"If we confine our observations, on the analogy between vegetation and the resurrection, to vegetation in its most simple state; and only presume that one grain shall, through its corruption, produce another similar to itself, we must at least acknowledge, in this case, that the difficulties will be equal; and we can no more account for the one, than we can comprehend the other. But when, to this simple state of vegetation, which we have supposed, we add that power of multiplication which it possesses, and which we constantly perceive in the production and re-production of grain, the difficulties which approach us are most, decidedly on the part of vegetation; while the doctrine of the resurrection stands, comparatively, unembarrassed with any obstacles which can forbid belief. 173

"If the power and process of vegetation were only known in theory, and if that theory had asserted, that one grain of wheat was capable of producing another new grain by the dissolution of it's component parts; if this, I say, had been as

now.

serted in theory only, without any correspondent fact to verify the declaration, the assertion would, even in that case, have had greater improbabilities to overcome, than the doctrine of the resurrection has For, as nothing of a similar nature would have preceded it, in point of fact and time, even the possibility of realizing such a theory would be rendered doubtful, and scepticism might have smiled at the idle vision, with the same Sadducëan sneer, that it now bestows upon the notion of a resurrection of the dead.

"But, if that early period which we have supposed, the asserters of future vegetation, proceeding further in their speculations, had declared, that, by some incomprehensible, but prolific power existing in nature, one grain of wheat would actually produce sixty, or one hundred grains, of equal magnitude and beauty with itself, and this too, through a process which threatened the inevitable destruction of all; I cannot doubt but sceptical men, forming their calculations from mere possibility, would have exploded such

a declaration, as something too romantic and visionary to occupy a rational mind. For, as the certainty of vegetation could not, in this case, have been realized by fact, which is the most infallible demonstration of theory, there could have been no foundation, on which the mind could rest, to form its calculations on the possibility of such an issue; a foundation, which, as in the case of the resurrection, all nature annually supplies by analogy.

"If human nature were immortal in it's present state, no change of essence would be suspected by the most sceptical of the human race. The nominal essence would have insured to us the propriety of that which is real, through all those possible changes which human nature, thus circumstanced, could undergo. Why, then, should we, in the present condition of man, pause at the grave? Why should we distrust the power which is infinite, the goodness which is illimitible, or the justice which is immutable? The power which gave being, can undoubtedly continue it, under all possible changes even

including death in the catalogue, either in this world, or another, though His modes of action remain totally unknown.

"That God will continue our existence may be inferred from his attributes and nature. His Justice demands it: and neither his Goodness nor his Mercy can withhold what Justice demands. Delinquency cannot be suffered to go unpunished. Where there is a capacity for moral action, there must be a capacity for punishments and rewards. Thus, the moral nature of our existence and of our actions, standing in close connection with Justice, insures a day of retribution; whether we have or have not any eye to the essence and compounded nature of man. And, as a day of retribution is necessarily founded upon justice, justice demands the same substance, the same essence, and the same being. Many actions, neither matter nor spirit could perform in a separate state: and, if these actions, which thus result from a compounded nature, are capable of sustaining a moral relation, they can neither be rewarded nor punished in any

"

other nature, than that in which they were performed. The union of two 'natures, therefore, in action, demands 'the union of two natures in a state of retribution, and we derive from this source the most indubitable evidences of a resurrection of the body.

V

"That there are many such actions as we have supposed, will become evident by adverting to fact. A plan of deliberate murder, when carried into execution, is plainly an action which includes both mind and body; while, at the same time, it is a flagrant violation of that justice, which is immutable in its nature. The soul alone' could plan, and the body alone could execute the deed. Both the hand and the heart are, therefore, implicated in the enor-3 mity, and both participate in guilt. Since the offence was of a nature, which neither the body nor the soul, separately, was capable of committing, it must be an action, which could only arise from the com pounded state of man, or from the union of those two natures, which constituted the person of the murderer: both natures