on Philostratus p. 84. speaking of Cato's Sarcasm in Tully's second Book De Divinatione with Respect to the Pagan Southsayers and blaming his prophane Acquaintance he seems to be of another mind Very miserable and sad must the condition of Mankind be if there be no certain Rules whereby Salvation may be obtained Yet such is the Condition into which Deism would bring us although we live according to its Principles Pag. 118. Seneca hath not wanted Advocates for the assertion of his Opinion nay even such who would pretend to justifie it out of the very Scriptures themselves as when Solomon says Eccl. 7.12 Then shall the Dust return to Dust as it was and the Spirit to God that gave it And Eccles 3.20 21. All go to the same place all are of Dust and all turn to Dust again who knoweth the Spirit of Man that goeth upward and the Spirit of the Beast that goeth downward to the Earth Again Eccles 3.19 That which befalleth the Sons of Men befalleth Beasts even one thing befalleth them both as the one dieth so doth the other yea they have all one Breath so that a Man hath no preeminence above a Beast ANSWER Our Author takes it for granted that Seneca was of opinion that the Soul was mortal the contrary hath been proved be to questionable These places of holy Scripture have been made use of by Mr. Hobbs in his Leviathan p. 303. The great Art in managing this Argument consists in confounding the Sense of those several places of holy Scripture which are to be interpreted a part from each other as is observed in Hobbs his Creed p. 223. the Preacher in this Book sets forth the beginning progress and ripeness of his Disquisition concerning the Happiness of man Wherefore in the beginning of his Enquiry he setteth down his raw Apprehensions and he relateth in the first and second Chapters how he once thought Folly equal with Wisdom and that there was nothing better than to eat and drink and what adventures and tryals he made towards the better understanding of what was good for the Sons of Men. In his third Chapter he declareth how full of Mystery he found the works of God ver 11. and how little was manifest especially to sensual Men of the future State But in the 11 and 12 Chapters wherein he declareth his advanced judgment and calleth Men off from the World to the thoughts of the day of Account and to the early Remembrance of their Creatour to the Fear of God and the Observance of his Commands He layeth it down as a positive Doctrine a Doctrine apt to promote such Observance Fear and Remembrance which at first was delivered by him as a Problem or as the mistake of worldly Men that when the wheel shall be broken at the cistern and the circle of our Blood utterly disturbed then the Dust shall return to the Earth as it was and the Spirit shall return to God who gave it This is a full and satisfactory Answer to the Advocates of this Opinion yet we might say wiâ—h good Reason and good Authority That Solomon in the forecited places personates the Atheist Raimundus Pug. Fid. p. 155. What our Author affirms p. 119 concerning some Men who have misapply'd those forecited places of holy Writ to the Anima Mundi of Pythagoras and which hath been revived by Averroes and Avicenna And to what end p. 125. he refers his Lordship the Right Honourable Strephon to Pomponatius and especially to Cardan is here to be considered because we may see from hence in what Authors our Deists are conversant and how dangerous those Authors are Averroes as Richer asserts lib. 4. Hist Gen. Concil par ult p. 22. was condemned in the Lateran Council under Leo the X. because he held That there was one only Soul in all Men which is the Universal Soul the Anima Mundi Whereas 't is certain that every Man hath a particular Soul of his own So that this Doctrine of Averroes tends to the subversion of all Religion and Piety a Doctrine fit for the Devil For as Cardan in his 19. Book de Subtil tells us the tallest of the Daemons that talked with his Father Palam Averroistam se profitebatur told him plainly That he was an Averroist Pomponatius as Dr. More lib. 3. de Immortal anim c. 16. informs us was of opinion that there were not as many particular Souls as Men. He acknowledged the Wisdom and Miracles of Christ but referr'd all to the Stars This was the Petrus Pomponatius who was as Richer says in the forecited place Preceptor to Pope Leo the X. and by whose command he writ the Book De Immortalitate Animae which was then generally read as Books of that nature commonly are but thanks be to God such Books are forbidden amongst us by Proclamation Cardan to whom he especially refers the most Ingenious Strephon p. 117. affirms the Law of Christ to be from Jupiter and Mercury that Jupiter being in the Ascendant was the cause of his so soon disputing with the Doctors in the Temple that it was Saturn tendred him sad whence Josephus took occasion to say Visus est saepius flere ridere nunquam That Jupiter meeting with Venus was the cause of our Lord 's having red Specks in his Face for which he cites Josephus saying He was Lentiginosus in facie Out of what hath been said it clearly appears That Impious and Blasphemous Authors are in repute with our Deists and that consequently 't is no wonder that such Oracles as these Pretended Oracles of Reasons are obtruded to the World Lastly it must not pass unobserved That this Cardan who has so wickedly derogated from our Lord hath also falsly fathered on Josephus the two forecited Assertions neither is there the least footsteps of either of them in any of the Works of Josephus Pag. 124. Besides the authority of the holy Scriptures as also the innumerable other arguments which may be deduced as well from Philosophy as Reason to prove the Immortality of the Soul together with its Rewards and Punishments tho' I determine not their Duration yet there is no argument of greater weight with me than the absolute necessity and convenience that it should be so as well to compleat the Justice of God as to perfect the Happiness of Man not only in this World but in that which is to come ANSWER That the Arguments which are brought from the Holy Scriptures are only sufficient to prove the Immortality of the Soul and the Rewards and Punishments of a Future State hath been proved already and it will appear to be so by what remains to be said with respect hereunto Yet our Author altho' he appeals to their Authority can have no benefit thereof Forasmuch as he makes our Saviour and Moses Politicians p. 121. And perhaps these Lawgivers established the Immortality of the Soul not so much out of regard to Truth as to Honesty hoping thereby to induce Men to Virtue p. 123. His
these Countries a very quick and easie Passage Gerard Vossius de Scientiis Mathematicis p. 242. says Ex Asia per fretum Anianum non difficilem fuisse Navigationem in Mexicanam atque inde facillimum transitum in peruanum I must confess nothing pleases me more than the common Saying Omnia modice intra moâ—um Yet I must subjoyn what Josephus a Costa says relating hereunto both upon the account of Mr. Boyle who in his History of Cold commends the said a Costa as a very inquisitive and philosophical Person as also upon the said Acosta's own account who was for a long time a Traveller in America In his Natural and Moral History of the West-Indies p. 303. he says The Old World joyns with the New in some Part by which Men and Beasts may pass And p. 503. If there be any Sea betwixt the Old World and America it is so narrow that wild Beasts may easily swim over and Men may go over in small Boats So that without a Miracle here is a plain Solution of this Difficulty how the remote Parts of the Earth might be Planted with Men Tygers Panthers Bears c. Pag. 5. 'T is a Paradox to me that Methusalem was the longest liv'd of all the Children of Adam and no Man will be able to prove it while from the Process of the Text I can manifest it may be otherwise ANSWER 'T is no Paradox to believe that which hath been opinioned by most Men and in most Ages and is Established on good Grounds although it may not unexceptionally be Established by the Process of a Text and such is the Case of Methusalem's long Life The Instances in Lucian de Longaevis and in Phlegon Trallian of the same Subject come very short of the Age of Methusalem Josephus indeed in the first Book of his Antiquities c. 4. cites Hesiod Hecataeus Hellanicus Acusilaus Ephorus and Nicolaus who affirm that some lived to a Thousand Years And Pliny in the seventh Book of his Natural Histry c. 48. confirms the same But each of those Authors leave us uncertain as to the Point in Hand Josephus lessens the Authority he produceth by insinuating the little Credit to be had to his Authorities 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 neither doth he express how they made their Computation Pliny destroys the Authority he brings by telling us that some accouâ—t six Months to a Year some three Months some a Lunar Month as namely the Aegyptians and that this is the reason why some were said to live a Thousand Years Which Latitude should we assume Methusalem may be said to have lived some Thousands of Years But the Computation of Time in the Mosaical Writings is most certain the Years are there according to the Course of the Sun the Months according to the Course of the Moon as will plainly appear The time of the Children of Israel's eating Manna is accounted fourty Years in the end of the sixteenth Chapter of Exodus and reckoned from their departure out of Aegypt Numbers the 33d Chapter Verse 38. Which Number from the same Season of the Year to the same by the Years of the Sun is most exact for they came forth of Aegypt the fifteenth Day of the first Month in the beginning of Barley Harvest and the very same Day of the same Month in Barley Harvest their Manna ceased Josh 4. ver 12. In the 25th Chapter of Leviticus the Israelites are commanded to sow their Fields and cut their Vineyard and gather the Fruits thereof six Years and to let the seventh rest as a Sabbath Year to the Lord. And seven of those Sabbaths are accounted Fourty nine Years at the end whereof in the tenth Day of