fall down into the center of the earth And that it is no more wonder to see springs issue out of mountains then it is to see a man bleed in the veins of his forehead when he is let blood there So in all places of the earth the parts of it are not disposed for apertion for some of them are so hard and compact that there seems to be no passage through them which is the most probable reason why there is no rain neither in those places because there is no such exsudation of those moist vapours through the surface of the earth which may yeild matter for rain as it is in many of the sandy places of Africa but usually mountainous Countryes have more large and as it were Temple-veins through which the moist vapours have a free and open passage and thence there are not only more frequent springs there but clouds and rains too Now if this account of the Origine of springs in the earth be as rational as it is ingenious and handsome and there is not much can be said against it but only that then all fountains should be salt as the water is from whence they come then we easily understand how the earth might be overflowed in the universal deluge for then the fountains of the deep were broken up or there was an universal opening of the veins of the earth whereby all the water contained in them would presently run upon the surface of the earth and must needs according to its proportion advance its self to a considerable height But because the salving the difference of the water in springs from what it is in the Sea is so considerable a phaenomenon in our present case I therefore rather take this following as the most rational account of the Origine of fountains viz. That there are great cavityes in the earth which are capable of receiving a considerable quantity of water which continually runs into them from the Sea which as it continually receives fresh supplyes from the rivers which empty themselves into it so it dispatcheth away a like quantity through those spongy parts of the earth under the Ocean which are most apt to suck in and convey away the surplusage of water so that by this means the Sea never swells by the water conveyed into it by the rivers there being as continual a circulation in the body of the earth of the water which passeth out of the Ocean into the subterraneous cavernes and from thence to the mountains and thence into the Sea again as there is a circulation of blood in mans body from the heart by the arteryes into the exteriour parts and returning back again by the veins into the heart According to which we may imagine such a place in the heart of the earth like Plato's Barathrum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As Plato in his Phaedrus describes it out of Homer a long and deep subterraneous cavity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Into which cavity all the rivers at last flow and from which they again disperse themselves abroad Now this Cavity of the earth thus fill'd with water supplyes the place of the heart in the body of the earth from which all those several aquaeducts which are in the earth have their continual supply but that which makes those passages of water which we call springs and fountains properly I suppose is thus generated from those Cavityes fill'd with water in the earth by reason of the hot streams which are in the body of the earth there are continually rising some vapours or little particles of water which are disjoyned from each other by the heat by reason of which they attain a greater celerity of motion and so pass through the inner pores of the earth till they come near the superficies of it Which when they have approached to they are beat back again by the cold which environs the surface of the earth or at least are so arrested by the cold and condensed by it that they lose the form of vapours and become perfect water again Which water being now more gross then while it was a meer vapour cannot descend again through the same pores through which it ascended before because these are not now capable of receiving it And therefore it seeks out some wider passages near the surface of the earth by which means it moves in an oblique manner and is ready to embrace any other vapours which are arrested in the same manner now when these are grown to a considerable body in the surface of a mountain or a plain and find a vent fit for them there appears a proper fountain whose streams are still maintained by the same condensation of vapours which when they are once come abroad are in continual motion whereby rivers are made which are still finding a passage through the declivity of the surface of the earth whereby they may return to the Ocean again Now according to this account that grand Phaenomenon of the freshness of fountain water when the water of the Sea is salt whence it originally comes is sufficiently resolved For meer transcolation may by degrees take away that which the Chymists call the fixed salt and for the Volatile salt of it which being a more spirituous thing is not removable by distillation and so neither can it be by transcolation yet such an evaporation as that mentioned may serve to do it because it is evident that fresh water will fall from the clouds which hath risen from those vapours which have come out of the Sea and besides these vapours or small particles of water in their passage through the earth especially when they come near the surface of it do incorporate with other sweet vapours as those which come from rain and others by which means they insensibly lose their former acidity and sharpness But those fountains which do retain their former saltness as there are many such in the world may very probably â—â— supposed not to have come from these vapours condensed but to be a kind of a breaking of vein in which the salt water was conveyed up and down the body of the earth Now then considering that mass of waters and multitude of vapours arising thence which are in the earth how easie is it for us to understand what the breaking open the fountains of the deep means in Scripture and how by that means together with the falling down of the Cataracts of the clouds and the letting loose of the Ocean the whole earth might be overspread with an universal deluge The possibility of which was the thing to be shewed The next thing we come to concerning the flood is the capacity of the Ark for receiving the several animals which were to propagate the world afterwards Concerning which two things are necessary to be understood what the measure of the Ark was and what the number of animals contained in it The measure of the Ark must be determined by the proportion of the cubit which there
