I. It will not be improper to observe
I. It will not be improper to observe
That the doctrine of the resurrection of the body from the dead has not been believed by some, but has been accounted absurd and incredible, though without any just reason, as will be shown hereafter, and as may be concluded from the words of my text.
This doctrine is of pure revelation, what the mere light of nature never taught men, and by which alone they being guided, have declared against. It has been denied, as Tertullian observes, by every sect of the philosophers. That the body was mortal, all agreed; that the soul was immortal, some of them asserted, though they had but dark and confused conceptions concerning its future separate existence; but that the body, when dead, should be raised again to life, was a subject of ridicule and contempt with them. Pliny calls it a childish fancy, vanity, and downright madness; as does also Caecilius, in Minucius Felix, who likewise reckons it among old wives’ fables. Celsus, in Origen, represents it as exceedingly detestable and abominable; and, of all the tenets of the Christians, this was had in the greatest contempt by Julian the emperor. The maintainers and abettors of this doctrine were always accounted by the heathen vain, trifling, and babbling fellows. Thus the Athenian philosophers of the Epicurean and Stoic sects mocked at the apostle Paul, when they heard him talk of the resurrection of the dead; “And some said, What will this babbler say?” Acts 17:18, 32. “Other some, he seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods; because he preached unto them Jesus and the resurrection.” They were so ignorant of this doctrine, that they took Jesus and the word used by the apostle for the resurrection, to be the names of some strange deities they had never heard of before; and therefore say, “He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods.” The heathen had no knowledge of this truth, no faith in it, nor hope concerning it. Hence they are described by the apostle Paul, as those who had no hope; when writing to the Thessalonians, he says, “ But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others, which have no hope, ” 1 Thessalonians 4:13, 14. By whom the apostle means not Christians, who had no hopes of the salvation of their departed friends and relations, but Pagans, who had neither faith nor hope in the resurrection of the dead, and a future state: and therefore had not that to support them under the loss of relations, which Christians had: wherefore the apostle adds, “For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus, will God bring with him.” Much after the same manner the Ephesians, whilst they were in their heathenish and unconverted estate, are described, Ephesians 2:12, by the same apostle; “At that time, says he, ye were without Christ:” that is, without any knowledge, promise, or expectation of the Messiah; “being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise; ” i.e. ye were not so much as proselytes to the Jewish religion, nor members of the Jewish church, and were entirely destitute of divine revelation; having no hope in the resurrection and future state, and so lived without God in the world, or as atheists in it, as it is in the original. And we may be the more induced to believe this to be, at least, part of the apostle’s sense in these passages; since he, in his defences before Felix and Agrippa, represents the doctrine of the resurrection as the object of hope, as in Acts 24:15: “And have hope towards God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust.” And in Acts 26:6, 7: “And now I stand and am judged, for the hope of the promise made of God unto our fathers; unto which promise our twelve tribes, instantly serving God day and night, hope to come; for which hope’s sake, king Agrippa, I am accused of the Jews.” And then follow the words of my text, “Why should it he thought a thing incredible with you, that God should raise the dead?”
Some, indeed, have thought that the Gentiles had knowledge of the resurrection which they collect partly from some notions and opinions of theirs, which seem to be a semblance with, and to be the broken remains of some tradition concerning it; and partly from express passages, wherein they think it is asserted. The notion of the heathen, from whence it is concluded that they had some hints of this doctrine, are these, viz. that the soul after death has a perfect human shape, and all the same parts, both external and internal, that the body has; that there is an equal duration of the soul and body after death; that there is a transmigration of souls into other bodies, especially human; that men may be translated body and soul to heaven; of which they give instances in Aristaeus, Proconnesian, Alcmena, Hercules, Helena, Romulus, Cleomedes Astypalensis, and others: and that after certain periods and revolutions, when the stars and planets are in the same configuration and respect to one another, which they formerly had, the same men shall appear in the world, and the same things in succession shall be done in it, which formerly have been. For instance: ‘Socrates shall be born at Athens of the same parents, be educated after the same manner, and eat the same food, wear the same clothes, teach the same philosophy to the selfsame scholars, be accused by the same accusers, condemned by the same council, and die by the same poison. And so, my friends, according to this notion, we are all to meet together again in this place, in the same position and situation, you to hear, and I to preach; my subject is to be the doctrine of the resurrection, and I am to give you an account of the notions of the heathen with respect to it, as I now do. But this notion seems rather expressive of a regeneration, or a new birth, or a reproduction of men and things, than a resurrection of them: and, I must confess, I cannot see what likeness there is between this, or any other of the above mentioned notions, and the Christian doctrine of the resurrection from the dead.