the seventh Month began the Jubilee These Years were manifestly Years of the Sun otherwise all the Fruits of those Years could not have been gathered in Harvest and Vintage as God appointed for Fourty nine Years of the Moon would very near have cut off One and a Half the last expiring in Winter before any Corn or other Fruit were ready to be gathered therein St. Austin in his fifteenth Book de Civitate Dei cap. 14. writing against the Opinion of some who were perswaded that the Years of the Ancient Fathers which lived in the first Age were not of the Sun useth these Words Tantus tunc dies fuit quontus nunc est Tantus tunc mensis quontus nunc est quem Luna caepta finita conclusit Tantus annus quontus nunc est quem duodecim menses Lunares addites propter cursum solis quinque diebus quadrante consummant The Day was as long then saith he as it is now the Month as long then as now contained within the compass of the Moon 's Course from the beginning to the end The Year was then as long as now perfected by twelve Months of the Moon with five Days and a Quarter added So that the Year in the Writings of Moses was a solar Year the same we use at this Day The Months mentioned by Moses were lunar Months compleat This is manifest by the History of Noah's Flood in the seventh and eighth Chapters of Genesis where we are taught that the Flood begun the seventeenth Day of the second Month and the Ark rested on a Mountain of Ararat in the seventeenth Day of the seventh Month which Space by God's holy Spirit is there counted a hundred and fifty Days which reckoning giveth to every Month thirty Days apiece neither more nor less Of this Opinion was St. Austin in hls fourth Book de Trinitate chap. 4. Si duodecim menses integri considerentur quos triceni dies complent talem quippe mensem veteres observaverunt quem circutius lunaris ostendit That is If the whole twelve Months be considered which contain thirty Days apiece such was the Month observed by Men of Old Time even that which the Course of the Moon sheweth According to this Measure of Time the Days of Methusalem were Nine hundred sixty and nine Years and it doth not appear that any other of Adam's Posterity lived so long I have been the longer on this pretended Paradox because this Instance is commonly made use of to invalidate the holy Scriptures and because the right stating of the scriptural Years and Months is of good Use in these Controversies Pag. 7. I know that Manna is now plentifully gathered in Calabria and Josephus tells me in his Days it was as plentiful in Arabia the Devil therefore made me quere where was then the Miracle in the Days of Moses since the Israelites saw but that in his time which the Natives of those Countries behold in ours ANSWER The Authority of Josephus is of little Moment in this case Mr. Gregory of Christ Church in his Discourse of the seventy Interpreters p. 33. hath these Words When Josephus cometh to the Miraculous Passages of holy Writ he useth a fair way of Dissimulation still moderating the wonder of a Work that he bring it
of his proposing them as Mr. Blount doth his Oracles he plainly enough insinuates to an intelligent Reader that his design was no other than to overthrow the Authority of the Pentateuch out of his Store-house it is that Hobbs Spinosa and other such Politicians in Mr. Blount's Common-wealth of Learning have furnished themselves with Objections such as they are and which have been often answered My Second Observation is That not only Philo Judaeus Josephus and all others as well Ancient and Modern Jews did understand by the Law the whole Pentateuch but also the Gentiles did understand it in the same manner and consequently it cannot be imagined that the Law mentioned by our Lord should be taken in a different Sense The Author I shall cite for Proof hereof is Dionysius Longinus in his Book 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sect 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So the Legislator of the Jews no common Person when he declares and makes known the Power of his God according to his Majesty presently in the beginning of his Laws he tells us that God said Let there be Light and it was so Longinus in this place calls the beginning of Genesis the beginning of Moses's Laws And if Genesis comes under that Denomination I think no question can be made of the other Books nor of the true Sense of those places by me brought out of the New Testament My Last Observation is That one of the great Proofs of revealed Religion depends on the Antiquity and Verity of the Mosaic Writings if these Books were not written by Moses a wide Gate would be opened for Libertines and Deists to redicule them and to expose them for Fables Preadamitism and the Eternity of the World might be received as uncontroulable Doctrines and Christian Religion deprived of the Support of those Writings to which our Lord was pleased to make an Appeal So that is is no wonder that Mr. Blount should be so positive and endeavour with such Confidence to subvert these Writings by affirming That it is evident that Moses was not the Author of them He well knowing that his pretended Oracles of Reason will be accounted Scandalous and False as long as this part of Holy Scriptures the Mosaic Writings can be defended SECT II. Of PARADISE IN this Section the Mosaic History of the Creation is wickedly ridiculed What Ireneus says of some of the Ancient Heresies viz. That the very naming of them is a sufficient Refutation the same may be said of some Passages I shall here Transcribe Pag. 25. There is a Dialogue between the Serpent and Eve It hapned upon a time that Eve sitting solitary under a Tree without her Husband there came to her a Serpent or Adder which I know not by what Means or Power civilly accosted the Woman in these Words or to this Purpose All hail most fair One What are you doing so solitary and serious under this Shade Pag. 26. Eve says Let me see had I best use it or no What can be more beautiful than this Apple How sweetly it smells but it may be it tasts ill Serpent If it tasts ill throw it away and say I am a great Lyar. Eve Well I 'll try thou hast not deceived me Give me one that I may carry it to my Husband Serpent Well thought on here 's another for you go to your Husband with it Farewel young Woman Pag. 27. God says to the Serpent Hereafter vile Beast instead of eating Apples thou shalt lick the Dust of the Earth and as for you Mistress Curious in sorrow shall you bring forth Children Pag. 33. It perplexes me how out of one Rib the whole Mass of a Womans Body could be built for a Rib doth not equal the hundredth perhaps not the thousandth Part of an entire Body Pag. 44. The Text says They sewed Fig-Leaves together and therewith made themselves Aprons From whence you may deduce the Original of the Taylors Trade But where had they Needles and where their Thread the very first Day of their Creation since the Thâ—ead-makers Art was not yet found out nor yet the Art of Working in Iron ANSWER In this Section are many such Queries but these are more then sufficient to make any Man Nauseate For what Man that hath but a Mâ—â—e of Piety will not be concerned to read such Expressions to read the Holy Oracles of God to be thus droll'd on by these pretended ones and this sacred Book of God to be thus exposed by a scurrilous Libel Our Author often cites the Canons of the Church when they serve his Turn Here he mentions none and I am certain there is good Reason for it for not to mention ancient Canons which he must necessarily know condemns this Practice The Council of Trent condemns it and in Session 4th condemns them who shall convert and wrest the Words of Holy Scripture to Prophaneness Scurrilousness Fabulousness Flatteries Distractions Superstitions or too scurrilous Libels The first Council of Millain declares That their Rashness is very wicked who absue the Words or Sentences of Holy Scripture to Flattery Contumely Superstition Impiety or to any prophane Purposes and that the Bishops are to punish such Offenders according to the holy Canons So that as far as I know this folly of our Author in sporting thus with Holy Scripture is condemned by all Christians of any particular Denomination in the whole World What is material and worthy of Consideration in this Section we will now examine Pag. 36. These are the Words of Moses There comes a River out of Eden to water the Garden and from thence it divides it self into four Branches the Name of the first is Pishon c. Gen. 2. Ver. 10. Whereby it is apparent that either in the Entrance or Exit of the Garden there were four Rivers and that those four Rivers did proceed from one and the same Fountain-head in Eden Now pray tell me in what part of the Earth is this Country of Eden where Four Rivers arise from one and the same Spring ANSWER That there may be a plain and a full Solution of the difficulties the Oracle proposes both in this Paragaph and in the other which shall be examined in this Section I shall premise a Consideration or Two of good use in the Matters under Debate The First Consideration shall be of the Opinions of the Ancient Jews and Christians as to this Book of Genesis The Second shall be of the great alterations that have happened to many places of the Earth since the Creation Out of which it will appear that many places then well known may now be wholy unknown to us Lastly I shall make a brief Reply to what the Oracle hath here declared The First Consideration relating to the Ancient Jews is that they always looked on the Book Genesis as a Book hard to be understood yet to contain a literal Sense St. Jerom in his Preface to his Commentaries on Ezechiel says Nisi quis apud eos aetatem Sacerdotalis
