The Immortality of Mans Soul, Letter 2 – Errata
SIR,
§. 1. IT is your wiſdom in Caſes of ſo great moment, to uſe all juſt endeavours for ſatisfaction; and I think you did but your duty, to ſtudy this as hard as you ſay you have done. But 1. I wiſh you had ſtudied it better; for then you would not have been a ſtranger to many Books which afford a juſt ſolution of your Doubts, as I muſt ſuppoſe you are, by your taking no notice of what they have ſaid. 2. And I wiſh you had known, that between the ſolving of all your Objections, and taking all on Truſt from men, or believing as the Church believeth, there are Two other ways to ſatisfaction (which muſt be conjunct): 1. Diſcerning the unanſwerable evidences in Nature and Providence, of the Souls future Life. 2. And taking it on truſt from Divine Revelation; which is otherwiſe to be proved, than by believing as the Church by Authority requireth you.
I have written on this Subject ſo much … ready, that I had rather you had told me, why you think it unſatisfactory, than deſire me to tranſcribe it, while Print is as legible as Manuſcript. If you have not read it, I humbly offer it to your conſideration. It is moſt in two Books: The firſt which I intreat you to read, is called, The Reaſons of the Chriſtian Religion: the other is called, The Unreaſonableneſs of Infidelity. If you think this too much labour, you are not ſo hard or faithful a Student of this weighty Caſe, as it deſerveth, and you pretend to be. If you will read them (or the firſt at leaſt), and after come to me, that we may fairly debate your remaining Doubts, it will be a likelier way for us to be uſeful to each other, than my going over all the miſtakes of your Paper will be. And I ſuppoſe you know, that we have full aſſurance of a multitude of Verities, againſt which many Objections may be raiſed, which no mortal man can fully ſolve, eſpecially from Modes and Accidents. Nay, perhaps there is nothing in the World which is not liable to ſome ſuch Objections. And yet I will not neglect, your writing.
§. 2. When you were convinc'd, That there is a firſt Cauſe, it would have been an orderly progreſs to think what that Cauſe is; and whether his Works do not prove his Infinite Perfection, having all that eminently which he giveth formally to the whole World, as far as it belongeth to perfection to have it. For none can give more than he hath. And then you ſhould have thought what this God is to man, as manifeſt in his Works: and you ſhould have conſidered what of man is paſt doubt, and thence in what relation he ſtands to God, and to his fellow-creatures: And this would have led you to know mans certain duty: and that would have aſſured you of a future life of Retribution. Is not this a juſt progreſs?
§. 3. But you would know a Definition of the Soul. But do you know nothing but by Definitions? Are all men that cannot define, therefore void of all knowledg? You know not at all what ſeeing is, or what light is, or what feeling, ſmelling, taſting, hearing is, what ſound or odor is, what ſweet or bitter, nor what thinking, or knowing, or willing, or loving is, if you know it not before defining tell you, and better than bare defining can ever tell you. Every vital faculty hath a ſelf-perception in its acting; which is an eminent ſenſe: Intuition alſo of outward ſenſible Objects, or immediate perception of them, as ſenſata & imaginata, is before all Argument and Definition, or reaſoning action. By ſeeing, we perceive that we ſee; and by underſtanding, we perceive that we underſtand. I dare ſay, That you know the Acts of your own Soul by acting, tho when you come to reaſoning or defining, you ſay you know not what they are. You can give no definition what ſubſtance is, or Ens at leaſt, much leſs what God is. And yet what is more certain than that there is Subſtance, Entity, and God?
§. 4. But I'le tell you what the Soul of m…n is: It is a Vital, Intellectual, Volitive Spirit, animating a humane organized Body. When it is ſeparated, it is not formally a Soul, but a Spirit ſtill.
§. 5. Qu. But what is ſuch a mental Spirit? It is a moſt pure Subſtance, whoſe form is a Power or Virtue of Vital Action, Intellection, and Volition (three in one).
§. 6. I. Are you not certain of all theſe Acts, viz. That you Act vitall, underſtand and will? If not, you are not ſure that you ſee, that you doubt, that you wrote to me, or that you are any thing.
II. If you act theſe, it is certain that you have the power of ſo acting. For nothing doth that which it cannot do.
III. It is certain, that it is a Subſtance which hath this power: For nothing can do nothing.
IV. It is evident, that it is not the viſible Body, as compoſed of Earth, Water and Air, which is this mental Subſtance. Neither any one of them, nor all together have Life, Underſtanding, or Will. They are paſſive Beings, and act not at all of themſelves, but as acted by inviſible Powers. They have an aggregative inclination to U…ion, and no other. Were it not for the Igneous Nature which is active, or for Spirits, they would be ceſſant. Therefore you are thus far paſt the dark, That there is in man an Inviſible Subſtance, which hath, yea, which is a Power or Virtue of Vital Action, Intellection, and Volition.
V. And that this Active Power is a diſtinct thing from meer Paſſive Power, or mobilitie per aliud, Experience puts paſt doubt. There is in every living thing a Power, or Virtue of ſelf-moving, elſe Life were not Life.
VI. And that this is not a meer accident of the Soul, but its eſſential form, I have proved ſo fully in my Methodus Theologiae, in a peculiar Diſputation, that I will not here repeat it. It's evident, That even in the igneous Subſtance, the Vis Motiva, Illuminativa, Calefactiva, is more than an accident, even its eſſential form: But were it otherwiſe, it would but follow, That if the very accidental Acts or qualities of a Soul be ſo noble, its eſſential muſt be greater.
VII. But it is certain, That neither Souls, nor any thing, have either Being, Power, or Action, but in conſtant receptive dependence on the continued emanation of the prime Cauſe; and ſo no Inviduation is a total ſeparation from him, or an Independence, or a ſelf-ſufficiency. Thus far natural light tells you what Souls are.
§. 7. You add you ſelf, That thoſe attainments which you were made capable of, you were deſigned to. Very right. God maketh not ſuch noble Faculties or Capacities in vain; much leſs to engage all men to a life of duty, which ſhall prove deceit and miſery. But you have Faculties capable of thinking of God, as your Beginning, Guide, and End, as your Maker, Ruler, and Benefactor; and of ſtudying your duty to him, in hope of Reward, and of thinking what will become of you after Death, and of hoping for future Bleſſedneſs, and fearing future Miſery: all which no Bruit was ever capable of. Therefore God deſigned you to ſuch ends which you are thus capable of.
§. 8. You ſay (p. 3.) Many have defended the Souls Immortality; but none have proved a Subject capable of a life of Retribution. It's a Contradiction to be immortal, or rewarded, and not to be a Subject capable. For nothing hath no accidents. Nothing hath that which it is not capable of haing.
