. namely, that the foul, after death, has a perfect human shape, and all the fame • Origen. contr. Celf. 1. 4. p. 20°. & l. 5. p. 244, 245. This was the notion of Pythagoras, Porphyr. in vit. Pythag. p. 188 and of Plato, Apuleius de Philofoph. 1. 1. and of Chryfippus, Lactant. 1. 7. c. 23 and of Zeno, Tatian. contr. Græc. p. 143. and of Timaus Locrus, de anima mundi, p. 24. Ed. Gale. See Dr Hody's Refurrection, &c. p. 16-22. • Ου καλὸν ἁρμονίην αναλύεμεν ανθρώποιο Καὶ τάχα δ ̓ ἐκ γαίης ἐλπίζομεν ἐς φάΘ. ἐλθεῖν Phocylid. poem. admon. 1. 97-99. Jofephus Scaliger ad Eufebium. p. 96.-Scaligeri judicio fubfcribunt Daniel Heinfius, Exerc. Sacr. ad Heb. iv. 12. & ad Theocritum, p. 20. Huetius, Demonftrat. Evangel. p. 113, & 608. & Alnetan. quæft. p. 136. Voffius de Poetis Græcis, p. 22. & de philofophia, p. 146. Joh. Reifkius, p. 67. de Sibyllinis. Georgius Calixtus de Refurrectione carnis, §. 6. Marquardus. Freherus, Parergon, p. 64. ut Barthium, Taubmannum aliofque præteream. Fabricii Biblotheca Græca, 1. 2. c. 11 p. 436. writer'. Besides, the verfes referred to are not fo expreffed, but that it is thought they may very well be explained, fo as to defign the Pythagorean tranfmigration, and not the Chriftian doctrine of the refurrection. Theopompus and Eudemus Rhodius, in Diogenes Laertius, tell us, that it was the opinion of the Perfian Magi, that men fhould live again and be immortal. This they received from their master and the founder of their fect, Zoroastres; who foretold, "that there fhould be a time when there would be a refurrection "of all the dead"." Nor need this be wondered at, fince, from the best accounts of him it appears that he was originally a Jew both by birth and religion; was a fervant to one of the prophets of Ifrael, and was well verfed in the holy fcriptures: out of which, without doubt, he took this doctrine, as he did fome others, and which he taught his Magi, and adopted into his new religion. It may be more furprizing to hear that Democritus, a corporeal philofopher, fhould have any notion of the refurrection of the dead; yet Pliny afcribes it to him, and derides him for it; though it has been thought by fome that he designs another Democritus, and not the philofopher, fince this opinion cannot be very eafily reconciled to his philofophy". But fuppofing that he, and not another, is meant, it is eafy to obferve how he came by it, seeing he not only lived in Egypt a while, and converfed with the priests there, but travelled alfo into Perfia, and learned of the Magi theology as well as other things. The notions of feveral pagan nations concerning the refurrection, Vetuftiffimi fcriptoris Judæi gnomas fub Phocylidis nomine legi contendit If. Voffius de Sibyllinis oraculis, c. 5. quæ fententia probatur Joh. Fello, Oxonienfi Epifcopo, in notis ad Cypriani, 1. 1. adv. Judæos, p. 27. ibid. s Refurrectionis dogma, v. 97. feqq. neutiquam ita a Phocylide declaratur, ut non poffit de metempsychofi exponi. Ibid. p. 437. * Ος καὶ αναβιωσεσθαι καλα τις μαγες, φησί, τες ανθρώπες, καὶ ἔσεσθαι αθανατος. Laert. proem. ad vit. philofoph. . Ὁ δὲ Ζωροάστρης προλέγει, ὡς ἔσαι πολὺ χρόνθ, ἐν ᾧ παντῶν νεκρῶν ἀνάςασις ἔξαι. Εneas Gazæus, in Theophraft. p. 77. apud Dr Hody, p. 30. * Vide Prideaux's Connection of the hiftory of the Old and New Teftament, par. 1. b. 4. P. 212, 213. 8vo. - Natural hift. 1. 7. c. 55. His words are cited at large in p. 98. Quæ apud Plinium 7. hift. nat. 55. notatur revivifcendi promiffa Democrito vanitas, videtur mihi refpicere Democriti dictum ad regem Darium conjugis morte affectum, quod refert Julianus epift. 37. parum enim cum Democriti philofophia commune habet, neque cum illa facile conciliabitur, quod viri docti ex illo Plinii loco colligunt Democritum a fide Chriftiana de refurrectione corporum alienum non fuiffe. Fabricii Biblioth. Grac. l. 2. c. 23 p. 770. 