corruption of the whole, of others not. The forms of inanimate bodies, and all irrational souls, when they are corrupted, cease to be; and therefore if they should be produced out of the same matter, yet were not this a proper resurrection, because thereby there would not be the same individual which was before, but only a restitution of the species by another individual. But when a rational soul is separated from its body, which is the corruption of a man, that soul so separated doth exist, and consequently is capable of conjunction and reunion with the body; and if these two be again united by an essential and vital union, from which life doth necessarily flow, then doth the same man live who lived before; and consequently this reunion is a perfect and proper resurrection from death to life, because the same individual person, consisting of the same soul and body, which was dead, is now alive again.

Having thus delivered the true nature of a proper resurrection, we shall easily demonstrate that Christ did truly and properly rise from the dead. For, first, by a true though miraculous generation he was made flesh; and lived in his human nature a true and proper life, producing vital actions as we do. Secondly; he suffered a true and proper dissolution by his death; his soul being really separated, and his body left without the least vitality, as our dead bodies are. Thirdly, the same soul was reunited to the same body, and so he lived again the same man. For the truth of which, two things were necessary to be shown upon his appearing after death; the one concerning the verity, the other concerning the identity, of his body. All the apostles doubted of the first; for when Christ stood in the midst of them, "they were affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit," Luke xxiv. 37. But he sufficiently assured them of the verity of his corporeity, saying, "Handle me and see for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have." He convinced them all of the identity of his body, saying, "Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself;" especially unbelieving Thomas, "Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side; and be not

faithless, but believing." The body then in which he rose, must be the same in which he lived before, because it was the same with which he died.

And that we might be assured of the soul as well as of the body, first, he gave an argument of the vegetative and nutritive faculty, saying unto them, "Have ye here any meat? and they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honey-comb; and he took it and did eat before them"-secondly, of the sensitive part, conversing with them, showing himself, seeing and hearing themthirdly, he gave evidence of his rational and intellectual soul, by speaking to them and discoursing out of the scriptures, concerning those things which he spake unto them while he was yet with them. Thus did he show, that the body which they saw was truly and vitally informed with a human soul. And that they might be yet farther assured that it was the same soul by which that body lived before, he gave a full testimony of his Divinity by the miracle which he wrought in the multitude of fishes caught, by breathing on the apostles the Holy Ghost, and by ascending into heaven in the sight of his disciples. For seeing no man ascended into heaven but he which came down from heaven, even the Son of Man which was in heaven;" seeing the Divinity was never so united to any human soul but only in that person, it appeared to be the same soul with which he lived and wrought all the miracles before. To conclude; seeing Christ appeared after his death with the same body in which he died, and with the same soul united to it, it followeth that he rose from the dead by a true and proper resurrection.

Moreover, that the verity and propriety of Christ's resurrection may farther appear, it will be necessary to consider the cause thereof, by what power and by whom it was effected. And if we look upon the meritorious cause, we shall find it to be Christ himself; for he by his voluntary sufferings in his life, and exact obedience at his death, did truly deserve to be raised unto life again. Because he drank of the brook in the way," because "he humbled himself unto death, even the death of the cross," therefore was it necessary that he should be ex

alted, and the first degree of his exaltation was his resurrection. Now seeing Christ humbled himself to the sufferings both of soul and body; seeing whatsoever suffered, the same by the virtue and merit of his passion was to be exalted; seeing all other degrees of exaltation supposed that of the resurrection; it followeth from the meritorious cause that Christ did truly rise from the dead with the same soul and the same body, with which he lived united, and died separated.

The efficient cause of the resurrection of Christ is to be considered either as principal or instrumental. The principal cause was God himself; for no other power but that which is omnipotent can raise the dead. It is an act beyond the activity of any creature, and unproportionate to the power of any finite agent. "This Jesus hath God raised up," "saith the apostle, "whereof we all are witnesses," Acts ii. 32. And generally in the scriptures as our, so Christ's, resurrection is attributed unto God; and as we cannot hope after death to rise to life again without the activity of an infinite and irresistible power, no more did Christ himself, who was no otherwise raised than by an eminent act of God's omnipotency; which is excellently set forth by the apostle, in so high an exaggeration of expressions, as I think is scarce to be paralleled in any author; "that we may know what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of the might of his power which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him up from the dead." Seeing then omnipotency is a divine attribute, and infinite power belongs to God alone; seeing no less power than infinite could raise our Saviour from the dead; it followeth, that whatsoever instrumental action might concur, God must be acknowledged the principal agent.

And therefore in the scriptures the raising of Christ is attributed to God the Father, according to those words of the apostle, "Paul an apostle not of men, neither by men, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father who raised him from the dead;" but it is not attributed to the Father alone. For to whomsoever that infinite power doth belong, by which Christ was raised, that person must be acknowledged to have raised him. And because

we have already proved that the eternal Son of God is of the same essence, and consequently of the same power with the Father, and shall hereafter show the same true also of the Holy Ghost, therefore we must likewise act knowledge that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, raised Christ from the dead. Nor is this only true by virtue of this ratiocination, but it is also delivered expressly of the Son, and that by himself. It is a weak fallacy used by the Socinians, who maintain, that God the Father only raised Christ, and then say they teach as much as the apostles did, who attribute it always either generally unto God, or particularly to the Father. For if the apostles taught it only so, yet if he who taught the apostles taught us something more, we must make that also part of our belief. They believe the Father raised Christ, because St. Paul hath taught them so, and we believe the same; they will not believe that Christ did raise himself, but we must also believe that, because he hath said so. These were his words unto the Jews, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up," John ii. 19; and this is the explication of the apostle, “ But he spake of the temple of his body," which he might very properly call a temple, because "the fulness of the Godhead dwelt in him bodily." And "when he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them, and they believed the scripture and the word that Jesus had said," John ii. 22. Now if upon the resurrection of Christ the apostles believed those words of Christ, "Destroy this temple, and I will raise it up," then did they believe that Christ raised himself; for in those words there is a person mentioned who raised Christ, and no other person mentioned but himself.

A strange opposition they make to the evidence of this argument, saying, that God the Father raised Christ to life, and Christ being raised to life did lift and raise his body out of the grave, as the man sick of the palsy raised himself from the bed, or as we shall raise ourselves out of the graves when the trump shall sound: and this was all which Christ did or could do. But if this were true, and nothing else were to be understood in those words of our Saviour, he might as well have said, "Destroy

this temple, and in three days any one of you may raise it up;" for when life was restored unto it by God, any one of them might have lifted it up, and raised it out of the grave, and have shown it alive.

This answer therefore is a mere shift; for to raise a body which is dead, is, in the language of the scriptures, to give life unto it, or to quicken a mortal body; " for as the Father raiseth up the dead and quickeneth them, even so the Son quickeneth whom he will," John v. 21. He then who quickeneth the dead bodies of others when he raiseth them, he also quickened his own body when he raised that. The temple is supposed here to be dissolved, and being so to be raised again; therefore the suscitation must answer to the dissolution. But the temple of Christ's body was dissolved when his soul was separated, nor was it any other way dissolved than by that separation. God suffered not his Holy One to see corruption, and therefore the parts of his body, in respect of each to other, suffered no dissolution. Thus as the apostle desired to be dissolved and to be with Christ, so the temple of Christ's body was dissolved here, by the separation of his soul; for the temple standing was the body living, and therefore the raising of the dissolved temple was the quickening of the body. If the body of Christ had been laid down in the sepulchre alive, the temple had not been dissolved; therefore to lift it up out of the sepulchre when it was before quickened, was not to raise à dissolved temple, which our Saviour promised he would do, and the apostles believed he did.

a

Again; it is most certainly false that our Saviour had power only to lift up his body when it was revived, but had no power of himself to re-unite his soul unto his body, and thereby to revive it. For Christ speaketh expressly of himself, "I lay down my life (or soul) that I might take it again. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down and I have power to take it again," John x. 17. The laying down of Christ's life was to die, and the taking of it again was to revive; and by his taking of his life again he shewed himself to be "the resurrection and the life;" for he which was "made of the seed of David according to