breathed into his noftrils the breath of life, and man became a living foul. We see here, that the whole man (for nothing is faid of his body in particular) was made of the duft of the ground. No part of him is faid to have had a higher or different original; and furely fo very important a circumftance as that of an immaterial principle, which could not be from the duft, would not have been omitted, if there had been any fuch a thing in the compofition.

When the whole man was completely formed, and not before, we are next informed, that God made this man, who was lifeless at first, to breathe and live. For it evidently follows from the text, that nothing but the circumftance of breathing made the difference between the unanimated earth, and the living foul. It is not faid that when one conftituent part of the man was made, another neceffary constituent part, of a very different nature, was fuperadded to it; and that these two, united, conftituted the man; but only that that fubftance which was formed of the duft of the earth became a living foul, that is became alive, by being made to breathe.

That no ftrefs is to be laid upon the word , which we tranflate foul (though it would be most of all abfurd to fuppofe, as we must have done, from a fair conftruction of this passage, that the dust of the earth could be converted into an immaterial foul) is evident from the use of the fame term in other places, I 2

in

in which it is used as fynonimous to man, the whole man, and in fome manifeftly fignifies nothing more than the corporeal, or mortal part of man.

Gen. xlvi. 26, All the fouls that came with Jacob into Egypt, which came out of his loins. The immaterial principle certainly could not come from his loins.

Exod. xviii. 4, The foul that finneth it shall die. Ez. xiii. 19, To flay the fouls that should not die, and to fave the fouls that should not live. Pf. vii. 1, 2, Save me, left he tear my foul, rending it in pieces. In all these paffages it is moft evident that the word foul is fynonimous to man, and that it refers more immediately to his body; fo that by man becoming a living foul, nothing can be underftood befides his being made alive; and the paffage fuggefts no hint of any thing but the property of life being fuperadded to that corporeal fyftem which was intirely formed of the duft of the earth, in order to make a complete living man.

Sometimes the word that is here rendered foul is used to exprefs the dead body itself, and is fo tranflated by us; as Lev. xxi. I, II, There fhall none be defiled for the dead among his people, neither shall he go in to any dead body, nor defile himself for father or mother. Ib. xix. 28, Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead. Numb. xix. 13, Whoever touches the dead body of any man that is dead. In this paffage the periphrafis is very

re

remarkable; and if, in this paffage, the word wfhould be rendered foul, it must be tranflated thus, Whoever touches the dead Soul of a man who shall die. See alfo Hagg. ii. 13.

In other paffages, where the fame word is by us rendered foul, there would have been much more propriety in tranflating it life, which does not denote a fubftance but a property.

Pf. lxxxix. 48, Who can deliver his foul [life] from the band of the grave. Job xxxiii. 30, To bring back his foul [life] from the pit. Gen. xxxv. 18, And it came to pass as her foul, [her life] was departing for fhe died. 1 Kings xvii. 22, And the foul [the life] of the child came to him again.

The fame obfervation may be made with refpect to the correfponding word in the Greek, x, in the New Teftament; as in Luke xii, 20, Thou fool, this night fhall thy foul [thy life] be required of thee; that is, this night thou shalt die.

Befides, whatever principles we may be led to afcribe to man from this account of his formation in Gen. ii. 7, the very fame we ought to afcribe to the brutes; because the very fame words are used in the account of them by the fame writer, both in the Hebrew and in the Septuagint, though they are differently rendered in our tranflation. For Gen. i. 24, we read, And God faid, let the earth bring forth the living creature [v] [living foul] and again,

I 3

again, Gen. ii. 19, And whatsoever Adam called every living creature [living foul] that was the name thereof. For this obfervation I am indebted to an ingenious and worthy friend, and I think it valuable and decifive in the cafe.

Let us now proceed to the account which the fcriptures give us of the mortality of man, to see whether we can find in any paflage relating to this fubject fome trace of an immortal foul.

Death is first threatened to man in thefe terms, Gen. ii. 17, Of the tree of knowledge, of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it; for in the day that thou eatest of it thou shalt furely die. Here is no exception made of any part of the man that was not to die. The natural conftruction of the fentence imports, that whenever the decree fhould take place, whatever was alive belonging to man would wholly ceafe to live, and become lifeless earth, as it had been originally.

The fame inference may be made from the account of the actual fentence of death paffed upon Adam, after his tranfgreflion. Gen. iii. 19, In the fweat of thy face fhalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it waft thou taken. For duft theu [not thy body only] art, and unto duft shalt thou return. If in this there be any allufion to an immaterial and immortal part in man, it is wonderfully concealed; for nothing appears, upon the face of the paffage, but that, as the whole

mart

man had been lifeless earth, he would become lifeless earth again. Every other conftruction is an express contradiction both to the words, and the spirit of the fentence. For what would have fignified the death of the body, to Adam, if there ftill remained an inextinguishable principle of life? and especially if, as the immaterialists in general fuppofe, he would afterwards have enjoyed a better life than he could have had in conjunction with the body; which could only be a clog to it, and obstruct its exercife and enjoyment.

Befides, according to the common hypothefis, all the punishment that is mentioned in this fentence, is inflicted upon the mere paffive inftrument of the foul, whilft the real criminal was fuffered to escape.

In general, to interpret what the scriptures fay of the mortality of man, which is the uniform language both of the Old and New Teftament on this fubject, of the mortality of the body only, which is a part of the man that is of the leaft value, and wholly infignificant when compared with the other part of his conftitution, the mind, is exactly of a piece with the Trinitarian interpretation of those paffages in the gofpels, which reprefent Christ as inferior to his father, of his human nature only; fuppofing the Evangelifts to have neglected the confideration of his fuperior divine nature; though if there had been any fuch thing, it was more especially requifite that it fhould

I 4