The passages cited out of heathen authors, to show their knowledge of this doctrine, are such as the Greek verses of Phocylides; in which he expresses his hopes, that, in a very short time, the relics of the deceased should come forth out of the earth into light. But this poem is thought, by learned men, not to be the work of the heathen Phocylides, but either some anonymous Christian, or of some ancient Jewish writer. Besides, the verses referred to are not so expressed, but that it is thought they may very well be explained, so as to design the Pythagorean transmigration, and not the Christian doctrine of the resurrection. Theopompus and Eudemus Rhodius, in Diogenes Laertius, tell us that it was the opinion of the Persian Magi, that men should live again, and be immortal; this they received from their master and the founder of their sect, Zoroaster; who foretold, “that there should be a time when there would be a resurrection of all the dead.” Nor need this be wondered at, since, from the best accounts of him, it appears that he was originally a Jew, both by birth and religion; was a servant to one of the prophets of Israel, and was well versed in the Holy Scriptures; out of which, without doubt, he took this doctrine, as he did some others, and which he taught his Magi, and adopted into his new religion. It may be more surprising to hear that Democritus, a corporeal philosopher, should have any notion of the resurrection of the dead; yet Pliny ascribes it to him, and derides him for it; though it has been thought by some, that he designs another Democritus, and not the philosopher, since this opinion cannot be very easily reconciled to his philosophy. But supposing that he, and not another, is meant, it is easy to observe how he came by it, seeing he not only lived in Egypt a while and conversed with the priests there, but travelled also into Persia, and learned of the Magi, theology as well as other things. The notions of several Pagan nations concerning the resurrection, are such as are either ascribed to them by authors not to be depended on, or plainly design transmigration, or are what they have borrowed from the Jews, either by conversing with them, or by reading of their writings; or else are the broken remains of some tradition, received from their ancestors, originally founded on divine revelation.
Some have argued from the Pagans’ account of future punishments, to their belief of this doctrine; as when they represent Aridaeus and other tyrants in hell, bound neck and heels together, their skin flayed, and they dragged through thorns and briers; when they speak of Sisyphus rolling a stone up a hill, which, when he has got it to the top, revolves upon his hands; of Ixion; fastened to a wheel in continual motion; of Tityus having vultures always feeding upon 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 unable to extinguish his thirst with either. But, as a learned author observes, the reason why the heathen described the punishments of the damned after this manner, was not because they thought that their bodies were not left here on earth, but partly because it is the vulgar opinion, that the soul had all the same parts that the body has, and partly because such descriptions do more easily move and affect us; and it is not easy to describe the torments of the soul after any other manner. Our Lord, in the parable of Dives and Lazarus, adds the same author, speaks of them in the same manner, as if they had bodies; though what is related of them, is supposed to be before the resurrection, and their bodies are supposed to be yet in their graves.
As for some particular instances of persons who have been said to be raised from the dead to life, mentioned by heathen writers; as Alcestis by Hercules, Hippolytus by Aesculapius, with many others of the like kind; Acilius Aviola, Lucius Lamia, Aelius Tubero and others are said to revive on the funeral pile; Er Aramenius Pamphilius is reported to come to life, after he had been dead twelve days; Hercules is said to live after he had burnt himself; and Aesculapius to be raised after he bad been struck with thunder, and who himself is said to restore one to life that was carrying to the pile; and much such a story is told of Apollonius Tyaneus. As for these instances, I say, they seem to be fabulous stories, and undeserving of credit. It is true, indeed, they have been credited by some of the heathen, and since they have an argument from hence may be improved against them with great force, and for the doctrine of the resurrection; 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 subject; I therefore proceed to observe,
That the Jews were peculiarly blessed by 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, ” Romans iii. 1, 3; and yet there were some among them, as the sect of the Sadducees, which did not believe this truth; they said, “there was no resurrection, ” Matthew 22:23; Acts 23:8, though in this, as our Lord says, “they erred, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God, ” Matthew 22:29. In this the Hemero-baptists agreed with them; nor did the Essenes acknowledge the doctrine of the resurrection; yea, many of the Pharisees held the Pythagorean notion of the transmigration of souls into our bodies, which is asserted by Josephus, and, by learned men, collected from several passages of Scripture; which notion has been embraced by many of that people. Nor is it so astonishing, as that, whereas, in the writings of the New Testament, there is a more clear discovery made of this truth, yet it has been denied and opposed by some who have had the advantage of them. It was the error of Hymeneus and Philetus, “that the resurrection was past already, ” 2 Timothy 2:18. And some in the church at Corinth held “that there is no resurrection of the dead, ” 1 Corinthians 15:12. These were followed by Simon Magus, Saturninus, Basilides, Carpocrates, Valentinus, and others, too numerous to recite; and, of late, the doctrine of the resurrection of the same body is rejected by Socinians and Quakers. But to go on,