other whatſoever, therefore kat' exochèn Hades heere ſignifieth Hell, & for ſpeciall emphaſis we are to name it Hell. Which particular is heere intended thus indeed, being alwayes cōtayned otherwiſe in the compaſſe of this general word Hades. So that albeit the gates of Hades in their own ſimple nature & common vſe are the ſame as the gates of Sheol or maveth, (which are no more but the gates of Death) as““Pag … before I hauehave ſhowed, and as**Zuingl… Eſay 38… Moller. … Pſal. 16…Isa 38Ps 16 others call it, periphraſis moriendi, a phraſe or ſpeach ſignifiing Death: yet I ſay the circumſtances heere in Matthew doe require a greater emphaſis in it. Even that Hell ſhould be chiefly and particularly noted as to weake againſt Gods Church; that ſo we ſhould much leſſe feare al other evills. Likewiſe in††Luk. 1…Luke 1 Luke, I grant Hades is to be tranſlated Hell: yet onelyonly becauſe of the circumſtances there. Seeing the wicked miſer being nowe in the ſtate of Death, was in tormentes: p. 188now where could this be indeed but in Hel? So that heere alſo for better emphaſis ſake it is beſt to name it Hell, but not for the nature of the word Hades. W^ch the worthy M. Bucer noteth wel, ſaying, Dives non ſimpliciter ſcribitur eſſe in Hade, ſed & in Gehenna: quia in tormentis & ſtammis. The Rich man is not ſaide to bee ſimply in Hades, but alſo in Hell: becauſe he is ſaid to be in firy torments. Thus I grant in 2. places Hell is intended by Hades in the Scripture. But what then? Will you conclude from this, as you do about Abyſſus? …g 213,In the Revelation, and Luke d Abyſſus is vſed to ſignifie Hell. Therefore it ſignifieth hell in the * Romans: or therefore every where properly it ſignifieth hel.…n 10 7. " Death ſomtime is the 2. Death.…g 170. Ergo it is ſo, Act. 2.24. If you will argue ſo about hades alſo from thoſe 2. places before named, I can eaſily deny your argument in all. The vntruth whereof hath appeared before in that principall place of the Acts: and likewiſe ſhall appeare in all the reſt following by Gods helpe.…g. 403. Next let vsus a conſider, b And thou Capernaum, … 11.23which art lift vp to the Heaven, ſhalt be brought down to Hades, to Deſtruction. I ſay Hades heere is not hell, but the Deſtruction of Capernaum the City. Chriſt threatneth 1. this proud and lofty City it ſelfe: alſo the inhabitants thereof for deſpiſing his Goſpell. The City it ſelfe with deſtruction and razing out from the face of the earth, which is it that hee meaneth by Hades. The inhabitants the wicked people thereof he threatneth with c Damnation in hell.… …4. For the 1^ſt. I vnderſtand that ſo Hades ſomtime may be referred to the Deſtruction even of vnreaſonable things, aſwell as of reaſonable men. For it ſeemeth the generalitie of the word Hades is ſuch that it ſignifieth No viſible being heere any more, … in the … gene.or Destruction from this world (as the proper Etymologie thereof admitteth) to any viſible Creature periſhing frō hence. Though it be certaine, it is not ſo often applyed to other thinges: but it belongeth moſt commonly & vſually indeed to Men only. Notwithſtanding to other things we may find it applyed: as where Plato (which d you ſtumble at) ſaith in Hades were Birds, … …4.Beasts, Trees, Flowers, Fruits, &c. I deny not but they had fabulous and toyiſh conceits about theſe thinges being in Hades: but wiſe men may ſee how their meaning was, theſe viſible creaturs being once brought to Deſtruction & to have no being any more heere, that then they yeelded hades vntounto them alſo, like as they did vntounto mē departed hence.…tarch de …ult. viv. This may be the meaning alſo of Plut. where d he p. 189maketh Hades to have the whole contrary part to the Sunne (whō they called alſo Apollo, & Delius, and Pythius) becauſe al Creatures vnderunder the Sunne (as we vſe to ſpeak) when they periſh hence and have no more being in this world, com to Hades. And thus it ſeemeth Moſes alſo vſeth Sheol, when he ſaith,bbNumb. 1 30 33.Num 1:30 men, women, children, and cattell alive, yea howſes and riches went to Sheol. Therefore heere Moſes certainly meaneth not Hell, as““Pag. 1… you think: but he ſignifieth 2. things.

1. That all theſe things were taken vtterly away out of this world by an vnrecoverable Destruction: which is the moſt generall and large ſenſe of Sheol.

2. That they deſcended downe into abbAs alſo Pſ… 86.13. an… 88.7. Deut. 32.Ps 86:13Deut 32 vaſt and deepe Gulfe in the earth: which alſo Sheol doth very often ſignifie in the Scripture, like to Abyſſus in Greek. After which maner alſo thoſeccPſal. 49.Ps 49 Sheepe in Sheol (whichddPag. 399. you turne to the worſt) may be vnderſtood.

