A DISSERTATION Concerning the Pre-existency of Souls: Wherein The state of the Question is briefly unfolded, and divers Arguments and Objections on both sides Alledged and Answered;
AND A free judgment concerning the Summ of the Controversie allowed to every one.
Being Originally written in the Latine Tongue, several years since, by the Learned C.P. and now made English by D. F. D. P. upon the recommendation of F. M. H. their Friend.
LONDON, Printed for J. Wickins, at the White Hart, and Rob. Kettlewell, at the Hand and Scepter, over against St. Dunstans Church in Fleetstreet. 1684.
THE PRAEEXISTENCY OF SOULS Asserted,
- First, By an exposition of the Hypothesis it self.
- Secondly, By a confirmation of the Hypothesis; which is derived partly from Reason, and partly from allegations of Authority and Testimony.
- Thirdly, by a refutation of contrary arguments.
Part I. Being Confirmatory.
CHAP. I. Propounding the Hypothesis it self.
THe Hypothesis of the Praeexistency of Souls is chiefly comprehended in the following Positions.
1. All humane souls have, in the universal Creation, flowed out from God.
2. A humane Soul is of its own nature, a Spirit, but of an heterogeneous essence, whose parts are a vital Center, and Rayes or Beams of a secondary substance; in the former is seated the superiour faculty of Reason and Sense; in the latter is placed the inferiour plastick or propagating Faculty, which is the Throne of a threefold vital aptitude, in a threefold vehicle.
3. The Soul from the very first moment of its Creation was united vitally with matter, yet in a state or condition very glorious.
4. Souls becoming sated or glutted with the long enjoyment and use of Aethereal Heavenly felicity and joys, which consist in the contemplation and Love of the supream Good, began somewhat more closely to consider their material vehicles, and becoming delighted with the delicacies thereof, did at first in a due [Page 4]proportion, and with a legitimate and allowed measure enjoy and use with pleasure unutterable, the softer and more curiously sweet emotions of them.
5. But after that, they falling into an immoderate Love and admiration of them, viz. through a too loose desire and unbridled appetite, they wholly plunged themselves into the lustful delights of them, in this regard leaping over the bounds of true temperance, whence afterwards their misery sprang forth and ensued.
6. For by reason of this immoderate use of their material vehicles, 1. They fell from their primaeval glory, into an inferiour and less happy state or condition. 2. Their Essence being at first immaculate and undefiled, but through the Love and contrectation, or use of impure pleasures being miserably infected, their Nature became affected, or seised with an inxpressible intemperance. 3. Their vital aptitude unto their formerly most pure vehicles became diminished. 4. Their [Page 6]most flourishing vivid Reason became limited, bounded, and stupefied, and, 5. They themselves became manifestly unfit to continue longer in an Aethereal heavenly life, whence they were forced out in the very act, to relinquish their first habitation.
7. Descending therefore downwards, they began to make tryal of a more vile matter, out of which they would frame to themselves vehicles more agreeable to their now polluted Essences; and at length arrived lower into the Atmosphere of this [Page 7]Earthly Globe, where still degenerating more and more, and being now delighted only with sensual pleasures, after some time spent, they utterly lost all use of Reason; and presently after, of sense also; so that at length they fell as it were asleep, and into a state of silence or rest.
8. Then their plastick or propagating Faculty only remained in its Vigour, with which the Spirit of Nature eminently conspired, who, upon every occasion of matter aptly prepared being [Page 8]given, admits and puts them into these earthly bodies, they being first united with seminal matter, and after that becoming inhabitants of a body duely Organized, as in their Prison and Grave.
9. Now this detrusion, or being thrust into these earthly vehicles, happens to them upon a double account: First, that they might be duely punished for such faults as they had committed in the state of Praeexistency, and then, that notwithstanding they should not want an occasion of returning [Page 9]into that state from whence they were fallen, if (viz.) in a due manner they applied their indeavours thereunto.
CHAP. II. Containing Reasons which confirm these Positions.
1. WHatever Hypothesis concerning the Original of the Soul, is more consentaneous to sound Reason than any other is, that Hypothesis of all others comes nearest to the Truth: But this of the [Page 11]Praeexistency of Souls is such: Therefore, &c. The second proposition of this Argument is thus proved: Because there are chiefly but two contrary opinions of this point. One of them is theirs who say that the Soul is propagated by natural generation from the Parents: The other is theirs who affirm that the Soul is created upon every occasion given for the generation. But in the former opinion we meet with a plain contradiction: For seeing that the Soul is a Spirit, it is of an Essence indivisible, [Page 12]that is, indiscerpible. The other opinion affordeth matters which are unworthily ascribed to the Divine Majesty: (whilst it makes God, the primary efficient cause of, and the Author, according to the most proper and peculiar manner of speaking, of the manifest crimes of Whoredom, Adultery, Incest, yea, of Buggery, viz. perfecting those impure Congresses, with the Creation of new Souls.) Yea, it moreover injureth the very Soul it self, which being created by God in [Page 13]all manner of purity, is thrust down into a Dungeon (saith this opinion) which is the impurest of all, by the depravity of which a many of them are so corrupted, that at last they are necessarily adjudged to that extreamest of calamities, that they all remain infidels or unbelieving. Seeing therefore these two opinions are thus absurd, what can be more probable than the Praeexistency of Souls?
2. If from the beginning of the World the matter of every single man remained undivided, which certainly must needs be subjected to many myriads of alterations and modifications, before it could arrive to the state of a humane body, it is much more probable, that every man's soul also did already exist, or was in being even from that very Age, Term, or beginning: But the former part of the Argument is true, no one [Page 15]Philosopher ever contradicting it: Therefore also is the latter part thereof true. The connexion of both parts of that proposition is thus proved; because it is most eminently probable that to the more Noble substance, there also belongeth the more Noble duration. But the Soul is nobler than the Body.
