Fire; or else there would be a constant Miracle.1 But they are only our own gross Conceptions of the matter which make a Miracle needful. Surely there may be Resemblance and Analogy enough in those future Punishments, to the painful Sensations which are excited by Fire, to apply that Name to them in a very proper Sense; tho' all the Effects are not exactly the same with those, which the Action of our ordinary Fire produces on the present human Body. It may be as agreeable to the Nature of that Fire, not to consume, or, to the Nature of those Bodies, not to be consumed, as the contrary is agreeable to the Nature of common Fire, and the Nature of the present Body. And such a Constitution of things may no more require a constant Miracle, than that which prevails now. But not to run into any nice Speculations, which may only serve to breed Dispute; this is certain, that Hell-fire will be such as will torment the Devil and his Angels, for whom it is prepared, as well as wicked Men. And can common Fire do this?? Can that act upon Spirits incorporeal? Or, if at all corporeal, (which however is not hastily to be taken for granted) with Bodies so infinitely subtle and

1 Appendix to the first Chapter of the second Epistle to the Thessalonians.

2 The Sentiments of Antiquity on this head may be seen in Suicer's Thesaurus, sub voc. "Ayyeλos & Saíuwv.

Those who ascribed any thing of Corporeity to Angels, were induced to it chiefly by their mistaken Sense of Gen. vi. 2. The Fact there mentioned they thought could not be accounted for without it. Besides, the word Body, [σŵμa] was of very indeterminate meaning; and some who applied it to them might only mean that they were Substances, not Shadows, or Nothings. This one would think was the Case of those, who called their Bodies immaterial, [o@μara ävλa] which in our modern Notions is a Contradiction.

spiritual, that common Fire does not seem likely to have much Force upon them.

All that I intend by this, is only to shew, that the future Fire, which will torment the Bodies of the Wicked, will not utterly consume them: I mean, there arises no clear Evidence that it will do so merely from the Reason and Philosophy of the thing itself. It may be otherwise for any thing we can tell. And our Ignorance of the Nature and Properties both of that Fire, and of those Bodies, should keep us from being positive in the point. True Reason will not be hasty to decide, where it is so very unqualified to judge. Experience supplies us with no Evidence of the Annihilation of any thing whatsoever; but, as far as it is interested in the Question at all, is rather a Presumption against it. True Philosophy teaches us, that the Souls of Men will neither cease to exist of themselves, nor can be destroyed by the Action of other Creatures. At least, this is allowed by the Patrons of Annihilation, that the Agents in the Destruction of the Body, are not capable of destroying the Soul.' And it may be nothing but a gross unphilosophical Imagination, that makes them think them capable of destroying the Body itself. So far therefore the Cause seems to go against Annihilation. And if these Reflexions do not amount to demonstrative Proof, they are at least so strong a Prejudice against it, that we have reason to expect, and insist, that the Testimonies produced from Scripture, to which the Appeal next lies, should speak fully and clearly to the Point, before we admit it. But do they so? Where is the Text that says plainly, that the time will come when the Wicked shall be no more?

1 See the Quotation from Mr. W. No. X.

When they will be as if they had never been born?1 When their Torments will reduce them to nothing? Or, deprive them of all Sense of Being? Some such plain Declarations as these would be to the purpose. But to infer Annihilation from a few Scripture-terms, which appear to have no such sense or meaning in Scripture, is doing nothing. Dr. Whitby seems to rest his Opinion more upon the Reason he gives for it, viz. That the Preservation of the Bodies of the Wicked will require a constant Miracle, which is not to be expected, than upon any Texts of Scripture. However, those which he points out to us, have been considered in our second Chapter, No. LXIX., XC. To what is there said, I shall only add, that supposing Destruction and Perdition in those Texts meant Annihilation, (which they do not) it would be perfectly arbitrary and unreasonable to limit this to the Bodies only of the Wicked; since the Texts speak of the Destruction and Perdition of Men, ungodly Men, who knew not God, and obeyed not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. These are to be punished with ever

1 'Tis to be observed, that when our Saviour came nearest the expressing this matter of Annihilation, he chuseth two other Phrases, (not this of Death, or any thing that way inclining) having never been born, and having a Mill-stone hanged about the Neck, and being cast into the midst of the Sea, which by an imperfect Resemblance seemeth meant on purpose to signify Annihilation: And yet it is also observable to the main Question, that either of these States (and so Annihilation) is better and more desirable, than the Lot which in God's Decree awaits a Betrayer of Christ, a wicked man, for that one Fact. Dr. Hammond: Judgment worthy of God: Vol. i. of his Works, p. 710.