§. 9. You ſay, None tell us what it is. How many Score Volumes have told it us? I have now briefly told you what it is. You ſay, [To ſay it is that by which I reaſon, is not ſatisfactory. I look for a Definition]. But on Condition you look not to ſee or feel it, as you do Trees or Stones, you may be ſatisfied. I have given you a Definition. The Genus is Subſtantia puriſſima; the Differentia is Virtus Vitalis, Activa, Intellectiva, Volitiva (trinum a Imago Creatoris). What's here wanting to a Definition?
I have told you, That there is an antecedent more certain Perception, than by Definition; by which I know that I ſee, hear, taſte, am, and by which the Soul, in act, is conſcious of it ſelf.
§. 10. You ask, 1. Is it a real Being? Anſw. I told you, Nothing can do nothing.
2. Is it really different from the Body? Anſw. A Subſtance which hath in it ſelf an Eſſential Principle of Life, Intellection, and Volition, and that which hath not, are really different. Try whether you can make a Body feel, or underſtand without a Soul. 2. Thoſe that are ſeperable, are really different.
3. You ask, Is it able to be without it? Anſw. What ſhould hinder it? The Body made not the Soul: A viler Subſtance giveth not being to a nobler. 2. Nothing at all can be without continued Divine ſuſtentation. But we ſee, Juxta naturam, God annihilateth no Subſtance: Changes are but by compoſition, and ſeparation, and action, but not by annihilation. An Atome of Earth or Water, is not annihilated; and why ſhould we ſuſpect, that a Spiritual Subſtance is? Yea, the contrary is fully evident, tho God is able to annihilate all things.
§. 11. You ſay, If it be meerly material, and differ from the Body but gradually, Death may be but its concentration of this active Principle in its own Body.
Anſw. If you underſtand your own words, it's well. 1. Do you know what material ſignifieth? See Crakenthorp's Metaphyſicks, and he will tell you in part, it's an ambiguous word. Sometime it ſignifieth the ſame as ſubſtantia; and ſo Souls are material. Sometime it ſignifieth only that ſort of Subſtance which is called corporeal. Dr. More tells you, That Penetrability, and Indiviſibility, difference them.
But what if fire ſhould differ from air materially, but in degree of ſubtilty and purity, or ſenſitive Souls from igneous, and mental from ſenſitive, but in higher degrees of purity of matter; Is it not the form that maketh the ſpecifick difference? Air hath not the igneous Virtue of Motion, …umination, and Calefaction; nor ig…s, the ſenſitive Virtues, nor meer ſenſi…ves the rational Virtues aforeſaid. For… dat eſſe & nomen. This maketh not …meer gradual difference, but a ſpeci….
There is in Compounds matter, and materiae diſpoſitio receptiva, & forma. There is ſomewhat anſwerable … ſpiritual uncompounded Beings. There is ſubſtantia, and ſubſtantiae diſpoſitio, & forma. Theſe are but intellectually distinct, and not …, and are but inadequate conceptions of one thing. That ſubstantia is conceptus fundamentalis, is confeſt. Some make penetr…bility and indiviſibility, ſubstantiae concep… diſpoſiti…. But the Virtus vitalis activa, intol… …, volitiva, in one, is the conceptus formatis.
2. But what mean you by [the active Principles concentration in its own body]? It is a ſtrange Fxpreſſion. 1. If you mean, that it's annihilated, then it remaineth not. … If you mean, that it remaineth an active Principle, you mean a ſubstance, or acci…t. If … ſubstance, it ſeems you acknow…g it a ſelf-ſubſiſting being, only not ſeparate from its carcaſs. And if they be two, why are they not ſeparable? If ſeparable, why not ſeparated? When the duſt of the Carcaſs is ſcattered, is the Soul concentred in every atome, or but in one? And is it many, or one concentred Soul? If you mean, That it's but an accident, that's diſprov'd before; what accident is it? If con…ntred in the body, the body, and every duſt of it, is vital and intellectual. And if ſo, every clod and ſtone is ſo; which I will not ſo much wrong you, as to imagine that you think.
§. 12. But you would know what's meant by a ſpirit, whether all that is not evident to ſenſe? Anſ. It is a pure ſubſtance (ſaith Dr. More, penetrable and indiviſible) eſſentially vital, perceptive and appetitive.
§. 13. You add, [How ſhall I know the difference between the higheſt degree of materials, and lowest of immaterials? To me an immaterial, and ſpiritual being, ſeems a kind of Hccus, a ſubſtantial nothing.
Anſ. If you take matter for the ſame with ſubstance, it is material. But not if you take matter, as it's uſually taken, for corporeal; or groſs, and impenetrable, and diviſible ſubstance, uncapable of eſſential, vital, ſelfmoving perception and appetite. If this ſeems nothing to you, God ſeems nothing to you, and true Nature, which is Principium motus, ſeems nothing to you: And all that performeth all the action which you ſee in the world; ſeems nothing to you. It's pity that you have converſt ſo little with God and your ſelf, as to think both to be nothing.
§. 14. What you ſay out of Gen. 1. is little elſe but miſtake, when you ſay [all was made out of the deep waters by the ſpirit of God]. The Text nameth what was made of them. It ſaith nothing of the Creation of Angels, or Spirits, out of them (no, nor of the Light, or Earth, or Firmament).
And whereas you ſay, [God made man of the duſt of the ground; but the body only is not man, ergo. Anſ. You uſe your ſelf too unkindly, to leave out half the words, Gen. 2. 7. And the Lord God formed man of the duſt of the ground, and breathed into his noſtrils the breath of life, and man became a living ſoul; when the Text tells us the two works by which God made man, will you leave out one, and then argue excluſively againſt it? What if I ſaid, [The Chandler made a Candle of Tallow, and then by another kindled it]? or [a man made an houſe of Bricks, and cemented them with Mortar, &c.]? will you thence prove, That he made a Candle burning without fire, or the Houſe without Mortar? Words are uſeleſs to ſuch Expoſitors.
§. 15. Page 4. you ſay; You know all matter is eternal.
But you know no ſuch thing. If it be Eternal, it hath one Divine perfection: and if ſo, it muſt have the reſt, and ſo ſhould be God. But what's your proof?
You again (believe the Souls concentration in its body]▪ Anſ. Words inſignificant. It's Idem or Aliud. If Idem, then duſt is Eſſentially Vital and Intellectual. Deny not ſpiritual forms, if every clod or ſtone have them. If Aliud, how prove you it to be there, rather than elſewhere? And if you conſidered well, you would not believe eſſential, ſubstantial life and mind, to lye dead and unactive, ſo long as the duſt is ſo.
§. 16. You come to the hardeſt Objecti- [The Souls defective acting in infants, ideots, the ſick, &c. and ſay, [It would rather not act, if it were as repreſented.]