Leviathan are Demonstrations Pag. 98. Constantine at first espoused the Arrian Interest to mount the Throne as the present Lewis the XIV did the Interest of the Hugonots ANSWER What ground or Authority our Immortal Deist might have for this His Assertion I do not know I believe it is a Dream of His own I am confident no Chronologer of any repute could affirm so great a Falsity nothing is more notorious both in Ancient and Modern History than that Constantine mounted the Throne before Arius himself much less the Arians made any considerable figure in the World Perhaps the odium He thought might reflect on Constantine by the Comparison of Lewis the XIV prompted Him to commit so palpable an Error Had there been any truth in this Imputation it cannot be imagined that the Arian Historian Philosorgius would have past it in silence who only says That when Constantius was dead and buried that Constantine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Connstantine was His Successor in the Empire Pag. 98. If you will believe the Learned Petavius and other Arians they did offer to be try'd by the Fathers that preceded the Nicene Council ANSWER Petavius is a late Author and unless he brings Proof for what he says he is not to be relied on in historical Matters of so remote Antiquity Sandius in his Nucleus Hist Eccles p. 256. cites our Bishop Taylor to the same purpose viz. That the Arians appealed to the Fathers for Trial and that the Offer was declined To which our learned Dr. Gardiner in the Appendix ad Nucleum makes this Answer Ego vero a reverendi Tayleri manibus venia petita fateor me Socratis Zozomeni verbis potius assenteri c. I for my part am forced to beg Bishop Taylor 's Pardon and do confess that I assent rather to Socrates and Sozomen who report the contrary Which Answer is good and valid The Bishops that lived in those Days were far enough from declining Trial by the Fathers that preceded the Nicene Council that they desired nothing more The Arians were the Men as Socrates says lib. 5. c. 10. that trusted to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They were the Men that refused the Judgments of the Ancients and defended themselves by Niceties and Disputations And to the same purpose Sozomen lib. 7. c. 12. I will cite two or three Authorities more which will make this thing so very plain that nothing but reading Fathers at second hand and too great Credulity can apologize for Mr. Blount Athanasius is known to be a Bishop who made as great a Figure in the Church as any one in his time a Man of great Learning and exemplary Piety and one that was as well acquainted with the Methods that the Orthodox and Arians made use of as any Man could possibly be This great Athanasius in his Book of the Decrees of the Nicene Synod says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Behold we have demonstrated this our Opinion from Fathers to Fathers as they delivered the same to us But for your parts O new Jews and Disciples of Caiaphas What Fathers can you produce that are Fautors of your Heresies Truly ye cannot bring so much as one of the number of those who were accounted Prudent and Wise all such detest you Ye can alledge none but your Father the Devil who was the sole Author of this Heresie and Defection from the Truth Alexander Bishop of Alexandria a Person in nothing inferior to Athanasius one that had all the Qualifications desireable in a good Prelate In an Epistle of his to Alexander Bishop of Constantinople as we find it in Theodoret's Ecclesiastical History Book the first Chapter fourth says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 You Arians have so good Opinion of your selves as that you think none of the Ancients are worthy to be compared to you Neither will ye endure that those who in my younger Days were esteemed as our Guides and Masters should upon any Terms be equalled to you Neither will ye grant that any of our present Colleagues have any competent Knowledge of these Controversies Ye think your selves to be the only wise Men and that although ye have nothing yet ye enjoy all things You boast that you alone are the finders out and possessors of Truth and that to you such Mysteries are revealed and kept from other Men. By which Words Alexander of Alexandria signifies that the Arian Sentiments were repugnant to the Doctrine of the most ancient Fathers to the Doctrine of his immediate Predecessors and of all those Bishops who had the Government of the Church when this unhappy Arian Heresy began He signifies also that the first Defenders of Arianism were Enthusiasts and pretenders to extraordinary Revelation To these two I will only add St. Austin who treating of the blessed Trinity at large in fifteen Books in his first Book Chapter the 3d. he delivers his Mind as fully and as much to the purpose as either of the two before quoted Thus he says Omnes quos legere potui qui ante me scripserunt de Trinitate divinorum librorum vetorum novorum Catholici tractatores hoc intenderunt secundum Scripturas docere quod pater filius spiritus sanctus unius ejusdemque substantiae inseparabili aequalitate divinam insinuent unitatem All the Authors that I have met with who have written before me of the holy Trinity all the Orthodox Writers and Commentators of the Divine Books of the Old and New Testament proposed this to themselves to prove that according to the Holy Scriptures the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost have one and the same Substance which includes a Divine Unity with an inseparable Equality This last Testimony of St. Austin is very remarkable and as comprehensive as the most zealous Trinitarian could desire And from hence we cannot but observe how blameworthy some very learned Men of the Roman Communion have been who though they sincerely believe the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity yet by affirming either by mistake or design that this heavenly Doctrine cannot be proved by Scripture nor by the Fathers that preceded the Nicene Council but only by unwritten Tradition they have given great advantage to the Antitrinitarian to triumph and have confirmed them in their Heterodox Opinion nempe hoc vult Ithacus magno mercantur Achivi Pag. 98. For at that Council the Arians were rather condemn'd by a Party than by the General Consent of the Christian Church because Constantine out of above two Thousand Bishops then Assembled excluded all but Three hundred and Eighteen nor were those perhaps for Accounts vary all Bishops that made up this great Council ANSWER This is a heavy Charge against the Nicene Council it had been but reasonable that the Immortal Deist should have showed the Grounds which he had for this Accusation No Truth nor Innocence can be sufficient if an Accusation goes for Proof He that should read the ancient View of Bishopricks in Aubertus Miraeus or the Sacred
Deist know this when so many Monuments of Antiquity relating to the first Centuries are lost This Method I remember to be used by Bishop Pearson in the Defence of Ignatius's Epistles It is certain that in the first and second Ages there were some that denied the Book of the Revelations to be Canonical Scripture and that the Author thereof was Cerinthus the Heretick and not St. John and there was no reason that induced them to think so besides this Doctrine of Milleranism Nepos an Egyptian Bishop was a great defender of this Opinion he writ a Book about the Year of our Lord 244. in defence of it he Titles his Book a Reproof of the Allegorists By that Name he called the Antimillenaries so that the Opponents of the Millenaries must have been then considerable their Nickname is sufficient Demonstration thereof 'T is very surprizing to hear our Deist affirm that they who oppose this Opinion never quote any for themselves before Dionysius Alexandrinus Forasmuch as the same Dionysius in Eusebius lib. 7. c. 25. affirms that some who Preceeded him rejected the Book of the Revelations upon that account Besides the Defenders of this Doctrine kept it as secret as they possibly could Non defendere hanc Doctrinam says Lactant. lib. de vit Beat. publice atque asserere solemus We are not wont to defend and assert this Doctrine publickly 'T is no wonder then if the Opponents of this Opinion were not so numerous 'T is also very plain that our Deist is mistaken in the Design and first Contrivance of this Millenary Invention as he calls it Nay Lactantius lib. 7. c. 26. pretends there is a Command from God to keep this Doctrine in silence Now if Lactantius who was himself a Millenary and well acquainted with their Methods hath rightly informed us our Deist's Suggestions must be very weak We read in Eusebius lib. 7. c. 23. how successful Dionysius was in overthrowing Milleranism and that Coracion a principal Man of that Party was so convinced by him as that He promised never to dispute for that Doctrine more never more to teach it nor to make any mention of it If the Books of Dionysius and Nepos two of the greatest and ablest Writers of the respective Parties were now extant we could not fail of having a true Prospect of this Controversie but their Books by the Injury of Times are perished Upon which consideration if we had said nothing else this last Remark had been sufficient to defeat Mr. Blount's Argument drawn from the Silence of the two first Ages The various reading of the much celebrated place in Justin Martyr relating to the Millenaries leaves us in Uncertainties But we are confident after a diligent Examination that Irenaeus no where pretends as our Deist bears us in hand that he did to relate the very Words which Christ used when he delivered this Doctrine Besides that which is a prejudice never to be overcome is the Silence of the Gospel in so important a Matter Our Author is frequent in quoting Councils as well as Fathers for Heterodoxies what reason there should be for his not citing any Councils in this Case no not so much as Gelasius Cyzicenus in reference to the Nicene Council I cannot account for I can only account for my self declare that what general or ancient Prov. Coun. have done in this case whether they have approved it or condemned it I do not know neither am I ashamed so to confess For Scaliger in his Exercit. 