The learned Author proceeds to shew that the other terms usually alleged in this Argument, (ảπwλeia, öλeßpos, the second Death, &c.) do not mean any such thing in Scripture as Annihilation.

lasting Destruction; but how the Annihilation, or Dissolution, merely of their Bodies, can be a Punishment to them, it is hard to conceive. It must be rather a Deliverance and Release, to be separated from their Bodies, in that Place of Torment. So that the Texts cannot possibly favour Dr. Whitby's Hypothesis. As to Mr. Whiston's Criticisms and Reflections, I have taken notice of them in the two first Chapters, under the respective Texts; which I need not here repeat.1

But as the whole Strength of the Objection is collected together, and presented in one View, by another Writer, I shall give you his Words at length. Thus then reasons the Moral Philosopher: "The

66

66

66

66

669

1 “Aπóλλʊμaι, signifies very often no more than to die, or to suffer great Troubles and Miseries; though from such Expressions in the New Testament some Patrons of loose and "atheistical Principles would infer, that there are no future "Punishments of wicked Men, but that upon Death they are 66 entirely annihilated. The Classic Authors take this and the (6 synonymous Words for a State of great Trouble and Perplexity; but never in this Sense that Latitudinarians wish it "might be taken in ; but can never prove that it is. Herodotus "has άñoλúμevos for a Person departed this Life, and living in Happiness, in another: Οὔτε ἀποθνήσκειν ἑωϋτοὺς νομίζουσι, ἰέναι δὲ τὸν ἀπολλύμενον παρὰ Σάμολξιν δαίμονα, they do not suppose that they who die are finally extinct, but that the Person that departs this Life goes to their God Zamolxis. We have in Xenophon ἀπολώλει τῷ φόβῳ. “So ̓Απωλόμην δύστηνος οὔκετ ̓ εἰμὶ δή in Euripides. 'Tis very common in this sense likewise in Latin "Authors. So Destruction and Perdition in sacred Writers only express incurable Despair and endless Miseries; because "that eternal Destruction is declared through the whole New "Testament to be only a State of extreme Sufferings, and the sharpest Sense of Guilt and divine Vengeance; and not Loss "of Being, or Annihilation." Blackwall's Sacred Classicks, Vol. I. p. 178, &c. 8vo.

66

66

66

R

"Fire which is utterly to consume, destroy, and burn "up the Wicked in the last Day, is called everlasting "Fire, because its Effects will be everlasting, and "there can be no possible Recovery from this second "Death. And thus the Fire which consumed the "Cities of Sodom and Gomorrah is call'd everlasting "Fire, because those Cities were destroyed for ever, never to be restored more. And thus this last "destroying Fire is said to be unquenchable, because "no Power or Policy can extinguish it, or deliver the "Ungodly out of it, till it has utterly consumed and destroyed the Subject. But, that the second Death "which wicked Men must undergo after they have "been raised, and received their Sentence, should be "an eternal Life in Torments, without ever dying "more; that a consuming and destroying, should be "an unconsuming, immortalizing Fire; that the mortal " and corruptible Bodies with which the Wicked shall "be raised, should be immortal and uncorruptible, "which is the sole Privilege of the Just; that eternal "Death and utter Destruction should signify Immortality, and eternal Life in Misery; and that when "the professed End and Design of Christ's coming "into the World, was to destroy the Devil and his "Kingdom, and all his Works, and to abolish and put "an end to Sin and Death for ever; that he should in "the Event come to establish the Devil's Empire for "ever in Hell over the far greater part of Mankind, and "to perpetuate and immortalize Sin and Hell, instead "of extirpating and destroying them: These are such

gross and glaring Contradictions, as cannot be recon"ciled to the natural Use of Words in any Language.'

There are several Propositions contain'd, or implied, in this noble Chain of Reasoning, which we must