Deus coelum terram Terra porro fuit otiosum quid confusumque inordinatum Sed Origenes asseverat ita sibi ab Hebraeis esse persuasum quod in aliquantum sit à vera proprietate derivata interpretatio Fuisse enim in exemplari Terra autem stupida quadam erat admiratione Omnia tamen haec in unum aiunt concurrere ut generata sit â—a quae subjecta est universo corpori sylva sermonesque ipsos sic interpretantur Where we finde by the Testimony of Chalcidius an universal consent as to the production of the universal corporeal matter by God for that is all which is understood by his term of generata est But this same author afterwards tells us that by Heavens and Earth in the first verse of Genesis we are not to understand the visible Heavens and earth For saith he the Heavens which are called the firmament were created after and on the third day when the waters were separated the dry Land appeared which was called earth Qui tumultuario contenti sunt intellectu coelum hoc quod videmus terram qua subvehimur dici putant porro qui altius indagant negant hoc coelum ab initio factum sed secundo die And therefore by the heavens he understands incorpoream naturam and by earth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the primigenial matter And this saith he appears by the following words The earth was invisible and without form i. e. this corporeal matter before it was brought into order by the power and wisdom of God remained a rude and indigested lump and that which is so might well be called invisible and without form And therefore it is called inanis and nihil because of its capacity of receiving all forms and having none of its own Symmachus calls it otiosa indigesta the former because of its inability to produce any thing of its self the latter because it wanted a divine power to bring it into due order That stupidity and admiration which Origen attributes to it he conceives to relate to the Majesty of God who was the orderer and contriver of it siquidem opificis auctoris sui majestate capta stuperet Thus we see that according to Moses the first matter of the world was produced by God which is largely manifested by Origen against the Marcionists a fragment of which is extant in his Philocalia and by Tertullian against Hermogenes and others who from the opinion of the praeexistence of matter are called Materiarii Having thus cleared the sense of Moses it is far more difficult to find out the true opinions of the ancient Philosophers concerning the production or eternity of corporeal matter there having been so great dissensions not only about the thing its self but about the opinions of some about it For it is plain by Plutarchs 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as well as the discourses of the later Platonists how eager some have been to interpret Plato's Timaeus in favour of the eternity at least of matter if not of the world But although Plato doth assert therein a praeexistence of rude matter before the formation of the world yet I see no reason why he should be otherwise understood then in the same sense that we believe a Chaos to have gone before the bringing the world into the order it is now in And in that sense may those places in Plutarch be interpreted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so likewise those following words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the meaning may be no more then that Plato conceived that all the productions of the kinds of things which are in the the world was out of a Praeexistent Hyle the one spiritual and intelligible out of which he supposed souls to be formed the other sensible and corporeal out of which other Beings which were more gross and material were produced So Chalcidius tells us that both Pythagoras and Plato looked upon constitutionem sylvae to be opus providentiae which I suppose relates not only to the bringing of matter into form but to the production of matter its self But after this he takes a great deal of pains to search out the true meaning of Plato concerning the Origine of Hyle and mentions the great dissâ—nsions among the Platonists about it and the obscurity of the Timaeus in it To him therefore I refer the Reader Who likewise brings in Numenius largely discoursing concerning the opinion of Pythagoras about it who condemns all those as not understanding Pythagoras who attribute to him the production of the indeterminate Hyle These are his words Numenius ex Pythagorae magisterio Stoicorum hoc de initiis dogma refellens Pythagorae dogmate cui concinere dicit dogma Platonicum ait Pythagoram Deum quidem singularitatis nominasse Col. nomine appellasse sylvam vero duitatis Quam duitatem indeterminatam quidem minime genitam limitatam vero generatam esse dicere Hoc est antequam exornaretur quidem formamque ordinem nancisceretur sine ortu generatione exornatam vero at que illustratam à Digestore Deo esse generatam Atque it a quia generationis sit fortuna posterior inornatum illud minime generatum aequaevum Deo à quo est ordinatum intelligi debeat Sed nonnullos Pythagoreos vim sententiaenon recte assccutos putasse dici etiam illam indeterminatam immensam duitatem ab una singularitate institutam recedente à natura sua singularitate in duitatis habitum migrante But however these Pythagoreans might be deceived who thought the Unity its self became the Duity yet it is evident by Numenius that he looked on the undetermined and confused matter to have been coaeval with God himself and not produced by him And if Numenius be as much to be credited in this as when he calls Plato Moses Atticus then the Creation of Universal matter can be no part of Pythagoras his Philosophick Cabala But whatever were the opinions of Plato and Pythagoras concerning the first origine of matter we are certain that the Stoicks generally asserted the improduction of matter and make that to be as necessary a passive principle for the Being of the world as God is the active and efficient cause So Diogenes Laertius reports of the Stoical principles concerning the Origine of the Universe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They make two principles of the Universe one active and the other passive the passive an essence without quality called Hyle or confused matter the active the reason which acts in the other which is God These two principles Seneca calls causa materia â—sse vero debet saith he aliquid unde fiat deinde à quo fiat hoc causa est illud materia Although Seneca seems to make a query of it elsewhere quantum Deus possit materiam ipse sibi formet an datâ utatur But Zeno is express in Stobaeus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The first essence of
