DISCOURSE VI.

II TIMOTHY, CHAP.-I. VERSE 10.

-And hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel.

THESE words being spoken of our blessed Saviour, and affirming that he through the gospel brought life and immortality to light, are thought by some to be exclusive of all arguments for a future immortality, drawn either from the light of reason and nature, or from the writings of Moses: for if the hopes of immortality were so supported before the coming of Christ Jesus, it could not be truly asserted of him, 'that he brought life and immortality to light through the gospel.' And so far at least they must be allowed to argue justly, that, if the text is to be understood in this exclusive sense, it will affect the proofs and authorities of any former revelation equally with those of sense and reason. But then, on the other side, it is certain that, if this argument does not impeach the authority of Moses with regard to this fundamental article of faith, neither will it shut out the proofs of natural religion; since it must destroy the evidence of both or of neither. Now, that it does not set aside the authority of Moses, is evident from our Saviour's argument to the Sadducees: Now that the dead are raised, even Moses showed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob :' Luke xx. 37. From whence it appears that our Saviour thought the law of Moses afforded good proof of a future life; which is inconsistent with the supposition that there was no evidence for life and immortality till the publication of the gospel.

But, supposing Moses or the law of nature to afford evidence for a future life and immortality, it remains to be considered in what sense the words of the text are to be understood, which do

affirm that life and immortality were brought to light through the gospel.' To bring any thing to light may signify, according to the idiom of the English tongue, to discover or reveal a thing which was perfectly unknown before: but the word in the original is so far from countenancing, that it will hardly admit of this sense. The Greek runs thus: φωτίσαντος δὲ Ζωὴν καὶ ἀφθαρσίαν. Now φωτίζειν signifies (not to bring to light, but) to enlighten, illustrate, or clear up any thing. You may judge by the use of the word in other places: it is used in John i. 9. That was the true light, which lighteth (or enlighteneth) every man that cometh into the world: pwτίξει πάντα ἄνθρωπον. Jesus Christ did not by coming into the world bring men to light; but he did by the gospel enlighten men, and make those who were dark and ignorant before, wise even to salvation. In like manner our Lord did enlighten the doctrine of life and immortality, not by giving the first or only notice of it, but by clearing up the doubts and difficulties under which it labored, and giving a better evidence for the truth and certainty of it, than nature or any revelation before had done. There is one place more, where our translators render the original word as they have done in the text: 1 Cor. iv. 5. Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts; and then shall every man have praise of God.' But in this place it had been more properly rendered, who will cast light on' the hidden things of darkness; and so rendered, it better suits what follows, and will make manifest' the counsels of the heart. The hidden things of darkness, which shall be brought to light at the coming of the Lord, are the actions and practices of wicked men; which, though they are of a certain and determinate nature, are yet hard to judge of, because we cannot discern the springs and motives from whence they arise: perfectly unknown to us they are not; if they were, there was no occasion for the Apostle to forbid us judging of them; for men do not, cannot judge at all of things which do not at all fall under their notice but they are so dark and obscure, that it is hard to judge rightly of them; and therefore it is but prudent to suspend our sentence till the day comes which will make all things

:

clear, which will hold such a light to these hidden things of darkness, that we shall manifestly discern them, and be able to view them on every side. So that, in this case, the hidden things of darkness are not supposed to be perfectly unknown, but only to be so dark and involved, that we cannot safely pass our judgment on them; and to bring them to light' imports no more than to set them in a clear light, and to make them plain and manifest to the eyes of all the world. According to the use then of the original word, 'to bring life and immortality to light' signifies to illustrate and make plain this great doctrine of religion, to dispel the doubts and uncertainties in which it was involved, and to give evident proof and demonstration to the world of the certainty of a future life and immortality.

The text, thus explained, leaves us at liberty to make the best both of the evidence of nature and of Moses for a future life and immortality, and asserts nothing to the gospel but this prerogative, that it has given a surer and fuller proof of this fundamental article than ever the world before was acquainted with. The true point then now before us, and which takes in the whole view of the text, is, to consider the evidence which mankind had for the doctrine of immortality before the coming of Christ, and the evidence which the gospel now affords; and to show where the former evidence failed, and how it is supplied by the latter.