3. He who through his Wisdom alwayes doth that which is best, he without doubt hath in this [Page 16]case also done that which is best: But now it is better to be in being sooner, than to be later, seeing always that it is good to be. But the first is true concerning God, therefore also is the latter true of him.
4. Whoever is supreamly and absolutely, and by consequence always good, he also is always communicative thereof to another; and then indeed by how much he is so to more, by so much is it better: But the first is true of [Page 17]God: Therefore also is the latter, and by consequence there were not from the beginning created Souls wanting, to whom God might communicate himself.
5. If the Goodness of God ought not to be determined to be less than any goodness of men, then it follows, that the divine goodness would not but now at length create or produce Souls. But the first is true, and therefore also is the latter. The connexion of that argument [Page 18]is proved; because good men, as much as in them lies, never let slip occasion of doing good, especially if nothing hinders them: how much less then shall the most glorious God do so, of and to whom we cannot so much as in thought imagine there can be any impediments.
6. He whose Government or Dominion could never be other than most full and compleat, to him never could be wanting [Page 19]Subjects, as many as possibly could ever be in being: But the Universal Dominion of God is unchangeable, and never was not most full and compleat; Therefore also there never were wanting to him as many Souls as could possibly ever be in being.
7. If God gave not such noble Creatures the same duration as he gave to matter, it follows, that He either could not, or would not do it, but that is repugnant [Page 20]to his Omnipotency, and this to his Justice. Therefore he did give it.
8. From what Opinion soever those difficulties which are met with in or about humane affairs can most easily be avoided, that same is not only the truest, but also the most useful opinion; but this concerning the Praeexistency of Souls is such: Therefore, &c. The minor proposition is proved, because by this opinion it is concluded that the souls of men [Page 21]did once exist in some other State or Condition, in which they did in various manners and degrees sin against their Creator: and thereupon it became necessary according to his most just judgments, that they should endure various calamities, and several sad chances or accidents one after another as a punishment inflicted on them for the many exorbitances of their Apostasie. By this Key may not only be readily unlocked that mystery, why many are so averse to all [Page 22]Religion and Vertue, yea, also plainly stupid, and being, as it were, corrupted by an invincible kind of sloth as to all things of such a Nature, even from their very Cradles, but to all vices almost are incorrigibly prone. But also why even whole Nations of people, for so many ages have lien as it were buried in the most savage barbarity, yea and many of them are even yet to this very day detained therein? Which strange Scene of things would necessarily much darken the wayes of [Page 23]the Divine providence, unless some glimmerings of Light should by and through this Hypothesis break forth upon them.
9. That opinion which is not contradicted by any of our faculties, is without doubt to be reputed to be true: But this of the Praeexistency of Souls is such: Therefore, &c.
10. Whatsoever opinion doth without any difficulty, alone explicate the Nature of Original sin, that [Page 24]is to be preferred before all others: This is such a one: Therefore, &c. The minor proposition is proved: Because by this Hypothesis, every man is himself concluded to be the Author of his first Original sin; nor is there any need that we should have recourse to the sin and punishment of Adam, where we certainly meet with a Labyrinh of difficulties: For here in this we hunt not after that secret and imperscrutable way or manner, how that sin of his is devolved [Page 25]down upon us: Nor is the Divine justice brought into danger of being accused, as if it should thrust down and shut up immaculate pure Spirits into foul and unclean bodies, and that without any fault of theirs; in as much as they were those who never had any commerce, or any thing to do with the sin of Adam: together with all the other Incongruities, which belong to the common opinion.
11. Whatsoever Opinion doth without all difficulty, alone unfold those things which occur about the various inclinations of humane minds, That is to be esteemed before others: But this of the Praeexistency is such: Therefore, &c. The minor is thus proved: The Internal Complexions of men are as various as are their External Constitutions; and the Temperaments of their minds are as diverse as those of their bodies, so that as there be [Page 27]peculiarities of Tempers in Bodies, or Radical temperaments in the Corporeal parts of Bodies, so also are there found Mental, or Soulish (if I may so speak) Propensions congenite or connatural to the Souls themselves, with which they come as it were sealed and impregnated into this World. For it may most easily be observed that some are most highly addicted or prone to such or such Opinions, insomuch that at the very first blush, as it were, they give up their [Page 28]assents unto them, yea, and afterwards stick close unto them, when as on the contrary, Others as equally learned, and who have no less sharpness of judgment, do notwithstanding hesitate in or concerning them, yea, though they were alike clearly proposed, and confirmed with equal evidence; so that oftentimes, they can by no means be brought to approve of them, but rather they most obstinately cry out against them, insomuch as this their averseness [Page 29]seems to be implanted and riveted into the very nature it self of these men. Whence now ariseth this Intellectual Congruity with some Opinions, and an Antipathy and Incompatibility with others, unless their Souls did praeexist, and came down into this state or condition thus prepossessed with a certain kind of affection to these or the other principles, and with an inbred hatred to the contrary. The same may be observed also about [Page 30]those things unto which many incline, as being very prone to some certain exercises, and peculiar operations, of which determinations singularly tending to many specialties there can be rendred no sufficient reason; unless it be this, that the Souls of these people had formerly appeared and acted on another Theater, before they came down into this, where they were addicted to some certain kind of actions which was very analogous or agreeable to this very [Page 31]sort, which they are observed to affect here; in which if they had been more than ordinarily delighted, and were exercised any long while, they then acquired a habit, and its probable, that they retained in themselves always some certain reliques concerning them, and some glimmerings and fragments as it were, and when the Reason, and the other faculties of these Souls came to Maturity, who can deny, but that these might be excited [Page 30] [...] [Page 31] [...] [Page 32]afresh, again to choose them, and to love them a new, and by a new recovery as it were, to call them back again into use.