the Iews in Gen. 2. we may likewise believe that there was a new Creation of man and woman in that Chapter distinct from that mentioned in the former Again further if there had been any such persons in the world before Adam no doubt Adam himself was ignorant of them or else it had been a false and ridiculous account which he gives of the name of his wife 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because she was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the mother of all living Not of all living things for that had been a more proper description of a Ceres or Magna Mater or Diana multimammia of our Grand-mother the earth but certainly it extends to all of the kind that all living creatures that are of humane nature came from her So the Chalde◠Paraphrast understands it she was called Hava because she was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the mother of all the sons of men And so the Arabick version quia ipsa fuit mater omnis viventis rationalis To which purpose our Learned Selden cites the version of the Mauritanian Iews and the Persick of Tawasius But what ever the credit or authority of these versions be this is most certain that Adam had no reason at all to have given this name to his wife as being the mother of all living if there had been any of mankind existing in the world from other mothers which had been long before Eve was formed So that we find it plain and clear that if the report given of things in Scripture be true the hypothesis of Prae-Adamites is undoubtedly false And certainly who ever 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 was not to gain any credit to his opinion from those arguments from Scripture which he makes shew of which are pittifully weak and ridiculous but having by the help of such arguments made his opinion more plausible his hope was that his opinion would in time undermine the Scriptures themselves When he had made it appear that the account given in the Scriptures of the plantation of the world was unsatisfactory since there were men before Adam which the Scriptures to please the Iewish Nation take no notice of So that after he had attempted to prostitute the Scriptures to his opinion his next work had been to have turned them out of doors as not of credit to be relyed on by any when they were so common to every opinion But how impious absurd and rude that attempt was upon the sacred and inviolable authority of the Scriptures hath been so fully discovered by his very many not unlearned adversaries that it might seem needless so much as to have taken notice of so weakly grounded and infirmly proved an opinion had it not thus far lain in my way in order to the clearing the true Origine of Nations according to the Scriptures The main foundations of which fabulous opinion lying chiefly in the pretended antiquities of the Chaldaeans Egyptians and others have been fully taken away in our first bsok where our whole design was to manifest the want of credibility in those accounts of ancient times which are delivered by Heathen Nations in opposition to the Scriptures There is nothing at all in Scripture from the Creation of Adam to the flood which seems to give any countenance to that figment but only what may be easily resolved from the consideration of the great conciseness of the Mosaick History in reporting that long interval of time which was between the fall of Adam and the Flood By means of which conciseness such things are reported as speedily done because immediatly succeeding in the story which asked a very considerable time before they could be effected and besides all things which were done before the Flood being all quite obliterated by it and all the numerous posterity of Adam being then destroyed only Noah and his Family excepted to what purpose had it been any further to have reported the passages before the Flood otherwise then thereby to let us understand the certainty of the succession of persons from Adam and such actions in those times which might be remarkable discoveries of Gods providence and mans wickedness in it which being most apparent at first in Cain and his posteriry did by degrees so spread its self over the face of the then inhabited world that the just God was thereby provoked to send a Deluge among them to sweep away the present inhabitants to make room for another Generation to succeed them This therefore we now come to consider viz. the History of the flood and the certainty of the propagation of the world from the posterity of Noah after the Flood I begin with the History of the Flood its self as to which two things will be sufficient to demonstrate the truth of it 1. If there be nothing in it repugnant to reason 2. If we have sufficient evidence of the truth of it from such who yet have not believed the Scriptures There are only two things which seem questionable to reason concerning the flood the first is concerning the possibility of the flood its self the other is concerning the capacity of the Ark for preserving all kinds of Animals The only ground of questioning the possibility of such a Flood as that is related in Scripture hath been from hence that some have supposed it impossible that all the water which is contained in the ayr supposing it to fall down should raise the surface of water upon the earth a foot and a balf in height so that either new waters must be created to overflow the earth or else there must be supposed a rarefaction of the water contained in the Sea and all Rivers so that it must take up at least fifteen times the space that now it doth but then they say if the water had been thus rarified it could neithe◠have destroyed man nor beast neither could Noabs Ark have been born up by it any more then by liquid ayre To this therefore I answer First I cannot see any urgent necessity from the Scripture to assert that the Flood did spread its self over all the surface of the earth That all mankinde those in the Ark excepted were destroyed by it is most certain according to the Scriptures When the occasion of the Flood is thus expressed And God saw that the wickedness of man was great upon earth and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually And the Lord said I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth It could not be then any particular deluge of so small a Country as Palestine which is here expressed as some have ridiculously imagined for we find an universal corruption in the earth mentioned as the cause an universal threatening upon
