the Stars and all the innumerable furniture of those infinite spaces were made only to spangle round this little speck of ours He begins with a in the beginning God created the Heaven and the Earth as if the Heaven bore any proportion to this little poor Earthy Atom And again God made two great Lights c. he made the Stars also bringing in those innumerable prodigious Bodies with a poor also which are millions of times bigger than all the rest of the Creation No Sir I have much more august conceptions of the Deity than to think he made such numerous and glorious Productions to dance attendance to such a puny point For I look upon God to be a Being of infinite Power and Goodness especially as well as Duration and therefore I cannot suppose he should lie snug within his own happiness from all Eternity and never display a vein of his good nature and communicative kindness till within a few thousand years last past That Men should have such abject and narrow-spirited thoughts of so diffusive a goodness raises in me such a transport of Passion or Zeal or what you please to call it that the names of Atheistical Heretical Papistical and a hundred others which your Folks are scar'd at don't seem to me half so impious and reflecting upon the Deity as this one Heterodoxy Cred. Answer to the Argument from the late Communication of the Divine Goodness I am glad to find you have this concern for God-Almighty's honour as to appear thus Zealous for it But you should not be too outragious at the Sacred Prophet for a matter it is hard to prove him guilty of For I look upon this his History of the Creation to be the most noble piece of Philosophy which ever the World was acquainted with and whenever there appear any blemishes in it it is only the sully it has contracted from bad Interpreters I confess the generality of Divines both Ancient and Modern have thought the whole Universe was created in the Hexaemeron because God is said to have then created the Heaven and the Earth and because the Stars are mentioned in the fourth days work This Opinion has given indeed mighty advantage to Atheistical Men especially those who had any tast of Philosophy and had considered what a little pittance of the Universe this Earth of ours was for the sake of which all things seem'd by this account to be framed at the same time nay this point is supposed to have busied the Deity more than all the rest Now I shall take off the force of this prejudice when I shall have proved that Moses does not assert the Stars to be any part of the Adamical Creation but that in all probability that Creation was not extended beyond the Sun and the Planets The fixed Stars probably no part of the Mosaick Creation As for the first Verse in Genesis where God is said to have created the Heaven and the Earth it is plain that frequently in Scripture Language the word Heaven does not signify more than the Regions of the Air as when in the 20. v. of this Chapter the Fowls are said to fly in the Firmament of Heaven The Windows of Heaven Gen. 7.11 The Bottles of Heaven Job 38.37 i. e. the Clouds The hoary frost of Heaven Job 38.29 and in a hundred other places where Heaven can be extended no further than the Air. So that when God is said here to create the Heaven and the Earth we cannot from hence conclude that he then created every thing in the vast extramundane spaces though the vulgar do sometimes call all this by the name of Heaven But this is not the knot of the Difficulty the greatest stress of the Objection lies upon the 16 Verse where among other parts of the Creation God is positively said to have made the Stars And God made two great Lights the greater Light to rule the Day and the lesser Light to rule the Night he made the Stars also Gen. 3.16 explained Gen. 3.16 But the Text does not necessarily denote so much Our English Translation interpolates the words he made which are not in the original for the simple Translation of the Hebrew is only this And God made two great Lights the greater Light to rule the Day and the lesser Light to rule the Night and the Stars So that here the word Stars seems to come in so very abruptly and by the bye that one would be apt to think that it was clapt in by somebody else after Moses his time who had a mind to be mending his Hypothesis or else was added as a marginal note by some Rabbi and so at length crept into the Text as Father Simon has proved several others have done And there might be the more countenance for this when the Jews found themselves to have been so horribly plagued for worshipping the Host of Heaven for Gods when they were Creatures tho' at the same time they could not find any account of their Creation among the other parts of the Universe This might be to afford a Covert to such Idolaters who might from hence infer the Stars to be uncreated Beings which was fairly taken way by adding such a Gloss in the Margin or by taking it from thence into the Text where the Transcriber could not think it reasonable it should be omitted Now this is no very improbable account to any one who considers how much by head and shoulders and the Stars comes in if we take the common Interpretation of the words But I think we may give a better Interpretation of them and that is this The words and the Stars are not to be referred to the word made in the beginning of the Verse but to the word Rule which immediately goes before and are to be coupled not with the Sun and Moon but the night The lesser Light to rule the Night and the Stars Whereby is denoted the peculiar usefulness and predominancy of the Moon above all other Stars and Planets in this Earth of ours For this shines out when they do but twinkle and affords a mighty influence in the production and growth of all Vegetables So that upon this account she may very well be called the Ruler of the Night and as it were Prince among the Stars For as it appears to us it is a glorious Planet and a Princely Light and it is no absurdity in the divine Legislator as some will have it in the literal sense to call it a Great Light O. R. For the Admired Plato himself goes a pitch or two higher and calls these two Luminaries 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Great Gods the Sun and the Moon Plat. Leg. Dial. 7. Now this notion of the words seems more rational because the Moon 's being Prince or Ruler among the Stars or Governess of the night is the common language of all people and what every old Author almost is full of Tully says she was called Diana because
impaired as appears from the Modern Writings and Inventions But if we consider the primitive fecundity of the Earth and its barrenness now adays of which I will discourse more by and by which natural fruitfulness is so celebrated in Ancient Writers under the name of the Golden Age and if we further add the Longaevity of our Antediluvian Progenitors and others for a considerable time after the Flood one would be inclined to think that nature has lost much of its primitive strength it enjoy'd when the Earth was impregnated with its juvenile vigour Creation of the World not like ordinary Productions 2ly There is no necessity because the World is produced in time that this primary production should in all respects answer to our natural and common productions I confess I have always took it to be not only an immodest but an ignorant way of arguing to say God must act such a way because nature so requires it that other-ways it would not be a natural way of acting and the like as if God was not the God of nature as well as of every thing else or that the power of God must be bounded by that of nature So in the present case because Men see that we are first Infants then Children afterwards Men and lastly Old Men which is the series from our Production to our Dissolution therefore some conclude that the like must follow from the Production of the World I remember there is a notable Dispute in Macrobius which was oldest a Hen or an Egg. And I think that Question might be easily solved by saying that naturally the Egg is before the Hen because she is generated out of it but in the first Creation the first Hen was produced supernaturally otherways than from an Egg because there was no preceding Hen to lay it And the Answer is the same to the matter in hand All natural Productions do proceed in the aforesaid Method from worse to better c. but the Creation of the World is a supernatural Production precedent to all the Laws of Nature which were to be observed after the first Production but were impossible to be observed before 3ly The Dissolution not piece-meal but Instantaneous But though there be no visible decay in the World it is no sufficient Argument to evince the Eternity of it especially to those who have Revelation against it for nothing but a downright Contradiction can make them believe the contrary But did never any thing come to an end but what had some visible decay before it Was never any Man kill'd or did die but only by a lingring Sickness Is not an House as liable to be destroyed by Fire or Earthquake as by Delapidations For we do not expect that the World should be destroyed from the defect of some internal Principle thereof but by the Will of God and by the withdrawing his preserving Power which keeps it in its frame and order We do not think that the World shall decay like an old House piece by piece but just like the stopping of a Clock all of a sudden when the Weights are down For when it shall please God to withdraw that Divine Energy which informs this great Machine and sets it a moving all the Wheels of Nature will be checked in an Instant and move no more for ever and if he does likewise deny his preserving Power which keeps the parts in their being even the very matter of them must crumble and sink into nothing Phil. Well Sir let this be as it will I have another knotty piece of Work for you and that is another Argument of Ocellus's which is this If the World be created then is the Universe created for I call the World by the name of the Universe being a perfect Collection of all Natures for besides the Universe there is nothing and if there be any thing it is contained in the Universe either as a part or an excrescence thereof now to make the Universe or every thing to be Created implies a Contradiction for if every thing be Created there will be nothing left to create so that it must upon this score be asserted that something must create it self which of all contradictions is the most absurd Does not this Objection pinch a little Cred. Arg. III Answ And a very little too for indeed it is nothing else but a Childish Fallacy grounded upon the doubtful signification of the Word Vniverse which sometimes may be used to signify the whole series of Beings whether create or uncreate so as to take in God himself or else to signify the whole compages of natural Bodies consisting of Earth Sea Heaven Stars or sometimes together with these Spirits