tree fell so it lay:' and that nobody was ever seen by them to return from the mansions of the dead; but that, for any thing they could find to the contrary, all passed into dust and rottenness, and perpetual oblivion.

Secondly, The other way therefore of convincing the world of this momentous truth (in comparison of which all science and philosophy are but trifles) must be by exemplification. That is to say, by giving the world an instance, or example of it, in some person or persons, who having been confessedly dead, should revive and return to life again. And this, one would think, should be as full and unexceptionable a proof that there may be a resurrection of men to a future estate, as could be desired; nothing striking the mind of man so powerfully as instances and examples, which make a truth not only intelligible, but even palpable; sliding it into the understanding through the windows of sense, and by the most familiar, as well as most unquestionable, perceptions of the eye. And accordingly, this course God thought fit to take in the resurrection of Christ; by which he condescended to give the world the greatest satisfaction that infidelity itself could rationally insist upon. Howbeit, notwithstanding so plain an address both to men's reason and sense too, neither has this course proved so successful for convincing of the world of a resurrection from the dead, and a future estate consequent thereupon, but that unbelief has been still putting in its objections against it. For it is not, I confess, the interest of such as live ill in this world to believe that there shall be another; or that they shall be sensible of any thing after death has once done its work upon them: and

therefore let truth, and Scripture, and even sense itself, say what they will for a resurrection, men, for aught appears, will for ever square their belief to their desires, and their desires to their corruptions; so that (as we find it in the 16th of Luke and last verse)though they should even see one rise from the dead they would hardly be persuaded of their own resurrection.' Such a sad and deplorable hardness of heart have men sinned themselves into, that nothing shall convince them but what first pleases them, be it never so much a delusion. Nevertheless, the most wise and just God is not so to be mocked, who knows, that by raising Christ from the dead, he has done all that rationally can, or ought to be done, for the convincing of mankind that there shall be a resurrection; whether they will be convinced by it or no. But now, if after all it should be asked, How is Christ's resurrection a proof that the rest of mankind shall rise from the dead too? I answer, That considered indeed as a bare instance, or example, it proves no more than that there may be such a thing; since the same Infinite Power which effected the one, may as well effect the other. But then, if we consider it as an argument, and a confirmation of that doctrine, (whereof the assertion of a general resurrection makes a principal part,) I affirm, that so taken it does not only prove that such a thing may be, but also that it actually shall be; and that as certainly, as it is impossible for the Divine Power to set its seal to a lie by ratifying an imposture with such a miracle. And thus, as Christ's resurrection irrefragably proves the resurrection of the rest of mankind, so it no less proves Christ himself to have been the Messiah; for

that, having all along affirmed himself to be so, he made good the truth of what he had so affirmed by his miraculous rising again, and so gave as strong a proof of his Messiahship, as infinite power, joined with equal veracity, could give. And upon this account we have his resurrection alleged by St. Peter for the same purpose, here in the text, which was part of his sermon to the Jews, concerning Jesus Christ; whom he proves to be their true and long-expected Messiah, against all the cavils of prejudice and unbelief, by this one invincible demonstration.

In the text then we have these three things considerable :

First, Christ's resurrection and the cause of it, in these words, 'whom God hath raised up.'

Secondly, The manner by which it was effected, which was by loosing the pains of death.' And,

Thirdly, and lastly, The ground of it, which was its absolute necessity, expressed in these words: 'It was not possible that he should be holden of it.' And,

1. For the first of these, The cause of the resurrection set forth in this expression, whom God hath raised up.' It was such an action as proclaimed an omnipotent agent, and carried the hand of God writ upon it in broad characters, legible to the meanest reason. Death is a disease which art cannot cure: and the grave a prison which delivers back its captives upon no human summons. To restore life is only the prerogative of him who gives it. Some indeed have pretended by art and physical applications to recover the dead, but the success has sufficiently upbraided the attempt. Physic may repair and piece up

nature, but not create it. Cordials, plaisters, and fomentations cannot always stay a life when it is going, much less can they remand it when it is gone. Neither is it in the power of a spirit or demon, good or bad, to inspire a new life. For it is a creation; and to create is the incommunicable prerogative of a Power infinite and unlimited. Enter into a body they may, and so act and move it after the manner of a soul: but it is one thing to move, another to animate a carcass. You see the devil could fetch up nothing of Samuel at the request of Saul, but a shadow and a resemblance, his countenance and his mantle, which yet was not enough to cover the cheat, or to palliate the illusion. But I suppose nobody will be very importunate for any further proof of this, that if Christ was raised, it must be God who raised him. The angel might indeed roll away the stone from the sepulchre, but not turn it into a 'son of Abraham;' and a less power than that which could do so, could not effect the resurrection.

2. I come now to the second thing, which is to show the manner by which God wrought this resurrection, set forth in those words, having loosed the pains of death.' An expression not altogether so clear, but that it may well require a further explication. For it may be enquired, with what propriety God could be said to loose the pains of death,' by Christ's resurrection, when those pains continued not till the resurrection, but determined and expired in the death of his body? Upon which ground it is, that some have affirmed, that Christ descended into the place of the damned; where during his body's abode in the grave, they say, that in his soul he really suffered the pains of

hell; and this not unsuitably to some ancient copies, which read it not divas Javáre the pains of death,' but divas ade the pains of hell;' and this also with much seeming consonance to that article of the creed in which Christ is said to have descended into hell.' But to this I answer, That Christ suffered not any such pains in hell, as the forementioned opinion would pretend, which we may demonstrate from this, that if Christ suffered any of those pains during his abode in the grave, then it was either in his divine nature, or in his soul, or in his body. But the divine nature could not suffer, or be tormented, as being wholly impassible. Nor yet could he suffer in his soul; for as much as in the very same day of his death, that passed into paradise, which surely is no place of pain. Nor lastly, in his body; for that being dead, and consequently for the time bereaved of all sense, could not be capable of any torment. And then, for answer to what was alleged from the ancient copies, it is to be observed that the word ads (which some render hell,) indifferently signifies also the grave, and a state of death. And lastly, for that article of the creed in which there is mention made of Christ's descent into hell, there are various expositions of it, but the most rational and agreeable is, that it means his abode in the grave and under the state of death three days and three nights, or rather three vuxdýμɛpa, viz. part of the first, and third, (so called by a synecdoche of the part for the whole,) and the second entirely. Whereby, as his burial signified his entrance into the grave, so his descending into hell signified his continuance there and subjection to that estate. And thus the three parts of his humiliation in the last and grand