Chapter XXI: Part 21

And he not only asserts but proves it with very great strength of reasoning, in 1 Cor. xv. and the argument he therein insists on, is taken from Christ’s resurrection, ver. 13. _If there be no resurrection, then is Christ not risen_; which is a doctrine that could not be denied by any that embraced the Christian religion, as being the very foundation thereof; but if any one should entertain the least doubt about it, he adds, ver. 17. _If Christ be not raised from the dead, your faith is vain, ye are yet in your sins_; that is, your hope of justification hereby is ungrounded, _and they also which are fallen asleep in Christ, are perished_; but this none of you will affirm; therefore you must conclude that he is risen from the dead: and if it be enquired, how does this argument prove the general resurrection, that he farther insists on from ver. 20. _Now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the first-fruits of them that slept?_ Christ’s resurrection removes all the difficulties that might afford the least matter of doubt concerning the possibility of the resurrection of the dead; and his being raised as the _first-fruits of them that slept_, or, as the head of all the elect, who are said to have communion with him in his resurrection, or to be _risen with him_, Col. iii. 1. renders the doctrine of the resurrection of all his saints, undeniably certain. As the first-fruits are a part and pledge of the harvest, so Christ’s resurrection is a pledge and earnest of the resurrection of his people. Thus the apostle says elsewhere, _If the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies_, Rom. viii. 11. And our Saviour, when he was discoursing with his disciples concerning his death, and resurrection that would ensue thereupon, tells them, that though after this he should be separated for a time from them, and _the world_ should _see him no more_, yet that _they should see him_ again; and assigns this as a reason, _because I live ye shall live also_, John xiv. 19. _q. d._ because I shall be raised from the dead, and live for ever in heaven; you, who are my favourites, friends, and followers, shall be also raised and live with me there; so that the resurrection of believers is plainly evinced from Christ’s resurrection.

I might produce many other scriptures out of the New Testament, in which this doctrine is maintained; but we shall proceed to consider what proofs may be deduced from scripture-consequences. And it may here be observed, that our Lord Jesus Christ, has by his death and resurrection, as the consequence thereof, purchased an universal dominion over, or a right to dispose of his subjects in such a way as will be most conducive to his own glory and their advantage. Thus the apostle speaks of him as _dying, rising, and reviving, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living_; and infers from thence, that _whether we live or die, we are the Lord’s_, Rom. xiv. 8, 9. And his being Lord over the dead is expressed in other terms, by his _having the keys of hell and death_; and this is assigned as the consequence of his _being alive_ after his death, or of his resurrection from the dead, Rev. i. 18. Therefore he has a power, as Mediator, to raise the dead. And to this we may also add, that this is what he has engaged to do, as much as he did to redeem the souls of his people. When believers are said to be given to him, or purchased by him, it is the whole man that is included therein; and accordingly he purchased the bodies as well as the souls of his people, as may be argued from our obligation hereupon, to _glorify him in our bodies_ as well as _in our spirits which are God’s_, 1 Cor. vi. 20. And they are both under his care; he has undertaken that their bodies shall not be lost in the grave; which is very emphatically expressed, when he is represented as saying, this is _the will of the Father which hath sent me_, John vi. 39, 40. or, contained in the commission that I received from him, when he invested me with the office of Mediator; _that of all which he had given me, I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day_. What should be the reason that he here speaks of things rather than persons, if he had not a peculiar regard to the bodies of believers? which, as they are the subjects of his power when raised from the dead; so they are the objects of his care, and therefore he will raise them up at the last day.

We might farther consider Christ’s dominion as extended to the wicked as well as the righteous. He is not, indeed, their federal head; but he is appointed to be their Judge; and therefore has a right to demand them to come forth out of their graves, to appear before his tribunal; though they are neither the objects of his special love, nor redeemed by his blood, nor the dutiful and obedient subjects of his kingdom; inasmuch as it is said, _God has appointed a day in which he will judge the world in righteousness, by that man whom he hath ordained, whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead_, Acts xvii. 31. And elsewhere it is said, that he was ordained _of God to be the Judge of quick and dead_, chap. x. 42. Therefore we read, that he shall _sit upon the throne of his glory, and before him shall be gathered all nations_, Matt. xxv. 31, 32. and of his determining the final estate, both of the righteous and the wicked, as it is expressed in the following verses; and this is described more particularly as being immediately after the universal resurrection; as it is said, ‘I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God, and the books were opened,’ Rev. xx. 12, 13. which, as will be observed under our next answer, respects his judging the world; and in order hereto it is farther said, that ‘the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them; and they were judged every man according to their works.’ And since Christ is represented as a judge, it is necessary that he should execute his vindictive justice against his enemies, and punish them as their sins deserve; but this respects not only the soul but the body; and therefore Christ that he may secure the glory of his justice, shall raise the bodies of sinners, that he may punish them according to their works; and therefore he is said to be the object of fear, in that he is _able to destroy both soul and body in hell_, Matt. x. 28.