2 Ουτω μάγων τινῶν διήκεσε καὶ Χαλδαίων - παρ' ὧν τάτε, περὶ θεολογίας καὶ ἀεξολογίας ἔμαθεν ἔτι παῖς ὢν Et paulo poft, φησὶ δὲ ΔημήτριΘ. ἐν ὁμωνύμοις, καὶ Αντισθένης ἐν διαδοχαῖς, ἀποδημήσαι αυτὸν καὶ εἰς Αιγυπίον, πρὸς τὲς ἱερέας, γεομετρίαν μαθησόμενον, καὶ πρὸς Χαλδαίες, εἰς τὴν Περσίδα, xai sis Thr igu&fàr dánaocar perioda. Laert in vit. Democr. Vide Julian, orat. 8. p. 453. resurrection, are fuch as are either afcribed to them by authors not to be depended on, or plainly defign a tranfmigration, or are what they have borrowed from the Jews, either by converfing with them, or by reading their writings; or else are the broken remains of fome tradition, received from their ancestors, originally founded on divine revelation. Some have argued from the pagans account of future punishments their belief of this doctrine'; as when they represent Aridaus and other tyrants in hell, bound neck and heels together, their skins flead, and they dragged through thorns and briars; when they fpeak of Sisyphus, rolling a stone up hill, which, when he has got to the top of it, revolves upon his hands; of Ixion, fastened to a wheel, in a continual motion; of Tityus, having vultures always feeding on his liver; and of Tantalus in extreme thirst, standing in water up to his middle, with apples hanging over his head, and near his mouth, and yet he unable to exstinguish his thirt with either. But, as a learned author obferves, "The reason why "the heathens defcribed the punishment of the damned after this manner, was "not because they thought that their bodies were not left here on earth; but partly, because it was the vulgar opinion, that the foul had all the fame "parts that the body has; and partly because such descriptions do more easily "move and affect us; and it is not eafy to describe the torments of the "foul after any other manner. Our Lord, in the parable of Dives and La"zarus, adds the fame author, speaks of them in the same manner, as if they "had bodies; though what is related of them, is fuppofed to be before the "refurrection, and their bodies are fuppofed to be yet in their graves"." As for some particular inftances of perfons, who have been faid to be raised from the dead to life, mentioned by heathen writers; as Alceftis by Hercules; Hippolytus by Æfculapius; Eurydice by Orpheus, and Glaucus by Polyidus; Capaneus, Lycurgus, Eryphile, Tyndareus, Hymenaus, with many others of the like kind'. Acilius Aviola, Lucius Lamia, Ælius Tubero, and others, are faid to revive on the funeral pile: Er Armenius Pamphilius is reported to come to life, after he had been dead twelve days: Hercules is said to live after he had So Juftin Martyr ad Græcos Cohort. p. 25, 26. Epiphan. Ancorat. p. 584. • Vide Palæphat. de Incredibilibus Hift. p. 56. • Paufanias in Corinth. p. 135 Hygin. Fab. 49. • Apollodorus de Deorum origin. 1. 1. p. 7. & l. f Apollodor. ibid. 1. 3. p. 172. Hygin. Fab. 51. Servius in Virgil Æneid. 1. 8. 3. p. 135. Hygin. Fab. 136. g Vide Valer. Maxim. 1. 1. de Miraculis, c. 8. §. 12. & Plin. Nat. Hift. 1. 7. c. 52. burnt P. 1247. h Valer. Maxim. ibid. extern. 1. Macrob. in fomn. Scipion. 1. 1. c. 1. Clemens Alexandrinus calls him Zoroaftres. Stromat. 1. 5. p. 598, 599. Ed. Parif. Vide Origen. contr. Celf. 1. 2. p. 70. & Aug de civitat Dei, 1. 22. c. 28. & L. Viv, in ibid. burnt himfelf'; and Efculapius to be raised after he had been ftruck with thunder, and who himself is faid to restore to life one that was carrying to the pile; and much fuch a story is told of Apollonius Tyaneus. As for these instances, I fay, they seem to be fabulous stories, and undeferving of credit". It is true, indeed, they have been credited by fome of the heathens; and fince they have, an argument from hence may be improved against them with great. force, and for the doctrine of the refurrection; for if they can believe these things, why should it be thought a thing incredible with them that God should raise the dead? It may be, I have been too long on this fubject; I therefore proceed to observe, That the Jews were particularly bleffed of God with that revelation which discovers the truth of this doctrine. In this they had the advantage of the Gentiles, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God"; and yet there were fome among them, as the fect of the Sadducees, which did not believe this truth; they said, there was no refurrection; though in this, as our Lord says, they erred, not knowing the fcriptures, nor the power of God'. In this the Hemerobaptifts agreed with them; nor did the Effenes acknowledge the doctrine of the resurrection'; yea, many of the Pharifees held the Pythagorean notion of the transmigration of fouls into other bodies, which is afferted by Jofephus', and by learned men, collected from several paffages of fcripure t; which notion has been embraced by many of that people": nor is it fo aftonishing, as that, whereas, in the writings of the New Teftament, there is a more clear discovery made of this truth, yet it has been denied and oppofed by some, who 1 Ειτα πισεύεις μὲν Ηρακλέα καίσαντα ἑαυτὸν ζῆν, καὶ Ασκληπιὸν κεραυνωθέντα ἐγηγέρθαι, τὰ δὲ VÃÒ TŰ ☺: 001 Ayóμera άmises. Theophilus ad Autolycum, l. 1. p. 77. Ed. Paris. Plin. l. 7 °c. 37. & l. 26, c. 3. Vide Apulei Florida, §. 19. 1 Philoftrat. vit. Apoll. 1. 4 c. 16. "Vide Palæphat. de Incred p. 56-58. & Plin Nat. Hift. 1. 7. c. 52. & Cuperi Apoth. Homeri, p. 125. n Rom. iii. 1, 2. • Matt. xxi. 23 Acts xxiii 8. P Matt: xxii. 29. 4 Vide Epiphan contr. hæref. 1. 1. hæref. 17. Juftin. Martyr. dialog. cum Tryph. p. 307. Ed. Parif. • Vide Jofeph. de bello Jud. 1. 2. c. 8. §. 11. Ed. Hudfon. Thefe perhaps are the Mapísal mentioned by Juftin Martyr among other Jewish sects as of the fame mind with the Sadducees. Dialog. cum Tryph. p. 307. Antiq. 1. 18. c. 1. §. 3. & de bello Jud. I. 2. c. 8. §. 14. Vide Reland. Antiq. Sacr. Vet. Hæbræor. par. 2. c. 11. §. 6. As Matt. xvi. 14. John i. 21. & ix. 1. Vide Poli Synopfin in locos. "Vide Shalfhelet Hakabala, fol. 38. 1. Menaffeh ben Ifrael de Refurre&tione, 1. 1. c. 16 & 1. 2. c. 18. Leo Modena's Hift. of the Jews, 1. 5. c. 11. Holften. Obferv. ad vit. Pythag p. 1 & Maji Synopf. Jud. Theolog. loc. 24. §. 5, 6. 18. who have had the advantages of them. It was the error of Hymenæus and Philetus, that the refurrection was paft already": and fome in the church of Corinth held, that there is no refurrection of the dead. These were followed by Simon Magus, Saturninus, Bafilides, Carpocrates, Valentinus, and others too numerous to recite; and of late the doctrine of the resurrection of the fame body is rejected by Socinians and Quakers. But to go on, II. I fhall now endeavour to evince both the credibility and certainty of the refurrection of the dead, notwithstanding it has been accounted by many abfurd and incredible. First, I fhall fhew the credibility of it; and that, 1, From its confiftence with the nature and perfections of God. If God is omnipotent and omnifcient, as he certainly is, or he would not be God, the refurrection of the dead is not incredible; it is what may be. God is omnipotent, he can do all things, what is impoffible with men, is poffible with him he cannot do any thing, indeed, that argues imperfection and weakness, or implies a contradiction and falfhood: he cannot lie or deny himself. But the refurrection of the dead is not an inftance of either. It is no contradiction, that the duft, which was formed out of nothing, being reduced to duft, fhould again form the body which it once conftituted; nor does this argue imperfection or weakness, but is a glorious inftance of mighty power A heathen once faid, that it was not in the power of God to raise the dead2; and to another, it feemed impoffible for any to restore life to one that is dead": but if God could make all things out of nothing, as he did, and, from a dark confused chaos, raise up fuch a beautiful structure as this world, and out of the duft of the earth form the body of man, and infufe into it, and unite it with a living and reasonable foul; then much more muft he be able to raise up a dead body, the matter and substance of which now is, though in different forms and shapes, and re-unite it to its foul, which still has a real existence: it is much easier to restore that which is, to its former condition, than to make y Vide Epiphan contr. hæref. August. de hæref. & alios hærefium fcriptores. z Imperfecta vero in homine naturæ præcipua folatia, ne Deum quidem poffe omnia. Namque nec fibi poteft mortem confcifcere, fi velit, quod homini dedit optimum in tantis vitæ pœnis: nec mortales æternitate donare, aut revocare defunctos: nec facere ut qui vixit non vixerit. Plin. Nat. Hift. l. 2. c 7. · · Ἐμοὶ δὲ δοκεῖ μηδένα ἀποθανόντα δύνασθαι τινὰ ἀναβιώναι. Palæphat. de Incredib, Hift. p. 56. Ed. Gale, Cantab. 1671. |