one to reach unless he be a mountainer born any other will scarce be able to ascend above six furlongs perpendicular for in the ascent of a mountain every pace doth reach but to an hand breadth perpendicular but if we do allow eight furlongs to a dayes ascent yet thereby it will appear that the highest mountains in the world are not above twenty four furlongs in height since they may be ascended in three dayes time and it is affirmed of the top of mount Caucasus that it may be ascended in less then the compass of three dayes and therefore cannot be much above two miles in height Which may be the easier believed of any other mountain when that which is reputed the highest of the world viz. the Pike of Teneriffe which the inhabitants call Pica de Terraria may be ascended in that compass of time viz. three dayes for in the months of Iuly and August which are the only months in which men can ascend it because all other times of the year snow lyes upon it although neither in the Isle of Teneriffe nor any other of the Canary Islands there be snow ever seen the inhabitants then ascend to the top of it in three dayes time which top of it is not Pyramidal but plain from whence they gather some sulphureous stones which are carryed in great quantities into Spain So that according to the proportion of eight furlongs to a dayes journey this Pike of Teneriffe will not exceed the height of a German mile perpendicular as Varenius confesseth then which he thinks likewise that no mountain in the world is higher For what Pliny speaks of the Alpes being fifty miles in height must be understood not perpendicular but in regard of the obliquity of the ascent of it so that he might account so much from the foot of the Alpes to the top of them and yet the Alpes in a perpendicular line not come near the height of a German mile If then the highest mountains do not exceed much above three miles in height for the Spaniards themselves affirm that those lofty mountains of Peru in comparison of which they say the Alpes are but like Cottages may be ascended in four dayes compass we see from hence then far greater probability how the waters in the time of the general flood might overtop the highest mountains Especially if it be made evident that there is so great an Abysse of subterraneous waters that the breaking open of the fountains of it may so much encrease the inundation arising from the clouds and from the breaking in of the Ocean upon the main Land And that there is such a mass of waters in the body of the earth is evident from the Origine of Fountains for the opinion of Aristotle imputing them to the condensation of aire in the caverns of the earth and that of other Philosophers ascribing them to the fall of rain-water received into such cisterns in the earth which are capable of receiving it are both equally unsatisfactory unless we suppose a mass of waters in the bowels of the earth which may be as the common stock to supply those Fountains with For it is very hard conceiving how meer aire should be so far condensed as to cause not only such a number of Fountains but so great a quantity of water as runs into the sea by those rivers which come from them as the river Volga is supposed to empty so much water in a years time into the Caspian Sea as might suffiâ—e to cover the whole earth by which likewise it is most evidenâ— that there must be some subterranean passages in the Sea or else of necessity by that abundance of water which continually runs into it from the rivers it would overflow and drown the world And from this multitude of waters which comes from Fountains it is likewise evident that the Origine of Fountains cannot be meerly from such water which falls from the clouds which would never suffice to maintain so full and uninterrupted a stream as many Fountains have Especially if that be true which some assert that rain-water doth never moisten the earth above ten foot deep for of far greater profundity many Fountains are And besides the rain-water runs most upon the surface of the earth and so doth rather swell the rivers which thereby run with greater force in their passage to the Ocean and doth not lodge it self presently in the earth especially if it descends in a greater quantity which alone is able to fill such Cisterns supposed to be in the earth especially in mountains which may keep a stream continually running Although therefore we may acknowledge that the fall of rain may much conduce to the overflowing and continuance of Fountains as is evident by the greater force of springs after continued rains and by the decay of many of them in hot and dry weather which yet I had rather impute to the Suns exhaling by his continued heat those moist vapours in the earth which should continually supply the springs then meerly to the want of rain and by the rise of most great rivers from such Fountains which came from the foot of mountains where the ground is supposed to be of so hard and consistent a substance as stone or chalke or something of like nature which might help to the conservation of water there from whence it after ran in streams to the Ocean which was the great argument of the famous Peireskius for this opinion although I say these things may argue thus far that rain-water doth much conduce to the preservation of springs yet it cannot give a sufficient account of the Origine of them Which with the greatest reason and probability is imputed to those subterraneous waters which pass up and down through the bowels of the earth Some have fancyed the earth to be as one great animal whose subterraneous passage's were like veins in the body which received water out of the Sea as the veins do blood out of the Liver and that there are some kind of hot vapours in the earth which supply the place of vital spirits which are diffused up and down the body through the arteries And that as in an animal there are some parts which upon the least prick do send forth blood and others are more callous where the incision must be deeper before any blood appears so it is in the earth when it is opened in a right vein we find presently a spring of water but if we chance to hit on a wrong place we go deep and may find none not that water is wanting but we have not hit on the veins through which it runs And thence as the blood with equal freedom and velocity ascends into the head as it runs into the legs because it is equally dispersed into all the parts from the center of it so in the body of the earth it is as natural for the water to ascend into the tops of mountains as it is to