12. Whatsoever Opinion floweth forth from the very Nature it self of Duration, that is a true Opinion; This is such, &c. The minor is proved, because whatever is capable of infinite duration from a respect of what's to come, the same is also capable of infinite duration in respect of what is [Page 33]past, and that in its own Nature, which in it self containeth nothing which is repugnant to this its former duration; but such is the Soul: Therefore &c.
CHAP. III. Containing Arguments drawn from Authority, and indeed chiefly that of Scripture.
AUthority is either Sacred, or humane, and that is such either simply, as are the Scriptures; or else according to [Page 35]a certain respect and consideration, as is that of the Fathers. That of the Philosophers is humane. The Arguments derived from the Authority of Scripture are either to prove the Praeexistency of all Souls, or of the Soul of the Messiah only: The former shall be produced in this Chapter.
1. In Deut. 29.14, 15. Neither with you only do I make this Covenant, and this Oath; But with all who stand here with us this day, [Page 36]before the Lord our God, and also with all that are not here with us this day. From whence the Jews do thus argue:
Those with whom God hath made a Covenant, they are not meer non-entities, because a Covenant doth require two real relatives: But God hath made a Covenant with Israelites, who were not yet born; Therefore they who were not yet born, were not meer non-entities; and then by consequence, their souls [Page 37]either lurked in the Souls of their Parents, which above is proved to be absurd, or else they already did praexist.
2. Isaiah 57.16. For I will not contend for ever, neither will I be always wroth: For the Spirit should fail before me, and the Souls which I have made. From whence the Jews fetch this Argument.
If God himself testifieth that he made Souls for Posterity, with which he [Page 38]will not contend, then those Souls, before that time came, in which the Spirit ought to hide, or cover men, did already praeexist: But from the Text the first is true, Therefore also is the latter true.
3. Jeremiah 1.5. Before I had formed thee in the Belly, I knew thee, (or rather I implanted knowledge into thee) and before thou camest forth out of the Womb, I sanctified thee, and ordained thee a Prophet unto the Nations.
Whence say the Jews: Whomsoever God so knew, as that he implanted knowledge into him, and sanctified him, and ordained him for a Prophet, he must needs be in being: But God did bestow all this upon one before he was formed in the Womb; Therefore one did exist before he was formed in the Womb: and if it was thus with one, what hinders that it may not be so with all, because duration is one and the same to all created Spirits.
4. Ecclesiast. 4.2, 3. Wherefore I praised the dead: which are already dead, more than the living, which are yet alive. Yea, better is he than both they, which hath not yet been, who hath not seen the evil work that is done under the Sun. Whence is this Argument: (compare this with Matth. 26.24.) To whom is given but the least Drachm of happiness, to him it cannot be denyed that he is in being: But to him that is not yet born, such happiness is given: Therefore, &c.
5. Job 38.21. Knowest thou, because thou wast then born, and the number of thy days is great: Or else by way of questioning, thus, Didst thou know or not that then thou shouldest be born, and the number of thy many days? From either sense floweth out a Praeexistency to the Soul of Job; in as much as he is concluded to be present at the beginnings of things.
6. Wisd. 8.19, 20. For I was a witty child, and had a good Spirit; Yea, rather being good, I came into a body [Page 42]undefiled. Now he who cometh into a body, being already good, certainly the making of his Soul began not with that of his body.
7. John 9.2, 3. And his Disciples asked him saying, Master, who did sin, this man or his Parents, that he was born blind? Jesus answered, neither hath this man sinned nor his Parents, but that, &c. whence is this argument:
Whatever opinion, when the most fair occasion was given, Christ did not refute, nor reproved it as [Page 43]erroeous, in that opinion is contained no unsoundness, nor danger, nor errour: But this of the Praeexistency is such an opinion, Therefore, &c.
8. Those who in Scripture are said to be lost, they were sometime not lost: For every thing which is said to be lost, thereby presupposes, that it was sometime in his power and possession, who after that, lost it: for that which was never in possession, can never be said to [Page 44]be lost: But all men in Scripture are said to be lost: Therefore all men were sometime not lost: And consequently were in the power and possession of the supream Lord: The minor is proved by Psalm 119.176. Jeremiah 50.6. Ezek. 34.16. Luk. 15.9, 24. chap. 19.10. Matthew 15.24. & 18.11.
9. Whoever are said to be erred and strayed like lost sheep, they are to be presupposed to have been in the flock: But in [Page 45]Scripture men are said to erre and stray from the flock like lost sheep, 1 Pet. 2.25. Joh. 11.52. Therefore they were in the flock once, and by consequence did praeexist.
10. Whoever are stransters and Foreigners in the Earth, They had their rise from elsewhere, than in the Earth, and have their Countrey elsewhere. But in Holy Writ, men are said to be strangers in the Earth: Therefore, &c. The minor is proved from Psalm 39.12. 1 Peter 2.11. [...]
CHAP. IV. Containing Arguments drawn from Holy Scripture, to prove the Praeexistency of the Soul of the Messiah.
IF Christ's Soul did praeexist, then did all Souls praeexist: But the first is true, as presently shall be taught from Holy Scripture: Therefore, &c. the major is proved, because Christ is in all things like unto us, sin [Page 49]excepted; Now by and in the Reason of all Souls there is the same manner of duration. The minor is proved,
1. Because Christ hath long since often appeared to the Patriarchs; He often conversed with Moses: He delivered the Children of Israel out of Aegypt; He accompanied them in the Wilderness; and led them into the Land of Canaan, &c. witness (besides innumerable places in the Old Testament) that of Paul 1 Cor. [Page 50]10.4. and that of John 1.11.