Thus we have endeavoured to prove the doctrine of the resurrection by arguments taken from the Old and New Testament, and those scripture-consequences from which it may be plainly deduced: so that how much soever it may be thought a strange and incredible doctrine, by those who have no other light to guide them but that of nature; it will be generally believed by all whose faith is founded upon divine revelation, and who adore the infinite power and impartial justice of God, the Governor of the world: and, indeed, it is not attended with such difficulties arising from the nature of the thing, as many pretend, since we have several emblems in nature which seem to illustrate it; which are very elegantly represented by some of the Fathers, and especially by Tertullian;[174] whom the learned and excellent bishop Pearson refers to and imitates in his style and mode of expression;[175] his words are these; “As the day dies into night, so doth the summer into winter: the sap is said to descend into the root, and there it lies buried in the ground. The earth is covered with snow, or crusted with frost, and becomes a general sepulchre. When the spring appeareth all begin to rise; the plants and flowers peep out of their graves, revive, and grow, and flourish; this is the annual resurrection. The corn by which we live, and for want of which we perish with famine, is notwithstanding cast upon the earth, and buried in the ground, with a design that it may corrupt, and being corrupted, may revive and multiply; our bodies are fed with this constant experiment, and we continue this present life by succession of resurrections. Thus all things are repaired by corrupting, are preserved by perishing, and revive by dying; and can we think that man, the lord of all those things, which thus die and revive for him, should be detained in death, as never to live again? Is it imaginable that God should thus restore all things to man, and not restore man to himself? If there were no other consideration but of the principles of human nature, of the liberty, and remunerability of human actions, and of the natural revolutions and resurrections of other creatures, it were abundantly sufficient to render the resurrection of our bodies highly probable.” We shall now consider,

V. Some objections that are generally brought against the doctrine of the resurrection. Some things, indeed, are objected against it, that are so vain and trifling, that they do not deserve an answer: as when the followers of Aristotle assert that it is impossible for a thing which is totally destroyed, to be restored to that condition in which it was before[176]: And some have been so foolish as to think that those nations, who burnt their dead bodies, put an eternal bar in the way of their resurrection; since the particles being so changed and separated by fire as they are, can never return again to their former bodies; or they who have been swallowed up by the ocean, and the particles of which they consisted, dissolved by water; and every one of them separated from the other, can never be again restored to their former situation. Such-like objections as these, I say, do not deserve an answer; because they consider the resurrection as though it were to be brought about in such a way, as effects are produced by second causes, according to the common course of nature; without any regard to the almighty power of God, that can easily surmount all the difficulties which, they pretend, lie in the way of the resurrection.

And there are other objections, taken from a perverse sense, which they give of some texts of scripture, without considering the drift and design thereof, or what is added in some following words, which sufficiently overthrows the objection. Thus some produce that scripture in Eccles. iii. 19, 20, 21. where it is said, _That which befalleth the sons of men, befalleth beasts. So that a man hath no pre-eminence above a beast, all go unto one place, and all are of the dust, and all turn to the dust again_; which we before mentioned as brought against the immortality of the soul; and it is also alleged against the resurrection of the body, by those who conclude that it shall be no more raised from the dead than the bodies of brute creatures. But this is rather a cavil or a sophism, than a just way of reasoning; inasmuch as the following words plainly intimate, that men and beasts are compared together only as to their mortality, not as to what respects their condition after death; and therefore it is no sufficient argument to overthrow the doctrine of the resurrection. These and such-like objections are so trifling, that we shall not insist on them: However, there are three or four that we shall lay down, and consider what answers may be given to them.

_Obj._ 1. It is objected against the doctrine of the resurrection, that though the power of God can do all things possible to be done; yet the raising the dead, at least, in some particular instances thereof, is impossible from the nature of the thing; and therefore we may say, without any reflection cast on the divine Omnipotency, that God cannot raise them, at least, not so as that every one shall have his own body restored to him; since there are some instances of Cannibals, or men-eaters, who devour one another, by which means the flesh of one man is turned into the flesh of the other. And in those instances which are more common, the bodies of men being turned into dust, produce food, like other parts of the earth, for brute creatures; and accordingly some of those particles of which they consisted, are changed into the flesh of these creatures; and these again are eaten by men; so that the particles of one human body, after having undergone several changes, become a part of another; therefore there cannot be a distinct resurrection of every one of those bodies that have lived in all the ages of the world.

_Answ._ To this it may be replied, that it cannot be proved, that in those instances mentioned in the objection, that when one man preys upon another, or when brute creatures live upon that grass which was produced by the ground, which was made fertile by the bodies of men turned to corruption, and it may be, may have some of the particles thereof contained in them: It cannot, I say, be proved, that these particles of the bodies of men are turned into nourishment, and so become a part of human flesh; since providence did not design this to be for food. If so, then it is not true in fact, that the particles of one human body become a part of another. But, suppose it were otherwise (to give the objection as much weight as possible) we may farther observe, that it is but a very small part of what is eaten, that is turned into flesh; and therefore those particles of one human body, that by this means are supposed to pass into another, make up but a very inconsiderable part thereof. Therefore, if some few particles of one human body in the resurrection are restored again to that body to which they at first belonged, this will not overthrow the doctrine of the resurrection of the same body. If the body of man loses a few ounces of its weight, no one will suppose that it is not the same body. So when the bodies of men are raised from the dead, if the far greater part of the particles thereof are recollected and united together, they may truly be said to constitute the same body; this therefore does not overthrow the resurrection of the same body from the nature of the thing.