Anſ. 1. It cannot be denied, but the Operations of the Soul here, are much of them upon the organized body; and tho not organical, as if they acted by an Organ, yet organical, as acting on an Organ; which is the material Spirit▪ primarily. And ſo there go various Cauſes to ſome Effects, called Acts.
2. And the Soul doth nothing independently, but as dependent on God, in Being and Operation: and therefore doth what God knoweth, and uſeth it too, as his Inſtrument, in the forming of the body; and in what it knoweth not it ſelf. And as God, as fons naturae neceſſitateth the natural agency of the Soul, as he doth the Soul of Bruits. But as the wiſe and free Governor of the world, he hath to moral acts, given mans Soul free-will, and therefore conducting Reaſon; which it needs not to neceſſitated acts, as digeſtion, motion of the blood, formation of the body, &c.
And as it is not made to do all its acts freely and rationally, ſo neither at all times, as in Apoplexies, Infancy, Sleep, &c. It is eſſential to the Soul, to have the active power or virtue of Intellection and Free-will, but not always to uſe it. As it is eſſential to the ſubſtance of fire, tho latent in a flint, to have the power of motion, lighe and heat.
And its conſiderable, that as a traveller in his journey, thinking and talking only of other things, retaineth ſtill a ſecret act of intending his end, (elſe he would not go on) when he perceiveth and obſerveth it not at all. He that playeth on the Lute or Harpſical, ceaſeth when his Inſtrument is, out of tune; becauſe he acteth by free-will.
But the Soul of an Idiot or mad-man acteth only per modum naturae, not by free-acts, but neceſſitated by God by the order of nature. Only moral acts are free; and that ſome other are but brutiſh, and ſome but vegitative, is no-more a wonder, than that it ſhould underſtand in the head, and be ſenſible only in the moſt of the body, and vegitative only in the hairs and nails. It operateth in all the body by the Spirits, as calid; but about the eyes, and open ſenſoria, by Spirits alſo as lucid, for that uſe.
§. 14. But never forget this, That nothing at any time doth what it cannot do: but many can do that which they do not. Tho the Soul in the Womb, or Sleep, remember not, or reaſon not; if ever it do it, that proveth it had the power of doiug it. And that power is not a novel accident, tho the act may be ſo.
§. 18. To your Explications p. 4. I ſay, 1. None doubts, but all the world is the work of one prime operating Cauſe; Whom I hope you ſee in them, is of perfect power, wiſdom aud goodneſs, the chief efficient dirigent and final cauſe of all.
2. I doubt not, but the created univerſe is all one thing or frame; and no one atome or part totally ſeparated from, and independent on the reſt.
3. But yet the parts are multitudes, and heterogeneous, and have their Individuation, and are at once many and one in ſeveral reſpects. And the unity of the Univerſe, or of inferior univerſal Cauſes (as the Sun, or an anima telluris, &c.) are certainly conſiſtent with the ſpecifick and individual differences of the parts.
E. g. Many individual Apples grow on the ſame Tree; yea, Crabs and Apples by divers grafts, nouriſhed on the ſame ſtock: One may rot, or be ſower, and not another. Millions of Trees, as alſo of Herbs and Flowers, good and poyſonous, all grow in the ſame earth. Here is Unity, and great Diverſity. And tho ſelf-moving Animals be not fixed on the earth, no doubr they have a contiguity, or continuity, as parts with the Univerſe. But for all that, a Toad is not a Man, nor a man in torment, undifferenced from another at eaſe, nor a bad man all one with a good.
§. 19. And if any ſhould have a conce…, That there is nothing but God and matter. I have fully confuted it in the Appendix to Reaſ. of Chriſtian Religion. Matter is no ſuch omnipotent ſapiential thing in it ſelf, as to need no cauſe or maker, any more than Compounds. And to think, that the infinite God would make no nobler Creature than dead matter, no liker himſelf, to glorifie him, is antecedently abſurd, but conſequently notoriouſly falſe. For tho nothing be acted without him, it's evident that he hath made active Natures with a principle of ſelf-moving in themſelves. The Sun differs from a clod, by more than being matter variouſly moved by God, even by a ſelf-moving power alſo. Elſe there were no living creature, but bodies in themſelves dead, animated by God. But it would be too tedious to ſay all againſt this that's to be ſaid.
§. 20. When you tell us of [One life in all, differenc'd only by diverſity of Organs], you mean God, or a common created Soul. If God, I tell you where I have confuted it. It's pity to torment or puniſh God in a murderer, or call him wicked in a wicked man: or that one man ſhould be hang'd, and another prais'd, becauſe the Engines of their bodies are diverſe. But the beſt Anatomiſts ſay, That nothing is to be ſeen in the brain of other Animals, why they might not be as rational as Men. And if it be an Anim… creata communis that you mean, either … think it is a univerſal Soul to the univerſ… world, or only to this Earth or Vortex. If to all the World, you feign it to have … Prerogative. If to part of the world, … each Vortex, Sun, Star, &c. have a diſt… individuate ſuperior Soul, why not … ſo inferiors? And why may not millions of individual Spirits conſiſt with more common or univerſal Spirits, as well as the life … Worms in your belly with yours. That which hath no Soul or Spirit of its own, … not fit for ſuch reception and communion with ſuperior Spirits, as that which hath. Communion requireth ſome ſimilitude. We ſee God uſeth not all things alike, becauſe he makes them not like.
§. 21. But if the difference between Beaſts, Trees, Stones, and Men, be only the organical contexture of the body; then 1. Either all theſe have but one Soul, and … are but one, ſave corporeally. 2. Or … very Stone, Tree and Beaſt hath an Intellectual Soul: for it is evident that man hath by its Operations.
I. Had you made but Virtue and Vice to be only the effects of the bodies contexture, ſure you would only blame the maker …f your body, and not your ſelf, for any of your Crimes: For yon did not make your own body, if you were nothing.
Is the common light and ſenſe of Nature no Evidence? Doth not all the world difference Virtue and Vice, moral good and evil? Is it only the difference of an Inſtrument in Tune, and out of Tune? Either then all called ſin is good; or God, or the univerſal Soul, only is to be blamed. Then to call you a Knave, or a Lyar, or Perjured, &c. is no more diſgrace, than to ſay, that you are ſick, or blind. Then all Laws are made only to bind God, or the Amima mundi; and all puniſhment is threatned to God, or this common Soul. And it is God, or the common Soul only in a body, which ſorroweth, feareth, feeleth pain or pleaſure.