from the true God or from Idols and false Gods So that the meer pretence to Divine revelation was that which God would have punished with so great severity The Iews tell us of three sorts of Prophets who were to be punished with death by men and three other sorts who were reserved to divine punishment Of the first rank were these 1. He that prophecyed that which he had not heard and for this they instance in Zedekiah the son of Chenaanah who made him horns of iron and said Thus saith the Lord this was the lying Prophet 2. He that speaks that which was revealed not to him but to another and for this they instance in Hananiah the son of Azur but how truly I shall not determine this was the Plagiary Prophet 3. He that prophesied in the name of an Idol as the Prophets of Baal did this was the Idol Prophet These three when once fully convicted were to be put to death The other rank of those which were left to Gods hand consisted of these 1. He that stisles and smothers his own prophecy as Jonas did by which it may seem that when the Divine Spirit did overshadow the understanding of the Prophets yet it offered no violence to their faculties but left them to the free determination of their own wills in the execution of their office but this must be understood of a lower degree of prophecy for at sometimes their prophecyes were as fire in their bones that they were never at any rest till they had discharged their office But withall by the example of Ionas we see that though the Spirit of prophecy like the fire on the Altar could only be kindled from heaven yet it might be destroyed when it was not maintained with something to feed upon or when it met not with suitable entertainment from the spirits of those it fell upon it might retreat back again to heaven or at least lie hid in the embers till a new blast from the Spirit of God doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 retrieve it into its former heat and activity Thus it was with Ionas 2. The other was he that despised the words of a true Prophet of such God saith Deut. 18. 19. And it shall come to pass that whosoever shall not hearken to my words which he shall speak in my name I will require it of him Which Maimonides explains by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 death by the hands of God which he thus distinguisheth from the Cereth that he makes the death per manus coeli to be less then the Cereth because this latter continued in the soul after death but the other was expiated by death but generally they interpret it of a sudden death which falls upon the person 3. The last is he who hearkens not to the words of his own Prophecy of which we have a most remarkable instance in Scripture concerning the Prophet whom God sent to Bethel whom Tertullian calls Sameas the Iews Hedua whom God destroyed in an unusual manner for not observing the command which God had given him not to eat bread nor drink water at Bethel nor turn again by the way he came Neither was it any excuse to this Prophet that the old Prophet at Bethel told him that an Angel spake unto him by the word of the Lord that he should turn back For 1. Those whom God reveals his will unto he gives them full assurance of it in that they have a clear and distinct perception of God upon their own minds and so they have no doubt but it is the word of the Lord which comes unto them but this Prophet could have no such certainty of the Divine revelation which was made to another especially when it came immediately to contradict that which was so specially enjoyned him 2. Where God commands a Prophet to do any thing in the pursuit of his message there he can have no ground to question whether God should countermand it or no by another Prophet because that was in effect to thwart the whole design of his message So it was in this action of the Prophets for God intended his not eating and drinking in Bethel to testifie how much he loathed and abominated that place since its being polluted with Idolatry 3. He might have just cause to question the integrity of the old Prophet both because of his living in Bethel and not openly according to his office reproving their Idolatry and that God should send him out of Iudea upon that very errand which would not have seemed so probable if there had been true Prophets resident upon the place 4. The thing he desired him to do was not an act of that weight and importance on which God useth to send his Word to any Prophets much less by one Prophet to contradict what he had said by another and therefore Tertullian saith of him poenam deserti jejunii luit God punished him for breaking his fast at Bethel and therefore that message of this Prophet seemed to gratifie more mans carnal appetite then usually the actions of Prophets did which were most times matters of hardship and uneasiness to the flesh 5. However all these were yet he yeilded too soon especially having so much reason on his side as he had being well assured that God had commanded him he had reason to see some clear evidence of a countermand before he altered his mind if he had seen any thing upon tryal which might have staggerd his faith he ought to have made his immediate recourse to God by prayer for the settlement of his mind and removal of this great temptation But so easily to hearken to the words of a lying Prophet which contradicted his own message argued either great unbelief as to his own commission or too great easiness and inadvertency in being drawn aside by the old Prophet And therefore God made that old Prophet himself in the midst of his entertainment as with a hand writing against the wall to tell him he was weighed in the ballance and found too light and therefore his life should be taken from him Thus we see how dangerous a thing it was either to counterfeit a Spirit of Prophecy or to hearken to those who did It is the generally received opinion among the Iewish Doctors that the cognizance and tryal of false Prophets did peculiarly belong to the great Sanhedrin And that this was one end of its institution So Maimonides after he hath largely discoursed of the punishment of a seducer and speaking of that of a false Prophet he layes this down as a standing rule among them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 No false Prophet was to be judged but in the Court of seventy one which was the number of the great Sanhedrin And there is some thing looks very like this in the proceedings of the people of Israel against the Prophet Ieremiah for the people the Priests and the Prophets they laid hold on him and immediately