_Object._ 2. It is farther objected, especially against the possibility of the resurrection of the same body that was once alive in this world; that the bodies of men, while they live, are subject to such alterations, that it can hardly be said that we are the same when we are men as when we are children. The expence of those particles which were insensibly lost by perspiration, and others being daily gained by nutrition, make such an alteration in the contexture of the body, that, as some suppose, in the space of about seven years, almost all the particles of the body are changed, some lost and others regained. Now if it be supposed that the same body we once had shall be raised, it is hard to determine; whether those particles of which it consisted when we were young, shall be gathered together in the resurrection, or the particles of the emaciated or enfeebled body, which was laid down in the grave.

_Answ._ We are obliged to take notice of such-like objections as these, because they are often alleged in a cavilling way, against the doctrine of the resurrection. The answer therefore that I would give to this, is, that the more solid and substantial parts of the body, such as the skin, bones, cartilages, veins, arteries, nerves, fibres, that compose the muscles, with the ligaments and tendons, are not subject to this change that is mentioned in the objection, by evaporation or perspiration; which more especially respects the fluids, and not the solids of the body. These remain the same in men as they were in children, excepting what respects their strength and size: And if the body, as consisting of these and some other of the particles that it has lost, which the wisdom of God thinks fit to recollect, be gathered together in the resurrection; we may truly say, that the same body that once lived, notwithstanding the change made in the fluids thereof, is raised from the dead.

_Obj._ 3. There is another objection which is sometimes brought against the doctrine of the resurrection of the just, especially against their being raised with the same body they once had, taken from the inconsistency hereof, with their living in the other world, called heaven; which is generally distinguished from the earth, as being a more pure subtil and etherial region, therefore not fit to be an habitation for bodies compounded of such gross matter as ours are, which are adapted to the state and world in which they now live: Whereas, to suppose them placed in heaven, is inconsistent with the nature of gravity; so that we may as well conclude a body, which naturally tends to the earth its centre, to be capable of living in the air, at a distance from the surface of the earth, as we can, that it is possible for such a body to live in heaven: Therefore they argue that the bodies of men, at the resurrection must be changed, so as to become etherial, which does, in effect, overthrow the doctrine of the resurrection, as respecting, at least, the restoring the bodies of men to the same form which once they had.

Moreover, this objection is farther improved by another supposition: which gave the Socinians occasion to assert, that the same body shall not be raised; namely, that if the bodies of men should be the same as they are now, they would be rendered incapable of that state of immortality which is in heaven. For by the same method of reasoning, by which, as has been before observed, they argue that man would have been liable to mortality, though he had not sinned, _viz._ that death was then the consequence of nature, inasmuch as the body was to be supported by food, breathe in proper air, and be fenced against those things that might tend to destroy the temperament thereof, or a dissolution would ensue, they conclude that we must not have such bodies as we now have, but etherial. And to give countenance to this, they refer to the apostle’s words in 1 Cor. xv. 50. _Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God_: And ver. 40. where he speaks of _celestial bodies_ as distinguished from _terrestrial_, and of the body’s being raised a _spiritual body_, ver. 44. And there is another scripture generally referred to, wherein our Saviour speaks of believers, in the resurrection, being _as the angels of God_, Matt. xxii. 30. which is to be understood, at least, as signifying that their motion will be no more hindered by the weight of the body, than the motion of an angel is; therefore their bodies must be of another kind than what we suppose they shall be in the resurrection.

_Answ._ 1. As to what respects the inconsistency of bodies like ours, living in the upper world, as being contrary to the nature of gravitation: It may be answered, that according to the generally received opinion of modern philosophers, gravity arises from an external pressure made upon bodies which are said to be heavy or light, according to the force thereof; and therefore those bodies that are in the upper regions, above the atmosphere, are equally adapted to ascend or descend; which sufficiently answers that part of the objection. This a learned writer takes notice of[177]: And if this be not acquiesced in, he advances another hypothesis; which, because it has something of wit and spirit in it, I shall take leave to mention, though I must suspend my judgment concerning it, whether it be true or false. He says, perhaps, our heaven will be nothing else but an heaven upon earth; and that it seems more natural to suppose that, since we have solid and material bodies, we shall be placed as we are in this life, in some solid and material orb; and this he supposes agreeable to the apostle Peter’s words, when he speaks of a _new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness_, 2 Pet. iii. 13. From whence he concludes, that either this world shall be fitted to be the seat of the blessed, or some other that has a solid basis like unto it. And to give countenance to this opinion, he refers to some ancient writers; and particularly tells us, that Maximus speaks of it as the opinion of many in his time; and Epiphanius brings in Methodius in the third century, as asserting the same thing.

2. As to what concerns that part of the objection, that bodies, like those we have now, are unmeet for the heavenly state, inasmuch as they cannot be supported without food and other conveniences of nature, which tend to the preservation of life in this world. To this it may be answered, that it is not necessary to suppose that the body shall be raised with such qualities as that it will stand in need of food, rest, or other conveniences of nature; which, at present, tend to the support of life: The apostle seems to assert the contrary, when he says, _Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats; but God shall destroy both it and them_, 1 Cor. vi. 13. There is certainly a medium between asserting, with some, that we shall be raised with an etherial body, in all respects unlike to that which we have at present; and maintaining, that we shall have such as are liable to the imperfections of this present state, and supported in the same way in which they now are.