Angels and the whole Intellectual World and in short every thing besides God Now when we say that the Universe or every thing was created we take the Universe in its latter signification exclusively of God who being an eternal Mind was self-subsistent and uncreate but of his infinite bounty did communicate a Being to all those other things which before had none of their own which Communication we call Creation Phil. Again proceeds that Excellent Philosopher Ocellus Oracles of Reason p. 213. The World is the cause of all perfection to other things but is of it self perfect and that which is the cause of safety to others must of its self be safe and permanent Cum Microcosmus à mundo trahit vivit Microcosmus cum Mundus à Microcosmo trahit desicit Microcosmus H. Blount de Anima Mund. Also that which is the cause of compactedness to others must of it self be compacted but the World is to all other things the cause of Being Safety and Perfection wherefore of its self it must needs be eternal perfect and permanent for ever Cred. Arg. IV Ans I grant this Argument would be conclusive if the World was the cause of all perfection because no perfection can produce it self and therefore must have an eternal cause which ways of proof we make use of in demonstrating the necessity of a Diety But here we deny the World to be the cause of all perfection and say whatever perfections it enjoys it received them from some superiour cause namely God Phil. But pray why may not the World it self be God And then it will be all one to say that the World is the cause of all perfection or that God is the cause of it And this notion does not seem at all to entrench upon the Majesty of the Deity for we shall secure all his attributes this way as well as you can yours For I look upon the World both to be Eternal and Infinite which are the two great Foundations of the Notion of a Deity For there never was a time in which there was not this vast extension of matter regularly ordered as it is now and there is no part of space but what is possessed by some Beautiful Machine or other which its Inhabitants esteem a World Now
of a Sphere And in the Night time we view a mighty number of Stars which considering their remoteness from the Earth seem all equally distant and so form an imaginary Sphere as when by pricked lines we represent a square or a circle as well as by continued ones And this especially is represented more livelily and seemingly real when the Interstices between the Stars are filled up with a pale scatter'd light And upon this account it is that we have in our eyes the Image of a great white Hemisphere studded with Stars But this does no more conclude the World to be a Sphere than the nine Pins set up by three and three make a real square tho' we may conceive it to be one or that Figure of the part of any Object which lies next to the eye and is seen by it is the Figure of the whole part of which lies behind undiscerned 2ly That no Argument of a perpetual Motion But granting the Universe was Spherical it would not from thence acquire a perpetual motion A Spherical Figure makes a thing move more easily but it does not make it always move For otherways Tops and Balls once put in motion would never cease Nay should you only assert that the motion of the parts of the Universe the Earth Planets Sun and Stars is circular and therefore they move Eternally the consequence would be very false And this opinion is more rationally maintained by some modern Theists who embrace the Corpernican and Cartesian Hypothesis But first it will not be granted that all the parts of the Universe do move in a circle for 't is plain that many of them move in an Ellipsis and Comets in a Parabola But secondly though they did move circularly they could not naturally move infinitely Phil. But give me leave to interupt you before you go any further I thought you had been too much a Philosopher to deny that a thing once in motion without impediment would move infinitely I know a Stone or an Arrow cannot move on infinitely because of the renitency of a gross Medium which hinders it but what should hinder the Earth the Sun or any one of the Planets from doing so Cred. The thing which you take for granted Motion of Bodies in contiguity with Bodies not Infinite that a thing once in motion without external impediment will always move will remain a Question 'till we know what motion is which we never shall Indeed I will not absolutely deny that a Body once moving in a vacuum would ever cease But this I will deny that a body moving in contiguity with other Bodies can naturally and of it self move infinitely Now this Earth of ours as all the other Planets and Stars move or swim in the liquid Aether which how fine and subtile soever it be is still a Body 'T is needless to go to prove the reality of this fluid Body because not to mention the explosion and crepitancy of nitro-sulphureous Bodies Accension and Fermentation c. the communication of Light from the remotest Stars do necessarily infer it for go upon whatever Hypothesis you will to explain Illumination by you must agree upon such an Intermediate Body to convey it in But it is most probable that Light is nothing else but this Intermediate Body or the Aether the Trepidation of which arising from the Original Luminous Body and communicated from one particle to another all along the space strikes at last upon the Organ and makes in us the Idea of what we call Light Now since this is a Body it has the Property of Body and that is Impenetrability and consequently Resistability and whatsoever resists another Body in Motion either changes the term of its Motion and returns it back again or else absorbs part of its Motion both which are inconsistent with an equable Eternal Motion Now since the Earth and every Planet moves in the Aether the Aether must some way or other retard the motion of it For since it is not of solidity enough to drive the Earth back it must by continual though little impulses weaken its Motion and therefore the Motion of the Earth can never be Eternal It will not avail to say that these checks or impulses of this fine matter are but small and insignificant for though they be never so small they will in an infinity of time perfectly absorb the whole Motion of the Earth or any other Planets and leave them at last dead moveless heaps of matter So that such a circular motion is not naturally Eternal nay that it is of any very long continuance it must be beholding to the conservative Providence of God which we can give no natural Reason for Sphericalness does not infer Infinity of Duration 2. Neither does a circular Figure contribute to the Duration of the Substance or the Bulk of the World Indeed in a hurly-burly of matter the jagged angular pieces are more apt to be broken and their parts knocked off than the round ones all whose parts are equally supported But the case is otherways in matter regularly modelled and where the motion is methodically terminated For we see that an Apple or an Orange is much sooner corrupted than a Flint and yet generally the one is far more circular than the other Phil. Indeed this is plausible Talk but though this you have said should be sufficient to overthrow the Arguments I have urged for the Eternity of the World yet it is no sufficient Proof that the World is not Eternal for there may be better Arguments than these I have produced to establish this Opinion or if there were not I should expect to hear something from you to prove it to be otherways For we find the World as it is and we are like so to leave it so that we must conclude it always was such until we see good reason to think the contrary Therefore the Proof Sir lies on your side and pray let us see if you can defend your Opinion better than I have done mine Cred. You should not miscal that my Opinion which is my Faith Arguments against the Eternity of the World but that shall break no squares between us I will endeavour to defend this as well as I can by those Arguments which together with God's Grace confirm me in it You must not Sir expect I should produce all those Arguments which are urged by Divines and Philosophers upon this subject I shall only bring some few choice ones which seem to have most weight and solidity And Arg. I. From the nature of Petrification 1st I shall prove the World is not Eternal from the nature of Petrification or the Growth of Stones and other Osseous Substances It is granted by all that Stones do grow and Philosophers have made it clear that the way of their Augmentation is by the concretion of saline particles which according to their commixture with more or less terreous matter make them either Fine as
this was the sum and acme of the Hieraglyphical way of writing Now this was a way of writing very troublesome and uncertain for the figures and marks must needs be very numerous and yet not represent one quarter of the words in a Language and therefore consequently very difficult to be unlocked The only way therefore to get rid of this trouble was to invent a few marks which might represent all manner of words And this was not very difficult to be attempted by those who had made any Observation upon the nature of words For such could easily determine that although words were never so numerous yet the Elementary parts which did compose them were but few They might soon perceive that all words were but four or five sounds diversly modulated by the Organs of the Mouth and Throat The five Vowels are far easier to be distinguished than the notes in Musick and the Consonants are not much more difficult In the word A-mo any one way perceive the first Syllable is only a clear plain sound of the Breath through the Mouth and mo is only a hollow sound modulated by the Lips Amor is a sound made by the same Organs with a regurgitation of the last Vocal sound to the Throat From hence an ingenious person may observe that by the modulation of these sounds fourteen or fifteen ways by the repeating or transposing them all manner of words are made And then he may very well conclude when he has sufficiently distinguished these sounds and modulations that by applying particular Marks or Letters to each of these he may represent all manner of words or write what he will with those few Characters And I doubt not but this or something very like was the reasoning of that admirable Person who first thought upon this noble Art Indeed it is far easier to run along with this thread of Thought after the Invention than before but to say that amongst so many Millions of Ingenious Men in millions of Ages no one should ever have reasoned after this manner or have prosecuted this hint successfully is a thing so very incredible that we Christians have not Faith to believe And this is all I have to say to you about the Eternity of the World so that now I am ready for your other exceptions if you have no more to reply upon this Head Phil. I