II. And if you equal the Souls of Beaſts, Trees, Stones and Men, you muſt make them all to have an Intellectual Soul. If man had not, he could never underſtand. And if they have ſo alſo, fruſtra fit potentia quae nunquam producitur in actum. It is certain that it is not the body (Earth, Air or Water) that feeleth, much leſs that underſtandeth or willeth. If therefore all men have but one Soul, why is it not you that are in pain or joy, when any, or all others are ſo? Tour ſuffering and joys are as much theirs. You hurt your ſelf when you hurt a Malefactor. Why are you not anſwerable for the Crimes of every Thief, if all be one?
§. 22. You vainly liken ſeveral Natures and Faculties to ſeveral pieces of Clock-work, For Natures and Faculties are ſelf-acting Principles under the prime Agent: but a Clock is only paſſive, moved by another: Whether the motus gravitationis in the poiſe, be by an intrinſlck Principle, or by another … active Nature, is all that's controvertible there. All that your ſimilitude will infer, is this, That as the gravitation of one poiſe, moves every wheel according to its receptive aptitude; ſo God, the univerſal Spirit, moveth all that is moved, according to their ſeveral aptitudes, paſſives as paſſive, actives as active, vitals as ſelf-movers, intellectuals as intellectual-free-ſelf-movers under him. No Art can make a Clock feel, ſee or underſtand.
But if the world have but one ſoul, what mean you by its concentring in the Carcaſs? Is the univerſal Soul there fallen aſleep, or impriſoned in a Grave, or what is it?
§. 23. Add page 5. You well ſay, That Life is the cauſe of all motion: Yea, infinite Life, Wiſdom and Love, is the cauſe of all: but there be ſecond Cauſes under it: Plurima ex uno. And it maketh things various, which it moveth variouſly; and maketh them vital, ſenſitive or mental, which he will move to vital, ſenſitive and mental acts. Operari ſequitur eſſe.
§. 24. You are apt to believe, That thoſe eminent Faculties wherewith men ſeem meer Senſitives, are only the improvement of Speech, and reiterated Acts, till they become Habits.
Anſ. 1. I had a Parrot that ſpoke ſo very plainly, that no Man could diſcern but he could have ſpoke as well as a Man, if he had but had the Intellect of a Man; and quickly would learn new words, but ſhewed no underſtanding of them.
2. Many men born deaf and dumb, are of a ſtrong underſtanding (enquire of a Brother of Sir Richard Dyett's, a Son of Mr. Peter Whalley of Northampton, a Son in Law of the Lord Wharton's, &c.
3. The Faculty and the Habit are Two things. The Faculty is the Eſſential form of the Subſtance. The Habit, or Act, is but an Accident. The Faculty is nothing but the active Power. And the Power goeth before the Act. Doth acting, without Power to act, cauſe the Power? What need you the Power, if you can act without it? And what's a Contradiction, if this be not, to ſay, I do that which I cannot do, or I can do that which I have no power to do? You are not a man without the Faculty, but you are without the Act; or elſe you are no man in your ſleep. The act then is but the Faculties act; and Habits are nothing but the Faculties promptitude to act. And this indeed is cauſed ſometime by very ſtrong acts, and ſometime, and uſually, by frequent acts; and ſometime ſuddenly, by a ſpecial Divine Operation. No doubt, but Oratory, and all Arts and Sciences, are cauſed by frequent acts, and their Objects: But thoſe acts are cauſed by humane Faculties, under God, the firſt Cauſe. You can never cauſe a Carcaſs, or a Parrot, or any Bruit, to think of God, and the glory to come, nor to do any proper humane act.
Credible Hiſtory aſſureth us, That Devils, or ſeparate Souls, have acted Carcaſſes, and diſcourſed in them, and ſeemed to commit Fornication in them, and left them dead behind them; and they were known to be the ſame that were lately executed, or dead, and were re-buried. Here the dead Organ was capable, when a Spirit did but uſe it.
You too much confound Intelléction and Ratiocination. The prime acts of intellective Perception are before Ratiocination. And there are a multitude of Complex Verities, which all ſound men know without Syllogiſms. The diſpoſition to know them, is ſo ſtrong, that ſome call it Actual Knowledg.
§. 25. Add page 6. It's well known, That the Natives in New England, the moſt barbarous Abaſſines, Gallanes, &c. in Ethicpia, have as good natural Capacities as the Europeans. So far are they from being but like Apes and Monkeys; if they be not Ideots, or mad, they ſometime ſhame learned men in their words and deeds. I have known thoſe that have been ſo courſly clad, and ſo clowniſhly bred, even as to Speech, Looks and Carriages, that Gentlemen and Scholars, at the firſt congreſs, have eſteemed them much according to your deſcription, when in Diſcourſe they have proved more ingenious than they. And if improvement can bring them to Arts, the Faculty was there before. When will you ſhew us an Ape or a Monkey, that was ever brought to the Acts or Habits before mentioned of Men? Yea, of thoſe that were born deaf and dumb?
§. 26. Your miſtake of Adam's caſ… and Solomon's words, is ſo groſs, that I will not confute it, leſt the deſcription of it offend you.
§. 17. The caſe of failing memories is anſwered before, in the caſe of Infancy and Apop…exies, &c. Our memory faileth in our ſleep: and yet when we awake, we find that there remains the ſame knowledg of Arts and Sciences. They did not end at night, and were not all new made tne next morning. The Acts ceaſed, becauſe the receptivity of the paſſive Organ ceaſed: but the Habit and Faculty continued. And when memory in old men faileth about names, and words, and little matters, their judgments about great things are uſually ſtronger (by better Habits) than young mens.
§. 28. You ſay, You know nothing wherein Man excels Beasts, but may be referred to the benefit of ſpeech and hands, capable of effecting its Conceptions.
Anſ. This is anſwered before. Thoſe Conceptions are the cauſe of words and actions: and is there no cauſe of thoſe Conceptions? And if mans Conceptions differ from the beaſts, the cauſes differed. And if the firſt Conceptions did not differ, the Subſequent would not differ neither, without a difference in the cauſal Faculties. Why do not Beaſts ſpeak as well as Men? Parrots ſhew, That it is not in all for want of a ſpeaking Organ. If one be born dumb, and not deaf, he will know but little the leſs for his dumbneſs. If he be born deaf and dumb, and not blind, he will ſtill be rational, as Dr. Wallis can tell you, who hath taught ſuch to talk and converſe intelligibly by their fingers, and other ſigns, without words. I confeſs, if all the outward Senſes were ſtopt from the Birth, I ſee not how the Soul could know outward ſenſible things, as being no Objects to it. And how it would work on it ſelf alone, we know not; but underſtand, and will, we are ſure it doth: and therefore can do it. And it's one thing to prove Beaſts to be men, or rational, and another thing to prove Men to be Beaſts, or irrational. If you could prove the former, viz. That Beaſts have Souls that can think of God, and the Life to come, if they could but ſpeak, this would rather prove them immortal, than prove man unreaſonable, or of a mortal Soul. Your whole ſpeech makes more to advance bruits, than to deny the reaſon of man.
