Let. 25. Lord BoLrINGBROKE. 13

*«c their race exiſted, that there is an active thinking principle ««in their compoſition.—— That théere are corporeal natures, *⅜ we have fenſitive knowlege: that there are ſpiritual natures «« diſtinct from all theſe, we have no knowlege at all. We «« onlv infer that there are ſuch, becauſe we know that we «« think, and are not able to conceive how material ſyſtems « can think ².“ And this certainly is a very reaſonable infer- ence, as reaſonable as it is to infer a material ſubſtance from the affections and properties of matter.

But though it is agreeable to reaſon to believe that the hu- man ſoul is immaterial and immortal, this doth not imply, as his lordſhip is pleaſed to inſinuate, that ¾it is immortal by ««the neceſſity of its nature, as God is ſelf-exiſtent by the ««c neceſſity of his a.“ Nor is it ſo underſtood by thoſe who maintain the natural immortality of the human ſoul. What they intend by it is only this: That God made the ſoul ori- ginally of ſuch a nature as to be fitted and deſigned for an immortal duration, nor naturally liable, as the body is, to corruption and diſſolution; but not, as if it were rendered ſo neceſſarily exiſtent as to be independent of God himſelf. Still it is in his power to annihilate it, if he ſeeth fit to put an end to its exiſtence; though there is no reaſon to think that he will ever do ſo. For ſince it was fitted for immortality by his own original conſtitution, this may be regarded as an indication of his will, that it fhall continue an immortal being, though ſtill in a dependence on the power and will of the Creator.

It is proper to obſerve here, that our author hath acknow- leged ſeveral things which furniſh a very reaſonable preſump- tion in favour of the docétrine of the immortality of the ſoul. One is, the univerſal prevalence of that doctrine from the eldeſt antiquity. For this ſeems to ſhew, that it is agreeable to the natural ſentiments of the human mind; or at leaſt that it was derived from a primitive univerſal tradition received from the firſt anceſtors of the human race, and which was originally owing to divine revelation. Both theſe may probably have contributed to the general ſpreading of this notion. This writer, according to his cuſtom, varies on this head. For after having expreſly aſſerted, that this doctrine was inculcated from time immemorial, and that it beagan to be taught long before we have any light into antiquity?; he pretends to aſſign the ori- ginal of it, and aſcribes the invention of it to Egyht, and that it came from thence to the Greexks, to whom it was brought by

2Vol. iii. p.(36.„Ibid. p. 5 5 9. ¹Vol, v. p. 237. 308. Orpheus,