345. calls verbum Nescio ingenni candidique animi pignus In the beginning of the Reformation there were some who endeavoured to give Countenance to this Opinion wherefore our Church then passed a severe Censure on such Persons For in a Convocation at London in the Year of our Lord 1552. in the last Article save one the Millenaries are called Hereticks The Article is as followeth They that go about to renew the Fable of the Hereticks called Millenarii be repugnant to Holy Scripture and cast themselves headlong into a Jewish Dotage This Article is to be seen in the Collection of Articles Injunctions c. p. 52. Prefaced by the Learned Bishop Sparrow I say Prefaced because the Author of the Antopology p. 56 informs us that the said Bishop told him That he was not the Collector and that if he had been concerned in the Collection he would have published more Materials The latter part of this Information seems very probable forasmuch as the said excellent Prelat was most accurate in Matters of this nature From what hath been said concerning this Subject we may sufficiently discover Mr. Blount's Vanity when p. 169. he affirms that there was as Universal a Tradition for Milleranism in the Primitive Times as for any Article of our Faith Whereas there is no Article of our Faith but may be tried and proved by that Golden Rule of Vincentius Lyrinensis Quod omnibus quod semper quod ubique the Articles of our Faith have been received by all Orthodox Persons at all Times and in all Places which cannot be said of Milleranism We acknowledge no Articles of Faith but such only as can be proved by Holy Scriptures and to such Articles the Rule of Vincentius is only competent This I conceive to be the Sense of our Convocation in the Year of our Lord 1562. Collect. Artic. p. 92. when they define that all Articles of Faith are grounded on those Canonical Books of Holy Scripture of whose Authority there was never any doubt in the Church I think I may not be importune and unreasonable if I relate the whole Article Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to Salvation So that whatsoever is not Read therein nor may be Proved thereby is not to be required of any Man that it should be believed as an Article of Faith or be thought requisite or necessary to Salvation in the Name of the Holy Scripture we do understand those Canonical Books of the Old and New Testament of whose Authority there never was any doubt in the Church SECT IX Of Augury Of a God Origin of Good and Evil plurality of Worlds Natural Religion Ocellus Lucanus PAg. 167. Augury is a sort of the ancient heathenish Superstition And Pag. 169. We may see that Superstition like Fire endeavours to resolve all things into it self ANSWER Mr. Blount hath given us some Account of the Pagan Superstition of Augury out of which it appears how insufficient Natural Religion is of it self and how necessary Revealed Religion is to shew the vanity of these Abominations To this purpose very remarkable is that of Alexander ab Alexandro in the end of his last Book Dierum genialium Quantum debemus Christo Domino Regi Doctori nostro quem verum Deum veneramur scimus quo praemonstrante explosa monstrosa ferarum gentium doctrina rituque immani ac barbaro veram religionem edocti humanitatem verum Deum colimus evictisque erroribus infandis ineptiis
he allows it to no Historian but Moses whom alone he makes to be divinely inspired As to the point of Antiquity we appeal to our Author himself who notwithstanding what he hath here written of this matter page 224. confesses That we have no Writer extant at this time more ancient than Moses unless it be Ocellus His exception of Ocellus is of no moment as we have proved in the foregoing Discourse After all my Search I can no where find Josephus absolutely affirming That the Egyptians Chaldeans and Phenicians had any certain Records of their Original but only Comparatively with the Greeks He no where affirms directly or indirectly that the forenamed Nation had more ancient Records of their Country to refute him and that therefore he thinks more convenient to yield to them in Antiquity and therefore our Deist is forc'd to use this Device This is the secret meaning of what Josephus says What Josephus says is clear and perspicuous there is no colour for so slanderous an Insinuation and I think I may affirm witout any Calumny or Controversy That not Josephus but our Deist had a Secret meaning to impose on credulous Readers by abusing good Authors We may bid Farewell to all Evidence in Matters of Fact if Secret meanings be allow'd of but perhaps our Deist had herein a regard to Himself hoping that at a dead lift This Secret meaning might gloss and varnish over some of his monstrous and incredible Tenents I am sure that by this Hocus-pocus Trick he might have cited The Hind and Panther which he quotes pag. 150. for the Antiquities of his Chaldeans Egyptians Phenicians and have quoted Josephus for the Frauds and Imposings of the Priest And now I am making towards a Conclusion I hope I may do a thing grateful to the Reader and be not thought to deviate from my Subject if I here present him with the great Aversion that our Church hath for Deism The Church of England Article 18. declares in these words They are also to be had accursed that presume to say that every Man shall be saved by the Law or Sect which he professeth so that he be diligent to frame his Life according to that Law and the Light of Nature for Holy Scripture doth set out unto us only in the Name of Jesus Christ whereby Men must be saved This Article plainly declares as Mr. Rogers on the Articles p. 87. collects that the Profession of every Religion cannot save a Man live he never so vertuously It also follows from this Article That no Man ever was or shall be saved but only by the Faith and Name of JESVS CHRIST The Opinion of the Deist is diametrically opposite hereunto For pag. 199. and 200. he affirms That Natural and Unrevealed Religion is sufficient to make us happy in a future State And he affirms p. 201. That this his Opinion is Charitable forasmuch as it doth not exclude any Dissenters from Eternal Happiness and that God may be pleased with different Worships St. Austin in his Book of Heresies cap. 72. reckons that of the Rhetorians to be one Forasmuch as they believe that all hereticks hold the Truth and walk uprightly Which Heresy St. Austin calls a Heresy of wonderful vanity and such as seems to him incredible my own part I cannot perceive any great difference between the Rhetorians and the Deists And whereas our Deist seems to value his Opinion upon the pretended Charitableness thereof and thinks that a Recommendation He is much mistaken for this Opinion is rather Turkish than Charitable We read in Busbequius Epist 3. that Rustan the Prime Vizier perswaded that excellent Embassadour to turn Musselman and that if he would do so he should receive great Honours and Rewards from Solyman his Lord and Emperour To whom Busbequins makes this Reply Mihi certum est manere in ea Religione in qua natus essem quamque Dominus meus profitetur Pulchre inquit Rustanus sed tamen de anima quid fiet Et de Anima inquam bene spero Tum ille cum paulisper intercogitasset ita est profecto neque ego ab hac absum sententia aternae beatitudinis consortes fore qui sancte innocenterque hanc vitam traduxerint quamcunque illi Religionem secuti sunt I am resolved says Busbequius to continue in that Religion in which I were born and which my Lord professes Very well says Rustan but what will become of your Soul in another World I am says Busbequius very confident of its welfare Then Rustan after some pause makes this Answer I am of your Mind this is my Opinion That all Persons shall be eternally happy that lead an innocent life notwithstanding their differences in Religion The Prime Vizier's Opinion seems to me to be the same with Mr. Blount's it is altogether so charitable And if our Deist had been present at that Interview 't is apparent enough with whom he would have sided And if the same Offers had been made to him which were made to that incomparable Embassadour 't is plain enough what he would have done So that if I should assert That Deism is a direct Road to Turcism I think I should not be mistaken Our Deist must have more Confidence and all things considered better luck than Polus had in Erasmus his Exorcisms if he can perswade any Persons who seriously consult their own Salvation To behold any Happiness in his Heaven It 's worth our observation in what detestation and abhorrence our Church of England hath the Opinion of the Deists for it affixes an Accurse to it which I think is not very usual for Provincial Councils Mr. Pool indeed in his Appendix to the Nullity of the Romish Faith pag. 240. 〈◊〉 these words If we look into the Records of Councils we shall find That this Practice of Anathematizing was not only in use in general but also in particular and Provincial Councils I doubt not but this Learned Man had good grounds for his Assertion Yet I must confess for my own part I have not observed this Method in Particular Councils if we except that Orthodox Council held at Gangra in Paphlagonia about the Year of our Lord 324. in every one of whose Canons about twenty in number we find an Accurse affix'd a sufficient Instance In Antiquity to justify our Church 's Method And since we have had an occasion to mention this Synod and that we live in an Age in which Atheism and Deism abounds to that degree that the Churches set apart for GOD's Service and our Religious Assemblies are slighted and contemned I shall conclude with the Judment of that Pious Synod Can. 5 Si quis docet domum Dei contemptibilem esse ut conventus qui in ea celebrantur Anathema sit How nearly this concerns our Deists and other despisers of GOD's Publick Worship who frequently abuse GOD's Ministers and make no Religion of traducing and ridiculing them is very plain and palpable and there is here NO SECRET MEANING EXEQUIAS DEISTAE QUIBUS IRE COMMODUM EST JAM TEMPUS EST. FINIS Books Printed for and Sold by Charles Yeo John Pearce and Philip Bishop Booksellers in Exon. SElect Hymns each fitted to two Tunes to be sung in Churches The Beauty of Holiness or a short Defence and Vindication of the pious Decency Regularity and Order of Reading the Communion-Service at the Communion-Table offered to a dissatisfied Neighbour from his Minister A Form of Prayer for Married Persons for the most part taken out of the Liturgy In the PRESS A Practical Treatise concerning Evil Thoughts wherein are some Things more especially useful for Melancholy Persons By William Chiloot M. A. Danmonii Orientales Illustres or the Worthies of Devon Printed by way of Subscription Price in Sheets Sixteen Shillings and Six Pence the first Payment Eight Shillings All Gentlemen that are willing to take the Advantage by Subscribing are desired to send in their first Payment with all speed to the Undertakers Charles Yeo John Pearce and Philip Bishop
