moment to the common people, who held the poets in mighty esteem and veneration, and used them as their masters of morality and religion. And the other sects too of philosophers* did frequently adorn and confirm their discourses by citations out of poets. Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device. This is directly levelled against the gross idolatry of the vulgar (for the philosophers are not concerned in it), that believed the very statues of gold, and silver, and other materials, to be God, and terminated their prayers in those images; as I might shew from many passages of Scripture, from the apologies of the primitive Christians, and the heathen writers themselves. And the times of this ignorance God winked at, (the meaning of which is, as upon a like occasion the same Apostle hath expressed it, that in times past he suffered all nations to walk in their own ways,) but now commandeth every one to repent: because he hath appointed a day, in the 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. Hitherto the Apostle had never contradicted all his audience at once: though at every part of his discourse some of them might be uneasy, yet others were of his side; and all along a moderate silence and attention was observed, because every point was agreeable to the notions of the greater party. But when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, the interruption and clamour became uni the ministry of the gods, and taught the separate existence of human souls: and their master Epicurus had bragged, that in all his writings he had not cited one single authority out of any book whatsoever. But."-D.] [sects too of philosophers; 1st ed. "sects of philosophers likewise."—D.] a Ver. 29. [t and; 1st ed. "or.”—D.] [ all his audience at once. . . . . the notions of the greater party; 1st ed. "the opinions of all his hearers at once: so that although at every part of his discourse some of them might be uneasy and nettled, yet a moderate silence and attention was still observed, because it was agreeable to the notions of the rest."-D.] versal; so that here the Apostle was obliged to break off, and depart from among them. What could be the reason of this general dissent from the notion of the resurrection, since almost all of them believed† the immortality of the soul? St. Chrysostom hath a conceit, that the Athenians took 'Aváσraσis (the original word for resurrection) to be preached to them as a goddess, and in this fancy he is followed by some of the moderns. The ground of the conjecture is the 18th verse of this chapter, where some said, What will this babbler say? other some, He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods (Févwv Sapovíwv, strange deities, which comprehends both sexes), because he preached unto them, 'Inooûv Kai Tην 'AváσTao, Jesus and the Resurrection. Now, say they, it could not be said deities in the plural number, unless it be supposed that 'Aváσraσis is a goddess, as well as Jesus a God. But we know such a permutation of number is frequent in all languages. We have another example of it in the very text; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring :" and yet the Apostle meant only one, Aratus the Cilician, his countryman, in whose astronomical poem this passage is now extant. So that although he preached to the Athenians Jesus alone, yet, by a common mode of speech, he might be called a setter forth of strange gods. "Tis my opinion, that the general distaste and clamour proceeded from a mistake about the nature of the Christian resurrection. The word resurrection (avaornoaobai and áváσTaσis) was well enough known amongst the Athenians, as appears at this time from Homer, Eschylus, and Sophocles: they could hardly then possibly imagine it to signify [ was obliged to break off, and depart; 1st ed. "broke off his discourse, and departed."—D.] t Ver. 33. [t since almost all of them believed; 1st ed. "seeing that almost all of them did believe."-D.] u Ver. 28. • Arati Phan. v. 5. . . . . πάντη δὲ Διὸς κεχρήμεθα πάντες, Τοῦ γὰρ καὶ γένος ἐσμέν. w Hom. Il. Ω. 551. Stan.-D.] Ανδρὸς δ ̓ .... Οὐδέ μιν ἀνστήσεις, δε. Æsch. Eumen. 655. [650. ed. ἐπειδὰν αἷμ ̓ ἀνασπάσῃ κόνις, Απαξ θανόντος οὔτις ἔστ' a goddess. But then it always* denoted a returning from the state of the dead to this present world; to eat and drink and converse upon† earth; and so, after another period of life, to die again as before. And Festus, a Roman, seems to have had the same apprehensions about it: for, when he declares the case of St. Paul his prisoner to King Agrippa, he tells him, that the accusation was only about certain questions of the Jewish superstition; and of one Jesus which was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive. So that when the Athenians heard him mention the resurrection of the dead, which, according to their acceptation of the word, was a contradiction to common sense, and to the experience of all places and ages, they had no patience to give any longer attention. His words seemed to them as idle tales, as the first news of our Saviour's resurrection did to the apostles themselves. All interrupted and mocked him, except a few, that seem to have understood him aright, which said they would hear him again of this matter. Just as when our Saviour said in an allegorical and mystical sense, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you, the hearers understood him literally and grossly: The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat? This is a hard saying; who can hear it pa And from that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.b I have now gone through this excellent discourse of the apostle, in which many most important truths are clearly and succinctly delivered; such as the existence, the spirituality, and all-sufficiency of God; the creation of the world; the origination of mankind from one common stock, accord ἀνάστασις. [In 1st ed. the passage is pointed, Ανδ. δ ̓ ἐπ. αἳ. ἀν. κόνις “Απαξ θανόντος, οὔτ. ἔστ' ἀν.