think we have bandied this subject about long enough and I thank you kindly for your Arguments which as you have urged them have had that force upon me as to make me abandon my former Opinion of the World's Eternity which indeed I never before thought so absurd as you have made it But still my dear Friend I have some dregs of a Doubt behind whether it may not be many thousand of years or perhaps Ages older than you look upon it to be if you go upon the Mosaical account For if we look into the ancient computations of other Nations besides the Jews we shall find prodigious accounts of Time For Scaliger in his Book de Emendat Temp. says that then A. D. 1594. O. R. p. 226. the Chineses reckoned the World to have been eight hundred eightscore thousand and seventy three years old and the * Id. 182. Bramins of Gauzrat said that in the years 1639. there had passed 326669 Ages To this if we add the excessive computations of the Egyptians and Chaldaeans and the Inscriptions of Ancient Marbles in some ancient Language which is now forgot we cannot in any probability allot the World so late an Original as the Mosaical account does Cred. The Argument I urged before from the Increase of Mankind is good against these excessive Computations as it is against the Eternity of the World Excessive Computations no Argument of the Eternity of the World for granting the World so old as is here pretended it would have been over-peopled long before now as much as it would have been in an Eternity So that if you allow the Cogency of the Argument in one case you must likewise in the other But besides the pure assertions of Nations as to their Antiquity without good History to support them have always been very little regarded because it has been a constant Vanity in all Nations to appear as old as they could Hence the Inhabitants of every Country endeavoured what they were able to be esteemed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Indigenae born out of their own ground or perpetual Inhabitants of it And with how great a Zeal Nations have carried this concern we may make an Estimate of by that pleasant contention of the Scythians and Aegyptians in the second Book of Justin As for the Aegyptians Diodorus Siculus who lived among them interprets their vast accounts of time by Months or Lunary years and so may the other be esteemed if there be any truth in them at all As for your old Inscriptions such as that which they tell us is to be seen at Caxumo in Aethiopia that is easily to be accounted for by the great alteration of Kingdoms and Languages For if the Romans after a few hundred years could hardly read or understand their old Laws what more can we expect from a few Barbarous Africans shut up from the rest of the World Of the Mosaick Account of the Creation Phil. Well Sir I shall trouble you no more upon this Head which has already taken up too great a part of our Discourse But I would fain see how you will get over our Objections against the Mosaick History of the Creation which your Bibles begin with For it seems to me to be such a Fardel of Unphilosophical contradictious talk as is fit only for the Chimney Corner instead of Witches and Apparitions One would expect that when an inspired Prophet should go about to give an account of the Origin of things he should do it in a noble Philosophick manner as Virgil tells us of old Silenus Vti per inane coacta Semina terrarum animaeque marisque fuissent Et liquidi simul ignis ut his exordia primis Omnia ipse tener mundi concreverit orbis c. Ecl. 6. Shews how the Earth By Atoms meeting in the Void had Birth What form'd the Soul and what the Ocean made And how the liquid Flames a Being had From whence all these their native Forms had bore And how the tender Globe was crusted o'er But instead of this he only Magisterially tells us things were so which any thinking Man that does not suffer every thing to pass upon him is assured of the contrary of For though your Arguments have convinced me of a temporary production of the World and that God some time or other perhaps not many thousand years ago did make it yet I can never believe it was made in that sort he would have it For he makes the whole Universe as well as this World or Earth of ours to be made at the same time as if those prodigious Bodies of
Adamants or Course as Pebbles and Free-Stone Now by experience we find it that these concretions are so strangely durable that hardly any time is able to dissipate and dissolve them for the Marbles in the Great Pyramid in Egypt which lie inwards and are not exposed to the washings of the Rains and the frettings of the nitrous Air are not in the least decayed for all they have stood there so many thousand years Now if Stones do continually increase and there be no sensible Decay of them upon supposition that the World has continued from Eternity the whole World would be turn'd by this time into one Massy Rock by this Eternal Petrification for many Ages ago the Earth would have been incultivable at least Men must have made use of Crows and Mattocks instead of Ploughs And we may further observe the inclination of the Earth to Petrification in places uninhabited or dispeopled as particularly in Palestine which formerly was a place luxuriantly fruitful but since by the Ravage of the Romans and the Turks the Inhabitants are so much thinned the Ground is grown stony and Barren for want of Cultivation I say for want of Cultivation for Tillage does macerate and break the Stony Earth again into a fine and kind soil which is fit for vegetation and therefore in these Cultivated parts of the World we are not so sensible of the increasing Petrification as we are in the uncultivated ones Besides I am apt to fansie that the subsidency of the Sea in most parts of the World is in some measure owing to the employing a great part of its saline Particles in the production of Stones which are partly concreted out of them for these thin salts which are from thence drawn up with the Mists and Rains are the principles of Petrification Now this Argument may be further improved if we consider the Duration of Osseous and Testaceous substances far exceeding the time of their Production The Bones of Animals are produced in a little time and are not dissolved in a very great one The shells of Oisters Mussels c. are concreted in one Year and yet last many thousands as appears by those Beds of shells we find in the Tops of Hills which have lain there at least ever since the Deluge So that to any Inquisitive Man it is plain that Nature is every day more and more over-taking her self and as it were treading upon her own heels For if the World had continued an Infinity of time we should have been all over-run with these Osseous and Conchous substances and no matter left among us proper for Vegetation And indeed we cannot but observe a kind of a Parsimony in Nature as if she was afraid of this by the speedy corruption and resolution of most Animals and Vegetables by a natural principle which we generally call Fermentation For there is an active spirituous Matter lodged in the composition of Plants Flowers Flesh c. which after the vital Principle is gone does by an agil internal motion shatter the compages in pieces that Nature may make use of the parts again for another Work just as Printers are used to knock their Letters asunder when the Sheet is wrought off Now unless Nature was afraid of wanting a sufficient stock of this fine matter and being reduced to the saxeous and unpliable which she sees every day to grow upon her she cannot be supposed to make such precipitate hast in the dissolution of her former Productions especially when Animals and Vegetables are so inconsiderable a part of the bulk of the Earth I do not say that this encrease of saxeous matter is any great inconvenience to the Earth already or ever shall be if it continues but some few thousand years more or that this is any imperfection in this great Work of the Deity for it is well enough contrived for a World of some thousand years Duration but not for an Eternal one the World will keep very well in repair for so short a time and therefore God Almighty does not see sufficient reasons to amend these small decays just as we when we have but a short time in a House or Estate we take little care to repair it if it be like to last well enough out our time Phil. Very Philosophick Divinity what is your next Argument Cred. Arg. II. From the sinking of Hills My next Argument I shall draw from the subsidency of Hills and the daily landing up the Sea which are things inconsistent with the Eternity of the World For if the World has been from all Eternity there could no where have been found such a thing as a Hill for millions of Ages ago the highest Hills would have been all washed down into the Sea and the Earth would have been reduced to an absolute Level so that the Waters would have totally overflowed it and rendered it unhabitable That the Hills are continually a sinking being washed down by the Rains and oftentimes vast Rocky parts of them tumbled into the Vales by Storms is undeniable to those that have seen the many great Stones which lie at the Bottoms of Hills in Wales and Switzerland to those that have observed some parts of the Walls of old Rome to lie thirty or forty foot under ground and other higher parts of the City as the Capitol to have their foundations wholly extant above ground and at the bottom of the same Mountain the Triumphal Arch of Septimius almost wholly overwhelmed in the Earth Again it is plain by observation that the Tops of many Towers of Churches have been seen of late from some places which they have formerly been hid from by the interposition of an high Hill which since it has been partly washed down by the Rains has discovered the Steeple which for some Ages before lay hid nay we can hardly see any old building of but an hundred Years standing that is built in low ground but we may observe the foundations to lie much deeper than they were at first laid which can be nothing but the Earth washed from the Hills and lodged there So that we must needs grant that the World is so far from having continued an Eternity of time or being like to continue so that it is every day more and more hastening to its ruin by an inundation if it had been Eternal long ago the Hills would have been all sunk into the Valleys the subsiding Earth would have choaked up the very Channels of the Seas so that the whole World would have been one circumfused Ocean or at least a noisom uninhabitable Marsh To say this would be millions of Ages coming to pass is nothing for the longest time bears no proportion to Eternity if a Dish of Water only once in a thousand years were thrown upon Mount Caucasus so as to come down just dirty in an Eternity of time it would have fetched done all that Prodigious Mountain and laid it as plain as a Bowling-Green Now this one Argument is