2. Because he himself testifieth, that he had a glory with his Father before the World was made, Joh. 17.5. But this was not the Glory of his divine nature, because that was in its own nature immutable; Therefore it was the glory of his Soul which already did praeexist.
3. Moreover He himself testifieth thus: I came but from the Father, and am come into the World. Again, I leave the World, and return unto the Father. As in John 16.28.
4. John 3.13. No man ascendeth into Heaven, but he who descended from Heaven, the Son of Man, &c.
5. John the Baptist testifieth of him, That he came from above. John 3.31.
6. Again, Christ himself saith, Joh. 6.32. My Father giveth unto you the true bread from Heaven: for he is the true bread of God, who descended from Heaven.
7. Vers. 38. I descended from Heaven.
8. The living Father hath sent me. This is the bread which descended from Heaven, Joh. 6.57.58. compare herewith, vers. 41. & 51.
9. 1. Cor. 15.47.
10. Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: but made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a Servant, and was made in the likeness of man, &c. [Page 53]They are the words of Paul, Phil. 2.5, 6, 7. All which, together with the foregoing words, can by no means be understood of the Divine Nature of Christ, which can neither be varied, nor moved from place to place, by reason of his divine Excellency and Omnipresence, which is essential to him; and by consequence they must necessarily be meant of the Soul of Christ, which praeexisted long before its earthly body; from whence a most certain argument may be framed, [Page 50] [...] [Page 51] [...] [Page 52] [...] [Page 53] [...] [Page 54]That the Souls of all other men did praeexist.
11. Compare herewith, Heb. 1.6. The Father bringeth in the first begotten into the World, Which is to be understood according to his humanity.
12. 1 John 3.5.8. He who is manifested or appeareth, he doth not then begin to be in being.
CHAP. V. Containing Arguments taken from humane Authority, yet are such as in their kind are Sacred.
1. LEt the Apostles of our Lord be here produced, even when they were not as yet illuminated, who were addicted to this opinion, and yet were [Page 56]not corrected by our Lord, as is manifest (1.) in that, that they asked him concerning him who was born blind, Joh. 9.2. (2.) In that, that they said that some thought that he was John the Baptist, others Elias, others Jeremias, or one of the Prophets, as in Matth. 16.14. Which assertion cannot stand unless upon the foundation of Praeexistency, nor yet was it corrected by our Lord, as without all doubt, had it contained in it any thing that was erroneous, it would have been by him [Page 57]who was the most holy, and the most benign Master, or Teacher. (3.) In that, that when our Lord said, That he came out from the Father, they presently answered, Behold now speakest thou plainly, and speakest no proverb? Joh. 16.29.
2. Let Clement of Alexandria come forth next, who often in his writings makes mention of this opinion, nor ever once redargueth it as erroneous; For in his Stromat. 1. He thus saith: ‘It is manifest that the Barbarians [Page 58]did especially honour their Lawgivers and Lords, calling them Gods, for they thought, together with Plato, that some good Souls having left their supercelestial abode, did make a descent into this inferiour Orb, and having assumed bodies, became partakers of all those miseries which are obvious in Generation, and became sollicitously careful of mankind, to whom they gave Laws, and taught Philosophy.’ And then in his 3. Book, he saith, when he disputeth [Page 59]against the Marcionites, and alledges many places out of Plato, which do partly directly, and partly indirectly include this opinion, amongst which is that out of his Phaedo, viz. ‘That there is a Secret brought down to us by Tradition, that we men are in this life, as it were in a Prison:’ So also is that other, where he citeth Heraclitus, also Pythagoras, and Socrates, together with Plato; ‘That Death is but what we see when up and awake; but what we see in sleep, is a [Page 60]Dream.’ But most agreeable of all is what he quoteth out of Philolaus the Pythagorean; ‘The Ancient Divines and Poets do testifie, that the Soul is conjoyned to this earthly body, by way of a punishment, and that she is, all the while she remaineth therein, as it were buried.’ But against this he saith nothing. In the same Book although he mightily sets himself against Julius Cassian, yet he useth these words: ‘This Noble wit is of an opinion which accordeth more with the [Page 61]mind of Plato, viz. that the Soul which is divine, and from above, bei [...], effeminated with lust, doth descend into Generation and Corruption.’ Yea, in his Protrept. he expresly saith: ‘That Christ did again call back into Heaven, those who were thrown down upon, and to the Earth.’
3. Let Origen follow next, who more openly did propagate this opinion, so as there is no need to give any Quotations out of him.
4. Moreover Synesius Bishop of Cyrenia, who in his 105. Epistle saith expresly: ‘In good truth I shall never design to be of the opinion, that the Soul in its existence comes after the Body.’ And in his 3 [...] Hymn: ‘As a drop from Heaven, I was poure [...] forth on the earth. Restore me to my spring whence I flowed in this banisht wandring birth.’
5. To these joyn Arnobius, who in his 1. Book against the Gentiles saith thus: [Page 63] ‘Do we not all owe unto God this in the first place, That we are, That we are called men, That being either sent from him, or fallen thorough blindness, we are detained in the chains of a Body?’
6. Prudentius appears next, who in his Hymn at the funeral Solemnities of the deceased singeth after this manner:
7. St. Augustine also speaks favourably of this opinion, in his 1. Book of Free-will: ‘Whether the Soul lived another kind of life before [Page 65]her conjunction to this body, is a great question, and a great secret.’ Also in the 3. Book, when he came to speak of the Praeexistency of Souls, he saith thus: ‘If we think of God, that he is any other than he is, our intention driveth us not into beatitude, but into vanity; but if we think of the Creature any thing otherwise than he is, so long as we do not hold that opinion, for that, that is known, and commanded, there is no danger.’ And in the discussion of that fourfold [Page 66]question, Whether, (viz.) the Soul be propagated, or created? Whether or no it was sent from God, from some secret receptacle, where it praeexisted; or that it fell down hither by, or of its own proper motion? he saith thus: ‘Either that same question is not, as yet, by the Catholick Writers of Divine Books, because of its obscurity and perplexity, brought and illustrated, as it deserves; or else if it be already performed, their Letters have not as yet arrived at my hands.’