these several living creatures after their kinds which did after propagate in those parts without being brought thither by the help of man If now this supposition be embraced by it we presently clear our selves of many difficulties concerning the propagation of animals in the world and their conservation in the Ark which many have been so much to seek for satisfaction in As how the unknown kind of Serpents in Brasil the slow-bellied creature of the Indies and all those strange species of animals seen in the West Indies should either come into the Ark of Noah or be conveyed out of it into those Countries which are divided from that Continent where the Flood was by so vast an Ocean on the one side and at least so large a tract of Land on the other supposing any passage but of one Continent into another which yet hath not been discovered Besides some kind of Animals cannot live out of that particular Clime wherein they are and there are many sorts of animals discovered in America and the adjoyning Islands which have left no remainders of themselves in these parts of the world And it seems very strange that these should propagate into those remote parts of the world from the place of the Flood and leave none at all of their number behind them in those parts from whence they were propagated These things at least make that opinion very probable which extends the production of animals beyond that of mankinde in the old world and that the Flood though it destroyed all mankinde and every living creature within that compass wherein mankind inhabited yet might not extend its self to those parts and the animals therein in which men had never inhabited And by this means we need not make so many miracles as some are fain to do about the slood and all those difficulties concerning the propagation of animals do of themselves vanish and fail to the groud This is the first way of resolving the difficulty concerning the possibility of the Flood by asserting it not to have been over the whole globe of the earth but only over those parts where mankinde inhabited Secondly Suppose the Flood to have been over the whole globe of the earth yet there might have been water enough to have overwhelmed it to the height mentioned in Scripture For which we are to consider that many causes concurred to the making of this Deluge first the air was condensed into clouds and those fell down with continued force and violence not breaking into drops but all in a body which Sir Walter Rawleigh parallels with the spouts of the West Indies which are thence called the Cataracts or Flood-gates of heaven God loosening as he expresseth it the power retentive which was in the clouds and so the waters must needs fall in abundance according to the expression in Iob Behold he withholdeth the waters and they dry up also he sendeth them out and they overturn the earth Now I say although these waters falling down with so much fury and violence as well as in so great abundance might quickly destroy all living creatures yet this was not all for God who held in the Ocean within its bounds whereby he saith to it Thus far it shall go and no farther might then give it Commission to execute his justice upon the sinfull world and to all this we have another cause of the Deluge which was That the Fountains of the great Deep were broken up By which Vatablus most probably understands Immensam illam profundam aquarum copiam quae est subter terram That vast body of waters which lies in the bowels of the earth now when all these fountains were broken up and the waters within the earth rush out with violence and impetuosity upon it it must needs cause an inundation so great as that is mentioned in the Scripture For as that judicious Historian Sir W. Rawleigh observes Let us consider that the earth had above 21000. miles compass the Diameter of the earth according to that Circle 7000. mile and then from the Superficies to the Center 3500. mile take then the highest mountain of the world Caucasus Taurus Tenariff or any other and I do not finde saith he that the highest exceeds thirty miles in height It is not then impossible answering reason with reason that all those waters mixed within the earth 3500. miles deep should be able to cover the space of 30. miles in height which 30. miles upright being found in the depths of the earth 116. times for the fountains of the great Deep were broken and the waters drawn out of the bowels of the earth But then withall saith he if we consider the proportion which the earth bears to the air about it we may easily understand the possibility of the Flood without any new Creation of waters for supposing so much air to be condensed and so turned into water which doth encompass the earth it will not seem strange to men of judgement yea but of ordinary understanding that the earth God so pleasing was covered over with waters without any new Creation But this will yet appear more probable if the height of the highest mountains doth bear no greater a proportion to the Diameter of the earth then of the 1670. part to the whole supposing the Diameter of the earth to be 8355. miles as P. Gassendus computes both And it is more then probable that men have been exceedingly mistaken as to the height of mountains which comes so far short of what Sir Walter Rawleigh allows to them that the highest mountain in the world will not be found to be five direct miles in height taking the altitude of them from the plain they stand upon Olympus whose height is so extold by the Poets and ancient Greeks that it is said to exceed the clouds yet Plutarch tells us that Xenagoras measured it and sound it not to exceed a mile and a half perpendicular and about 70. paces Much about the same height Pliny saith that Dicaearchus found the mountain Pelion to be The mount Athos is supposed of extraordinary height because it cast its shadow into the Isle of Lemnos which according to Pliny was 87. miles yet Gassendus allows it but two miles in height but Isaac Vossius in a learned discourse concerning the height of mountains in his notes on Pomponius Mela doth not allow above 10. or 11. furlongs at most to the height of mount Athos Caucasus by Ricciolus is said to be 51. miles in height Gassendus allowing it to be higher then Athos or Olympus yet conceives it not above three or four miles at most but Vossius will not yeild it above two miles perpendicular for which he gives this very good reason Polybius affirms there is no mountain in Greece which may not be ascended in a dayes time and makes the highest mountain there not to exceed ten furlongs which saith Vossius it is scarce possible for any