your Hypothesis Sir I believe the Generation like the Age and stature of Mankind is governed by a steddy unalterable Law and is not to be turn'd about to go either fast or slow like a Dukes-Place Clock I find all of you when you have but a new Hypothesis to advance will take Nature as well as your Bibles by the Nose and lead them which way you please to serve a turn Cred. This is not Sir an empty Hypothesis but a necessary Truth to confute the Calumnies of Unbelievers against the Mosaical Books This proved by Scripture and Reason which is not only consonant to the tenour of those Writings themselves but to experience and good reasoning There was a peculiar Blessing of Increase given to those first Ages after the Flood God Blessed Noah and his Sons and said unto them be Fruitful and Multiply and Replenish the Earth Gen. 9.1 And therefore we Christians who acknowledge the Authority of Divine Writ are bound to believe this blessing took effect Besides this is agreeable to all the reason in the World that the first Ages should be most prolifick the World being to be stocked by a few Persons For the World lay wast till there were a considerable number of Inhabitants born to cultivate it Men wanted sufficient Associates and Assistants and the benefit of mutual kindnesses and Artifices but when Mankind arrived to a competent frequency when the Earth was divided into distinct Proprieties and Men were of sufficient number to be serviceable to one another there was not such need of a multitudinous Production as was before and therefore as the World was more Peopled the Increase did proportionably slacken Besides if the World had kept on its former Increase without abatement the Earth must have been over-stocked before this time or at least before the time which God had allotted for it Your instances of Famines Wars and Deluges are only assertions without proof and therefore I shall forbear speaking to them especially since we find they have done no great mischief to the increase of Mankind as far as History goes Phil. Have you any thing further to urge upon this point Cred. Arg. IV. From History and the late Invention of Arts. Yes Sir The late Invention of Arts and the shortness of the History of the World are invincible Arguments against its Eternity If the World was from Eternity you must needs make them an Eternal Race of the most stupid Blockheads imaginable without the least dram almost of Wit or Contrivance or indeed common Sense and that none of these qualifications ever were known in the World till within these two or three thousand years last past For there is hardly any useful Art or Science but we know its Original and Progress and its first Inventer or at least its first Introducer into such a part of the World which were absolutely impossible to do if there had been Eternal Inhabitants there For who can imagine that amongst an infinity of Rational Men after so many Millions of hints and opportunities none should before these last Ages have lighted upon those ordinary Arts which it was so uneasy to be without and were so easy and apposite to be found Could the World or at least Greece be from all Eternity without the common Tools of the Carpenter the Saw the Augre the Plain and the Plumb Line till Daedalus had the happiness to invent them Did Mankind for ever live upon Roots and Herbs till Ceres or which is all one the Aegyptian Isis found out the sowing Wheat and Barly How could they be strangers to such easy Inventions as those of Wine and Honey till Bacchus shew'd them to the World Should no one know how to cut and polish Stone till Cadmus taught it How should the Art of Dialling be so late found out to mention nothing of Clocks and Watches The Romans had not so much as a Sun-Dial till the second Punick War and when they had one they were forced to make use of that alone Plin. Nat. Hist Lib. 7. Cap. 60. being placed in the Forum for a hundred and one years although Pliny tells us it never went right all the time What a sad shift was poor King Alfred put to to measure the Hours by the burning of a Candle marked into twelve parts Spelman in Vit. Alfr. and to be forced to invent the Lanthorn to secure it from the Wind of the Windows because Glasing was not then in use I shall not trouble you with the Invention of Guns Printing c. for to be short if the World be Eternal as you pretend to be sure most of our Arts would have an higher Original than you see they have but it is monstrously incredible that Mankind should have continued so many millions of Ages and never found out any thing useful to themselves but only in these latter times Then as to the second part of the Argument who can imagine if the World was Eternal that we should have no History above 3000 years standing but that all the remarkable Acts of so many millions of Ages should be buried in Eternal Oblivion and not the least memoirs in History concerning them What unhappy Men were those Eternal Inhabitants to have all their actions forgot whilst History is crowed up with so many minute inconfiderable Actions which have been done in a few Ages last past How should it come to pass that only in so many Myriads of Ages Greece it self should have afforded us nothing of History but a little Poetick Banter 'till the time of Herodotus and Thucydides That Egypt the School of Greece not long before knew nothing but a silly Hyperbolical Chronology and some Mystical Hieroglyphicks This is so strangely inconsistent with your pretended Eternity of the World that it affords most evident marks of the lateness of it Phil. Your Argument from the late Invention of vulgar Arts is not so conclusive as you would make it For those Arts which are supposed to be invented in these last times were in all probability only revived after a long time of disuse or they might have several times been lost and as many times re-invented Just as Painting in Glass has been lost for an Age or two and now is by some Artificers as is reported regained in its ancient perfection So we have lost the Art of making Napkins which would burn off their Soil in the Fire instead of washing made of the famous Asbestos mentioned by Pliny Lib. 19. Cap. 1. We know nothing of the Art of making Glass malleable which was invented in Tiberius his time mentioned by the same Author Lib. 36. Cap. 26. Therefore when they tell us of the Inventions of Cadmus and Ceres and Daedalus we must esteem them only as the Retrievers of some former although long disused Invention As for your History-Argument it is true Lucretius has bestowed some handsome Verses upon it Praeterea si nulla fuit genitalis origo Terrarum Coeli
of them for tho' we do not know it God may But perhaps there may be another sense of the words than what is usually apprehended And God made the Firmament and divided the Waters which were under the Firmament from the Waters which were above the Firmament v. 7. Now by the Firmament is generally and I think very well understood the Atmosphere of the Earth or the Regions of the Air. All the difficulty is to find out what these Coelestial Water or Waters above the Air be Now there is no need to seek out Pools in the Empyreum if we can find Waters nigher home Then tell me Sir why may not the Waters which belong to each Planet be these Waters above the Firmament That the Moon has Waters analogous to our Seas is demonstrable from the diverse Reflexion of Light from her different parts nay from the very shape of Seas and Islands we observe in her and that the other Planets have the same is highly probable from their similitude to one another Now I suppose that before the Work of the second Day all this Planetary Water lay undistinguishably dispersed throughout the Expansum and together with the Aether made up that Pellucid Globe which was left by the secession of the opake and terreous parts that subsided to the seven respective Centres and formed the Bodies of the Planets The work therefore of the second Day was to make a Division of these Waters to distribute them in proper proportions to the several Planets and in obedience to God's command all the Aqueous parts of the Great Pellucid subsided towards the Centres of the Planets and were circumfused about their Globes Thus the Expansum was cleared off a second time by the subsidency of the Aqueous and uninflammable parts and left the Pellucid to consist of a still finer and purer substance as you see described in the Figure III. Now this subsidency of the Aqueous parts to the different Centres Moses calls dividing the Waters under the Firmament from the Waters which are above the Firmament The Waters under the Firmament are the Waters of the Earth the Waters above the Firmament are those of the Moon and other Planets which since the second days work are distinguished but lay confusedly dispersed in the Expansum before Phil. I protest Sir I am very well pleased with this Explication of yours this has engaged me to have a better Opinion of the Mosaick Hypothesis than ever I had in my Life for it now seems to have something of Reason and Philosophy in it But still there seem to be some Difficulties in this third days Work For it is not easy to conceive how all the Channels of the Seas should be hollowed out in one days time or what should be done with the Earth which was digged out of those hollows O. R. P. It should seem to require more than one days time for the Waters which covered the most inland Countries to run off from thence into those Oceanal Channels Pray Sir how do you get over these Difficulties Cred. This is Sir The Seas easily formed in one Day in Scirpo nodum quaerere to raise doubts where there is not the least appearance of any For what a mighty difficulty is it for God Almighty to hollow out the Channels of the Seas in one Day If you and I were to get Workmen to do it in such a time it would be a very difficult Enterprize But for God-Almighty to do that in four and twenty Hours time by an Almighty Power which he might if he had pleased have done in an instant is such a wonder as no wise man should be startled at You see here this little bit of Earth which I take out of this border I can in a minutes time mould it into what form I will I can make it round or oval convex or hollow or how I please and may not we very well suppose that God-Almighty might in as little time have formed Earth into what Figure he pleased The Earth was then very flexible its parts being not then setled into its present hardness and therefore might easily be moulded into any Figure whatsoever But to wonder how God could bring the Waters which covered the Inland Countries in one days time into the Channel of the Sea is to me very strange For why should God in his Creation be tied to the dull sluggish motion of his Creatures since Motion is demonstrated to be infinitely fast or slow as God pleases And why should we oblige him in his works to any determinate degree of it We see the Waters move just such a pace now