§. 29. You ſay, You know no better way to attain a right knowledg of our ſelves, than by beholding our ſelves in Adam, and enquiring what Nature had endued him with, which will fall far ſhort of what we now admire in our ſelves.
Anſw. 1. As a multitude of Objects, and Experiences, more tend to Wiſdom than one alone; ſo to know both what Adam was, and what all men are, and do, doth evidence more to our information, than to know Adam's firſt Caſe alone.
2. Adam's firſt Powers are to be known by his acts; and his acts were not to be done at once, in a minute, or a day: And we have not the Hiſtory of his Life much after his Fall. But we may be ſure, that Adam's Nature in Innocency, was no baſer than ours corrupted. And therefore Adam had the Powers of doing whatever other men ſince have done.
3. But let us come to your Teſt: 1. Adam was made a living Soul by the breath of God, after the making of his body of the earth.
2. Adam and Eve were bleſſed with a generative multiplying Faculty: but they did not generate God; nor did every bruit that had alſo that Faculty. Therefore there is a Soul which is not God, in every Animal, (nor yet an Univerſal Soul).
3. Adam, no doubt, could not know external ſenſible Objects, till they were brought within the reach of his ſenſe: no more can we.
4. Adam knew the Creatures as ſoon as he ſaw them; and gave them Names ſuitable. This is more than we could ſo ſoon do.
5. Adam had a Law given him; and therefore knew that God was his Ruler. He knew that God was to be obeyed; he knew what was his Law: elſe it had been no ſin to break it. He knew that he ought to love, and believe, and truſt God, and cleave to him: elſe it bad been no ſin to forſake him, and to believe the Tempter, and to love the forbidden Fruit better than God. He knew that Death was the threatned Wages of Sin. In a word, He was made in the Image of God: And Paul tells us, it is that Image into which we are renewed by Chriſt: And he deſcribeth it to conſiſt in wiſdom, righteouſneſs, and true holineſs.
6. And we have great reaſon to think, that it was Adam that taught Abel to offer Sacrifice in Faith, and delivered to his Poſterity the Traditions which he had from God. Tho Adam did not do all this at once, he did not receive a new Soul or Faculty for every new act. Can Apes and Monkeys do all this? Doth God give them Laws to know and keep as moral free-agents?
But you ſay, Adam knew not that he was naked. Anſ. What! and yet knew God and his Law, and how to name the Creatures, and how to dreſs and keep the Garden? He knew not that nakedneſs was ſhameful; for he had newly made it ſhameful.
Perhaps you think of Adam's forbidden deſire of knowledg, and his miſerable attainment of it. But that did not make him a new Soul, that had no ſuch Faculty before. Adam was the Son of God by Creation, Luk. 3. and it was his duty and intereſt to live as a Son, in abſolute truſt on his Fathers care and love: and inſtead of this, he was tempted to ſelf-dependance, and muſt needs know more than his duty, & his fathers love and reward: He muſt know good and evil for himſelf: like a Child that muſt know what Food, and Rayment, and Work is fitteſt for him, which he ſhould know only by truſting his Fa…thers choice; or as a Patient that muſt needs know every Ingredient in his Phyſick, and the Nature and Reaſon of it, before he will take it, when he ſhould implicitly truſt his Phyſician. Man ſhould have waited on God for all his Notices, and ſought to know no more than he revealed. But a diſtruſtful, and a ſelfiſh knowledg, and buſy enquiring into unrevealed things, is become our ſin and miſery.
§. 36. You ſay, Suppoſe all this anſwered: what will it avail, as to a life of Retribution, if all return to one element, and be there immerged as Brooks and Rivers in the Sea, and we loſe our individuation.
Anſ. I anſwer'd this in the Appendix to the Reaſ. of the Chriſtian Religion. I add 1. Do you believe, that each one hath now one individual Soul, or not? If not, how can we loſe that which we never had? If we have but all one univerſal mover, which moveth us as Engines, as the Wind and Water move Mills, how come ſome motions to be ſo ſwift (as a Swallow), and others ſo ſlow, or none at all; in as mobile a body)? Yea, how cometh motion to be ſo much in our Power, that we can ſit ſtill when we will, and riſe, and go, and run, and ſpeak when we will, and ceaſe, or change it when we will? A ſtone that falls, or an arrow that is ſhot, cannot do ſo. Sure it is ſome inward formal Principle; and not a material Mechanical mobility of the matter, which can cauſe this difference.
Indeed if we have all but one Soul, it's eaſie to love our Neighbours as our ſelves, becauſe our Neighbours are our ſelves. But it's as eaſie to hate our ſelves as our Enemies, and the good as the bad, if all be one (for forma dat nomen & eſſe). But it's ſtrange, that either God, or the Soul of the World, ſhall hate it ſelf, and put it ſelf to pain, and fight againſt it ſelf, as in Wars, &c.
But if you think ſtill, That there is nothing but God and dead matter actuated by him, I would beg your Anſwer to theſe few Queſtions.
1. Do you really believe, that there is a God? that is, an eternal infinite ſelf-being, who hath all that power, knowledg, and goodneſs of will, in tranſcendent Eminency, which any Creature hath formally, and is the efficient Governor of all elſe that is. If not, all the world condemneth you: for it is not an uncauſed Being, and can have nothing but from its Cauſe, who can give nothing greater than it ſelf.
2. Do you think this God can make a Creature that hath a ſubordinate Soul, or Spirit, to be the Principle of its own Vital Action, Intellection, and Volition, or not? Cannot God make a Spirit? If not, it is either becauſe it is a Contradiction (which none can pretend), or becauſe God is not Omnipotent; that is, is not God; and ſo there is no God; and ſo you deny what you granted. But if God can make a Spirit,
3. Why ſhould you think he would not? Some of your mind ſay, That he doth all the good that he can; or elſe he were not perfectly good. Certainly his goodneſs is equal to his greatneſs, and is commmunicative.
4. Hath he not imprinted his Perfections in ſome meaſure, in his Works? Do they not ſhew his glory? Judg of his Greatneſs by the Sun, Stars, and Heavens; and of his Wiſdom, by the wonderful Order, Contexture, and Goverument of all things. Even the Fabrick of a Fly, or any Animal, poſeth us. And do you think, that his love and goodneſs hath no anſwerable effect?
5. Do you think, that paſſive matter doth as much manifeſt Gods Perfection, and honour the Efficient, as vital and Intellectual Spirits? If it be a far nobler Work for God to make a free, vital, mental Spirit, to act under him freely, mentally, and vitally, than to make meer atomes, why ſhould you think that God will not do it?