Ministerii id est tricesimum annum implever it principium Geneseos legere non permittitur Unless a Man had attained to the Year of the Sacerdotal Ministry which is the Thirtieth Year compleat they were not permitted to Read the beginning of Genesis Which Practice appears also out of the Prologue Galeat and from Origen on the Canticles we are told by both that the Jewish Doctors forbid these Four things because of their Difficulty and Profoundness to be read by any but such as attained to Thirty Years of Age and those were the Three First Chapters of Genesis the beginning and end of the Prophet Ezechiel and the Book of Canticles This Decree of the Jewish Doctors is also mentioned by Prosper Aquitanicus lib. 3. de Vita Contemplativa c. 6. Where he gives us a good Account thereof and contends for the literal Sense Now altho they account this Book obscure yet I do not find that any of the Ancient Jews excluded a literal Sense Philo Judaeus excepted whose Arguments are very weak and unbecoming so great an Author It was a known rule among the Rabbies that Scripture falls not in with the Midrash i. e. The Scriptures are to be Interpreted in a literal Sense And Buxtorf de punct Antique tells us That when the Allegorical or Cabalistick Sense is contrary to the Literal the Cabalistick is to be rejected neither must we think otherwise of the Modern Jews if they will be consentaneous to themselves and the Eighth Article of their Creed Out of which it necessarily follows that altho the Jews allowed an Allegorical Sense yet they never allowed any which interfered with the Literal If we consult the Ancient Christians we shall find that they were careful to preserve the Literal Sense of Genesis Epiphanius in Ancorato c. 57. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. If there be no Literal and Sensible Paradise then there is no Fountain no River no Pison no Gihon no Tigris no Euphrates no Fruit no Leaves no Adam no eating the Forbiden Fruit but the whole truth is a Fable and nothing but Allegory And c. 54. of the same Ancorate he calls Origen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a furious Mad Man for his obtruding on the World Allegory instead of a Literal Truth St. Jerom in his Comentaries on Daniel c. 10. Writing something with relation to the Mosaical Creation seems to be much concerned in these Words Eorum deliramenta conticescant qui umbras imagines in veritate quaerentes ipsam conantur subvertere veritatem ut flumina Arbores Paradisum putent allegoriae legibus se debere subruere Let their follies be gone who searching after shadows and Images in the Truth endeavour the subversion of the Truth it self and think to bring Trees Rivers and Paradise it self under their Rules of Allegory St. Austin lib. 8. de Genesi ad literam cap. 1. Having delivered His opinion that some things in Genesis may admit as he calls it a Spiritual Sense doth then in general declare Narratio in his Libris non genus locutionis figuratarum rerum est sicut in cantico canticorum sed omnino gestarum est sicut in Regnorum libris hujuscemodi Ceteris The account which we have in the Book of Genesis is not Allegorical or Figurative as in the Book of Canticles but it is Historical and Literal as in the Books of the Kings and such like Historical Books As to the Second Consideration which relates to the great Changes which have happened to the Surface of the Earth I need not say much since I think it is taken for granted by all that have any acquaintance with History or Geography We Read in Plato's Timaeus of a Discourse between the Egyptian Priests and Solon about Six Hundred Years before our Saviour Solon is told there that of old Time without the Streights of Gibraltar there was a very great Island called Atlantis bigger then Asia and Africa put together and the said Island was afterward by a great Inundation and Earthquake in one Day and Night wholly overwhelmed and drowned in the Sea Some of the Ancients as Strato quoted by Strabo in the first Book of his Geography say that the fretum gaditanum or Streight of Gibraltar was forcibly broken open by the Sea The same they affirm of the Thracian Bosphorus and Hellespont that the Rivers filling up the Euxine Sea forced a Passage that way where there was none before of the like nature is that account of the Samothracians mentioned by Diadorus Siculus The River Arnus in Tuscany now falleth into the Sea Six Miles below Piza Whereby it it appeareth saith Dr. Hakewel that the Land hath gain'd much upon the Sea in that Coast for that Strabo in his time reporteth it was but Twenty Furlongs that is but Two Miles and a half distant from the Sea Varenius Conjectures That all China which is as bigg as all Europe or a great part of it was raised Originally from the Sea for that great and impetuous River called the Yellow or Saffron River coming out of Tartary and very often overflowing the Country of China is said to contain in it so much Earth and Sand as make up a Third part of its Waters the evenness and level Superficies of the whole Country of China renders this conjectture the more probable as that great Phylosopher Mr. Ray is of opinion in the 5th Chapter of the Consequences of the Deluge I shall here add what we find to this purpose in that excellent Geographer Maginus in his Preface and in Ocellus Lucanus Certum est says Maginus Insignes variationes in terrae partibus continuo evenire propter aquarum Inundationes marium praeruptiones ac recessus etenim non solum Regiones urbis oppida flumina alia hujusmodi sua nomina pro tempore mutant amissis prorsus prioribus Verum etiam fines ipsarum Regionum variantur urbes oppidaque senectute delentur Mare in uno loco Continentem Terrae dilatat in alio coarctat flumina quandoque augescunt quandoque minuuntur quandoque cursus variant quandoque etiam prorsus deficiunt sic quoque fontes stagna paludes alibi exiccaentur alibi vero procreantur 'T is certain there are great variations on the Surface of the Earth which continually happen by Inundations the breaking in and recess of the Sea Nay not only Countrys Citys Towns Rivers and the like change their Names but also Limits and Bounds the Sea in one place gains on the Land in another place it loseth Rivers sometimes grow sometimes lessen sometimes change their Channel sometimes wholy fail Fountains great standing Waters and Marshes in some places are dried up and appear in other places where they never were before Ocellus Lucanus who is an Author much valued by Mr. Blount p. 21â— of the Oracles hath these Words Nâ—w corruptions and violent alterations are made according to the parts of the Earth sometimes by the overflowing of the Sea Sometimes with
Hereticks in Reading the Fathers to Flies if they happen on any place that is sound they pass it over if putrid or rotten there they suck It must be Confest that St. Austin was here in a mistake and that in this Point he came wide of the mark to use Mr. Blount's expression St. Austin was indeed of this Opinion in lib. 5. de Genesi ad literam and lib. 6. c. 5. but the occasion of his mistake was Reading the Book of Ecclesiasticus in Latin And for the satisfaction of my Reader I shall cite a place out of Gerhard Vossius in his Pars altera de Creatione thesis 16. Where he takes notice of this Mistake of St. Austins and the occasion of it and from whom we have a satisfactory Answer Hoc Siracidae illo Ecclesiastici 18. adstrui posse censent Qui vivit in aeternum creavit omnia simul sed praeterquam quod apocrypha canonicis opponi non debent Graece est non 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hoc est pariter ut sententia sit omnia unum agnoscere creatorem sive communiter ut in complutensi transfertur hoc est communi lege ut Junius vertit accipi debere sequentia inibi ostendunt quod si vidisset Augustinus non tantoper◠〈◊〉 eo loco torsisset in Genesi ad literam lib. 5. 〈…〉 lib. 6. c. 5. By that place of Siracâ—des in the 18th of Ecclesiasticus some think it may be proved That God created all things not in any Intervals of time but in one and the same Instant The place of Ecclesiasticus is commonly but falsly translated He that liveth for ever created all things together or at once but that besides Apoeryphal writings are not to be opposed to Canonical Scripture The Greek hath another meaning for in Greek the sense is He that liveth for ever hath created all things in like manner So that the sentence in Ecclesiasticus is All things in like manner have one and the same Creatour Thus 't is translated in the Complutensian Bible or else as Junius hath translated it All things were created after the same method as it were by a common Law And this is the genuine sense of the place as the following places in Ecclesiasticus will convince us Which if St. Austin had seen he had not been misled nor had been put to so much trouble by this place No Man can have a greater deference for St. Austin than my self yet I must confess that both those great Men and the Governour of the African Churches were but meanly skilled in the Greek St. Austin confesses the same in his 8th Epistle to St. Jerom Petimus ergo nobiscum petit omnis Africanarum Ecclesiarum studiosa societas ut interpretandis eorum libris qui Graece Scripturas nostras quam optime tractaverunt curam atque operam impendere non graveris We desire and together with us desires all the Studious Society of the African Churches that he would not think it burthensom to bestow some pains in interpreting those Books which were written in Greek upon the holy