and therefore God must necessarily forsooth wait their motions and protract the time of his Creation because of that This I am sure is something of the Philosophy of a Country-man as you call it This is a true Plebeian Hypothesis and something of Kin to that of Horace Rusticus expectat dum labitur amnis at ille Labitur labetur in omne volubilis aevum Phil. Pray Sir have a care of insulting for you are not got so clear off from this days Work yet I am afraid you will have a deadly rub in your way when I shall ask you if it be not a little inconsistent in the Mosaick Philosophy to make the Trees and Herbs before the Sun Upon this Hypothesis we may very well expect to find Orange Trees and Melons in Greenland when all manner of Plants could grow where there never had been any Sun at all Your Prophet had been a better Botanist if he had but contriv'd to have post-poned his Herbage for one day at least for then the Sun might have brought them out thick and threefold but for this cold dark watry ground to be so prodigiously prolifick is so strangely unnatural that methinks you should be ashamed to think of it Cred. I wonder Sir Trees and Plants might easily grow before the Sun was made you should expect or talk of nature in the Creation for God was then producing nature and not acting according to it He was then forming those Laws and Methods of Nature but he could not be supposed to act by them before he had formed them But nevertheless what unnaturalness I pray was there in creating Plants before the Sun If they had been created some years before it there would have been something in the Objection but all this time was but one poor day Now few Plants are so tender but they will live as long a time as that without either Sun or Water or Earth But these being formed in the Earth the third day cannot be supposed to have died before the fourth when the Sun began to shine upon them But I cannot imagine what need there should be of the Sun for the Creation of Plants Indeed there is very great need of it in the natural production of them to open the Fibres to elevate the Juices to unfold the Coats and Leaves of the Embryon Plant
in the seed But here were no precedent Coats and Leaves to be unfolded for God then formed the Plants immediately out of the common Matter so that the seed was the production of those first Plants and not the Parent of them And God said let the Earth bring forth Grass and Herb yielding seed after his kind and the Tree yielding Fruit whose seed was in it self after his kind Gen. 1.12 But granting a vital warmth should be requisite for the production of these primitive Plants it could not be wanting in the new Earth For the Terreous parts of matter having been agitated in the Chaos by such a rapid motion and having subsided to the Center from such distant parts of the Expansum with so great a Celerity they must needs have contracted an extraordinary heat much more than is requisite for the ordinary Production of Plants nay as we may probably conjecture a Heat nigh to an Inflammation Which perhaps might have been the Cause why the Waters were circumfused first round the Globe when God might as easily have made them at first to settle into their Channels but only to temper the heat of the Agitated Particles Now Sir if one was to measure the method of the Creation by the Vertuoso's Rules methinks we should never have any recourse to the Sun for the Production of Plants for he produces them at a slow tedious rate the Herbs once in a year and the Trees in a much longer time But here was to be a Plantation of the whole World in half a days time and therefore there was need of a more speedy Production Now the new Earth warm yet by its late agitation and impregnated with the moisture of the circumfused Waters would make a kind of a warm Bed to speak in your way for the hasty Production of Plants and might raise up all the Herbage of the World as quick as Jonah's Gourd or a Chymical Sallad So that I should rather think the Gentlemen of your way instead of finding fault with Moses for a Plebeian Philosopher should admire him for an excellent Vertuoso Phil. Now I have something to say to the fourth days work according to Moses his Hypothesis the Deity must bestir himself this day more than ordinary For Sun Moon and Stars are a very considerable job of work for one day especially when the Furniture of our poor Earth took up so many Indeed you have handsomely removed the difficulty of the fixed Stars but then even each of those six Planets which remain would require as long a time for their Formation as this our Earth O R. p. 72. because they are of the same form and as we have reason to believe their Equipage is not very unlike Therefore I cannot be reconciled to your Prophet for crowding the Formation of all these into one day Besides I cannot see how the Relation of this days work agrees with the Explication in your Scheme For if the Planets were formed by the first secretion of matter upon the first day how can they be made the fourth The Expansum before this time seems to be drained of all matter but the Aether and therefore I am at a loss to find what the Sun could be made of This does to me seem something dark and mysterious and requires a little of your Art Credentius to clear it up Cred. This Objection Sir is a little complicated and therefore I shall answer to the parts of it distinctly 1. How the Planets are said to be made the fourth day Whereas you suppose that all the Planets were formed this fourth day and had all those Ornaments they are probably endowed with then bestowed on them this is more than can from Scripture be inferred It is not improbable that God Almighty wrought them all off one as soon as the other and that they grew on to perfection by the same degrees so that the work of each of them was going forwards from the first to the sixth day For all these Planets are so mutually linked to one another and are so much of the same piece that one cannot easily suppose the formation of either of them was distinct from that of another Now though the bulk of these Planets were formed before this day and in all probability some of their Ornamental Parts as perhaps their Seas and their Plants yet they are said to be made the fourth day because they are made the Moon and the Erratick Stars to us They were before only Invisible Globes but by the Light of the Sun which was this day Created they became Conspicuous and Reflected upon the Earth a bright shining Light which they borrowed from thence Thence they are very properly said to be made because though their substance was before yet they were not a Moon or Stars For the formal reason which does constitute a Moon is its reflexion of light in such constant vicissitudes its different Phases c. which is the notion the generality of Mankind frames of the Moon now this it had not till the fourth day and therefore is very properly said to be made For facere in the Latin Tongue has its derivation from novam faciem induere so that a thing is then said to be made when it has another appearance than it had before Neither is the original word gnasah which is used here much different For that signifies not only any new formation but any new use or outward appearance of a thing For sometimes it signifies to sacrifice as the Latin Verb facere so Exod 10.25 that we may make or sacrifice unto the Lord our God So Psal 66.15 I will make to thee an Ox with Goats Which is a much bolder Metaphor than that of Virgil Cum faciam vitulâ pro frugibus Now it is plain here that the sacrifice was made before only the new offering it up or dedicating it to a Religious use is termed making So Numbers the 9.10 it is termed making a Passover unto the Lord where only the Observation of a time already made is termed making So 1 King 12.32 Jeroboam is said to make the high places and Chap. 25.32 Ahab made a Grove Now God-Almighty had made those Hills and Groves before only those wicked Princes dedicated them to those Idolatrous uses The Planets therefore and especially the Moon are very properly said to be made this fourth day because they made their first appearance upon this day to the Earth they had then their first use put upon them of being Luminaries to this World Why Moses relates the distinct formation of the Earth alone 2. Although each of these Planets might take up as much time in its formation as our Earth yet Moses is not to be blamed for not relating distinctly the formation of them It is enough for his purpose to give an account exactly of the sublunary Creation and not to trouble the Peoples Heads with Astronomical niceties His business was to give them an account of their Original
never go down with me For Moses then seems to make the whole World to be stocked with one pair of Animals of each sort or to be sure he makes but one Man and one Woman to People all the Earth which is monstrously absurd For any common Observer of Nature may take notice how careful she is for the propagation of Kinds that she is rather guilty of a superfoetation than a Parsimony this way How many millions of Acorns doth one single Oak produce during the time of its standing any one of which is capable of renewing its Species Not to mention the Polypodium and such other super-abundantly fruitful Plants there is not an Apple or a Pear-Tree but what produces ten thousand times more Kernels than what is absolutely necessary And if the Hypothesis of Mr. Lewenhoeck be true as I never saw any good reason to the contrary that the Foetus is produced from an Animalcule in the sperm of the Male what myriads of these are produced every concoction Therefore whereas Nature is so over and above careful in the propagation of kinds when she is in a manner profuse in the production of Seeds that she may be sure to obviate all manner of Contingencies and Lets which could possibly happen how can we suppose that she acted by such contrary Methods in the first formation of things If there were but two of a sort created upon what miserable uncertainties did the perfection of the Universe depend If any one Male or Female had died before it had produced its kind there had been a species lost for ever Nay a Lion a Bear or a Wolf might have eaten up half a score of some Species for a Breakfast If Adam had been as much a Villain as his Son Cain he might have served his Wife as Cain did his Brother They might each or both have been devoured by some wild Beast they might have fell from a Tree or a Precipice or into a River they might have been Poisoned by some venomous Plant or Animal or lastly Eve might have died in her first Child-Birth Now if any of these things had happened the Deity had been put to the trouble of a new Creation Most certainly therefore since God-Almighty does take such abundant care for the propagation of each single Individuum he would never leave a whole species to such a number of Casualties If such a number of superfluous