As to what the apostle says concerning _flesh and blood not inheriting the kingdom of heaven_, he does not mean thereby that our bodies shall be so changed, that they shall in no respect consist of flesh and blood: And when he speaks of _celestial_ and _spiritual_ bodies, it is not necessary for us to suppose, that hereby he intends ærial or etherial bodies. But this will be more particularly considered under a following head, when we speak of the circumstances in which the bodies of believers shall be raised from the dead. As for that other scripture, in which they are said to be _as the angels of God in heaven_, that respects their being immortal and incorruptible; or as the context seems to intimate, that they need not marriage, to perpetuate their generations, in that world: Therefore we have no occasion to strain the sense of the words, so as to suppose that our Saviour intends in his saying _they shall be as the angels_, that they shall cease to be like what they were when men on earth.

_Objec._ 4. The last objection which we shall mention, is taken from its not being agreeable to the goodness of God, extended to those who are made partakers of the resurrection to eternal life; inasmuch as it is a bringing them into a worse condition than the soul was in, when separate from the body. This objection is generally brought by those who give into that mode of speaking often used by Plato[178] and his followers, that the body in this world, is the prison of the soul, which at death, is set at liberty: therefore they suppose, that its being united to the body again, is no other than its being condemned to a second imprisonment, which is so far from being a favour conferred, that it rather seems to be a punishment inflicted. Others, with Celsus, reckon it a dishonour for the soul to be reunited to a body that is corrupted.[179] And others speak of the body as being a great hindrance to the soul in its actings; and frequently inclining it to the exercise of some of those passions that tend to make men uneasy, and thereby unhappy; and that this may, some way or other, take place in a future state.

_Answ._ It is no great difficulty to answer this objection, in which there is not a due difference put between the present and future state of believers. The only thing which might give occasion to men to conclude that their souls are imprisoned in this world is, because they are abridged of that happiness which they shall be possessed of in another; which the apostle calls _The glorious liberty of the children of God_, Rom. viii. 21. And as for the reproaches which some of the greatest enemies to Christianity have cast on this doctrine, these are not sufficient to beget the least dislike of it in the minds of serious and unprejudiced Christians. What though the body be turned to corruption? It shall be raised incorruptible, and in glory; and therefore shall be a palace fit to entertain its noble inhabitant: what though it has, in this world, offered many temptations to the soul to sin, by which it has been sometimes overcome and exposed to those passions that have defiled, and made it very uneasy; is this to be objected against its being raised from the dead in such a state of perfection, that it shall never more contract any guilt, or render the soul unhappy, by any inconvenience arising from it? But this will farther appear, when we speak of the condition in which the body shall be raised under a following head. We shall therefore proceed,

VI. To consider the resurrection of the dead as universal, including in it all who have lived, or shall live, from the beginning of time, till Christ’s second coming, excepting those who shall be found alive; on whom a change shall pass which is equivalent to a resurrection.

1. That all the dead shall be raised: this is expressly mentioned in that vision, _I saw the dead both small and great, standing before God; and the books were opened; and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them; and they were judged every man according to their works_, Rev. xx. 12, _& seq._ where the Judge is represented as demanding the bodies of men of all ranks, conditions, and ages, out of those places where they have been lodged, with a design to reward or punish them according to their works: therefore, if the justice of God is to be displayed in this solemn and awful transaction, and the bodies as well as the souls of men, are the subjects on which this judgment must pass; then it follows, that it will be universal: thus our Saviour says, _All that are in the graves shall hear his voice and shall come forth; they that have done good unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil unto the resurrection of damnation_, John v. 28, 29. This is so evident a truth, founded on the divine perfections, as well as express words of scripture, that it is strange to find that any, who allow that the dead shall be raised, should deny the universality thereof.

However, we meet with several expressions in Rabbinical writers, which seem to speak of it as a peculiar privilege belonging to some, but not to all; and therefore they have a proverbial expression, that though the rain descends on the just and on the unjust, yet the resurrection of the dead belongs only to the just:[180] and this they infer from the words of the prophet Daniel, in chap. xii. 2. _Many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake_; which words contain a difficulty which most have found it an hard matter to account for, agreeably to the sense of the prophet, who speaks, in the words immediately following, of the consequence hereof, as, _some_ shall awake _to everlasting life, and some to everlasting shame and contempt_; whereby he divides the world into two parts, and considers one as happy, the other as miserable; therefore he must, doubtless, speak of an universal resurrection. But the great difficulty lies in these words; _Many of them that sleep in the dust shall arise_; from whence, some conclude that this expression contains an exception of others who shall not arise: thus some Jewish writers seem to have understood it; but I rather think, that the word _many_, there, imports nothing else but the _multitude_, _q. d._ the whole number of those that sleep shall awake.[181]

It is somewhat hard to determine what the Rabbinical writers intend when they seem to confine the resurrection to the Israelites; and some of them to exclude, not only the wicked from it, but those that had not addicted themselves to the study of the law, whom they call the Gnam Haaretz: thus they are represented in scripture as giving them but a very indifferent character, _The people that knoweth not the law are accursed_, John vii. 49. by this means they bring the number of those that shall be raised from the dead into a very narrow compass: nevertheless they speak of future rewards and punishments in another world; therefore some have thought, when they exclude all but the Israelites, and, of them, all but those who were in the greatest reputation amongst them, that they understand nothing else by the resurrection, but that which they fancied would happen in the days of the Messiah; in which, they suppose, that some of the Jews shall be raised from the dead before the general resurrection at the last day; and in this sense we may easily understand their exclusive account, when they speak of many that shall not be partakers of this privilege; and if it be extended to the resurrection at the last day, then I am apt to think, that they intend hereby a resurrection to eternal life, and so some understand that common proverb but now mentioned, concerning the rain’s descending upon all; but the resurrection’s belonging only to the just, in this sense; that though the rain descends upon the wilderness, and barren ground; yet it is only some places which are made fruitful thereby: accordingly, though the resurrection be universal, both of the righteous and wicked; yet the resurrection to eternal life belongs only to the just.[182]