Chaos formation of man among the Phaenicians Of Adam among the Germans Aegyptians Cilicians Adam under Saturn Cain among the Phaenicians Tubalcain and Jubal under Vulcan and Apollo Naamah under Minerva Noah under Saturn Janus Prometheus and Bacchus Noahs three sons under Jupiter Neptune and Pluto Canaan under Mercury Nimrod under Bacchus Magog under Prometheus Of Abraham and Isaac among the Phaenicians Jacobs service under Apollo's The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a from Bethel Joseph under Apis Moses under Bacchus Joshua under Hercules Balaam under the olâ— Siolenus THE main particulars contained in the Scriptures concerning the history of Ancient Times being thus far cleared there remains only that evidence which there is of the truth of the historical part of those eldest times in those footsteps of it which are contained in the Heathen Mythology For we cannot conceive that since we have manifested that all mankind did come from the posterity of Noah that all those passages which concerned the history of the world should be presently obliterated and extinguished among them but some kind of tradition would be still preserved although by degrees it would be so much altered for want of certain records to preserve it in that it would be a hard matter to discover its original without an exact comparing it with the true history its self from whence it was first taken For it fared with this Tradition of the first ages of the world as with a person who hath a long time travelled in forraign parts who by the variety of Climes and Countries may be so far altered from what he was that his own relations may not know him upon his return but only by some certain marks which he hath in his body by which they are assured that however his complexion and visage may be altered yet the person is the same still Thus it was in this original tradition of the world through its continual passing from one age to another and the various humours tempers and designs of men it received strange disguises and alterations as to its outward favour and complextion but yet there are some such certain marks remaining on it by which we find out its true original Two things then will be the main subject of our enquiry here 1. By what means the original tradition came to be altered and corrupted 2. By what marks we may discern its true original or what evidences we have of the remainders of Scripture history in the Heathen Mythology 1. Concerning the means whereby the Tradition by degrees came to be corrupted There may be some more general and others more particular The general causes of it were 1. The gradual decay of knowledge and increase of Barbarism in the world occasioned by the want of certain records to preserve the ancient history of the world in Which we at large discoursed of in our entrance on this subject Now in the decay of knowledge there must needs follow a sudden and strange alteration of the memory of former times which hath then nothing to preserve it but the most uncertain report of fame which alters and disguiseth things according to the humours and inclinations and judgements of those whose hands it passeth through 2. The gradual increase of Idolatry in the world which began soon after the dispersion of Nations and in whose age we cannot at so great a distance and in so great obscurity precisely determine but assoon as Idolatry came in all the ancient tradition was made subservient in order to that end and those persons whose memories were preserved in several Nations by degrees came to be worshipped under diversities of names and such things were annexed to the former traditions as would tend most to advance the greatest superstition in the world 3. The Confusion of Languages at Babel was one great reason of corrupting the ancient tradition of the world For in so great variety as suddenly happened of languages in the world it cannot be conceived but such things which might be preserved in some uniform manner had all Nations used the same language would through the diversity of Idiomes and properties of several tongues be strangely altered and disguised as will appear afterwards This alteratisn of languages in the world upon the confusion of tongues at Babel brought as great a confusion into the original tradition as it did among those who were the designers of that work And because this subject of the Original and cause of this diversity of languages among men doth both tend to explain the present subject and to clear the truth of Scripture history I shall a little further enquire into it Chiefly on this account because it is pretended that such a confusion is needless which is delivered in Scripture for the producing such diversities of languages which would arise through meer length of time the varieties of Climes and customs in the world But if we only speak concerning the sense of Moses about it the enquiry is of greater difficulty then at first view it seems to be For it is pretended that Moses nowhere speaks of a diversity of languages as we understand it but only of a confusion of their speech who were at Babel which might well be although they all used the same language that is there might be a confusion raised in their minds that they could not understand one another their notions of things being disturbed so that though they heard one word they had different apprehensions of it some thinking it signified one thing and some another as Iulius Sâ—aliger tells us that the Iews he had conversed with did not understand by it a multiplication of tongues but only by that confusion their former notions of things by the same words were altered As if one called for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a stone one by that word understands lime another water another sand c. this must needs produce a strange confusion among them and enough to make them desist from their work But supposing no such division of languages there yet after their dispersion which might be caused by the former confusion by the different Laws rites and customs commerce and trading and tract of time there would have risen a division of their several tongues But if there were such a division of tongues miraculously caused there that as it is commonly said all those who were of the same language went together in their several companies whence comes it to pass that in their dispersisn we read of several families dispersed which used the same language after their dispersion as all the sons of Canaan mentioned Gen. 10. 15 16 17 18. used the Canaanitish tongue in Greece Iavan and Elisa had the same language In Aegypt Misraim and Pathrusim in Arabia the sons of Ioctan and Chus in Chaldaea Aram and Uz the inhabitants of Syria Mash of Mesopotamia Nimrod of Babylon Assur of Assyria whence comes it to pass if their several tongues were the cause of