Animalcules are produced for the formation of one Foetus when nature takes such mighty care to produce with the more certainty one single Effect how can we suppose that she should leave the whole human species liable to be destroyed by so many Accidents This is not at all reasonable Credentius let your Bibles say what they will Besides I cannot imagine how all the World should be Peopled by these two How could their Progeny get into America whose Inhabitants seem coaeval with the Land it self How could the Blacks and Whites have one common Parent They seem to be divers kinds of Men and a White can no more beget a Black than a Bull can beget a Boar. Pray Sir afford us a Cast of your subtilty to evade these Difficulties Cred. I confess Philologus there is in this Argument a Philosophical prettiness and that is all such as will take with some of the Vertuoso part of the World who prefer an Experiment to a Revelation but it does not so with me for I have learned to make my Philosophy strike sail to my Faith and to think that Omnipotency can do that which ordinary nature is at a loss for But as I have observed before you Philosophical Gentlemen do not argue justly when you argue from the ordinary and Conservative God acted by other Methods in the Creation than now to the Creative Power of God that God must have done so and so in the Formation of the World because he does so in the Conservation of it For the Reasons of both these are very different Then Omnipotence chiefly employ'd it self but here is the Province for Wisdom then God acted absolutely by an uncontroulable Power but now he has in some measure given the reins out of his own Hand he has in many degrees made over his Original Power to his Creatures and left it to the Determination of Free-Will and oftentimes to the lets and impediments of what we call Casual Events So that it was very wisely contrived of the Deity after the Alienation of this Original Power to be more abundantly cautious in the Production of Species when the Power of Production was delivered up to other hands Whilst God-Almighty made all things by his Absolute Creative Power his Almighty Fiat could not but produce a necessary Effect but when he delivered this over to second Causes which acted but weakly and sometimes corruptly there was then need that he should make more ample provision for the propagation of Species and for the prevention of miscarriages in their Production when the immediate causes were not Omnipotent To make this plainer yet to you by a familiar Instance You know Sir you have the happiness to be an exquisite Mathematician and particularly you understand the Art of Gunnery He then took an immediate care of the Species so as you can unless some extraordinary chance does intervene hit or come very nigh the mark you shall design by the discharge of a piece of Ordnance Now you being so excellent this way you would not perhaps provide for your self more than one single Ball for this purpose but if you was to order a young Practitioner or one perfectly ignorant of this Art to do this one that knew nothing of the Bore or the length of his Piece or the strength of his Powder one that could make no estimate of the distance or heighth of the object or the renitency of the Medium you must allow him a far larger quantity of Ball and Powder that he by random shots may effect that which you do at once by demonstration The application is easy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God is the Mathematician he in the first Creation of the World acted himself in lieu of nature till nature came to be setled and was able to shift for it self his Omnipotent Uncontroulable Power did not withdraw it self but continued with a particular over-ruling Providence to take care of the Species till such time as by their numbers they were able to encounter with extraordinary contingencies And this is evident from the great care God took of the first Pair of Mankind Adam and Eve by placing them before the Fall in a Garden so delicately adorned and afterwards by providing them Coats of Skins Gen. 3.21 Now when God-Almighty designed to take such particular care of the Archetypal Pair he might easily enough secure their productions from all casualties and stock the World as well by one pair as by ten thousand but when he thought fit to withdraw this peculiar Providence and leave Generation to
Tree was to make men long lived that were to eat of it and for this reason was called the Tree of Life I do not see how this one Tree had been sufficient for all the Progeny of Adam in case they had not sinned or however it would have been very inconvenient for men to have come from America to Eden for these Vivifical Apples All this looks very surprizing Credentius and is too much like a piece of the old Poetical Divinity Cred. It is true The Relation of the two Trees not ridiculous things look very strange and odd that are unusual which makes us we can hardly forbear laughing at an old Fashion after some time of disuse though we liked it well enough when it was common Now the State of Innocence and the lapsed State of Mankind being so very different we must suppose that there were some things consonant to the first State very disagreeable to our present one and this is but reasonable to imagine Now of a great number of these Moses has reckoned but a few amongst which are these Trees As for the Tree of Life I cannot imagine any thing more agreeable to such a State of Innocence Now a State of Innocence supposes Immortality for Death came by Sin and something was requisite to make men Immortal when their Bodies naturally were not so Indeed God might have done this by his immediate Almighty Power but he generally cooperates with second causes Now what fitter means can we suppose for the continual renovation of Mens Bodies without any manner of decay than the fruit of such a Tree If some Food of an extraordinary quality be requisite why not the Fruit of a Tree as well as the Flesh of an Animal as well as an Herb a Root or any thing else When God had designed that Mens Bodies should never yield to decay or Death methinks it was very reasonable for him to direct them to the eating a certain fruit of a Tree whose juice was of that spirituous nature as to impregnate their blood with an indefectible vigour and to keep them in a constant Youth without pain or disease or imbecillity 'till such time as he should translate them to a better World And this I take to be the use of the Tree of Life It is uncertain whether or no this Tree was but one single one and always to be continued in Eden if there had been no lapse it is most probable many of them would have been transplanted to other parts of the World as the innocent Off-spring had increased but when Mankind had sinned it is probable that God destroyed this species out of the World as being now grown useless and inconsistent with the Curse and Punishment of Man And this the Heathens seem to have some traditional notion of when they speak of the Nectar and Ambrosia which maintained the Immortality of their Gods and Moly which was the great Panacea celebrated by the Heathen Poets As for the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil it was I suppose called so not because it had a vertue to confer any such knowledge but because the Devil pretended in his Temptation of the Woman it had it receiving its name from that unfortunate Deception And tho' God calls it the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil before the Fall yet that is related by Moses by way of Anticipation as if I should say the Romans Encamped in Essex or Middlesex though neither of those places were then known by that name And as for that other place v. 22. Behold the Man is become as one of us to know good and evil I look upon that to be only a bitter Irony to upbraid Man with his foolish disobedience and disappointment Phil. I suppose you will hardly be able to get off so well with your four Rivers as you have done with your Two Trees I find here that your inspired Author was as bad at Geography as the Turks are at Chronology They have both a good will to their cause and therefore will garnish it out with all the fine things they ever heard of Thus the Turks when they would make King Solomon as brave a Man as they can make Alexander the Great the Master of his Horse and twenty other great Men Lacqueys and Foot-Boys to him And thus Moses when he would describe a curious Garden makes four of the greatest Rivers in the World to be in lieu of Canals in it He does not matter the great distance of place and the different sources of the Rivers but jumbles together all Asia and Africk O.R. p. 35 c. to make a pretty little Garden for Adam to dress Here is Tigris and Euphrates and Nilus and Ganges as the Interpreters explain them which have their Origin in this spot of ground so that it must reach at least from the Fountain of Nile i. e. from the Midland of Africa to India All this is very strange Credentius Cred. To this we answer Philologus Difficulties about the Rivers of Eden removed 1st It is not certain from the Mosaical Relation of what extent this Gan-Eden or Paradise was It might be for ought we know a very considerable part of the habitable Earth which the the Ante-diluvians were kept out of or at least were so for a considerable time Now if Eden was of so large a circumference it might afford an origin to several very distant Rivers So that Adam might only cultivate that part of it which he was first placed in 2ly It is likewise very uncertain what Rivers are meant by these Hebrew names As for the Interpreters they are so various in their Conjectures that it would be tedious to recount them It seems most probable to me that these Rivers are only some branches of the River Euphrates if so be the Channel of the River had a being before the Flood 3ly It can never be exactly known where these Rivers were because of the great alteration made in the World by the Deluge which has mightily altered or it may be obliterated their Course For I believe that at the Flood the mighty confluence of Waters over the Face of the Earth and the breaking open the Deep or Subterraneous Waters turned the Earth into something like its Chaotick 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or that Mud it was at the first Creation so that the Course of Rivers must be altered by the washing away their Banks and the choaking up their Channels And therefore it is in vain to seek for these Ante-diluvian Rivers in those Courses of Waters that trickle over the Earth now And therefore you do very ill to censure the Mosaical Writings because you cannot find those Rivers now a days which he speaks of before the Flood Phil. But by the way Sir if Moses describes these Rivers as they were before the Flood which you suppose to be different from what they are now this will render it a very idle and superfluous Description O.