Thus I ſay Sheol may ſhew the vtter taking away (not of men onelyonly, but) of other things alſo when they have no being in this world any more. Which Abacuk alſo meaneth in ſaying,eeAbac. 2.2…Hab 2:2 neither Sheol nor Death can be ſatisfied, if he make any difference in theſe. Alſo in the very like place of theffPro. 30.1…Prov 30:1 Proverbs, Sheol ſeemeth to bee moſt rightly vnderſtood in the moſt large ſignification. To which ſenſe likewiſe, I take it that phraſe in Daniel, en lo, may be compared, though heere it be vſed of Meſſiah: …tikkare Meſſiah, ve ên lo, Dan 9.26Dan 9:26Meſſiah ſhalbe cut of and ſhall have No being. He meaneth, Not any more as he was before in this world: which in effect is nothing els then that which Sheol ſignifieth. Yet wee muſt come neerer. You alleage 2. frivolous proofes of Sheols ſignifying Hell: viz: when it hathggPag. 147. Oppoſition to Heaven, and Situation as the lowest. For the Situation of Hell, it is a ſecret which Gods worde hath not revealed at all. Neither ought we to determine, as you very raſly do,hhPag. 112. Jf Hel be any where, there can be no doubt but it must be in the lower parts of the earth. You know the Apoſtle mentioneth theiiEphe. 2.2.Eph 2:2 Ayre, and thatkkcap. 6.12. on high, as being the place of Divels. Notwithſtanding far be it from me to affirme that hell certainly is not beneath. Yet your pretended ſcripturs are meerely forced to prove it. As in the chief I have ſhewed already. In the reſt it will appeare likewiſe anon. Howbeit, whereſoever Hel indeed is, though we do grant in it to be locally in the earth beneath vsus; yet every Oppoſition betwene Shammajim the Heavens or Skyes, and Sheol doth not ſignifie the oppoſition p. 190betweene Heaven and Hel. This you ſhall never be able to prove: Shammajim thus placed ſignifieth the Skyes, not the very place of Heavenly glory in the preſenſe of God, which in Engliſh we call Heaven. And Sheol thus placed ſignifieth not Hell, the place of torments: but it is taken thus 2. wayes. Somtime for † a vaſt and deepe Gulfe only or pit in the earth,Abyſſus. the bottom wherof we know not.Amos. 9.2. Iob. 11.8. Pſa. 139.8.Amos 9:2Job 11:8Ps 139:8 So doe a many of your places meane, which you draw and wreſt to ſignifie Hell. Somtime for Ruine and Deſtruction or Aboliſhing of any viſible Creatures from hence: which ſeemeth to be the largeſt & moſt proper ſenſe of Sheol. …heols proper ſenſe.So doth it in Jſay ſignifie, where Sheol is threatned to the King of Babel, b Though thou be lifted vp to the Skyes, Iſa. 14.15.Isa 14:15yet ſhalt thou bee brought downe to Sheol, that is (in this place) to an inglorious Deſtruction and No being in this word: and (thy carcaſe) vntounto the ſides of the pit, that is the Grave. This the contrariety heere ſheweth, Thoug… thou be lifted vp to the Skyes. He meaneth not heere, into the glory of the Saints of God in Heaven: but lifted vp in great pomp and worldly glory, as the Latin phraſe meaneth alſo when they ſay ad ſydera tolli. Now ſaith the Prophet to this King of Babell: Though at this time it be thus with thee, yet ſurely thou ſhalt be brought down to the contrary point, to an inglorious Destruction, and a wiping out from the Earth. Which ſenſe of Iſay is alſo very well confirmed by the like matter in Ieremy. c Though Babel ſhould mount vp to the Heavens, …er. 51.53.4.and though ſhe ſhould defend her ſtrength on high: yet from me ſhall her Destroyers come, ſaith the Lord. A ſound of a cry cometh from Babel, and of great Destruction from the Chaldeans, &c. Where that which Iſay called Sheol, Ieremy ſpeaking of the very ſame matter nameth Destruction, vtter laying wast, and overthrowing of that City and State. And ſo to come to our purpoſe,A very He…raiſme. d this is the very ſame phraſe heere in Mathew touching Capernaum: Thou Capernaum which art lift vp to the Heaven ſhalt be brought down to Hades: that is, to Deſtruction, & to an inglorious Not being any more in the world as before time it had ben.…des Deſtructiō, Razing, …aking away Which alſo is confirmed by that which he addeth preſently of Sodom, that if they had had the meanes of repentance as Capernaum had, Sodom might have remayned a City to this day. Inferring by this that Capernaum for their greater contempt of God and his word, deſerved more then Sodom to be deſtroyed & p. 191to becom no City. Hitherto this is the firſt iudgment threatned to the ſtate of the City; Hades Deſtruction, or an vtter razing out from the earth. The 2. iudgment heere threatned followeth in the next verſe, Moveover I ſay vntounto you that it ſhalbe eaſier for them of the land of Sodom in the day of iudgment then for theſe. Heere indeed is Hell threatned to them of Capernaum: yet as touching that before, there was nothing els but the overthrow and deſtruction of their Citie ſignifyed by that worde Hades, applyed to the Citie, as is before declared. And contrary to this you hauehave not any piece of reaſon in al that““Pa. 147.1… 409. you ſay here about. The world of Souls (which††Pag. 403.409. you play withall) Hades may and doeth ſignifie: but yet then only when it is referred to deceaſed Soules, & not otherwiſe. Next, let vsus view the Corinthes aaPag 408. 1. Cor. 1….551 Cor 1:55O Death where is thy victorie? O Hades, O Destruction, or, O Power of Death where is thy ſting? Heere it is referred to the deſtruction of the whole and intire Perſons of men taken away by death out of this worlde: who in the end by this conqueſt and triumph over Death & the power therof (at the laſt day) ſhalbe reſtored to life againe in a true and perfit Reſurrection and reſtitution. This is the whole ſcope and drift of the Apoſtle heere: and you graunt it. But you inferre, that therfore it is meant of Hel. Of Hell, which way? Becauſe ſince by ſinne Hell gat poſſeſſion of both partes of man aſwell of his body as of his Soule, the full deliverance and conquest ouer Hell, is not but in the Reſurrection. This is very vntrue. Our full deliverance from Hell and from Satan is obtayned in this life: as it is written,bbLuke 1.7.Luke 1:7 We being delivered from our enemies and from the handes of all that hate vsus, must ſerve him without feare all the dayes of our life in bolines and righteouſnes before him. That is, we being heere truly iuſtified by his grace, are fully freed and delivered from all the power of our enemies. Satan isccLuke. 11. … Rom 8.33. Ioh. 8.51, 5 & 5.24.Luke 11Rom 8:33John 8:51John 8:5John 5:24 conquered, ſpoyled, bound, and caſt out from vsus. So that your ſpeach is very bad and ſcandalous, where you ſay,ddPag. 216. The bodyes of the Saintes lying in their graves are in the Divells walke. For then the Graves where bodyes ly ſenſeles, are a part of Hell, properly taken. At leaſt the Deaths of the Reprobat and of the Children of God, (eeAnſwerab to your do… trine pa. 24 touching the ſtate of their bodyes) till the reſurrection, are all one: And men truly iuſtified are iuſtified but in their Soules, Sinne remayning ſtil charged on their Bodies, and therefore in their bodyes they remaine ſubiect to the power p. 192of Hell, and to the curſe of the Law, and to the claime of Satan, till the day of our Reſurrection at the laſt iudgement.You call it … part of the …ages of ſin. And thus the godly muſt pay " a part of their own redemption and ſatisfaction for ſinne. And then Chriſt was not our only and abſolut Redeemor. If this be good doctrine, let the godly iudge. Your ſelfe overthroweth this enough,Pag. 156. ſaying, f He changed the curſe of death and made it now a rest from all labours. So that I hope the Bodyes of the dead Saintes are not in the * Divells walke: Nor ſubiec…ed to the R…ge of Sa…anmuch leſſe are they g in the poſſeſſion of Hell,Pag 216. in the handfast of Hell. Further you ſay vponupon the text:Pag. 178 h Through death Christ destroyed him that had the power of death, that is the Divell. Pag. 179.Whereby i it is evident, that Hell is ſpoyled of all right and claime to the members of Christ, hee brake, &c. I hope in this life the godly are the members of Christ: then in this life they are fully freed from Hell for euer. Wherfore it is very vntrue that Hell properly taken, hath any poſſeſſion of the