-D.] Soph. Electra, 136. ̓Αλλ ̓ οὔτοι τόν γ' ἐξ ἀΐδα παγκοίνου λίμνας πατέρ ̓ ἀνστάσεις, οὔτε γόοισιν, οὐ λιταῖς. [⚫ they could hardly then possibly imagine it to signify a goddess. But then it always; 1st ed. "(so that it could hardly possibly be imagined to be a goddess) but it always.”—D.] [t upon; 1st ed. "upon the."-D.] ing to the history of Moses; the divine Providence in overruling all nations and people; the new doctrine of repentance by the preaching of the Gospel; the resurrection of the dead; and the appointed day of an universal judgment. To all which particulars, by God's permission and assistance, I shall say something in due time. But at present I have confined myself to that near and internal* and convincing argument of the being of God, which we have from human nature itself; and which appears to be principally here recommended by St. Paul in the words of the text, That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him; though he be not far from every one of us: for in him (that is, by his power) we live, and move, and have our being. The proposition, which I shall speak to from this text, is this: that the very life, and vital motion, and the formal essence and nature of man, is wholly owing to the power of God; and that the consideration of ourselves, of our own souls and bodies, both directly and nearly conduct us to the acknowledgment of his existence. And, 1. I shall prove, that there is an immaterial substance in us, which we call soul and spirit, essentially distinct from our bodies; and that this spirit doth necessarily evince the existence of a supreme and spiritual Being. And, 2. That the organical structure of human bodies, whereby they are fitted to live and move, and be vitally informed by the soul, is unquestionably the workmanship of a most wise, and powerful, and beneficent Maker. But I will reserve this latter part for the next opportunity; and my present undertaking shall be this, to evince the being of God from the consideration of human souls. (1.) And first, I say, there is an immaterial substance in us, which we call soul, essentially distinct from our bodies. I shall lay it down as self-evident, that there is something in our composition that thinks and apprehends, and reflects and deliberates; that‡ determines and doubts, consents and [t it; 1st ed. " this.”—D.] [* internal; 1st ed. “intrinsical.”—D.] [ that; not in 1st ed.-D.] denies; that wills, and demurs, and resolves, and chooses, and rejects; that receives various sensations and impressions from external objects, and produces voluntary motions of several parts of our bodies. This every man is conscious of; neither can any one be so sceptical as to doubt of or deny it; that very doubting or denying being part of what I would suppose, and including several of the rest in their ideas and notions. And in the next place, 'tis as self-evident, that these faculties and operations of thinking, and willing, and perceiving, must proceed from something or other as their efficient cause; mere nothing being never able to produce any thing at all. So that if these powers of cogitation, and volition, and sensation, are neither inherent in matter as such, nor producible in mattert by any motion and modification of it, it necessarily follows, that they proceed from some cogitative substance, some incorporeal inhabitant within us, which we call spirit and soul. 1.) But first, these faculties of sensation and perception are not inherent in matter as such; for, if it were so, what monstrous absurdities would follow! every stock and stone would be a percipient and rational creature. We should have as much feeling upon clipping a hair of the head, as upon pricking a nerve. Or rather, as men, that is, as a§ complex being, compounded of many vital parts, we should have no feeling nor perception at all. For every single atom of our bodies would be a distinct animal, endued with selfconsciousness and personal sensation of its own. And a great number of such living and thinking particles could not possibly, by their mutual contact and pressing and striking, compose one greater individual animal, with one mind and understanding, and a vital consension of the whole body, [ part of what I would suppose; 1st ed. " each of them mentioned and supposed before."-D.] [† producible in matter; 1st ed. “acquirable to matter."-D.] [t clipping a hair of the head, as upon pricking a nerve; 1st ed." the clipping off a hair, as the cutting of a nerve."-D.] [ as a; 1st ed. " a."-D.] |