Scriptures And Father Simon in his Critical History on the Old Testament Book 3. says That Austin did not understand Greek well enough to read the Greek Fathers Commentaries upon the Bible and therefore He desired St. Jerom to translate them into Latin that he might read them Yet it must be granted That although he was no Critick He had yet some skill in that Language for he makes sometimes mention of the Greek Codes as Ep. 59. and in his Retractations but his skill therein was so ordinary as it often occasioned some mistakes Upon the whole 't is very surprizing that such a Critick in the Greek as our Deist would be thought to be when He saw St. Austin's slip as He must unavoidably observe it if he read Him of these matters should yet make use of His Authority it being certain that the false Latin translation misguided that great Father All the Question seems to be about the particular matter of the Creation when God was pleased to make the World And that this may be a thing of some difficulty I think few men will deny that have well considered it I am sure Gassendus in his Physicks was of this opinion when he says Majus est mundi opus quam ut assequi mens humana illius molitionem possit The creation of the World is so great a work that a Man can scarce comprehend it after a diligent intention And I have often thought that this of Gassendus is not much abhorrent from that of Solomon Ecclesiastes 8th ver 16. and 17. When I applied my heart to Wisdom and to see the business that is done upon the earth for also there is that neither day nor night seeth sleep with his eyes ver 17. Then I beheld all the work of God that a Man cannot find out the work that is done under the Sun because though a man labour to seek it out yea further tho' a wise man think to know it yet shall he not be able to find it Maimonides who was in great Reputation among the Jews determines the Question thus Omnia simul creata aberant postea successive invicem separata all things were created at once and afterwards divided into separate Classes and Times However it be 't is certain St. Austin had a firm Veneration for the Mosaic History he never ridiculed it as our Author does and if he mistook in the Interpretation of a place of Genesis he may be excused who submitted himself to the Rule of Faith and constantly believed that the World had a Beginning And although our Author in this place thinks St. Austin came not wide of the Mark yet I suppose he will not thank him for what he says in his 43d Chaprer of Heresies where he accounts the Origenists for Hereticks for interpreting Paradise Allegorically and not according to the Letter SECT IV. Of the Modern Brachmans PAG. 77. Having spoken already of the Modern Brachmans in the Indies whom besides the near Resemblance of their Studies and Customs we have several other Arguments to show they are descended of the ancient Race ANSWER There is a Treatise amongst the Works of St. Ambrose whose Title is de Moribus Brachmanorum this Treatise is in three Libraries in Italy viz. the Vatican the Millain and Medicean under the Name of St. Ambrose but there are good Arguments to induce us to believe this Treatise to be Spurious In this Treatise are several commendable Qualities of the Brachmans represented and the Dialogue between Dandamis and Alexander contains good Morality But the Account we have here is so different from that in ancient Authors as that it may easily induce us to conceive a vast difference between the Ancient and Modern Brachmans Pag. 78. Now their Body of Learning doth not teach nor treat of each little Point or Nieity in Philosophy as our Modern
cannot be concluded from this passage For he frequently contradicts Himself in this particular And as Lipsius in the Third Book of His Stoical Physiology observes aliquando accedit aliquando recedit sometimes He affirms it sometimes He denieth it In the 36th Epist where He commends a certain person who removed from unavoidable Troubles in publick Affairs and comforts Him against death he hath these Expressions Mors quam parti mescimus recusamus intermittit vitam non eripit venet iterum qui nos in lucem reponet dies Death which we so much fear may intermit Life it shall not wholly deprive us of it the day will come which shall restore us from Death to Life And if we add what follows quem multi recusarent nisi oblitos reducerent his Contradictions in this place will be both visible and palpable In his 63d Epistle which was a Consolatory one upon the Death of a Friend and in the end of that Epistle he says Et fortasse si modo sapientum vera fama est recipitque nos locus aliquis quem putamus periisse praemissus est And perhaps our Friend whom we fear is lost for ever is only gone before us Some wise men are of Opinion that there is a common Receptacle for us all And this makes Lipsius in his Commentaries on this place to say Dubie trepide super immortalitate animae alias Seneca philosophizes doubtfully of the Immortality of the Soul as he doth also in other places And although Mr. Blount would in this page perswade us that Senecae is for the Mortality of the Soul yet p. 124. he confesses the Contradiction himself where he writes When I hear Seneca the Philosopher and others preaching up the doctrine of the Souls Immortality with a quid mihi cura erit transfuga tackt to the end of it nothing under Heaven seems to me more unaccountable and contradictory By which we see what little regard is to be had to the Stoical Philosophers if you consider them without their moral Sentences He that hath but the least Skill in Natural Philosophy cannot but perceive how grosly erroneous they are therein They who make the great God Corporeal they who make the Stars to feed on the Vapours of the Earth in which absurd Notion Seneca with his Rhetorical Flourishes seems to boast they who make the Sun to drink up the Waters of the Sea to quench his Thirst and the Moon to drink up the Rivers they I say who discourse so unphilosophically in these Physical Matters if they err in the momentous point of the Souls Immortality it cannot be accounted strange Natural Religion being according to our Author grounded on the immortality of the Soul and yet as it will appear hereafter that this immortality cannot certainly be known but by Scripture and the Parsons harangues as He by way of contempt says p. 118. and not by the Reasons of Philosophers The necessity of Revealed Religion must be very evident which our Deists Hypothesis will not allow P. 118. No Subject whatever has more entangled and ruffled the thoughts of the wisest men than this concerning our future State it has been controverted in all Ages by men of the greatest Learning and Parts ANSWER The Method Mr. Blount proceeds by in concluding from the Immortality of the Soul to future Rewards and Punishments is very good and I think the Reciprocal Consequence to be equally true The Sadduces as Josephus tells us lib. 18. Antiq. c. 2. affirm 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Souls of men perish together with their Bodies And the same Josephus de bello Judaico p. 788. affirms that the Sadduces did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They did deny the Immortality of the Soul and consequently Rewards and Punishments in the world to come And in this the Sadduces were agreeable to their Principles Ludovicus Vives in his excellent Book De veritate fidei chap. 5. lays it down for certain that whatsomever was affirmed by Philosophers with respect to a future State ita sunt leviter dicta ac frigide ut non satis videantur credere quae affirmabant Whatever they affirmed with respect to Rewards for Vertue or Punishments for Vice was so slightly and coldly delivered as that they seem not to believe themselves And the same Author speaks to the same Purpose chap. 6. What the Philosophers declare as to Remunerations after this Life they do it timide quasi diffidentur They declare their Opinions with Fear and Diffidence This Censure of Ludovicus seems to be too mild as I will exemplifie in some Particulars Cicero in his Oration pro Cluentio speaking of the Death of a certain Person says Quid mali mors illi attulerit Nisiforte ineptiis ac fabulis ducimur ut existimemus illum apud inferos impiorum supplicia sufferre What Evil did Death bring to him certainly none at all unless we give credit to such Fables and Fooleries as we are told befal impious Persons in another World And in the first Book of his Tusculane Questions Quae anus tam delira quae timea ista Aehcrontia templa alta orâ—i pallida Leti obnubila obsira â—enebâ—is loca Non pudet Philosophum in eo gloriari quod haec non timeat quod falsa esse cognoverit What dreaming Old Woman can be so delirious as to be afraid of Acheron's Temples of the Principalities of Hell of pale Death of the cloudy and dark Palaces below It is a shame for a Philosopher to boast that he doth not fear these things for he knows that they are meer Cheats As for Pythagoras we have his Opinion in Ovid's Metamorphosis Quid Styga quid tenebras quid nomina vana timemus Why should we be so vain as to be afraid of Styx Acheron and such ridiculous Trifles And Plato alone seems only to speak doubtingly when in his Phaedon speaking of the Rewards of good Men concludes with a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I cannot positively determine in this matter To these I must add many more Testimonies together with that large Quotation of Pliny with which our Author fills two whole Pages and more but these may suffice to make it appear that we can have no certainty of a future State but from the Scriptures And that Natural Religion Mr. Blount's Diana can give no satisfaction in this Point controverted as he says by Men of the greatest Learning and Parts It would be now worth knowing what are the Expectations of a Deist with relation to this future State To which Mr. Blount replies Pag. 91. That there is a probability of such a Deist's salvation before the Credulous and ill living Papists which in truth is no more then this the Deist hath more probability of his salvation then he that hath none at all Especially if he be in earnest when he writes Pag. 92. That the Popish Religion stands on the same Foundation with Heathen Idolatry I say if he be in earnest for in his Notes
be accused of Incogitancy and of not Reading the Authors he cites Of this Opinion or not much differing from it was Photius that Learned Patriarch of Constantinople in his 205th Ep. to Theod. Hegumenos 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The Circumcision of Abraham and his Posterity was instituted as an Emblem of Restraint from Incestuous Copulations The Chaldeans did lie with their Mothers Daughters and Sisters by a wicked and abominable Custom Wherefore that neither Abraham nor his Posterity should be polluted with these their wicked Practices God instituted Circumcision The circumcising his own Flesh importing the dividing and averting him from those of his Consanguinity or Affinity in respect of Conjugal Conversation Whereas the Chaldeans Impurity and Incest continued a long while after Abraham's time without either Fear or Shame And here it must not pass unobserv'd That Mr. Blount makes use of the same Method that the profest Enemies of Christianity did of old Julian the Apostate affirmed that the Jews learned to Circumcise from the Egyptians as we are told by St. Cyril Book the Tenth contra Julianum p. 354. And Celsus affirms the same thing to whom Origen Lib. 2. p. 17. returns this Answer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That Abraham was the first of all Mankind that was Circumcised SECT VIII Of Marrying two Sisters Judaism Christianity Millenaries PAg. 136. It is lawful to marry two Sisters The first Text of Scripture which is commonly urged in this case is that of marrying a Brother's Wife which seems to be forbidden where by a side wind they would bring in that of marrying a wife's Sister as parallel saying Ubi eadem ratio ibi idem Jus but with their Pardon the Simile doth not run upon four feet the reason is not the same for the words in Leviticus 18. and 16. which forbid the marrying a Brother's Wife say Because a Man thereby uncovers his Brother's nakedness which seems not at all to be a good reason against marrying the Wife's Sister because every Man is supposed to have discovered his first Wife's nakedness before any such Marriage with her Sister ANSWER Our Author's Opinion concerning Marrying two Sisters seems to me grounded on that which He calls in the 106 p. of his Book the bewitching smiles of a Woman whom he there unhandsomly denominates The most lovely Brute of the Vniverse And I doubt not but his Friend Torismond as he calls him p. 135. looks on it as his best Argument We do not say that Similies always run on four feet but I am sure the present Similies do The reason of the Law is the same both as to Brothers and Sisters And whereas he says Every Man is supposed to have discovered his first Wife's nakedness He seemeth not to understand the Scripture Phrase which is only used with relation to a turpitude committed by an unlawful Marriage If a Woman marries her Father she discovers the nakedness of her Mother in a Scriptural sense tho' in our Author 's Unscriptural sense Her Mother's nakedness was discovered before by Her Father Mr. Selden in his Vxor Hebraica Book first Chap. 6. tells us that whereas we read in the 16th Verse of the 18th Chapter It is thy Brother's nakedness in a most ancient Copy of the Greek Version in the King's Library at Saint James's Instead of Turpitudo est fratri tui the words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 She is thy Brother's Wife Quasi says Selden ipso nomine seu turpitudinis seu nuditatis fratris foemina seu uxor ejus expressim nominaretur As if says he he by the words turpitude or nakedness of this Brother his Woman or his Wife was expresly named If this Remark of Mr. Selden's be well it is of good use So that the Reason of the Law is the same in marrying of two Sisters as marrying a Brother's Wife The Sense of the Law with Relation to Brothers is Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy Brother's Wife for it is thy Brother's nakedness And by a parity of reason Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy wife's Sister for it is thy Wife's nakedness What our Author says concerning Penal Laws that they are ty'd up to the very Letter is true but it hath no place ubi eadem oratio Where there is the same reason And therefore the Karans or Scripturians among the Jews who are opposed to the Talmudists or Traditionals that bind themselves most to the Scripture Rule have resolved this matter First that there is place for Argument and Deduction from the words of the Law Secondly that whatsoever can be deduced thence either a fortiori or a pari either because the remoter degree is prohibited or that which is equally remote is to be deemed piously and rightfully concluded Thus when ver 7. the Father and Mother are both named and v. 12. The Father's Sister And v. 13. The Mother's Sister And v. 14. The Father's Brother yet the Mother's Brother is not named nor the Sister's Daughter which would be equivalent with that And yet this being the Marriage of the Uncle on the Mother's side with the Neece which is of the same distance with the Uncle of the Father's side with the Neece and the Aunt on the Mother's side with the Nephew from the naming and prohibition of these ver 13 and 14. by the parity of reason that which is not named is by all resolved to be prohibited And as Dr. Hammond p. 436. hath observ'd just thus it is in this matter The Wife's Sister which is not named is directly in the same degree of Propinquity with the Brother's Wife which is named and prohibited Pag. 138. The Canon of Scripture which seems more nearly to concern this case is Leviticus 18. ver 18. where it is said Neither shalt thou take a wife to her sister to vex her to uncover her nakedness besides the other in her life time But this doth not therefore seem to restrain or prohibit the marrying of two sisters one after the other for the first being dead the other cannot be a Rival or vexation as the Text calls it to her dead sister And then how shall the Prohibition be urg'd if the reason of it be removed it is rationally apparent that there is great stress placed in those Expressions during her life and to vex her in uncovering her shame upon her as doth more fully appear in our Translation of the Bible in Queen Elizabeth 's Reign printed An. Dom. 1599. ANSWER If as Mr. Blount says p. 137. all Penal Laws are straitly ty'd up to the express Letter of the Law where there is par ratio the like or same reason and no where to be construed by Parallels he hath lost more for his purpose in this place of holy Scripture than he got by the former For then nothing can be concluded from this place of Leviticus for marrying a Wife's Sister after her death the express Letter of the Law mentions nothing of it All that can
All the old Paraphrasts call Shilo the Messias the Targum of Jerusalem renders it expresly untill the time when King Messiah shall come Jonathan renders it untill the time when Messiah shall come Onkilos untill Messiah come whose is the Kingdom The Talmud also reckons Shilo among the Names of the Messiah Hoornbeck writing of the Conversion of the Jews reckons the Concurrence of divers Rabbies to this Interpretation And to the same purpose Morney du Plessis in his Book of the Truth of Christian Religion cap. 27. all which Authorities assure us that the Ancient Jews understood this Prophesy of the Messias and that this was no Imagination according to a Fantastick Cabbala as is wickedly suggested The truth of this exposition is Confirmed by the Words which follow To him shall the gathering of the People be For this is the same Character by which he was declared to Abraham In thy Seed shall all the Nations of the Earth be blessed He was signified also by this Character in the Prophet Isaiah In that day there shall be a Root of Jesse which shall stand for an Ensign of the People to it shall the Gentiles seek and his rest shall be Glorious As also in the Prophet Micah The Mountain of the House of the Lord shall be Established on the top of the Mountains and it shall be Exalted above the Hills and the People shall flow unto it And thus the Blessing of Judah is plainly understood Judah thou art He whom thy Brethren shall praise Thy hand shall be in the Neck of thine Enemies thy Fathers Children shall bow down before thee Now this Blessing was to make way for a greater This Government was not to fail until there came a Son out of Judah's Loyns greater than Him For whereas Judah's Dominion reached only to the Tribes of Israel the Dominion of Him who came out of His Loyns should be over the World all Nations shall serve him Seeing then that this Exposition is not only according to the ancient Jews but according to the Scriptures themselves How greatly hath Mr. Blount erred in affirming that this Exposition was occasioned by the introduction of Sects among the Jews Page 158. As for the Messias being of the line of David this was no general Opinion for how then could any have imagined Herod the great to have been the Messias ANSWER If this way of arguing be good there is no general Opinion concerning any thing Leo Modena in his History of the present Jews p. 249. acquaints us that the 12th Article of their Belief is That the Messias is yet to come And Modena pag. 247. says that this is one of those Articles which are generally believed by all Jews without contradiction Yet Isaac Vossius p. 226. of the Sibilline Oracles tells us Ne nunc quidem inter Judaeos desint qui Herodem pro Messia admittant There are not wanting now some among the Jews who affirm that Herod was the Messias Is there any Opinion more general than that of the Existence of God yet some Philosopers have deny'd it Have there not been some Prodigies in Nature who denied that there was any such thing in the World as Motion yet nothing can be more evident Aristotle in his Metaphysicks disputes against some who deny'd that it imply'd a Contradiction for the same thing to be and not to be at the same time 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Yet I presume most men think the contrary to be a general Opinion In a word this Method of Argumentation used by our Author is very ridiculous For what Tully in his Books de nat Deorum speaks is very manifest Nihil tam absurdum quod non dixerit aliquis Philosophorum Nothing contained so great an absurdity but some Philosopher or other would contend for it Pag. 158. How could Josephus fix that Character upon Vespasian as Him who should restore the Empire and glory of Israel to whom all Nations should bow and submit unto his Scepter ANSWER Josephus sought the Favour of the Romans and He was kindly used by them so that 't is not so strange He should interpret Oracles in Favour of Vespasian None of the Jews besides Him did so Philostratus says That Apollonius Tianaeus was familiar with Vespasian and He indeed apply'd the Oracles of the Messias or King promiss'd to Vespasian but He was a vain Sycophant a Magician and in this very ridiculous But notwithstanding their Flatteries Vespasian was of another Mind He was perswaded that the Oracle did belong to one of the Jewish Nation and of David's Family wherefore He made it his Business to destroy the whole Race of that Family as Eusebius informs us lib. 3. cap. 11. and 12. Page 158. I do not read that the Jews harboured any such Exposition during their Captivity under Nebuchadnezzar albeit that the Scepter was at that time so departed from the Tribe of Judah that it was never resetled in it more ANSWER I have already made it plain that the authentick Paraphrasts of the Jews understand it in this sense as also God's holy Prophets Our Author takes for granted That there should always be a King of the Tribe of Judah until the Coming of the Messiah which is not affirmed by the Prophesy We readily acknowl'dge that Judah was not a Kingdom till the Coming of the Messiah for there was no kingly Authority in Judah before David nor after Zedekiah Unless you perhaps count the Macchabees of whose Tribe there is some dispute as Du Plessis Morney assures us c. 29. of his book of the truth of the Christian Religion or Herod who was an Idumaean The Meaning therefore of the Prophesy is Not that Judah should have a King till the Messiah came or that it should not cease to be a Kingdom but that it should not cease to be a State a Body Politick having Power of Government within its self until Messiah came Wherefore the Seventy for Sceptrum a Scepter translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Ruler not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a King 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Governour should not fail to be in Judah It should not cease to be a Government altho' it had no King of that Title It cannot be said that the Scepter departs from the Poles whether the Elector of Saxony or Prince of Conti enjoy it And to this purpose Episcopius in his Institutions truly asserts Nec dubitandum quin respublica ista quando ei praecrant Levitae Hasmonâ—i aut Herodes Idumaeus aut quicunque alius eamque ex legibus more populi regebant respublica semper manserit populi Judaici eaque nomenclatura ubique venerit ut ex historia temporum manifestum est 'T is not to be doubted but that it was the Republick of Jewry when the Hasmonean Levites presided or Herod the Idumean or whosomever else govern'd according to the Laws and Customs of the People of Jewry This Republick so long continued and it had that Denomination as is manifest out of History
manner The Mother of all those living Creatures who are rational To this concurrent Consent we are necessitated to add this Remark viz. That if the Hypothesis of the Preadamites be true Adam had been very ridiculous in calling Eve the Mother of all living when she was according to them but the Mother of the Jewish Nation And Moses had been very incongruous in his History which I suppose no good Man will say or think If we consult other Scriptures how effectual to this purpose is that of the first Epist to the Corinthians Chap. 15. The first man Adam was made a living Soul To what end I pray should the Apostle write this but to denote that he was the Root and Original of all Mankind As also that the first Man is of the Earth earthy which is a formal declaration of that of the second of Exodus He was formed of the dust of the earth In the 17. Chapter of the Acts ver 26. 't is said that God hath made of one Blood all Nations of Men for to dwell on the face of the Earth How inconsistent is this with a double Creation and the proceeding of the Jewish Nation alone from the latter I know it is pretended that some Gr. Copies read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And Erasmus who loves sometimes to be singular says Verum haud scio an perperam a librariis haec Scriptura Truly I do not know whether this place of Scripture may not be changed by the Copiers But here it is with an haud scio Erasmus cannot tell us on his word and Suspicions signify nothing I am sure St. Chrysostom Homil. 38. on the Acts of the Apostles reads according to our vulgar Copies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And Grotius on this place in the Criticks seems fully to express the Sense when he writes That God made all Men. Ex semine unius Adami ut eo quoque modo cognationis naturali vinculo colligaret God made all Men out of the Seed of one Adam and bound them as it were with one Natural bond of Consanguinity And in truth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Blood is taken in this place for the Stock or Lineage out of which Men came And so it is frequently taken in Greek and Latin Authors Homer in the fourth Book of his Odysses 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ' My dear Son thou art well descended And Theocritus in his Heracliscus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ' Thou art of the Stock of Perseus Among the Latins we have Virgil Aeneid 6. Projice tela manu sanguis meus ' Cast thy darts my Son And Tibullus ad Matrem de Filia Quicquid agit sanguis est tamen illa tuus Let her do what she will she will be still your Daughter And not only among the Poets but also among the Oratours too As Quintilian in his Declamation pro Milite Abdicandus ejurandus est non sanguis tuus You may abdicate and abjure him if you please he is neither your Son nor your Relation What Mr. Blount affirms concerning the Jews That divers of them are of this Opinion amounts not to much for all Men know how illiterate and how monstrous the Rabbins have been in their Opinions since our Saviour's time Origen in his 2d Book against Celsus says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We have nothing now from the Jews but Trifles and Fables Morinus in his third part and 7th Exercit. gives this Censure of them Nihil est tam absurdum tam comicum tam ridiculum tam monstrosum atque ab omni fide probilitate abhorrens ad quod probandum statim praesto non sit illis e sacra Scriptura testimonium There is nothing so absurd so comical so ridiculous so monstrous so abhorrent from all faith and likelihood which they are not ready to prove out of some place of Holy Writ This seems to be a Description of our Deists and Pre-adamites in their abuse of the Scriptures however it demonstrates the little advantage Mr. Blount can promise himself from the countenance they give to his Opinion Capellus in his Arcannm Punctuationis Book 2. c. 3. Judaei in propria historia peregrini antiquitatum suarum prorsus ignari The Jews are strangers in their own Histories are ignorant of their own Antiquities And certainly this Character is justly applicable to all such of them as collect from the Wrâ—tings of Moses That there were two Creations and that Adam was not the first Man Scaliger in his sixth Book of the Emendation of times acquaints us Manifesta est Judaeorum inscitia mnlta quae ad eorum sacra et historiam pertinent longe melius nos teneamus quam illi The ignorance of the Jews is very manifest and we Christians know their Sacred Rites and their Histories much better than they themselves These are Testimonies which I have borrow'd from Learned Men who were very conversant in all the Jewish Learning And yet after all we have reason to believe this is a mistake in Mr. Blount For the 4th Article of the Jewish Faith believed by all Jews without contradiction as L. Modena tells us in his Hist p. 245. is That God was from all eternity and that all other other things besides had a beginning at some time And Article 9th That Moses was wholly dictated by God and put not one syllable in of himself Which as they plainly repugn the Opinion of Ocellus Lucanus so I think it not very reconciliable with the Consequences of Pre-adamitism which open so wide a door to Atheism The words of the most Learned Bishop Stillingfleet in his Origines Sacrae p. 537. are worthy of consideration Whosoever says he seriously considers the frequent Reflections on the Authority of the Scriptures which were cast by the Author of that Fiction and his endeavouring on all occasions to derogate from the Miracles recorded in it may easily suspect the Design of that Author That his Opinion in time would undermine the Scriptures themselves This seems to be the Character of Mr. Blount for his Method is the same How wickedly p. 25 and 26. doth he feign a Dialogue between Eve and the Serpent With what levity p. 44. doth he write of the Taylor 's Trade and the Thread-maker's Art which he makes use of to disparage the Mosaic History With what Blasphemy doth he discourse of our Lord p. 162. where he writes that some mean Persons called Him the Son of David and the Mobb by that Title did cry Hosanah to him when he made his Cavalcade upon an Asinego How unbecomingly doth he speak of our Lord and Moses when p. 121 he makes them together with the Impostor Mahomet to be Politicians And how like the Author of Pre-adamitism he derogates from Divine Miracles the beginning of his Book sufficiently proves where he uses all his Art to subvert these Divine Demonstrations and well knowing that his main strength lies in those Difficulties he places them in