iuſt, and handfaſt or power on them, or that Hell is not fully ſubdued for them vntill the Reſurrection. I graunt that the common death heere is called an enemy: Cor. 15.26.but he meaneth not ſuch an Enemy as Hell is, eſpecially as this is ſpoken touchinge the godly. Yet it is an Enemie even to them, not as any Curſe at all, but as a Memoriall & conſequent of the old Curſe (like as a ſcarie is where was a deadly wound) alſo as a peaceable and quiet ſtopp or ſtay vntounto them,…ea & becauſe … is pain…ull …o the fleſh in … his life. that their whole perſons cannot yet enioy their appointed felicitie. Howbeit for all this toward them it hath not the leaſt affinitie with Hell at all. Therfore Hades heere in no ſort ſignifyeth Hell, but only Death, or the power of Death, or the world and kingdom of Death, or ſomething to that effect onelyonly. Yea the very text ſeemeth thus to expound it ſelfe, ſaying, Where is thy ſting, O Hades? The ſting of Death is ſinne. Where the later ſeemeth a very direct anſwer and expoſition of the former words. Thus, The ſting of Death (or Hades) is ſinne: noting theſe 2. wordes (Hades and Death) as Synonimaes for one thing, beeing applyed to men. Or if““Pag. 408. you will hauehave them to differ, He may take Hades for the**As it vtterly …aketh away, … witholdeth …rom a viſible …ate. Power & ſtrength of Death (which the brain-ſick Idolators made a God) or the Dominion and Kingdome of Death. Theſe reſpectes Hades might well hauehave with the Apoſtle, which differ from Thanatos Death, the meere ſeparation of the Soule from the Body: which yet in effect are all one, and hauehave no p. 193difference touching our purpoſe. Like as we ſawaaPa. 1… &c. 1 before howe all Authours have vſed them. Further, The Grave of the Wicked is not to be n…med nor reckoned Hell properly, nor any part thereof. In Hell there wanteth not ſenſe of paine. If you ſay, it is an entrance to hell, and that which holdeth and reſerveth the wicked vntounto hell. Yet then it is not Hell: for even thus the Grave and Hell doe greatly differ. Finally, Hades isbbSee … pag. 1… adverſarie to the Reſurrection. But Hell would not bee adverſarie to the Reſurrection. Therefore Hades heere is not hell, no not to the wicked. Death in deed and the Dominion of Death is an adverſarie to the Reſurrection, and at that day it ſhalbe vanquiſhed and vtterly aboliſhed, when all fleſh ſhall liue againe. As for Hell that ſhall increaſe thē and bee advanced, when all the wicked both bodyes and Soules ſhalbe ſubdued vnderunder it for ever. Therfore Hades heere is not hell, but the power of Death, as hath bene ſaide, or the Dominion of Death or meerely to that effect. Alſo we are to note, that the Apoſtle heere plainly alludeth to that of Hoſeah:ccHoſe. O Sheol, ò kingdom of death, or power of 'Death, I wilbe thy destruction. Not, o Hell. For the Prophet ſpeaketh this to comfort Iſrael in their captivitie againſt their continuall Deſtructions and razings out from this world, ſhewing that now the Lord would ſtay his iudgement that way, & Death (which had conſumed them) ſhould now deſtroy them no more, but they ſhould liue and flouriſh againe. This the Apoſtle might notably allude vntounto, ſpeaking of the Reſurrectiō. As for Hell if the Prophet had meant it (as he doeth not) the Apoſtle could make no alluſion to it, nor hauehave any thing to deale wch it in this matter of the Reſurrectiō ſimply. So that where you ſay, what reaſon is there to exclude out of theſe words Chriſts victorie over Hell, it is very weake. What reaſon is there to include it, where the Apoſtle ſpeaketh only of our reſurrection from bodily Death, and of nothing els. Next we come to the Revelatiō: Firſt,aaRev. I have the Keyes of Hades (that is of Deſtruction, or of the**The … ble w… the D… kingdome of death and of Death. Or, we may take them as 2. words for one and the ſame thing: that is, both of them for Death. For heere Chriſt ſheweth only, that as He was dead, ſo nowe he hath overcome Death. & hath power to dy no more: as I hau… bbTrea… pa 11…heeretofore noted. What ſhew of reaſon hauehaveccPa 17 you then, to bringe in heere Chriſtes power over the Damned Soules in Hell? Becauſe p. 194there is mention …lſwhere of the Key of hell: Therefore the Key of h…des heer is the ſame. What color of reaſō is there in this? Again a One ſitteth on a pale horſe whoſe name was Death, Rev. 6.8.Rev 6:8& Hades Deſ…on the world of the Dead, or the Kingdom of Death followed a…ter …m. Th… in no wiſe can be Hel: becauſe the text addeth, Power … them to ſlay with the ſword and with ſamine, and death, and with wilde beasts. Hell ſlayeth none in that ſorte, theſe are not the weapons of Hell: but of the Dominion and Power of Death th…ſe and ſuch other mo,…ag 406. are the proper weapons. b You take it to b… the power of the Divell, becauſe the Divell ſlayeth ſom…times the bodyes of men. Which you proue by the bodily ſlaying and ſiniting of Iob and his children. This indeed is the thing which we holde. This is not the Torments of Hell in the place of Damned: theſe be onelyonly bodily harmes and death. So that heereby you confirme our purpoſe: for we denie not but God ſomtime vſeth Satan to puniſh and to ſlay the bodies of men. But ſeeing this is nothing but Death, not Hell which then is inflicted: therefore it is b…ſt to take Hades heere moſt generally as the nature of it is, for the Power of Death, or the world of the Dead. Hell by no meanes it can be.…g. 398. You tell me in c one place, that my beſt skill is in varying phraſes. It is better to vary phraſes then to vary opinions, as you very often doe. I vary phraſes to expreſſe Hades, which in Authours is not alwayes the ſame thing: or at leaſt not after the ſame maner. Whoſe generall largenes which it properly hath, can not in one word be expreſſed in Engliſh. Wherefore my varying of ph…aſes to this purpoſe (I hope) is pardonable, ſith indeed it is neceſſarie. That cōiecture of mine of the 4^th part of the worldes not going to Hell at once, I never eſteemed it worth the ſtanding on. I he laſt place is, † Death and Hades (that is the Dominiō, or power of Death) were cast into Hell. …v. 20.14.I ſaid, it was abſurd to ſay Hell was cast into Hell: You anſwer, it is more abſurd to ſay the world of Soules was caſt into Hell. Where you doe but dally and play with words.…t … ^e wo…e …e Dea… A…ally. For I vſe not that terme * the world of ſoules, though it may be named ſometime, in a good ſenſe. Which you will by no meanes conceave: only you delight much to ſport your ſ…lfe with it. Our anſwer thē is this; There is no abſurditie to ſay, that at the laſt (day when the * laſt enemy ſhalbe deſtroyed) then Death,…ore pag. 2. and the power of Death, or the Kingdome and Dominion p. 195of Death ſhalbe caſt into Hel: that is eternally d…ſt…oy…d & ab…iſhed, & ſhall r…turn to the Divell wh… they came. To ſay many ſo…t that thē Hell phalbe caſt into Hell, ſoūdeth ſenſ…les in my …at…s. Although you meane the Contayning to b… put for the Contayned, H…ll for the Divels of Hel: and that the Divels ſhalb… thē caſt into h…l fire. Yea although one Andreas & …eda vnderſtand it ſo likewiſe. For neither you nor they (it …meth) do coſid…r, that this place aſſigneth them to Hell then at the laſt day, who yet are not in Hell, but ſhalbe then caſt into Hell …nd deſtroyed. But the Divels areaa2 Pet. 2. I…d. 6.2 Pet 2 in Hell already, & reſerved in e…rlaſting ch…mes of darknes. Therefore the Divels cannot be vnd…ſtood heere by Had…s, that they ſhalbe then caſt into Hel, ſeeing …hey are already caſt in to Hell for ever. Death, and the Power thereof being the laſt enemie that ſhalbe d…ſtroyed, is not yet, but ſhalbe indeed at the laſt day aboli…hed & ſwallowed vp of Hell. Laſtly …eere is ſhewed the moſt general & vniverſall rendring vp of all the …ead whatſoever to iudgment. But Hel plainly hath not all the Dead▪ Death, & the world of the Dead, or th… Dominion of Death have all. Therefore D…ath & Hades heere do not ſignifie properly the Div…ll & Hell: but this only, that Death, and the vniverſall Dominion or power of Death yeelded vp to iudgment al the Dead, both great & ſmal both good and bad to be iudged according to their workes.