contraction of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so writ it at length it must be acknowledged that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used in the Phaenician Theology for Saturn but yet the circumstances of the story make the ordinary reading not improbable neither is it strange that Abraham should be called by the name of the people which he was the Progenitor of That Isaac should be meant by his only son called Ieoud is most likely for when God bids Abraham go sacrifice him he saith Take thy son 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thy only son Jâ—hid is the same with the Phaenician Ieoud That Sara is meant by Anâ—bret the original of the name implyes which is as Bochartus derives it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Annoberest that is ex gratiâ concipiens which the Apostle explains Through faith Sara her self received strength to conceive seed Now all the difference is that which was only designed and intended by Abraham was believed by the Phaenicians as really done that it might be as a president to them for their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sacrificing of men a thing so much in use among the Phaenicians and all the Colonyes derived from them as many learned men have at large shewed But besides this there are particular testimonies concerning Abraham his age wisdom and knowledge his coming out of Chaldea and the propagation of knowledge from him among the Chaldeans Phaenicians and Aegyptians are extant out of Berosus Eupolemus and others in Iosephus and Eusebius and from thence transcribed by many learned men which on that account I forbear transcribing as being common and obvious Some have not improbably conjâ—ctured that the memory of Iacobs long peregrination and service with his Uncle Laban was preserved under the story of Apollo his banishment and being a Shepherd under Admetus For Callimachus reports that Love was the cause of Apollo's travails as it was of Iacobs and withall mentions a strange increase of Cattel under Apollo's care answerable to what the Scripture reports concerning Iacob But it is more certain that the memory of Iacobs setting up the stone he had rested on for a pillar and pouring oyle upon it and calling the place Bethel was preserved under the annointed stones which the Phaenicians from Bethel called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as hath been frequently observed by learned men from whence came the custome of anointing stones among the Heathens of which so very many have largely discoursed Thence the proverb of a superstitious man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Arnobius calls lubricatum lapidem ex olivi unguine sordidatum It seems the anointing the stones with oyle was then the symbol of the consecration of them The name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for such a stone occurres in Hesychius the Greek Etymologist Damascius in Photius and others That the memory of Ioseph in Aegypt was preserved under the Aegyptian Apis hath been shewed with a great deal of probability by the learned Vossius in his often cited piece of Idolatry from the testimonies of Iulius Maternus Rufinus and Suidas and from these three arguments 1. The greatness of the benefit which the Aegyptians received by Ioseph which was of that nature that it could not easily be forgot and that no symbol was so proper to set it out as the Aegyptian Apis because the famine was portended by lean Kine and the plenty by fat and Minucius at Rome for relieving the people in a time of famine had a statue of a golden bull erected to his memory 2. The Aegyptians were not backward to testifie their respect to Ioseph as appears by Pharoahs rewarding of him now it was the custom of the Aegyptians to preserve the memories of their great Benefactors by some symbols to posterity which were at first intended only for a civil use although they were after abused to Superstition and Idolatry 3. From the names of Apis and Serapis Apis he conceives to be the sacred name of Ioseph among the Aegyptians and is as much as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Father so Ioseph himself saith he was as a Father to Pharoah And Serapis as Rufinus and Suidas both tell us had a bushel upon his head and Serapis is probably derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sor which signifies a Bull and Aâ—is So that by this means the story of Ioseph is attested by the Aegyptians superstitions of which they can give no account so likely as this is Many things concerning Moses are preserved in the story of Bacchus not that from thence we are to conclude that Moses was the Bacchus of the Greeks as Vossius thinks but they took several parts of the Eastern traditions concerning him which they might have from the Phaenicians who came with Cadmus into Greece while the memory of Moses was yet fresh among the Canaanites In the story of Bacchus as Vossius observes it is expresly said that he was born in Aegypt and that soon after his birth he was put in an Ark and exposed to the river which tradition was preserved among the Brasiatae of Laconica and Bacchus in Orpheus is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and by Plutarchde Iside Osiride Palaestinus and he is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which agrees to Moses who besides his own Mother was adopted by Pharoahs daughter Bacchus was likewise commended for his beauty as Moses was and was said to be educated in a mount of Arabia called Nysa which agrees with Moses his residence in Arabia fourty years so Plutarch mentions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the banishments of Bacchus and Nonnus mentions Bacchus his flight into the red sea who likewise mentions his battels in Arabia and with the neighbouring Princes there Diodorus saith that Bacchus his army had not only men but women in it which is most true of the company which Moses led Orpheus calls Bacchus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and attributes to him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereby we understand Moses his being a Legislator and that he delivered the Law in two tables Moses his fetching water out of a rock with his rod is preserved in the Orgia of Bacchus in which Euripides relates that Agave and the rest of the Bacchae celebrating the Orgia one of them touched a rock and the water came out and in the same Orgia Euripides reports how they were wont to crown their heads with Serpents probably in memory of the cure of the siery Scrpents in the wilderness A dog is made the companion of Bacchus which is the signification of Caleb who so faithfully adhered to Moses To these and some other circumstances insisted on by Vossius Bochartus adds two more very considerable ones which are that Nonnus reports of Bacchus that he touched the two rivers Orontes and Hydaspes with his thyrsus or rod and that the rivers dryed and he passed through them and that his Ivy-staffe being thrown upon the ground crept up and down like a Serpent and that