6. And do you not diſhonour, or blaſpheme the prime Cauſe, by ſuch diſhonouring of his Work, as to ſay, he never made any thing more noble than Atomes, and Compoſitions of them.
7. Is there not in the Creature a communicative diſpoſition to cauſe their like? Animals generate their like: Fire kindleth fire: Wiſe men would make others wiſe: God is eſſential infinite Life, Wiſdom and Love: and can he, or would he make nothing liker to himſelf than dead Atomes? Yea, you feign him to make nothing but by Compoſition, while you ſay, That matter it ſelf is eternal.
8. But when the matter of Fact is evident, and we ſee by the actions, that there is a difference between things moved by God, ſome having a created Life and mind, and ſome none, what needs then any further proof?
§. 31. But if you hold, That we have now diſtinct Spirits, which are individual Subſtances, why ſhould you fear the loſs of our individuation, any more than our annihilation, or ſpecifick alteration? If God made as many ſubſtantial individual Souls, as men, is there any thing in Nature or Scripture, which thteatneth the loſs of Individuation? I have ſhewed you, and ſhall further ſhew you enough againſt it.
§. 32. You ſay, page 7. Every thing returneth to its element, and loſeth its individuation: Earth to Earth, Water to the Sea, the Spirit to God that gave it. What happineſs then can we hope for more than deliverance from the preſent calamity; or what miſery are we capable of, more than is common to all?
Anſ. 1. Bodies loſe but their Compoſition, and Spiritual forms. Do you think, that any Atome loſeth its individuation? If it be ſtill diviſible in partes infinitas, it is infinite. And if every Atome be infinite, it is as much, or more than all the world; and ſo is no part of the world; and ſo there would be as many Worlds, or Infinites, as Atomes. It is but an aggregative motion which you mention. Birds of a Feather will flock together, and yet are Individuals ſtill. Do you think any duſt, or drop, any Atome of Earth or Water, loſeth any thing of it ſelf, by its union with the reſt? Is any Subſtance loſt? Is the ſimple Nature changed? Is it not Earth and Water ſtill? Is not the Haecceity, as they call it, continued? Doth not God know every duſt, and every drop from the reſt? Can he not ſeparate them when he will? And if Nature in all things tend to aggregation, or union, it is then the Perfection of every thing. And why ſhould we fear Perfection?
2. But Earth, and Water, and Air, are partible matter. Earth is eaſily ſeparable: The parts of Water more hardly, by the means of ſome terrene Separaror: The parts of Air yet more hardly: and the Sun-beams, or ſubſtance of fire, yet harder than that (tho it's contraction and effects are very different): And Spirits either yet harder, or not at all. Some make it eſſential to them to be indiſcerptible; and all muſt ſay, That there is nothing in the Nature of them, tending to diviſion, or ſeparation. And therefore tho God, who can annihilate them, can divide them into parts, if it be no Contradiction; yet it will never be, becauſe he uſeth every thing according to its nature, till he cometh to miracles. Therefore their diſſilution of parts is no more to be feared, than their annihilation.
3. But if you take Souls to be partible and unible, then you muſt ſuppoſe every part to have ſtill its own exiſtence in the whole. And do you think, that this doth not more advance Souls than abaſe them? Yea, you ſeem to Deifie them; while you make them all to return into God, as drops into the Sea. And if you feign God to be partible, is it not more honour and joy to be a part of God, who is joy it ſelf, than to be a created Soul? If a thouſand Candles were put out, and their light turned into one Luminary, as great as they all, every part would have its ſhare in the enlightning of the place about it. Is it any loſs to a ſingle Soldier, to become part of a victorious Army.
4. But indeed this is too high a Glory for the Soul of man to deſire, or hope for. It is enough to have a bleſſed union with Chriſt, and the holy Society, conſiſtent with our Individuation. Like will to like, and yet be it ſelf. Rivers go to the Sea, and not to the Earth. Earth turns to Earth, and not to the Sun, or Fire. And the holy and bleſſed, go to the holy and bleſſed: And I believe, that their union will be nearer than we can now well conceive, or than this ſelfiſh ſtate of man deſireth: But as every drop in the Sea, is the ſame Water it was, ſo every Soul will be the ſame Soul.
2. And as to the incapacity of miſery which you talk of, why ſhould you think it more hereafter than here? If you think all Souls now to be but one, doth not an aking Tooth, or a gouty Foot, or a calculous Bladder, ſuffer pain, tho it be not the body that feeleth; but the ſame ſenſitive Soul is pain'd in one part, and pleas'd in another. And if all Souls be now but God in divers Bodies, or the Anima mundi, try if you can comfort a man under the torment of the Stone, or other Malady, or on the Rack, or in terror of Conſcience, by telling him, That his Soul is a part of God. Will this make a Captive bear his Captivity, or a Malefactor his Death? If not here, why ſhould you think that their miſery hereafter will be ever the leſs, or more tolerable for your conceit, that they are parts of God? They will be no more parts of him then, than they were here. But it's like, that they alſo will have an uniting inclination, even to ſuch as themſelves; or that God, will ſeparate them from all true unity, and ſay, Go you curſed into everlaſting fire, prepared for the Devil and his Angels, &c.
§. 33. No doubt it's true, that you ſay, page 7, and 8. That matter is ſtill the ſame, and liable to all the changes which you mention. But it's an unchanged God, who doth all this by Spirits, as ſecond Cauſes, who are not of ſuch a changeable, diſſoluble, partible nature, as Bodies are: It is Spirits that do all that's done in the world. And I conjecture, as well as you, That univerſal Spirits are univerſal Cauſes. I ſuppoſe, That this Earth hath a vegitative form, which maketh it as a matrix to receive the Seeds, and the more active influx of the Sun. But Earth and Sun are but general Cauſes. Only God, and the ſeminal Virtue, cauſe the ſpecies, as ſuch. The Sun cauſeth every Plant to grow; but it cauſeth not the difference between the Roſe, and the Nettle▪ and the Oak. The wonderful unſearchable Virtue of the Seed cauſeth that. And if you would know that Virtue, you muſt know it by the effects. You cannot tell by the Seed only of a Roſe, a Vine, an Oak, what is in it. But when you ſee the Plants in ripeneſs, you may ſee that the Seeds had a ſpecifying Virtue, by the influx of the general Cauſe, to bring forth thoſe Plants, Flowers, &c. Neither can you know what is in the Egg, but by the ripe Bird; nor what the Soul of an Infant is, but by Manhood and its Acts.