Thus it is evident and cleere that Hades no where in the …ew Teſtament doth ſignifie properly Hel, as you ſay it doth. Thus alſo that is concluded fully and perfitly which my 2. Reaſon††Pag. 15 before affirmed: that you have not one place at all in the Scripture to prove that Chriſts Soule was in Hell.bbAct. ….2 One place only you have ſtood vponupon, that Chriſts Soule was in Hades: but that helpeth you nothing at all, as we have ſeene. You muſt prove indeed that Chri…ts Soule was in Gehenna, if you would perſwade any man of knowledg, which you ſhal never do. Gehenna in the New Teſtament is properly Hell: but Hades is never properly ſo taken, as I hope it is ſufficiently before proved. Therefore the Conclu…ion is good, To thinke that Christes Soule was ever in Hell, is a thing that ought to be v…terly denyed.

Yet, heere we muſt conſider a maine obiection of yours: …ven thoſe words of our common Creed,Touching C…. … which vſually in Engliſh w… vtter thus; He deſcended into Hell: originally … is, He deſcended p. 196into Hades. And in truth this is all that you have to all…age for your opinion.…ſwere. But I anſwer 2. wayes. Firſt, Admitting, then Denying the authority of th…ſe words in our Comon Cre…d. 1. Admitting 1the authority of theſe words, (& yet, Not as ſufficient, not as Apoſ…h…all, but ſuch, as may be f…ō godly and ſound Chriſtians) w… affirme that we can well vnderſtand them according to the Scriptures vſe of Hades rightly: viz: that Chriſtes whole humane Perſon came vnderunder the power and Dominion of Death, or that he d…caying in this world & * falling down from that ſtate of life wherein a while he flouriſhed, went abſol…tly from hence into the world of the Dead, … before …. 153.according to the law of nature which all other men follow likewiſe when they d…. How this ſenſe doth fully agree alſo with the mindes of the ancient Fathers generally, we have at large d…clared c before.Pag. 166. Pag. 1…4. But this ſerveth not your turne: & therefore you will needes inioyne vsus d 3. Rules to be exactly and pr…c…ſ…ly kept in the expounding of theſe words: namely 1. Distinction of matter. 2. Conſequence of order. 3. Propriety of words. You muſt know that we can be no more ſtrict,Note. nor more religious in obſerving the Ci…cūſtances of matter & order even in the holy Scriptures themſelves, then you inioyne heere to be obſerved in theſe words of men. Might not theſe godly men (think you) miſſe in ſom ſuch Circumſtance or light point, although the Scripture can not? Or if they might, why impoſe you ſuch ſtrictnes on our conſciences about mens words, as if heere were no poſſibility of any the leaſt miſſing, or imperfection. How beit we admit your 3. Rules alſo,3. Rules. and will obſerve them ſufficiently. Firſt theſe words 1He deſcended to Hades may very well expreſſe a Distinction of matter differing from all the words heere beſides. They naturally and properly ſignifie (as before we ſhewed) that Chriſt came to vtter decay in this world, and being taken hence was gathered in both partes (of his Manhood diſſolved) wholy & intirely to thoſe who were departed before him into another world. Or ells thus, that he came vnderunder the full power &eebefore Pag. 192. Dominion of Death. Now either of theſe differeth verily from meere and ſimple Death.…vian. …ce …ea…h. For to Dy prope…ly is nothing els but the going a ſunder of the Soule from the Body. That other is to be wholy razed out from the preſence and ſight of this world, alſo a remayning vnderunder the poſſeſſion and ſtrength of Death, and a going to the ſociety of them in another world.g. 192. Theſe indeed are f differing points and degrees p. 197in Death: albeit in effect generally they bee all one with Death, that is they be neceſſa…ily conſequent, & alwayes conioyned vntounto Death. Againe if thoſe wordes in the Creed were only but a more emphaticall phraſe of through and perfit Dying and Departing hence, if there were in them no further Diſtinctiō of matter then ſo, yet this were enough to diſtinguiſh them frō the other words, Dead and Buryed. This is cauſe enough (eſpecially in the Ancient times, when men ſuppoſe this Creed was framed, & when Chriſts Humanity and naturall Death was by al meanes ſubtilly and violently oppugned after a ſhort worde ſignifying his Death and Buriall, yet for more emphaſis ſake, and for further Viging the ſame, to add… this other ſhort familiar phraſe importing (no other maine matter then was before noted, but only) a more effectuall and more abſolut ſignification thereof. Which in trueth theſe our wordes in queſtion doe well performe, He came vnderunder the Dominion of Death, or Went to the ſocietie of the Dead, following preſently after theſe wordes Dead & Buried. And thus your 2. Rule 2alſe, Conſequence of order is rightly kept. For euen in reſpect of time it is certaine, that Chriſts whole perſon periſhing frō hence was wholy ioyned to the Dead, after the preciſe ſeparation of his Soule and body, which was his Death. And his Buriall being the viſible part thereof, in good reaſon may be ſet before that which ſignifieth the whole contayning alſo his Soules inviſible going vntounto the Dead. Laſtly, if there be no more in this but a ſtronger emphaſis meerely, & a more full-ſignifying phraſe, it might well come after termes of leſſe emphaſis. Your 3. 3and laſt Rule, Proprietie of Wordes is plainly for vsus, and againſt your ſelfe. For that which we ſtrive for, is theaaPa. 157 169 17… native and proper ſenſe of Hades, even according to the etymologie of it, and according to common vſe. You, if you vrge it to ſignifie Hel, do indeed make a††Pa. 171. Figure in it, viz. Synecdoche, a part for the whole, as before we hauehave ſhewed. As for the other word heere in the Creed katébe or katélthe, Hee deſcended, or came vnderunder, it is not neceſſarie to take it alwayes to ſignifie a locall going downe, ſpecially thus ioyned with Hades. For thus it may aptly & lively ſhew the fall or whole casting down of a mans perſon from the ſtate of life, to death and vtter deſtruction out of this world: as alſo men are ſaid to ſtand vp and ſpring vp when they live. Or it may ſerue to expreſſe the Force and Dominion p. 198of Death which Chriſt came vnderunder when he dyed. Or the abaſement and humiliation of Chriſt yeelding & ſubmitting him ſelfe ſo farre, that is not onelyonly to Dy, but alſo to come vnderunder the ſtrength and force of death by lying held, & ſubdued (as it were) for ſo long time in it. All this the very property of the word katebe admitteth very eaſilie: and Ruffinus liketh it where he interpreteth this phraſe…uffin. in …mb. " Deſcendit in mortem, He deſcended vntounto Death. If any thinke this to be ſomewhat figurative, yet it is verily ſo familiar and eaſie to all people as that other word in this Creed is, He ſitteth at the right hand of God: yea it is farie eaſier indeed. And heerein all the later famous, learned and godly Reſtorers of Religion in a maner doe ioyne with vsus, as Mat. Bucer, P. Martyr, Bulinger, …ſlitut.Olevia, &c. Yea M. Calvin "liked this alſo wel enough: though yet he ſeemeth to leane more to another ſenſe (viz. Chriſtes Helliſh ſufferings) which indeed is a true doctrine, as before is declared, though to this place of the Creed (I thinke) not ſo fit. Now theſe men your L. ought not to skorne nor reproch, though you have leave to deale ſo with me. Their pietie, learning, and authoritie is ſuch with all that love the Goſpell, as will overwaigh your big wordes and high lookes, and whatſoever els you are lifted vp withal aboue our mediocritie. Hitherto we hauehave anſwered, admitting the authoritie of theſe wordes He deſcended to Hades.

