"the Generality of Mankind can never arrive """ at ;""" (p. 275.) I fay, though our Author may, and does take Advantage of this, as he would likewife of Dr. Lowth's Reason why no exprefs Mention is made by the poetical Writers of the Old Testament of the Nature of the Soul, or of future Rewards and Punishments, viz. because they (the Jews) had not Faculties equal to the Conception of fpiritual Truths; (p. 275-278. &c.) ——Yet, notwithstanding all this, the Doctrine of a future State, or a Resurrection, might be fufficiently declared, and generally received, though it was notexplicitly revealed, or particularly and fenfibly described by the Writers under the Old Testament. For, admitting the Imaginations of the Jews to have beer as grofs, and their Appetites as carnal, as the Examiner pleases; yet, I suppose, he will grant me they had natural Hopes and Fears, and common Understandings. And if fo, though their Ideas were not adequate to the Conception of Spiritual Truths, or the great Secrets and Mysteries of the Gospel, which were accordingly hid under the Veil or Cover of Types, &c. yet they could not fail to make suitable Applications of known Facts, of many scriptural Paffages, References, and Allufions, and Accounts handed down by Tradition, &c. and to form thereupon a general Notion or Belief of a future State, and of the Reunion of the Soul to the Body. And if they could not but form fuch VOL. I Dd a Notion,

a Notion, they must likewife neceffarily annex to it the Idea of future Rewards and Punishments, (and would probably imagine those Punishments would be perfonal likewife) though the Happiness of the Bleffed was not exhibited under the fame, or even fo many Images under the Old, as it was afterwards under the New Testament, and though they were unacquainted with the Doctrine of St. Paul to the Corinthians; a Doctrine, by the way, laid down for the Satisfaction and Conviction not of Jewish, but of Gentile Converts to Chriftianity.— And whether what we have been advancing is not much for the "Credit of the Jewish Revelation,” and yet not to the Difcredit of the Chriftian, let the candid Reader determine. -After all, as has been already remarked, we shall not find ourselves enabled to form a precise Idea of future Happiness or Mifery, by the Declarations either of the Old or New Teftament for this Purpofe; for though the Images under which both are represented in the latter be numerous, and many of them fenfible and material likewise, yet, as I have elsewhere had Occafion to observe, they are not only of a general, but of a very different Nature too; and accordingly, with respect to future Happiness, the Apostle af fures us, that Eye hath not feen, nor Ear beard, neither have entered into the Heart of Man, the Things which God hath prepared for them that love him: as, in regard to future Mifery, the popular

indeed,

indeed, but various Representation under which it is described, viz. of a burning Lake, outer Darkness, or a gnawing Worm, leaves no certain or determinate Idea behind it: fo that the great Conclufion to be drawn from these Confiderations to the Honour of Chriftianity, is, that it most fully and peremptorily reveals a future State, that it clearly and explicitly ftates and proposes to us the Terms of Salvation or Acceptance with God, and that it directly and pofitively confirms and affures to us the Re-union of our Souls to our Bodies, by the glorious Refurrection of our Lord and Saviour Jefus Chrift.

And therefore, when we reflect, by the by, that, in this present Life, we look into Futurity, at best, through a Glass darkly, and that the Scriptures of the New Testament itself have not been fo plain and express upon this Subject, but that many strange Notions and Hypotheses, inconsistent with each other, have been started and advanced upon it, we shall be the lefs furprised to observe the Jews, as well as other People, entertaining fantas tic Opinions relative hereuuto; fuch as was that taken Notice of by Dr. Lowth, fub terra reliquam vitam agi mortuorum: an Opinion however this, with the Examiner's Leave, not at all "incon"fiftent with the Notion of the Refurrection." For this Opinion seems manifeftly to relate only to the

Dd 2

the intermediate State between Death and the Refurrection; and confequently, in this Light, the Notion of the Soul's Existence, &c. " in some sub"terraneous Region," appears, I confess, to me lefs chimerical than the Theory of it's Sleep or Inactivity during that Period: (See p. 381.) so that the facred Writers might accommodate themselves to a popular Opinion, without contradicting a revealed Doctrine. (p. 282. Notes.)—In a word, the Question upon this Occafion is not, whether the Doctrines of the Refurrection, and of a future State, were revealed in the fame Manner, and in the fame Terms under the Old, as they are under the New Teftament;-but whether we have not abundant Foundation in Reafon and Scripture to conclude, that both these Doctrines were received by the Body of the antient Jews, how much foever their Belief might be infected with certain whimfical and popular Notions?-The Examiner has indeed produced a Collection of Texts in his firft Chapter, in Support of his System, which, it is hoped, appear to be fairly reconcileable with the common Hypothefis; whereas the Authorities we have been alledging cannot, I apprehend, be wrested, with the least Colour, from the plain and obvious Purport of them. It is perhaps fuperfluous to add more Authorities to these; though I cannot refift the Inclination I have to defire the Examiner's Opinion of the 18th Chapter of Ezekiel. The Prophet declares

declares that-The Soul that finneth it shall die ;the Son shall not bear the Iniquity of the Father, neither fhall the Father bear the Iniquity of the Son;

-the Righteoufnefs of the Righteous fhall be upon him: and the Wickedness of the Wicked shall be upon him; (Ver. 20.) When a righteous Man turneth away from his Righteousness, and committeth Iniquity, and DIETH IN THEM, for his Iniquity that he hath done fhall be die; again, when the wicked Man turneth away from his Wickedness that he hath committed, and doeth that which is lawful and right, he he fhall fave his Soul alive; because he confidereth, &c. he shall furely live, he shall not die. (Ver. 26. &c.)-Now I would ask, whether, upon the Suppofition of no future State, all Souls do not die?Whether Life and the Enjoyments of it must not always have been at best of such short and precarious Duration, and unavoidably intermixed with fo much Evil, that the Threats and Encouragements juft recited could not be effectual for any true Purpofe?-Whether in this Life the Son does not bear the Iniquity of the Father, as in the Cafe of Difeafes, &c.?—Whether hereditary Punishment is not exprefly denounced in the second Commandment, which affures us that the Lord vifits the Iniquity of the Fathers upon the Children, unto the third and fourth Generation, &c.?. Whether then, if by Death in this Chapter we are not to understand eternal Death, or Separation from the Divine Pre