sensible Creatures the ground can neither be innocent nor guilty it is neither capable of receiving a kindness nor an injury because it wants sense to perceive them Neither does it imply any absurdity that the Earth should be cursed for the Sin of Man for this is consonant to the general Opinion of Mankind in things of the like nature For the Ancient Heathen had not only their Piacula things accursed by way of transmutation of punishment and their Dies nefandi accursed times but even their Campi scelerati accursed Fields But your principal mistake is that you fancy this Curse of the Earth by God Almighty to be an effect of his Anger or a weak human-like Passion when it is only the result of a wise and equable Justice For we can never suppose so wise a Man as Moses to have such a silly notion of a Deity as this comes to to make him curse the Earth in an angry mood because Man had vexed him For his Cursing the ground was only a predent punishment of Man that had offended for it was Man that was to suffer by this Curse of it and not the ground it self The ground felt no harm by bringing forth Thorns and Thistles but Man was a sufficient sufferer by it when he by the sweat of his Brows was forced to keep it in an ordinary fertility and much inferior to its Paradisiacal Fruitfulness Phil. Such another odd kind of undecent Passion does your Jewish Legislator attribute to the Deity when he in the same fit of Anger Metamorphizes the poor Serpent because the Devil made use of his Body Besides I cannot imagine how that should be a punishment to the Serpent which seems to be natural to it O. R. p. for 't is as natural for a Serpent to creep as for a Man to walk And he might as well have made it a punishment for Man to stand bolt upright as for the Serpent to creep upon the ground But be this as it will and grant it a punishment for the Serpent to creep how did the poor Beast deserve such a Punishment How could it help or hinder the Possession of the Devil Or why should God be more angry at the Serpent so possessed than he was at the Demoniacks in the Gospel Cred. I find you are mightily concerned that no injustice should be offered to Brute Beasts when you do not care how much you do to this divine Writer and Prophet of God by exposing his Writings without any ground But I pray Nor the Curse of the Serpent what injustice was it to the Serpent to have his Form something altered from what it was before I am confident he was not able to distinguish whether it was altered or no for that would imply an intelligent nature to have contemplated his former state and to have compared it with his latter which it was impossible for the Serpent to have done But to receive a new shape which he did not know whether it was better or worse without any sensible pain or alteration to him and this too done by an Almighty Power to whom he ow'd his whole being and could claim nothing at his hands this is so far from being Injustice that it is Bounty still Besides Man being Lord of the Creation had a natural right over the Serpent and this change being design'd by God for Man's good and Instruction there was no more injustice in changing the Form of the Serpent for his sake than in suffering other Creatures to be slain for his food Nor lastly must we suppose that God Almighty was any ways offended at the Serpent because the Devil had possessed his Organs but the reason he worked this change in his Body was because it should remain as a Monument of the Unhappy Fall of God's Aversation to Sin and to deter men from the Commission of that which brought such Vengeance with it This was no proper punishment of the Serpent but only an Instructive Emblem to Mankind such as our Saviour's cursing of the Fig-Tree not to punish the Wood but to read the Disciples an Emblematical Lecture what they were to expect if they did not bring forth Fruits meet for Repentance Neither is it disagreeable to the reason of Mankind to have a proper punishment inflicted upon the Serpent for being the Instrument of this unhappy Miscarriage any more than it is when we destroy Knives and Swords and Beasts that have been Instrumental in any Man's murder As for the natural Reptility of the Serpent it is plain from this History it is false and we suppose the change to be from such a bright winged Saraph as was before mentioned to a mean creeping Snake Phil. Well! but what think you Credentius of the opening Adam's Eyes by the eating the Apple and his seeing himself naked which he knew not of before I protest this looks very strange For Blindness was but a very sorrowful Ingredient in the Paradisiacal state And if they could not have seen their Nakedness before O. R. yet methinks their other senses would have informed them Or if they had not I do not think they were any great losers by their Expulsion for their Loss of the Orchard was abundantly compensated by the use of their Eyes Cred. The phrase to open Eyes The meaning of their Eyes were opened among the Jews does not denote always a cure of Blindness as is frequent in the History of the Gospel but oftentimes Metaphorically does signify the sudden coming of any thing to a Man's knowledge by any way whatsoever Thus God is said to open the eyes of Balaam when the Angel represented himself in a bodily shape to him Num. 22.31 And thus the Disciples eyes were opened when they recollected that the person that had discoursed with them in the way to Emaus was the Lord. Not that these were blind before but because they came suddenly to know something which they were ignorant of before by some new surprizing illumination and clearing up as it were the Eyes of their understanding Thus our first Parents after the Fall presently came to find the irregular effects of their corrupted nature or what the Scripture here calls nakedness By which word according to the usual modesty of the Hebrew Tongue is understood all the irregular Appetites to Venereal pleasures which they were strangers to in their State of Innocence and began now at first to experience and were therefore asham'd of their foul Degeneracy and upon this account were desirous of Cloathing to hide those Irregularities from the sight of others Phil. But then this Explication Credentius makes this Pudor circa res venereas subsequent only to the Fall O.R. p. 43. whereas it is congenit to his nature and is not only implanted in Mankind but in other Animals which seem to have some kind of shame in such matters Cred. I think it can never be proved that irrational Creatures have any sense of shame in Venereal matters but the
Essences which Aristotle and some others before him did explain the Phaenomena of Nature by And indeed this Axiom was very conclusive against that Opinion for when by that Philosophy it should be asserted that a Room was enlightened by the Generation of the Form of Light or that Fire was extinguished by the corruption of the form of Fire it was very seasonably replied in the words of this Maxim Ex nihilo nil fit nothing is produced 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but from something which was before a thing is not produced by annihilation of the old Form and the Production of a new Substance which was not before out of nothing for the course of Nature allows of no such supernatural Productions all these Phaenomena are to be accounted for by the alteration of the Figure and Motion of the Parts and the different appearances they produce in the Mind of Man Intel. Syst Cap. 1. p. 30 c. And this Dr. Cudworth in his Intellectual System has proved at large to be the meaning of this Assertion of the Ancient Atomick Philosophers But then Sir be pleased to consider what this Axiom has to do to confront the Omnipotent Power of God in the first Creation unless it can be proved that it implies an absolute Impossibility for God to create any thing out of nothing which no one can reasonably assert Now no one can say it implies an absolute Impossibility for then such Impossibility must arise either from want of Power in God to do it or from some natural Repugnancy in the thing it self It cannot proceed from want of Power in God for he is the Origin of all Power and every thing that is possible to be done can be done by him To say the Impossibility arises from the part of the Subject is as incongruous For such Impossibility must be caused from a Power of resisting in that thing or from a Contradiction which the doing thereof would imply But there can be no Power of resisting in any thing which is able to resist the Divine Activity because that and all other Power came from Him which argues in Him a greater Power But as for the Subject of Creation that is Nothing and therefore that to be sure cannot give any Resistance There remains only to prove that it implies no Contradiction to produce something out of Nothing Indeed to be and not to be at the same time implies a Contradiction but to be and not to be at diverse times does not and the reason is obvious Because the Existence of a Thing in any one Instant does perfectly exclude all possibility of non-existence for that Instant but the not being of a Thing in any Instant does not exclude any possibility of its being afterward when God Almighty pleases Now it is so far from being a Contradiction for a Thing to be produced out of nothing by God-Almighty that we find it according to the Philosophy of some in some measure done even by finite Beings For they account Accidents a sort of Beings which are produced by Creatures themselves out of nothing by a kind of subordinate and delegated Creation which God has given them the Power of by Vertue of their Beings Thus the Mind produces Thought the Fire produces Heat the Sun produces Light which are all distinct from the Substances which produce them and yet are generated out of nothing But however both Thought and Light and Heat are real