All that I shall observe at present is, that this is not altogether disagreeable to the scripture-mode of speaking; which, though in some places it asserts the resurrection of the whole world, in others, by the resurrection, we are to understand nothing else, but a resurrection to eternal life: thus the apostle Paul, when he speaks of his _attaining unto the resurrection of the dead_, Phil. iii. 11. intends hereby his obtaining a glorious resurrection. And our Saviour, when speaking concerning the happiness of the saints in another world, expresses it on this wise; that they shall be _counted worthy_, or meet, _to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead_, Luke xx. 35. so that whatever is said by Jewish writers, tending to limit the resurrection of the dead to eternal life, to some particular persons, it does not appear but that even they held, in other respects, a general resurrection, both of the just and unjust; which is as demonstrable as is the resurrection in general.

2. They who are found alive at Christ’s second coming, shall undergo a change; which, though it cannot be called a resurrection, will be equivalent to it. The apostle Paul gives an account of this, as what was before unknown to the church; _Behold I shew you a mystery; we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump_, 1 Cor. xv. 51, 52. And elsewhere he speaks of them when thus changed, as _caught up in the clouds together with_ other saints, that are raised from the dead, _to meet the Lord in the air_, 1 Thess. iv. 17. This is no less an effect of almighty power than a resurrection; for hereby their bodies, though never separated from their souls, are brought into the same state as the bodies of others shall be, when re-united to them, and thereby be rendered incorruptible and immortal, as the bodies of all other saints shall be, and made partakers of the same glory with which they are said to be raised. We have an emblem of this in Christ’s transfiguration, when there was such a change made, for the present, on his body, that his face shined as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light. And there was not only a resemblance, but a kind of specimen hereof, in the translation of Enoch and Elijah, whose bodies were before this, liable to corruption, and all other infirmities that attend this present life, but were made, in a moment, celestial and glorious. And the body of our Saviour, though it was raised from the dead incorruptible and immortal, yet, during the space of forty days, while he continued on earth, it was not made so glorious as it was immediately after the cloud received him into heaven, when it underwent such a change as was agreeable to the place and state into which he then entered; even so the bodies of the saints, at last, shall, by this change, be made meet for heaven, and received, with other saints into it.

VII. We shall now consider the condition in which the body shall be raised. And,

1. Those circumstances of honour and glory which respect more especially the resurrection of the just: this the apostle mentions, and describes them as _raised in glory_, 1, Cor. xv. 43. It is the same body indeed, that is raised, which he illustrates by _a grain of wheat_ springing up, and changed into a full-grown ear; which, though it be greatly improved, and very much altered from what it was, when cast into the ground, yet _every seed_, as he observes, has _its own body_, ver. 38. From whence we may infer, that the same body shall be raised from the dead, though with very different qualities. There are several things mentioned by the apostle, in the account he gives of the bodies of the saints after the resurrection; which some have attempted to explain in such a way, as is hardly consistent with a resurrection of the same body. The Socinians generally maintain that the body shall be altogether new, as to its substance, as well as its qualities: and others speak of it as an aerial body; as supposing that the gross and heavy matter, of which it formerly consisted, is not adapted to an heavenly state, and would render it not altogether free from a liableness to corruption. This opinion a late writer mentions, as what was espoused by some of the Fathers, which he speaks very favourably of; and inasmuch as the apostle calls it _a spiritual body_, 1 Cor. xv. 45. and seems to distinguish it from _flesh and blood_, which _cannot inherit the kingdom of God_, ver. 50. he thinks that though the same flesh and blood may rise from the grave, it will then or afterwards, receive such a change, as will render it spiritual and incorruptible; and so, perhaps, when it comes to heaven, will not be flesh and blood; or, that it will clothed with such an heavenly body as will keep it from a possibility of corruption; and accordingly he supposes that the apostle is to be understood in this sense, that flesh and blood unchanged and unclothed with its heavenly body, cannot inherit the kingdom of God; and that this body with which it shall be invested, will be thin, aerial, spiritual, bright, and shining; and, in that respect, may be called celestial.[183] The reason he assigns why _flesh and blood_, namely, such as is subject to corruption here, _cannot inherit the kingdom of God_, is, because the flesh may be cut and divided, and the blood let out, which would subject it to corruption; therefore it must be changed, and _put on incorruption_.