But wee are in truth to know,…ere. that (as you cite them and vige them) they have no ſuch authoritie & credit, as hitherto we have yeelded vntounto them. And that for 3. cauſes. Firſt, for that your Trā ſlating and terming them, He deſcended into Hel, is corrupt, partiall, and vntrue. Which I truſt is manifeſt by that which I have ſhewed before touching the true property & natural vſe of Hades. If you ſay among vsus all men do ſo ſpeak heere and tranſlate hades Hel. I pray you cōſider that this article (as alſo I think this whole Creed) was at firſt written in Greek, and not in Engliſh. Wherefore the Engliſh terme (how comon ſo ever) muſt not preiudice vsus, nor the truth in this matter, as very vnreaſonably a you indeavour to make it to do.…g. 420. Convince vsus evidently and ſoundly by Greek authoritie, that Hades is alwayes Hell, or that Hades is never applyed to the condicion and ſtate of the godly deceaſed and then I will yeeld: or els my ſufficient proofes before to the contrary will convince the vntrue and partiall tranſlation. Another p. 199reaſon to deny vtterly the authority and credit of theſe wordes (He deſcended to hades,) & ſo to hold them vnable to make any argument as from our Creed, is becauſe this ſpeciall clauſe of Chriſts deſcending to Hades or to Infernum is new, and lately put into our vulgar Creed called the Apostles Creed. bbRuffin Symb.Ruffinus witneſſeth (who lived about 500. yeeres after Chriſt) that it was not at all in the Creed in his time. I ſay not at all… neither in the Romane Creed, nor yet in the Creed of the Eaſterne Churches. His words are theſe, Sciendum ſanè est quod in Eccleſiae Romanae ſymbolo non habetur additum, Deſeendit ad inferna: ſed nee in Orientis Eccleſiis habetur hic ſermo. Will you ſay, Ruffinus lyeth? Or can you bring to the contrarie any proofe? I think not: yea I am ſure you can not. Then if there were no ſuch Article as this, nor anie ſuch wordes any where in the Creed for the ſpace of 500. yeres after Chriſt, I mervaile what authoritie they hauehave now to be taken neceſſarily for a diſtinct article in our Creed, and as differing materially from Dead and Buried. Sure, it isaaNamely Deſ…le. Hades. to new to be receaved for doctrine, whichbbPag. 13… ſprang vp ſo late. Yea, thusccEraſm. … Symb. Ca… 4. Eraſmus may ſeeme to hauehave ſome colour for his coniecture, that about Thomas Aquinas time they might (peradventure) be put into this Creed. Third: we can not ſee, but that whenſoever whoſoever put it firſt into this place, they ſignified heereby it ſeemeth, that Christ went to Limbus, a place vnderunder the earth, where they imagined the bleſſed Patriarkes reſted. For this was indeed the opinion generally of the ancient Chriſtians even for““Limbus inter tay… before Ch… deſcendin… bades wa… our ſet …c… o… the Cr… a long time, and ſtil is retayned among the Papiſtes, though now growen much worſe thē it was of old. But this you iuſtly cōdemne as an error as wel as we, how generall and how ancient ſoever it be. Now alſo though this were the 1^ſt meaning of this Article, whenſoever it fi…fte tooke place in the common Creed, yet this was not Hell: this giveth no furtherance to your aſſertion, that Chriſt went into the place of the Damned in tormentes. But Thaddaeus, Jgnatius, Athanaſius, hauehave theſe very words. Yet they ſay not any where that they were in that ſet forme of the Apoſtles Creed**Which … deed they … had not. which we now have. Alſo they are cleane againſt your opinion heere, as preſently wee ſhall ſee. You will ſay, yet even Ruffinus in his expoſition of the Creed alleageth this article, and he alloweth the doctrine thereof. I anſwere, He alleageth truly theſe wordes Deſcendit ad inferna, but p. 200not out of any example of the Apoſtles Creed: yea he expreſly denieth it to be therein any where at that time, as before we ſhewed. Only it being his owne and the common opinion then, hee groundeth it vponupon other reaſons (namely certaine miſ…aken ſcriptures) yet ſuch as he was content to like of, and ſo holdeth indeed that Chriſt went downe to Infernum, that is to Limbus Patrum, as an opinion then common among men, and worthy (as he thought) to be beleeued, and to be applyed to this place of the Creed touching the Death of Chriſt,…aſin. in …mb. Ca…h. 4. although as yet no ſuch matter was contayned in the common Creed. Eraſmus ſayeth, The Fathers would not be ſo raſh as to put it into the articles of their Creed, ſeeing their opinions heereabout were ſo varying and doubtfull. Now this you know was all miſtaken, wrongfully gathered from the Scriptures, as badly applyed to the Creed, & nothing els indeed but the common error of thoſe tymes. Yet then hitherto all this is farre from iuſtifying your opinion, ner…er may you alleage the Creed for your warrant. Where note alſo that Ruffinus heere vnderſtandeth the very matter it ſelf (preciſely ſignified by theſe words Deſcendit ad inferna) to be immediatly but this, that He dyed like other good men, and was buried. For hee ſaith, Vis verb…adem videtur eſſe in eo quod Sepultus dicitur: The effect of this phraſe He deſcended to Infernum, ſeemeth to be all one and the ſame with this, He was Buried. And afterwarde going ab…ut to prove by the Scripture that Chriſt deſcended to Jnfernū, he ſheweth that hee meaneth his death heereby and his buriall: Quod in infernum deſcendit evidenter praenūtiatur in Pſalmis, vbi dicit: Et in pulverem mortis deduxisti me. Et iterum, Quae vt…litas in ſanguine meo dum deſcendo in Corruptionem. And before vponupon thoſe wordes: He was Crucified vnderunder Pon. Pilate, and deſcended to infernum h… giveth this ſenſe among other wordes, Divina natura in mortem per carnem deſcendit. The Divine nature humbled it ſelfe evē vntounto Death in respect of the fleſh. Howſoever then he thinketh conſequently that Chriſt deſcending to infernū did after Death goe to a place beneath vntounto the godly Soules departed before, & then ſet them free from thence and caried them with him, yet it appeareth that immediatly by this phraſe and properly he meant no more, but that he Dyed and was Bu…ied: all the reſt was conſequent as an effect after this, according as he and p. 201moſt others of the Ancients did think. Laſtly heer we ſee that Ruffinus extendeth this his Deſcending to the Divine nature: but he meaneth it improperly and in a certaine ſorte, according to that alſo in the Philippains,aaPhil. … He being in the forme of God, bbVerſehumbled himſelfe & became obedient vntounto death. So that properly he meaneth it of the very death of his Manhood, and nothing els. Which is our very minde and iudgment, agreeing alſo generally with the Fathers heereinccPa. 162 before rehearſed. But Ignatius ““Pag. 1you thinke, † is clearely yours: likewiſe oneddPag 17 Thaddaeus, by Euſebius report one of the 70. Diſciples which the Evangeliſt Luke ſpeakes of: alſoeePag 41 Athanaſius Creed. Ignatius ſaying, Christ deſcended to Hades alone, but roſe again with many, Igna…us.meaneth evidently his Buriall and going downe into his Grave: as you acknowledge thatffPag. 14. Hades many times may well ſignifie. Which is the plainer to be his meaning, for as much as he noteth his Buryall heere in no other wordes beſides. And ſure he alludeth to that in Mathew,ggMath 27 53.Matt 27:53 The Graves did open, and many bodyes of the Saintes which ſlept, aroſe▪ And came out of the Graves after his Reſurrection, and went into the holy City and appeared to many. This is touching the Reſurrection of their bodyes out of their Graves, not of their Soules anſing vp from Hell. Neither in Ignatius is there any ſhew of reaſon that he meant Hades for Hell. He may meane, I grant, (that which is in effect all one) the reſtoring of their whole Perſons taken away hence by Death, or their comming from vnderunder the Dominion and power of Death: which indeed is according to the proper largenes of this word. Alſo that Chriſt (katélthe) came vnderunder the ſame. Not that he went locally downeward, except in his Buriall; but touching his whole manhood that hee was humbled and abaſed even vnderunder the Dominion and ſtrength of Death. And thus it is true, thathhAs Ruffi… alſo vnd… ſtood …t. … 200. Chriſt by his Death (including alſo togeather his Buriall) came downe or Deſcended. But only this you vrge and ſtand vponupon for your claime to Ignatius, becauſe it is ſaid. He brake downe the wall or ſtop, which was never brokē before. Where you may know that the meaning is this: The power of the Grave, or the ſtrength and force of Death was now by Chriſtes Death & Reſurrection vtterly overcome and diſſolved, which remayned in deed from the beginning of the world (till Chriſtes death) as a mighty Wall not broken downe. But now the vertue of his death and reſurrection brake it cleane downe for ever. So that heereby p. 202Chriſt is taught to be (as the Apoſtle alſo to like effect ſpeaketh) the first fruites of the Dead. Pag. 179.But you ſay, a Many roſe from the dead before Christ, and therefore that partition was often broken by others before him. I aunſwer, Though ſome being dead did riſe to life againe before Chriſtes Reſurrection (as touching the time) yet the vertue and power of Chriſtes reſurrectiō was before them, by which only and meerely they roſe againe. Neither yet was Reſurrectiō to all the Dead foorth with performed by the Reſurrection of Chriſt: neuertheles throughly purchaſed it was evē then, and by the only power and vertue thereof is & ſhalbe performed to all in due time. So that thus Chriſt alone brake that wall and ſtop, and abſolutly he hath broken it downe, which no man before him nor beſides him ever brake. The like vntounto this is your Thaddaeus ſentence:…ddaeus. …naſius. alſo Athanaſius in his Creed. Whom the rather thus I vnderſtand, (as it ſeemeth, moſt reaſonably and neceſſarily) becauſe they expreſſe neither his Death, nor his Buriall at all in any other wordes ſave theſe, He deſcended to Hades. Therefore ſurely this is it, which heere they meane by his deſcending to Hades; and this is all that they meane therein, that he was brought vnderunder the dominion of death and was Buryed. …eſcending …plied to …ts Soule … Death) …ever foūd …cripture, in anie …cient …ed.Conſdering alſo that * no Ancient Creed in the world hath all theſe 3. divers and diſtinct Clauſes, He 'Dyed, was Buryed, Deſcended to Hades: not the very Apostles Creed (as we call it) in Ruffinus time had them, as we have ſeene. But this laſt clauſe which is in queſtion was put in "ſince that time (to ſignify Chriſts going to Limbus, it ſeemeth) by whomſoever it was put in,…t wel ob…ed: Treat …ag. 93. …g. …15. as is before ſaid. b Your ſeeking to prevent this reaſon, becauſe the Ancient Creeds want ſundry other Articles which now are in our vulgar Creed, is to no purpoſe. For as much as they all do evermore intend to ſet down perſitly the ſumme of Chriſts accompliſhed Redemption & Mediation at the leaſt. Not any of thoſe his maine workes are in thē omitted. Now alwayes in the Creeds where they expreſſe his Dying and Burying, there is omitted his going to Hades. Where they expreſſe his Going to Hades, Note.there they omit his Dying, or his Buriall, or both. Therefore I may well conclude, I thinke, that no Ancient Creed in the world ever meant to teach that Chriſt went to Hades, except in ſuch a ſenſe only as was (in their iudgement) in effect all one as to Dy, or to go among the Dead, and to be Buried p. 203and no more.Thaddae… co…n…e… Thus farre of Thaddaeus and Athanaſiaes Creeds. Howbeit to ſpeak plainly, your Thaddaeus whomaaPag 1 179. you ſo highly eſteeme, is a meere coūterfait. You ſay, This report of him inbbPag. 1… Euſebius, by ſom men is coūted fabulous. Nay, who ever ſince Euſeb. (I think) held it for better? Many other like matters are to much allowed by Euſeb. in other caſes alſo: notwithſtanding his ſtory of the church affaires thē (I grant) is iuſtly receaved as the beſt that we have extant. But it is ſtrange that this fable & forgerie of Thaddaeus ſhould ſo pleaſe you. It is all forged, or els fouly corrupted; for theſe reaſons:

1. This writing touching Thaddaeus brought by Euſebius from Edeſſa, ſaith, that Judas the Apoſtle (who ſent this Thaddaeus being one of the 70. Diſciples) was the ſame who is called alſo Thomas the Apoſtle. But the Scripture it ſelfe ſheweth that Iudas and Thomas were 2. divers and ſeuerall Apoſtles. Therefore this writing is falſe.

2. Heere alſo we may probably conceave an other errour; that this Thaddaeus (one of the 70.) ſeemeth to be miſtakē in this Syriā writing for Thaddaeus one of the 12. Apoſtles.

3. Further this counterfait Thaddaeus was content to receave (and did receave) even from a King him ſelfe, and alſo (as it ſeemeth) from one of his Nobles, Adoration and worſhip. Whereas the true ſervants of Chriſt Peter & the Angell refuſed vtterly the ſame in ſuch very maner offered vntounto them by meaner perſons in reſpect of ſtate. Therefore this Thaddaeus, if he were any, was ſome falſe Apoſtle, and came not by Chriſtes ſending, but led by the ſpirit of errour and ſeduction: as ſome were, who went abroad in the name of Diſciples and Apoſtles, in thoſe dayes.

4. Neither doe I ſee how it can poſſibly be true which this Thaddeus ſaith, that Chriſt aſcended vp to his Father with a great multitude: ſeeing the Scripture ſheweth how after 40. dayes (the tyme that he converſed with his Apoſtles) hee aſcended in all their ſightes, alone vp into Heaven.

You get nothing therfore by citing theſe vngainful**None which … prove … very Ph… to be in poſtles … then: th… prove … Matter … witneſſes for you. Nor yet by citing the Apostolike Creed: ſeeing you ſtand only vpō the preciſe order of the words He Dyed, was Buryed, deſcended into Hades. Which how weakely they make for you,ccPag. 1… 199. before we have ſhewed. Whervnto this may be added, that verily it ſeemeth there was no certaine preſcript number of Articles in the Creed of olde, much leſſe any preciſe or exact forme of wordes, ſuch as p. 204now we hauehave, and which is all your hold. This partly by Ruffinus writing vponupon it,Wee may inke that y^e poſtles Creed … no exact …rm of words y^e primitive …es. may be vnderſtood: who among the words of the Creed then, rehearſeth not divers materiall wordes, which our vſuall forme now hath expreſly. The Ancients Ignatius, Irenaeus, Iustin, Tertullian, Origen, &c. in their Creedes doe differ more both for words, and matter alſo. Yet they all pretend to rehearſe the Apoſtolike Creed, as by Tradition they receaved it, & as they ſeverally conceaved it: at leaſt ſo far alwayes as concerned Chriſts maine & diſtinct works of Redemption wrought for vsus. Neither overthrow you this, in ſaying, that b ſom of thē want a good many of the Articles which are in the Apostles Creed. For (as I ſaid) they want none (neither ought they) concerning Chriſtes mediation wrought for vsus. His going to Hell was a maine & a diſtinct part thereof, if he went thither indeed. Wherefore they might not in any wiſe be defective therein. Againe though they want Articles which are now in our forme of the Apoſtles Creed, yet how prove you that they want any of that, which with them was vulgar and common? Laſt of all, though ſome of the Ancients do not perhaps rehearſe all the Articles of the Apoſtolik Creed, (as it was then currant by Tradition in the Churches) yet you have no colour in the world to thinke that none of them all ſhould rehearſe it wholy and intirely. But in none of them all is this forme of the Creed found which we now have, and do obſerve. Yea by the varietie & difference of them all, who ſtill profeſſe that they vtter the Apoſtolike Creed taught them by Tradition, we may ſee that the Apoſtles Creed had not any exact nor preciſe forme of words at the beginning (as now we have it vſed among vsus) but it contayned onelyonly (as we may thinke) certaine Heads of Doctrine fundamentall,…om the A…tles (…t ſee…th) there … receaved …rief ſumme …tter, no …ciſe forme words for … common …ed. That there is one God, 3. Perſons, The Father, the Sonne, and the Holy Ghost, That the Sonne Ieſus Christ is both God and Man, That as man hee was extreamely humbled for vsus even vntounto Death, and after that exalted vntounto glory in Heaven, whence in due time he ſhall come to iudgment, &c. This in effect all Creeds do expreſſe, but in words they differ greatly, & ſomtimes ſome have mo articles then theſe: yet ſuch they ſeeme to bee as were on ſome ſpecial occaſion more particularly and expreſly noted, being otherwiſe either ſome part or els ſome proper effect & conſequent from theſe. And ſo it might come to paſſe that ſome p. 205of the Ancient Creeds differed ſomwhere in ſome particular articles from other Creeds, yea all of them in words from each other: and yet in ſubſtance and effect they were all one. Seeing then that the Apoſtles Creed for the preciſe forme of words was not the ſame in the primitive Churches which we now have: yea that at firſt it had no exact forme of words at al. For it is ſure that no man can prove by good teſtimony that there was any, or indeed any other then ſuch as theſe ancient Fathers thus variably and differingly rehearſed. Seeing alſo it is proved, that this ſet forme which we now have, ſpecially our article in queſtion was not††As a … the C… receaved for many hundred yeares after Chriſt; ſome ſuppoſing that theſe words were not put in till neer 1000. years after him. I ſay, All this being conſidered, it is evident that your Argument only frō the preciſe and exact forme of words in the Creed, & from the order & placing of He deſcended to Hades, namely after Dead & Buryed, is not worth any thing, to induce thereby an Article of faith, That Christs Soule went to Hell.