§. 34. You here pag. 7. divert from the point of the Immortality or Nature of the Soul, to that of the Reſurrection of the Body: of which I will now ſay but this; Chriſt roſe, and hath promiſed us a Reſurrection, and nothing is difficult to God. foreign oft ſignifieth our living another life after this. The Body hath more parts than Earth and Water. The Spirits as we call them, which are the igneous parts, lodged in the pureſt aereal in the blood, &c. are that body in and by which the Soul doth operate on the reſt. How much of theſe material Spirits the Soul may retain with it after Death, we know not: and if it have ſuch a body▪ it hath partly the ſame; and God can make what Addition he pleaſe, which ſhall not contradict identity: Paul ſaith of Corn, God giveth it a body as pleaſeth him, in ſome reſpect the ſame, &c. in ſome not the ſame that was ſown. We do not hold, That all the fleſh that ever a man had, ſhall be raiſed as that mans. If one man that was fat, grow lean in his ſickneſs, we do not ſay, that all the fleſh that ſickneſs waſted, ſhall riſe: It ſhall riſe a ſpiritual body. God knoweth that which you and I know not.
§. 35. You add, how eaſie it would have been to you to believe as the Church believeth, and not to have immerged your ſelf in theſe difficulties?
Anſ. 1. The Church is nothing but all individual Chriſtians; and it is their Belief which makes them capable of being of the Church: As we muſt be men in order of Nature, before we are a Kingdom of men; ſo we are Believers before we are a Church of Believers. A Kingdom or Policy maketh us not men, but is made of men; and Church-ſociety or Policy maketh us not Believers, but is made up of Believers. Therefore Belief is firſt, and is not cauſed by that which followeth it? And why doth the Church believe? Is it becauſe they believe?
And whom do they believe? Is it themſelves? I doubt you have fallen into acquaintance with thoſe whoſe Intereſt hath made it their Trade to puzzle and confound men about things as hard to themſelves as others, that they may bring them to truſt the Church, and then tell them that it's they that are that Church, as a neceſſary means to the quieting their minds. And they tell them, You are never able by reaſon to comprehend the myſteries of Faith; the more you ſearch, the more you are confounded. But if you believe as the Church believeth, you ſhall ſpeed as the Church ſpeedeth., But it's one thing to believe the ſame thing which the Church believeth; and another to believe it with the ſame faith, and upon the ſame Authority. If a man believe all the Articles of the Creed only becauſe men tell him that they are true, it is but a human Faith, as reſting only on mans Authority; but the true Members of the Church believe all the ſame things, becauſe God revealeth and attesteth them; and this is a Divine Faith: And ſo muſt you.
If you love light more than darkneſs and deceit, diſtinguiſh, 1. Believing men for Authority. 2. Believing men for their Honeſty, 3. Believing men▪ for the natural impoſſibility of their deceiving.
And the foundation of this difference is here: Mans Soul hath two ſorts of acts, Neceſſary and Contingent, or mutably free.
To love our ſelves, to be unwilling to be miſerable, and willing to be happy; to love God as good, if known, &c. are acts of the Soul as neceſſary, as for fire to burn combuſtible contiguous matter; or for a Bruit to eat; ſo that all the Teſtimonies which is produced by theſe neceſſary acts by knowing men, hath a Phyſical certainty, the contrary being impoſſible. And this is infallible hiſtorical knowledg of matter of fact. Thus we know there is ſuch a City as Rome, Paris, Venice, &c. and that there was ſuch a man as K. James, Ed. 6. Hen. 8. William the Conqueror, &c. And that the Statutes now aſcribed to Ed. 3. and other Kings and their Parliaments are genuine. For Judges judge by them; Lawyers plead them, Kings own them, all men hold their Eſtates and Lives by them. Contrary mens Intereſt by Lawyers are daily pleaded by them againſt each other; and if any one would deny, forge or corrupt a Statute▪ Intereſt would engage the reſt againſt him to detect his fraud.
1. The certain effect of natural neceſſary Cauſes hath natural neceſſary evidence of Truth.
But when all knowing men of contrary Diſpoſitions and Intereſts. acknowledg a thing true, this is the effect of nataral neceſſary Cauſes.
Ergo it hath natural neceſſary evidence of Truth.
2. It is impoſſible there ſhould be an Effect without a ſufficient Cauſe.
But that a thing ſhould be falſe which all knowing men of contrary Diſpoſitions and Intereſts acknowledg to be true, would be an Effect without a Cauſe; for there is no Cauſe in nature to effect it. It is impoſſible in nature that all men in England ſhould agree to ſay, There was a King James, K. Edward, Q. Mary, or that theſe Statutes were made by them, if it were falſe. This is infallible Hiſtorical Teſtimony. It were not ſo ſtrong if it were only by one Party, and not by Enemies alſo, or men of contrary Minds and Intereſts. And thus we know the Hiſtory of the Goſpel; and this Tradition is naturally infallible.
II. But all the Teſtimony which dependeth on humane Acts, not neceſſary, but free, have but an uncertain moral humane Credibility. For ſo all men are Lyars; i.e. fallible, and not fully to be truſted.
And I. Thoſe Teſtimonies which depend on mens Honeſty, are no farther credible, than we know the Honeſty of the men: which in ſome is great, in ſome is …, in moſt is mixt, and lubricous, and doubtful, Alas! what abundance of falſe Hiſtory is in the world! Who can truſt the Honeſty of ſuch men, as multitudes of Popes, Prelates, and Prieſts have been? Will they ſtick at a Lye, that ſtick not at Blood, or any wickedneſs? Beſides, the ignorance which invalidates their Teſtimony.
II. And to pretend Authority to rule our Faith, is the moſt unſatisfactory way of all. For before you can believe that Jeſus is the Chriſt, and his Word true, how many impoſſibilities have you to believe? 1. You muſt believe that Chriſt hath a Church. 2. And hath authorized them to determine what is to be believed, before you believe that he is Chriſt. 3. You muſt know who they be whom you muſt believe; whether all, or ſome, or a major vote. Whether out of all the world, or a party. 4. And how far their Authority extendeth? Whether to judg whether there be a God, or no God; a Chriſt, or no Chriſt; a Heaven, or none; a Goſpel, or none: or what. 5. And how their determinations out of all the world may come with certainty to us: and where to find them. 6. And when Countreys and Councils contradict and condemn each other, which is to be believed. Many ſuch impoſſibilities in the Roman way, muſt be believed, before a m…n can believe that Jeſus is the Chriſt. In a word, you muſt not puzzle your head to know what a man is, or whether he have an immortal ſoul; but you muſt, 1. believe the Church of Believers, before you are a Believer in Chriſt. 2. And you muſt believe, that Chriſt was God and Man, and came to ſave man, before you believe that there is ſuch a creature as man, or what he is, and whether he have a ſoul capable of ſalvation. But I have oft elſewhere opened theſe Abſurdities and Contradictions; where you may ſee them confuted, if you are willing.
