A saint or a brute the certain necessity and excellency of holiness, &c. ...…

1. And first, whereas you say you are not sure of a Life hereafter, I demand of you, Whether you are sure that there is no such life? I am sure you are not. If you think you are, (which none but a debauched man can think, that hath put out the eye of Natural Light) let us hear your Proof, and you shall soon be told the vanity of it. But if you are not sure that there is no such life, then I would know of you, Whether a Possibility of such Everlasting things deserve not greater care and diligence then is used by the Holyest Saint on earth? You say, You are not sure that there is a Heaven for Saints. But what if it prove true, (as nothing more true) will you sit still, and lose it for you know not what? or for want of a little care in seeking it? You say, You know not whether there be a Hell for ungodly men, or no: But what if it prove true (as certainly it will) where are you then? Will you venture your selves upon the Possibility of such an Endless Loss and Torment, which now you might on reasonable terms escape? You will confess that a Possibility of a Kingdom should be more regarded, then a Certainty of a pin or a feather: And a Possibility of some Tormenting disease but for twenty years, should more carefully be avoided then the Certain stinging of a Nettle.

Quer. 2. You say, You are not sure that there is a life to come? But are you sure to continue the life you have? Or is it any great matter that you are called to lose, for the obtaining of […] that you are not sure of? You know the contrary, or easily may do. You are sure that you have not long to be here. Nothing more ⟨p. 132⟩sure then that you will shortly die. And your are not sure but it may be to morrow. And while you are here, it is nothing worth the naming (but what hath reference to another life) that you do possess. What have you to your flesh, but meat, and drink, and sleep, and lust, and such kind of bestial delights! Which it is better be without, then have, if we could also be without the need of them. Can you call these by the name of Happiness, without renouncing your Reason and Experience? You say, You know not what God will do for you hereafter: But you know what sin and the world will do for you here: Even Nothing but hold you in a transitory dream, and then dismiss you into rottenness and dust. If you were not certain of another life, as long as you are most certain of the vanity of this, doth not Reason tell you, that a Possible Everlasting Glory, should be preferred before a Certain vanity? If you were not sure to get any thing by God and a Holy Life, yet as long as you are sure, even as sure as you live, that you can lose nothing by it, that is worth the talking of, is not the case then resolved, which way is the Better? If you say, you shall lose your fleshly pleasures; I answer, They are not worth the having. The pleasure doth not countervail the trouble: no more then the delight of scratching (as I said before) doth countervail the trouble of the itch. Moderation and temperance is sweeter then excess. If too much be better then enough, and that which hurteth nature better then that which helpeth it, then self-destroying and fighting against your bodily welfare, would be best. Is not a temperate meal more pleasant then a gluttonous surfeit, that is worse to the feeling of the glutton the next day? Is not common food that costeth not much, and kindleth no troublesome itch in a mans appetite, more pleasant then enticing costly dainties?