After this it ſhall not be amiſſe to conſider ſome other reaſons of good moment. Our 3^d. Reaſon is:REAS… If there be no certaine benefit to the godly by Christes going to Hell, then doubtles he went not thither. But there is no certaine benefit to the Godly by Christes going to hell. Therefore doubtles he went not thither. This Reaſon youaaPag … call our ſtrongeſt fort. It is not our ſtrongeſt, but yet ſtrong indeed: for you have made no where any good anſwer to it, neither can you. I know a number of wordes you have throughout your whole treatiſe denying the Aſſumption, but they are nothing in the world but meere preſumptions. You ſay,bbPag … Is the ſubduing of hell powers, and the treading on all their force, and the reſtraining of all their fury ſo ſmall a matter with you, that it doth no good to the Godly? And elſwhere moſt tediouſly and vainly you augment & repeate the marvelous thinges that Chriſte did by his Humane preſence in Hell. I would willingly beleeve it, but alas who ſaith ſo beſides your ſelf, or only ſuch as can tell no better then you. Where is that become now,ccPag … what I read in the worde of God that I beleeve, what J do not reade, that I do not beleeve, &c. It is eaſy to ſay, that you will onelyonly hold what the Scripture aſſureth: but in practiſe you will ſlip from this preciſe order, when you liſt. I know well that you boldly ſay that theddPag … Purpoſe of Christs deſcent p. 206is plainly profeſſed in Scriptures, to be the ſpoyling of Sathan, and delivering of men from the power of Hell. Is it plainly profeſſed? I beſeech you, where? I wott well what you will faine & deviſe of the Fathers, when you impute ſo palpable vntruths to the word of God it ſelf. Shew vsus one title, one iot of any benefit which (by the Scriptures) Chriſt wrought for vsus by his locall preſenſe in Hell, and then I will ceaſe to gainſay it forever. Otherwiſe tell vsus never ſo much of the wonderfull and ſingular fruite of Chriſts being there, the more you amplify, the more you hazard your credit, & the more we ſhall wonder at your bold avouching matters which are not in the word of God. The benefits all and every one (which you every where rehearſe) I moſt vnfainedly and religiouſly beleeve: namely that he deſerved all good things for vsus, and obtayned thē for vsus in his Reſurrectiō, &c. Aſcention: and that finally and fully he ſhall in his laſt iudgment tread downe Satan vnderunder our feet. But what is this to his locall being in Hell? Shew therefore I ſay by the expreſſe word that Chriſt in Hel did theſe, or any parte of theſe good things for vsus. If you do not (for as yet I ſee no title to prove that) ſurely all your talke is but blaſts of vanitie. The which I rather beleeve that you never can nor wil do, becauſe you confeſſe aſmuch ſomewhere as overturneth all your ſhew of Chriſtes doing good to vsus in Hell.…g. 160. For, a This conquest (you ſay) Christ purchaſed by his paſſion, but he did not execute it till his reſurrection. If he executed nothing till his Reſurrection, and purchaſed all in his Paſſion, then he did nothing in Hell. For his Reſurrection was diſtinctly after his ſuppoſed being in Hell, whither he never afterwards returned to execute there any thing at all. Nay, Auſtin your only ſtay thinketh * he deſcended in vaine, vnles he did good to ſom who were even there in Hell in torments. …e before …g. 168.But this you vtterly renounce. So that every way ſtil it remayneth good, that ſeeing there is no certaine benefit that Chriſt did in Hell, neither to vsus, nor to any, therefore we are not to beleeue that he was in Hell.

Our 4^d. Reaſon: There is altogeather as great reaſon and as vrgent cauſe that Christ whole man (both Soule, …SON 4.and Body) ſhould be preſent in Hell to free vsus thence wholly, (that is our Souls, & Bodies) as there is that his Soule must be there preſent to free thence our Soules. But ſimply it is confeſſed that his Body was never there, p. 207neither had any cauſe to be, for the freeing of our Bodies. Therefore it followeth, that neither his Soule was ever there, nor had any cauſe ſo to be, for the freeing of our Soules. Heere I wiſh, you would anſwer my propoſition without Skoffes & taunts and haughty diſdaine, as your manner is. But bring ſome evident and cleere difference that his Soul muſt go more neceſſarily thither alone then that his Body alſo ſhould, and let it be truly grounded on the proportion of faith and Chriſtian Religion, if not on expreſſe Scripture. I wot well what you bring from ſome Fathers,aaPag. 17… Fulgentius, bbPag. 17….181.Athanaſius, & others, That his Soule by being preſent in Limbo, (that they meane by Hades and Infernum) ſaved vsus from Hell, & by his fleſh temporally dying he gave vsus life eternall, and by lying in the grave vncorrupted he gave vsus incorruptiō. Heere we allow them ſo far as they meane, that what one parte of him did, that our whole man and every parte received good by. But if they think, his Soul by Divine ordināce had need to be actually preſent elſwhere, then only with the godly deceaſed, to execute his victory gotten before on the Croſſe againſt Satan, to thend that we might be free frō Hell, thē let thē ſhew vsus the Scripture for this Divine ordināce: & ſo (by Gods grace) we ſhal forthwith imbrace it. Otherwiſe at leaſt let them ſhew vsus a reaſon (or do you ſo much for them) why both parts ioyntly ſhould not rather have gon thither by like neceſſity to execute that togither, which both ioyntly had got and deſerved for togeather: the benefit alſo whereof is to come (not to one parte alone, but) ioyntly to both in vsus. Againe, why this going to Hell by our Saviour Chriſt was not rather after his Reſurrection, when he had begun his actuall Triumph in deed by ioyning togeather againe both partes of his manhood, in both which togeather before he had bene humbled. Neither is it likely that he began it before his Reſurrection, ſeeing the ScripturebbMath. Luke 2… Act 2 2. & 3.15 40 & 1 17.3. & Rom. 4.6.4. & … Cor. 15 … 1.20 1 14. 2 T… 11.Luke 2Acts 2:2Acts 3:15Rom 4:6Rom 4:4 every where noteth this as the firſt part of his exaltation after death, and it being ſtrange in Chriſtian reaſon & againſt proportion of faith to think, that one parte of Chriſt (his Soul) ſhould gloriouſly triumph, the other (his Body) all this while lying in Humiliation, poſſeſſed with death in the Grave, which you ſay is the Divels range, a part of his power, and of the Kingdom of darknes. Yea alſo ſeeing it is moſt likely that he would cleere himſelfe firſt wholy and intirely in both partes, before he would begin to p. 208ſtrip and ſpoyle Sathan for vsus. Laſtly ſeeing it is a greater degree of triumph & victory to ſpoyle the enemy, to tread him vnderunder foote, to breake his houſes and ſtronge Holdes, to ſet free the captiues, to make him and his to bow the knee to the conquerour, then to get perfit life & freedom to himſelfe. So that alwayes that, is after this. Wherefore it ſeemeth that Chriſte did thus alſo. If he did actually ſuch thinges in Hell, it was not till after his Reſurection; before which time he had not perfit life and deliverance himſelf. Let vsus I pray have ſome cleere and Chriſtian reaſon againſt theſe ſtrong likelyhoods: and then let vsus aske a point or two more, w^ch we think will follow likewiſe, if your aſſertion be true. Firſt, if one part of Chriſt, viz: his Soul only were in Hel to execute his victory which before hee had merited on the Croſſe, then why in his ſufferinges, righteouſnes, and obedience might not one parte of Chriſts manhood have aſwell ſufficed. I ſay why might not one parte alone have in this world merited enough (which Appollinaris an Haeretick affirmed) aſwell as that one parte might ſerve to triumph for vsus in Hell. Againe ſeeing his Body in the Grave by overcoming corruption which is a part of the Kingdom of Satan as † you ſay,…g. 216. did thereby ſave our bodies frō that part of Satans walk as you call it, by what reaſon is it that thereby he deſtroyed not conſequentlie the whole kingdom of Satan, ſaving thereby our Soules alſo, in ſo much that Chriſts Soule might not have needed to have come into Hell for that purpoſe. Or if they meane that his fleſh being in the Grave, and his Soule being in Hell did ſeverally and diſtinctly ſave our fleſh and our ſoules, then how will you be reconciled with them,…ur ſelfe …eth it, … all men …g a who do deny that point. Further for the actuall ſtripping of Satan of his ſpoyles, why was it needfull that an actuall preſence of any parte of his manhood ſhould be in Hell, ſeeing indeed it is certaine that the whole actuall triumph of Chriſt over Satan proceedeth not of the proper vertue of the manhood, but onelyonly from the vertue and power of the Godhead of Chriſt. Therefore that might poſſibly be as effectuall and as fully accompliſhed in the abſence of the manhood as in the prſence: all the while that the Godhead and manhood were ſtill vnited and continually togeather in one Perſon.

Laſt of all, if it were the very humane preſence of his ſoule that ſo delivered our ſoules from thence that they ſhall never come thither p. 209why did not the preſence of his fleſh in the Grave keepe ours that it ſhould never come there, or at leaſt that it ſhould never putrifie nor rot, as his fleſh did not. All theſe ſequeles and conſequences are as good and as likely as your aſſertion, that Chriſtes Soule (and not his fleſh) ought to be locally in Hell for this end, that ours might never come there.

Further, I made this Argument in my““Pa… 160 former Treatiſe, that Chriſtes Deſcending into Hell (if ever hee did ſo) could not be iudged any part of his Exaltation or Glorification. To which your reply is, I know not whether more ſtrange, or skornful. But you††Pa. 416. reſolue that theſe words He deſcended to Hell, importeth his Exaltation and Triumph. Yet you skoffe at me for the like: as if I had ſaid,““Pa… His Deſcending was Aſcending: & Hell was Heaven. But heerin you affirme vntruly. 1. I ſay, Though his Soule leaving his body Aſcended: yet this is not meant by that phraſe, He deſcended to Hades. 2. I never ſaid that Hades ſignified Heaven, although ſome inaaIn a… ble ſ… Hades are in Heaven. 3. Much leſſe did I ever ſay, that Hell is Heaven. Why thē cry you out of**Pag … impudencie, facing, ridiculous, and audacious, preſumption. &c. Who preſumeth let the adviſed reader iudge, when you thus confidently avouch as an article of faith that Christes Soule locally deſcended; and yet bring not one proofe of it from Gods word, nor from any mans opinion, whom you will cleave vntounto fully. ThatbbPa. … you avouch““ve… Phil. 2. for it, is more ſtraunge: where we have not one word of his local being in Hel. And that the**ver… Coloſſians 2. ſhould proove it, paſſeth all the reſt. Where (though we graunt you your reading) yet the expreſſe text referreth that triumph to Chriſtes Croſſe: which you openly deny. That of the Councells, howe Chriſt roſe againe,††Th… prove for yo… having ſpoyled Hell, I eaſily yeeld; ſeeing that proveth not his locall being there. The ſame I affirme of that Allegorie in Luke; which ſheweth ChriſtesccLuk… … Overcoming, Binding, and Spoyling of Satan in deed: but not by his locall being in Hel. What if Chriſt doe ſet out many pointes of doctrine by Parables? Yet ſuch are thoſe pointes, as are proved otherwiſe and elſwhere. The Parables doe but illuſtrate them. Howbeit this Parable in queſtion, Chriſt expreſly applyeth to his Dispoſſeſſing of Divells out of mens bodyes. Wherefore you ought not to wreſt it to another thing, whereof there he hath not a word, nor any where els: p. 210that is, to ſhew how Chriſt bound the Divell in Hell locally. Rather remember, I pray, howe God ſhewed his diſpleaſure againſt your wreſting of his word, by that ſtrange terrour that happened even then, when you were deſcended into the depth of this vncouth doctrine at Paules Croſſe. Which for the time ſo affrighted many 1000. of people, that it will never be forgotten in England while your opinions be remēbred: albeit this grew but of a ſmall occaſion, as after it ſeemed.

Where you charge me in the end, arrogantly and abſurdly to falſifie the Synod of our Realme,… 17. it is but what your ſelfe doth in effect. I ſaid, Our Synod corrected K. Edwardes Synod. You acknowledge and profeſſe that " in the later words of that former Synod now left out, …. 419.are 3. things that cannot be iustified by the Scriptures.

1. That the Spirites of the iust were in Hell.

2. That Christ there preached vntounto them.

3. That he ſtayed there till his Reſurrection.

Which our Synod ſince very profitably hath overskipped and ſuppreſſed. Firſt then your ſelfe granteth, that our later Synod corrected the former about this matter: which in my wordes you cannot indure to heare. 2. You charge theſe words of K. Edw. Synod. with 2. pointes, which are not in them. 1. That it ſaith, how the Spirits of the iust were in Hell: and that Chriſt deſcending thither, ſtayed there till his reſurrection. In me you would make this a great matter, ſo to miſreport the wordes of a Synod, which in deed ſaith nothing heereof. 3. It is well that you * renounce that of " Peter, … 22.….3.19(by Austins direction) as making not at all for any locall being of Chriſt in Hell. But yet heerein your ſelfe openly refuſeth the minde of all your predeceſſors, yea of our later Synod, if they believed as you vrge that they did. For if they liked Chriſts locall being in Hel, they miſliked not the applying of that in Peter therevnto: as by Mai. Nowells Catechiſme may appear. Neither miſliked they his tarying there till his reſurrectiō: which Austin alſo holdeth as firmely, as that he was there. All which you vtterly diſclaime, as wel as I. Why then do you aggravat my differing from them, and ſee not your owne. 4. That our Engliſh Clea…gie generally did or doe beleeve Chriſtes locall deſcent into Hell (although they reade and rehearſe thoſe words ſo tranſlated) certainly no man will, nor ought to acknowledge. Every man is aſſured of the cōtrarie. You can argue nothing then p. 211heerein by our vſuall naming of this word Hell, in this place of the Creed. Which yet is al that you**Pag. … have heere. So that your concluſion is vaine. If Hell in Engliſh bee Hell, and going downe bee deſcending, &c. Likewiſe is that, You are content to be tryed by all the Fathers both Greeke and Latin. Who all (as hath ben ſhewed) doe make againſt your opinion. Alſo as touching the Scripture you are vtterly deſtitute thereof: which yet alone muſt take place with vsus in this matter. All that you bring for your purpoſe, are meerely miſtaken & miſtranſlated wordes of Scriptures, Creedes, and Fathers: as (I hope) hath plainly bene proved. This therfore may ſuffice for vsus to refuſe your doctrine in theſe points. Wiſdome ſhalbe iuſtified of all her children. To God only wiſe be praiſe through IESVS CHRIST for ever. Rom. 16.17.

FINIS.