It would take up too much time to examine minutely the several arguments for the immortality of the soul, which are to be found in the writings of heathen authors; nor would it perhaps answer the purpose of our present inquiry: for the natural evidence in this case is not so much to be estimated by the acuteness of this or that writer, as by the common sense and apprehension of mankind: and this, and all other opinions which have any pretension to derive themselves from nature, owe their authority, not to the abstracted reasonings of any school, but to some general sense and notion which is found in all men, or to some common and uncontroverted maxim of reaThe unbelievers of this age have abused their time and pains in their endeavors to expose the natural evidence of immortality, by confronting the different sentiments of the ancient philosophers, and by showing their uncertainty and in

son.

consistency for what if Plato, if Aristotle, if Tully, are inconsistent with one another, or with themselves, in their abstracted arguings on this point? What is this to the evidence of nature, which is not the single opinion of Plato, or any other philosopher, but the united voice of all mankind? This was the common belief of the world, derived from some common sense, or principle of reason, before any philosopher had so much as thought of an abstracted reason for the proof of it: and had not the common sense of nature dictated this truth to them, I am very confident the philosophical reasons had never been thought of. That the common belief and persuasion was the foundation of the philosophical inquiry, is evident from hence, that all the ancient writers on this subject appeal to the common notion and consent of mankind, as one great argument for the truth of the doctrine: which certainly proves this at least, that the world was possessed of this belief long before they were writers, or ever the philosophical reasons were thought of. If the notion was common, that alone is a sufficient proof that it did not arise from abstracted reasoning; for no common opinion ever did or ever can: and the reason is plain; for a common opinion is that which is received by the generality of men, who never were, who never will be, capable of attending to abstracted reason. Now this natural evidence, distinguished from the intricacies of philosophy, is the thing which we inquire after, and which will stand its ground, whatever becomes of the private notions of learned men; for nature may be in the right in giving notice of a future life, however men may be mistaken, when they come to consider and ascertain the nature and cause of it; which to do is the mark and aim of philosophy.

But the common consent is the voice and law of nature; for what all agree in must needs derive itself from something that is common to all; and what is so, but the sense and instinct of nature? When men come to speculation, they differ as much in the cast and turn of their minds, as they do in the features and lineaments of their faces; and therefore speculative reasoning will never produce a common persuasion.

This belief and persuasion of the certainty of a future life arose from the common sense that men have of the difference of

good and evil, and of every man's being accountable for the things done in this world; which account not being taken in this world, as the least degree of observation will enable men to see, they concluded, or rather they felt from the very force of reason and conscience, that there was an account to be given hereafter. Such an internal argument as this, which springs up in the heart and from the heart of every man, has a greater weight in it than all the reasonings of philosophy put together, and will tie men down, if not to hope for, yet at least to fear a future immortality; either of which is the silent voice of nature testifying the reality of a life to come.

That this is the true foundation of the universal belief of a future life, may be learnt from hence, that the persuasion of another life was always connected with the supposition that there were different states for good and bad men; so that you cannot any where trace the notion of immortality, but you find evidence also for the different conditions of men in another life, according as they have behaved themselves in this. Now these two opinions being thus inseparably united, it is easy to judge which is the natural sense, and which the consequence : let any man try, and he will find that it is not the expectation of living that makes men infer the reasonableness or necessity of a judgment; but it is the reasonable and natural expectation of judgment, which makes them infer the necessity and reality of a future life.

Into what great absurdities this natural notion grew under the management of poets is well known: they named the princes and the judges, and described the tortures of the wicked, as their fancies led them; and their inventions became the vulgar theology. But this still shows the truth of what I have asserted; for neither would the poets, whose business it is to raise fine scenes on the plan and probability of nature, have so painted the torments and the enjoyments of men departed, neither would the world have received their inventions, had there been no foundation in nature to support the romance.

As to such as imagine that the notion of a future life arose from the descriptions and inventions of poets, they may even as well suppose that eating and drinking had the same original, and that men had never thought of it but for the fine feasts and