8. St. Basil also, &c. And
9. Gregory Nazianzen, who that they were not adversaries to this opinion, appears from hence, that out of Origen's Writings they collected a very remarkable Treatise, on which they put the title of Origen's Philocalia, in which are found places, not a few, which partly implicitly partly explicitly affirm the Praeexistency of Souls.
10. John of Hierusalem. 11. Phil astrius. 12. Boethius may be added to the rest.
CHAP. VI. Containing Arguments derived from the Authority of the Philosophers.
THe Testimony of the Antients is indeed found to exceed all others, let us turn our eyes which way soever we please.
1. In Aegypt, the most Antient Nurse of occult sciences, we have Trismegistus assenting thereunto, as is apparent out of his Fragments.
2. As also the Gymnosophists, with whom the Brachmans of India, and the Persian and Chaldean Wisemen had to do, as is manifest from the Magical or Chaldean Oracles, upon which Pletho and Psellus wrote Commentaries.
3. To these add the abstruse Philosophy of the Jews [Page 70]which they call the Cabbala, whose Author was Moses the chiefest of all the Philosophers who ever were: Whence Manasseh Ben Israel concerning the Creation, Prob. 15. s. 5. out of Gemara Hagigae citeth the following words: ‘In the Empyrean Heaven are Mansions of life and peace, and of the Souls of the Just, and of Spirits, and also of those Souls which are to come into the world:’ And out of Bereschith Rabba alledgeth that testimony, that the Jewish Doctors do expound [Page 71]that place of Psalm, 139.5. After and before thou formedst me, concerning the Creation of Adam: that is, of men, which was done first on the first day, and then on the sixth day.
4. Hither also doth especially belong Philo [...] the Jew, in whom nothing is more familiarly treated on, than this opinion, that the Quotations are needless. We may add, 5. Zoroaster. 6. Pythagoras. 7. Epicharmus. 8. Empedocles. 9. Cebes of Thebes. 10. Euripides. 11. [Page 72] Plato. 12. Euclid. 13. Virgil. 14. M. T. Cicero. 15. Plotin. 16. Jamblichus. 17. Proclus. 18. Porphyrius. 19. Psellus; and a many others. And amongst the Moderns, 20. Marsilius Ficinus. 21. Also Johann. Fernelius, who adjoyneth to himself, Hippocrates and Galen, viz. in Book 2. c. 4. of his concerning the hidden causes of things. 22. Cardan of the immortality of Souls. p. 235.239. &c. 23. Pomponatius, who notwithstanding is little favourable to the immortality of the Soul. And lest we should leave out [Page 73]any body, we will here also recount, 24. even Aristotle himself, who in his tract of the Soul, l. 1. c. 3. when he speaks of the necessary quality of a body of being to be actuated by a Soul, he inveigheth against them who handle this matter so negligently, as if it were possible, according to the Pythagorick Fables that any Soul might enter into any body: for to every Animal blongeth a proper species or kind, as also to be of a peculiar form; But they who teach otherwise, [Page 74]do say the same, as if any one should affirm, that the Smith's art goes into the pipe which is made; for every art must use its own instruments, and every Soul its own Body. Where certainly Aristotle doth not inveigh against the Opinion of Transmigration (which includes in it self, that of Praeexistency) but that the Soul of man can enter into the body of a Brute, and on the contrary; This is that absurdity which Aristotle rejecteth, tacitly approving of the other [Page 75]part of the opinion. Yea, in his tract of the generation of Souls, l. 3. c. 11. he speaks out more clearly. ‘Out of the Earth, and its humidity are generated Plants and other living creatures, because in the earth is a moisture, and in the moisture a Spirit, and in the whole Universe an animal heat; so that all things are in a manner full of Souls.’ Also in l. 2. c. 3. where he especially handleth the Question of the Praeexistency of sensitive, and rational Souls; whether, viz. both of them may be [Page 76]said to praeeist, or the Rational only, he thus concludes: ‘It remains then, that the Rational Soul only doth enter from without, as that which alone is divine, and with whose operation, that of the body hath nothing in common.’ In which words he expresly followeth the Opinion of his Master Plato.
Part II. Being Confutatory.
CHAP. VII. Containing objections from the adverse part, and answers to them.
1. BUt here some argue to the contrary, thus: If the Soul should be united to the body for a punishment, [Page 78]then that union would not be natural; nor would be a good thing, and a perfection of nature; but rather something that is evil, as is all punishment, which would be most absurd.
The Answer.
(1.) As for instance, it is injoyned also to man, for a punishment, that in the sweat of his brows he should eat his bread; that a woman shall bring forth in pain; that the earth shall bring forth Briars and thorns, and yet notwithstanding, neither [Page 79]the sweat, nor the pain of Child-bearing nor the bryars and thorns in respect of the earth, do cease to be natural; yea, this very gross and inglorious body it self, instead of that glorious one in the state of innocency, is given to a man for a punishment, and yet is a thing natural.
(2.) It is therefore a Fallacy taken from what is said with limitation, to what is said simply: For simply the Soul is not united to the body for a punishment, but [Page 80]restrictively, and this union according to the 9. Thesis of this Hypothesis is not granted to the Soul only for a punishment, but also for an advantage, that, viz. an occasion for the Soul to return unto its former state and condition should not be wanting unto it.