Beings and do properly Exist and are composed out of no Pre-existent Matter and therefore must be produced out of Nothing either by the immediate Power of God continually acting which is most reasonable or by a subordinate Power communicated to the Creature with its Being Now why is it not as easy for the Deity to produce Substance out of nothing by his Almighty Power as it is for a Creature to produce Accidents by his finite and limited One Or why could not God-Almighty produce all things out of nothing at first as well as to produce these Accidents Modes or Appearances every moment All the Difficulty which makes some Men unwilling to allow this power to God is because we do not see any Instance of this before our eyes being used only to Natural and Artificial Productions We see Blood produced out of Food and Flesh out of Blood we see the Juices of the Earth turned into Wood the Wood into Smoak and Flame whilst the matter remains the same after those so many alterations and therefore we conclude that no production or Corruption can be made any other way than this We experience that a Carpenter cannot build a Ship or a House without pre-existing materials and therefore we are apt sillily to conclude that God himself can do no more because we cannot conceive how he should do it or because he must do it by other Methods than those which we are used to But I pray is not this as unreasonable as for a blind Man to deny that any one can perceive Colours because he cannot possibly conceive how they should be distinguish'd And if there be other good Arguments to prove that God has Created the World out of nothing it is in vain to deny it because it is inconceiveable by us or contrary to the course of nature since the Creation Phil. Well! but what say you to Ocellus's second Argument Ocellus Luc. Tex 3. Oracl Reas p. 211. If the World be made or produced it must follow the Laws of other productions it must grow from worse to better from its infirm Estate to its 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Vigor and so decline to its old Age and Dissolution But we find that the World always was as it is now there has never been the least decay in i◠nor the least improvement of its perfection it always stands at the same stay and so always must continue Cred. Argum. II Ans To this Argument Sir be pleased to take this Answer 1st That it is a thing somewhat uncertain whether or no the World continues in the same state it was in at the beginning most learned Men for many Ages have been of the contrary opinion that it grows old and doth every day verge towards its final Destruction and Dr. Hackwell who wrote his Book of Providence about Threescore Years ago was the first Man that had the Boldness to encounter with the received opinion and he raised himself not a small number of Adversaries upon it But truly I am so far of that learned Mans opinion as not to think any very remarkable decay is to be found in the World for the Heavenly Bodies do observe the same motions and when we espie any difference between the Ancient and Modern Accounts it ought to be attributed to want of exactness in the old Calculations the Bodies of Men are of the same magnitude as is manifest by the Ancient measures of Digits Feet c. and their natural parts or ingeny seem not at all to be
conclusion in the World and therefore I am sure that any Argument which shall go about to prove a necessary Fatality is false I am sure I have a Liberty to walk or to sit and therefore to say these actions are but the necessary productions or emanations of the Deity is to say what I know to be false which will be so far from perswading a Man that it will only serve to enrage him And lastly this opinion contradicts the common-sence and experience of all Mankind For if these continual mutations which we behold in the World as Generations Corruptions c. are but the necessary Exhibitions of the Deity then they cannot be promoted or hindred by the interposition of any thing else the contrary of which is manifestly evident For how many Men are killed in Wars or Duels by the Ambition or Malice of others How many Animals as Sheep Hens have their Breed incouraged by Men and many as Wolves and Lyons diminished or destroy'd How many contribute to the Decrease of Mankind by a Voluntary Celibacy and how many towards the Increase of it by Marriage or Polygamy To say nothing of the Devastations made by God himself in Plagues Earthquakes Famines and the like So that these successive Generations are so far from being the necessary Effects of the Deity which he cannot alter himself that they are lyable to the alterations of thousands of his Creatures Such a Changeableness contrary to the Attributes of God Nor is this Opinion of yours less repugnant to the other Attributes of God his Impassibility his Goodness Wisdom c. we can never conceive a notion of a God that is subject to Passion or Pain or Sickness or Infirmity But if we make the World to be God and all us Creatures to be parts of him we must make him lyable to all these Weaknesses and Misfortunes God must be Sick and God must be Lame God must be Angry and Hungry and Thirsty when any poor Men or Beast are under these circumstances So it is impossible to think of a Deity without being Wise and Good But your notion of God will make him guilty of all the Folly and Wickedness in the World God must be circumvented and imposed upon when any designing Creatures put tricks upon their Fellows God must be guilty of all those sillinesses and inadvertencies which foolish Men commit and wise Men deride Besides this notion will charge all the wickedness in the World upon God it will not only make him to lend assistance but himself to commit all the Perjuries Rapines Whoredoms and other Lewdnesses which 't is a shame to mention For if God be every thing then God does every thing not only those vertuous Actions which are the subject of History and Panegyrick but also those wicked and infamous ones which are known only in Jails and Stews But to attribute these things to God which the most profligate Villains themselves are ashamed of is a Blasphemy so loud and daring that it shocks humane nature but to think of it sets a Man a trembling but to hear such an impious assertion tho' he should not consider all the horrid consequences of it Phil. Pray Sir don't grow too warm upon a Point of Philosophy for I have a great deal more of it for you yet Have a care you do not fret your self too much upon the first Heat for if you do I foretel I shall win the Prize Well! but farther says your old Philosopher the circular Figure and Motion of the World do demonstrate its Eternity for what is compos'd of a Spherical Figure is on every side equal and consequently without beginning and ending and if the motion be circular it is consequently * It is very comical to observe how Mr. Blount has translated these two words in Ocellus He translates 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Stable but a Stable Motion is a Bull for 't is as much as to say a Motion which stands or is at rest He renders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by never shifting its former place But who ever said Motion was in a place before for Place is only an affection of Body and 't is as incongruous to say motion changes its place as to say a white or a green motion But besides 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 can never signify never shifting place but that which has no Exit or End 'T is a Metaphor taken from the windings in a Wood which Strangers go round and round in and think they can never find their way out Which is a very apt Simile of an Eternal Motion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 never to be gone through and never to have an end Here is Logick for you Cred. Arg. V Answ Logick Sir no 't is very poor Sophistry 't is meer quibbling upon Words For what tolerable consequence is there in your first Argument from the Spherical Figure of the World Because a Sphere is without beginning or ending therefore the World which is Spherical is so too Does not every one know when we say a Sphere is without beginning or ending we mean one thing and when we say God or the World is so we mean another The one we say has no beginning or end in respect of Mensuration It is not of a long Figure the Extremities of which we call the two ends at one of which we begin when we measure it but the parts thereof lie equally distant from the Centre it is neither long nor broad and if you measure it there is no assign'd part or end to begin at but you may begin your computation where you please and so in this sence we say it has no beginning or end But when we say God or the World has no beginning nor end we mean it in respect of Duration that there shall be no period of Time to bound their Being or their Nature or Existence never had a beginning which is quite another thing But granting you mean by this that the Spherical Figure of the World does infer the perpetuity of its motion or duration the Argument is weak on all sides No constat of the Sphericalness of the Vniverse For 1st that the Figure of the World is Spherical is more than most will allow or indeed any Body but those who stick to the old Mumpsimus of Solid Orbs. The Figure of the World or Universe may be square or oval or any other Figure for ought that we know as well as Spherical The Figure indeed of so much of it as appears to us is a Sphere but that is no more Argument that it is so than that the Moon is a white yellowish shining Plate about the bigness of the Crown of ones Hat when she is at full We see in the Day time that Arch of ragged Clouds hovering over our Heads equally to the Eye distant from the Superficies of the Earth which with the refracted Rays of Light that with a blewish Colour fill up the Interstices seem to form the half