This account of the bodies of the just after the resurrection, seems, indeed, to be a medium between the two extremes, either of those who suppose that the body shall differ but little from what it was whilst here on earth, or of others, who conclude it to be nothing else but an aerial body; yet it contains several things taken for granted, without sufficient proof, which I cannot readily give into: nevertheless what he farther adds on this subject is undeniably true, _viz._ that the body, which before was subject to filth and deformity, is raised in glory and splendor, _shining like the sun_, Matt. xxiii. 43. That which was once _vile_, is _fashioned like Christ’s glorious body_, Phil. iii. 21. and is freed from all defect or deformity in its members, and from any dishonourable parts. Not subject to weakness by labour, decays of age, to impotency and wasting by diseases; but nimble, strong, active, and that without reluctancy or molestation, grief, pain, or lassitude; it is raised a spiritual body, possessed and acted by the Holy Spirit; and advanced so far to the perfection of spirits, as to be free from grossness, ponderosity, from needing rest, sleep, or sustenance, and is fitted for a spiritual and celestial state in which our bodies shall wholly serve our spirits, and depend upon them, and therefore may be styled spiritual. If we stop here, without giving too much scope to our wit and fancy, in advancing things too high for us, and confess that we know not, or, at least, but a little of the affairs of an unseen world; or, as the apostle says, _what we shall be_, Phil. iii. 21. we say enough to give us an occasion to conclude that it is a glorious and desirable state, and the change wrought therein, such as fully answers our most raised expectations, and is agreeable to a state of perfect blessedness. Thus concerning the condition and circumstances in which the saints shall be raised.

There is one thing which must not wholly be past over, which is farther observed in this answer, namely, that the bodies of the just shall be raised by the Spirit of Christ: This is what the apostle expressly says, _If the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead, dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead, shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you_, Rom. viii. 11. The bodies of believers, which were, in this world, the temple of the Holy Ghost, and were under his divine influence whilst living, shall not cease to be the objects of his care when dead; and as an instance of his regard to them, as well as denoting the subserviency hereof, to their attaining that complete redemption which Christ has purchased for them, the Spirit, in a peculiar manner, demonstrates his personal glory in raising them from the dead: Whereas, others are said to be raised only by the power of Christ.

2. We shall now consider the circumstances in which the wicked shall be raised, namely, in dishonour; or, as the prophet Daniel expresses it, _to shame and everlasting contempt_. Some marks of dishonour shall, doubtless, be impressed on their bodies, in that they shall be raised with all those natural blemishes and deformities, which rendered them the object of contempt. That part which the body bore in tempting the soul to sin, shall tend to its everlasting reproach; and when reunited to it, those habits of sin which were contracted, shall incurably remain, as well as the tormenting sense of guilt consequent hereupon, which exposes them to the wrath of God for ever; so that their resurrection, which renders them immortal, brings upon them endless misery. And it is said to be brought about by Christ, as an offended Judge, as the consequence whereof, they are summoned to his tribunal, who will render to every one according to his works. Which leads us to consider Christ as coming to judge the world; which is that solemn transaction that will immediately follow after the resurrection.

Footnote 153:

“By affirming, that the grain produced from the seed sown, is not the
very body which is sown, the apostle I think insinuates, that the body
to be raised is not numerically the same with the body deposited at
death, but something of the same kind formed by the energy of God.
Having such an example of the divine power before our eyes, we cannot
think the reproduction of the body impossible, though its parts be
utterly dissipated. Farther, although the very numerical body is not
raised, yet the body is truly raised, because what is raised, being
united to the soul, there will arise in the man thus completed, a
consciousness of his identity, by which he will be sensible of the
justice of the retribution which is made to him for his deeds.
Besides, this new body, will more than supply the place of the old, by
serving every purpose necessary to the perfection and happiness of the
man in his new state. According to this view of the subject, the
objection taken from the scattering of the particles of the body that
dies, has no place; because it does not seem necessary, that the body
to be raised, should be composed of them. For the scripture no where
affirms, that the same numerical body is to be raised. What it teaches
is; that the dead shall be raised.”

DR. MACKNIGHT.

Footnote 154:

_This is reported in a very fabulous manner, and is reckoned no more
than an idle tale by Pliny, who mentions it among other stories of the
like nature. Vid. Plin. Nat. Hist. Lib._ vii. _Cap._ lii. _Animam
Aristæi etiam visam evolentem ex ore, in Proconneso, corvi effigie,
magna quæ sequitur fabulositate. This is also mentioned as a fable by
Origen._ _Vid. Origin. Lib._ iii. _Contr. Cels._

Footnote 155:

_Vid. Plin. Nat. Hist. Cap._ lii. _Reperimus inter exempla Hermotimi
Clazomenii animam relicto corpore, errare solitam, vagamq; e loginquo
multa annunciare, quæ nisi a præsenti nosci non possent; but by the
following words he speaks of him as not dead, but in a kind of
deliquium; corpore interim semianimi; but yet it was given out by
many, that he died and rose again very often. This Lucian himself
laughs at as a foolish tale. Vid. Lucian. Enc. Musc._

Footnote 156:

_Vid. Plat. de Repub. Lib._ x.

Footnote 157:

_Vid. Euseb. Præparat. Evang. Lib._ xi. _Cap._ xxxv. _It is mentioned
by Plutarch, Symp. Lib._ ix. _Cap._ v.

Footnote 158:

_Macrobius speaking concerning it, in Somn. Scip. Lib. 1. Cap. 1.
represents Cicero as being under a great concern, that this story of
Er was ridiculed, by many who did not stick to say, Visum fuisse Erem,
vitam effundere, animamq; recipere, quam revera non amiserat. See more
to this purpose in Hust. Demonst. Evang. Prop._ ix. _Cap._ cxlii.