2. In every thing, that is, first wch is natural, and then that which is preternatural; but the separation of a Soul, and a separate subsistence is preternatural; but union is according to nature: Therefore [Page 81]this must needs be before that, and not on the Contrary.
Answer.
The argument is of that sort call'd by Logicians, an Ignoratio Elenchi; for by this Hypothesis it is no where taught, that the Soul before its union with an earthly body, is in a separate state simply considered, but rather had been in an union with its more pure vehicles, viz. the Aethereal, and the Aereal, and being at length separated from them, it descended [Page 82]into this Terrestrial body.
3. If God in the beginning had created separate Souls, then he created not all things in a perfection agreeable and due to the nature of every one: The Reason of the consequence is, because the Soul attains to its proper, and its connatural perfection in the body, and not out of the body.
Answer.
This is the same Argument [Page 83]with the last, and is so named. Also we must distinguish betwixt bodies, whereof three are such, as to which the Soul hath a natural aptitude: An Aethereal body, such as is promised to us in sacred Writ: an Aereal one, and an Earthly one. If therefore it be said, That the Soul obtaineth her proper perfection in an earthly body only, the assertion is denyed: but if the Aethereal body be not excluded, it is already said, that according to this Hypothesis, the Soul long since [Page 84]attained to this perfection.
4. If Souls do exist before their bodies, they are either on the way, or in their native Country, or in neither: but none of these can be affirmed: Therefore they do not praeexist.
Answer.
Souls are at first in their own Country, where they sprang forth: but after that in a neutral state or condition, when they be fallen down into a state of sin: but when they are let into [Page 85]these bodies, they enter into the way of returning. Therefore the minor proposition of the argument is false.
If Souls should praeexist, without all doubt they could not utterly forget that State or Condition; which yet it's manifest that none of them remember any thing of, therefore they did not praeexist.
Answer.
It will easily appear, that the forgetfulness of their former [Page 86]condition doth evince nothing against the the praeexistency of Souls, if we consider those things which either plainly take away, or in a wonderful manner impair our memory in that life: of all which we shall in this place find the concourse, and in a greater degree, and from more powerful causes, than could ever happen to any man living. Now those things which here in this world do plainly deprive us of our memory are most chiefly these. 1. If opportunity be [Page 87]wanting of remembring any thing: as it happeneth to them, who rising from sleep, dare swear that they dreamed nothing all that night, yet afterwards occasion being given in the daytime, they recover into their memories oftentimes a long tract of dreams. 2. If we are disused to apply our minds to some things; and thus when with great labour we have written some things whilst we were School-boys, when we are grown up to be men, for the most part we cannot own [Page 88]them for ours, but that our names written in them can convince us. 3. When some very remarkable change of constitution and temperament happens in our bodies, either by some external accident, or by some more vehement disease, or by Old age. Now all these principles of oblivion are more eminently found in the souls descent into this earthly dungeon, than ever was possible to be done so long as she inhabited in the same. For it's far beyond all doubt, that the difference [Page 89]between that scene of things which the Soul sees out of the body, and that which she sees in the body, is by far greater than that which is between those things which a man seeth sleeping, and those which he sees waking: Now the perpetual affairs of this present life bring into the Soul a very remarkable disuse as to the remembring of former things past. Moreover their descent, it's probable, happened mostly, when they were in a state of silence, in which perhaps many myriads of [Page 90]Souls lay for many ages; but if they might have descended; not passing the state of silence, there occurs to their memory examples of their former state or condition, as it was with Christ in Joh. 17.5. Finally the descent into this earthly body is a greater mutation, and much more apt to blot out former impressions on the memory than any one accident, or any other disease, which yet happening, do often destroy in many persons all memory in this life.
But here again they object and say; if a bare mutation of vehicles can introduce into the Soul an utter forgetfulness of all things formerly done, it follows, that it may also be feared that the like may happen to her after her departure out of this earthly body; which is absurd, because then memory remaineth wholly firm, and Conscience will never cease to be and operate.
Answer.
These have a different consideration, [Page 92]because between the former state of Souls and the present there interposes a state of silence and of inactivity, in which all the superiour faculties, viz. of Reason and sense to which memory belongs, lie as it were benummed or asleep: Now between the present state and the future there interposeth no such thing, whence neither can follow an utter abolishing of memory.
6. If God hath created Souls with a threefold vital [Page 93]aptitude, to a threefold vehicle, which is to be the last receptacle of fallen Souls, it follows that God created them with a necessity of falling, because every vital aptitude and consequently also that aptitude to an earthly vehicle flows from the essence of the Soul, and by consequence is necessary.
Answer.
There is a distinction between a vital aptitude considered in it self, and between its being deduced into act: [...] [Page 96]ist, and therefore there belonged to her many vehicles, it follows that when she hath laid down her earthly vehicle, she must again assume another; and consequently there needs no Resurrection of the flesh.
Answer.
We must distinguish betwixt the meaning of the word [Flesh] in the state or condition wherein it is now Flesh, and in the further and larger acception thereof, viz. when it is used for that, that was Flesh: [Page 97]now according to this latter, and not according to the former acceptation is the Resurrection of the flesh to be understood: for flesh as flesh shall not rise again, because as the Apostle witnesseth, 1 Cor. 15.51. We shall all be changed; But that which sometime was flesh, shall rise again, and shall be changed into the nature of that its vehicle, which is then competent to every Soul; because every mutation of matter is not accidental to it, and it is all one to its substance, after [Page 98]what manner or shape its particles are formed (for it is indifferent to Wax whether it represent the shape of a man, or of an apple; whether it be melted, or whether it be congealed;) there is nothing that will be lost from that substance which was our flesh: whether it should be turned and attenuated into the consistence of Air, or of Aether.