§. 36. Your queſtion about the ſouls nature, exiſtence, and Individuation, may be reſolved by a ſurer and eaſier way: as followeth:
I. By your own certain experience.
1. You perceive that you ſee, feel, underſtand, will and execute. 2. You may know, as is oft ſaid, that therefore you have an active power to do theſe. 3. You may thence know, that it is a ſubſtance which hath that power. Nothing can do nothing. 4. You may perceive, that it is not the terrene ſubſtance, but an inviſible ſubſtance, actuating the body. 5. You may know, that there is no probability, that ſo noble a ſubſtance ſhould be annihilated. 6. Or that a pure and ſimple ſubſtance ſhould be diſſolved by the ſeparation of parts (or if that were, every part would be a ſpirit ſtill). 7. You have no cauſe to ſuſpect, that this ſubſtance ſhould loſe thoſe powers or faculties which are its eſſential form, and be turned into ſome other ſpecies, or thing. 8. And you have as little cauſe to ſuſpect, that an eſſential vital intellective power, will not be active, when active inclination is its Eſſence. 9. You have no cauſe to ſuſpect, that it will want Objects to action in a World of ſuch variety of Objects. 10. And you have as little cauſe to ſuſpect, that it will be unactive, for want of Organs, when God hath made its Eſſence active; and either can make new Organs; or that which can act on matter, can act without, or on other matter. He that can play on a Lute, can do ſomewhat as good, if that be broken. 11. And experience might ſatisfie you, that ſeveral men have ſeveral ſouls, by the ſeveral and contrary Operations. 12. And you have no reaſon to ſuſpect, that God will turn many, from being many▪ into one; or that unity ſhould be any of their loſs. All this, Reaſon tells you, beginning at your own experience, as I have (and elſewhere more fully) opened.
§. 37. II. And you have at hand ſenſible proof of the individuation of ſpirits, by Witches, Contracts, and Apparitions: of which the world has unqueſtionable proof, tho there be very many Cheats. Read Mr. Glanvill's new Book, publiſhed by Dr. Moore, Lavater de Spectris, Zanchy de Angilii, Manlii Collect. Bodin's Daemonolog. Remigius of Witches, beſides all the Mallei Malificorum, and doubt if you can. If you do, I can give you yet more, with full proof.
§. 38. III. But all that I have ſaid to you, is but the leaſt part, in compariſon of the aſſurance which you may have by the full revelats on of Jeſus Chriſt, who hath brought life and immortality to light in the Goſpel▪ where the ſtate, the doom, the rewards and puniſhment of ſouls is aſſerted.
And without dark and long Ambages, or Roman Juggles, we prove the truth of this Goſpel, briefly and infallibly thus:
I. The Hiſtory of Chriſt's Life, Miracles, Doctrine, Death, Reſurrection, Aſcenſion, the Apoſtles Miracles, &c. is proved by ſuch forementioned evidence, as hath phyſical certainty: Not ſuch as dependeth only on mens honeſty, or moral argument, much leſs on a pretended determining authority; but ſuch as dependeth on neceſſary acts of man, even the conſent of all ſorts of contrary minds and intereſts, as we know the Statutes of the Land, or other certain Hiſtory. But we are ſo far from needing to ask, which part of Chriſtians it is that is this Church, that is to be believed, that it tendeth to the aſſertaining of us, that all the Chriſtian World, Papiſts, Proteſtants, Greeks, Moſcovites, Armenians, Jacobites, Neſtorians, &c. herein agree, even while they oppoſe each other. To know whether there was a Julius, or Auguſtus Caeſar, a Virgil, Ovid Cicero, and which are their Works; yea, which are the Acts of Councils▪ no man goeth to an authorized determining Judg for the matter of Fact, but to hiſtorical proof. And this we have moſt full.
II. And if the History be true, the Doctrine muſt needs be true, ſeeing it is fully proved by the matters of Fact. Chriſt being proved to be Chriſt, all his words muſt needs be true.
§. 39. The Goſpel of Chriſt, hath theſe four parts of its infallible evidence.
I. The antecedent and inhererent Prophecies fulfilled.
II. The inherent impreſs of Divinity on the Goſpel it ſelf, unimitable by man. It hath Gods Image and Superſcription; and its Excellency, propria luce, is diſcernible.
III. All the Miracles, and Reſurrection, and Aſcention of Chriſt, the Gift of his Spirit, and extraordinary Miracles of the Apoſtles, and firſt Churches.
IV. The ſanctifying work of the Spirit by this Goſpel, on all Believers in all Ages of the World, by which they have the Witneſs in themſelves. A full conſtant unimitable Teſtimony.
§. 40. And now how highly ſoever you think of Bruits, think not too baſely of Men, for whom Chriſt became a Saviour: And yet think not ſo highly of Men, Bruits and Stones, as to think that they are God. And think not that your true diligence hath confounded you, but either your negligence, or ſeducers, or the unhappy ſtifling of obvious truth, by the ill ordering of your thoughts. And I beſeech you remember, that Gods Revelationt are ſuited to mans uſe, and our true knowledg to his Revtlations. He hath not told us all that man would know, but what we muſt know. Nothing is more known to us than that of God which is neceſſary for us: Yet nothing ſo incomprehenſible as God. There is much of the Nature of Spirits, and the world to come, unſearchable to us, which will poſe all our Wits: yet we have ſufficient certainty of ſo much as tells us our duty and our hopes. God hath given us Souls to uſe, and to know only ſo far as is uſeful. He that made your Watch, taught not you how it's made; but how to uſe it. Inſtead therefore of your concluding complaints of your condition, thank God, who hath made man capable to ſeek him, ſerve him, love him, prai…e him, and rejoyce in hope of promiſed Perfection. Live not as a willful ſtranger to your Soul and God. Uſe faithfully the Faculties which he hath given you: ſin not willfully againſt the truth revealed, and leave things ſecret to God, till you come into the clearer light: and you ſhall have no cauſe to complain, that God▪ whoſe goodneſs is equal to his greatneſs, hath dealt hardly with mankind. Inſtead of truſting fallible man, truſt Chriſt, who hath fully proved his truſtineſs; and his Spirit will advance you to higher things than bruits are capable of. God be merciful to us dark unthankful ſinners▪
Mar. 14. 1681. Ri. Baxter.
ERRATA.
IN the Second Part, p▪ 12. l. 9. for primus r. Primae p. 16. l. 21. for is r. are.
I have not leiſure to gather the reſt, if there be any.
End of the text · Richard Baxter, The Immortality of Mans Soul (1682)