Footnote 159:

_See a late learned writer, Hody on the resurrection of the same body;
who refers to several places in Heathen writers, of whom some believed
it; others exposed it as fabulous, Pag. 13-16._

Footnote 160:

_Thus Pliny, who a little before related several stories of persons
raised from the dead, notwithstanding calls the doctrine of the
resurrection_, puerile deliramentum. _Vid. Ejusd. Nat. Hist. Lib._
vii. _Cap._ lv. _and elsewhere he speaks of it as a thing in its own
nature impossible; and therefore concludes it to be one of those
things which God cannot do. Lib._ ii. _Cap._ vii. _Ne Deum quidem
posse omnia, nec mortales æternitate donare, aut revocare defunctos.
And Minutius Felix. Vid. Ejusd. Octav. Cap._ xi. _brings in an
Heathen, who was his friend, railing at it, without any decency, as
though it was no better than an old wives fable; and the principal
argument he produces, is, because he supposes it impossible for a body
that was burnt to ashes, to spring up into life again. And Celsus,
speaking concerning the impossibility of God’s doing any thing
contrary to nature, reckons this among those things. Vid. Orig. Contr.
Cels. Lib._ v. _Page 240. and says, the hope hereof is more worthy of
worms than men and styles it an abominable, as well as an impossible
thing, which God neither can nor will do._

Footnote 161:

Αναστασις.

Footnote 162:

_Vid. Volkel. de vera relig. Lib._ iii. _Cap._ xi. _Apparet
promissionem vitæ sempiternæ in prisco illo foedere factam minime
fuisse. And in a following part of this chapter, wherein he
professedly treats on this subject, he adds; Quæ apertis
luculentissimisq; verbis ut in nova scriptura fieri videamus, hoc Dei
beneficium nobis polliceantur. Ex quorum munere, hoc de quo agimus,
nequaquam esse hinc patet, quod antequam Christus illud explicaret,
nemo unquam extitit, qui vel suspicari auderet, tale quid illo
comprehendi._

Footnote 163:

_Vid. Joseph. de Bell. Jud. Lib._ ii. _Cap._ vii. Και γαρ ερρωτσαι παρ
αυτοις ηδε διξα φθαρτα μεν εναι τα σωματα, και τήν υλὴγ ου μονιμον
αυτοις, &c.

Footnote 164:

_See Dr. Hody on the resurrection, &c. Page 56-59._

Footnote 165:

_See Bishop Pearson on the Creed, Artic. 11. who observes, from their
writings, that because, in the formation of man, mentioned in_ Gen.
ii. 7. _Moses uses the word_ וייצר, _and in the formation of beasts,
verse 19. the word_ ויצר, _the former having two_ jods, _the latter
but one: Therefore the beasts are made but once, but man twice; to
wit, once in his generation, and the second time in his resurrection.
And they strangely apprehend a proof of the resurrection to be
contained in the malediction_, Gen. iii. 19. Dust thou art, and unto
dust thou shalt return, _q. d. thou art now dust while thou livest;
and, after death, thou shalt return unto this dust, that is, thou
shalt live again, as thou, dost now: And those words in_ Exod. xv. 1.
then sang Moses and the children of Israel; _they render_ he shall
sing, _viz. after the resurrection in the life to come, and from
thence infer this doctrine, which could afford but very small
satisfaction to the Sadducees, while they omitted to insist on other
pregnant proofs thereof_.

Footnote 166:

_See Vol. II. Heb. and Talmud. Exercit. on_ John iv. 25. _wherein he
says, that they pretend to prove it from_ Deut. xxxi. 16. _where God
says to Moses_, Thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, and rise again;
_which is an addition to, as well as a perversion of the text; which
says_, the people shall rise up and go a whoring, _&c. and Page 541,
and 787. he represents them as proving it from_ Josh. viii 30. _where
it is said, that Joshua_ built an altar unto the Lord; _which they
translate_, he shall build an altar; _supposing this to be after the
resurrection: And from_ Psal. lxxxiv. 4. Blessed are they that dwell
in thy house, they will be still praising thee, _they suppose is meant
of their praising God after the resurrection. See many other absurd
methods of reasoning to the same purpose, referred to by him in the
same place._

Footnote 167:

_Macab._ vii. 9, 11, 14, 23, 29.

Footnote 168:

_Thus Josephus Jacchiades, referred to by Witsius in Symb. Exercit._
xxvi. § 41. _in explaining that famous text in Daniel_ xii. 2. _says,
Et tunc fiet miraculum resurrectionis mortuorum: Nam multi dormientium
in terra pulverulenta expergiscentur, hi ad vitam æternam, qui sunt
sancti; illi vero ad opprobria & detestationem æternam; qui sunt
impii. Quorum resurrectionis causa est, ut impii fateantur palam, suam
fidem esse falsam, & eos qui ipsis fidem habuerint, prosecutos fuisse
vanitatem atque evanuisse, ipsique agnoscant suos majores falsitatem
possedisse. And Menasseh Ben Israel, de Resurr. mort. Lib._ ii. _Cap._
viii. _proves it from the same scripture. More to the same purpose may
be seen in Dr. Hody on the resurrection, Page 72. &_ seq. _who quotes
several of the Talmudical writers, as signifying their belief of this
doctrine; and especially Pocock in Maimon. Port. Mos. Cap._ vi. _who
produces a multitude of quotations to the same purpose; in which some
assert this doctrine without proof, others establish it by solid
arguments, and some mix a great many absurd notions with it, which we
shall, at present, pass over_.