8. If the Soul did praeexist at first in an Aerial vehicle, it follows, that after death also the like must be [Page 99]given unto it, lest it be forced to make a leap: But such a vehicle would be altogether incommodious to departing pious Souls, because the Air is the habitation of Devils, and full of Tempests.
Answer.
There are divers degrees in the Air; nor is there any need that pious Souls should be after death shut up within the Atmosphere of the earth, where these inconveniencies are; but there may be found much higher [Page 100]places in the Air, where is greater quiet.
9. If the Hypothesis of Praeexistency is true, it follows, that a man may die oftener than once: for if when a man departeth out of this life, his vital aptitude to an earthly body be not yet expired, it will be necessary, that he should return unto such a like body, untill a vital aptitude to an Aerial body shall awaken in him, and upon this account he ought to die oftener than once, which is absurd, [Page 101]as Heb. 9.27. Job 16.22. 2 Sam. 12.23.
Answer.
1. The saying of Heb. 9.29. that it may rightly be understood, we must distinguish, 1. betwixt the term [Man] largely taken, for the Soul, in what state or condition soever it be, and more strictly for the Soul united with the body made out of the earth. 2. Betwixt universal and particular judgment. Paul therefore is thus to be unfolded: that whatsoever Soul is united [Page 102]with its earthly vehicle, it is appointed to it, Once to be dissolved from this vehicle, and then it must stand before a particular judgment, where the Divine Justice inquireth whether he hath so lived as that he is to return to his former state, or condition, or not; For the universal judgment followeth not upon the deaths of particular men.
2. As to what is said in Job 16.22. it is answered that that is particular, and speaks only of the Death of [Page 103] Job, animadverted in himself, that the end of his vital aptitude to a terrestrial vehicle did draw near; therefore as an Holy man, there was no need for him to fear a return to this earthly tabernacle: Now from a particular to an universal, the Consequence is never good.
3. The argument out of 2 Sam. 12.23. doth in like manner labour under a fallacy (called in Logick) an argument from what is said limitedly, to what is said simply. For it was a [Page 104]particular case, that the Soul of David's young Son was not so to return into an earthly vehicle, so as again to become the Son of David, and in the very daies of David should return unto him: yet from thence we may not argue universally.
10. From this Hypothesis of Praeexistency it follows, That the Heavenly glory of the life to come is unconstant, and may be lost. For if Souls can fall down from their former glory, what hinders but [Page 105]that they also can fall from that which is to come?
Answer.
The promises in the Holy Scriptures do hinder, in which an incorruptible Crown is promised to the faithful for a special reward, 1 Cor. 9.25. and that which never will fade away, 1 Pet. 5.4. Whence it is that Paul testifies, that we shall rise again in incorruption, 1 Cor. 15.42.52. And this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal, [Page 106]immortality, vers. 53. that Death may be swallowed up in victory, vers. 54.55. together with Sin, the sting thereof, Hosea 13.14.
11. From this Hypothesis it follows, that divers Souls may enter into one body, because they are said to want the use of reason and sense, nor actually to have any but a plastick faculty, which cannot discern, whether any other Soul is entred in already, or not.
Answer.
We must distingish betwixt a formative entrance, and that which is not formative: the first is when the vital centre of the Soul obtaineth its place in that point of matter, in which the spirit of the Universe hath already determined the primary seat of the soul: Although therefore a thousand Souls should enter together into one material body, yet only one amongst them all could obtain the formative ingress, [Page 108] viz. such a one as whose vital point should possess or occupy the primary point of the matter, which seeing it is indivisible, cannot be obtained by more than one: nor can it possibly be said, that more or many can together possess one and the same point, or, be homocentrick: for should it be so, that would come to pass either of purpose, or by chance; the first cannot be, because the use of Reason and Sense is absent; nor can the other be, because the matter of [Page 109]the vehicles which are not to be laid aside without a reason or cause, doth hinder; in which notwithstanding that this homocentricity be allowed, penetration of dimensions cannot be avoided.
12. From this Hypothesis it will follow, that the other Planets also are to be inhabited by men: Because that some of them being nearer to that place of happiness, from whence these Souls are fallen down, are greater than this earthly Globe.
Answer.
The consequence is denyed, because that there will be a want of seminal matter duely prepared. For God placed Adam in this Globe of Earth, as the first preparer of such matter; out of the bounds of which men from thenceforth will not be.
CHAP. VIII. Containing the Arguments of the adverse part, which they take from holy Scripture.
1. THe first place is out of Genesis 1. vers. 28. thus: Whoever by the power of Gods command, [Page 112] Increase and multiply, do multiply themselves according to their kind, they no less propagate themselves as in respect of Soul as well as of body: because to the constitution of the species or kind of things animate, there as much belongeth a Soul as a body: But men by vertue of Gods command, do multiply themselves according to their species or kind; Therefore, &c. and by consequence, Souls do not praeexist.
Answer.
We allow the whole Argument, but deny the consequence to the conclusion: For men can propagate themselves also as to Soul, though the Soul be not taken from out of their substance; for a man whilst he generateth, prepareth nothing but matter, convenient to the introducing of a Soul; and so he is a cause without which the effect cannot be produced, by reason of the introduction of Souls: just as he who prepares [Page 114]matter or fewel for the fire, is the cause without which the fire cannot be introduced, and thus also he multiplieth fires, which notwithstanding come from without: thus also magnetical bodies or Loadstones can by rubbing only multiply themselves, if, viz. they be rubbed upon Iron, although the subtile matter which combineth therewith cometh from without: 2. These things being thus premised in a humane manner, we answer to the minor proposition [Page 115]by denying it, for in Holy Writ, is no such addition, that man was to multiply according to his species or kind; but it is nakedly put thus: increase and multiply, which are indifferent phrases without all determination of the principal efficient cause.
2. From Gen. 5. vers. 3. If Adam begat a Son according to his own image & likeness, it follows then that his Son was also begotten by him as to his Soul: But the first is true, therefore also is the latter so.
Answer.
We deny the antecedent: because likeness may be understood to be external, by reason of the body, to the corruption of which the Soul was also subjected, although it came into it from without.
3. From Gen. 46. vers. 26. whatsoever went forth from out of the loyns of the Parent, that did not praeexist; but the Souls of the sons, &c. Therefore, &c.
Answer.
In this Saying is a Synecdoche of one part for another; where the Soul is taken for the body, as the Scripture also speaketh elsewhere: as Psal. 16.10. He will not leave my soul in the Grave, &c. 2. In this also may be said to be a metonymy of the form for the thing formed, of the Soul for the thing animated. 3. If the acception were proper, this absurdity follows: that the Soul is propagated from the Father only, the [Page 118]Mother contributing nothing
4. From Job 14.4. Who can give a clean thing out of that that is unclean? whence it followeth that from the impure Soul of the Father, must proceed or come forth an impure Soul of the son.
Answer.
The particle [From] doth not always signifie the prinpal efficient cause, but often times also the instrumental cause, or that cause without which the effect cannot be [Page 119]produced, and so is it to be understood in this place.
5. From Psal. 51. vers. 5. Behold I was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.
Answer.
The Text speaketh of the iniquity and sin not of the Infant, but of the generating Parents; but if the sin were to be understood of the infant; this is then the sense or meaning: Behold my Soul being already in in-iniquity from a preceding [Page 120]fall, is received into the Womb of my Mother.
6. That which is born of the Flesh, is Flesh, John 3.6.
Answer.
The word or term [to be born] importeth no essential dependence on him who begetteth: for the Soul, even already, before its nativity, being carnal, that is, having gained a vital aptitude unto Flesh, coming forth from carnal Parents, is called Flesh, even as impure water derived through [Page 121]impure pipes, when it breaks forth, is so much the more impure.
7. Rom. 5.12. As by one man sin entred into the world, and by sin Death, so Death is passed unto all men, because all have sinned; from this it follows that before Adam there was no sin.
Answer.
Adam in the Allegorical History of Moses, is a figure of all mankind, and this very Text doth shew that death is passed unto all men, [Page 122]not upon that account, that Adam only hath sinned, but in as much as every single man hath sinned: The Particle [One] signifies the same as [First] doth, as in Mar. 16.2. Luke 24.1. John 20.1. Acts 20.7, 8. Rom. 9.11. it is said that the Children, who were not yet born, had done neither good nor evil; whence it is concluded, that Souls before this earthly life, had not committed sin.
Answer.
Not being as yet born, [Page 123]are either such as exist before the union of Soul and Body, or such as exist in that union: the Text speaks of these latter, not of the former, because first they are expresly named Children. 2. The determinate time in which they had committed neither good nor evil is denoted, viz. when the Lord said, The Elder shall serve the Younger: which he then said, when they were already alive, and the Infants moved in the Womb: and so being not yet born they may be said to have [Page 124]committed neither good nor evil actually, although before the union somewhat of a fall had preceded: and therefore the predicate is to be limited; they had done nothing of good or evil, viz. in the state of the earthly union of Body and Soul.
9. From 2 Cor. 5.10. They argue thus: If in the place where an account is to be rendred of all sins, an account is to be rendred of those only which are proper to the body, as every one hath done, it followeth, that [Page 125]without the body there is no sin; But the former is true, and therefore also the latter.
Answer.
The Antecedent is denyed. 1. Because in the Text is found no such exclusive particle [Only]: but from the greater part, viz. the actual sins, is the denomination of the judgment made; therefore it may also be that that account must be generally rendred of original sin. 2. Granting, that an account was not to be given of this sin, yet it doth not [Page 126]follow, that it was not committed: because (1.) it would have been obliterated already by the general oblivion in the Soul. (2.) It should have already suffered punishment for it, viz. its being thrust down into this earthly Dungeon or Prison.
10. From Hebr. 7. v. 5.9, 10. Who paid Tythes in the loins of his Father, He, even as to his Soul, is in his Father: But, &c. Therefore, &c.
Answer.
The Antecedent is denyed: for this phrase, [to be in the loins of his Father,] signifieth nothing else than not to be as yet born, and yet to be in a possibility to be born: therefore such as is the Nativity, such also is the possibility or power of being to be born. Now the Nativity doth not admit of the concurrence of the Father, otherwise than as an instrumental cause to prepare the matter for the introduction of the Soul: [Page 128]Therefore also the possibility or power of being to be born ought thus to be understood.
11. From Ecclesiast. 12.7. The Spirit returns to God who gave it: whence they thus argue. As the body is from the Earth, so the spirit is from God: and at the time of generation, dust is given from the Earth, Therefore also at that time the Spirit is given from God.
Answer.
We must distinguish between a giving which is originary, and that which is participative: this is meant in this place, but not that: For as although the body be taken out of the earth, yet its matter originally does not then at last begin; so, although the spirit be given from God at the time of generation, viz. by an universal concurrence, yet it followeth not that it then at length beginneth.
12. From Zach. 12.1. The Lord saith, who formeth the Spirit of man in the midst of him: if therefore the spirit of man is formed within him, it did not praeexist.
Answer.
By [Spirit] in this place is to be understood the animal Spirit, as often it is elsewhere, Gen. 6.17. ch. 7.15. compare the 15. verse, importing the same sense almost of Psalm. 33. even as also is the determination in the midst of [Page 131]him, viz. it denoteth it to be in his bowels: whence it is that it so follows not in respect to the Soul.