Footnote 169:

_Vid. Tertull. de Resurrect. Carn. Cap._ xxx. _Non posset de ossibus
figura componi, si non id ipsum, & ossibus eventurum esset._

Footnote 170:

_Vid. Hieron. in Ezek._ xxxvii. _Nunquam poneretur similitudo
resurrectionis, ad restitutionem Israelitici populi significandam,
nisi staret ipsa resurrectitio, & futura crederetur; quia nemo de
rebus non extantibus incerta confirmat._

Footnote 171:

_Vid. Menasseh Ben Isr. Lib. 1. de Resurrect. Cap._ ii. § 4. _Hic
textus expressus est. & infallibilis quo sine omni dubio resurrectio
probatur._

Footnote 172:

_Vid. Hieron. Epist. 61. ad Pammach. de error. Joh. Hieros. Quid hac
prophetia manifestius? Nullus tam aperte post Christum, quam iste ante
Christum de resurrectione loquitur._

Footnote 173:

_The words are put in the form of an interrogation, which sometimes
argues a strong negation, but not always, since here it seems to imply
a concession that he should live again._

Footnote 174:

_Vid Minut. Fel. in Octav. § 33. Vide adeo quam in solatium nostri
resurrectionem futuram omnis natura meditatur Sol demergit, &
nascitur; astra labuntur, & redeunt; fiores occidunt, & reviviscunt;
post senium arbusta frondescunt semina non nisi corrupta revirescunt;
ita corpus in sepulchro ut arbores in hyberno occultant virorem,
ariditate mentita. Expectandum nobis etiam corporis ver est_, &c.

Footnote 175:

_See his Exposition on the Creed, Artic._ xi. _and Tertull. de resur.
Carn. cap._ xii. _Aspice nunc ad ipsa qunq; exempla divinæ potestatis:
dies moritur in noctem, & tenebris usquequaq spelitur. Funestatum
mundi honor, omnis substantia deusgratur. Sordent, silent, stupent
cuncta; ubiq; justitium est, quies rerum. Ita lux amissa lugetur; &
tamen rursus cum suo cultu, cum dote, cum sole, eadem & integra & tota
universo orbi reviviscit, interficiens mortem suam noctem, rescindens
sepulturam suam tenebras, hæres sibimet existens, donec & nox
reviviscat, cum suo & illa suggestu. Redaccenduntur enim & stellarum
radii, quos matutina successio extinxerat. Reducuntur & siderum
absentiæ, quas temporalis distinctio exemerat. Redornantur & specula
lunæ quæ menstruus numerus adtriverat. Revolvuntur hyemes & æstates, &
verna, & autumna, cum suis viribus, moribus, fructibus. Quippe etiam
terræ de cœlo disciplina est, arbores vestire post spolia, flores
denuo colorare, herbas rursus imponere, exhibere eadem quæ absumpta
sunt semina; nec prius exhibere quam absumpta: mira ratio: de
fraudatrice servatrix: ut reddat, intercipit: ut custodiat, perdit: ut
integret, vitiat e ut etiam ampliet, prius decoquit. Siquidem uberiora
& cultiora restituit quam exterminavit. Revera foenore interitu, &
injuria usura, & lucro damno: semel dixerim universa conditio recidiva
est. Quodcunq; conveneris, fuit: quodcunq; amiseris, nihil non iterum
est. Omnia in statum redeunt, quum abscesserint. Omnia incipiunt, quum
desierint. Ideo finiuntur, ut fiant. Nihil deperit, nisi in salutum.
Totus igitur hic ordo revolubilis rerum, testatio est resurrectionis
mortuorum. Operibus eam præscripsit Deus ante, quam literis: viribus
predicavit ante, quam vocibus. Præmissit tibi naturam magistram,
submissurus & prophetiam, quo facilius credas prophetiæ, discipulus
natura: quo statim admittas, quum audieris, quod ubiq; jam videris;
nec dubites Deum carnis etiam resuscitatorem, quem omnium noris
restituorem. Et utiq; si omnia homini resurgunt, cui procurata sunt
porro non homini, nisi & carni, quale est ut ipsa depereat ut totum,
propter quam & cui nihil deperit? Et Vid. ejud. apologet cap._ xlviii.
_in which he proves the resurrection of the body from the possibility
of that being restored to a former being, with the same ease that it
was made out of nothing; and shews how God has impressed upon this
world many testimonies of the resurrection; and then he adds, Lux
quotidie intersecta resplendet, & tenebræ, pari vice decedendo
succedunt, sidera defuncta vivescunt, tempora, ubi finiuntur,
incipiunt, fructus consummantur, et redeunt. Certe semina non nisi
corrupta et dissoluta foecundius surgunt, omnia percundo servantur,
omnia de interitu reformantur. Tu homo tantum nomen, si intelligas te,
vel de titulo Pythix discens, dominus omnium momentum et resurgentium,
ad hoc morieris, ut pereas?_

Footnote 176:

_This is what they generally intend by that aphorism, a privatione ad
habitum non datur regressus._

Footnote 177:

_See Hody on the resurrection_, &c. _Pag. 205-208._

Footnote 178:

_Vid. Plat. in Cratyl, who brings in Socrates as gravely punning on
the word_ σωμα, _q. d._ σημα, sepulchrum; _and supposing that this
name, was given to denote that the soul suffers punishment for its
faults, by being detained or shut up in prison. And Seneca speaks to
the same purpose: corpus hoc, animi pondus, & poena est, permanente
illo urgetur, in vinculis est. Vid. Sen. Epist. 65._

Footnote 179: